Clark: Global Warming a National Security Problem That Must be Dealt With

[Clarkie1]

"Promoting Prosperity with Climate Change Policy"

<snip>

...it has to be considered a national security problem. There's just no other way to deal with it.

...there are two possible scenarios. There's a gradual change and there's the abrupt change scenario. But one of those two scenarios is almost certain to happen, because carbon stays suspended in the atmosphere for a hundred years or more.

<snip>

...there are profound implications that you can see coming our way. And I look at three of them. First of all, there's displacement. If water levels rise in the gradual model over the next hundred years by less than a meter, a hundred million people living in low lying areas around the world are going to have to move. They're going to be affected.

<snip>

These are catastrophic storm potentials the likes of which we're just starting to experience. So Katrina would be not a once in a hundred years storm, but a once in five years storm. And it wouldn't be just on the gulf coast of the United States. It could be in the Pacific. It could be in southeast Asia or elsewhere. So it's the displacement of people.

<snip>

Gradual warming also means that rainfall patterns change. So the Pacific northwest gets drier. In Alaska, there are forest fires. Agriculture suffers. People can't ... especially in the lesser developed countries, they can't sustain the traditional living patterns. They're going to move. So populations shift and move. That causes national security concerns for governments.

<snip>

And the third thing, of course, is as a consequence of global warming, whether it's gradual or abrupt, you will change agriculture. You'll change fisheries. You'll change water flows. Nations will find they have different resources available. And those resource needs and migrant flows and other things will cause tensions and changes in alliances and border controls and problems and issues.

http://www.securingamerica.com/node/1172

[Kutjara]

1. Don't tell BushCo or they'll send the environment to Gitmo. n/t

[Clarkie1]

2. LOL.

Good one!

:hi:

[chookie]

3. There he goes again, thinking long term strategy

Wes gets it.

Climate change has often been the root cause of dramatic changes in human culture.

Two ways to deal with it -- address it in a meaningful fashion and try to curb it, and establish early on strategies to deal with it -- or ignore it and some day run amok in panic, which can/will destablize the entire planet politically.

Wes is making realistic assessments about critical issues we will face in the future. That's leadership.

Wes has my support, again.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Wes is my #3.

Al Gore
Russ Feingold

But Wes, he's all-riiiiight too.

Way to go, Wes.

[Clarkie1]

5. Here's my order...

Clark
Gore
Russ

[FrenchieCat]

6. Hey....that's mine too!

:headbang:

[Clarkie1]

7. Cool.

:hi:

[Warren DeMontague]

10. Well, we're just about on the same page, aren't we?

I would be extremely happy with any two of those three in the WH.

[oasis]

8. Clark continues to impress. (eom)

:thumbsup:

[Donna Zen]

9. And it is happening now

I listened to that interview, and I would advise others to do the same. One of the ideas that Clark stresses is that it is happening now. We cannot wait to act.

I also was impressed with his advice to refer to Global Climate as a national security issue. He said to refrain from mentioning the EPA, the frame is national security. He's right. People will understand this better...they'll listen, and the rightwing will have a more difficult time with that frame.

The book the General recommended for us to read is The Weather Makers. I bought it, but Mr. Z grabbed it and now I'll have to wait.

Wes is blogging tomorrow and taking questions. I hope someone asks him about the environment.