The influence of various weapons on the earth's environment

The world today is full of crises. India and Pakistan have been at war for generations, relying on nuclear tests to maintain the deadlock. In Africa, soldiers are rampant; In Latin America, drug lords are rampant, triggering regional wars. The activities of organized criminal gangs in Russia have intensified. Crises occur frequently in the Middle East, Africa and Central America. Biological weapons are widely used and terrorism is still rampant.

Throughout history, war has always been a common means to solve contradictions and conflicts in human society. But today, mankind has paid a higher price for the war. New destructive weapons will endanger the biodiversity of the earth and destroy ecosystems, species and human beings themselves. While the infinite development of human beings leads to ecological crisis, modern weapons of war do more damage to the earth.

In war, the army often aims at destroying the enemy's environmental conditions. Alain Gille, a member of the Honorary Committee of the 50th Anniversary of IUCN and an agroecologist, said: "Poisoning and drilling wells in arid areas is a common' ecological killing weapon'. For centuries, people have been using such' weapons', such as burning crops and vegetation on enemy land. " But the damage caused by modern war is more extensive and serious. During the Gulf War, black smoke billowed from burning oil fields, which not only killed countless wild animals, but also released a lot of carbon dioxide, which aggravated global warming and triggered ecological disasters. The destructive power of nuclear weapons has not been proved by human beings, but we know that it is enough to interrupt life on earth for thousands of years.

Jeff McNeely, chief scientist of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), pointed out that to protect the earth, we must admit that war can threaten the existence of life at all levels "from genes to ecosystems". The impact of the war is direct. For example, dioxins released by Agent Orange during the Vietnam War led to the destruction of genes and a lot of losses of crops. The impact of the war can also be indirect. For example, displaced Ethiopian refugees drained the already insufficient resources and collapsed, making it difficult for local residents to make a living. The most terrible thing is the use of biological weapons. McNery said: "The revolution in biotechnology has enabled people to effectively produce biological weapons agents without large-scale equipment." Biological bombs are powerful. According to United Nations research, a 10 ton biological bomb can kill 25% of Fiona Fang's population and infect 50% of people. If the weapons used in the war continue to destroy biodiversity, then the conflict caused by the decline of life resources will also trigger a new war. It is predicted that in the next 50 years, the world population will increase to 9 billion, and the global economic output will increase five times; According to this inference, the scarcity of renewable resources will increase sharply. McNery pointed out: "Many problems related to biodiversity, such as soil erosion, desertification, forest degradation, water pollution and the reduction of food production potential, will reduce the earth's ability to support life systems, thus causing conflicts."

The vicious circle has begun to show its head and feet. Israeli fresh water supply depends on the water resources in Gaza, West Bank and Jordan Valley. If we look at today's tense situation from this perspective, people may find a new explanation. Mark Halle, policy adviser of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, said: "The pressure brought by the huge population on Rwanda's fragile resources over the years has aroused considerable concern. This may help people understand the terrible genocide of 1994. "

The unequal distribution of resources between the poor and the rich has laid the groundwork for future disasters. Federico Mayor, Director-General of UNESCO, said that at present, a small number of people on earth consume a disproportionate amount of resources. This is the root cause of the conflict. In order to avoid disaster, "we must narrow the existing gap between the rich and the poor." To this end, Sadruddin Aga Khan, managing director of Bellerive Fund, said: "We urgently need to establish new values. In addition to trade and economic interests, there should also be environmental, social and ethical concepts to compete with it. There should be a strong restriction mechanism to ensure a fair and balanced distribution of international power among governments, international organizations, markets and non-governmental organizations. The distribution of rights and obligations of these international forces should promote the fair enjoyment of global interests. "

Organizations such as UNESCO are carrying out large-scale educational activities. Meyer said that UNESCO's peace education project is such a pioneer. The plan is all-encompassing, even including a radio soap opera to promote conflict reconciliation in Afghanistan. The United Nations General Assembly has designated the year 2000 as the "International Year for the Culture of Peace".

IUCN has also established a "Peace Park" project. In this plan, IUCN cooperates with the government to establish environmental protection buffer zones in areas with potential conflicts. At present, there are 65,438+000 such areas: for example, at the junction of Costa Rica and Panama, people have been working hard to protect nature and enhance mutual understanding. Kruger National Park in South Africa is adjacent to Mozambique in the east. There were wars in the past, and now this area is ready to establish a "Peace Park". This park will connect Kruger in South Africa with Banhine and Zinave National Parks in Mozambique and Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe, and become a nature reserve spanning three countries. This action will not only promote biodiversity conservation and regional cooperation, but also provide a large number of employment opportunities and promote regional economic development through tourism. Another proposed "Peace Park" will connect national parks in Congo, Rwanda and Uganda to protect more than 600 mountain chimpanzees living there.

If this action is to succeed, it needs a new understanding of the word "security". McEnery said: "The security between countries has gone beyond the narrow military definition in the past. Ethnic conflicts, environmental degradation and pollution, social unrest caused by hunger and large-scale refugee flows will all constitute the destruction of social stability and the material basis of global biodiversity-productivity. Military strategists around the world should establish new concepts and incorporate biodiversity into strategic decisions. "

In some countries, this has been taken seriously. The military departments of the United States and Britain have formulated policies to protect biodiversity and the environment. Although it is still an armchair strategist, it has taken a step forward.

Historically, civilization has developed and declined. If we want human civilization to last, we must try our best to protect a healthy environment. Some experts warn that if re-education cannot accomplish this mission, only the destruction of war can bring about change. To stop the existing war mode, McEnery said, "It may take a famine or a successful biological war to change people's minds. Historically, mankind has always relied on war to break the existing power pattern and establish a new power pattern.

1. Meteorological weapons

A disastrous weather can affect the other side's transportation, electricity, communication and even agricultural production, and its harm is self-evident. It can also change the magnetic field and make all the electronic products of the other party's information network invalid.

The result may aggravate the deterioration of the earth's environment, which may be more harmful to all mankind than nuclear weapons, and the United States may not be spared. America is not out of the earth yet.

2. Electromagnetic gun

Launching projectiles to destroy each other by impact may not be expected to produce an artificial meteorite shower, or to be precise, a metal storm, which will cause asteroids to hit the ground.

This is not good news for the global environment.

3.supersonic speed

Weapons above Mach 5 make it possible to bomb every corner of the world, but the impact on the earth's environment is also destructive.

4. Stealth weapons

From electron invisibility to ion invisibility ... which one is not damaging the environment?

Excerpted from: /topic_360263.html

Explosion pollution: /ThreadDetail.aspx? threadid = 1 10 145934

Lead bullet pollution: /view/6 16483.htm

Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons pollution:/view/1537123.htm

Contamination of depleted uranium ammunition:/qk/94341x/200301/7446590.html.