The Pentagon released a National Defense Strategy that for the first time in more than a decade does not mention manmade global warming as a security threat.
An 11-page summary of the new National Defense Strategy makes no mention of “global warming” or “climate change”. The document makes no mention of “climate,” “warming,” “planet,” “sea levels” or even “temperature.” All 22 uses of the word “environment” refer to the strategic or security landscape.
The document is here: https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf
The National Defense Strategy, signed by Defense Secretary James Mattis, doesn’t have much to say about energy issues, except that the U.S. would “foster a stable and secure Middle East” and “contributes to stable global energy markets and secure trade routes.”
The Pentagon released the strategy document Friday, and officials were clear that it would make no mention of global warming. The Bush administration added global warming to the defense strategy in 2008, but the issue gained top-tier status during the Obama administration.
The Trump administration released its “America First” security strategy in December, which called for “[u]nleashing these abundant energy resources— coal, natural gas, petroleum, renewables, and nuclear” to boost the economy and aid U.S. allies.
That plan de-emphasized policies aimed at fighting manmade global warming, a complete u-turn from national security under the Obama administration.
“Climate policies will continue to shape the global energy system,” reads the National Security Strategy, released in December.
“U.S. leadership is indispensable to countering an anti-growth, energy agenda that is detrimental to U.S. economic and energy security interests,” reads the plan. “Given future global energy demand, much of the developing world will require fossil fuels, as well as other forms of energy, to power their economies and lift their people out of poverty.”
The Daily caller and the Huntington Huffington Post were used as sources for this story.
This cartoon got it right:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Time to end the bio-fuel nonsense in the military too. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/08/16/president-obama-announces-major-initiative-spur-biofuels-industry-and-en
Has corn ethanol done anything to make us less dependent on foreign oil or has it been fracking + offshore & ANWR exploration + pipelines + … ? No thanks to Obama the USA is on the verge of becoming a net energy exporter.
According to the EIA –
Now if only Trump could end the ethanol mandate we would once again be able to feed the world with ease. And my lawnmowers would have proper power again.
But on this one I’m not holding my breath.
Check your local farmer’s coop. Our’s sells pure gasoline, no ethanol from one pump for equipment operation.
We have a place too, but they charge a dollar more. Too much for a cheapo like me.
I use a combination of PRI-G and Marine Grade STABIL in all my small engines. The result is one-puil engine start, even after 18 months of just sitting around. Highly recommended.
“Climate change” is not a thing, because climate is an average of weather. Saying that “climate change” causes “extreme weather” is like saying Manhattan’s higher population density than Ottumwa, Iowa’s causes people to move from the cornfields to the Big Apple. An average cannot drive the data.
Do “climate scientists” even realize this, or even realize that’s what they’re saying? Or perhaps they do realize the inanity of the remark, but count on the useful idiots in the media to not ponder its meaning, nor the sheeple to question it.
Here’s why that policy is wrong..
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/17/coast-guard-wants-cruise-missiles-arctic-icebreake/
Icebreakers, I hear you say… “because of the ice in the not melting arctic…”
Well the reason the Russians are building ice breakers is because with thinner ice and longer periods of open water, with icebreakers they can keep more routes open year round.
Russian military policy assumes climate change is thawing the arctic and they are moving their military into the region to support economic expansion…
Better acknowledge climate change and load up those missiles
“Opponents say arming the Coast Guard vessels sends a dangerous signal to Moscow that Washington is looking for a fight over the Arctic”
Love that reasoning, it looks to me more like arming the Coast Guard ships is a response to the ‘dangerous signal’ Moscow is sending Washington by moving military forces into the artic.
“because with thinner ice”…no Griff
They are building them to break up ice that’s 4.5-5 meters thick….that’s not thinner ice…that’s technology
“Russian military policy assumes climate change is thawing the arctic and they are moving their military into the region to support economic expansion…”
Very doubtful. Everything I’ve read regarding Russian scientists’ views about climate is that it is getting cooler.
+1 Russia and China know exactly what’s going on with CC and hope the Western Countries are fooled into submission so they can prosper at our expense.
Also Russia is building 3 brand new nuclear powered Ice breakers with ice melting capability.
That’s how convinced they are that sea ice is melting away,
But as we all know, Arctic sea ice is STILL in the top 10% of Holocene extents, time-wise, anyway. More than in the MWP and WAY MORE than basically any time before the MWP.
Data from the Chukchi Sea and from above Iceland (the two main expansion areas), shows that conclusively.
Only time its been at a higher extent was during the LIA, and short period leading up to and down from the late 1970s
There’s an awful lot of sea ice up there, y’know.
More totally ridiculous drivel, Griff?
Do you never get tired of making a public exhibition of yourself?
It’s amazing what some people will do for a paycheck.
Griff you keep telling us there is going to be ANY ice … you know “ICE FREE ARCTIC”.
So can you please clarify your position are we going to have thinner Arctic ice or be Ice free?
Here is your chance to prove you aren’t a troll, answer the question which is it.
Griff, why would Russia do this if the ice was thinning longer periods of open water?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-nuclear-icebreaker-ship-sibir-world-biggest-most-powerful-northern-sea-route-baltic-shipyard-a7965596.html
“they can keep more routes open year round.”
Yep and they need nuclear powered icebreakers to do it.
They are sick of their cargo ships getting stuck in sea ice or it being impassable for large parts of the year.
Thanks for pointing that out, griff. 🙂
Now take both feet out of your mouth.
Less ice means more need for icebreakers.
Griff, do you have any idea how incredibly stupid you sound?
I fear that we will have to add militant environmentalists to the threat list soon enough as a result of this.
And to the “Endangered” list 30 seconds after that.
MAGA
This is utterly horrifying. The greatest threat to national security since World War Two and the petroleum industry removed it from the USA Department of Defense’s web sites. This is utter madness. It’s almost as if the tRump Regime were working for a hostile foreign country…. like Russia.
The preceding public service announcement was brought to you by the makers of Thorazine…
Bringing peace to the world….one shuffle at a time
LOL! I really do hope your were being sarcastic Desertphile.
I mean drill baby drill is doing so much for the oil based Russian economy. “In 2018, the US is expected to overtake both Russia and Saudi Arabia to become the world’s greatest oil producer.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/286409/
“Petroleum industry removed it from the website”?
Yeah sure. The fossil fuel industry has nothing to fear from government. They are too important and everybody knows it.
In fact, the petroleum industry is VITAL to our military, as every piece of motorized equipment runs on some kind of oil-derived fuel.
And, trust me, there’s no way the military will ever run on solar or wind power…
Russia makes it’s money selling oil and natural gas. They would love it for the US to stop producing both.
Hurrah !!!!!!
Finally— some sanity.
Hurrah! A bit more of the AGW slop drains out of the socialist griffters swamp!
I wonder if the Navy has figures out yet that you can’t fuel a cruiser with biofuels.
I’m not sure about “National Defense” but I’m glad a friend gave his snowblower to combat “Global Warming”!
Climate Skeptics are Modern Day Churchills
Modern climate skeptics share many of the characteristics of Winston Churchill, as well as challenges. Winston Churchill, like Patton, believed that they were born to fulfill a destiny. They both had unwavering confidence in their ability, and the role they would play in shaping world history. They paid untold personal costs and made huge personal sacrifices, all for the unselfish goal of protecting society from itself, or more accurately, the political left. The reward for protecting society and preserving freedom was extreme opposition, criticism, humiliation, failure, underminings, and misguided political demagoguery. Their crime? They were unafraid to speak the unpopular truth and unwaveringly defended it. They were unashamed and unafraid to oppose the political left.
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/climate-skeptics-are-modern-day-churchills/
Lets hope this sets an example and other countries follow the US lead.
Alternate Title:Pentagon Restores Verifiable Science to National Defense
The fact that climate change was ever on the national defense threat list illustrates how certifiably wacky our government had become under Obama. The man declared climate change as the single most important threat to our world. Was he on LSD?
No. He was and still is on OPM.
No. Barack Hussein Obama is a socialist that follows Alyniski’s Rules for Radicals: Never Waste a Perceived Crisis, especially one created by socialists.
@J Mac
“Alyniski’s Rules for Radicals: Never Waste a Perceived Crisis”
Kindly point out where in Alynski’s writing that advice appears. I can’t see to find it.
Here’s a link to a PDF of the book – https://chisineu.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/saul-alinsky-rules-for-radicals-1989.pdf
and here are the rules:
“Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.”
“Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
“Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
“A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
“A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
“Keep the pressure on,”
“The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
“The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
“If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside”
“The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it”
If I had a dollar for every time someone attributed something to Rules For Radicals that isn’t in the book, I’d be a very wealthy person.
By the way, the Tea Party and Dick Armey – those flaming *socialists* were using it as a handbook.
Kindly provide your evidence of the TEA Party using Alinski’s Rules for Radicals as a ‘handbook’.
T.E.A.: Taxed Enough Already.
From their web site, the Tea Party Patriots are focused on 3 priorities:
1) Personal Freedom – We are most free when the Constitution is followed, and all Americans can live life the way they want, as long as it does not harm others or infringe on their rights.
2) Economic Freedom – A growing economy, with reduced tax rates and government spending, gives businesses the ability to hire more people and us all a chance to earn more.
3) Debt Free Future – Increasing the US debt puts an undue burden on future generations. It is only fair and right to pay the debt we have incurred so our children are not stuck with our bills.
https://www.teapartypatriots.org/
These may seem like ‘radical’ ideas to socialist, but they are foundation issues with main street USA.
Freeze, personalize, and polarize that!
As I stated, Obama was an acolyte of Alinsky. So was his Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel, his Chief of Staff. In the midst of the 2009 economic ‘crisis’, “Never waste a good crisis”, from the Alinsky triumvirates ‘horses mouth’ ….
https://youtu.be/B62igfNu-T0
In addition, MorinMorris, had you diligently invested your dollars for 30 years in capitalist companies that made real products real people wanted, and employed real people in real jobs that paid real wages and real taxes, today you would be a very wealthy person. It’s not too late to embrace an economic system that really work, ya know?
The only advice the TEA party ever took from Alinsky was to make your opponents live up to their own standards.
Something leftists have never been willing to do.
I guess a funny thing happened on the way to Forum.
But is ‘diversity’ still a thing?
Everything stops being funny when the crops don’t grow.
MY President !!!! WINNING !!!!
Let’s see if I have this right.
The Pentagon including climate change as a risk, under pressure from the president is not a political act.
On the other hand, the Pentagon removing climate change as a risk when that pressure is removed, is a political act.
The Canadian army is spending large sums of money replacing all their sodium lights with LEDs. It would appear that in Canada (one of the coldest countries in the world), climate change is still considered a national security threat.
PS, As I understand it sodium lights are as or more efficient than LEDs, so this is all a virtue signaling greenwashing.
I think this may have helped change their minds.. Or maybe they are just being nice and loaning this Military Inventory to the bff Canada for a bit..
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/navy-ship-montreal-stuck-1.4497416