A mild reminder in the Gaza chaos that war is not green 3

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   Jon Rynn Posted 11:09 pm
   07 Jan 2009

   Thanks for the reminder, ErikPutting solar panels in military parking lots is not something to be excited about, I don't think.  And the Air Force would like to be on the cutting edge of coal-to-liquids, among other things.
   Then there's the horrible toll on the environment -- and of course, on people.  I've sometimes thought that it might make things clearer to call military equipment destruction machinery.  There are so many euphemisms in the military, but destruction is its basic function.
   Sometimes it's necessary, unfortunately, but it's also important to point out the destructive effects that the military has on our economy and politics -- and on Israeli economy and politics too, by the way (and on Arab economy and politics).  Not only are the money for military resources taken from civilian projects, but the military serves as the equivalent of the Soviet central planning apparatus, with all of the inefficiencies of that system.
   In a way, the political effects are most toxic (and part of the reason for the Gaza situation may be to help the right-wing parties in Israel).  Militarization takes everybody's eyes away from the prize of social justice and environmental sustainability.  The Republicans tried to use this strategy mercilessly for the last...well, many decades, but particularly in the Bush Administration.  And that led the public to put up with the socially destructive policies of elite-building policies, to the detriment of the society and ecosystems.

   Permalink

2. 

   bbaue Posted 4:22 am
   08 Jan 2009

   military sustainability: oxymoron?Corporate Watchdog Radio Co-Host/Producer Bill Baue here.
   Erik, thanks so much for blogging on this show, and linking it to the situation in Gaza.
   At the core, I think military and sustainability are irreconcilable opposites, and human culture would be best served by minimizing the former and maximizing the latter.
   That said, I think Hunter Lovins handled the oxymoron of military sustainability beautifully and pragmatically.  In a nutshell, the military exists, and it will likely continue to exist -- in a big way -- for the foreseeable future.  So while we can advocate for demilitarization and diplomacy and peace, the military complex will still be chugging away, so it's in our best interests to make its chugging as efficient as possible.  Green the devil, so to speak.
   BTW, Corporate Watchdog Radio just re-launched as Sea Change Radio, featuring a full interview with Hunter Lovins on the Presidential Climate Action Project and a ViewPoint commentary from Charlie Cray of the Center for Corporate Policy on corporate campaigners engaging with the Obama Administration on curbing corporate hegemony.  Check it out at http://www.cchange.net where you can stream and download our shows and subscribe to our podcast.  You can also comment  there.  And we migrated the entire Corporate Watchdog Radio archives there.
   Bill
   
   Co-Host/Producer, Sea Change Radio
   
   Contributing Writer, CSRwire.com
   
   Adjunct Professor,
   
   Marlboro MBA in Managing for Sustainability    

   Permalink

3. 

   Erik Hoffner Posted 5:19 am
   08 Jan 2009

   CO2 and the militaryThanks, Bill, good to hear  about the new Sea Change name.
   This just came to my attention regarding CO2 emissions and the military: interesting:
   http://carboncontrolnews.com/index.php/ccn/show/fear_of_u ...
   Fear Of U.S. Political Fallout Kills Talk Of Military CO2 Emissions, by Charles Davis
   "While the details of a new climate change treaty are supposed to be hammered out over the next year, little attention is being paid to how--or even whether--such an agreement should account for the significant amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions associated with overseas military activities, including conflicts such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sources say the heightened focus on national security concerns in recent years, and a strong desire to get the United States to support a new climate agreement, are likely to suppress explicit discussion of military emissions in the ongoing talks to replace the expiring Kyoto Protocol...."
   
   The Orion Grassroots Network: supporting grassroots groups working for conservation, justice, & more
   
   

   Permalink