Thursday, December 12, 2019
Home Tags National Security

Tag: National Security

Truth-Tellers (like Spanberger and Luria) Vs. a Cult in Which Truth...

This is WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST. The question of our times is, "Will the Lie defeat the Truth?" Believing the Unbelievable Two months into Trump's presidency,...

Trump Gives Himself Away on Putin and Russian Meddling

Not that we didn't know that Trump would go to the Putin summit, despite how the indictments brought by Mueller on Friday underscored the...

All Republican Patriots Must Choose: Party or Principle

This piece is running in newspapers in my conservative congressional district in Virginia (VA-06). ******* Winston Churchill said: “Some men change their party for the sake...

Sen. Tim Kaine: Bernie Sanders Would Be “Incredibly Risky” on Foreign...

by Lowell On a Hillary for America conference call a few minutes ago, Sen. Tim Kaine shared his thoughts on Hillary Clinton and what the...

A Law to Make Congress Follow the Constitution

Senator Kaine Public Square 52 photo 141021SenatorKaine_zps8b320dca.jpgGoing to war is serious business. Senator Kaine (D-VA) believes that those in whom that power is vested should follow a deliberate process and that the executive should be bound by the decision. The Constitution is not vague about the responsibilities but the world presents circumstances that are.

In an attempt to clear up any misunderstanding about the authority to commit forces to war, Senator Kaine has joined with Senator McCain (R-AZ) to offer legislation that will establish a process to ensure the judicious application of military force. Yesterday's participation in the Richmond Times Dispatch Public Square series was part of Senator Kaine's effort to gather "comments, suggestions, criticisms..." in a strategy to shape and craft the bill.

Tacitly, President Bush followed the requirements of the War Powers Act, a law passed in 1973 following the frustration over the prosecution of the Viet Nam War. That was designed to rein in the initiative of any President using military force but written with both Johnson and Nixon in mind. Johnson had the support of a Congress that never imagined the scope of involvement that would precipitate. Then Nixon attacked two countries, Laos and Cambodia, without consulting Congress. To be honest, no President went as far as Bush to conform to the letter of the War Powers Act. The others managed to avoid anything more than consulting with Congressional leadership and always went on their merry way. However, the fact that George Bush appealed for authority may be more revealing about how thin he knew his justification was and that he needed cover rather than indicating sincere regard for the law. Plus the timing of the request appears suspiciously politically motivated.

Further, the authorization that Congress gave President Bush has no sunset or clearly defined achievable objective. As long as it remains in effect, Presidents can and will chase any remnant or offshoot of al Qaida's ghost, real or imagined, while waving the authorization as justification for centuries to come. So, even if you argue that he and his successor have acted under the authority of the War Powers Act, you observe the same result that arose before the Act, different day: war(s) with a scope never imagined when authorized, being fought in second, third (fourth, fifth...) party countries. Senator Kaine's obsession with the subject is more than justified.

Denying Climate Change Requires Willful Ignorance

If Admiral Titley doesn't lose deniers when he addresses evolution, then their eyes will glass over when the discussion turns to data and real science for comprehension. Dismissing measureable data and employing the argument that trace substances are insignificant require the suppression of intelligence. It's not stupidity; it's fear.

The sun's radiation, measured by NASA for a half century now, has remained constant to within about +/- 0.3%. We also know that the greenhouse gasses reradiate long wave radiation. Again, that reradiation can be measured by NASA. The amount of heat leaving the atmosphere at those wavelengths has been decreasing. That's the basics.

Rising Sea Levels And National Security

In this second of the three aspects of climate change that threaten national security, Admiral Titley discusses rising sea levels. The pace of change is gradual. The magnitude of change is small. And that allows deniers respite from reality. But the environmental effects, though local, will be catastrophic.

Glaciology combines the science of numerous disciplines. Deniers want to use simple observations of surface ice to support their conclusions. Unfortunately, it is not so simple. Ocean water is warming and with that the relationships of the glaciers to the earth on which they were grounded. Many are now afloat. We are not so certain what this means. What we know is that there is data to support the projection of a one meter sea level rise by 2100; and that is conservative.  

Tom Perriello: “It’s Crazy” Not to Have a National Energy Strategy


Courtesy of virginia5rawfootage, here's Tom Perriello speaking at a town hall meeting in Martinsville last week.
I continue to believe that every day we lack a national energy strategy, we are just gift wrapping jobs to China and India. It's crazy. I honestly believe this is the clearest example of jobs for the next 25 to 30 years...Every day that we wait to have a national energy strategy, not only do we reinforce Chavez and Ahmedinejad and petrodictators around the world that hate this country, but we destroy our competitive advantage.
Tom Perriello clearly "gets it" on clean energy, the economy, and national security. Robert Hurt clearly does not. On this crucial issue alone, I'd argue that people should support Perriello. More broadly, what's clear from listening to both Perriello and Hurt is the wild disparity in thoughtfulness and honesty between the two candidates. Listen to Hurt for a minute or two, and your brain will start "hurt"-ing from all the nonsensical, discredited right-wing talking points ("supply side," "Nancy Pelosi," blah blah blah) you'll get. In stark contrast, what you get with Tom Perriello is a serious, sober analysis of where we're at, where we need to go, and how we can best get there. You also get political courage - the ability to do what's right even if it's politically difficult, whereas with Robert Hurt you get the exact opposite - pandering, finger-in-the-wind demagoguery.  Why is this race even close?

VoteVets on the High National Security and Economic Cost of “Fuel”


Even if you're a hard-hearted soul who doesn't care whether or note we trash the planet, you should certainly care about the economic and national security costs of our "addiction" to oil. And remember, oil is traded in a world market, so it doesn't matter if we directly import from crazy Ahmedinejad; every time we fill up our vehicles, it's another "fungible" drop consumed, and some of that money goes to Iran's nuclear weapons program, Al Qaeda, the Bin Laden family, etc. Think about that for a minute, then call your Senators and tell them to vote for comprehensive, clean energy and climate legislation ASAP!