Before this latest act of aggression and bombs bursting in the sovereign air space of another country, UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon had presciently remarked that "there is a sense that there is change in the air." You can say that again. According to his press handout,
(Moon) has invited world leaders, from government, finance, business, and civil society to Climate Summit 2014 this 23 September to galvanize and catalyze climate action. He has asked these leaders to bring bold announcements and actions to the Summit that will reduce emissions, strengthen climate resilience, and mobilize political will for a meaningful legal agreement in 2015. Climate Summit 2014 provides a unique opportunity for leaders to champion an ambitious vision, anchored in action that will enable a meaningful global agreement in 2015.His first mistake is that he's inviting all the wrong people. Like oil and water, warmongering and climate change alleviation do not mix, as evidenced by that fantastic "Flood Wall Street" protest march yesterday, which brought attention to Too-Big-To-Jail Big Finance's role in polluting the earth. As usual, the wrong people were arrested.
And then there are the war criminals, either identical or related by incest to the finance criminals. The Pentagon has already been declared immune from blame in its ongoing and accelerated role in the climate catastrophe. From an award-winning "Project Censored" story published in 2009:
By every measure, the Pentagon is the largest institutional user of petroleum products and energy in general. Yet the Pentagon has a blanket exemption in all international climate agreements.
The Pentagon wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; its secret operations in Pakistan; its equipment on more than 1,000 U.S. bases around the world; its 6,000 facilities in the U.S.; all NATO operations; its aircraft carriers, jet aircraft, weapons testing, training and sales will not be counted against U.S. greenhouse gas limits or included in any count.
The Feb. 17, 2007, Energy Bulletin detailed the oil consumption just for the Pentagon's aircraft, ships, ground vehicles and facilities that made it the single-largest oil consumer in the world. At the time, the U.S. Navy had 285 combat and support ships and around 4,000 operational aircraft. The U.S. Army had 28,000 armored vehicles, 140,000 High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles, more than 4,000 combat helicopters, several hundred fixed-wing aircraft and 187,493 fleet vehicles. Except for 80 nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, which spread radioactive pollution, all their other vehicles run on oil.
Even according to rankings in the 2006 CIA World Factbook, only 35 countries (out of 210 in the world) consume more oil per day than the Pentagon.The American military's reported use (five years ago) of 320,000 barrels of oil a day didn't even factor in the oil used by state department "contractors" and other auxiliary war personnel. Since the last Iraq war caused the emission of at least 141 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) from March 2003 through December 2007, one can only imagine the lasting damage that the latest expansion and escalation of death will unleash into the atmosphere. President Obama, who is increasingly and scarily referring to himself as the "Commander in Chief" rather than the "president," has already promised that the current greed-grab for more oil and treasure should last at least three years.
Follow the money. Take a deep breath, (if you still can) and then keep taking to the streets.
Yes, it is time for taking to the streets against war, war, war. Where have the real warriors gone like those marching against the Vietnam debacle which finally brought an end to it? We are in deep trouble and it is not only about climate change. Thank you Karen for a magnificent column which should be more widely distributed and I always wondered about the pollution left behind by wars, both atmospheric and on- the-ground destruction which remains on the earth forever like agent orange. And to say nothing about the human carnage in it all.
ReplyDeleteAnd then there is this from the Los Angeles Times:
ReplyDelete"As he arrives at the U.N., Obama may face pressure to demonstrate the legal
basis for the Syrian strikes without an authorization from the U.N. Security
Council or, it appears, consent from the Syrian government."
An informative article from Truthout:
ReplyDeleteAirstrikes Begin in Syria: A Decisive Blow or an Ominous Precedent? http://shar.es/1ahDvl via @sharethis
I have to laugh at the Left's agitation over Ruth Bader Ginsburg's refusal to step down from the Supreme Court because she has outlived her usefulness, and the time is opportune—but maybe not for much longer—to replace her with a younger model.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newrepublic.com/article/115973/ruth-bader-ginsburg-should-retire-supreme-court
Once the darling of the Left, Ginsburg is now its bĂȘte noire, because she won't sacrifice herself for the sake of a greater political strategy.
How quickly they turn on their own.
Too funny!