From the occasionally used cortex department:
Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said on Friday at a campaign event that the United States’ blueprint for beating global warming needs to be the same as the blueprint the U.S. used for defeating Nazi Germany in the 1940s.
“So we talk about existential threats, the last time we had a really major existential threat to this country was around World War II,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “And so we’ve been here before and we have a blueprint of doing this before.”
“None of these things are new ideas,” Ocasio-Cortez continued. “What we had was an existential threat in the context of a war. We had a direct existential threat with another nation, this time it was Nazi Germany, and axis, who explicitly made the United States as an enemy, as an enemy.”
“And what we did was that we chose to mobilize our entire economy and industrialized our entire economy and we put hundreds of thousands if not millions of people to work in defending our shores and defending this country,” she stated. “We have to do the same thing in order to get us to 100% renewable energy, and that’s just the truth of it.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hillary could be interested in Cortez as an Aide.
When has nice weather become an existential threat`?
400 ppm CO2 – global greening, more trees, more food, disappearing deserts.
+1,5 C from little ice age, most, if not all, of it is already done. Less extreme weather, warmer winter nights in the Northern hemisphere.
War against GW is an existential threat to the economy and well-fare in Western World. Why should we swear allegiance to the donor class billionaires?
A RAF analyst who had worked in aerial photography during WW2 told me some time ago that the only really effective uses of bombing were bombing the rail network on D-Day to stop German tank reinforcements being brought up to resist the invasion, and bombing the oil plants which restricted the ability of the Luftwaffe.
The rest of the bombing just caused a lot of misery.
The effect of bombing on civilian morale was not as great as expected, similar to UK experience in the Blitz.
Industrial production in Germany was dispersed, and after the war he inspected factories where new roofing had been built under the existing shattered roofs so that aerial photography just showed an apparently bombed out factory.
Do you expect the alarmists to bomb refineries, coal mines and bridges? Well, a bit far fetched, but not improbable.
But aren’t they starting on the oil pipelines already?
Precision military targeting worked – It took out the Tirpitz, the V2 factory and the V3 guns – using really large Barnes-Wallis earthquake bombs.
City bombing was very effective in the Spanish Civil war and the early months of WW2 – it worked when the bomber stream was unopposed and could bomb in daylight in good conditions. Consequently, predictions were made on both sides that the war could be ended quickly by city bombing – Goering promised Hitler that he would obtain Britain’s surrender in a matter of a few weeks. ‘Bomber’ Harris said that Bomber Command would do the same to Germany.
It turned out that Britain could oppose a daylight bomber stream effectively, even at short notice, because it had invented an Integrated Air Defence solution. And Germany could oppose one later because there were such great distances to travel that daylight air interception was fairly easy. Consequently, both sides had to attack by night, and they were lucky to get their bombs in the right country. The US initially tried attacking by day in heavily armed bombers and still got shot out of the sky.
Eventually, these problems were solved. The British used OBOE to navigate and centimetric ground-mapping H2S radar to hit invisible targets at night, and Pathfinding techniques – the US used long-range Mustang escort fighters to engage the Luftwaffe during the day. But neither side managed to bomb cities as effectively as the Germans had at the beginning of the war – not until right at the end, when the Allies hit targets like Cologne, Hamburg and Dresden. If that had been managed at the start of the war, then the bomber’s predictions might have been true – as it was it was too little, too late…
The modern day history of bombing cities tells us it is to destroy “civilian moral”. There was a much more pragmatic reason. Cities held the workforce that produced the weapons of war. Raw materials were turned into the ships, guns, tanks, aircraft, and most other manufactured items, in cities.
Destroy the ability of the workforce to produce replacement items that the fighting forces needed to wage war, and you destroy the ability of the military to win against an enemy that can provide those war fighting manufactured goods.
When you run out of bullets, or tanks, or ships, or aircraft, or even fuel before your enemy does, you are limited to a defensive posture and the end is certain, unless the situation changes.
Churchill said that the one thing that caused him most worry was the U-boat menace.
If Doenitz had been given the 300 submarines he wanted at the start of WW2 he could have strangled the supply routes to the UK, but Hitler was fixated on building large capital ships like the Graf ẞpee and Bismarck.
I guess she doesn’t support nuclear fission technology nor hydraulic fracturing…
But how “pure” is she?
Does she support the mass production of batteries made with minerals mined in Africa with unspeakable work conditions?
It was never about emissions, that was the smokescreen, aided by the Üsful idiots”as Stalin correctly called them.
The burning of the books by th Natzis in the late 1930 tees hás its parellel in th attack on the real science of today.
When we see the opposition to Hydro, the Greenest source of electricity, usually by some said to be rare animal, then its obvious what the Greens stand for. Its world government aided by the UN, with its two thirds black and brown composition.
MJE
“Bücherverbrennung” burning of books, took place already on May 10, 1933, three and a half months after the “Machtergreifung”.
I hate to say this, but boy is she dumb. War production put millions into work. A Green economy will put millions out of work. You simply cannot make things less efficient and preserve our current levels of wealth. Less efficient means less produced means less wealth.
She, like so many Lefties, misunderstands the (pretty bogus) Stern Report. That didn’t say there were not costs if acting, it simply claimed the costs were lower than the costs of not acting.
By all means campaign for what you believe in, but she is just delusional about the consequences of what she wants.
Problem Solving
Simples!
Great, now words mean what you want them to mean! I cringe every time I here that stupid cliche – “existential threat”!
She managed to completely abuse the word “existential” despite misusing it four times. Ok, I’ll give her the first usage because it makes sense in the context, even though it doesn’t mean what she thinks it does
Essentially, existential means “real” or “exists” and even if used in the philosophical sense, actually weakens the “threat” because it implies that it is only in her own head.
The cliche – which I won’t repeat – doesn’t mean mortal threat or threat to existence, it may have come to mean “deadly threat” but it actually means ‘threat that exists’ full stop period.
‘Existential threat’ now means ‘threat to our existence’, which is an absurd an abuse of a word as the phrase ‘Climate Change’.
Existential threat means what the person hearing it wants it to mean. Some one needs step up and ask miss dumb-ass, in public, what SHE means when she says it.
“Miss Ocasio-Cortez, could you please explain what you mean when you use the term, “existential threat”? Do you believe that human existence in threatened? Do you mean that current society is threatened? Do you simply mean that there is a “real threat” and you are using what you consider sciencey sounding language to enhance your show?
Rarely have I seen as empty an intellectual as Ms Ocasio-Cortez
You can certainly say that again.
Rarely have I seen as empty an intellectual as Ms Ocasio-Cortez
With Bernie “in crisis mode” about CO2, no wonder new candidates flip. Cortez should know better – after all she campaigned on Glasss-Steagall, the FDR 1934 banking law that made the US recovery possible after 1929-1932 which Clinton repealed in 1999. By 1936 FDR knew war was coming. By 1940 the recovery had unleashed the economy. The crash program was the Manhattan Project which gave us nuclear power (and weapons).
A national fusion crash program is now acutely needed. “Market forces” are a foisted farce compared to the neutron strong force and science driven programs.
The greenie and banking party pressure must be overwhelming.
‘The United States’ blueprint for beating global warming needs to be the same as the blueprint the U.S. used for defeating Nazi Germany in the 1940s.’
Yeah, hold up at the Elbe and let the Soviets do the dirty work.
The usual classic fatal failure to be specific.
‘The same tactics’.
Yes, by who?
Directed at what?
Usually these vague appeals to drastic action envisage the US reducing its emissions dramatically, while the rest of the world increases, for a net increase in emissions.
Or is the lady, in this unusual case, proposing an alliance which shall include China and India, in which all parties make dramatic reductions in their emissions?
No, thought not. Its a case of lets do something unilaterally which we know to be ineffective and useless when done unilaterally.
Because, Nazis.
Firebombing civilians, yes, that might help. At least in the eye of an ecoterrorist.
It follows the war-like rethoric many greens use. We must fight climate change we have to win the battle and so on.
The problem is that the “greens” are at war with the nuclear power technology, only technology that enables huge decrease in “carbon” moving around and ending as CO2.
They would probably bomb fission plants if allowed to.
The reason they had to destroy Germany is they were using real money not a ponzi debt scheme.
That made my Brain bleed out my nose
What we have here is a very pretty dumb girl who is even dumber than she is pretty. Running against an entire gaggle of dimocrats she was able to garner 16%, I believe, of the vote which was the top of a very poor heap. Hopefully the other 84% of her party are not stupid enough to actually put her in office. But then I’ll be surprised if that seat does not go to a dimwit of some kind or another.
Sorry, different primary. She ran in two at the same time! Won as a write in in the second. Go figure. New York politics.
Simple: Air power was the key element to a victory in WW2. Alexandria should build a fleet of a million aircraft, and bomb the global warming to smithereens.
I’ll apply for a position of a scientific advisor for Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And a military advisor. She is not hiring a common sense advisor.
As a proxy for climate change, maybe she wants to bomb/invade all ME countries that export “carbon”?
That would be a change, in continuity.
WWII was an existential threat?
*Sigh*
It has become quite clear to me that the young masses have become so mindless that they actually want to be ruled and told what to think and do.
They think they know it all so well that they don’t need any lessons from the past.
I’m waiting for square wheels to be “invented”. Wait, what? They have?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnGLvksZW1k
Well, he is “tinkering with new wheel designs”, so maybe he’ll get there soon!
I wonder whom should we bomb first? China or ourselves?
The complete vapidness and lack of cognitive abilities in our younger generation should be sobering to us all. Here’s another young, photogenic leftist with no accomplishments and no noticeable abilities. The media loves her because they think she can be another Obama. But Obama won in no small part by pretending to not be who he really was (especially in 2008). Ocasio-Cortez already doomed herself by publicly touting her actual views and policy positions.
Godwin.
She’s right! To win the second world war the democracies were willing to do anything. Nothing was off the table including making an alliance with another reprehensible ideology and developing,then using atomic weapons. In Vietnam and Korea certain actions and strategies were not allowed and those wars were never won in the same way that WWII was won. To truly win the war on global warming we will need to consider all options. I’m not willing to consider all options nor is Alexandria. I am willing to consider nuclear power though something that she is not.
Her enemy does not exist. It is a war against the windmills of her mind. No real scientist can help her, but perhaps a psychologist could.