This is not Obama's Katrina, it is his Hiroshima.

[grantcart]

Nothing irritates me more than the American obsession with connecting the most recent event with the most well known recent famous example.

Every conflict is Vietnam.

BP is Katrina.

Any abuse of power is Watergate.


It makes intelligent discussion almost impossible because you have to first explain why the comparison isn't apt and then you have to return to the real issues.

This episode has nothing similar to Katrina. We have had hurricanes before and we knew about evacuations and getting things ready. We knew that people needed food, water and that hospitals needed electricity.

We really haven't had a lot of experience with deep sea oil exploration wells blowing up and creating an event that, from an environmental point of view, is closer to Hiroshima than it is to Katrina.

President Obama needs to elevate the issue to an even higher plane.

In 90 days the oil will be stopped and the clean up will become a massive multi billion dollar event. There will be some unexpected good news, clever inexpensive solutions that no one thought of before, and some harsh realities about rebuilding plant and fish populations that will take a decade if we are lucky.

The Japanese response to Hiroshima was two fold:

1) They changed their fundamental way of thinking. The threw out their militarism and constructed a constitution that didn't even allow for a traditional military.

2) They developed a cooperative environment to rebuild their economy.




You want to ban US offshore drilling? Fine.

Right now their are 400 wells being added to a single field in Brazil. If something happens to those wells the oil goes into our Oceans.

Until we change our petroleum based economy then oil companies around the world will be pushed into more and more hazardous environments to take on more and more risky extraction.

The low hanging petroleum fruit has been picked. From now on it gets riskier and riskier.



So now is the time to summon a collective American response, ironically modeled on the Manhattan Project that created the "Little Boy" that wiped out Hiroshima.


Think big and add a zero.

Now is the time to grasp the historic opening to challenge this country to pivot like Michael Jordan and go in a completely new direction.


Create incentives and taxes that will take petroleum out of the car industry in 15 years.

We can do it. We tamed the west, built the trans American railroad, electrified a continent, and yes we walked on the moon.


In 6 months from now, Mr. President, you will not be judged on your response to this crises based on how well you coordinated the cleanup but how effective you are in making these wells redundant.


We can do it, trust me, after all we are the people who figured out how to wipe out an entire city with a single bomb.

It is summoning this country to big challenges that this country has shown the world the strength of its people and the brilliance of its leaders.

[Hardrada]

1. Hear! Hear!

[tabatha]

2. Yes, it requires no thinking to make these easy, facile comparisons.

But it is the quick easy sound bite that everyone grabs in their busy lives.

It is probably an attempt to provide CliffsNotes, but the notes are wrong.

ps - send to Obama.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

13. THIS MEDIA IS THE ENEMY OF DEMOCRACY

[demwing]

33. No it isn't - dig deeper.

Unbridled Corporate greed and international power is the enemy of Democracy. Without Corporate control and manipulation, the press would be the friend and watchdog of Democracy.

[breadandwine]

57. The problem is that Obama just attended a fundraiser in the Getty oil home.

He is so busy having a mind meld with corporatists that if there is a way to crack the whip and get some action on the leak, he is too busy sucking up to the DLC corporatists to know about it. Obama is a total wimp and this is essentially the end of his presidency. His presidency has run out of gas because the DLC mindset of constantly running to the middle of the road, no matter how far to the right that entire road is, has run out of gas. If Obama continues to be a Republican-lite corporatist DLC suck up he will go down the same rat hole they are going down because he is showing no leadership. He went golfing in the middle of this. He is telling stupid rhetoric stories of how his daughter asked him if the leak is fixed yet. He is listening to the corporatists and political consultants instead of marshaling the powers he has to do something. It's all talk, and I-can't-do-anything. Does he even know that BP is doing all the booming wrong, and it could be done a lot more effectively?

At every step of the way BP has futzed around ineptly doing a half-assed job with each "solution" they tried because the attitude of the oil industry is "Booming and cleanup is for F*CKIN' P*SSIES" as one person connected to the industry quoted the attitude. Some of the solutions might actually have worked if they weren't doing them in so half-assed a manner. For instance, the latest solution involved pumping heavy drilling mud into the well but BP ran out of the mud and had to stop the procedure while they waited to get more. Why didn't they have enough mud on hand in the first place so they wouldn't have to interrupt the solution in the middle, one of the most foolish things they could do. Why didn't they wait till they had enough mud on hand to do the whole thing instead of in the half-assed, interrupted way that was likely to fail? BECAUSE THEY WERE THINKING OF HOW THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH NOT SPENDING SO MUCH ON MORE MUD. Now we won't know if it might have worked had they had all the mud on hand for one single long effort instead of start-and-stop while the well backed up again. These people are INCOMPETENT but Obama is busy trusting them and SUCKING UP to them.

If Bobby Kennedy were running the show he would already have poured through every regulation to stretch it so that he could kick some ass and get BP to cut the bullsh*t. He would have dredged up every little used law from 1807 to justify bossing BP around and micromanaging the whole thing instead of trusting them at every turn and maintaining a hands-off attitude with his "corporate partners." He would be finding legal excuses to seize BP assets on grounds of "piracy" or arresting BP officials on grounds of being "enemy combatants." I'm exaggerating here but not much. There are so many laws and regulations on the books, if you have enough BALLS, which Obama DOESN'T, you'll do what you have to to take charge, put a political and legal gun to BP's head and get the job done. Don't forget that Al Capone was nailed on tax evasion. If the government wants to nail somebody, they can do it. Obama is the president of the United States but he acts like he's BP's little gofer. If Obama had BALLS he'd start talking about shutting down BP altogether with the kind of political brinkmanship that would scare the sh*t out of them.

Remember the "energy crisis" of the 1970s? Gas prices were so high. Then Carter began pushing alternative energy. The oil industry, which couldn't POSSIBLY bring down gas prices since it's all supply and demand, blah blah, suddenly brought them down drastically. Why? Because Carter was using their orchestrated energy crisis against them. He threatened to take away their punch bowl and it scared the sh*t out of them. So the colluders suddenly brought down gas prices. But Obama won't do anything like this because his whole mindset is to be a goody two shoes suck up and cave to the corpoaratists and be middle of the road and Republican lite even if the entire road is all the way over on the right side of the universe. Same with BP. They are failing because they have the wrong corporate culture and mentality, not because the problems are unsolvable, and they could solve the whole thing if they weren't so full of sh*t and doing everything only for show and public relations. The problem is Obama trusts them and is going along with them and raising money from them, which has to be totally politically deaf.

Obama is not doing anything because he is a DLC wimp.

[swilton]

77. True

If there was ever a time when we needed some creative thinking it is now. Going to the status quo discourages that when we need it most....The progressive base is where the 'outside the box' solutions will be drawn from.

Although BP has the oil engineering technology to stop this; they have taken long enough. They remain responsible but it is time to make this more of a collaborative effort to stop the leak and to clean up the aftermath. This is an international disaster in the making and I've long called for efforts to go beyond the US and BP.

[defendandprotect]

81. Heard about that one: Obama/Getty . . . great disappointment . . . sad . . . !!

Obama/DLC -- denied it a lot but the actions are clear!!

[tblue]

92. Obama's worldview is that the middle ground is holy ground.

He is hell bent on staying a centrist course, which means keeping Conservadems and Joe Lieberman and a Republican or two on his side. That is his measure of success. But it''s not succeeding right now.Hence, the granting of evironmental safety waivers for drillers after the BP rig explosion followed abruptly by the begrudged call for a new-drilling moratorium. He really did not want to do that. Just a few weeks ago, he included new drilling in his evergy plan. I believe where he struggles is in searching for middle ground where there is no sensible middle ground. And in showing conviction for something logic has to tell him doesn't make sense anymore. I don't think we the people on the left were ever Obama's key constituency and he feels no compunction to go to bat for our cherished dreams. And it looked in his press conference that he resented like hell that his "middle ground uber alles" fantasy is being upended. It's likda like, without that safe middle ground, he doesn't know where to go from here.

[Raine1967]

3. K&R

Oh I agree with this OP.

Now I pray that we as a nation have the fortitude to see it thru.

[Jennicut]

4. One of the best posts I have read on this whole thing.

This disaster may be the only thing that shocks people and politicians into creating a way to get away from oil. Difficult to do? Yes. Impossible? I don't think so. And the oil being looked for right now is getting riskier...peak oil, anyone? The President touched upon that ever so briefly at the press conference the other day.

[grantcart]

5. Tks

[CoffeeCat]

6. Wow, powerful statement...

...and the sad thing is...Obama trusted in BP when they reassured him, "We got this!" when
the leak first happened. I'm sure Obama walked into a hornet's nest when he was first elected,
being shown just how powerful the corporations are and how entrenched they are in our government.

I bet Obama allowed BP a lot of latitude when the leak first happened, and maybe
he trusted them. That's all blown to hell now.

I'm sure Obama understands just what you said, that this is his Hiroshima. I'm sure
he understands now, that in order to save his Presidency--that he must stand up to the
corporations and break the grip they have on our country. That means going up
against the corrupt politicians and the neocons too--and they'll make sure Obama is
tripped up and destroyed if he dares to challenge the status quo.

Obama is in an impossible situation. I am having trouble with this, and I am
often overwhelmed with fear, anger and sadness about this spill. I can only
imagine how Obama feels--knowing how truly evil and corrupt BP is and that they
own many politicians.

[obxhead]

45. I can agree to an extent, but Obama in no way has clean hands

when it comes to BP cash.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/its-complicated-obama-has-received-the-most-bp-cash/


"I'm sure Obama walked into a hornet's nest when he was first elected, being shown just how powerful the corporations are and how entrenched they are in our government."

Yeah, so firmly entrenched that they even own him as well.

[The Hope Mobile]

54. Yes, they definitely own him. nt

[goclark]

91. "They " own America

Cheney and the Corporations OWN America.

The rich don't care about who owns our country because they have not felt the pinch in the pocket. They are playing on the same team.

The Middle Class ( if there still is one) don't have the power to do anything about it because they are too busy working to feed their families.

The poor don't have the money or influence to make anyone do anything.

In terms of ownership, Obama doesn't "Own" anything that could even touch what the RICH ROBBERS have stolen from this country.

If anything Obama is "New ~ Kinda Rich" and New Power in Name Only.

[CoffeeCat]

55. I agree with you...

Obama has taken a lot of cash, from BP, and from other special interests (such
as big pharma and the health-insurance lobby).

I may be fooling myself, but I sense that Obama wasn't as corrupt and owned
like most of our current politicians. He wasn't in the Senate that long. I'm
sure he knew how government worked and that there was a corrupt relationship
between dirty politicians and the corporations.

However, when he became President--I'm sure he was "schooled" about just what
the corporations and the dirty politicians expected--compliance. Kinda like
how the mafia works. You know they're bad, then you take their loans and get
involved--and it's only after they've got you--that you realize just how
dastardly the whole thing is.

Plus, BP is screwing with him. They lied to the President about having the spill
contained and having a plan to fix it. They misinformed the President--perhaps
manipulating him into not treating this as a four-alarm emergency--because of
those assurances. Then, Obama finds out they've lied their asses off--while
the spill grows into an epic disaster. I'm sure he's pissed.

What bothers me is that the Coast Guard is taking directives from BP. They threatened
that CBC camera crew with arrest if they took pictures of an oil-soaked beach. When
the crew asked who was giving the Coast Guard the power to do this, the CG replied, "BP."

I don't think the President ordered BP to use the CG as their personal police--to keep
information from the public. It feels as if BP has power fueled by a corrupt system
that can circumvent the President.

I'm not saying that the President is innocent. Or that he's not a part of the problem.
I think he's in the game, and just like the guy who took the loan from the loan shark--he's
realizing that he's got to play or face consequences. It will be interesting to see
how Obama handles this. I truly think the neocons, the corporations and other elite
powerbrokers are so in control of everything, and it's nearly beyond repair.

I would say that the recent FAA ban on any flights going over the spill below 3,000 feet--doesn't
bode well. BP wants to control information and public perception. So, how did BP
get its wish granted? Did they order the FAA to issue that order, and was the President
complying or was he somehow circumvented?

[obxhead]

88. Yes, great questions

that must be answered. In some way he has to be complicit in the new no fly zones. If he's not, that opens a far bigger and almost more dangerous can of questions that must be answered.

Really looking for some of that transparent government that was promised to us about now. Hell I would be happy with even just a bit of honesty in general about the severity of this oil volcano. :(

[tabatha]

47. Well stated.

[Bluesbreaker]

93. Don't say BP tricked Obama

He sold his soul to BP long ago. He wasn't fooled by BP; he's been in bed with them for years. Here's a little item you might find interesting:

During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html#ixzz0pSmlMsut

[rufus dog]

7. Great job grantcart

Looking for long term solutions rather than short term photo ops is what it is all about.

[grantcart]

10. tks

[demwing]

32. And not "just" long term solutions (not to diminish the importance of same)

but a fundamental restructuring of how we think.

[patrice]

8. Thiis is similar to some things I learned from the deaths of some of my loved ones.

I don't know about heaven and hell, but I do know that the one sure validation of a life, of a husband (or two), or of a sister (or two), or of a father, or an eco-system, or of a way of life, the one sure validation of something that was personally valuable is to change one's self for the better in a manner that is consistent with the value that they/it manifested in your life. The loss is thus transformed into growth.

[grantcart]

9. Yes the lessons of gray hairs. Sometimes you have to abandon incremental

and examine a basic way of life.

[patrice]

35. . . . with a desire for truth above ALL else. This requires humility . . .

and death is real good at humbling us, but we must get past our anger first.

[DarthDem]

11. SUPERB Post

Just fantastic.

[zalinda]

12. I wish I could recommend this OP 50 more times. n/t

[grantcart]

15. so do I lol

[boppers]

14. Chernobyl, not Hiroshima.

Hiroshima was intentional. Hiroshima was *ordered* by the president.

[grantcart]

16. The point of the OP was not the level of destruction

because obviously Hiroshima was much worse.

The point is that it offered an opportunity for the Japanese to restructure their world view and their economy.

In this analogy, which is meant to get be shocking so as to get people to view it in a completely different historical context, we are the Japanese.

The terrible consequences of the Deepwater well leak offer us either a precursor to more incidents or the beginging of the end of the petroleum based internal combustion engine. If, in that sense, we make the transformation as the Japanese did then this terrible incident will not have been in vain.

If however we fail to take the opportunity it will indeed become a Chernobyl.

[JCMach1]

17. It is most likely already at Chernobyl levels- it goes downhill the longer it continues

Huge swathes of the ocean are going to be unlivable and toxic for decades or more.

Much of this damage will be in slow motion and horrific... and yes, cancer rates along the gulf will probably rise... :(

[slackmaster]

18. Interesting take, K&R

:kick:

[depakid]

19. What you refuse to ackowledge- that any other objective person does

Is that this President ratified Republican drilling policies- and put his name and stamp on their safety, when- at the same time he declined to take the necessary steps to ensure (as other nations have) that the regulations- and regulatory authorities...

how to put this in the vernacular- had their shit together.

Bottom line- this is representative of many of the Obama administration's "go along to get along" type deals- and when all is said and done- historians will write about it- just as they write about the nature of the preceding administrations.

Best we can hope for at this point is that we- and they have learned a little something- and that we repeat the same mistake the next go round.

[Kablooie]

21. That doesn't change the fact that the poster is right. It may not happen, but he's still right.

[readmoreoften]

22. +1

[treestar]

42. He was not going to change everything overnight

It's still the same country - no major revolution occurred. The government is huge. We do need oil, there's no getting away from that for now.

[Kablooie]

20. YES! We HAVE to eliminate our slavish dependence on oil!!!!!!!! There ARE alternatives!

Oil has to be made a minor energy source.

If we did not need oil for every single aspect of society
it would increase our national security in so many, many ways.

Viable alternatives aren't available right now but they
are possible if enough effort is put in to developing them.

[femmedem]

23. First time I ever shared a DU post on FB. n/t

[placton]

24. and yet

this President will do nothing - as he waits to be replaced by another GOP president in '12

[DimplesinMI]

60. See you have a Michigan Avatar.......

I hate to say this in the wake of this human made disaster BUT "Thank God" I live in Michigan were our Five Great Lakes are not used for the drilling of oil. We are blessed that are water is healthy and fresh. We are blessed to have fish life in practically in any direction you turn (mostly everywhere in Michigan is 10 minutes or less away from a lake).

I see what is going on in the Gulf with the oil right now and wonder about the long-term effects for our state. We are the ONLY state that is so blessed with the natural resource of water....that everyone needs to live. I hate to think of the long term effects of the oil plume....it effect on the oceans....and a scrabble for fresh water and fish...pointing straight to our state.

Please BP and President Obama.....get this man made disaster in the Gulf FIXED QUICK. Before the greedy corporate interests that obviously run our country.....turn to Michigan to destroy our beautiful, peaceful, Lakes.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SaveAmerica]

26. Now if the distractors would be quiet so he can get down to work w/o distraction

One more thing added to his enormous 'to-do' list. Imagine how effective he could be if he could just dig down and get some good stuff done.

[Starckers]

27. Oil

All here are saying do away with oil, but just look around.  I
am in my office and The carpeting comes from oil, the plastic
housing on my computer comes from oil, the plastic on my
binders, the ink that is on every printed page, the toner in
the printer, the paint on the wall, the cable covering, my
pens, anything plastic, anything printed or painted, my
running shorts, all come from oil.  Oil is transported through
pipelines and is so easy to move around.  You need to come to
grips here.

[grantcart]

53. You are the one that needs to come to grips with reality

The known amount of oil is X


The amount of oil that we are using is Y


The amount of oil that we are discovering every year is Y - 20%.


While the immediate extraction is very cheap and efficient the amount of known reserves is declining every year and even with extraordinary discoveries will deplete the known reserves in 20 years.


Add to this the fact that India and China are increasing consumption dramatically means only one thing.


And you don't have a grip on it.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

[RainDog]

58. Hemp

Starckers -

EVERYTHING that you listed is available for production from a bio-degradable, annual crop: hemp.

Ford made a car body from hemp that was stronger than steel.

This nation HAS TO stop pandering to stupidity and oil profits and allow this industry to replace petrol-derived products.

Obviously this is not the only solution (costs need to reflect the real costs of things - plus the cost of a thing is the only way that Americans have EVER chosen to do the best thing rather than the cheapest thing) - but it is a major step in the right direction.

Just as the founders required farmers to grow hemp, and FDR's administration utilized hemp for the war effort against fascists, this nation needs to once again recognize the value of the plant is greater than the value of a prison-petrol economy.

[judesedit]

28. You are absolutely right. FIrst..Katrina involved thousands of human and animal lives immediately

Many of whom did NOT survive. Bush waited 4 days before even flying over Louisiana. He had to eat cake first. Then he let red tape and hierarchy bullshit stand in the way of emergency help.
The BP explosion DID involve loss of life, but there was no salvaging possible other than what was done. Yes, the BP oil gusher, is a devastating tragedy for the Gulf, the sea life in that area, the atmosphere, the tourist industry, and definitely for the people relying on the fishing industry. But this in not a matter of saving people from their rooftops, bringing in food and water, setting up tents, arranging for tailors (that never came) then cleaning up the city which was right underfoot once the water receded. By the way, they've never rebuilt the levies to withstand a major hurricane. This geyser is happening a mile under the ocean, was lied about until BP could lie no more, has very few people knowledgeable enough on the subject to even know where to begin on this massive a project, and is exactly the reason we should NO LONGER allow off-shore drilling.
AUTOMOBILES AND TRUCKS SHOULD BE CONVERTED TO RUN ON VEGETABLE OIL IMMEDIATELY! Willie Nelson and others have been using it for years. All you need is a little bio-fuel to get it started. It would be great for farming and would create lots of jobs. It is possible, practical, and necessary now. We wouldn't need half the oil to continue enjoying life as we know it. There has also been a prototype engine that gets like 60 miles to the gallon of gasoline. But they hurried up to conceal that little gem so they could continue to rip us off.
I DARE ANYBODY THAT THINKS HE/SHE CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF STOPPING THIS CATASTROPHE TO COME FRONT AND CENTER RIGHT NOW! I'm sure Obama will welcome you with open arms. Stop criticizing the man who has a totally effed-up country to deal with post Bush/Cheney besides this massive fault of deregulation and Cheney tactics, none of which is Obama's fault, although he has taken responsibility. In my opinion Obama is doing a fantastic job in the face of his opposition, which includes the Party of No, still fighting deregulation. And if you dare to check out the current conditions of Japan compared to the current conditions of the U.S., I think you'll have to agree. Our greedy, self-serving politicians have got to be voted out NOW. They have let the basic infrastructure of this country fall to ruins beyond repair to fatten their own pockets, and deregulated us into oblivion. Do the research.

[judesedit]

108. Correction: Party of No still fighting "REGULATION" . Thank you very much

.

[Shining Jack]

29. Great post.K&R.

Humans need to compare events with other older ones so it helps get a grasp about what's going on.I understand what you're saying and I totally agree with most of it but I'll make a comparison between an older catastrophe and what's going on right now in the gulf.An event that is not well known:

Gulf oil spill has 'perfect precedence' in 1979 disaster.

Miami Herald Monday,05.24.10

"The exploratory oil well two miles below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico exploded in a ball of fire, spurting millions of gallons of crude into the sea. As weeks turned to months, oil executives grappled with capping the well.The growing slick turned into an immediate ecological nightmare.

The year was 1979.The blowout of the Ixtoc I, drilled by the Mexican-run Pemex, retains the dubious record of causing the world's largest accidental oil spill, dumping an estimated 138 million gallons over nine months. Eventually, Pemex cut off Ixtoc I with two relief wells and a cement seal."
...

"If some scientists, who say BP and the U.S.Coast Guard are underestimating how much oil is leaking now,are right,the current gusher could easily eclipse the demise of Ixtoc I in the Bay of Campeche. By their count, instead of the 210,000 gallons leaking per day, it's more like 4 million."

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/23/1644742/spill-has-perfect-precedence-in.html

So if someone needs to make a comparison,this is the best precedent for that region,on a much smaller scale.I hope that it won't take nine months to stop this,BP should get a good kick in the butt to move faster and quit doing all those PR tricks to cover their asses and do something to stop this nightmare.

I just wanted to add some information and play Devil's advocate a little.This whole thing is making me sick.:(

[Still Sensible]

30. Excellent! n/t

[Stuart G]

31. K and R

[Turbineguy]

34. Excellent

and constructive.

[thucythucy]

36. I think the Hiroshima analogy is flawed

in a number of ways. Or more to the point, the characterization of how and why Japanese society shifted in the ways it did post 1945 is off the mark, and thus inapplicable to our current situation.

The Japanese people, Japanese society, the Japanese elites or what-have-you, did not make the laudable changes cited because of Hiroshima, at least not entirely. The Japanese constitution, for example, was imposed by the Japanese people by an occupying power (the United States). The anti-militarist provisions of that constitution have at least as much to do with American sensibilities as they do to Japanese. What Hiroshima did (along with the Russian declaration of war a short time later) was convince a large enough portion of Japanese rulers that the war was utterly lost. It also profoundly shocked the Japanese people, of course, and made them far more amenable to the changes imposed by the occupying power. But it is highly doubtful, at least to my mind, that the sorts of changes listed by the poster--at least in regards to militarism and imperialism and democracy (the economic restructuring is a different matter) would have happened had the bombing of Hiroshima not been followed by the American occupation. Remember too, that Japanese education was also entirely revamped--also at American insistence--so that Japanese boys and girls would no longer be inculcated into militarism at any early age.

If one is going to use an analogy here (and I agree that all historical analogies inevitably fall short--that's always the case with analogies, more or less) I think Chernobyl is much more apt. First, like the present disaster, this was an accident in the energy industry resulting from a combination of poor design and poor oversight, and pushing the technology ahead of where it was safe to go. Second, like Chernobyl, there were immediate deaths, followed by more long term health and environmental consequences that will take years if not decades to measure.

I think there is a third similarity to Chernobyl that is perhaps most chilling, which is also perhaps why this analogy has not, to my knowledge, been brought up by the mainstream media. And that is that Chernobyl was the tipping point, the straw that broke the camel's back, that began the process that was the lead to the unraveling and collapse of the Soviet Union. The economic consequences of Chernobyl--not only the immediate cost but the fact that the accident rendered a huge swathe of productive farmland and industrial plant completely useless--added to the burden of the Afghan occupation, the parasitic Soviet military/industrial complex, the inefficiencies of Soviet economics in general--graft, greed, corruption--coupled with the loss of faith all these engendered, gave the crumbling edifice a shove that even Gorbachev couldn't right. The coup attempt was the final straw, after which it all came tumbling down.

So, instead of BP=Katrina and Obama=Bush, what we have is BP=Chernobyl and Obama=Gorbachev. Gorbachev, you might recall, was a "reformer" dedicated not to a radical restructuring of the Soviet edifice, but incremental changes that were supposed, over time, to lead to some form of "socialism with a human face." Instead, he presided over the system's utter collapse. Obama, similarly, seems dedicated to the proposition that American society can be saved by tinkering at the edges--regulating the private health insurance industry instead of confronting and replacing it is the most obvious example--to give us a kinder, gentler predatory capitalism. FDR was able to pull it off, more or less, but he had three plus terms, an overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress, and a much better ability to explain what needed to be done than Obama has thusfar been able to demonstrate.

It is this analogy that has me worried, because what followed after Gorbachev was hardly an unmitigated good. True, the collapse of Soviet power meant the end of the extended Soviet (and Russian) empire, much as the collapse of American military and economic power may (and to some extent already has) led to greater independence, certainly in Latin America, but also in Europe and Asia. But the dislocation and suffering in Russia itself was something fierce, and in many ways we're still watching events there play out.

Of course there are many ways in which this analogy doesn't apply. But I think it is far closer to the mark than any other analogy I've seen discussed.

Best wishes to all.

ThucyThucy

[thucythucy]

37. One quick correction:

That should be: "imposed ON the Japanese" by an occupying power, not "imposed BY."

There are probably other typos, but I hope the gist of my post comes across.

[thucythucy]

39. I also want to add

that I agree that this is an excellent post, despite the flawed analogy, and absolutely agree that the best (indeed probably the only) way to make the scale of the solution fit the absolutely horrific dimensions of this catastrophe is to use it to wean us from our dependence on petroleum to the fullest extent possible. In that regard, I think another reason the Chernobyl analogy is not being raised is that it puts the question to Obama's support of the nuclear power industry. Remember, the president has told us that advances in nuclear technology have made it safe. I take such assurances as about as valid as the assurance that deep sea drilling was and is a low risk proposition.

[scarletwoman]

40. +100 -- Very good post. I think you have it right.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, and welcome to DU. :hi:

sw

[grantcart]

49. my original point was that all analogies are flawed

But if it takes an analogy to get the point then Hiroshima is the best from the environemental point of view.



As for the "peace constitution" and article 9 it did not come from the Americans it came from the Japanese:


According to the Allied Supreme Commander Douglas MacArthur, the provision was suggested by Prime Minister Kijūrō Shidehara, who "wanted it to prohibit any military establishment for Japan—any military establishment whatsoever."<1> Shidehara's perspective was that retention of arms would be "meaningless" for the Japanese in the postwar era, because any substandard postwar military would no longer gain the respect of the people, and would actually cause people to obsess with the subject of rearming Japan.<2> Shidehara admitted to his authorship in his memoirs Gaikō Gojū-Nen (Fifty Years Diplomacy), published in 1951, where he described how the idea came to him on a train ride to Tokyo; MacArthur himself confirmed Shidehara's authorship on several occasions.




So the reason that it is more like Hiroshima than Chernobyl is that the events in Japan had a more positive impact on Japanese leaders than Chernobyl had on Soviet leaders.

[thucythucy]

70. Thank you for

that information. I stand corrected.

And I share your view that all analogies are flawed. In fact, historical analogies can often be dangerous, the most obvious example being the use of "Munich" and "appeasement" to argue for every counterproductive intervention by the US since 1945. "Korea is like Munich," "Vietnam is like Munich" "If we don't fight them in Iraq" etc. etc.

Anyway, as I said, I hope your vision of how this will all play out comes to pass.

Best wishes.

[quakerboy]

71. I think that you have the right of this one

I wish that I could rec a post.

This thought, your comparison is well worthy of its own OP. I strongly urge you to consider rewriting it for such purposes.

[leftstreet]

102. +10000

Excellent post

Welcome to DU!

[Bragi]

38. This *is* (not might be) Obama's defining issue

This disaster, and the federal government and society's response to it, will define Obama's Presidency. I sincerely hope he knows that, and is up to it.

[treestar]

41. The glib people we allow to go to the top in journalism

We really ought to learn to make more than appearances count.

Just because someone looks good does not make them the best journalist.

These people should be interviewing those involved, BP's board, people who work for BP (who probably don't want to be interviewed, but they could make that point) people down on the gulf, people who are working on trying to stop the oil flow, clean up experts, etc. They do to some point, but not in enough depth, leaving too much time for pompous, ignorant bloviating.

[Billy Burnett]

43. Meanwhile, a friend in LA just told me the Davis-Bacon Act has been suspended for cleanup contracts.

:mad:

[laughingliberal]

106. Disgusting but utterly predictable. nt

[Butch350]

44. One more diatribe - to add to the overflowing pile.

Anyone got any real revelations to get things motivated.

Another pretty speech - run for office - PLEASE!

[freddie mertz]

46. Excellent post. K & R. This may be our final wake-up call.

[Hamlette]

48. history not quite right

Japan did not decide much on its own during occupation. Making the right choice with a gun pointed at you isn't necessarily all that noteworthy. Germany did the same thing.

When the history is written of these times, someone might notice that Obama has done more than all other presidents combined to make those wells redundant.

yeah, yeah, he could do more.

[grantcart]

51. The civilian leaders that took over after the war enthusiastically

embraced the US path to a constitution.


Article 9 of the Japanese constitution did not come from the Americans but was an entirely Japanese proposition that caught the Americans by surprise.



According to the Allied Supreme Commander Douglas MacArthur, the provision was suggested by Prime Minister Kijūrō Shidehara, who "wanted it to prohibit any military establishment for Japan—any military establishment whatsoever."<1> Shidehara's perspective was that retention of arms would be "meaningless" for the Japanese in the postwar era, because any substandard postwar military would no longer gain the respect of the people, and would actually cause people to obsess with the subject of rearming Japan.<2> Shidehara admitted to his authorship in his memoirs Gaikō Gojū-Nen (Fifty Years Diplomacy), published in 1951, where he described how the idea came to him on a train ride to Tokyo; MacArthur himself confirmed Shidehara's authorship on several occasions.




Before criticizing the historical accuracy of something you might actually want to know something about it.

[Hamlette]

109. and the fact that they were occupied had nothing to do with it. I see.

[scentopine]

50. It wouldn't work today - right wingers, dems and repubs put profit above

all other motives. Union Carbide, BP, Exxon, Goldman, AIG - they will put themselves in the middle of any solution.

Every single thing you mentioned put the government in charge. The government at that time attracted skilled engineers and scientists who were bound by a genuine duty to public service.

That is dead now with the "me" generation. Obama's partnership with BP is the new model we are facing.

With only two mainstream political parties, MSP, both beholden to their Fortune 500 benefactors, we are truly fucked and returning to an era of servatude and surfdom where we work our asses off and the government takes our tax pool and turns it over to big corporations.

The millionaires will always be able to afford fresh fish and big SUVs and big houses. Until they suffer the way the people in the gulf suffer, there will be no change. Its the culture of me.

[vademocrat]

52. Great post - although Japan had "help" making the changes -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Japan

"On September 6, US President Harry S. Truman approved a document titled "US Initial Post-Surrender Policy for Japan".<6> The document set two main objectives for the occupation: (1) eliminating Japan's war potential and (2) turning Japan into a western style nation with pro-American orientation. Allied (primarily American) forces were set up to supervise the country, and "for eighty months following its surrender in 1945, Japan was at the mercy of an army of occupation, its people subject to foreign military control.""

[grantcart]

68. According to MacArthur the inclusion of Article 9- was pure Japanese in its origin.

According to the Allied Supreme Commander Douglas MacArthur, the provision was suggested by Prime Minister Kijūrō Shidehara, who "wanted it to prohibit any military establishment for Japan—any military establishment whatsoever."<1> Shidehara's perspective was that retention of arms would be "meaningless" for the Japanese in the postwar era, because any substandard postwar military would no longer gain the respect of the people, and would actually cause people to obsess with the subject of rearming Japan.<2> Shidehara admitted to his authorship in his memoirs Gaikō Gojū-Nen (Fifty Years Diplomacy), published in 1951, where he described how the idea came to him on a train ride to Tokyo; MacArthur himself confirmed Shidehara's authorship on several occasions



In any case the Japanese embrassed the change and made it their own.

[quakerboy]

73. Either way, not terribly important to the truth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces

I always thought they had no military. That's what my history classes taught me. Then I was reading an article in which it stated that Japan's contribution to the Iraq invasion was a warship described as "one of the most advanced on the planet".

Granted, they do not seem to be a force to wag the dog, such as we have here, but they do have something. And If we stop being able to be their effective protector, they will find someone else, or they will bolster what they have to a more meaningful level.


That said, what force will stop us driving our cars and using plastic bags? Cause as far as I can tell, the BP spill hasn't touched either.

[TwentyFive]

56. I wish you had 5 minutes with President Obama (and his advisors) in the Oval Office.

In the long arc of history, Big Oil are buggy whip makers.

They are powerful and will fight their demise. President Obama needs to take his large, very powerful hand, and gently, firmly, confidently push them onto the ash heap of history.

[hay rick]

59. Or Sputnik.

Deepwater Horizon should be our wakeup call and call to action. This is an opportunity for Obama to push for the dramatic changes in energy policy that are long overdue. If he doesn't define the problem, the stakes, and the need for shared sacrifice (also known as investment) then BP should go down in the story books as Obama's Katrina.

[jwirr]

61. THIS is why we elected President Obama to lead us to change that

will build our future. So far he has missed some of the steps but I still have hope that he will see where we here on DU and other sites like that of Kunstler are telling us we need to go. If he does not there will be more of the same mess and it will get worse. In the meantime read "Blessed Unrest" and remember that what each of us do in our personal life will join with the whole and like it or not we will get the change we need.

[Tumbulu]

62. It is not "his" anything

it is "our" wake up call to kick the petroleum habit. I really like your post- and think that our president can lead us- but I do not want to assign blame on him, that is all.

[AtheistCrusader]

63. Japan has a traditional military again.

The JDF has expired, and they have a military that can engage in offensive operations again.

You make good points, and I like where you're going with it, just pointing out the military clauses had an expiration and they have expired.

[golfguru]

65. Also Japan can manufacture nuclear bombs within months

since they have all the infrastructure and knowhow necessary and the
economy to support the expense.

[grantcart]

67. Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution is still intact and never expired.

ARTICLE 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. (2) To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.


The JDSF is still the armed forces of Japan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces#Article_9

Thus the JSDF has very limited capabilities to operate overseas, lacks long range offensive capabilities such as long-range surface-to-surface missiles, aerial refueling (as of 2004), marines, amphibious units, and large caches of ammunition. The Rules of Engagement are strictly defined by the Self-Defense Forces Act 1954.



While Article 9 is still in effect there have been recent additons to give more flexibility, primarily in light of North Korean threats



In November 2005, constitutional revisions were proposed which would create a cabinet level Defense Ministry while keeping the old clauses mandating official non-aggression. Under the proposed revisions, the JSDF would also be formally referred to as a military force for the first time since its establishment. The new wording proposed is "In order to secure peace and the independence of our country as well as the security of the state and the people, military forces for self-defense shall be maintained with the prime minister of the cabinet as the supreme commander".




Nevertheless the status of JSDF is really beside the point because the essential point is the degree of change that the leadership and people of Japan went through. Even given the most liberal interpretations of the JDSF it has only a fraction of the political power that the Imperial Army had.

[golfguru]

72. If Japan was attacked by any foreign power, Japan can re-arm

in a hurry. It is one of the most technically advanced countries in
the world, with highly skilled work force. Most of all it is wealthy
enough to build any weapons of choice.

[davidpdx]

111. Very true

And not to get too off point because this thread really wasn't about Japan but was about the oil spill..

I had a conversation with my grandfather last summer (one of the last before he passed away) about the fact that JSDF. He fought in WWII and said that he thought it maybe feasible to look at letting Japan defend themselves. I very much disagreed with him, having lived in Korea for over six years and with the long running distrust between the Japanese and Koreans (and one can see why given the brutal occupation for decades) that Japan shouldn't be allowed to do so. I also argued that it could lead to an arms race in Asia. My grandfather and I disagreed very much on politics (he was very much to the right) and matters of world policy, but it was interesting to have a chance to spar with him a little.

[golfguru]

64. All true except for one oversight

The safer ocean wells can operate in shallow waters which are typically
close to the shore. The main reason BP is having heck of a time is because
the well is in one mile deep water. At that depth the water pressure is enormous.
It is impossible for a human diver to operate that deep.

[pundaint]

66. So we are hoping it's his Tet Offensive?

The event, after which, the majority finally caught the clue on futile warfare, a lesson sadly forgotten by those future leaders who so assiduously avoided their own participation in that war.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Radical Activist]

74. Obama was already responding before the disaster happened.

He has already:

Passed new mileage standards
New incentives for electric cars
Invested billions to build high speed rail
Took old gas-guzzlers off the road. (Cash-for-clunkers wasn't just about helping Detroit, in case you didn't know)
Invested billions in renewable energy and efficiency through the stimulus bill.

Obama did all of these things before the spill happened. Lack of leadership from Obama is not the problem. Lack of cooperation from Congress is the problem. The question is whether we can get Congress to go as far as Obama would like to take us.

[redqueen]

75. K&R

[swilton]

76. Yankee Creativity and Ingenuity

Is all We Need - throw out the old paradigms and welcome the new. No We Can't can not be a part of our vocabulary.

[FrenchieCat]

78. This is not Obama's Hiroshima.....

although it may be ours.

So when you say...."President Obama needs to elevate the issue to an even higher plane",
I think that is what we all need to do, not just President Obama.

And when you say...."In 6 months from now, Mr. President, you will not be judged on your response to this crises based on how well you coordinated the cleanup but how effective you are in making these wells redundant". I say that in 6 months time, we as Americans, unfortunately, will not be judged by what could have been the possibility of our response even if it is with Americans that the onus should be.

See, I think the problem we really face is ourselves, and the fact that we,
like everyone else around are trying to find a label for this thing as a political repercussions,
instead of finding a label for it in terms of political will
(although I do agree that is what your OP is all about).
I think that this is a big mistake that we, the media,
Obama's supporters, and political opponents alike are making, because it is convenient,
clean and keeps the rest of us off the hook.

Hiroshima is a misnomer, as it is synonymous with absolute and total destruction resulting
in a war that we were fighting.....and calling this occurrence that, isn't helpful...
Because then, we might as well call this Obama's Holocaust.
I rate those events, Hiroshima and the Holocaust,
in where the lives of millions of human being's were willfully exterminated a far stretch in even invoking the event of Hiroshima here, although the premise of what you are saying is appreciated.

I do not consider this event as our the absolute destruction,
but it is OUR rather rude and loud wake up call,
not so much Obama's wake up call ALL ON HIS OWN.

when we are polling in the majority of still supporting offshore drilling;
when we have a state like Louisiana which can angrily demand cleanup,
but has yet to get a clue that they are as much the culprit of their own situation,
(wanting their cake and eating it too),
not only on their own but with the effort of the collective greed of industry;
and then Americans cynically look for Government to save us all,
after a significant number of Americans have, for years,
bought into "Small Government" as the answer.....
Then who and what is really the problem? It isn't simply Pres. Barack Obama...
in fact, he should burden a lesser share of the blame than most other parties involved.

If we don't here and elsewhere start going after, in full force, the obvious contradictions
that we collectively, as American have supported and believed in for so long,
than we are not fit to blame a single soul,
because as each of us take up time in adding to the pile-on of those looking for the true culprit,
IF we cannot acknowledge and focus on the fact that the real culprit is in fact,
the collective American people who in the majority, have chosen who would represent
our Government for the past 30 years. If we can't concentrate on that, than we aren't worth much.

I conclude that our American collective mindset is who is to blame here,
and we should be discussing how we are going to change this (as you did),
but we shouldn't believe that one person can change this, because that wouldn't be true,
and would be setting one person for a giant fail....and keeping us off the hook once again,
while we look for singular figures to blame.

We must actively challenge the obvious contradictions that the media is purposefully ignoring while they chase the obvious named villains; because we really do know that the biggest villain is really us; that collectively as "ordinary Americans", we've lacked the political will up to this point,
and I dare believe that the same Americans guilty of where we are, will once again obscure
the real solutions by playing the same old games. In other words, we cannot win until we
admit that we are the ones that we have been waiting for.

[BrklynLiberal]

80. +1000! I wish I could rec your post.

It is deserving of a thread of it s own...truly

[grantcart]

94. I made clear that the analogy to Hiroshima was from a strictly environmental

point of comparison and not in terms of its immediate human casualties.

The Deepwater well disaster is simply one part of a growing environmental catastrophe that will cause conflicts and misery for millions of people, this is just the most graphic example of it.

The accelerated deterioration of the planet's ecosystem is happening now. We lost 8 years under Bush and now each month is critical.

There is only one person who can make a clarion call like Kennedy did for the Apollo Mission or Roosevelt's decision on the Manhattan Project.

Obama volunteered to lead us into history and now history is calling his number.

I believe that he will take this disaster and turn it into a massive turn from individual consumption of fossil fuels because it is the only logical choice we now have.

This is not the time to moderate, this is the time for bold moves. By doing so now he will not only have the good will of the people but the strong wishes of most of the business community who know that the present path is untenable.

We are going to face 60 more days of darkening the Gulf with oil before the long clean up can begin in earnest. This is not the time to think individually or think small. We need a leader who will take bold and decisive actions. My bet is that Obama is that guy.

[FrenchieCat]

105. I still think if we lean on only this man, we are setting him up for a fail.

A majority of folks wanted to go to the moon,
and although JFK offered up the challenge,
it is Americans that took him up on his offer.

I don't know if things work that way still....

Obama's been talking, but few have been listening:

"Now, let me make one broader point, though, about energy. The fact that oil companies now have to go a mile underwater and then drill another three miles below that in order to hit oil tells us something about the direction of the oil industry. Extraction is more expensive and it is going to be inherently more risky.

And so that's part of the reason you never heard me say, "Drill, baby, drill" -- because we can't drill our way out of the problem. It may be part of the mix as a bridge to a transition to new technologies and new energy sources, but we should be pretty modest in understanding that the easily accessible oil has already been sucked up out of the ground.

And as we are moving forward, the technology gets more complicated, the oil sources are more remote, and that means that there's probably going to end up being more risk. And we as a society are going to have to make some very serious determinations in terms of what risks are we willing to accept."

Too many are too busy blaming him and trying to figure out what to call this..."Obama's Whatever"...
to even bother to hear what he is saying.

[BrklynLiberal]

79. Breathtaking, insightful post. Thank you!!

Pls share it with the likes of Rachel and Keith so perhaps it will see more of the light of day it deserves..

[freedom fighter jh]

82. Think out of the box: Don't stop at taking petroleum out of the car . . .

. . . but take the car out of the picture, at least to some extent.

Better transit, better bikeways, and better sidewalks are part of the answer.

[Lorien]

85. it's not just about autos. Eat less beef, more organics, demand less packaging

and more solar and wind projects. The automobile is only a small part of the equation.

[defendandprotect]

98. True . . . at town level, we have probably a thousand cars at our RR station

every weekday. Yet, town has always been resistant to providing trolley service.

The last excuse I heard is because the wealthy here don't want to use them!!

Yeah -- it's always crackpot responses --


People understand the common sense of it all -- they understand we shouldn't be

drilling off-shore -- but they also understand that we have a corrupt system and to

get it straightened out, when they're not sure that everyone would be with them, would

take a lot of work!! And up against wealthy corps/oil industry the opposition would be

very heavy.

I really think that's the reality of this --

[Lorien]

83. The naysayers and paid trolls will squeal otherwise, but the technology DOES EXIST

to go green and clean and do away with most fossil fuel consumption. The technology exists, but the political will does not. That's what we need to focus on.

[defendandprotect]

96. Agree . . . and wasn't BP buying up wind companies?

And I'm sure it could have been done long, long ago --

That's why the oil industry has kept up its expensive and heavy propaganda

re no Global Warming! And GM crushed thousands of electric cars in California!

Oil should have been nationalized long ago!!





:)

[theFrankFactor]

84. Obama will not push big oil out of his bedroom. Sorry. He's a Corprocrat.

[Odin2005]

86. Great analogy!

[defendandprotect]

87. Disagree . . .

http://www.doug-long.com/mccloy.htm

Personally, I don't have problems with comparisons to the past . . .

most of these problems are connected - and most of us referring to them understand

the underlying corruption -- the conspiracy which is the establishment -- and the

similarities and sameness that they are referrring to.


Vietnam is the example of perpetual war that we use when referring to the new perpetual

wars -- Afghanistan and Iraq.

And if you truly understand Watergate, you understand it never ended.


Katrina provided multiple shocks -- our unpreparedness which seemed purposeful and suspicions

about that remain. The racism that was so obvious. The lack of any meaningful assistance

when it did come from government -- the corruption and profiteering at the expense of NO/LA.

And, overall, the still looming question -- is America any longer capable of responding to

natural/unnatural catastrophe?


IMO, while this is recognition of Hiroshima as environmental tragedy it neglects the human

insanity behind it.

We really haven't had a lot of experience with deep sea oil exploration wells blowing up and creating an event that, from an environmental point of view, is closer to Hiroshima than it is to Katrina.

Remember that we all continued on TESTING nuclear weapons -- even nuking

the Bikini Islands! We exploded nuclear weapons in outer spaces!!


Males studied physics for 300 years and what they came up with was atomic bombs!

Meanwhile, there is also a little matter of a guy who was at Truman's elbow --

Ass't Secretary of War -- John McCloy --

Everyone else was against using the atomic bomb against civilians in Japan --

Including Ike and Einstein.

It was an immoral and inhumane thing to do --


http://www.doug-long.com/mccloy.htm


Further, we have no actual idea when and how this well will be closed --

Basically it looks like BP has no idea what they are doing --


And no one should say "NO" to permanent banning of off-shore drilling until we have

absolute and specific ways to deal with picking up oil from the oceans -- WITHOUT USING

TOXIC CHEMICALS -- and can prove that any well that might "blow" could be dealt with --

NOT in 3 months, but immediately.


This is also blaming the victims -- and naive --

Until we change our petroleum based economy then oil companies around the world will be pushed into more and more hazardous environments to take on more and more risky extraction.

Americans have been propagandized re Global Warming over the last 50/60 years by the oil

industry lying and disinforming them. Americans have NOT been "pushing" any oil company to

drill off-shore. True, they barely understand "peak oil" -- but that's also the result of

oil industry propaganda.

So -- you're calling for a change in culture?

Do you understand that we've known for almost 60 years that we can no longer burn fossil fuels?

Do you know that our scientists WARNED HUMANITY again in 1992 and the reaction of the press

was SILENCE? *** See below


The problem isn't a lack of ingenuity -- the problem is a lack of will --

the problem is that our elected officials and candidates are PRE-BRIBED and PRE-OWNED by the

oil industry. And it's not simply this issue which is effected by corporatism . . . ALL of the

issues we face are dealt with mainly by keeping corporate interests topmost!


Create incentives and taxes that will take petroleum out of the car industry in 15 years.

Do you understand that California did this in the 1990's and that there were thousands of

electric cars on their roads -- beautiful, efficient autos -- which GM turned around and

crushed -- refusing to permit those who were leasing them to buy them?

See: "Who Killed The Electric Car?" -- probably at your library.


Yes, we can do it -- we did it!! And, we can finance new plants to manufacture electric

cars -- to finance plug in availability everywhere -- just as America once financed the

stations to service the gas-guzzlers!

We can subsidize the manufacture of these cars -- solar batteries soon? -- the building of

them and their purchase!

But then you might also explore what the oil industry/GM did post-WWII to knock out

public transportation all over America which may help you to understand why none of this

has been happening for the last 60 years!!





***

SCIENTISTS WARNING TO HUMANITY/
GLOBAL WARMING


http://www.ucsusa.org/ucs/about/1992-world-scientists-warning-to-humanity.html
1. Scientist Statement
World Scientists' Warning to Humanity (1992)

Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences, issued this appeal in November 1992. The World Scientists' Warning to Humanity was written and spearheaded by the late Henry Kendall, former chair of UCS's board of directors.
INTRODUCTION


Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about.
THE ENVIRONMENT


The environment is suffering critical stress:


The Atmosphere
Stratospheric ozone depletion threatens us with enhanced ultraviolet radiation at the earth's surface, which can be damaging or lethal to many life forms. Air pollution near ground level, and acid precipitation, are already causing widespread injury to humans, forests, and crops.


Water Resources
Heedless exploitation of depletable ground water supplies endangers food production and other essential human systems. Heavy demands on the world's surface waters have resulted in serious shortages in some 80 countries, containing 40 percent of the world's population. Pollution of rivers, lakes, and ground water further limits the supply.

Oceans
Destructive pressure on the oceans is severe, particularly in the coastal regions which produce most of the world's food fish. The total marine catch is now at or above the estimated maximum sustainable yield. Some fisheries have already shown signs of collapse. Rivers carrying heavy burdens of eroded soil into the seas also carry industrial, municipal, agricultural, and livestock waste -- some of it toxic.


Soil
Loss of soil productivity, which is causing extensive land abandonment, is a widespread by-product of current practices in agriculture and animal husbandry. Since 1945, 11 percent of the earth's vegetated surface has been degraded -- an area larger than India and China combined -- and per capita food production in many parts of the world is decreasing.


Forests
Tropical rain forests, as well as tropical and temperate dry forests, are being destroyed rapidly. At present rates, some critical forest types will be gone in a few years, and most of the tropical rain forest will be gone before the end of the next century. With them will go large numbers of plant and animal species.


Living Species
The irreversible loss of species, which by 2100 may reach one-third of all species now living, is especially serious. We are losing the potential they hold for providing medicinal and other benefits, and the contribution that genetic diversity of life forms gives to the robustness of the world's biological systems and to the astonishing beauty of the earth itself. Much of this damage is irreversible on a scale of centuries, or permanent. Other processes appear to pose additional threats. Increasing levels of gases in the atmosphere from human activities, including carbon dioxide released from fossil fuel burning and from deforestation, may alter climate on a global scale. Predictions of global warming are still uncertain -- with projected effects ranging from tolerable to very severe -- but the potential risks
are very great.


Our massive tampering with the world's interdependent web of life -- coupled with the environmental damage inflicted by deforestation, species loss, and climate change -- could trigger widespread adverse effects, including unpredictable collapses of critical biological systems whose interactions and dynamics we only imperfectly understand.


Uncertainty over the extent of these effects cannot excuse complacency or delay in facing the threats.
POPULATION


The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits. Current economic practices which damage the environment, in both developed and underdeveloped nations, cannot be continued without the risk that vital global systems will be damaged beyond repair.


Pressures resulting from unrestrained population growth put demands on the natural world that can overwhelm any efforts to achieve a sustainable future. If we are to halt the destruction of our environment, we must accept limits to that growth. A World Bank estimate indicates that world population will not stabilize at less than 12.4 billion, while the United Nations concludes that the eventual total could reach 14 billion, a near tripling of today's 5.4 billion. But, even at this moment, one person in five lives in absolute poverty without enough to eat, and one in ten suffers serious malnutrition.


No more than one or a few decades remain before the chance to avert the threats we now confront will be lost and the prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished.
WARNING


We the undersigned, senior members of the world's scientific community, hereby warn all humanity of what lies ahead. A great change in our stewardship of the earth and the life on it is required, if vast human misery is to be avoided and our global home on this planet is not to be irretrievably mutilated.
WHAT WE MUST DO


Five inextricably linked areas must be addressed simultaneously:

We must bring environmentally damaging activities under control to restore and protect the integrity of the earth's systems we depend on.
We must, for example, move away from fossil fuels to more benign, inexhaustible energy sources to cut greenhouse gas emissions and the pollution of our air and water. Priority must be given to the development of energy sources matched to Third World needs -- small-scale and relatively easy to implement.


We must halt deforestation, injury to and loss of agricultural land, and the loss of terrestrial and marine plant and animal species.


We must manage resources crucial to human welfare more effectively.


We must give high priority to efficient use of energy, water, and other materials, including expansion of conservation and recycling.


We must stabilize population.
This will be possible only if all nations recognize that it requires improved social and economic conditions, and the adoption of effective, voluntary family planning.


We must reduce and eventually eliminate poverty.
We must ensure sexual equality, and guarantee women control over their own reproductive decisions.
DEVELOPED NATIONS MUST ACT NOW


The developed nations are the largest polluters in the world today. They must greatly reduce their overconsumption, if we are to reduce pressures on resources and the global environment. The developed nations have the obligation to provide aid and support to developing nations, because only the developed nations have the financial resources and the technical skills for these tasks.

Acting on this recognition is not altruism, but enlightened self-interest: whether industrialized or not, we all have but one lifeboat. No nation can escape from injury when global biological systems are damaged. No nation can escape from conflicts over increasingly scarce resources. In addition, environmental and economic instabilities will cause mass migrations with incalculable consequences for developed and undeveloped nations alike.
Developing nations must realize that environmental damage is one of the gravest threats they face, and that attempts to blunt it will be overwhelmed if their populations go unchecked. The greatest peril is to become trapped in spirals of environmental decline, poverty, and unrest, leading to social, economic, and environmental collapse.


Success in this global endeavor will require a great reduction in violence and war. Resources now devoted to the preparation and conduct of war -- amounting to over $1 trillion annually -- will be badly needed in the new tasks and should be diverted to the new challenges.


A new ethic is required -- a new attitude towards discharging our responsibility for caring for ourselves and for the earth. We must recognize the earth's limited capacity to provide for us. We must recognize its fragility. We must no longer allow it to be ravaged. This ethic must motivate a great movement, convincing reluctant leaders and reluctant governments and reluctant peoples themselves to effect the needed changes.

The scientists issuing this warning hope that our message will reach and affect people everywhere. We need the help of many.
We require the help of the world community of scientists -- natural, social, economic, and political.
We require the help of the world's business and industrial leaders.
We require the help of the world's religious leaders.
We require the help of the world's peoples.
We call on all to join us in this task.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

95. +1

[DailyGrind51]

89. Force the disclosure of the minutes for Cheney's secret Energy meeting!

If Cheney is found complicit in permitting negligence on behalf of BP or Halliburton, prosecute the bastard!

[autorank]

90. This is a "strawman" argument

This isn't Obama's anything other than the sum of events up until now. Saying it's his Viet Nam
or Hiroshima or anything by comparison creates a straw man, a convenient foil that diverts
intelligent discussion of the event and how it was handled.

The management of the Deepwater Hirizon-BP catastrophe needs to be evaluated carefully and with
attention over time.

The verdict is still out.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

97. Stop drilling baby stop!!!

I've never agreed with oil.

[PatrynXX]

99. Yeah the Katrina thing bugs be a bit.

Nobody died out right by the thousands. And I wouldn't call this Hiroshima either. You do bring up Brazil however.

Thats been a sore spot for over a decade , while not in the same area (Ecuador)mentioning Brazil reminds me of the book Savages (http://www.amazon.com/Savages-Joe-Kane/dp/0679740198/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275269925&sr=8-1) by Joe Kane. Whenever I see the Nature Conservancy today I always am reminded of a quote the Huaorani said when they heard that name. Something like. Yeah they are run my the oil companies. I've thrown everything I ever get from them straight in the trash. Actually went to a book signing/speaking engagement at a college years ago in the late 90's. Instead of buying the book brand new, I had my well worn read book signed by him. He was a rather cool guy. Brazil has more tribes too and I doubt they would bother to respond to an oil spill like we do. It'd just wash up on the shores and kill the tribal people.

had to look him up. hard to find Joe now. He's lost his hair :( like me although a bit more so. http://www.nisquallylandtrust.org/about.php just do a control F :)

[Canuckistanian]

100. "The low hanging petroleum fruit has been picked"

Ain't that the truth.

As DUer GliderGuider says, petroleum is a "one-time gift" to humanity. We've managed to take a resource that's taken millions of years to develop and squander it in less than 100 years.
AND we've released so much CO2 so fast that it's fundamentally changing our climate.

We've got some choices to make. And we don't have long to decide.

[golfguru]

103. Unfortunately reality is different

There is 500 years worth of oil & coal left in the world at present rates of
consumption. This is why it is difficult for green energy to take off
commercially. Few are willing to invest their money in green energy.
The fossil energy people can bankrupt them quickly by dropping prices.
It costs Saudi's no more than $10 to extract & ship a barrel of oil.

[rhett o rick]

101. This disaster is Pres Obama's Waterloo. How about that?

You are dreaming if you think this president will use this disaster to turn around rampant corporatism (read fascism). Unless he makes some serious changes, he is gonzo. This disaster proves that the corporations run the country. BP has decided who can view the damage. BP has decided what methods to use to fix the disaster. BP decided to use a toxic dispersant over experts objections. BP has decided that no one can fly over the area or be on the beaches during cleanup. Where is our government? Cowering in the corner. Hoping they dont piss off potential financial donors.

[FrenchieCat]

104. You sound like those dumbass Republicans.

Guess y'all are wishing for the same things......
because you obviously see things in the same way.

[rhett o rick]

107. You choose to insult me instead of responding to what I said.

Are you happy with the Pres response to the BP oil spill?

By the way the republicans are in a quandary as to what to say. Some like Palin say that Obama is in the pocket of big oil. Others, like Rand Paul say the Pres is putting his foot on BP's throat.

I am merely pointing out that the Pres was on thin ground with the left before the BP disaster. Unless something changes, this may be the last straw.

I truly wish for Pres Obama to succeed. I personally worked hard to get him elected. But I am concerned that unless he gives up his ties with big corporations, we will have another republican in the WH.

Saying things like, "Guess y'all are wishing for the same things......", is sad. Do you think that Pres Obama is above criticism?

I think an important difference between Democrats and repubicans is that we Democrats are willing to hold our people's feet to the fire, where the repukes dont allow any criticism. Dont you agree?

I know you are frustrated, but insulting me isnt the answer.

[caseymoz]

110. Everyone needs to wrap their minds around this word: unprecedented.

This is not like anything else we've seen. If it goes on just another month, we'll be talking realistically about the end of the planet.

Comparing it to things in the past gives us comfort. We mustn't get comfortable now. This is not like anything before. It's only like Obama's Katrina, his Waterloo, his Wounded Knee, his Munich Conference, his Chernobyl (my previous analogy, I will admit) or anything else if we survive, literally first, and then as a nation.