Bill McKibben is off the rails: 'Use America's defense budget to fight climate war'

From the “say anything to save the planet” department comes this wackadoodle idea from Weepy Bill. I’m sure ISIS will get behind him to drain our defense budget fighting mostly intangible threats.

Described by the Boston Globe as “America’s most important environmentalist”, 350.org founder Bill McKibben says America’s defense budget must “be put to work defending us against the most dangerous adversaries we face” — climate change.

BILL MCKIBBEN:

“It should be possible to build large quantities of solar panels and turbine blades, and it should be possible to put lots of people at work on good jobs doing that, okay? And it should be a huge priority, and if you think we don’t have the money then you’re not paying attention. We have things like the defense budget that need to be put to work defending us against the most dangerous adversaries we face. The conceit of that New Republic piece was that we are in fact already at war though we do not really recognize it. But, by all the measures that we normally count as warfare, that’s what’s going on. We’re losing territory day by day. People are being killed day by day in great numbers. There will probably be added to that death toll tonight someplace along the coast of Florida. We’re at war, we’re just not fighting back, and the time has come to do that, and it will take as the history of WWII shows, government leadership to make that happen. It will take a concentrated national effort and a concentrated international effort to make that happen. It won’t happen on its own, it requires leadership.”

Bill McKibben: The Hottest Fight in the Hottest Year – Oberlin College Oberlin, Ohio October 6, 2016

h/t to the Harry Read Me Files and Matt Dempsey

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

278 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paul Johnson
October 7, 2016 8:40 pm

The Obama Administration has already wasted millions of scarce DOD dollars on green projects. Solar panels are going up at military bases to demonstrate a “commitment” to green energy. The Air Force and Navy are already being forced to test-run ships and planes on fuels adulterated with obscenely expensive biofuels. It’s all been a fiasco.

LarryFine
October 7, 2016 9:01 pm
Logos_wrench
October 7, 2016 9:05 pm

I could see this moron being Hillary’s EPA head.

hornblower
Reply to  Logos_wrench
October 9, 2016 11:45 am

Nonsense!

willhaas
October 7, 2016 9:06 pm

The reality is that the climate change we are experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them. Our federal government is broke and deep in debt with no money to spend on anything let alone waste it on climate change which we cannot affect no matter how much money we spend. According to Obama’s economic “plan” the federal government is suppose to be posting annual surpluses to be used to start paying down the debt but that is not happening. To date Obama’s economic “plan” has failed completely. We have yet to bring the troops home in FY 2014. The President has failed to come up with the budget cuts that are suppose to have gone along with the tax hike on the rich and the ACA taxes as part of the President’s balanced approach to deficit reduction. Then what about the President’s “free preschool for all” that is still awaiting funding? We are so deep in debt we need to be spending less money and not more. Spending all the money in the world will have no effect on climate because we do not know how to intimidate the sun and the oceans to provide the ideal climate all the time We have not even defined what the ideal climate is let alone figured out how to achieve it. Turning all CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere to O2 and graphite will not stop hurricanes from forming, It would end life on Earth as we know it but have no effect on climate.

rogerknights
October 7, 2016 9:12 pm

McKibben says what millions of his supporters believe, or close to it.

Neo
October 7, 2016 9:13 pm

But there are so many in line to divert the defense budget for things like education and infrastructure

Philip
October 7, 2016 9:51 pm

Chicken Little is on the loose, good luck getting Bill back on his meds.

South River Independent
October 7, 2016 9:56 pm

The primary requirement to survive global warming or global cooling, whichever occurs, is cheap, reliable energy.

Non Nomen
Reply to  South River Independent
October 8, 2016 12:46 am

Do you really expect that a member of the American Academy should know that? It might smash his “Weltanschauung”, so he prefers to ignore it. That’s how these cloud-cuckoo-landers are.

Amber
October 7, 2016 10:43 pm

This guy looks like one of those creepy clowns .

October 7, 2016 11:33 pm

Senile

snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 12:07 am

Oops, left out a few words on my above post. The vast majority polled in Iraq and Syria claim the US created and supports ISIS. In Yemen Saudi Arabia is destroying cities and targeting civilians with near 10,000 civilians dead. Drop a bomb near a hospital in Allepo and Obama and Kerry are screaming war crimes yet the Saudi’s are intentionally destroying hospitals and medical facilities in Yemen and no one says a word. 55,000 dead Americans in the Vietnam war with hundreds of thousands maimed or cancer ridden years later from agent orange. Over 3 million civilians dead in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia either from US actions or from the US destabilizing the area. Lots of Vietnamese cancer cases from agent orange. More tons of bombs dropped on Laos than in all of WW2. Afghanistan elected a socialist government that had goals of educating it’s citizens and elevating healthcare but the US created Al Qaeda to create a situation that would draw the Russians into the conflict. Zibignew Brezinski admitted that was the goal of funding of what would become Al Qaeda told Jimmy “peacemaker” Carter when he signed the bill. Most of the governments we overthrew south of our border promised to educate and lift their citizens, which US corporations did not want, and we installed brutal dictators that collectively killed millions of innocent people. People claim socialism does not work so why did the US depose, or attempted to, every socialist leader south of it’s borders shortly after being elected. What was the US afraid of?

Marcus
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 12:43 am

…Gee, I bet you think Venezuela is a paradise !! D’oh !!

ClimateOtter
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 2:13 am

Ah, good. Now, could you get back to why mcFibben’s wanting to spend 600 Billion on a non-issue is not a good thing?

Harry Passfield
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 2:45 am

Snedly, do you live under the freedoms and protection of the USA and its Constitution? Or are you sufficiently armed with your moral fortitude to live in another country, one, preferably, that shares your disdain for the USA?

michaelpalmeruw
Reply to  Harry Passfield
October 8, 2016 6:08 am

You can both be right. Yes, you have the freedom to speak your mind in the U.S., but that doesn’t invalidate Snedly’s collection of historical facts.
I also wouldn’t jump to conclusions about Snedly’s regard for the U.S. in general, or even about his living in the country. Sometimes the most ardent critics of someone or something are the ones who care the most.

ClimateOtter
Reply to  Harry Passfield
October 8, 2016 6:44 am

If he cared the most, Michael, he wouldn’t leave crucial historical details out of his ‘critique.’

South River Independent
Reply to  Harry Passfield
October 9, 2016 11:03 am

Yes, Otter. He left out Lincoln’s illegal war against Southern Independence that has led to Southern Cultural genocide that continues to this day.

MarkW
Reply to  Harry Passfield
October 10, 2016 9:45 am

snedly’s facts are either wrong, or completely out of context.

TA
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 6:25 am

“Oops, left out a few words on my above post. The vast majority polled in Iraq and Syria claim the US created and supports ISIS.”
You need to substitute “Obama and Hillary” for “US”.
Obama and Hillary did enable ISIS with their pacifist “cut and run” policy, but they didn’t create it.

hornblower
Reply to  TA
October 9, 2016 11:46 am

Nonsense!

MarkW
Reply to  TA
October 10, 2016 9:45 am

Sorry hb, but that is completely correct, no matter what your professor told you to think.

SMC
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 8:18 am

Well snedly, your propaganda screed hasn’t improved… you really need to work on it. Hopefully, since you have such disdain for the US, you live in some other country.

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 8, 2016 1:19 pm

snedly arkus —
There is a little poem that goes —
Yesterday upon the stair
I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today
I wish, I wish he’d go away
You are haunted by your delusions and the America you think exists has no more reality than the man upon the stairs.

MarkW
Reply to  snedly arkus
October 10, 2016 9:44 am

I bet this moron felt that polls conducted in the former Soviet Union were perfectly accurate as well.
Sheesh, the ability of some people to believe whatever they need to believe.

Cameron J.
October 8, 2016 12:19 am

I’d really like to know why presumably intelligent people such as Bill can so adamantly make ridiculous statements such as this. I really doubt he believes in the words coming from his mouth but he (and countless others) just keep saying them. It cannot be just for the money, there must be something else.

Reply to  Cameron J.
October 9, 2016 8:06 am

The latest “leaks” of Hillary speeches also explains McKibbon. “..you have to have a Public position and a Private position”. The public position is what was tested by focus groups to be “convincing” even if you don’t believe it yourself, as long as it advances your agenda.
On the other hand, each may be true believers in their respective “causes” (prevent CAGW, or in Hillary’s case the US becoming part of a global, socialist world order – as also revealed in the leaked speeches.)

MarkW
Reply to  Cameron J.
October 10, 2016 9:46 am

Just look at snedly.

October 8, 2016 12:54 am

Pssst, Bill…
Bomber Barry and his Green/Left government are already spending around $600 billion a year (disclosed) on non-threats. You want to attack the climate when it’s being all warm and fuzzy and quaintly medieval?

William
October 8, 2016 1:04 am

Do we really want to spend more money on schools and education?
To date we have spent zillions of dollars on this, yet the results of all this spending are both a disgrace and an embarassment. And each year it gets worse. I have just read an article that claims 30% of college graduates are functionally illiterate and innumerate.
Better that we cut spending on schools and education by 50%, and force those that really want an education to pay for it.
I guarantee this would immediately purge the system of most of the garbage that is being passed off as education, and most of the left wing lunatics who are masquerading as teachers will discover what unemployment is.

October 8, 2016 1:13 am

there are some crazy things going on in British politics, the USA is catching fast, I wonder is this just an Anglo-Saxon thing, or something to do with decline in the sunspot count /sarc

JCR
Reply to  vukcevic
October 8, 2016 3:36 am

Nah – it’s a more general western European thing. The Germans are even loopier than Obama, and the Brits aren’t far behind. What is hilarious is that moonbats (George Monbiot will have an esteemed place on history for being the inspiration for this term) like weepy Bill can’t, won’t or don’t notice that the rest of the major powers (Russia, China, India, even Japan) are completely ignoring him. And these powers are the ones driving carbon dioxide emissions.

hunter
Reply to  vukcevic
October 8, 2016 6:18 am

V, I think we had all best fasten our seatbelts because the ride is going to get really bumpy

October 8, 2016 1:44 am

Bill McKibben is mentally handicapped. He is a typical Global Warming / Climate Change Alarmist, like Hillary Clinton and Bark O’Bummer, who are all constantly looking forward to the next climate/weather disaster. They are hoping for huge numbers of casualties and enormous damage to property and community. Hurricane Matthew is their latest vehicle. Meanwhile warmer weather and increased CO2 increase crop production and food supply, reduce the number of hurricanes hitting America and green the Earth

Thomho
Reply to  ntesdorf
October 8, 2016 2:31 am

To snedly arkus
Your long list of the alleged foreign policy crimes of the USA is too long to reply or rebut
one by one
But let me focus on just the Korean war in which you join with Gore Vidal in attributing to American aggression supporting a south korean dictator (Syngman Rhee)
Fir a start It was the well armed North which invaded the south
After some time the UN sought to intervene
So it was not just the US
Some 21 nations supported the UN response
Of these 19 nations sent troops led by the US
Just some of the nations who fought were
Commonwealth nations
UK
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
South Africa
Non Commonwealth
USA
Thailand
France
Belgium
Philippines
Turkey
So just that one example of Korea suggests
A certain bias in your post

ClimateOtter
Reply to  Thomho
October 8, 2016 3:13 am

Ignoring the full story in order to pull down the United States is a big thing these days. SJWs do it in spades. I’m sure he also ignores that Iran’s economy was Booming under the Shah and they were right up there with Israel in their relationship with us- which is why islam needed to tear it all down.

David A
Reply to  Thomho
October 8, 2016 3:51 am

Thomno and climateotter are correct IMV. Korea can be well defended. Our cold war action in Iran somewhat defended bases on results and regional stability. Vietnam can be defended somewhat, and no, the US is not responsible for Cambodia. Iraq, under Bush, can be poorly defended, under the O, not at all.
However I have no respect for what Obama and Hillary have done in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lybia, and what they failed to do in Egypt. In every case elements of radical Jihad gain power, influence and violence, death and poverty result. There is a reason 75 percent of the citizens in Alepo have fled to territory controlled by Assad.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Thomho
October 8, 2016 10:34 am

Korea does happen to be one of the better examples. Just compare the standard of living in the south to that of the north. I would guarantee that most in the south are glad we intervened.

catweazle666
Reply to  Joe Crawford
October 13, 2016 5:51 pm

“Korea does happen to be one of the better examples. “
Indeed.
Apart from which, the Korean war was actually a United Nations gig – not a US one, and one of the very few successful ones, too.

TA
Reply to  ntesdorf
October 8, 2016 6:29 am

“Bark O’Bummer”
I like that! He does bark, doesn’t he.

hornblower
Reply to  ntesdorf
October 9, 2016 11:53 am

This moderate democrat believes that AGW is exaggerated. Most American do as well. Insulting people who are allies is no way to advance your position.

MarkW
Reply to  hornblower
October 10, 2016 9:48 am

Accepting the lies of your allies in order to not insult them is no way to live.

AndyG55
October 8, 2016 2:31 am

This is for Weepy Bill
Towards 700+ppm
Let the planet’s biosphere FLOURISH.comment image

Yirgach
Reply to  AndyG55
October 8, 2016 5:25 pm

I would add:
One Molecule at a time.

Harry Passfield
October 8, 2016 2:40 am

I can just see Josh having great fun with this one. Imagine, the military (it’s their budget, after all) responsible for building wind turbines and solar farms.
The wind turbines would be armour-plated and the towers would double as rocket silos; the solar panels would be disguised laser arrays designed to shoot down enemy aircraft/pigeons. And the whole lot of them would be gold-plated, made with million-dollar hammers and wrenches. The military sure knows how to spend. And, of course, all turbines and PVs would have to be upgraded on a rolling schedule of designed in obsolescence.
Seriously, all McKibben is promoting is the employment of half the population to fill in the holes dug by the other half. That’s full employment, by his lights.

willhaas
October 8, 2016 3:04 am

According to the President’s economic “plan” all of our off shore military personnel were to have come home before the end of FY 2014. so our military budget should already be at a minimum. Just half of the savings is suppose to be enough for the federal government to start paying down the debt starting in FY 2015. That means that just half of the savings is suppose to be enough for the federal government to post annual surpluses starting in FT 2015. That is a lot of savings. The other half of the savings is suppose to be invested in infrastructure. So what ever savings are realized by changing our military budgets, the money has already been spent many times over. Before we start to consider any new spending we need to pay off our debts.

4TimesAYear
October 8, 2016 3:30 am

Ya know that tipping point they keep talking about? I think he reached it and went right over the edge

October 8, 2016 4:16 am

Bill McKibben ‘Use America’s defense budget to fight climate war’
Slow down McKibben, sceptics have a horse in this race too
http://www.drjeffcornwall.com/don%20quixote.gif

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  vukcevic
October 8, 2016 7:14 am

Great comment, but this has gotten way off subject, with an interesting dying (?) hurricane maybe a little similar to others. Need to get back to basics. I spent much of WWII staying at my grandparent’s (He was in WWI) farm while my father and uncle were overseas. I was almost in the Korean War, have been in several hurricanes, remember Earth Day, but took a thermodynamics course instead.
I know what a crisis is.

October 8, 2016 4:16 am

I just wonder if McKibben’s sponsors feel they’re getting their money’s worth.?
I mean – it isn’t like he’s lavishly funded from a public subscription perspective is it?
Who picks up the not inconsiderable tab for 350.org?

AndyG55
Reply to  tomo
October 8, 2016 11:40 am

Soros

Reply to  AndyG55
October 8, 2016 12:12 pm

Yeah ….. not much of a stretch to see that I guess
I though off-their-Rockerfellas were also quite chummy with Batty Bill

October 8, 2016 4:21 am

I’m for shifting $10 billion a year from the military budget to a nuclear plant construction program. This will enhance energy security and increase employment. Another budget item that needs priority is a border defense system to ensure unauthorized individuals don’t enter the country carrying WMD components. I don’t think this is an issue which needs to be discussed with neighbors, nor do we have to make stupid comments like Trump did about others paying for USA national defense. Trump is an idiot and a baiter, but the security deficiencies associated with an undefended border aren’t acceptable.

Phil
Reply to  fernandoleanme
October 8, 2016 4:32 am

…the security deficiencies associated with an undefended border aren’t acceptable.

+1

emsnews
Reply to  fernandoleanme
October 8, 2016 5:17 am

Let’s play the global warming game with the liberals: letting in millions of legal and illegal aliens is going to kill the planet because they will be polluting the atmosphere. Heck, humans in general are bad for Nature so…we know the end to this ideology.

Greg Woods
October 8, 2016 4:33 am

Stop Big Climate now, before it is too late – oops….

Griff
October 8, 2016 4:38 am

So what does the Defense Dept think about the threat of climate change?
http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/612710
“The report finds that climate change is a security risk..”
What does the US Navy think?
“Climate change is not only a threat to the environment but a threat to our national security. Coastal military bases and U.S. Navy missions on seas are at risk. Military readiness could be compromised by these environmental changes. Read about the challenges the Pentagon faces posed by a changing climate”
https://cleantechnica.com/2015/02/18/us-navy-reacts-blockbuster-rolling-stone-climate-change-story/

stevekeohane
Reply to  Griff
October 8, 2016 6:07 am

“Tina Casey specializes in military and corporate sustainability, advanced technology, emerging materials, biofuels, and water and wastewater issues. Tina’s articles are reposted frequently on Reuters, Scientific American, and many other sites. Views expressed are her own.
Great sciencey source Griff

Marcus
Reply to  Griff
October 8, 2016 6:13 am

…Griff, are you really that stupid ?? You know damn well they MUST do and say what ever their liberal masters tell them….Grow up !

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Griff
October 8, 2016 8:37 pm

Griff October 8, 2016 at 4:38 am
“What does the US Navy think?”
Well truthfully I don’t think you will find it in any touchy feely publications. They follow orthers and are true to their oaths.
Perhaps it would be best to go outside on a quiet night and ask the ghosts of Taffy 3.
michael

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 9, 2016 12:46 am

orders
must spell check

South River Independent
Reply to  Griff
October 9, 2016 11:11 am

It is good that DoD is thinking about the effects of climate change on defense requirements and capabilities. The danger is that they believe they can prevent climate change instead of merely mitigating its effects, whatever they are.

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
October 10, 2016 9:49 am

The politicians at the top of the military command structure repeat what they are told to repeat.

Chimp
Reply to  Griff
October 10, 2016 12:31 pm

The armed forces do as ordered. Obama has ordered them to regard climate change as a greater threat than China, Russia or Iran, so they obey.