U.S. Military caves to endless global warming attack

The Atlantic: David A. Graham: Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel: Get Used to Endless War

From ISIS to climate change, the Pentagon chief says, the threats that face the United States are long-term challenges.

It sure seems like there are frightening events happening everywhere today—from ISIS to Ebola, Russian imperialism to Chinese saber-rattling, climate change to congressional dysfunction. But is it really worse, or will this, too, pass?

Bad news: It’s really worse, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told James Fallows at the Washington Ideas Festival Wednesday….

And Hagel didn’t seem especially sanguine that it would end anytime soon. In other words: Get used to endless war…

He noted in particular the challenge of global warming, which Hagel’s Pentagon has made a priority, declaring it a national-security threat, even as Hagel’s own Republican Party continues to block broader steps..

Buckle your seatbelts.


h/t to WUWT reader pat

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 30, 2014 12:05 am

Some people will say ANYTHING to keep the funds going their way.

Olaf Koenders
Reply to  cnxtim
October 30, 2014 4:04 am

I think John Kerry has been kissing his toes – or worse!

Reply to  Olaf Koenders
October 30, 2014 3:35 pm

Do they think we can be beheaded by Climate Change?
Yeah, they probably do.

george e. smith
Reply to  Olaf Koenders
October 30, 2014 3:55 pm

He conceivably could touch his toes, and maybe kiss them during his floor exercise routine. As for that other, It’s probably easier to touch your right elbow, with your right hand ; or verse vicea !

Richard Keen
October 30, 2014 12:09 am

“congressional dysfunction” ???
Presidential, I’d say. Foreign policy, international relations, etc. are the job of the executive department.

October 30, 2014 12:29 am

Team of Bumblers?
Are Susan Rice and Chuck Hagel equal to today’s new national-security challenges?


When President Obama, after months of equivocation over how to respond to the takeover of parts of Iraq and Syria by radical militants, announced in September that the United States would “lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat,” the White House swung quickly into action, sending proposed legislation to train and equip Syrian rebels to Capitol Hill that same day.
Unfortunately, the White House failed to consult with the Pentagon—which would be doing most of the rolling back—on the timing or details of the announcement.

You’ve really got to ask whether the Pentagon is generally blindsided by the Whitehouse pronouncements … do they really believe that GW is a threat to security in the way that other issues are ? I feel desperately sorry for them if they do.

Reply to  Streetcred
October 30, 2014 7:16 am


more soylent green!
Reply to  Streetcred
October 30, 2014 7:26 am

Yes. No. No.

October 30, 2014 12:53 am

War against ISIL endless? Only so long as Obarmaclese decrees it.
Currently ISIL thanker trucks at $10,000 to $15,000 each are transporting crude across the Syrian, Turkish, Jordanian and Iranian borders. Over 200 trucks a day. They are earning millions a day. Some of this oil is being extracted from captured well heads, but much is being siphoned of the Iraq to Turkey pipeline that Obarmaclese has agreed not to shut down.
This oil is the death blood of ISIL. The flow could be stopped tomorrow with 10 A10s. But Obarmaclese is doing nothing.

Reply to  Konrad.
October 30, 2014 5:07 am

But wait… I was distinctly, and loudly, told that it was Bush that was stealing the oils.
Why are democrats always so historically incapable of managing military matters??? Have they ever, ever in the history of the US, managed anything military without excessive cost, loss of life, and screw ups?

Eustace Cranch
Reply to  CodeTech
October 30, 2014 6:07 am

If there was a better way to prosecute WWII than FDR did, I’d like to hear it.
For the record: I am NOT a democrat, or liberal, nor do I approve in any way of FDR’s domestic policies. But credit where credit’s due.

more soylent green!
Reply to  CodeTech
October 30, 2014 7:30 am

FDR did a pretty admirable job for WW2. He still had his issues. He used his kitchen cabinet instead of the official offices for his most valued work and advice. He also had a habit of letting his subordinates have drawn-out policy squabbles until (and if) he made up his mind on what to do. The New Deal was about the worst economic policy he could have implemented.
But FDR prosecuted the war pretty well. He took his boot off the neck of American business and industry so we could produce the food, weapons, ammo and oil the free world needed to defeat the Axis. People had faith in him and believed in him and believed what he said.

Reply to  CodeTech
October 30, 2014 10:40 am

I wouldn´t brag too much about Republican abilities to manage foreign policy or military matters after the serial mistakes made by Bush. US foreign policy has been quite sick for many years….the country is way too focused on Israeli interests, and this muddies up its ability to maneuver in the Middle East and elsewhere.

george e. smith
Reply to  CodeTech
October 30, 2014 4:15 pm

Fernando Leanme
October 30, 2014 at 10:40 am
I wouldn´t brag too much about Republican abilities to manage foreign policy or military matters after the serial mistakes made by Bush. US foreign policy has been quite sick for many years….the country is way too focused on Israeli interests,…..”””””
Where have you been hiding ?? The Republicans have been out of power for almost six years. Time enough for a more enlightened administration to steer the ship of State in a better direction.
So just who are our friends in the Middle East, whose interests we should put ahead of the only democratically elected government and the people who elected them ??

george e. smith
Reply to  CodeTech
October 30, 2014 4:45 pm

Not only FDR, but Harry Truman also. For somebody with no special training for that aspect of the job, Harry presided over some of the most important decisions ever made on this planet. We all know what those were, including his decision to tell Gen Douglas MacArthur, that in the end, the civilians are in charge.
I’m not going to brand any political party as being more inept in defense matters. In the end, the guy with his boots on the oval office desk, has to play the hand that is dealt.
But these days, too many people are just tinkling, and tittering and otherwise just twiddling their thumbs (literally) that they can’t be bothered with any of that.
Next Tuesday, will demonstrate just how little they care about reality.

Reply to  CodeTech
October 31, 2014 1:37 pm

War is caused by the failure of politicians.
War is always messy.
FDR wanted the US/ Allies to win.
This administration served the anti-war crowd when it evacuated our military from Iraq.
Now, The US is there again to re-do what our military had already done.
The first “victory” was squandered. Squandered to pay political dues incurred to win an election. All the lives spent to gain it, wasted.
Victory in war is not the aim of this administration. Victory in elections is.

Reply to  CodeTech
October 31, 2014 2:02 pm

Truman had infinitely more military experience than did FDR, since he had served as a National Guard artillery officer in World War I. FDR’s only national security experience was political, as Asst. Navy Sec.

Reply to  CodeTech
November 2, 2014 6:30 am

RobRoy, it’s not always true that war is caused by the failure of politicians, at least not directly. Hitler wanted living space and was determined to get it, no matter what. There wasn’t really any politicking after the Rhineland that was going to make a difference. It was either go on a defensive war or let him roll unopposed across Europe.
From the perspective of political failings being the root cause of the rise of Nazism in the first place, sure… however Nazism, at least its core principles of racial purity, anti-semitism, eugenics… these were considered modern science back in that era. I do believe the reason so many were against US intervention in 1939-1941 was that they supported many of Hitler’s goals.
We do live in a more enlightened time, however we have definitely gone too far in some ways. The pathetic (and all too common) belief that all cultures and belief systems are of equal merit is the reason we allow the enemy into our midst, then always seem shocked when they show themselves.
By the way, to all who disputed my original statement, you’re right. It’s not democrats, but leftists that can’t manage to handle even the simplest military operation… from LBJ to Carter to Clinton to this dimwit, they simply can’t grasp the concept and refuse to give the military commanders sufficient authority to accomplish their goals. Let’s face it, we’re talking about people who think police should shoot to wound, not kill. People with an irrational fear of weapons, who are actively trying to block children from even being aware that weapons exist. People who think “force” means strong language and a firm tone.

Reply to  Konrad.
October 30, 2014 5:57 am

But…. There are no A-10’s any more. They were all retired last year for budget reasons. This is why 9 soldiers were killed in a friendly-fire incident earlier this year; the military has to use B-1 bombers for close air support nowadays. Seriously.
I guess it’s because B-1 bombers emit less Co2 than A-10’s? It can’t be cheaper to fly a B-1 than an A-10.

more soylent green!
Reply to  RCM
October 30, 2014 7:32 am

As a former flyboy, I can tell you that ground support isn’t how the Air Force envisions its mission.

Reply to  RCM
October 30, 2014 5:45 pm

Retiring A-10’s has little to do with budgetary concerns. Though the Air Force would like everyone to believe that line of reasoning. Their argument was that by keeping what they call an obsolete platform running they had to maintain an entirte separate logistics train operating. Retiring in favor of F-16’s reduced the types of aircraft in inventory to be maintained. Supposedly it also would result in reduced unit purchase prices for F-16’s if we bought more to fill the A-10 role, even though F-16’s are considerably more expensive. But the real reason is as soylent points out. USAF does not see itself as mud movers. They are jet jockeys. Fighter aces that sweep opponents from the sky. The red baron, Steve Canyon, Richard Bong.
I think that some Air Guard units might still be operating A-10’s.

Catherine Ronconi
Reply to  Konrad.
October 30, 2014 11:56 am

Three AC-130s.

Björn from Sweden
October 30, 2014 1:04 am

Eisenhower was prophetic in his farewell adress 1961. The point is, this is not impossible to predict, this does not happen by chance, it is planned and deliberate. New enemies will always be invented to keep the military industry going.
“Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. …
…In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocation, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet in holding scientific discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite”
… and here we are.
It is happening in Sweden also, fake enemis and threats are fabricated to justify military spending.
Very similar to fake ecological threats jo justify taxation.

Keith Willshaw
Reply to  Björn from Sweden
October 30, 2014 4:33 am

The use of fear as a method of controlling populations is as old as politics. It was a long established policy in ancient Sumer, Israel and Egypt. The watchword of the Roman republic in the 1st and 2nd centuries BC was ‘Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam’ or ‘I consider that Carthage must be destroyed’. Where there is no convenient threat one can always be manufactured as we saw in Germany in the early 20th century.

more soylent green!
Reply to  Björn from Sweden
October 30, 2014 7:35 am

The free world largely disarmed after the great blood bath of WW1. The progressive belief was that large armies and navies caused military conflict. How did that work out for the free world beginning in 1939 or so?
Where do you suppose Sweden might be today if the USA and western Europe hadn’t formed NATO? Where would we be if the USA hadn’t decided to stand up the the USSR?

Björn from Sweden
Reply to  more soylent green!
October 30, 2014 2:18 pm

NATO(IL) is a very dangerous beast that is starting wars all over the world to justify its existens and military spending. I would feel very mych safer if NATO disbanned. Military leaders in Sweden, and politicians with ties to arms industry are shamlessly pretending that Russia will soon invade Sweden and we therefore must join NATO for protection. Sweden has very little free press, newspapers are controlled with subsidies and free radio is made impossible by legislation so we have in reality only government controlled radio and tv, and most newspapers are very obedient to the government. Hold on to your freedoms in the USA, dont be like Europe.

george e. smith
Reply to  Björn from Sweden
October 30, 2014 4:06 pm

“””””…..“Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. …”””””
We will keep that in mind, next time the rest of the world wants our help in defending their territorial interests, instead of taking care of that themselves. We are not even allowed to use our defensive forces to defend our country, even though Article IV section 4 of the US Constitution tells the Federal Government that that is their job to do, and they simply ignore that directive

Björn from Sweden
Reply to  george e. smith
October 31, 2014 4:33 am

“We will keep that in mind, next time the rest of the world wants our help in defending their territorial interests, instead of taking care of that themselves.”
Please do, that would be very helpful.

October 30, 2014 1:22 am

Ho, Ho, Ho, Russian Imperialism, nothing to do with the fact that the Crimea has been part of Russia for centuries, charge of the Light Brigade anyone? or is that history to old and inconvenient for our modern policy makers.

Reply to  John Leon
October 30, 2014 1:43 am

Of corsé it is. They can’t even remember that they are the ones who funded, trained, and armed the anti-Assad rebels who became ISIS. (But they also helped Saddam Hussein into position, and Osama bin Laden was (allegedly) their BFF when he was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, so they could claim of to be following tradition.)

Reply to  RoHa
October 30, 2014 3:33 am

Didn’t they also back the Taliban? Then fought them tooth and nail?

Reply to  RoHa
October 30, 2014 4:26 am

Jimbo, I think that was the Brits.

Reply to  RoHa
October 30, 2014 3:30 pm

aaron , I should have said the mujahideen.
But was their silent backing for the Taliban rise to power from the CIA?
AFP http://www.rense.com/general14/rise.htm
This is getting spooky, I’m outta here!

Reply to  John Leon
October 30, 2014 5:59 am

I’ve spent some years in Crimea, looking up its extremely diverse landscapes, history, archaeological sites, and excellent wines. In fact, Crimea was Kimmerian (Galatic), then Scythian, then Greek, Then Roman, Venetian/Genovese/Byzantine, then it belonged to Alans and Goths, then Tatars came, and were owners of Crimea for centuries, than Turks ruled Crimea for about 300 years, and only then, mostly to repel Turks and Tatars, Russians captured Crimea in 18th century. Krushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine, and this fact has been confirmed by the disarmament agreement with Russia, whereas Ukraine retained Crimea in exchange for giving up its nuclear weapons and for giving Russia access to its navy base in Sevastopol. By taking Crimea by force, Russia breached all its treaties and obligations. Occupation of Crimea by Putin is nothing but an illegal and criminal act of war.

more soylent green!
Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 30, 2014 7:36 am

Gosh, if you’re going to pull facts and history on us, well that’s just dirty pool.

Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 30, 2014 10:44 am

On the other hand an European Union incursion into Ukraine is sure to bring along NATO (and therefore German, French, UK, and US troops). These are the last three nations to invade Russian territory in force in the last 200 years. The Russian see this as a very threatening posture by the US and EU nations, and are responding accordingly.

Jason Calley
Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 30, 2014 11:52 am

“Occupation of Crimea by Putin is nothing but an illegal and criminal act of war.”
Maybe not… It depends on how you look at the political violence in Ukraine during the first part of this year. Were the changes in the Ukrainian government a simple restructuring? A US inspired and financed coup? A revolution? An overthrow? After elected President Yanukovych was forced out of office, did Crimea have a legal or ethical obligation to remain loyal to the new government — or did they have the natural right to embrace whatever form of government the people of Crimea chose? Was the Crimean election which chose to rejoin Russia a fair election, or was it rigged?
I honestly do not have enough information to know what the truth of all these questions is, buy answered one way, Putin is a criminal. Answered another way, Putin is a protector. Unfortunately I do not trust American MSM, nor can I trust the pronouncements put out by our current American politicians.
The occupation of Crimea may very well be criminal — but it is definitely not clear cut.

Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 30, 2014 12:19 pm

So it’s okay for people in Yugoslavia to vote themselves into more than half a dozen independent countries but it is not okay for the people of Crimea? Give it a rest.
Obama, and his mentor with the obsessive compulsive hate Russia disorder (Zbig), thought they could just endlessly expand NATO eastwards and then they made the move to grab Ukraine and it all fell apart. The Russians sill have Sevastopol and don’t pay $90 million a year to Ukraine and the west is left with an economic basket case that has no industrial heartland left because they are voting and fighting to leave as well.
You can blame Putin all you want but he has clearly outplayed NATO’s east expansion on this one. No I don’t like Putin as I think he is a ruthless killer but what would the USA do if Russia overthrew the democratically elected government of Mexico and started talking about having it as part of the Warsaw Pact? It would last about as long as Crimea staying part of the Ukraine. You walk into someone’s neighborhood and throw your weight around without consequences.

Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 30, 2014 3:40 pm

NATO could have annexed Russia… ever think of that?
Of course, Putin would then have nobody to fight but those who wanted transparent governance, and the KGB head of Germany when the Wall fell couldn’t have that, now could he?

Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 30, 2014 5:58 pm

Crimea is not a simple issue. Alexander is correct in the current seizure being illegal under international law. However it gets complicated by the fact te majorty of citizens are now ethnically Russian and prefer to associate with Russia. I’d bet on this being a done deal. Ukraine is not getting it back. As for eastern Ukraine, that is a different story. Russia’s claim is considerably weaker and if western nations continue with sanctions and support to Ukraine, Russia will eventually have to concede. I just don’t expect it to happen anytime soon and without some sort of face saving mechanism for Putin.

Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 31, 2014 8:52 am

“and only then, mostly to repel Turks and Tatars, Russians captured Crimea in 18th century. ”
Well that’s longer than the existence of the state Ukraine, so what’s your beef? Russia has the older claim, we agree on that.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
Reply to  Robertvd
October 30, 2014 2:00 am

Robert, to be fair, your graph shows debt without inflation. You actually need to show debt as a percentage of GDP to make it accurate…

Reply to  The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
October 30, 2014 3:17 am

Yep . The US dollar is getting worthless . Say adios to your savings in dollars and say adios to retirement. You’ll have to work until you die.O yes and say adios to affordable healthcare.

Reply to  The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
October 30, 2014 6:07 pm

The US dollar is not anywhere near as threatened as you think. Recall the panty bunching when talk of lowering the credit rating of the US first started? Now recall what actually happened – the Fed was able to lower the rate it paid out on government bonds to record lows. People were almost willing to pay the US Treasury to take their money.
Fo the US dollar to become worthless some other currency will have to take its place. Right now none is in sight. It isn’t the Euro – the EU economy is too shaky and has systemic issues far bigger than the US has. And talk all you want about China’s economy, no one is going to rely on a currency whose value can be manipulated at will by their government.
Face it – all the world knows that there is no where safer for their money than the US.

Robert W Turner
Reply to  Robertvd
October 30, 2014 8:37 am

No, don’t look here, nothing to see here. Look over there at man-bear-pig, or over there it’s the IS, or over here look Russia is a threat to American security.

Don Graham
Reply to  Robertvd
October 30, 2014 3:07 pm

Where is your evidence for stating that Putin is a ruthless killer? Apart from that statement I agree with everything you say. Bush and Obama have been the true ruthless killers around the world over the last 13 years ,that, no one can deny. Putin got a bad rap for kicking the shysters out of Russia at the end of the Cold war that were turning Russia into a colony of the West , something the West still desires. There is a lot of nonsense written about Putin by the MSM to demonise him . How dare the west (US) deem regime change in Russia or any country as desirable , undeserved , unearned total arrogance.

Reply to  Don Graham
October 30, 2014 9:42 pm

Putin has killed at least 120 journalists because he didn’t like what they reported.
And what’s with his confrontation with Ukraine? Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine isn’t trying to take over Russia.
Sounds like Putin wants to re-establish the old Russian Empire. And that’s from his own mouth, Don.

Reply to  Don Graham
October 31, 2014 8:49 am

RockyRoad, if your information about 120 journalists killed by Putin comes from CNN, I’d take it with a grain of salt. Also you might want to read up about that very unfortunate car accident of one Michael Hastings.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Don Graham
October 31, 2014 9:09 am

“…Bush and Obama have been the true ruthless killers around the world over the last 13 years … .”
Uttered by Don Graham on Oct. 30th, 2014, at 1507.
And they most certainly have killed FAR more civilians and non-combatants than the All-ah-hoo Ahk-bar Gang. Right.
Mr. Graham? …. Mr. Graham?……. MISTER GRAHAM! Take that bucket off your head and look around at some real world data.
Fantasyland is more fun, eh? Well, just don’t expect us to not laugh at you when you skip about in your 30-year-old “Give Peace a Chance” T-shirt, giddily spouting nonsense — because you are SO SILLY.

Dr. Paul Mackey
October 30, 2014 1:29 am

Study the “Great Game” and you will find Russia has been playing the game of empire building for centuries….Anthony Hopkirk has produced some very enlightening and entertaining histories of this period.

October 30, 2014 1:31 am

We have always been at war with Eastasia…

Andrew N
Reply to  dbstealey
October 30, 2014 1:47 am

Sorry, as of today we have always been at war with Eurasia…

Reply to  Andrew N
October 30, 2014 5:18 am

Double-plus ungood.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
October 30, 2014 1:39 am

We have had news reports this morning, here in Britain, of “unusual” Russian bomber sorties.
However, if oil prices continue to fall, Russia won’t have the cash for fuel for its airplanes! It will be very interesting to see what happens to oil prices. It’s hurting Iran and Russia. The US can squeeze them even more if it frees up its reserve. It could mean dire times for ordinary Russians as the money dries up. A very cold couple of winters could see some serious grumbling.

Reply to  The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
October 30, 2014 6:32 am

You don’t need cash to buy fuel for your airplanes when you already have the fuel.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
Reply to  DirkH
October 30, 2014 7:00 am

It has to be refined to be kerosene. The refining process is expensive and so is the infrastructure to support it.

Robert W Turner
Reply to  DirkH
October 30, 2014 8:41 am

Rosneft alone has the capacity to refine over 1 million barrels each day.

Reply to  DirkH
October 31, 2014 8:47 am

I would think that Russia has that infrastructure in spades already.

October 30, 2014 1:43 am

Obama has been purging high ranking military officers. The result will be a military that sucks up to Obama, instead of doing the job they were designed to do.
This can only be part of a deliberate and treacherous plan. The more I watch him, the more convinced I am that Obama is totally anti-American. Never listen to what he says, he’s very good at sweet-talking. Rather, watch what Obama does. Watch his actions. They would scare the hell out of the average citizen — and they should.

Reply to  dbstealey
October 30, 2014 7:00 am

+ 1 But I would make it ‘Obama & Co’ I don’t think he’s the brain.

T. Port
Reply to  dbstealey
October 30, 2014 7:23 am

This website would have more credibility if it stuck to serious discussions about claimate. Postings by conspiracy nuts do not help.

Reply to  T. Port
October 30, 2014 9:31 am


more soylent green!
Reply to  T. Port
October 30, 2014 12:10 pm


Don Graham
Reply to  T. Port
October 30, 2014 3:11 pm

This morning it was nice and sunny but this afternoon its cold and raining. Claimate change?

Reply to  T. Port
October 30, 2014 9:44 pm

You and I both know “serious discussions about climate” are a relative waste of time.
Climate has been changing for over 4 billion years and will continue to do so until the Sun consumes the Earth.

Reply to  T. Port
October 31, 2014 8:45 am

T.Port, are you saying that the firing of Generals and Naval officers by Obama is an invention by conspiracy nuts? I think it is not. Then why does he do it, T.Port? You have offered no explanation. I think you are unhappy about this information being disseminated. Are you working for the US government? In what position?

Mario Lento
Reply to  dbstealey
October 30, 2014 9:46 pm

Citizens have been walking out as Obama speaks, the military is weary of him. I have a little hope that America will vote the right way on Tuesday. Get the Democrat stronghold out our pockets… but then we have this debt looming.

October 30, 2014 1:44 am

Rulers have known since dawn of time that the best and easiest way to keep their subjects under submission is to keep them in a constant state of fear; better to be feared than loved…
Granted, sometimes existential threats exist, but more often than not, threats are either contrived or propagandize to seem worse than they really are.
Ironically, rulers often hide or trivialize the worst existential threats, especially if they’re of the rulers’ making, for example: $18 trillion national debt, $1 trillion/yr budget deficits, inflation, bogus $trillions printed, underemployment, loss of property/personal freedoms, etc.
Global Warming is the perfect example of a contrived threat that allows unlimited government power grabbing by political hacks with the added bonus of fleecing $trillions from taxpayers, with the added twist of having many naive taxpayers actually clamouring for even more expensive CO2 taxes/legislation; the trifecta of government tyranny! You couldn’t ask for a more elegant scam.
The scary thing about getting the Defense Department involved in the CAGW scam is that it effectively weaponizes it….
You don’t have to be a conspiracy nut to realize that if, for some insane reason, an international treaty on CAGW is reached, the military could be used to enforce it; i.e.cut your CO2 emissions, or else, you capitalist dog!
Regardless of the aforementioned scenario, getting the Defense Depatment onboard the CAGW scam allows government hacks to waste $100’s of billions on moving costal bases, shoring up rivers basins close to bases, installing $billions of solar panels and wind turbines on bases, running military jets/vehicles on “green” fuel, etc…
The world has gone collectively (or should I say Progressively) insane..

Martin A
October 30, 2014 1:45 am

Ironically, the cost of its military spending will eventually lead to the end of the American Empire.
When the USA’s credit card maxes out, the dollar will collapse, with repercussions beyond anything dreamed up by the CAGW believers

Reply to  Martin A
October 30, 2014 1:49 am

The military has been gutted over the past six years. Its budget is much smaller — but social spending is skyrocketing.
If the U.S. credit card maxes out, it will not be due to military spending. And a strong military is the one thing that benefits every citizen equally. Because without a country, or even with a diminished country, we all suffer.
The question is: why is our military being gutted, at the same time that we are forced into endless wars? Don’t you think there’s a reason behind it?
Obama campaigned on a platform of getting us out of the wars in the middle east. Instead, he has escalated. Yet the left is completely silent…

Reply to  Martin A
October 30, 2014 1:58 am

That is the traditional assumption, but assumptions are seldom correct.

Reply to  Martin A
October 30, 2014 3:30 am

Not really, Martin. Granted, the US should only be spending about $400 billion/year on its military instead of $800 billion/yr. The military is one of just 16 powers that US citizens granted to the Federal government, and has historically been the largest portion of total Federal spending.
Military overspending by $400 billion/yr is not what bankrupted the US… The US has about $100+ TRILLION in unfunded liabilities (mostly Medicaid/care and Social Security), which will never be paid… The US spends about $2+ TRILLION/yr (Federal + State) welfare programs/social security/medicaid/care. That’s what killed the US “Empire”.
The US became a “democracy” during the Wilson Administration and have never recovered. The US was supposed to be limited Federal Republic. That’s ultimately what killed the US, which is what the US Founding Fathers predicted would happen….

David A
Reply to  SAMURAI
October 30, 2014 3:46 am


more soylent green!
Reply to  Martin A
October 30, 2014 7:40 am

No, not even close. Look at entitlement spending. Look at spending for social programs.
This doesn’t mean our military spending couldn’t use some trimming. But the facts are military and other defense-related spending are nothing compare to our unfunded entitlement liabilities and our social programs.

Reply to  Martin A
October 30, 2014 6:11 pm

See my reply to Robert above. The dollar is nowhere close to collapsing.

Reply to  timg56
October 30, 2014 9:47 pm

…except practically every country in the world no longer wants the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
Britain lost that enviable position back in 1973 as their Leftward ways instilled lack of confidence in the Pound Sterling.
The same thing will happen to the dollar and for the same reason.

Reply to  timg56
October 31, 2014 8:41 am

October 30, 2014 at 6:11 pm
See my reply to Robert above. The dollar is nowhere close to collapsing.”
The recent Dollar strength is due to its inverse correlation with the oil price, which has been pushed down by Saudi; for reasons we can only speculate about at the moment. Saudi is planning something, possibly force a breakup of OPEC which would allow them to turn around and make new deals – and those would be with China, in Yuan, as China is their best customer.

Reply to  timg56
October 31, 2014 10:16 am

Rocky & Dirk,
You both need to brush up on your economics. Where do you get “…except practically every country in the world no longer wants the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency.” from?
If this were true then they wouldn’t be buying US notes. It really is that simple. And the “strength” of the dollar – ie how much it buys of other currencies, is not what we are talking about. The only relationship it has to buying US Treasury notes is how much value a buyer gets. It has nothing to do with whether or not they buy.
The people who say that the world economy is looking to ditch the dollar are either hoping someone believes them and switches to their currancy, envious of the US’ position, or talking heads whose job it is to talk, no relevancy required. If you want to believe them, feel free to. Just don’t expect anyone to mistake you as knowledgable in economics.

October 30, 2014 1:57 am

The climate obsessed tactic is to infect every level of government with cliamte related jobs and policies that must be funded. They are kooks but they are not dumb.

Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
October 30, 2014 2:01 am

Haven’t there been wars and rumors of wars since about ten thousand years ago?

Reply to  Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
October 30, 2014 2:18 am

yes. There has also been end of the world manias since at least the people who put the Noah story together.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
Reply to  hunter
October 30, 2014 2:48 am

Good ‘un.

Reply to  Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
October 30, 2014 8:46 am

Jesus noted the wars and rumors of wars as an indictor of us approaching the “end times.” We have always had wars. What we have not had, and what has popped up in the recent 20 years, is wide-spread conspiracy-theory type discussion of rumors of wars. Examples: who really shot JR (I mean JFK), who really carried out 9-11, is Hilary and friends behind gun-running from Libya-Turkey-Syria, is government behind Newtown massacre, Reid move to push Bundy off land was not a war against a tax-evader but a war for Reid/China solar deal, and so on. We have wars, but it seems like for almost every one, we have a rumor of what the war really is.
Sometimes the Bible’s prophesies show up to be true. people might want to mull this over a bit…
From Matthew 26:
“The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me.”
-The poor are still here, just like he said, and Jesus left, just like he said.
” When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”
-The Gospel is still preached, and the story of the woman doing this annointing is still told. Three true prophecies in one passage.
I recognize that “Rumors of wars” I subject to interpretation, but there sure are a lot of rumors out there lately.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
October 30, 2014 8:58 pm

Wow. I’m amazed.

October 30, 2014 2:16 am

Reblogged this on SasjaL and commented:
The psychosis is worse then we thought …
Björn from Sweden on October 30, 2014 at 1:04 am
– Yes and media don’t see any problems in helping …

October 30, 2014 2:46 am

While the US Military gets distracted with “Climate Change” Doomsday Raptures as if they are magically true somehow, Putin’s Russian Military gets ready for it’s expansion using the full “carbon based” resources at it’s disposal.

October 30, 2014 2:52 am

In 1974 the CIA was so worried about a cooling climate it prepared a report [PDF].
On August 1, 1974 the White House wrote to Secretary of Commerce Frederick Dent.

“Changes in climate in recent years have resulted in unanticipated impacts on key national programs and policies. Concern has been expressed that recent changes may presage others. In order to assess the problem and to determine what concerted action ought to be undertaken, I have decided to establish a subcommittee on Climate Change.” [PDF]

In 1988 Hansen began a new round of climate scare – global warming. Billions have been spent with no discernible effect on global co2 emissions and a temperature standstill lasting over 18 years and counting. Maybe they are aiming at the wrong target.

Reply to  Jimbo
October 30, 2014 3:06 am

In 1972 George J. Kukla (of the Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory) and R. K. Matthews (Chairman, Dept of Geological Sciences, Brown University) wrote a Letter to President Nixon.

Dear Mr. President:
Aware of your deep concern with the future of the world, we feel obliged to inform you on the results of the scientific conference held here recently. The conference dealt with the past and future changes of climate and was attended by 42 top American and European investigators. We enclose the summary report published in Science and further publications are forthcoming in Quaternary Research.
The main conclusion of the meeting was that a global deterioration of climate, by order of magnitude larger than any hitherto experience by civilized mankind, is a very real possibility and indeed may be due very soon.
The cooling has natural cause and falls within the rank of processes which produced the last ice age. This is a surprising result based largely on recent studies of deep sea sediments……
(2) Increased frequency and amplitude of extreme weather anomalies such as those bringing floods, snowstorms, killing frosts, etc……..

There doesn’t seem to have been a consensus on global cooling but the above just illustrates how little it takes to spook people. The standstill should now spook them.

Reply to  Jimbo
October 30, 2014 3:17 am

In 2003, the ONA at the United States Dept of Defense was asked to produce a study on the likely and potential effects of abrupt modern climate change should global warming cause a shutdown of thermohaline circulation and catastrophic cooling. [PDF]. Controversy followed.

October 30, 2014 2:57 am

So this man has tumbled to the fact that WW2 is over and the Soviet Union is gone? Well done!
But this is strange:
“Even if a new era of comity arrived in Washington, however, Hagel forecast that the U.S. would continue to grapple with overseas threat for the foreseeable future. “Tyranny, terrorism, the challenges and threats to our country … is going to be with us,” he said. “It’s a reality. I see these things continuing to stay out of there.””
Out OF there? Is this just bad English?

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  ConTrari
October 30, 2014 3:21 am

Freudian slip, more likely. He likes fighting warm, but not hot, wars.

October 30, 2014 3:58 am

Reblogged this on A Conservative Christian Man.

Bruce Cobb
October 30, 2014 4:11 am

It’s too bad Hagel is such a moron, unable to see the difference between a real threat, such as ISIS and the bogeyman, “climate change”.

October 30, 2014 4:42 am

Hagel may be a Republican, but he is no conservative. Eisenhower warned us this would happen.

Mike H.
Reply to  Gregory
October 30, 2014 10:11 am

Hagel is not a Republican he’s a progressive. Big difference.
You can call yourself whatever you like, it’s how you act that really adds definition.

more soylent green!
Reply to  Mike H.
October 30, 2014 12:13 pm

Hagel is a Republican. There is no ideological screening required to self-identify as a member of the party. He can be a Republican and vote whatever way he wants. And no matter what his policies or how he votes, he is still a Republican.

Mario Lento
Reply to  more soylent green!
October 30, 2014 12:49 pm

@more soylent green! October 30, 2014 at 12:13 pm
Hagel is a Republican. There is no ideological screening required to self-identify as a member of the party. He can be a Republican and vote whatever way he wants. And no matter what his policies or how he votes, he is still a Republican.
There is an acronymic name. RINO – Republican In Name Only. Just sayin’

Doug Huffman
October 30, 2014 5:04 am

When the phrase “endless war” is seen, at least recall Joe Haldeman’s The Forever War. If not read, then read it.

October 30, 2014 5:49 am

Quotes by H.L. Mencken, famous columnist: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” And, “The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it.”

October 30, 2014 6:07 am

Lions and Tigers and Climate Change, oh my! Lions and Tigers and Climate Change, oh my!

October 30, 2014 6:20 am

Meh. For one thing, the military creates contingency plans for all sorts of outlandish crap – like alien attack from space. For another, they consume gigantic amounts of fossil fuels. The planning might just as well encompass scenarios where the ultra-greens somehow gain political ascendancy and increase fossil fuel prices 2x or 3x.

Reply to  c1ue
October 30, 2014 6:39 am

Who was it, ah, Neil Young, he said the US army produces way more CO2 than ISIS therefore the USA is more evil than ISIS. Recently, on Howard Stern’s show.

tom s
Reply to  DirkH
October 30, 2014 8:46 am

Ol’ Neil better stop doing concerts then. Lots and lots of co2 there Ol’ Neil. Ugh!

Marilynn in NorCal
Reply to  DirkH
October 30, 2014 12:33 pm

Well, he’s right on both counts. The U.S. army DOES produce more CO2 than ISIS and the corporation known as the UNITED STATES IS more evil than its spawn ISIS. The only correction is to leave out “therefore” and you have two facts that stand quite well on their own.

Reply to  DirkH
October 30, 2014 6:15 pm

Neil Young is an idiot. You can’t do the drugs he has and be considered as credible.

Reply to  DirkH
October 31, 2014 8:36 am

MariLynn; heh, nice observation. But he did make the connection.

more soylent green!
October 30, 2014 7:42 am

Last century, the US Army had a contingency plan in case of an invasion from Canada.

Reply to  more soylent green!
October 30, 2014 4:42 pm

No, that plan still exists and is regularly updated as are most contingency plans.

Reply to  more soylent green!
October 31, 2014 11:16 am

I’d be concerned if they didn’t.

Janice Moore
October 30, 2014 8:05 am

In defense of our wonderful United States Armed Forces who know that their mission is to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America” and NOT to fight CO2 fairies (or germs or …. well, lots of junk the Democrats want them to “fight”….) —
— the Secretary of Defense is a POLITICAL appointee.
And that is all.
Chuck Hagel is just a puppet who squeeks Democrat talking points.
“Hagel’s Pentagon” — LOL.

Bruce Cobb
October 30, 2014 8:14 am

It’s positively Hagelian. In principle, that is.

October 30, 2014 8:45 am

The Pentagon is a very large building. It is so large that they can hold a press conference in one part of the building on the same day as a terrorist act hits another side of the building earlier in the day. It can also distribute WH BS directives while conducting other missions. Next stop: USDA meat inspectors and global warming.

Reply to  Resourceguy
October 31, 2014 8:34 am

“It is so large that they can hold a press conference in one part of the building on the same day as a terrorist act hits another side of the building earlier in the day.”

October 30, 2014 10:05 am

Gee, global warming means greens ague to stop domestic pipelines that increase national security. Global warming means we don’t do off shore drilling to increase national security. Global warming means we close down coal plants and decrease national security.
But hey, we SURE DO NEED that military running around in the Middle East to keep the oil flowing.
Ya think the military thus wants domestic oil production and thus REDUCE the need for the military? No kidding, be it the Middle East, Russia and the US military = they ALL don’t want increased energy security in the USA since as such it reduces their importance.
The military is just another arm of the government with the same self interest. The military’s position on global warming clearly justifies their self interest by preventing domestic energy production and at the same time is a position that justify carbon tax systems that FEEDS this big government monster called the military.
Gee, who would have thunk that the greens and the military are in the same bed wanting reduced domestic energy production, but hey lets import oil from those folks in the Middle East that want to blow us up! Anyone have some spare war ships to send to some conflict in that part of the world? Gee, if we have all our own oil, then WHO cares about some sand dunes in the Middle East? And who would care about sending those multi billion dollar war ships into that part of the world?
Yes, the military is a HUGE dog wagging the SAME tail as the greens and socialists to justify their existence.
Albert k

more soylent green!
Reply to  albertkallal
October 30, 2014 10:41 am

Sorry, don’t buy it. Not even the generals at the Pentagon want to send our soldiers, sailors and airmen to die just to keep our funding.
Your facts are wrong, also. We don’t buy much oil from the Middle East. Surprisingly little. Go come up with another conspiracy, maybe involving FEMA.

Reply to  more soylent green!
October 31, 2014 8:32 am

The USA does not need to buy ME oil, that might be true; but the USA does kill, bomb and burn anyone who dares to sell oil for something other than US Dollars; to maintain demand for T-Bills around the planet; see Saddam; Gaddafhi, and the current vilification of Putin. And the unfortunate accident of the Total boss.

Reply to  more soylent green!
October 31, 2014 10:21 am

You apparently are drinking from the same bottle as albert.
The reason other nations buy Treasury bonds is simple – there is no safer place to put their money. No currancy is more reliable, no government more trustworthy and no economy more capable.

Reply to  albertkallal
October 30, 2014 6:17 pm

I hope you are at least drinking the good stuff.

Mario Lento
October 30, 2014 10:20 am

” to congressional dysfunction. ”
I am so sick of the bumper sticker slogans presented as if they were some fact. Congress is doing what it is supposed to do. That is, one party tries to keep in check things which they find uttery against their principles. If there were only a single party, laws would be continually written without representation of alternative views. Often times, the best thing congress can do is NOT act to take away more from one group and give it to a more worthy group.
And of course, there is one person Harry Reid, who has damned the process of bipartisanship by preventing so many bills passed by the House of Representatives to go to vote in the Senate

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Mario Lento
October 30, 2014 1:01 pm

Some info about this here (may require a subscription):
They have also been handmaidens to Harry Reid , the Majority Leader who has devoted the last four years to protecting Mr. Obama while turning the Senate into the world’s least deliberative body.

Mike H.
October 30, 2014 10:20 am

Hagel and al-Bama might consider one point in the middle of their machinations, the clarion call of war is how two bit dictators usually bring their country together during a self created internal crises. If we’re already at war, and it has been declared to be so, then the lever of war is lost. They might just be caught hoisting themselves on their own petard.

Mike H.
Reply to  Mike H.
October 30, 2014 10:25 am

should be: “two-bit dictators and wanna-be’s”

Catherine Ronconi
October 30, 2014 10:46 am

This is nothing new. The Obama Administration has been foisting “Climate Change” off on the military since 2009. It’s disgusting, but we salute and follow orders. He has purged any general officers not willing to toe the party line.

Joel O'Bryan
October 30, 2014 11:36 am

Everyone must first and foremost recognize several facts when evaluating what Hagel stated.
1. Hagel is a politician.
His background suggest he understand business and foreign trade. He has limited national security expertise other than sitting through committee meetings in Congress. Obama nominated him to be SecDef most likely because he was inexperienced enough not to challenge him or his WH on matters of National Security, and as a get-along-to-get-along establishment Republican he is malleable.
2. He is second in command of the US military, only subordinate to the President.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Combatant Commanders must follow his orders. If they do not agree and cannot abide by or with his or his boss’s priorities, their ONLY option is to resign and let another general be promoted to their job who agrees to follow Hagel’s orders.
Once you understand those two facts, then one can see how the US military becomes the President’s social-political tool, from a President who little regard for national defense policy nor does he want to.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 30, 2014 6:18 pm

Re: #2 above
there is hope.
So long as the majority of the US military are pro-liberty and truth (and they are!), all will be well IN SPITE OF THE PLAGUE IN THE WHITEHOUSE.
The person occupying the oval office may be “Commander in Chief,” but the U. S. military’s CONTROLLING authority is the Constitution of the United States. And no one, not Nixon, not Dope, NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
Including natural law
which is simply
what a healthy human conscience says is: “the right thing to do.”
BY DEFINITION there will be very little evidence to cite of the times that the U. S. Armed Forces have successfully done the right thing over the years (and, ARE doing, even in the past 6 years, despite the No-Hand-Over-MY-Heart**….. er,…… until I HAD to do it to get elected….. “Commander in Chief’s” vile Rules of Engagement….), but, I can cite one:
On April 8, 2009, Somali pirates hijacked a Maersk container ship. Captain Mark Phillips ended up a hostage in his failed attempt to exchange himself for the pirate captured aboard his ship. The U.S.S. Bainbridge went full ahead to the rescue. The team of SEALS aboard was refused permission to shoot the pirates at any opportunity — in an effort by B. Hussein to spare the lives of those who shared “my Muslim faith” {see c. 2008 ABC interview with George Stephanopoulos, quickly corrected, but also see video below for indisputable evidence for B. Hussein’s “muslim faith”}***. Thanks to Commander ___ (I sure hope his career was not torpedoed after that incident …. I’m not even mentioning his name, though not a secret, here, just to keep him from suffering simply do to ANY publicity rousing the retribution fiends who may have chosen to overlook his actions so far…), the SEALS killed 2 (?) of the pirates and rescued Capt. Phillips. EVEN THOUGH, at that time, the Rule of Engagement hissed out by B. Hussein was (paraph.) “only shoot if Phillips is in imminent danger” — Phillips’ merely being held captive had already been (during his 4-day ordeal at sea) ruled NOT “imminent danger” enough(!!!).
And then what happened to the Navy SEALS in Afghanistan, …. not all that long after? Pay-back.
Tough beans, you vile, anti-American, pseudo-president — the SEALS did the right thing and, in SPITE of all you might do to them in revenge: THEY WILL DO IT AGAIN.
DO THE RIGHT THING rules our wonderful military men and women.
Thank God.
Natural Law, as referred to in the Nurnberg trials, “the law above the law,” is ultimately the sole control over the savagery that is Naziism or fascism or communism or socialism (which INEVITABLY become, as Friedrich Hayek warned, “a dictatorship of the elite” — real world experiments in Russia, China, Cuba, and on and on prove this. It is fact, not conjecture).
Though you will see little evidence, it is operating EVERY DAY.
GO, UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES!!! We, the People, have your back (with that shotgun in the back bedroom closet, if need be…..).
Source videos:
Video evidence of Barack Hussein Obama refusing to place his hand over his heart during the playing of “The Star Spangled Banner” (shows, incidentally, how dumb he is, too — any saavy politician…. (head shake)):
(youtube vid — I HIGHLY RECOMMEND MUTING THE SOUND… (shudder))

youtube video evidence of B. Hussein’s “muslim faith”
WARNING: disturbing images at end…

The above evidence explains a LOT of what has happened over the past 6 years.
Conclusion (answering #2 above): the de jure formality that makes one “Commander in Chief” (or one of his stooges), does not make one de facto commander of ….. anything.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
October 30, 2014 6:25 pm

Sigh. I used the “N-z–ii” word (and likely a couple of others, lol). Sorry for the need to mode-rate (red face).
Correction (if my post about the hope we can have due to the noble nature of the majority of those in the U.S. Armed Forces gets publishe — oh, please, oh, please, oh, please, dear mo-d-er-ator)
due to ANY publicity… .”

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
October 30, 2014 6:26 pm


Reply to  Janice Moore
October 31, 2014 11:36 am

Revealed is right. Baraq Hussein bin-Obama al-Indonesii has repeatedly revealed himself inadvertently.

October 30, 2014 12:27 pm

The only thing scarier than the current administration’s stupidity is going to be the future administration’s stupidity. As far as the leadership pool is concerned this country is wading in the very shallow end.
We’re screwed.

Marilynn in NorCal
Reply to  LogosWrench
October 30, 2014 12:38 pm

More like a plastic kiddie’s wading pool, and nobody’s wearing diapers…
But it’s all in the long-term plans. As Gerald Celente says, “Don’t forget to vote. Throw out the bums and bring in the scums.”

Marilynn in NorCal
October 30, 2014 12:34 pm

Chuckie forgot to mention, “endless false flag operations.”

Marilynn in NorCal
October 30, 2014 1:07 pm

“He noted in particular the challenge of global warming, which Hagel’s Pentagon has made a priority, declaring it a national-security threat, even as Hagel’s own Republican Party continues to block broader steps..”
HAGEL’s Pentagon!? Seems like folks have forgotten the Pentagon study during the Bush (Jr) regime that breathlessly declared the national security threat presented by man-made global warming. (They hadn’t switched to the multipurpose term “climate change” yet.) Plans were being made to deal with the mass migrations and riots that were sure to stem from all the CAGW droughts, floods, failed crops, and general unrest.
Why does Orwell’s version of news reporting in “1984” keep coming to mind?

Reply to  Marilynn in NorCal
October 31, 2014 10:45 am

The younger Bush Administration fought the insanity of CACA, first by not implementing the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, then by waging the so-called “war on science” so decried by Leftists at the time. The Pentagon was most certainly no under orders to “fight climate change” during Jan 2001 to Jan 2009, as it has been since, under the Obama Administration.

Marilynn in NorCal
Reply to  milodonharlani
October 31, 2014 1:38 pm

Is this another right wing attempt to whitewash the criminal Bush administration? Don’t forget that the left wing and the right wing are appendages of the same predatory bird.
I didn’t say anything about the Kyoto Protocol. The fact remains that the Pentagon during Dubya’s regime issued a report on the threat of CAGW to national security. The statement that “Hagel’s Pentagon has made [climate change] a priority, declaring it a national-security threat” is disingenuous at best. The traitors in office build upon the foundations of their predecessors. Hagel’s position is rooted firmly in the previous Pentagon recommendations.

Reply to  milodonharlani
October 31, 2014 1:56 pm

You are misinformed.
I assume you refer to the 2004 Office of Net Assessment study, which was not adopted by the Pentagon, ie the office of then Defense Secretary Rumsfeld & JCS, but was indeed rejected by them &, according to the MSM, “suppressed”. The study emerged from a handful of bureaucrats & did not reflect the thinking of either the DoD or the Bush Administration.
Hence the Obama Administration bears complete responsibility for corrupting the Pentagon with cockamamie CACA.

Reply to  Marilynn in NorCal
October 31, 2014 4:31 pm

You both have good points but let’s remember the source of this insanity was the Clinton-Gore administration.

October 30, 2014 5:10 pm

So long as all wars are sustainable, everything will be alright. People dying and being killed would be a plus if the IPCC and Agenda 21 philosophies are taken literally. Mind you the bodies will need to be buried well.

October 30, 2014 8:25 pm

Reblogged this on Norah4you's Weblog and commented:
Back to Middle Age? IPCC acts and make humans believe that Humans are the centre of Universe…..
Other bloggers reblogg and comments from U.S. Military caves to endless global warming attack, SasjaL’s blogg

Mac the Knife
October 30, 2014 9:07 pm

The US Military has not ‘caved’ to the endless global warming attack. The political appointee Chuck Hagel is the wuss that has ‘caved’, in the service of Obamunism.

Reply to  Mac the Knife
October 31, 2014 10:28 am

The US Armed Services are civilian led. When their civilian leadership tells them to focus on climate change, they salute and say “Yes sir.” They might offer counsel, but if it is ignored, well it wouldn’t be the first or last time.
How important climate change is to the services will likely change with a change in administration. For that matter, its importance under the current leadership will only extend to how much funding may be attached.

October 30, 2014 9:18 pm

Ha! Wait until the Canucks stop selling their oil (amongst the largest reserves in the world) at cut rate prices to south of the border! Dust off those invasion plans again, boys!

Reply to  John
October 31, 2014 11:41 am

Canada had (& probably still has) plans to counter a US invasion, too. The 1920s plan was to counterattack into & seize major cities in Washington State, Montana, Minnesota & New York to divert US attention until, it was hoped, relief forces from the Empire were able to strike back.

Reply to  milodonharlani
October 31, 2014 2:07 pm

That’s simply due diligence by the military.
The US and Canada are close, very close. We love each other in fact.
Get Real!
Canada and the US will continue to stand together.

Reply to  milodonharlani
October 31, 2014 4:44 pm

I know. Thank God. A good time is always had by all during joint & combined ops at CFB Cold Lake, for instance, & senior officers pull rank whenever there is a mission to Canada, especially it seems to Quebec.
My point is that defense establishments plan for every conceivable possibility, no matter how remote.
BTW, liked your statement that the Obama Administration plans for victory in elections, not wars. Well said.

Mario Lento
Reply to  milodonharlani
October 31, 2014 4:55 pm

Plans for victory regardless of patriotism! That the Democrat under Obama have a machine designed to harvest non-citizen votes is frightening. That the machine has in fact been working is a sign that our republic has turned into a democracy, being pandered to by dumb as a fox politicians.

October 31, 2014 9:34 am

Competency is the main MIA in this (policy) conflict.

Brian H
October 31, 2014 11:28 am

Well, that’s all righty then. Since GW, especially AGW, is a non-issue and a non-threat, the secondary issues will be easily dealt with! Non-sarc.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights