Ecological Warfare

[nbk2000]

Trawling the 'net as always, I found this interesting article about how plastic waste is killing huge numbers of ocean lifeforms:

Scientists have found that this plastic waste is wreaking havoc on the marine life.

Charles Moore: "When birds are forging in the ocean now, they have the
option of eating plastic along with their natural prey. ... they look like
their natural prey which is squid."

You can see albatross dying from eating plastics, its carcass now revealing
the contents of it's stomach.

Charles Moore: "Ninety percent of the dead chicks on Midway Island contain
this kind of material."

And it's coming from around the world.

Charles Moore: "This dead bird had all these reds in it. ... you've got
cigarette lighters from Japan, mayonnaise jar lids from Japan all kinds of
red debris."

Captain Moore would like to see a ban on red colored plastic as a first step
in cleaning our oceans.

Charles Moore: "This chick died with a full stomach, stopped begging its
mother for food. And even though its stomach was full, there was such a
small percentage of the stomach filled by nutritive food, it died from
starvation with a full stomach."

An example of how much plastic is filling up these birds can be seen in a picture of one of the dead ones:

http://www.bestlifeonline.com/cms/uploads/1/dead_bird.jpg

Now, since we know plastic will essentially last forever, and can be made to look like anything, what about making objects to deliberately look like a particular type of ocean prey, with the intention of killing off the predators?

The example above of red objects being mistaken for squid, for instance.

Purpose would be egological disruption of the food chain, breaking a cycle of life, and destroying a source of food for enemy nations. Many nations depend on fish for protein for their populations. Disruption of that food chain would lead to mass-starvation.

This effect could be enhanced by lacing the plastics with disrupting horomones which would pass through the food chain, killing or sterilizing animals higher up the food chain as well, rather than just the one animal that ate the plastic bait.

An example of this would be the small fish that eats the bait gets weak from starvation, gets eaten by a larger predator, who in turns bioamplifies the hormonal concentrations, until an enemy human catches it and eats it, becoming enfeebled or sterilized from hormonal disruption.

Deliberate seeding of many ghost nets, anchoring them in the waters around the target nation, would also reduce live catches.

Dropping dissolving pellets of red-tide dinoflagellates into harbors and along coastlines, to poison shellfish, would also reduce food supplies.

[Vitalis]

Sure, certain countries depend on ocean lifeforms for sustenance. Why not add more TTX-producing bacteria to the water so the puffer-fish will absorb more tetrodotoxin.

No more fugu for you...

[simply RED]

Genetically modified or uncommon for the weather conditions organisms are believed to be unable to survive in their "new" habitat. The idea of biological warfare is (was) that the organisms which are contaminated will become contagious and further spread the disease. Every piece of literature says so, but nobody tried it actually. And I think it is only partially true.

Anyway, having water resistant, water soluble pathogen may prove useful in variety of conditions.

[Jacks Complete]

Fugu wouldn't be affected. The cooking process (for which there is training and licensing) deactivates it, so even twice as much would make no odds.

You could rip almost any country a new asshole with a few hundred dollars and a few plane tickets. The UK has no Colorado beetle, and (little) foot & mouth, the USA has no BSE (supposedly) and there are plenty of small places that have no (insert whatever pest species you like here) that would be very upset should they appear. Just look at the lengths Australia has to go to with rabbits!

If I were a terrorist looking to do another judo move like the Twin Towers, I'd be looking at biological terrorism. It's the gift that just keeps giving. And if you can set up a natural reservoir in the native bat or bird population, then it's around forever.

[chemdude1999]

I find this thread interesting. I know we often focus on methods of killing, disruption, etc.; however, I think this one would have limited use.

First, how would one gauge the effectiveness of the ploy? I suppose looking at catch numbers would be a good indicator. Plus, an overall decline in the food supply would show up eventually. But, both of these take time to produce data. Time is usually of the essence in a war (known or hidden).

Secondly, the concept sounds deceptively simple, but how would a nation go about employing it? That would take further research, and does not discount the idea.

Finally, without out sounding PC, our water supplies are under danger as it is. We have seen over the last 2-3 decades that small changes in one area can adversely affect other areas. Granted the ghost nets would not leave permanent damage. They may deplete a fish to the level that it could not recover, though.

The idea does have merit for isolated bodies of water. But, this would be in-country and the logistics just got more complicated.

Having said that, it does have general merit, too. This idea would have to be employed on a case-by-case basis, of course. I would be very hesitant to release a pathogen, though. After killing and conquering, wouldn't the conqueror what viable resources? Just some thoughts.

[nbk2000]

Firstly, imagine loading up the persian gulf with ghost nets? There goes their fish harvest.

Next, some pathogenic material that's injected into the water table (Deep Digger, anyone?) to render that unusable.

That aquatic weed that chokes up water canals in florida? I think it'd like a new home in Iran's water distribution system. Zebra mussels too.

Japanese horn beetles and African snails would devour their crops.

A good ol' fashioned locust plaque wouldn't hurt either.

[Hirudinea]

The problem I see with using biologic weapons to attack another country, while, a great idea, is that they're hard to control, thats why they weren't used during WWII.

[chemdude1999]

I agree, Hirudinea. One of the eventual outcomes of a all-out war is subjugation. The conquerors would be spending plenty of money on rebuilding the infrastructure, let alone repairing ecological damage.

However, I believe NBK was implying a possible covert war without want of subjugation (simply knock them back a few hundred years). Correct me if I'm wrong.

It would be a good way to fuck over a class or race of people. But, again, the world we live in is smaller than it was 200 years ago. We would have to be careful of possible unintended impacts.

[JohnG]

A few years ago, in a nearby state (New England), a snakehead fish was found. Aka the "walking fish", it could survive extended periods out of water (a couple days!!), and it could "walk" to nearby bodies of water. It is native to Asia, and they ended up poisoning several ponds, killing all the fish in several ponds. It was considered a very high threat to the local ecosystem, although I am unsure how so.

[nbk2000]

He who controls the Spice controls the Universe!

Or, in this case, He who controls the food and water controls the world.

Oil is important, but you can't eat or drink oil, and you'd be dead from dehydration long before the lack of gas for your car became important.

The middle-east comes to mind first, followed closely by China.

There are very few countries in the world that are secure in their food supply. We've seen what happens to countries that can't keep their populations fed...they cease to effectively exist.

The only reason the Norks still exist is because of their nuclear weapons being used as extortion tools to extract food aid from S. Korea.

We could reduce world population very easily by ceasing to sell (or give!) food to the rest of the world, and 'help along' the resulting world famine with agri-warfare.

With world population greatly reduced, with the major portion of the surviving population being America and it's western allies, the rest of the uppity nations will no longer matter, having been starved into irrelevance.

[W4RGASM]

The US had quite a good go at experimental 'rice warfare' during the cold war; and in keeping with that I'm developing a list of the most likely pathogens for crop warfare...

Corn/Maize: Ustilago Maydis
Rice: Xanthomonas Campestris
Potato: Pseudomona Solanceorum
Sugar Cane: Xanthomonas Albineans
Soy: Sclerotina Sclerotonium
Coffee: Colletotrichium Coffeanum
Cannabis: ???
Opium Poppy: Pseudomonas Cichorii
Coca: Fusarium Oxysporon
Citrus: Xyella Fastidiosa
Cotton: Xanthomonas Campestris

Just a start, at least... Any suggestions for taking out cannabis crops?

[nbk2000]

When you say "taking out cannabis crops", that sounds like some DEA agent talking about taking out a weed field in south america.

Are you perhaps referring to the non-psychoactive form, Hemp, which actually has industrial usage?

[Charles Owlen Picket]

In a certain sense, when a country's government is so filth and corrupt that their illicit drug exportation is part and parcel with that nation's economy, the thrust of dealing with something like marijuana would actually affect that country to an overwhelming degree.

When I think "filthy & corrupt"; I think MEXICO! While most people would imagine the production of hemp in textile and related usage, Mexico's drug cartels are so deeply infused with the main political party , PRI, that a disruption of drug money would hurt the political elements from the very top on down.

When the USA experimented with using Paraquat to spray marijuana with that herbicide; it was Mexico who vocally announced it would never participate. Mexico is wonderful example of a VERY wealthy country with lying bastards for leaders who would do anything at all for money. Such scum really DO have drug production as a elemental part of their economy.

[simply RED]

In some village in Mexico CIA found large Marywanna plantation.
Attempting to destroy it, they started to burn the plants.
The whole village went out to breathe the smoke...

[Hirudinea]

I agree, Hirudinea. One of the eventual outcomes of a all-out war is subjugation. The conquerors would be spending plenty of money on rebuilding the infrastructure, let alone repairing ecological damage.

No actually my worry is that if we use a biological agent to destroy an enemies wheat crop that agent could also also infect our wheat crops or those or our allies (who wouldn't be our allies for long without any food. ;) ), what we need is a controlable biological weapon.

The US had quite a good go at experimental 'rice warfare' during the cold war; and in keeping with that I'm developing a list of the most likely pathogens for crop warfare...

Do you have a pathogen for wheat, barley and oats, and do you have treatments for "Western" crops?

Or, in this case, He who controls the food and water controls the world.

Oil is important, but you can't eat or drink oil, and you'd be dead from dehydration long before the lack of gas for your car became important.

Which is why we need to get off our addiction to foreign oil, I'ed love to see how many madrasas the wahabis could fund around the world without the money we give them for their dionsludge!

There are very few countries in the world that are secure in their food supply. We've seen what happens to countries that can't keep their populations fed...

We could reduce world population very easily by ceasing to sell (or give!) food to the rest of the world, and 'help along' the resulting world famine with agri-warfare.

With world population greatly reduced, with the major portion of the surviving population being America and it's western allies, the rest of the uppity nations will no longer matter, having been starved into irrelevance.

Well yes and no, most of the worlds nations can't afford to keep their current populations feed, but they do have enough land to feed a good amount of their populations, even using privative farming techniques, and while half of them would starve to death, I'm sure the other half would be really pissed off, and pissed off at us.

Now if we really wanted to kill the third world off, we should do it with kindness. We should supply the third world with geneticly engineered wheat, rice, and other crop seeds, that give higher yeilds, are more drought and pest resistance, this seed should be supplied freely, or at very low cost. Once the seed is established as the majority crops in the third world, we release a chemical into the enviroment that triggers a "suicide" gene, killing off the plant. Instant famine, wherever these crops had been planted, no time to shift to a different agricultural base, I'ed guess about 85-90% fatality, and cleanup would be much easier. But hey thats just an idea.

[W4RGASM]

When you say "taking out cannabis crops", that sounds like some DEA agent talking about taking out a weed field in south america.

Are you perhaps referring to the non-psychoactive form, Hemp, which actually has industrial usage?

Well, both really. As mentioned, countries like Colombia and Mexico have drug and blood money ingrained soo deeply into their govenment andf economy that one could hardly attack world economic crops without thinking to also take out those ones.

[simply RED]

Well, both really. As mentioned, countries like Colombia and Mexico have drug and blood money ingrained soo deeply into their govenment andf economy that one could hardly attack world economic crops without thinking to also take out those ones.

Why don't you try to export democracy there? All places where America blessed the people with the great opportunity to participate in real elections have become paradise on earth - no crime at all. Nobody needs drugs...
Like Iraq, Vietnam, The Balkans, The Former Soviet States...

Of course this is because they followed the USA model, where clean, pure money - money earned with hard labor or ingenious management are ingrained so deeply into the government and economy.

[Gammaray1981]

@ simply RED: There's no such thing as clean money. Just because the blood and dirt on it hasn't rubbed off there from YOUR hands, doesn't mean it isn't dyed brown.

On a more directly factual note, apparently 8/10 banknotes contain traces of some form of illicit substance.

A tailored insecticide might be of some use. Since insects pretty much support all the food chains of the world, a chemical engineered to sterilise or kill the local pollinators/bird and rodent food/people food (in the case of locusts) could cause considerable medium-term damage to the ecosystem.

[Vitalis]

A small amount of tetrodotoxin allowed to remain in the prepared dish is favored. How would one measure how much remained in the prepared dish if they were assuming the fish had the average amount of tetrodotoxin in them?

This would be small scale, of course, but any large scale Ecological Warfare will eventually come back to haunt the perpetrator.

[nbk2000]

That's called 'Karma Theory' - if you do something bad to someone else, it'll come back on you.

[nbk2000]

Some files I found in my archives about ecological warfare and treaties restricting same.

[chembio]

What about the Cane Toad? It's managed to disrupt the balance between several of Australia's species...

[Hirudinea]

What about the Cane Toad? It's managed to disrupt the balance between several of Australia's species...

The cane toad, the rabbit, the cat, the rat in Australia, purple lusftife (sp), the zebra mussle, the west nile virus in Canada, the brown tree snake in Guam, all of these are disruptive to the enviroment, annoying to be sure, but all put toghter they haven't killed one person, which isn't enviromental warfare, enviromental pranksterism mabye, but enviromental warfare, no.

[Telkor]

An attack on the antarctic crill (e.g. using algaecides, copper or chromium) would really eliminate the fish industry by removing 500 million tons of biomass from the food chain. But this would harm any country that depends on fishing.

[Jacks Complete]

The rabbit hasn't killed anyone in Oz, but look at the costs of controlling them. Set that against what would have been if there were no rabbits, and hence more farmland for pasture, so more cows and more money for the farmers, and you can see a massive upset (millions of £) to the status quo for what, £10? in start-up costs (£2 for grabbing a few rabbits and £8 shipping?)

Likewise the BSE and Foot & Mouth crisises in the UK. Both cost millions at least, for a cost of about 50p.

Those two show a very easy way to have a country destroy itself through it's own over-reaction to an input that is quite minor. A bit like the over-reaction to a single event has nearly brought down the entire USA economy through stupidly pressing on once victory in war was achieved.

Of course, a combined biological attack would be devastating if timed correctly, just like any other attack. Al Quidditch made millions on the money markets due to the foreknowledge of the 9/11/01 attacks. You could so easily make a fortune riding the same odds. Borrow a load of money from the bank, dose up a few steers with something nasty, and then, while the market tumbles for beef jerky, buy a load of jerky futures. Sell them 3 months later and repay the bank loan and keep the profits. You could, of course, do the exact same thing with nothing more than a rumour or fake press report about the West Nile or Bluetongue virus, but what is one report against the hundreds of column inches that a real release would get you?

[Hirudinea]

The rabbit hasn't killed anyone in Oz, but look at the costs of controlling them. Set that against what would have been if there were no rabbits, and hence more farmland for pasture, so more cows and more money for the farmers, and you can see a massive upset (millions of £) to the status quo for what, £10? in start-up costs (£2 for grabbing a few rabbits and £8 shipping?)

Likewise the BSE and Foot & Mouth crisises in the UK. Both cost millions at least, for a cost of about 50p.

Still that is economic, I was thinking of warfare as invloving a bodycount, but for economic warfare rabbits or cane toads or name your vermin are good weapons.

Al Quidditch Who? made millions on the money markets due to the foreknowledge of the 9/11/01 attacks. You could so easily make a fortune riding the same odds. Borrow a load of money from the bank, dose up a few steers with something nasty, and then, while the market tumbles for beef jerky, buy a load of jerky futures. Sell them 3 months later and repay the bank loan and keep the profits. You could, of course, do the exact same thing with nothing more than a rumour or fake press report about the West Nile or Bluetongue virus, but what is one report against the hundreds of column inches that a real release would get you?

Somthing like that would be an interesting way to wreck a nations economy while making money for your own country. (Of course its also a good way to get a nuke up your nationa ass.)