Conservationists, just as any other group espousing a specific philosophy or point of view, should carry out there efforts as far as their convictions carry them provided that they do not abridge the freedom of others or violate the law of the jurisdiction in which they find themselves in. As far as the specific case with the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society that you cite, I believe that violating standard maritime navigation rules are way out of bounds. Becoming a maritime nuisance, causing injury and possibly even a death in the future may rally a very hard core group of supporters, but actually deters collateral and marginal observers, the very people whom they should be trying to sway for their cause.
Deforestation will result in human demise. What connection aren't people getting. We are depleting our food sources because of greed.
We need to eat whale like I need a hole in the head. We need to have more wooden cabinets like we need a case of Coke. We don't really need to descimate these things and perhaps because no one is really clueing in conservationists need to go further.
Maybe they aren't going far enough. It's funny...we can drop bombs on the citizens of foreign countries but somehow trying to deter deforestation and whaling is nuts.
Funding research and legislation is the way to get this done, and there is progress being made. Listen to this and open your mind. Sustainable forestry can be done, and without hurting lumberjacks.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.