Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Arctic crisis

Tineric
Posts: 46
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 7:27:24 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
The Arctic region becomes a zone of long geopolitical rivalry. This competition will be expressed not only in the military confrontation, but also in the economic, technological and political competition. At the same time the state will show less and less willingness to compromise in the pursuit of its national interests in international organizations. Activation of NATO in the Arctic will lead to a reconfiguration of relations in the sphere of environmental security and to form a new Russian challenges and opportunities.

The Arctic is under close attention of foreign - aircraft, ships and submarines of NATO countries. The intensive industrial development of foreign companies, as well as military presence, appears negative for the fragile Arctic environment, resulting in ever-increasing degradation of arctic ecosystems. Appearance of more than 100 "hot spots" in the Arctic, primarily related to industrial production and the presence of military installations. Huge many kilometers around landfills having polar stations, military units, towns, ports. In addition, there is the problem of oil-contaminated areas, a huge number of abandoned boats and military installations.

Based on the above, it should be emphasized that only when strict control and comply with environmental requirements will be able to preserve the unique Arctic environment. International cooperation in the sphere of ecology, a must; otherwise provide a sufficient level of environmental protection will be simply impossible.
In spite of the environmental problem, the United States and its allies make the militarization of the Arctic. Not surprisingly, to the development of the Arctic expanses Navy brought it: they are given the task to oust Russia from the Arctic Ocean to make way for the US, Canadian and European oil companies. That is why the States intensified its military cooperation with the Nordic countries and are increasingly carried out in the region of a military exercise.

It is obvious that States are willing to "bite off" a huge chunk of the territory that rightfully should belong to Russia, despite the environmental consequences: hardly Washington encroach on the territorial waters of Canada and Norway, which are US allies. The purpose of US - absolute dominance in resource-rich Arctic Ocean.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 9:55:03 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 7:27:24 AM, Tineric wrote:
The Arctic region becomes a zone of long geopolitical rivalry. This competition will be expressed not only in the military confrontation, but also in the economic, technological and political competition. At the same time the state will show less and less willingness to compromise in the pursuit of its national interests in international organizations. Activation of NATO in the Arctic will lead to a reconfiguration of relations in the sphere of environmental security and to form a new Russian challenges and opportunities.

The Arctic is under close attention of foreign - aircraft, ships and submarines of NATO countries. The intensive industrial development of foreign companies, as well as military presence, appears negative for the fragile Arctic environment, resulting in ever-increasing degradation of arctic ecosystems. Appearance of more than 100 "hot spots" in the Arctic, primarily related to industrial production and the presence of military installations. Huge many kilometers around landfills having polar stations, military units, towns, ports. In addition, there is the problem of oil-contaminated areas, a huge number of abandoned boats and military installations.

Based on the above, it should be emphasized that only when strict control and comply with environmental requirements will be able to preserve the unique Arctic environment. International cooperation in the sphere of ecology, a must; otherwise provide a sufficient level of environmental protection will be simply impossible.
In spite of the environmental problem, the United States and its allies make the militarization of the Arctic. Not surprisingly, to the development of the Arctic expanses Navy brought it: they are given the task to oust Russia from the Arctic Ocean to make way for the US, Canadian and European oil companies. That is why the States intensified its military cooperation with the Nordic countries and are increasingly carried out in the region of a military exercise.

It is obvious that States are willing to "bite off" a huge chunk of the territory that rightfully should belong to Russia, despite the environmental consequences: hardly Washington encroach on the territorial waters of Canada and Norway, which are US allies. The purpose of US - absolute dominance in resource-rich Arctic Ocean.

I can't wait until squabbling and environmental carelessness ruins the Arctic -_-

Seriously, the Arctic is of immense scientific interest and not a place for the regular dumb exploitation of natural resources.
Meh!
slo1
Posts: 4,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 4:03:40 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 7:36:03 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The earth is a tool, not a temple.

That is like calling a house a tool. It is much much more than that.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 4:21:31 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 7:36:03 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The earth is a tool, not a temple.

Question is, how do we treat our tools. like we get them from harbor freight, or do we plan on passing them to generations.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 5:34:41 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 4:21:31 PM, TBR wrote:
At 8/11/2016 7:36:03 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The earth is a tool, not a temple.

Question is, how do we treat our tools. like we get them from harbor freight, or do we plan on passing them to generations.

The default should never be, "let it go as the winds take it."
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 8:15:38 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 5:34:41 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/11/2016 4:21:31 PM, TBR wrote:
At 8/11/2016 7:36:03 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The earth is a tool, not a temple.

Question is, how do we treat our tools. like we get them from harbor freight, or do we plan on passing them to generations.

The default should never be, "let it go as the winds take it."

Why not? There is no harm in not using every square mile for human wellbeing
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 8:28:47 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 8:15:38 PM, TBR wrote:
At 8/11/2016 5:34:41 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/11/2016 4:21:31 PM, TBR wrote:
At 8/11/2016 7:36:03 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The earth is a tool, not a temple.

Question is, how do we treat our tools. like we get them from harbor freight, or do we plan on passing them to generations.

The default should never be, "let it go as the winds take it."

Why not? There is no harm in not using every square mile for human wellbeing

Fine, you pay for the charity.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2016 8:45:12 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/11/2016 8:28:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/11/2016 8:15:38 PM, TBR wrote:
At 8/11/2016 5:34:41 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 8/11/2016 4:21:31 PM, TBR wrote:
At 8/11/2016 7:36:03 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The earth is a tool, not a temple.

Question is, how do we treat our tools. like we get them from harbor freight, or do we plan on passing them to generations.

The default should never be, "let it go as the winds take it."

Why not? There is no harm in not using every square mile for human wellbeing

Fine, you pay for the charity.

Pay what? Seriously!