By Mathew Carr

That death figure is for the past five weeks alone

This:

Since President Trump blocks emissions cuts, he slows climate policy, he expands fossil fuels, and he undermines scientific agencies and multilateralism, the result is:

…more warming, more extreme rainfall, more deadly heatwaves, more destructive storms, more death

…this worsens global inequality, boosts tensions and war, benefiting all the world’s military-industrial complexes

It’s a type of brutal weapon.

Trump is speeding the world into an era of multipolarity.

Hatred of America is intensifying.

———

Not this …no Mr Bridgen:

Given the current news about hurricanes and extreme weather, I thought I would sure this from the US Patent office, filed in 2001.
How to control hurricanes and their intensity 😳 pic.twitter.com/OLWJLxPkt4

— Andrew Bridgen (@ABridgen) October 29, 2025

ChatGPT unchecked:

Here’s the latest overview (last ~30 days) on deaths from flooding and related cyclones in Asia — including Sri Lanka — from recent reporting.

🌏 Overview: Deaths across Asia

In total, recent floods and landslides across parts of Asia have killed over 1,100 people.  The worst-hit countries include Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Malaysia. 

🇱🇰 Sri Lanka — Impact in Detail

In Sri Lanka, the confirmed death toll has soared to 355.  In addition, around 366 people are reported missing as of the latest reports.  The disaster — triggered by Cyclone Ditwah — led to severe flooding and landslides, particularly in the central highlands. 

📊 Other Severely Affected Countries

Indonesia: ~ 604 deaths.  Thailand: ~ 176 deaths reported in flooded and landslide-affected areas.  Malaysia: A smaller number of confirmed fatalities (but still included in the overall toll). 

⚠️ Context & Ongoing Uncertainty

Hundreds remain missing in multiple countries — including Sri Lanka and Indonesia — so the death toll may rise further.  The flooding and landslides were triggered by extreme weather: cyclones combined with prolonged heavy rainfall across those regions. 

There is a risk that climate action is being weaponised against the people:

ChatGPT unchecked:

I get what you’re pointing at — inaction on climate change can functionally cause harm even if it isn’t a “weapon” in the literal sense.

Here’s a clear way to frame it:

1. Not a weapon → but the effects can resemble deliberate harm

If a leader blocks emissions cuts, slows climate policy, expands fossil fuels, or undermines scientific agencies, the result is:

more warming more extreme rainfall more deadly heatwaves more destructive storms

Those impacts can kill people.

So while this is not a weapon in intent, it does inflict predictable, preventable harm.

That’s why some critics describe climate obstruction as:

“negligent homicide by policy” “slow violence” “passive weaponisation of the climate”

These are moral or political statements—not literal ones.

2. “Weapon” implies intent

A weapon requires:

a tool plus deliberate intent to harm

Climate inaction is usually:

ideological political economically motivated or based on misinformation

It’s rarely framed by those actors as intent to cause environmental disasters.

3. A sharper way to describe it

Instead of “weather weapon,” the more accurate terms are:

climate negligence climate obstruction climate malpractice policy-driven risk amplification

Those are grounded in evidence, accountability and public policy.

4. If what you mean is:

Can a leader’s actions make weather disasters worse and kill more people?

Absolutely yes.

And that effect can be as large or larger than any conventional weapon.

If you want, I can:

break down specific Trump-era climate decisions and their projected impacts

compare the mortality effects of climate delay vs conventional conflict or analyse the climate-policy positions of 2025 candidates

Just tell me which angle you want.