Cold War

The amount of arable land may actually be decreasing worldwide, thanks to desertification (increasing sizes of deserts like the Sahara, the Gobi Desert and the US West), as well as increasing saltification of land. Problem of using fertilizer is that we’re are increasing the salinity of the soil up to a point it will be gradually become toxic and yields will go down. When the soil cannot sustain plant life any longer, it will lead to a desert. Its already happening in Latin America and in the US (the Dust Bowl). Happening in China too. Erosion of top soil thanks to flooding (think Yangtze and the Mississippi) does not help. Worsening the situation is the real estate development over farm land, which is happening all over in the Asian countries.

This year, there was a “rice” crisis that happened in South East Asia where rice prices suddenly escalated. Many countries like Egypt, Vietnam and Thailand stopped exporting, causing a cringe on rice importing and eating countries. Already there is a proposal to create a “rice OPEC” between Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.

I think you’re thinking more near term than I am (near term being relative, obviously). There’s a good amount of space left to exploit right now, sure. But give it 50 years, and then see how much of that space is still available for exploitation due to populations increasing and the amount of arable land required for food production increasing as well. Hell, we may need a huge war at some point just to clean out enough space for everyone else.

Fundamentally, Jews and Moslems have coexisted, are doing so and can continue to coexist. The really hot point between Israel and Arabs is actually “lebensraum” between the Israelites and the Palestinians. So the real issue is about living room.

I think before you start exploiting the moon, we will start exploiting the rest of the planet that hasn’t been exploited yet. The oceans, the Artic and the Antartic. One of the most ignored developments in China in the last year or so, while we are focusing our eyes on new frigates, new submarines and the Varyag in dock, was the fact they completed a large first class research ship that was meant to explore the Artic. This ship is now in operation.

In the future “eco-wars”, we should consider the genuine threat of military force against tankers, pipe lines and even oil rigs. Consider for example, the economic impact if a submarine goes into the Gulf of Mexico and starts torpedoing at the oil rigs. What about the oil rigs in the North Sea? Those in the China seas? Those off shore in South America? The effect caused by a small airforce from a rogue nation that targeted the oil refinery and oil pipelines of its opponent in Latin America or Africa. Or asymmetrical forces, like speed boats against tankers or guerrillas against oil pipelines, or a terrorist attack against an oil well in a third world country.

In the future “eco-wars”, countries with competent navies will start using sea power to assert themselves over ocean “territory” like as if they’re on land, as well as on the Artic and Antartic. In Asia, this is already begun to show itself with disputes, though they’re currently very minor. That may escalate however, as land resources can grow thin. The US with Canada, European Union and Russia may find themselves in a three front competition for Artic resources, projecting power using nuclear submarines going under the ice cap. Likewise in the Antartic, powers like the UK and France will start claiming pieces of the continent, which will be fiercely disputed by Japan, India, Australia, Korea, Brazil, and China.

On land, Central Asia and Africa will become hotbeds, as powers compete for the remaining land resources in a multifront competition. Valuable capture points will include oil wells, pumping stations, pipelines, to rivers, highways and even railways, since transportation access is vital to the acquisition and distribution of resources. Our TVs will be filled with images of guerrillas with AK-47s guarding oil pipelines and wells, while tank columns guard railways and highways.

What if controlled fusion is mastered? Heavy hydrogen isotopes maybe found better at the bottom of the ocean than on top. Countries will start building underwater submarine bases or off shore rigs designed to drill minerals off the ocean floor, or pull deuterium from the heavy water at the sea floor.

It will be so Mahanian, with a dash of Seaquest.

I know about those laws, but here is my scenario. Say one nation discovers some sort of very valuable resource on Moon.. and say finds very rich deposit which covers area about 10km radius. Could one Nation mount legal argument to claim whole area??

The closet current example would be say if Shell finds in international waters somewhere area of 10km radius rich in Gas.. and plonks couple of platforms in there.. can the prevent any other company from deploying their own platforms in the zone, or does anybody have right to access so long as they are not droping their platforms 200 yards next to yours, which would be safety Hazard.

Under the current international laws regarding space exploration, no nation has a right to unilaterally lay claim to the Moon. 50 years or so down the road, we could see a breakout of these agreements by the first nation to be able to profitably do it, in much the same way that the USA broke out of the ABM Treaty. There’s where your potential for conflict lies, at least in part.

I’m gonna assume that the Israelis and Muslims will disagree about the “no religious wars” bit, but for what it’s worth I think they should be a thing of the past, the West is just too afraid to use the right kind of force necessary to put an end to it.

But I do see where you are going with the wars over resources. The next major war won’t even be fought on the Earth, I don’t think. As technology progresses, populations increase, and resources dwindle, there will be a greater push among the developed nations to find a way to exploit other bodies, beginning with the Moon. That’s where the next major war will be fought, over real estate on the surface of the Moon to combat resource shortages and overpopulation on Earth. This won’t happen tomorrow or in ten years, but that’s the road we’re heading down. It has nothing to do with ideology or politics, but with the natural growth of the human race.

It does bring up a very interesting moral question. Let’s say the USA develops (way down the road, bear with me) technology to travel efficiently and frequently to the Moon and other planets and populate them. Do we have a moral obligation to share this with the rest of the world, or are we to act in our own interests first, basically leaving the rest of the planet to fend for itself?

Absolutely No moral obligation what so ever.If you develop something its your right to use it for your benefit… well except for maybe Cancer Vaccine or something like that.

However say US builds a lunar base on the surface.. and start exploiting any ore or resources (H3 anyone) … then 20 years down the track China or Russia or EU arrive at same capability, and decide to follow suit. Can US say “No we claim Moon” , or “We claim this part of the Moon,” … or is it one free for all.. come and get it if you can , so long as you dont build your lunar mine like right next to mine.

Interesting debate topic.

PS: There is some dude in US selling realestate on the moon.. he has no legal position to do this what so ever.. but people have still forked out more than 5milion to him for basicaly piece of paper that says you now own this block of land on the moon. With so many idiots on this planet how come i have not figured out idea to get rich of them… :(:( … Maybe ill set up company to sell billboard/advertising rights on Comets :D:D

I’m gonna assume that the Israelis and Muslims will disagree about the “no religious wars” bit, but for what it’s worth I think they should be a thing of the past, the West is just too afraid to use the right kind of force necessary to put an end to it.

But I do see where you are going with the wars over resources. The next major war won’t even be fought on the Earth, I don’t think. As technology progresses, populations increase, and resources dwindle, there will be a greater push among the developed nations to find a way to exploit other bodies, beginning with the Moon. That’s where the next major war will be fought, over real estate on the surface of the Moon to combat resource shortages and overpopulation on Earth. This won’t happen tomorrow or in ten years, but that’s the road we’re heading down. It has nothing to do with ideology or politics, but with the natural growth of the human race.

It does bring up a very interesting moral question. Let’s say the USA develops (way down the road, bear with me) technology to travel efficiently and frequently to the Moon and other planets and populate them. Do we have a moral obligation to share this with the rest of the world, or are we to act in our own interests first, basically leaving the rest of the planet to fend for itself?

There won’t be a Cold War.

Nor Religious Wars nor Ideological Wars. It won’t be Capitalism vs. Communism, Democracy vs. Autocracy, Christianity vs. Islam. Regardless of what is written and said, propagandized, commercialized, said over FOX or CNN.

The Future of War will more and more centered on the Resource Wars. The first aspect of it will be wars centered on Oil, then it goes on to other natural resources ranging from clean water to fishing grounds. We will be fighting for rights over the Artic, the Antartic and under the sea.

Regardless of what is said, or said to cover true intentions, no one will fight over ideas as ideas don’t put food on the plate. But resources do. Everything else is just an excuse.

Russia is actually capitalistic. So is China. So is India. So what is the problem? The problem is that capitalism hinges on growth to survive, jobs for people, so they can feed, house and cloth themselves. Capitalism hinges on the central core issue that growth must be infinite. However, growth consumes resources and resources are not infinite. So you will have a collision between the need to grow and limits of resources. You will reach to a point, that to continue to grow, it will be at the expense of someone else.

Russia understands this. That’s why it plays the energy card with China and Europe. Cross me and I hope you will enjoy the cold winter. Nice to see convenient pipelines running in South Ossetia. Like we’re not in North Korea but in Iraq because Iraq has the oil. China knows this, that’s why it has trade relations with Sudan and Venezuela. Everything are like chess pieces being moved over a board, seeking better positions here and there. It plays through a combination of hard power like the Russians rolling into Georgia, or soft power, like the way the Chinese moved into Sudan. This will be the New yet the Old and Original Geopolitik—the contention over resources.