One of the loudest drumbeats in support of “Cap and Trade” legislation has been if the United States doesn’t tackle climate change with legislation we’ll face a national security catastrophe. Nations will collapse, waves of refugees will sweep the world, and states will war on other states over scarce resources. The poster child for the national security nightmare argument was melting glaciers in India that would lead to dramatic shortages of fresh water and water wars between nuclear-armed states. Now comes a report from India —never mind. Apparently the claim …
According to the LA Times, John Brennan, the senior Obama counterterrorism official, declared there was “no smoking gun” in the Christmas Day Detroit bound bombing. Putting aside the frantic phone calls from the father — pardon me, Mr. Brennan, but that’s a big deal. There was no smoking gun found after Pearl Harbor or 9/11. There is almost never a smoking gun. There was no smoking gun in 26 of the 28 terrorist attacks foiled by the US since 9/11 (Abdulmutallab and Richard Reid were stopped by dumb luck). We …
The Heritage Foundation’s Steven Groves and Ben Lieberman are live at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference reporting from a conservative perspective. Follow their reports on The Foundry and at the Copenhagen Consequences Web site. “It is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action – it’s military leaders in my own country and others who understand our common security hangs in the balance.” President Obama said this in his Nobel acceptance speech last week. And indeed, as high level government officials arrive on Wednesday December …
In his speech to the UN on climate change, President Obama warned that the “security and stability of each nation and all peoples—our prosperity, our health, our safety—are in jeopardy” and that “we must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change.” This message of fighting climate change in order to ensure national security has become a major element of mainstream environmental rhetoric, so much so that many have likened the battle to a full-scale “war.” While examples of this are …
Proponents of global warming legislation or an international treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions argue that climate change could affect the safety, not only in the United States, but in other countries as more natural disasters will lead to increased global conflict. But the claim that warming causes increased tension and causes wars is misleading according to recent testimony from Heritage analyst James Carafano: The global climate has always been changing. Adapting to these changes and human efforts to manage their surrounding environment is a permanent feature of human competition. …
In poll, after poll, after poll, the American people have clearly expressed their preference for prioritizing economic growth over global warming. This is a major problem for those on the left who want to reorganize our entire economy under the guise of cap and trade climate change legislation. Tacitly admitting they have lost this argument, the left has shifted gears and is trying a new tack: global warming is a threat to national security. So Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) recently blogged at the Center for American Progress: [C]limate change injects a …
In response to Heritage analyst James Carafano’s paper, “National Security Not a Good Argument for Global Warming Legislation”, the American Security Project responded to four “myths” in Carafano’s piece. But their retaliatory facts ignore Carafano’s central premise that the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill will do much more economic harm than environmental good and would undermine “the nation’s capacity to deal with natural disasters here and abroad.” Part I is here. ASP’s other two critiques are: 1.) Refuting Carafano’s notion that “U.S. action alone would not impact world CO2 levels.” …
FOREIGN POLICY AND NATIONAL SECURITY The Good Iraq and Afghanistan: In his first 100 days, President Obama has largely continued to implement the strategic course laid out by the Bush Administration in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, which makes sense. U.S. vital interests do not change because of partisan shifts in power, and neither do the facts on the ground, the resources available to the nation, or the enemy’s objectives. The Bad Dumbing Down Missile Defense: In his first 100 days, the President approved a roughly 20% cut for missile defense …
At National Journal’s National Security Expert Blog, Heritage Senior Research Fellow James Carafano reacts to the new director of national intelligence, retired Adm. Dennis Blair’s recent claims that the worldwide economic crisis is the single greatest threat to the national security of the United States. Carafano writes: Sure the economic troubles have “implications” for national security. After all, the world gets less not more safe in troubled times. Right before World War I, tariffs were sky-high and open trade was under assault on every front. The economic woes of the …
Sometime today a missile will be fired from Kodiak, Alaska. As it sails over the Pacific, it will be followed by four target-tracking sensors that will help guide a long-range interceptor fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The missile from Kodiak will be representative of the type we would expect from a country such as North Korea or Iran. It will be similar in terms of distance involved, trajectory, speed and flight time (33 minutes). A successful test today would join a growing body of evidence that missile …
