Eaarth

[roflwaffle]

Read the article (Click on the link in my last post).

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by roflwaffle

You may not, but the U.S. military does.

Looks like they're already gearing up to start more wars.
More wagging the dog.

[dcb]

That was 2007, we are under new management now

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by dcb

That was 2007, we are under new management now

Some might say new "General Secretary".

Yeah I know, I'm gone again. Blame GMail...

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by roflwaffle

Read the article (Click on the link in my last post).

OK, I read the link. This is not the official viewpoint of "the U.S. Military" as you stated. It is the opinion of a "blue ribbon panel" of 11 retired officers. One is said to be a "former NASA administrator". Do you realize how much NASA has gone downhill in the past decade?

Did you know that many officers have definite political ideologies, sometimes overtly stated? This is why a Commander in Chief (AKA the President) will often replace a commanding officer with one who is aligned with the ideology of his political party.

The "blue ribbon" panel (all so called panels of this type are a way for retirees to make a few $$$ or retain influence) "agreed with the broad scientific consensus". So there we have it: a panel of retired officers supporting the CONSENSUS. In other words all they are doing is rubber stamping what the consensus says and jumping on the bandwagon, as it were.

This proves nothing, except to say they are part of the 'amen chorus'. And it is NOT the official position of the U.S. Military, as you led us to believe.

[roflwaffle]

I never stated it was the "official viewpoint" of the U.S. military, whatever that means, I just said it was something the military was concerned about. Here's some recent stuff on the same subject from the DoD.

In its 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) (PDF), released Monday, the Department of Defense says it’s critical to craft a “strategic approach to climate and energy.”

“Climate change and energy are two key issues that will play a significant role in shaping the future security environment,” the QDR states. “Although they produce distinct types of challenges, climate change, energy security, and economic stability are inextricably linked. The actions that the Department takes now can prepare us to respond effectively to these challenges in the near term and in the future.”

The Defense Department notes that climate-related changes are already occurring around the globe, with an impact on the roles and missions it has and the environment in which it works. A warming world also raises the possibility of more geopolitical conflict by making worse existing problems like poverty, environmental degradation and food and water security.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by roflwaffle

I never stated it was the "official viewpoint" of the U.S. military, whatever that means, I just said it was something the military was concerned about. Here's some recent stuff on the same subject from the DoD.

Considering the political ideology of the current administration, is it any surprise that the DOD is taking this position? Whenever there is a change in the executive branch of government, that change is reflected in the policies of any given department. Again, this proves nothing except to illustrate that it is the way politics works. It's another 'rubber stamp' in approval of a consensus.

Since Global Warming/Climate Change is a project of the Left, it is fully expected that they will be promoting it in any way they can, overtly or not.

If you don't believe this, ask yourself why AlGore was so involved with promoting it.

Is this piece your idea of a news story? Your 'source' is GreenBang.com. Why do you think they called it that? Apparently everything they write or disseminate is supportive of the "Green" movement. In other words, it is partisan and self-serving; that is the nature of propaganda.

[NeilBlanchard]

The military is apolitical and they have to plan for the future based on the facts.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

The military is apolitical and they have to plan for the future based on the facts.

Whom are you kidding? What nonsense. It is a part of government and subject to all the influences of partisan politics. HA! Maybe the next thing you will be telling us is that the State Department is apolitical, too. Either you are extremely naive, or you think everyone else is. (But I doubt it's the former.)

[roflwaffle]

The military at least tries to be apolitical. If they really aren't as you suggested then we should see a flip in policy when we see a flip in politics.