Guest LMAO by David Middleton
Climate Change Is This Generation’s Vietnam War
It’s an existential threat to millennials—and older Americans are standing in the way of action.
By MATT FORD
March 14, 2019
Every year, the world’s elite gather like the Illuminati in the Swiss chalet town of Davos for the World Economic Forum, where they discuss how to solve humanity’s most pressing problems. Often that results in comically out-of-touch conversations, such as the idea, put forth at this year’s summit, that digital “upskilling” can solve economic inequality. But sometimes it provides a platform for someone like the 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, who appeared before these elites like the prophet Cassandra.“Either we prevent 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming or we don’t,” she said at the summit in January.
[…]
Like the Vietnam protesters of the ’60s and ’70s, millennials have shown a knack for mass organizing.
[…]
The ruling gerontocracy won’t make it easy for younger Americans to translate their political energy into policy.
[…]
The Vietnam War was a clear mortal threat to young people, tens of millions of whom were eligible to be drafted; nearly 60,000 Americans were killed in the conflict. Climate change presents a different sort of threat to millennials. It’s less immediate than an ongoing war, less visceral than being shot at. But ultimately it will prove more catastrophic. Even if drastic action is taken over the next decade, the impact of rising global temperatures on civilization will dwarf the Vietnam War’s bloodshed. The World Health Organization has projected that come 2030, climate change will cause an additional 250,000 deaths per year.
Combatting climate change will take much more effort than ending the Vietnam War, and much longer.
[…]
I’m still laughing. When I saw the title, I said to myself, “Self, they’re right. The Global War on the Weather is like the Vietnam War. No matter how much blood & treasure our government spends, it can’t win.” But, the author went in a whole different direction; he’s comparing the Global War Against the Weather to protests against the Vietnam War.
I think my analogy is better. In the early 1960’s, the choices were: Either we defeat communism in Southeast Asia or we don’t. From 1953 to 1975 spent $168 billion (almost $1 trillion in 2011 USD) and 58,000 American lives on a war that was unwinnable under the conditions imposed by our government. In the Global War Against the Weather, we face a choice of preventing or not preventing 1.5 °C of warming.
“Either we prevent 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming or we don’t,” [Greta Thunberg] said at the summit in January.
Greta, I’m afraid I have bad news for you. With or without the New Green Deal Cultural Revolution… we don’t prevent 1.5 °C of warming. Let’s use the Paris Accord as a proxy for the Green New Deal Cultural Revolution.
We already have 1.0 °C relative to the mid 1800’s and about 1.5 °C relative to the coldest phase of the Little Ice Age, the coldest part of the Holocene Epoch. If 1.5 to 2.0 °C of warming relative to the glacial interstadial temperatures of the Little Ice Age is an “existential threat to millennials,” their threshold for existence is set too low (or would that be too high?).
The Vietnam War was a clear mortal threat to young people, tens of millions of whom were eligible to be drafted; nearly 60,000 Americans were killed in the conflict.
[…]
The World Health Organization has projected that come 2030, climate change will cause an additional 250,000 deaths per year.
Is this a non sequitur or a red herring?
Vietnam War…
STATISTICS FOR INDIVIDUALS IN UNIFORM AND IN COUNTRY
VIETNAM VETERANS[…]
3. 2,709,918 Americans served in Vietnam , this number represents 9.7% of their generation.
[…]
CASUALTIES
[…]
2. Non-hostile deaths: 10,800
3. Total: 58,202 (Includes men formerly classified as MIA and Mayaguez casualties). Men who have subsequently died of wounds account for the changing total.
[…]
- 2,709,918 divided by 9.7% equals 27,937,299.
- 58,202 divided by 27,937,299 equals 0.002… 0.2%. 99.8% of the Vietnam War generation did not die in the Vietnam War.
Those were real deaths. The brave men and women who sacrificed their lives in the Vietnam War were real people… They have names.
Global War Against the Weather…
The World Health Organization has projected that come 2030, climate change will cause an additional 250,000 deaths per year.
Is this comparable to to Vietnam War in any way, shape or form?
| World Birth and Death Rates |
| Estimated 2011 |
| Death Rate |
| • 8 deaths/1,000 population |
| • 55.3 million people die each year |
| • 151,600 people die each day |
| • 6,316 people die each hour |
| • 105 people die each minute |
| • Nearly two people die each second |
In 2011, 55.3 million real people died. That’s 0.8% of 7 billion people. If I add 250,000 to 55.3 million, it’s still 0.8% of 7 billion people. Furthermore, these hypothetical deaths are the results of models. There will be no way to actually attribute any of these deaths, if they occur, to whatever climate changes actually occur between now and 2030.
Now, we do have a pretty good idea how many real people, with names, are currently dying due to energy poverty.
4 million is 7% of 55.3 million. Will a $240/gal tax on gasoline to fund a $122 trillion Global War on Weather make energy poverty better or worse? My bet is on worse.
Combatting climate change will take much more effort than ending the Vietnam War, and much longer.
Note to The New Republic: There’s only 1 “t” in combating.
The Global War Against the Weather will cost at least $122 trillion, claim tens of millions of lives and have no discernible affect on the weather. Clearly the Global War Against the Weather will require this sort of effort:
So… Climate Kiddies… You can either proceed with your “really futile and stupid gesture”…
Or you can shut up and enjoy the gift that the “ruling gerontocracy” has bestowed upon you…
I like the “I can’t tidy my bedroom” sign girl, at least she has a sense of humor. 🙂
And, in a way, “saving the planet” is the fashionable go-too excuse to avoid having to do anything useful.
If she can’t tidy her bedroom what makes here believe she can tidy the earth?
Cue George Carlin
David
“2,709,918 divided by 9.7% equals 27,937,299.” ?
2,709,918 / 9.7% =262,862.046
9.7% = 0.097
NR has a point. ‘Adults’ unaffected by weather are protesting warming just like similarly-aged ‘adults’ unaffected by the draft protested Vietnam. They tend to look the same, too.
P.J. O’Rourke — ‘Everybody wants to save the Earth; nobody wants to help Mom do the dishes.’
That is because saving the earth requires significantly less personal energy.
Wash the dish, rince the dish, turn the dish over
Wash the dish, rince the dish, put it in the drying rack
Repeat until ALL dishes are done
OR
Make a sign and stand there
The Save the planet arts and crafts exercise is as close to zero energy expenditure that a human can get. I am expending more energy posting this comment.
“I can’t tidy my bedroom….” because SHE HAS TOO MUCH CRAP and should help save the planet by donating 90% of her belongings to those less fortunate. She should also smash her cell phone and get rid of the computer. Again, they use too much energy. A bed and a closet with a couple of outfits seems sufficient. If she’s serious.
As for loving bird-choppers, perhaps the moron should LIVE UNDER ONE for about six months and report back.
Clothes made of linen; cotton uses too much water to grow. And plastics are banned because they’re made of oil. And nothing with metal in it because it comes from mining.
We should ask the guy with the “I’m a Huge Fan” sign what he has against birds.
I think the the second idiot from the left could be referencing Prof. Jordon Peterson about not being able to clean up her room. JP says if you want to do something good for the planet and humanity then start with yourself and clean up your own room first. I would add probably to raise good kids too, since a lot of kids seem to have been brainwashed by the klimate hustle, by deluded parents and an out of control education system. Clearly child abuse scaring these poor kids half to death with the world is ending in 12 years nonsense.
The idiot with the poster about trees should have stayed in class because he really does need an education as it seems this future Einstein thinks raised CO2 in the atmosphere is a threat to trees. This really worries me….here are parallels to marxist indoctrination and nazi indoctrination and the kids are the ones to go for. We need that voice of reason Jordan Peterson speaking out loudly against what is child abuse by those who were themselves abused by left wing educators …the first line of believers. We are seeing strand after strand of Critical Theory being acted out.
Bingo!
Ward, J.K., Harris, J.M., Cerling, T.E., Wiedenhoeft, A., Lott, M.J., Dearing, M.-D., Coltrain, J.B. and Ehleringer, J.R. 2005. Carbon starvation in glacial trees recovered from the La Brea tar pits, southern California. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 102: 690-694.
Nicely done. That extra “t” was a stutter, not typo 🙂
Where are all the studies on how large scale wind and solar deployments impact the climate?
Haven’t seen many since I read this article almost decade ago.
http://news.mit.edu/2010/climate-wind-0312
First point … I like CO2.It makes the food we eat and provides the oxygen we breath. It travels complicatedly between sea and air and earth and rocks in one great big cycle. It is part of the planet and its atmosphere. I know a bit about its history having a degree in Geology among other things but I do understand 30 years in the oil industry as a geophysicist makes me Satan’s right hand man and someone who cannot argue against petulant children because they are pure of thought and I am corrupt….and well, “they know”.
I notice something a little strange going on. You will see it also if you just step back a little from the coal face of trying to reason with pure science against people who have no care about science unless they can find a minute detail of one partial dataset which after massaging and homogenizing and pasteurisering and looked at in a darkened room by candle light on Halloween sort of supports one small part of what they claim is happening if you look at it with a squint through a glass eye.
Joking aside and if this was not so serious it would be funny. However, Maybe I am stupid BUT…………given that the majority of CO2 produced by human activity in the world is in India and China…… why are we doing this to ourselves in the UK? We represent 1% of the world CO2 production.
IF, just IF there really really REALLY is a problem in 12 years time and the world will end or at lease go horribly wrong, do you REALLY think nothing serious would be going on right now except for virtue signaling by politicians and screeching by marxists pretending to be environmentalists ? If there REALLY was a problem would be seeing the story line of Independence Day or one of those other nonsense disaster epics with Putin and the Donald announcing their engagement.
Think for a moment, why is ANY investment going on at all if this 12 year thingy is real? Why are mortgages for 25 years and 30 years still freely available? If anyone knows a risk it is banks and insurance companies. I have a house RIGHT NEXT TO THE SEA. I can throw a stone into it. Mortgage absolutely no problem. Insurance also. if all of what we are told is even 5% true the banks and insurance would not touch it with a barge pole.
If there REALLY IS a problem and India and China are pumping out the majority of CO2 surely they would by now be being ordered at a point of a gun to stop? The fact that this is NOT happening and in fact there is an almost total silence about it speaks volumes.
We have exponential population growth that the marxists pretend is not happening, except for marxists like Occasional Cortex who tells people in the West ( notice not the third world) that they need to consider not breeding. A worrying fact. There are more people alive today than have ever died….chilling. Anyway, IF we accept that mankind is responsible for global warming and by a leap of the same irrationality, climate change then there must be a relationship between population and global warming…more people more global warming. If the problem IS real and it IS caused by man why is third world breeding going on without a murmur by the marxist do gooders unless of course there is an ulterior motive
We also have a skewed business market in the West with unscrupulous and devious people making a fortune out of governments who cannot wait to throw our money at them if they say “Green” or “Sustainability” or “Eco”. These companies are fueling the fear industry to hide the total dodginess of what they are doing “Bitter medicine but it is for your own good”. How else do you have the perversion of Drax which after a very costly refit burns wood pellets from America which travel on DIESEL POWERED BOATS for heaven’s sake! Wood pellets which per therm of heat produced release far more CO2 to the atmosphere than coal. There are now highly efficient and clean coal burners so doing the maths why are we not burning coal? We are told that wood pellets are carbon (I so hate that ignorant term) neutral. Yes just think, all the energy consumed cutting down trees and bringing them to processing mills then putting them on diesel ships and burning in Drax. Yes we are told that burning a tree in one second and planting another which takes 50 years plus to mature balance each other out so everyone smile! Who is doing the maths here?
If I was not so stupid I would think therefore that this is nothing to do with climate but is pure leftist subversion in bed with the very worst of capitalism, just part of Critical Theory being played out and the UK Conservatives cannot join in the fun fast enough!
So, as I alluded to earlier I must be stupid and those kids super smart or is it just that I am biased, unable to think rationally as a scientist because of my links to Satan’s brew?!
Satan has a lot of right-hand men… 38 years as a geophysicist/geologist in the Climate Wrecking Industry. SEG member since 1981, AAPG member since 2004.
Yep… If CO2 emissions were an existential threat, no one would be piddling with wind turbines and solar panels…
N2N… like the unrestricted bombing of North Vietnam.
“However, Maybe I am stupid BUT…………given that the majority of CO2 produced by human activity in the world is in India and China…… why are we doing this to ourselves in the UK? We represent 1% of the world CO2 production.”
Because India is too poor to pad their wallets and China is already communist.
Jon, as a Brit, I’m sure you have compassion for residents of former colonies forced to use cow dung as fuel for their cooking fires. Might I suggest that a Drax-like programme be initiated, in which Brexit voting materials and ballot papers are shipped to those colonies? Or are the fumes from the burning of such materials more toxic than those from cow pats?
Highway to hell
https://youtu.be/SMaVii7nnj4
Yes David, the first thought when reading the title is the shared futility, and the extreme exaggeration of actual threat.
Communism was and still is an existential threat to liberty and prosperity.
Always worse when the threat comes from within.
Don’t they hate white patriarchal men.
Clearly not if you surround them with token attractive stupid female .. it is like a bond movie .. the hero always has to have the girl on the arm.
The Communists were moving down through Asia one country at a time. The Americans slowed them down in Korea, but stopped them in Vietnam. Even though the Communists won Vietnam, they didn’t take any more countries in Asia.
Apart from Laos and Cambodia.
Laos and Cambodia were already occupied by the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam war.
Back in the day, starting in the 1950’s the communists started taking over country after country, all over the world, on every continent, and at one time they looked like they might be unstoppable. This is why the United States fought in Korea and South Vietnam, and I agree with another poster, that the U.S. stopped the momentum of the worldwide communist movement in South Vietnam.
Without pushback, the North Vietnamese would have had a free hand to take over all of Southeast Asia. The North Vietnamese had a very capable military, and they were being supplied with all the military equipment they needed by both Russia and China.
If not for the U.S., and a decade-long war that sapped North Vietnamese strength and manpower, the North Vietnamese would certainly have conquered all the way to the gates of India. And who knows what would happen in India, with such a communist success. India had its share of communists at the time.
I do think the North Vietnamese were basically focused on their own national interests, but they would certainly have pushed their envelope had the U.S. not stood in their way.
The U.S. should have attacked Hanoi and the rest of North Vietnam right after the Tet Offensive of 1968. I remember thinking, “surely, we are going to go on the attack now”, after the North Vietnamese failed Tet Offensive. The war would have been over in six months, had we done so, imo.
But politics got in the way, and that was about the time I decided our leaders were not serious about pressing forward to a quick victory. It would be equivalent to Trump trying to run the Vietnam war while dealing with the Nancy Pelosi Democrats. Even though the right action is apparent, the politics won’t allow it to happen. So we wasted five more years in South Vietnam in a war of attrition.
Yep, we should have attacked the North Vietnamese homeland and put an end to that war quickly.
“In an insane world a sane man must appear insane.
– C. William King
…and all this time I thought it was Spock who said it.
My memory sucks, I thought Sarek, his father quoted that
I wonder whether these children know about solar-panel-fried birds or wind-mill-diced bird entrails, and the marvelous structures and creatures of nature sacrificed for the renewable-energy advancement of stupidkind.
If they did, then those protest signs might read:
I’m not a fan of those big fans
or
Mirrors are for hair stylin’ NOT for bird fryin’
“I speak for the trees”
Good on you girl, so do I.
So I take it then that you are in favour of doing all we can to increase atmospheric CO2 in order to benefit those trees, and help them to thrive?
She won’t speak for my acres of timber, I’ll show her a willow switch.
“She won’t speak for my acres of timber, I’ll show her a willow switch.”
condensed to:
https://www.google.com/search?q=She+won%E2%80%99t+my%2C+I%E2%80%99ll+show+her&oq=She+won%E2%80%99t+my%2C+I%E2%80%99ll+show+her&aqs=chrome.
“that digital “upskilling” can solve economic inequality…”
But we will always need someone to do the unskilled jobs.
+42 x 1042
Any Caddyshack references are welcome, as far as I’m concerned.
I remember the “Coming Ice Age”, and that we were told,in school, that Reagan was going to get us into a Nuclear World War before his term was up, that there would be Nuclear Winter even if you survived, (since discounted as unlikely)that we would be out of oil before 2000, that the population would be too large before that, that we were deforesting the planet so fast, we’d have no trees before 2000, and on, and on.
When nothing happens to curb fossil fuel usage, to curb CO2 production, when China and India are totally dwarfing American FF usage, and the amount of trash coming out of Asia is in no way curtailed, how do they think these disaffected youth are going to react? Once the world does not end despite predictions, they learn, just like we did, to take such predictions with a grain of salt.
I guess, with the advent of social media, this should happen much more quickly than in the past.
“No matter how much blood & treasure our government spends, it can’t win.”
The problem is, we did win. Then the politicians threw away the victory.
We didn’t win. We crushed the Viet Cong and NVA on the battlefield. We almost bombed North Vietnam out of the war in 1966… We bombed them to the peace table in 1972… But we never finished them off.
Every time we put them on the ropes, we backed off.
If we had stationed U.S. combat troops in South Vietnam like we did in South Korea and Japan and Germany, then South Vietnam would still be South Vietnam.
The anti-war Democrats changed that equation, and threw South Vietnam to the wolves by pulling all U.S. combat troops out and refusing to honor the Paris Peace Agreement which required the U.S. to come to South Vietnam’s aid if North Vietnam attacked again Millions of South Vietnamese were killed or displaced as a result, after South Vietnam finally fell to North Vietam.
Unrestricted air war against North Vietnam. Amphibious hook north of the DMZ, clear NVA art’y. Armored drive to Savannakhét. Shut down Ho Chi Minh Trail System. Reestablish DMZ north of 17th parallel, anchored on Savannakhét in the west and the coast in the east.
And if we had left the US Military in charge after it’s “win” in /of Iraq, … like we did after it’s “win” in /of Japan, ….. then Iraq could have been “westernized” just the same as Japan was.
“then Iraq could have been “westernized” just the same as Japan was.”
Instead, Obama allowed the Mad Mullahs of Iran to gain a huge influence and foothold in Iraq. Which will give us headaches in the future.
The left is doubling down on virtue signalling. We really need to do something ridiculously expensive and counterproductive to prove what good people we are.
Hey, climate koolaid kids dissing coal & gas electricity –
it was well before your time, but remember what Joni Mitchell sang –
“You don’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone”
As I recall Joni was wrong about DDT as well. 🙂
In one breath, these people complain about the earth being too crowded. In the next breath, these people complain, without proof, people are dying because “climate change”. Which just goes to show that they care, not about people’s well-being, but how they can use people to achieve their goals.
I don’t know, if I were of “This Generation”, I sure wouldn’t want to hang my hat on the dumbest, most asinine, and destructive know-nothing campaign in human history, the Climate Campaign. I’d want to get as far away from it as I possibly could. Because “This Generation” is definitely up for the All-Time Stupidest award.
I am a Vietnam vet, I was discharged and out-processed Christmas Eve, 1969, through the Oakland, California center. When I and several fellow discharged soldiers went through the San Francisco Airport we were attacked, in some cases physically, and the Army Ranger in front of me had red paint (the blood of babies) thrown on him. Now this. What I’m wondering if is whether or not I am supposed to go attack these “Vietnam equivalent climate protestors”? I am not a PTSD victim but I am sure I could work myself into a rage, especially when I think of our tax dollars going for this nonsense when just causes go begging.
My older brother, who passed away last May, was a USMC sergeant. He spent 1967 touring rice paddies and villages around Da Nang. I viscerally hate those who treated you, him and all of those who bravely served as “baby killers.”
While my brother was in the Marines, one of the Berrigan bothers was a resident of the Federal Correctional Institute in Danbury CT. We drove by the prison whenever we went into Danbury and there was always a group of long-haired maggot-infested, pinkos protesting. Even though I was only about 12 years old, I distinctly remember asking my Mom if she would please run them over.
“I am a Vietnam vet, I was discharged and out-processed Christmas Eve, 1969, through the Oakland, California center.”
I processed out 10 days earlier than you, Ron. 🙂 At the same out-processing center in Oakland.
Fortunately for me, noone attacked me, and I was wearing my military dress uniform (on purpose).
I had heard about the attacks and the spitting. I guess all of us had, and most of those guys processing out changed into civilian clothes before they left. But not me. I wore my uniform and I was looking for trouble. Perhaps my body language was why I didn’t get accosted.
OTOH, several females in the airports seemed to like the uniform. They bought me drinks and were very nice to me. I very much appreciated that. A good time was had by all.
Thank you for your service to our country, Tom, ditto to Davids Marine sergeant brother, and cheers for your excellent experience. Mine was quite different, and I think it was because the “Christmas Early Out” was publicized. Anyway, the military experience gave me a level of discipline sorely lacking in todays Gen Z.
Hey M.F.
Did you serve ? No ?
Anyone in your family serve ? No ?
Then you don’t have a leg to stand on .
Go away .
Boy, they’re trying every play in the manual, aren’t they?
(Bold mine)
I CAN’T TIDY MY ROOM – I am too busy being a hypocrite. It seems like this will all implode some day, well maybe die quietly.
Like many comments above, a picture is worth a thousand words…. If you have not yet seen utube videos by Geoff green, I highly recommend viewing as an example why water dominates temperature…no CO2 to be seen or felt – man made or otherwise.
https://youtu.be/HCvUElkI6nE
Many others showing the weather in Australia.
This lot cannot wait to become third world quick enough ( yes I know I should write “quickly”).
but it don’t read so good.
What would Douglas Adams make of this all? Where are you when we need you Douglas to bring some sanity to an insane world?
Adams would say, “See, I told you so! Humans are descended from the passengers on the Golgafrincham B Ark.”
Not even the A team…
Well, it’s back to war. The last time around, it was WWII. Now it’s Vietnam. OK.
On a recent thread, I advanced the idea that artillery could be most effective in the war on Climate Change. Now, my ideas have been borne out by current events.
Tactical Considerations:
An artillery unit needs forward observers and spotters to locate the targets and direct fire onto those targets. One question is how something like Climate Change can be identified and located sufficiently for an artillery barrage to be successful. The answer is simplicity itself. Fire control teams need only monitor various kinds of rallies and protest events.
Whenever a speaker at one of these events says something like “Climate Change, it is real, it is here, it is happening now!“, take that as your targeting information. Have Fire Control direct an artillery barrage onto that location immediately.
Results:
After several such events, Climate Change will not dare rear its’ ugly head. Frightened activists and politicians claiming “It’s here, it’s happening now.” will become a distant memory.
Alternatively, whenever a speaker starts to mention Climate Change, the audience will evacuate and seek cover.
Does this mean the AGW/CC crowd are executing a “retrograde offensive” by scaling from WWII to Vietnam?
A “retrograde offensive,” LMAO.
Hopefully they’ll follow that with a “strategic redeployment.”
I heard this on Limbaugh
https://www.studyfinds.org/survey-millennials-life-more-stressful-than-ever-before/
Here are the top 20 stressful scenarios reported by millennials:
1. Losing wallet/credit card
2. Arguing with partner
3. Commute/traffic delays
4. Losing phone
5. Arriving late to work
6. Slow WiFi
7. Phone battery dying
8. Forgetting passwords
9. Credit card fraud
10. Forgetting phone charger
11. Losing/misplacing keys
12. Paying bills
13. Job interviews
14. Phone screen breaking
15. Credit card bills
16. Check engine light coming on
17. School loan payments
18. Job security
19. Choosing what to wear
20. Washing dishes
Saving the planet will also remove a huge number of these stresses with no phones, automobiles, can’t be late to work if you don’t have a job, what to wear is not a problem, etc, but there will be a huge increase in lack of job security (unless hunting/gathering counts), and that dish washing thing is going to skyrocket and you’ll be doing it a creek or a wash bucket. All in all, I can see most of the list solved with their “Save the Planet” ideas.
Let’s try and stop the nonsense about 1.5C of warming. We should be ridiculing the absurd claim that 0.5C warming from today’s temperatures will be catastrophic.
“We should be ridiculing the absurd claim that 0.5C warming from today’s temperatures will be catastrophic.”
Especially since we have had about 0.5C of global *cooling* since Feb. 2016.
The UAH satellite chart:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_January_2019_v6.jpg
A tale of two cities
Miami – July is hottest month – average 91°F … January is coldest month – average 76°F
NYC – July is hottest month – average 76°F ….. January is coldest month – average 35°F
#1 Miami’s average July temp is 15°F hotter than NYC’s average July temp
#2 Miami’s average January temp of 76°F is the same as NYC’s average January temp
#3 Miami’s average January temp is 41°F hotter than NYC’s average January temp
Now, given the fact that Miami is 15°F hotter in the summertime ……. and is 41°F hotter in the wintertime, …… tis no wonder the “snowflakes” are scared to death of an impending catastrophic 1 or 2 degree increase in average temperature.
From the article: “I’m still laughing. When I saw the title, I said to myself, “Self, they’re right. The Global War on the Weather is like the Vietnam War. No matter how much blood & treasure our government spends, it can’t win.”
Actually, the U.S. military *did* win the Vietnam war. The U.S. and North Vietnam and South Vietnam signed a peace treaty in 1973, and major combat ended. South Vietnam was still South Vietnam then. We won. Just like in South Korea.
Then, Watergate happened, Nixon resigned, Ford was appointed president, and the Liberal Appeaser U.S. Congress took over and threw South Vietnam to the communist wolves by causing all U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn from South Vietnam, and then failing to help the South Vietnamese when North Vietnam broke the peace treaty in 1975 and attacked South Vietnam again, even though the U.S. was legally and morally obligated to defend South Vietnam. The Democrats didn’t care. All they wanted to do was wash their hands of South Vietnam. And that’s what they did.
Vietnam was like Iraq: U.S. troops go in and take out the bad guys, and then Democrats come in and screw everything up when they get in charge, and the war that was won goes to hell in a handbasket. Two good examples of why Democrats should NEVER be allowed to guide U.S. foreign policy and war policy. They fail every time they try it. Appeasers appease, they don’t take actions against our enemies. They run away from out enemies.
Americans can be confident in their fighting forces. We defeat America’s enemies when called to do so. And I must say, I met some of the current generation of our fighting forces and was very much impressed with them. You don’t want to take these guys on.
Americans should have NO confidence in ANY Democrat when it comes to defending the United States.
The US military won on the battlefield. The war was lost in Washington DC and on the evening TV news.
“on the evening TV news.”
Yup, with LBJ’s political add portraying …… a little girl picking flowers, …. a nuclear bomb exploding …… and the TV screen going “black”.
Goldwater lost, …… LBJ was elected POTUS …… and the Nam War recruitment and expenditures dictated by the Democrats went into “overdrive”.
And Walter Cronkite declared the war lost right after we crushed the Viet Cong and NVA in the Tet Offensive. After Tet 1968, the VC ceased to exist as an effective fighting force.
“After Tet 1968, the VC ceased to exist as an effective fighting force.”
Yes, the Viet Cong, South Vietnamese communists who hid in plain sight among the South Vietnamese civilian population, made the mistake of believing their own propaganda which said that the Tet Offensive of 1968, would be the final battle to push the U.S. out of South Vietnam, and so instead of remaining hidden, they came out in public as communist fighters, and then when the Tet Offensive was stopped by U.S. and South Vietnamese forces, the Viet Cong had nowhere to hide, the ones who were still alive after the battles, that is.
The Viet Cong should not believe everything they read in the papers. Distorted views of reality can get you killed!
‘The war was lost in Washington DC and on the evening TV news.’
By progressives.
“The US military won on the battlefield.”
That’s the main point I want to emphasize. The U.S. military defeated the enemy before it.
The reason I’m a little sensitive about this is because the anti-war Left use the “lost the war” meme to try to make people think the U.S. military was not capable of defeating the enemy and therefore, the U.S. should shy away from pursuing further military adventures. The Left claims the Pentagon Papers said the Veitnam war was unwinnable. This is an example of that meme. It’s also a lie and the Pentagon Papers have been distorted, just like everything else about the Vietnam war. The winning of the war puts the lie to the Pentagon Papers report referred to. The war *was* winnable and was won on the battlefield.
It is important that other Bad Guys in the world know just how lethal the U.S. military can be. They need to know that despite all the fools in the U.S. government, that if they ever get in a fight with the U.S. military, they are going to be destroyed.
That just might discourage otherwise reckless dictators from doing stupid things with regard to the U.S, and might save us a lot of trouble in the future.
Yes, we have stupid politicians, but you don’t won’t to go up against the U.S. military. They demonstrate why you should be afraid every time they take the field.
Win the war, lose the peace.
What a bunch of ungrateful, privileged, immature brats. Their ancestors, through hard work and perseverance have handed them a virtual paradise (compared to life just 100 years ago) and all they can think to do is complain that it isn’t good enough and try to tear it down. They haven’t yet earned the right to criticize the generations that came before them.
On that same day in this comment:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/14/npr-its-2050-and-this-is-how-we-stopped-climate-change-riiight/#comment-2655228
I said:
My argument was that Climate Change activism is the younger generation’s Vietnam War protests. Both misguided. Both due to ignorant child-like young adults who thought they knew more than they did.
In my comment, I didn’t take Matt Ford’s idiotic presumptions that CC is something we need to worry about.
I wonder if Matt Ford read my comments for his ideas to write a story??
It is racist, sexist, and ageist to imply that only old, white men are sufficiently intelligent to see CAGW for the scam that it is.
Disgusting brain washed, indoctrinated fools…I mean IDIOTS. Good God!
As the climate gets chiller, the alarmists get shriller.
“We have to destroy the economy to save it.”
“Self, they’re right. The Global War on the Weather is like the Vietnam War. No matter how much blood & treasure our government spends, it can’t win.”
Yeah: and like the Vietnam war it is based on a lie of the domino effect and the idea that you can bomb people back into the stone age. Well I have news for the little agitators: you can send society right back into the stone age with the policies mooted as the Green New Deal. Nothing works faster than to start a civil war in the midst of a collapsing economy.
And about that damn “4 million dying from” cooking over wood fires. Please, please read the original source and not the NYTimes version of it. It says smoke from cooking fires is attributed to have contributed to the premature death of 4m people per year, all of whom were born after 1935.
Attributed to…
contributed to…
premature death…
Not “killed”. It is all made up, literally, if you look into how that number was imagined.
I assert by various attributions that 1% of all visitors to this website to have at last once dreamed of driving a yellow Boxster. Prove me wrong.
Say that again ….
Say that again ….
“DUH”, ….. 4 million dying from cooking over wood fires, …. 3 million dying from cigarette smoke, …… 1 million dying from secondhand smoke, … yada, yada, yada.
Just who in ell is performing all the autopsies that prove or justify the above claims
I was a child propagandized in public “school” during the Vietnam War, and now I’m part of the “gerontocracy.” Older and unbrainwashed is better.
These are the same liberals that will fly happily jetset around the world, drink Fiji water in plastic bottles shipped across the pacific, live in big houses, consume the finer things in life imported from all over the world, and use devices and products like mobile phones that would be impossible without fossil fuels. They have free will to “take action” themselves, but they refuse to do so. I can only assume they think “taking action” means other people have to make sacrifices, not them.
Recently there was an article about how the older you are, the more likely you are to be skeptical of the climate change nonsense. One of the reasons given was that people over 45 remember the global cooling scare of the 1970s. I would argue that it’s simply a result of being alive decade after decade and none of the disaster scenarios ever coming to pass. It’s easy for a 20 year old to buy into it, but after 40 or 50 years of nothing happening, you start to get tired of the garbage…
So is algore the new Hanoi Jane?
No, fentynal is this generation’s Vietnam War. Just look at the body count.
Sad to see so many skulls full of mush believe the Globalist\Deep State canard that somehow links destructive Climate Change to Capitalism! The only thing the two have in common is that both start with “C”! A far more fitting correspondence are the terms Climate Change and Communism because elimination of Capitalism leaves the doors wide open for implementation of the most destructive, incidious, and nefarious form of government ever invented, and that is Communism! And that is the goal of the Deep State Globalists!
Perhaps these kids would feel differently if we were to suggest that they should be drafted to go fight a shooting war with the world’s most prolific emerfing CO2 emitter. Because I don’t think they’ll stop emitting otherwise.
Clearly, the “pawn” on the left does NOT speak for the trees, for if she did, she would be saying “Thanks for the CO2, we LOVE it!”
The analogy works on a certain level. The Vietnam War was a giant mistake perpetrated by highly educated government experts that wasted ridiculous amounts of money and cost thousands of lives. Stated that way, the comparison to “climate change” is obvious.