Skip to main content

View Diary: The 'Hoax' (139 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the military has (7+ / 0-)

    They are aware, and have already done studies on the sociopolitical impact of climate change. They are realists, Inhofe, not so much.

    •  Yes, that's my point (4+ / 0-)

      As much as I'm not a huge fan of the US Military - in times like these, it might be more worth citing their studies than the EPA's . ..

      (or perhaps it is more like they accept the EPA's studies - not sure if they have actually done their own - but still, methinks Inhofe would have to do some big time spinning to denounce information from that source)

      •  Many of the things we get upset at the military (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The grouch, orlbucfan, jamess

        for aren't really the military's fault. It's the civilian leadership that got us into all these crazy wars and has spent trillions on worthless crap meant to kill lots of innocent people and make contractors rich.

        Sure, there are military leaders who've helped them make it happen, many of whom eventually retire and get high-paid jobs for contractors, and others who have ordered or engaged in atrocities or proven to be hugely incompetent.

        But generally the military leadership is very leery of war and rarely pushes for it, from what I've read, and most rank and file service members just want to do their job and go home. So of all the people who could potentially weigh in on climate change, I'd guess that the military is more credible than most. They've surely got some of the most sophisticated weather forecasting models and technology around and are not in the denial of reality business.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Mon Apr 15, 2013 at 06:01:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's an interesting perspective (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Of course, when a country is so in the thralls of the military that civilian leaders don't dare even utter a discouraging word - much less take action - that's a rather meaningless distinction.

          An example of this principle in action is when Obama asked four generals on the Afghan situation and their solution all involved "more war" - so we got "more war"

          Of course, Obama probably wanted that in the first place, but it would have been an interesting dynamic if they had all suggested the wise course - i.e., pull out ASAP.

          •  Depends on which generals you ask (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            The hotshots on the joint chiefs chairman track have their own agenda. One of the most important things you do as a leader is figure out who's lying to or playing you and who you can trust. Anyone can go opinion shopping, too.

            And I was referring more to the everyday brass who get most of the real work done and aren't playing for a 4 star generalship. I read or heard somewhere that if you want good opinions in any large organization, don't talk to the top brass, talk to their subordinates. They do the real work.

            "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

            by kovie on Mon Apr 15, 2013 at 12:33:02 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site