Jump to content

Talk:Environmental impact of war/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Global warming

First of all, there is no conclusive proof that Global Warming is caused by fossil fuels. Second, this isn't the place to rag on the DoD. --EnderWiggin1 (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

There may not be "conclusive proof that Global Warming is caused by fossil fuels" but the conclusion by scientific community is that it is as good as being conclusive. The article is not being used to "rag on the DoD". It is telling it like it is. I have reverted your edit that said fossil fuel use is not the cause of global warming. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Consensus of Opinion does not prove fact, 1. and 2. Where are all the other world military organizations? Why should this be put in Environmental Effects of War when it would be better served on the page about the DoD. --EnderWiggin1 (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I know a consensus on an opinion does not "prove fact". That is called the bandwagon fallacy. However, since the vast majority of climate scientists are in agreement about global warming and climate change Wikipedia must take that stance. The DoD is in the article to illustrate the effects of fossil fuel use. I am very aware of WP:systemic bias within Wikipedia but in this case the DoD is a good example given the level of fuel consumption by the American military. Global figures on fossil fuel use by the military would be an ideal replacement for the DoD figures. You are most welcome to research and add global fuel use to the article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Toxic Remnants of War Project

Seems a good place to mention our new research project: http://www.toxicremnantsofwar.info/ whose purpose is to examine whether there is a regulatory solution to the release of toxic materials as a result of military activities. The site will act as a data resource. ICBUW (talk) 16:47, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Sources to Consider

I am working on a project for my history of ecology class. Here are some sources I would recommend using to add to the information on the page regarding the Environmental Impact of War.

1) Kanyamibwa, Samuel. "Impact of war on conservation: Rwandan environment and wildlife in agony". Biodiversity and Conservation. (1998): 1399-1406.

2) King, Jessie. "Vietnamese wildlife still paying a high price for chemical warfare". The Independent, sec. Environment. (2006).

3) Peluso, Nancy Lee, and Michael Watts. Violent Environments, (New York: Cornell University Press, 2001).

4) Readman, J.W., S.W. Fowler, J.P. Villeneuve, C. Cattini, B. Oregioni, and L.D. Mee. "Oil and combustion-product contamination of the Gulf Marine environment following the war." Letters to Nature. (1992): 662-664.

5) Robinson, J.P. The Effects of Weapons on Ecosystems, (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1979).

6) Russel. Edmund. War and Nature: Fighting Humans and Insects with chemicals from World War I to Silent Spring, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

7) Shapiro, Judith. Mao’s War Against Nature: Politics and the Environment in Revolutionary China, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

8) Westing, Arthur. Cultural Norms, War and the Environment, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988).

(Mrjohnson007 (talk) 20:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC))

Proposed improvements to the article: Outline

War has been analyzed, documented, and critiqued for decades. Historians look at the results of war, and base their research on a nation’s capability during wartime and the costs associated with war. However, the detrimental effects that war has on the environment are often overlooked. When the war ends, there are human, monetary, and also environmental costs. Scorched earth policies, Chemical warfare, and even Nuclear warfare have been used during wartime. Not only are these events tragic, but they also leave a wake of environmental devastation that last for decades and even centuries after the war. Two elements accurately capture the extent of the environmental impact of war; the evolving relationship between war and nature, and the progression of international conflict from World War I to the Rwandan Civil War.

The relationship between war and nature has existed since the origins of conflict between men, but only in recent human history has man completely dominated and exploited nature for his war endeavors. This section will analyze the harmful effects, both intended and unintended, of the production, testing, stockpiling, and use of Weapons of mass destruction and Chemical warfare. Since ecosystems are all closely interdependent and some are more brittle than others, man’s effect on the environment directly effects the existence of humans. The evidence from scholars’ research suggests that military devastation and environmental exhaustion are the two main threats to mankind; both of which are interconnected.

The next section will focus on the events that led up to the current relationship between war and nature. Prominent events that highlight the environmental impact of war include: World War I, World War II, Vietnam War, and the Rwandan genocide. The culmination of chemical weapons used during WWI and Vietnam crippled the environment, and led to the desertification of entire ecosystems along with the death of hundreds of thousands of people. More specifically in Vietnam we see the use of Agent Orange and Agent Blue in order to flush out the Viet Cong and destroy the countries food supplies. This kind of mass destruction is only surmounted by the atomic bombs used to end the war in the pacific during WWII, which poisoned thousands of square miles of soil, caused genetic mutations in plants and animals, and disrupted the atmospheric composition over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Progressing forward into time, the extent of environmental devastation can also be shown by looking at the Rwandan Civil War between 1990-1994, which led to the elimination of conservationist efforts to preserve wildlife and a complete disregard for future sustainability of the environment in Rwanda.

Mrjohnson007 (talk) 20:48, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

This is a great, informative article! The lead-in section is successful in providing a brief summary of the article. However, I think some more details could be included so that this section gives an even clearer understanding of what is actually in the article. Also, since this is a broad topic that relates to many specific examples and events, it is good that links to other Wikipedia articles on these events are included in the lead-in section (and the rest of the article).

The article has a clear structure that makes sense for the topic. As mentioned, this is a broad topic with many issues, which could make organizing the article difficult. Although I like the way it is structured now, I think it could possibly be more organized if there was some sort of separation between the more general, common environmental issues associated with war and certain specific events. For example, right now in the Issues section, there are subsections for things such as "The use of fossil fuels," "Intentional flooding," and "Testing of nuclear armaments" alongside subsections on the atomic bombings on Japan during WWII and the Gulf War. I think these specific events might be better suited in the "Specific cases" section. Overall though, I like the issues you chose to focus on and the examples you included.

There is mostly balanced coverage throughout the article, with the most detail being in the subsections within the "Issues" section. I think more details, even if it were just a couple of sentences (if possible), would be a good addition to the events mentioned in the "Specific cases" section. Although links to their articles are included, it might be useful to include some information about them in this article as well. Also, I don't know if there is much else to touch upon, but the "War and environmental law" section could also be expanded.

This article appears to have only neutral content, as I detect no biases. The author does a good job explaining many of the environmental impacts of war, even when these impacts have been caused by the U.S.'s actions. The article is also clearly well-researched, as the author has included a long list of various sources, which all seem to come from reliable publications concerning different environmental issues caused by warfare. Overall, very nice work!! Ashleyweir (talk) 23:36, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Review

This article is done well the new additions to the page have been pretty well thought out. I was having a hard time finding sources in subjects such as “fossil fuel use”, “Gulf war” and a few others i’m sure these will be added later on. The lead section seems to begin in the middle of a thought i’m not sure if there was more you planned on adding before but it looks incomplete. The coverage of the various issues is well balanced but a few sections look like they could use more information. Fossil fuels and testing of nuclear armaments could be expanded upon i believe. There are also a few claims about the contribution to global warming. but can this be attributed that much more than the everyday lives of industrialized countries. SwMcPeek (talk) 11:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Further comments on content

Hi Mrjohnson007! You've done a very nice job expanding and organizing this article. You'll see from peer comments some suggestions around the lead-in section and the difference between the "issues" and "special cases" section. These are comments you should consider as you finish your revisions. I have two suggestions for you: 1) you might post a brief summary of your recent additions to this page on the talk pages of other relevant articles. This might help drive some editors toward this page and give you some additional feedback with which to work. 2) You might refer to Edmund Russell's War and Nature (which I see listed in your bibliography above) to flesh out more of the domestic impact of World War II in America, even though the war was primarily fought elsewhere. I think this would be an interesting conceptualization of the "environmental impact of war," given that products like DDT used during combat/conflict later had tremendous impact on American landscapes in peace-time. My last comment is for future editors--I know the focus of this revision was not on the Gulf War section. That said, it looks like from your bibliography that the fourth item (from Readman, et al) could help give proper citations to the Gulf War material, which is presently largely without citations. Very good work here! --Enstandrew (talk) 15:54, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Environmental impact of war. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Environmental impact of war. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Environmental_impact_of_war/Archive_1&oldid=1197238077"