Military preparing to fight ‘climate change’ instead of wars? By Dustin Howard, 2/10/16
When our national focus
was still sane, the United States Department of Defense had a singular goal:
defending the U.S, while maintaining the capability to wage war on two fronts.
What did that look like? If the United States were drawn into a two front war
like World War II, we would be able to triumph.
So what happens when you
take on so many priorities that the objective actually becomes more elusive? We
should ask the Pentagon after they implement Directive E
4715.21, or the directive
relating to “Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience.”
The directive comes as a
direct result of Executive Order 13653, Obama’s effort to institutionalize his stance
on climate change within the government. The thinking goes, “If the effects of
climate change are imminent, shouldn’t we make the appropriate preparations?”
What could go wrong?
For starters, what
happens when the military procuring weapons based not solely on cost,
reliability and effectiveness? Does the introduction of “climate
sustainability” disrupt this already cumbersome balancing act? Producing cost
effective, functioning technology is already a challenge that the defense
establishment grapples with, doesn’t this create more problems than it solves?
This is corroborated by
the Daily Caller’s report, which excerpts the report by saying “The way in
which DoD acquires its weapons platforms and supplies will also see significant
changes. According to the document, the assistant secretary of defense for
acquisition will overhaul “policies to integrate climate change considerations
into mission area analyses and acquisition strategies across the life cycle of
weapons systems, platforms, and equipment.”
That’s pretty bad, but
it gets worse. It also creates “climate boards” that will integrate the new
standards into all layers of the services.
Worse still, the
military’s tactical aims are being complicated,
according to Americans for
Limited Government President Rick Manning, “Sergeants leading a platoon should
not be worried about the environmental sensitivity of a rice paddy that needs
to be traversed to achieve their mission, while providing the maximum security
for the personnel under their command. Tank commanders should be afforded
all the training they need no matter how much fuel is expended in the
process. And Naval Captains should run their ships at the speeds that are
necessitated by the immediate needs of the situation. Instead, President Obama
would install bureaucratic boards and other second guessers along with real
time tactical climate change assessments that would be held over officers’
heads should they choose what was deemed to be a climate change insensitive
course of action.”
A three year moratorium
on the Obama climate order should be instituted by Congress to assure that the
full impacts can be realized before doing great damage to the technical
capabilities of our armed forces, as well as damaging our capability to project
force. If we want to return to the original mission of our military, which is
readiness, Congress itself must be ready to flex its Article I muscles. Our
safety may very well depend on it.
Dustin Howard is a
contributing editor at Americans for Limited Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment