What was that about global warming being laughable lefty paranoia?

Posted by David on Monday, February 23, 2004 at 12:49 PM.

OK, I have to prep for a meeting, so I don't have time to comment on this, except for a very self-righteous "Goddamn RIGHT!", but here's the link to the article in The Guardian and a few choice excerpts:

Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

[ . . . ]

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

[ . . . ]

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office - and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,' added Watson.

And, for the record, the irony of being happy that the Pentagon is reporting that we're screwed has not escaped me.


rfkj, on Monday, February 23, 2004 at 1:30 PM:

(I'm just playing devil's advocate here.)

Isn't that the report that's basically a security analysis of what could happen if rapid global climate change becomes a reality? I don't think it's saying that global warming exists--I think it lays out a scenario of what might happen if there is rapid catastrophic climate change.

It's kind of like a nuclear war survivability scenario: you know, all the Halliburton execs into hardened bunkers, everyone else is SOL.


Andrew Sundstrom, on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 at 5:59 AM:

From the annals of insecurity -- pity us New Yorkers:

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Example/ExampleStart.shtml

By the way, the Atomic Archive root page is outstanding.