At 8:28. Labelled a threat multiplier at 9:16

[youtube]RlILOdeEvS8[/youtube]

Mods ban this fucker

Can almost guarantee you didn't watch it. Cant the answer be a little nuanced?

In the context of Syria, it's perfectly acceptable to say the U.S invasion of Iraq that left a power vacuum in Iraq was partially the cause. The Iran-Saudi fight for influence in the region is part of it, the Ideology of Islam which many of its practicers believe is part of it, lack of education is part of it, the way france and the UK partitioned the old ottoman empire and created essential fake states and yes, the extreme drought, potentially caused by climate change also influenced it.

Like most things, the answer is nuanced. You can debate wether one thing affected it more than the other, but when a drought causing 4 million people from rural areas in syria, or 20% of the total population to go to the cities right before a huge civil war started, it sounds like the drought had a fairly big part of it.

Here's a good video that walks through WW2 from the perspective of a fight for recourses. Now obviously WW2 wasn't just a fight for resources, but some of it, probably. Theres at least an interesting case to be made

[youtube]H-2q-QMUIgY[/youtube]


Edited by tbitm: 24/11/2015 04:33:34 PM

but I thought ISIS were middle class and elite Iraqis? thats what mcjules claims

Much of the military know how for ISIS is from Saddams former Ba'athist party. They knew how to keep control during Saddam's rein of terror and are assisting a large portion of the idiotic fundamentalists religious fools. mcjules is half right

Neither of you have any fucking idea.

"To the right winger, complex problems have simple solutions"

Its ironic, but not surprising and sad at the same time that if the Republican Party were to gain power, global warming would be exacerbated due to their wilful ignorance of the issue and inaction, considering the US are the second largest polluter in absolute terms. That the Pentagon labels global warming a threat multiplier suggests that terrorism, indirectly, will be exacerbated by the wilful ignorance of the Republican Party on global warming, due to increasing scarcity of resources. And the Republicans pride themselves so much on their response to (perceived) terrorism, the terrorism that their actions will indirectly exacerbate! The problem is that more cognitive dots have to be connected to join the issues (i.e. "nuanced" ), but are people mentally engaged enough to care?


Edited by Murdoch Rags Ltd: 25/11/2015 11:00:20 AM

It isn't just a multiplier, wars will be fought for water, probably in our lifetimes.

And it isn't just the right wingers, most can hold a view that many factors can attribute to the ISIS. The other half would be fervent Trump supporters

On the left, we need to do a better job weeding out our nut jobs who blame imperialism and climate change and have blinders up when evidence counters that agenda.

-PB

Please explain how they are wrong, as their statements were largely accurate. As someone who has studied and worked in this field for decades I am interested in what stunning insights you have to offer.

But you know everything because you studied and worked in the field. :)

He has no insights.

Stalin, Castro , Chairman Mao...jam them up your piehole Rags

Listen to a respected scientist

[youtube]xTJf0lsCkUA[/youtube]

=d>

Dr. Nye is absolutely right, to the point that even the Pentagon has been calling for action on climate change for at least a year. Military leaders view climate change as a "threat multiplier," which is a good way of describing the effects of drought on local economies, and therefore personal political actions.