Pentagon: U.S. Military Could Collapse Within

[ExpandMyMind]

U.S. Military Could Collapse Within 20 Years Due to Climate Change, Report Commissioned By Pentagon Says

Quote

According to a new U.S. Army report, Americans could face a horrifically grim future from climate change involving blackouts, disease, thirst, starvation and war. The study found that the US military itself might also collapse. This could all happen over the next two decades, the report notes.

The senior US government officials who wrote the report are from several key agencies including the Army, Defense Intelligence Agency, and NASA. The study called on the Pentagon to urgently prepare for the possibility that domestic power, water, and food systems might collapse due to the impacts of climate change as we near mid-century.

 

The report was commissioned by General Mark Milley, Trump's new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, making him the highest-ranking military officer in the country (the report also puts him at odds with Trump, who does not take climate change seriously.)

The report, titled Implications of Climate Change for the U.S. Army, was launched by the U.S. Army War College in partnership with NASA in May at the Wilson Center in Washington DC. The report was commissioned by Gen. Milley during his previous role as the Army’s Chief of Staff. It was made publicly available in August via the Center for Climate and Security, but didn't get a lot of attention at the time.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mbmkz8/us-military-could-collapse-within-20-years-due-to-climate-change-report-commissioned-by-pentagon-says

Link to the report:

https://climateandsecurity.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/implications-of-climate-change-for-us-army_army-war-college_2019.pdf

Quote

Current conversations about climate change and its impacts are often rancorous and politically charged. As an organization that is, by law, non-partisan, the Department of Defense (DoD) is precariously unprepared for the national security implications of climate change-induced global security challenges. This study examines the implications of climate change for the United States Army. This includes national security challenges associated with or worsened by climate change, and organizational challenges arising from climate change-related issues in the domestic environment. Given that, the study’s starting point is the implications of climate change for the U.S. Army, and the Army is therefore the focus of the analysis and recommendations. That said, much of the analysis involves DoD and other elements of the government, and most of the Army-specific recommendations have parallels that apply to other military services. 

The study itself did not involve original research on the nature or magnitude of climate change. The analysis assumes, based on the preponderance of evidence available, that significant changes in climate have already occurred, likely to worsen in the years ahead. The study did not look to ascribe causation to climate change (man-made or natural), as causation is distinct from effects and not pertinent to the approximately 50year horizon considered for the study. The study does, however, assume that human behavior can mitigate both the size and consequences of negative impacts that result from climate change

 

[preacherman76]

The climate has always changed, and always will change. 

[Space Commander Travis]

Let me see if I can guess ... what could possibly avert this grim catastrophe?

I know, more money!  

[BrooklynGuy]

10 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

U.S. Military Could Collapse Within 20 Years Due to Climate Change, Report Commissioned By Pentagon Says

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mbmkz8/us-military-could-collapse-within-20-years-due-to-climate-change-report-commissioned-by-pentagon-says

Link to the report:

https://climateandsecurity.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/implications-of-climate-change-for-us-army_army-war-college_2019.pdf

 

Thank you for the link and my compliments on finding an article that reports Climate Change will be the end of America's Military though it may take longer than 20 years.  As always I enjoy reading your posts and our good natured jabs at one another. 

[+susieice]

Oh brother

[Tatetopa]

16 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

The climate has always changed, and always will change. 

Yes, that was the point of the report.  If you read it, it says they do not try to identify cause man made or natural, only the consequences.  So that makes us even more stupid if we know that climates will always change but we do nothing to prepare for it.

[preacherman76]

22 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Yes, that was the point of the report.  If you read it, it says they do not try to identify cause man made or natural, only the consequences.  So that makes us even more stupid if we know that climates will always change but we do nothing to prepare for it.

I’m open to suggestions, that don’t involve making me poor. 

[+OverSword]

Okay, then to avert this catastrophe I suggest we pull our military back to all the bases we occupied prior to 1900 and dig in  

[Robotic Jew]

Socialist propaganda!!!

[Doug1029]

Why do I think that no climate scientist had anything to do with this report?

Doug

[Doug1029]

4 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

Socialist propaganda!!!

More like Army propaganda.

Doug

[Robotic Jew]

I will also collapse within 20 years unless the government gives me billions of dollars and an inadequate support group to manage what I spend it on. 

[Doug1029]

14 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

I will also collapse within 20 years unless the government gives me billions of dollars and an inadequate support group to manage what I spend it on. 

I'm going to collapse within 20 years with or without the billion dollars.

I wouldn't even know what to spend it all on.

Doug

[Robotic Jew]

3 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

I'm going to collapse within 20 years with or without the billion dollars.

I wouldn't even know what to spend it all on.

Doug

I know exactly what I would spend it on. 

[ExpandMyMind]

1 hour ago, Doug1029 said:

Why do I think that no climate scientist had anything to do with this report?

Doug

Quote

The study itself did not involve original research on the nature or magnitude of climate change. The analysis assumes, based on the preponderance of evidence available, that significant changes in climate have already occurred, likely to worsen in the years ahead.

The analysis was conducted by NASA and the Wilson Center. 

[Tatetopa]

6 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I’m open to suggestions, that don’t involve making me poor. 

For the military some simple stuff to start with  Move or harden facilities to plan for weather pattern changes.  That takes some time.  At least have some alternatives so that when a level 5 hurricane is approaching you don't leave 300 million dollar aircraft in a tin roof hanger that gets blown apart and destroys them. 

For the rest of us, it will be money.  The insurance companies are already taking a hand in that .  Cities on the South East Coast like Charleston  need flood and high water plans to get insurance.  Private home owners in flood plains will likely face the same increase or denial of insurance.  Gulf coast beach property may be hard to sell.  Cities will probably limit development in some areas forcing housing prices up.  In the long run, as stubborn as we are, most of the money will be spent repairing damage rather than avoiding it.

[Tatetopa]

6 hours ago, Doug1029 said:

Why do I think that no climate scientist had anything to do with this report?

Doug

I think they took the word of the climate scientists and simply asked if this is likely to happen, what will be the result?  More of a strategy and tactics session than questioning existing science.  I know they have been working on this for a long time.  A few years back they put out an analysis of the displacement of refugees and the ripple effects due to flooding and heat related crop failures in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.  They wanted to know how many people would lack food and water,where they were going to go and how that would disrupt economies. Waste of money?  Maybe not. Thinking about war and catastrophe and planning some alternatives is something they do.

I know I sound like a military apologist at the moment, but they are less wasteful than we usually give them credit for.  A lot of the White Elephant projects are mandated by politicians as pork for their district rather than a real need from the military.  That came up a few years back when they proposed a number of base closures and Congress people wouldn't hear of it.  Some of the expense of military projects is built in fail safe systems . And then $390 dollars of that $400 toilet seat that gets all the publicity is diverted into Black Projects.  And of course they are not going to say that, they just have to take that bad publicity. 

[Space Commander Travis]

On 11/6/2019 at 2:26 AM, Tatetopa said:

I think they took the word of the climate scientists and simply asked if this is likely to happen, what will be the result?  More of a strategy and tactics session than questioning existing science.  I know they have been working on this for a long time.  A few years back they put out an analysis of the displacement of refugees and the ripple effects due to flooding and heat related crop failures in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.  They wanted to know how many people would lack food and water,where they were going to go and how that would disrupt economies. Waste of money?  Maybe not. Thinking about war and catastrophe and planning some alternatives is something they do.

Yes, it's one of those "what if this happens" strategy games they always play. The end result of which is always the same: Well, if this was to happen, we'd need more money.

[Tatetopa]

10 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

Yes, it's one of those "what if this happens" strategy games they always play. The end result of which is always the same: Well, if this was to happen, we'd need more money.

Sometimes, not always.  There are cash neutral decisions in some cases. 

We like to rail about how much money the Defense Department wastes.  We should just get rid of then shouldn't we, or just let accountants decide how much to spend to fight a war.?

[Space Commander Travis]

8 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Sometimes, not always.  There are cash neutral decisions in some cases. 

We like to rail about how much money the Defense Department wastes.  We should just get rid of then shouldn't we, or just let accountants decide how much to spend to fight a war.?

what, you think the Defense Department has any idea? 

[A rather obscure Bassoon]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

 

 or just let accountants decide how much to spend to fight a war.?

When it comes to War there is always money there to fight it.

[Doug1029]

2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Sometimes, not always.  There are cash neutral decisions in some cases. 

We like to rail about how much money the Defense Department wastes.  We should just get rid of then shouldn't we, or just let accountants decide how much to spend to fight a war.?

At the Battle of Sterling, Sir John Warren let the king's chief of the exchequer convince him that staying in the castle and waiting out a siege would cost too much.  Sir John took his forces outside, gave battle and got his butt kicked.  Maybe he should have spent the money.

Doug

Edited November 7, 2019 by Doug1029

[Setton]

Maybe this is China's plan that Trump kept banging on about...