Disinfopedia: Environmental warfare
Environmental warfare is "defined as (1) the intentional modification of a system of the natural ecology, such climate and weather, earth systems such as the ionosphere, magnetosphere, tectonic plate system, and/or the triggering of seismic events (earthquakes) (2) to cause intentional physical, economic, and psycho-social, and physical destruction to an intended target geophysical or population location, (3) as part of strategic or tactical war.
"Environmental war however carried out is almost always a violation of the 1977 United Nations Treaty
against modification of the environment. Thus, environmental weapons are developed in secret, and acts of environmental war are carried out covertly, as both environmental weapons and war are illegal under international law. Environmental war is generally carried out as a strategic deception (Psyops
"Environmental war weapons systems can include chemtrails, chemical weapons systems (climate and weather modification) and electromagtnetic weapons systems (climate and weather modification; seismic warfare).
"Some definitions of environmental war are more broad. For example, the use of Depleted Uranium
in the Yugoslavia war has been termed environmental war."
Source: Ecology News
Note: The 1977 Treaty is the "United Nations
General Assembly Resolution 31/72, TIAS 9614 Convention
on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques". Signed in Geneva May 18, 1977; Entered into force October 5, 1978; Ratification by U.S. President December 13, 1979; U.S. ratification deposited at New York January 17, 1980. See Summary and Analysis
, Wikipedia entry on the Convention
, and Parties to the Convention
All's Fair in Space War
by Noah Shachtman
Wired News | Oct. 01, 2004
The American military has begun planning for combat in space, an Air Force report reveals. And commercial spacecraft, neutral countries' launching pads -- even weather satellites -- are all on the potential target list.
"Air Force Doctrine Document 2-2.1: Counterspace Operations" is an apparent first cut at detailing how U.S. forces might take out an enemy's space capabilities -- and protect America's eyes and ears in orbit. Signed by Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. John Jumper, the unclassified report sketches out who would be in command during a space fight, what American weapons would be used and which targets might be attacked.
In that way, the report is similar to hundreds of others in the Pentagon's archives. But buried in the report's acronyms and org charts are two striking sentiments, analysts say. First, the document declares that the U.S. Air Force is duty-bound to slap down other countries' space efforts, should the need arise. Then, Counterspace Operations (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/servic ... d2_2_1.pdf
) declares that a satellite or ground-control station doesn't have to belong to one of America's enemies in order to get hit.
"You could be inflicting large costs on a company or country that has no role in a war. And that introduces great possibilities for backlash and political fallout," warned Theresea Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information. "You could wind up damaging the capabilities of our allies -- or even ourselves."
But the Air Force may not have much of a choice, really. Nearly all the world's militaries -- including America's -- rely on private companies' satellites for relaying messages, taking pictures or guiding bombs. During the Iraq invasion, for example, commercial orbiters carried 80 percent of U.S. forces' satellite communications.
In the opening pages of Counterspace Operations, the Air Force announces that it has a new job: to maintain America's "space superiority" -- the "freedom to attack as well as the freedom from attack" in orbit. This emerging mission has become just as important to American forces as control of the skies, the report states. And together, the two form "crucial first steps in any military operation."
Keeping this "space superiority" is really three jobs in one, the Air Force argues. The service needs to know what's happening in space, from solar flares to hostile satellites to orbiting debris. It has to defend against attacks on its space-related systems; last year, Iraqis tried to jam the Global Positioning System, and the Air Force expects similar moves in the years to come. Finally, the Air Force has to be ready to break down opponents' ability to use space at any time.
These opponents aren't just the few countries sophisticated enough to be called "space-faring," the document makes clear. Smaller states now routinely rely on larger countries' satellites to take pictures and route calls from above. Even low-tech terrorist cells have used satellite phones to make calls. So the Air Force sees nearly every nation, and every insurgent group, as a potential adversary in space.
The Air Force states this matter-of-factly in Counterspace Operations, as if the notions were anything but controversial. In truth, they represent a kind of power grab for the service, argues Jim Lewis, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (http://www.csis.org/
"The Air Force is advancing a pawn in the game," he said. "They have a goal that they've wanted to do for a long time -- they want to do warfare in space. This is a way to put it out there, and see if anybody slaps it down." Continued here...