Firefighters and emergency crews may finally be getting the upper-hand on the massive wildfires that have spread across Colorado. The fires come at a time when at least 2000 heat records have been matched or broken in localities across the country, and scientists are warning that man-made global warming is behind the extreme weather.
Famed scientist and former TV host Bill Nye joined Ed Schultz tonight to talk about the threat of climate change.
"This is a chance for us all to pull together and address climate change," said Nye about the unusually harsh weather crises the U.S. is facing. "The last sixteen years have been the hottest ever."
Nye envisioned a nationwide push for clean energy. "This would be a national effort," he said. "We would lead the world in these new technologies and people would embrace it."
"The people who are gonna get rich are gonna do it elsewhere instead of here," warned Nye, pointing out that investors are going abroad to invest in alternative energy technologies.
Leave a Comment:
Bill Nye is right - but it will fall on deaf ears so long as the clerics and corporations continue to decide what's best.
The right's objection to human-influenced climate change is financial, not science-based. It costs money to not pollute the planet, and corporations don't want to spend it. If their disagreement was purely scientific, they wouldn't say a word about it. It would be a scientific discussion, not a political one.
Tyler:
irisheagle banned, lots of #1 violations, parachute of outlaw12, also banned, considering they displayed the exact same violating behavior. First rule, folks:
#146.5 - Mon Jul 2, 2012 4:40 PM MDT
WHERE IS MD????
The Department of Defense has many programs about green energy and energy conservation. The both the Naval War College and the U.S. Army War College have strategic studies programs studying the implications for global warming for future military conflicts and humanitarian disasters. All the military services want their Senior Ranking Officers to be able to plan for humanitarian disasters, refugee issues, and conflicts arising from global warming. The number of programs in the Department of Defense that promote green energy actually is exciting and comprehensive. These programs include these and many more: wind farms, solar panels, energy conservation programs for buildings, flex fuel vehicles, biomass and coal to liquid fuel for aviation fuels, electric vehicles, and portable solar systems for use in troop cantonment areas to save fuel when powering up electrical equipment.
If you wish to read about these things go to the Department of Defense Green energy blog and the Department of Defense Sustainability websites to watch videos of General Sullivan and Admiral Mullen from the Joint Chief of Staff about green energy and energy conservation. The articles in these two websites are numerous and large. I am not sure many civilians are aware of the scope that the military is making to reduce fuel consumption. Many officers believe in peak oil production and green energy. Many of these programs will have direct civilian and commercial applications that will impact nearly everyone's life in America. Like so many other things one of the grimmest lessons out of the Iraq war and Afghanistan war is the demonstrated need to drastically reduce fuel consumption because of losses taken in military convoys due to roadside bombs. A gallon of fuel in a remote Forward Operating Base can cost up to $400 per gallon by the time it gets to the soldier in the field. When the future energy crisis hits many of these DOD programs will prove a godsend for civilians who are not even aware of the huge changes going on in the Department of Defense. When the real implications of peak oil start to grip the nation the DOD has already made green energy part of its business model. The rest of America must follow suit very soon. The DOD programs are a catalyst for making a large variety of programs our country will need to face the future with a world at peak oil and adapting to global climate change.
We need to compare the global warming deniers and the peak world oil production deniers to the isolationists before the attack on Pearl Harbor. FDR had to fight the isolationists despite what he really knew about the rise of aggressive fascism in the late 1930's and the dangers America faced. FDR had to do all kinds of executive orders that "bent the laws" of neutrality so we could start up an industrial expansion towards armaments for munitions, naval, and army expansion including "Lend Lease" to Britain and later on the Soviet Union. This process dragged on dangerously long because the isolationists were in denial about real world facts. So it is the same with our conservative friends across the aisle who are in denial about the realities of the global economy during a time of peak oil and global climate change. The BRIC's and the Asian-Pacific Rim countries will be producing about 200 million new cars by 2020. The other reality is that most oil experts are saying we may have already passed peak world oil production in 2009. We currently produce 85 million barrels per day of conventional oil sources. Most experts expect this to start declining steadily in coming years despite increased drilling. The point here is that there is no time to lose. The Department of Defense is doing all that it can to reduce oil consumption and promote green energy. The man behind the push to do all of this before the peak oil energy storm breaks over a gas guzzling nation is President Obama.
Nice to know that DOD (and, presumably, DARPA too) is fully engaged with renewable power sources for military vehicles. Down the road, those advances will be leveraged for civilian use, making that technology available for planes, trains, cars, and boats. In the end, yet another good investment of taxpayer funds, as with NASA in the past (and likely again in the future).
I think solar flares are causing the extreme heat.
Not a chance @mrsjordanjr. A solar flare is essentially caused by activity associated with sunspot activity, that generates an electromagnetic storm that we refer to as "solar wind" - a stream of very energetic charged particles (mostly protons and electrons) moving at speeds up to a million miles a second. [See http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SolarWind.shtml for more details.
Solar flares have the potential to interfere with electronics, such as TV, Cellular Phones, and Radio through scrambling signal transmission. Also with your GPS, electric power grid, satellite systems, etc.' it depends on how strong the the solar flare is and where on Earth and the atmosphere the corresponding solar wind hits.
There's also a good chance that the Northern (and/or Southern) Lights will be seen closer to the Equator than normal.
If I may add to CosmicChuck's excellent post....
The Sun has been QUIETER than usual, and yet we are setting record temperature after record temperature.
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/
IT ISN'T THE SUN!
(And God help us if the Sun DOES get back up to it's "average" activity level, because it would push our climate just that much harder.)
There is no comprehensive global heat model.
It is irresponsible to be having this discussion with no comprehensive model.
A model is required because the issue is more complicated than accounting for human activity. The specific problem that is causing excessive heating over the US is increased carbon emission by China, which increases global warming over the US, Canada, and Mexico.
There are four different contributions to global heating.
First, human activity is increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. This traps heat inside the atmosphere. This has artificially heated the earth several degrees warmer, but this heating is not evenly distributed.
Second, solar activity declined at about the same time that the industrial revolution began, and the artificially lowered the temperature of the earth several degrees. The heat output of the sun now appears to be increasing.
Third, the gulf stream is melting the arctic ice cap, which will be gone within a few decades. It became possible to travel by ship through the Arctic Ocean for the first time in 2009.
Fourth, ocean heating increases evaporation. About half of sunlight is absorbed by ocean water, and warmer air increases cloud cover that reduces sunlight entering the atmosphere. This introduces feedback that stabilizes temperature.
"Third, the gulf stream is melting the arctic ice cap, which will be gone within a few decades. It became possible to travel by ship through the Arctic Ocean for the first time in 2009."
Actually the Artic ice cap is growing in some areas and Polar bears are not drowning for lack of ice as Gore has asserted.
This is the actual science that shows the Arctic will be ice free during the summer in my lifetime.
Stick with sites in the *.gov and *.edu domains if you want facts.
Government employees and university professors can be fired for making false claims.
The Global Warming lie claims that there is a consensus among climate scientists that a known man-made global warming crisis exists. Official statements to the contrary presented by more than 650 international climate-related experts who presented contrary official testimony recorded in a 2008 U.S. Senate minority report suggest otherwise. So do petitions signed by more than 30,000 scientists that have challenged IPCC's 1995 procedures and report representations. Those circumstances prompted Dr. Frederick Seitz, former president of the U.S. Academy of Sciences, the American Physical Society, and Rockefeller University to write in The Wall Street Journal: "I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer review process than events that led to this IPCC report."
It is estimated that over 5 trillion dollars has already been spent fighting global warming. Five trillion dollars for a hoax! Imagine how much better off we would all be if that money had been spent fighting global hunger or any of the other problems facing humanity.
If Global Warming is such an emegency, how come so called developing nations like China (and scores of other countries) are given a waiver?
There is a consensus among satellites measuring the Arctic ice cap.
Satellites agree: Arctic ice is declining.
Satellites don't care about politics. The don't lie. They don't sleep. They don't eat. They don't care. They just report measurements.
It is amazing what scientists will say when you pay them enough money.
The scientists that have made statements that disagree with actual satellite data have become unemployable by universities. They now work for private companies and can't go back.
Hmm global climate change has never ever happened before......hmmmm.....have you heard of the ice age. You know that time when the whole planet was covered in ice, well look around, no glaciers in my neighborhood. Where did it go? Oh that's right it MELTED 'cuz it go hotter. The planet is a living organism and goes through a long and grand osiliation between climate conditions all on its own.
So when there is ice eventually that means in ocean making the world warmer and warmer until the polar ice caps which are the last large peices of ancient ice flows melt because of water. This melting obviously means more ocean, more melting in a self perpetuation cycle. So once it's all melted then the ocean expansion losers the planets temperature thus freezing the ocean again. This is a natural process which take millions of years. So it does exist and that means you can not argue it can become a problem.
I find it interesting that we as a species consider ourselves the be the most important creation of the divine and have the right to destroy any planets or animal species it sees.
In reality there is no contraversy just you wanting to reject reality and substitute your own. There is no scientific controversy among real scientists. 99% of scientists agree, way more than your little 4k. More importantly who cares how many believe it that in itself has no bearing on its veracity.
People can say thesame thing about evolution. There is no contraversy. It doesn't matter who speaks with congress so on that note....who was in the senate minority at the time you mention....hmmm.....you were those people.....
cracks do you remember which party that was? Hmmmm......
@Crackhead Awards,
You are right, satellites don't lie, but people and politicians do. I remember in the '70's the people talking about and a documentary about, 'The Next Ice Age'. Although it scared me, as a preteen, it wasn't true. The Climate Change (i.e. Weather) stuff is all politics now.
We have been this hot, and this cold before and we will be again. It's weather. Stop pissing your pants over it.
so here we are. no global warming say the the ney sayers. give em strong arguements to the contrary as the above from Crackhead.
what sullyman is saying reminds me of the frog in the pot of water. just increase the heat a little at a time and the frog stays comfy. all of a sudden, no more frog, he's on the plate and past tense.
The U.S. first needs to get off of imported OPEC oil. The DOD is working on green energy and energy conservation measures. However, these efforts are only in the prototype development stages and will take the DOD years to improve upon, refine, and implement. Much of these efforts started under the Bush administration but President Obama and the former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Mullen were major forces behind these changes towards renewable energy and green energy. If the military bases, vehicle fleets, and the federal civilian vehicle fleets and buildings all follow suit to make the public sector a positive catalyst for change.
The days of cheap oil are over with. Peak oil conditions are something we Americans must grapple with this decade. Projections are we will see oil markets shoot right back up to $150 per barrel as soon as this global recession ends, as it will. Those who deny global climate change and peak world energy are in denial about two things. The first is the rise of the BRIC nations and Asian-Pacific Rim countries. 200 million more vehicles will be produced in all of these countries. China and India are expected to see their fossil fuel consumption quadruple by 2030. These countries are major industrial powerhouses who emit lots of carbon into the atmosphere.
The second area of denial is the fact that most of the oil we consume today was discovered before 1973. Today, about 80% of the world's oil comes from these older fields. Despite more investment in technology and oil drilling, oil companies are having to expend ever greater resources for smaller finds of oil. Most of the major oil fields have been tapped long ago. We find more oil in more remote and costly places like the deep ocean off of Brazil. But we need to remember that other places like Alaska are drying up. We can not drill our way out of our energy problems we need to build our way out with new technology, energy conservation, and vastly upgraded technology such as smart grids, bullet trains, and commuter rail.
When fuel is $10 per gallon, there will be calls to tear up the Interstate highways and build French TGV bullet trains on them, especially in high population density areas like the northeast, Great Lakes area, and California to include areas of Texas and Florida. $10 per gallon fuel will focus our fuel guzzling minds like a prisoner awaiting his hanging. We can expect no mercy or clemency for our fuel guzzling ways in the 21st century global economy. We must leave oil before oil leaves us. Time is precious but I am afraid that too many people would just rather wait until the next Middle East conflict before doing anything about energy policy. The urgency of an Apollo or Manhattan type comprehensive energy policy could not be more prescient for our country.
makes sense to me Rex....but you know how that goes....common sense stuff.
@Rex,
America is projected to be off of OPEC oil in less than 20 years. It is attributed to higher vehicle efficiency and Western Hemispere oil exploration and extraction.
We have enough oil in the US to last us several decades if the government will just let us get it.
Step back from the ledge.
It was refreshing to hear comments by an actual scientist in contrast to the drivel we hear from lobbyists and paid champions of subsidized industry.
As a nation, we should be leading the way to combat climate change. But, short term profits are the sole goal of both industry and the politicians they control. Too bad. Profits could be made from investing in clean energy or other innovative strategies. But, Wall Street, the bankers, and our short sighted and intellectually compromised politicians control the money and profit very well from policies they enact on behalf of industry.
Instead of all of the millions of dollars that corporations are giving to PACs, why not set aside some of the millions to innovate!! Who really cares about Romney v Obama. Until we change the way we funtion, the government cannot run regardless of the person at the top. The President is "managed and controlled" by big money and policy, pork, and all the rest is designed to profit the politicians willing to "pass" legislation favorable to the industry controlling a given politician.
Where does that leave the rest of us: it leaves us in 100 plus degree weather, storms, and violent rages from nature because of what we have done to the earth. Even politicians cannot escape now. So perhaps the answer is simply: let storms rage, let the temperature rise, then will politicians wake up. This week in Washington DC, hopefully they are thinking, the weather is really bad.
What weird program do you use for these videos? I've got almost every one out there, and still these videos won't play.
It is not enough for politicians and industry to pollute the atmosphere. With hydrofracking, they are causing more problems. The ROI is not worth the issues that hydrofracking is now causing which includes water pollution, earthquakes, and lung disease.
Again, the sole reason we have engaged in hydrofracking is for "short term" profitability with $$$ going to industry and politicians. That is it!!!
Google Winona, MN and hydrofracking: Winona is a beautiful little town that is now the center of controversy because they have a very rare sand which is required for hydrofracking. So they had truckloads (50 plus or more daily) coming through the town. Car dealerships could not keep their cars on the lot clean due to all of the sand in the air. Yup, thank our "elected" officials for being good stewards of our resources-meaning stewards for themselves and their bank accounts.
Who hasn't had to listen to someone drone on about how much hotter it is these days, or how much more violent the weather is these days, or how much less/more snow we're having in recent years, etc.? The advocates of global warming in the scientific, political, and educational communities have gone to great lengths to foster these data-defying assumptions of extreme change, and they do nothing to counter the absurdity of the resulting statements. And yet if the warming advocates' own numbers are correct, these statements, and the assumptions underlying them, are completely ridiculous.
Read more: #ixzz1zaCug8VJ
Sully: You stupid ignoramus, have you found real academic sources that prove what the scientists from NOAA, NASA, the DOD, NCAR and the Department of Energy are saying about global warming? You can find endless scholarly articles in the websites of these government websites. Academic related websites also show that global warming is caused by human activities namely consumption of carbon based fossil fuels. I gave you examples of ice cores cut into Antarctica that correlate to increased greenhouse gases with the onset of the Industrial Revolution. I also gave you the examples, as others have, of satellite pictures over a 30 year period that clearly show polar ice in the Arctic Ocean and in Antarctica that are receding and breaking up at what glaciologists say is an increasing level. Also most glaciers in mountains around the world are greatly receding. Scientists also say record heat, storms, hurricanes and fires all play into the scenario of global warming on a fast widespread scale. Your answers are what to all of this? Your academic sources from experts are where or whom?
You can not come to this sight and simply claim that something is false over and over again. Are you a glaciologist, a climatologist, or some other type of expert who has a background in science to refute these experts at NASA, NOAA, the Department of Energy's NCAR etc? You fail to produce academic websites that refute what the experts at government and academic institutions are saying about human activity warming the earth. If you don't have lots of sources to back up your claims why are you wasting our time with your global warming denial? Your claims are nothing more than propaganda from the Big Fossil fuel contributors like big oil, big coal, and others like the Koch brothers group who have a vested interest in denying basic science for their own profits. Go screw yourself global warming is real.
Just another NUT lefty....
VOTE NObama 2012!!!!
Rex- it's obvious your the ignorant fool here. You name agencies but don't provide content. You ask me where are my links but you don't provide any.
"The days of cheap oil are over with. Peak oil conditions are something we Americans must grapple with this decade"
- America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America’s Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC’s short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.
- We've had warm periods here on earth long before the industrial age.
- NOAA - The tax-payer funded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has become mired in fresh global warming data scandal involving numbers for the Great Lakes region that substantially ramp up averages.
The beleaguered federal agency appears to be implicated in the most blatant and extreme case of climate data fraud yet seen. Official records have been confirmed as evidence that a handful of temperature records for the Great Lakes region have been hiked up by literally hundreds of degrees to substantially inflate the average temperature range for the northeastern United States.
-NASA - A group of 49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA administrator Charles Bolden, Jr., blasting the agency for making unwarranted claims about the role of carbon dioxide in global warming. "We believe the claims by NASA and GISS [NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies], that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data," the group wrote. "With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled."
NASA's climate hysteric Dr. James Hansen believes that sea levels will rise 75 meters (236 feet) by 2500 if we don't do something to curtail greenhouse gas emissions. That claim, when repeated during the breakfast session on Tuesday, elicited gales of laughter from the audience. How is it possible to predict anything with any accuracy 500 years into the future? But Hansen is taken seriously by the scientific community and climate realists are smeared as tools of the oil and gas industry.
- DoD - Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and a Senior Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, welcomed successful bipartisan votes on amendments that he sponsored to the Defense Authorization bill which will hold the Obama administration accountable for forcing the Department of Defense (DoD) to spend scarce resources on a far left green agenda. Last week, Senator Inhofe took to the Senate floor to put the spotlight on this problem and vowed that he would introduce a number of amendments that would prevent President Obama from making DoD go green at an exorbitant price tag, especially when he has cut funds for essential military programs.
- Polar Ice Caps - A report from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado finds that Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007. The same agency that said the ice at the North Pole would disappear by now.
The Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia in Britain is one of four places in the world where global temperature data sets are compiled. A major problem found by those who base reason on facts in the leaked Emails showed utter corruption and fraud with investigators distancing themselves from “scientific” modeling that essentially was rebuked by actual science.
It seem that Al Gore’s Global Warming Hoax was nothing more than political science and never had any basis in fact or science as the so called skeptics had said from the beginning.
What is Global Warming? It’s a religion, who’s money lines the pockets of those running the scam of cap and trade and pay their dues at the alter of the Rev. Albert J. Gore’ Church of Climatology. It’s a ploy by the socialist among us to redistribute wealth from our nation to third world countries because it seems “fair.” Interestingly the two biggest polluters China, and India refuse to sign any such climate schemes. Does that seem fair? LOL.
"You can not come to this sight and simply claim that something is false over and over again".
That's exactly what you have done with claims that AGW is a scam. What a phony hypocrite you are!
Isn't Bill Nye the Science Guy the same guy that everyone laughed at when he collapsed onstage at a speaking engagement about a year ago. I loved this guy, when I was a kid and grew up with him, but is this guy even medically able to comment on this?
I don't, however, believe in his views on Climate Change, i.e. weather. Weather happens, period.
Here is a report that discusses the relationship to our recent severe weather to global warming in PDF form.
Source: Dr. Kevin Trenberth, 2012, "Framing the way to relate climate extremes to climate change", Springerlink website.
Here is a good source for reports about the retreating ice pack in the Greenland that is experiencing rapid glacier melting threatening significantly rising sea level changes in coming decades.
Source: Andrew Freedman, June 29, 2012, "Greenland Ice Sheet Melt Nearing Critical 'Tipping Point'", Climate Central website.
Ice core samples taken by glaciologists in the Antarctic show stable CO2 gas levels and greenhouse gas levels in the atmospheric conditions for many thousands of years with sudden gains made in greenhouse gases 150 years ago. Scott Pelley did an excellent report for CBS's 60 Minutes in 2007, describing the disappearance of mountain glaciers, starving penguins, and ice core samples that show inexorable rises of greenhouse gases corresponding to the industrial revolution a 150 years ago.
Source: Scott Pelley, August 19, 2007, "60 Minutes: Watching the World Melt Away" CBS News website. Note this is a video.
Dr. Kevin Trenchard, Senior Scientist for the National Center for Atmospheric Research, NCAR, was interviewed by Judie Woodward of the "PBS's News Hour". Dr. Trenchard discussed gave a six minute narration about this years unprecedented levels of fires in our western states and violent weather that ripped through the Midwest and Northeastern states with tornado like winds across a huge area of the U.S. Dr. Trenchard says that we are experiencing about ten times the amount of new record breaking temperatures for this time of year. There is a lack of moisture both from substantially less snowfall in the mountains and less rainfall in the western states where fires are raging. He says the fires, the sweltering heat, and the violent storms are all due to the effects of global warming/climate change. He also said that these heat spells tend to shift to different parts of the world. Some parts of the world may actually decrease in temperature but the overall trend is unequivocal warming trends. He noted Russia had a severe heat spell several years ago as did Melbourne, Australia. Dr. Trenchard gave a blunt warning at the end of his interview: "This is a view of the future, so watch out.”
Source: PBS News Hour website: July 2, 2012, "What's Causing Unusually Hot Temperatures in the U.S.". Note: there are both a transcript and a video for this interview by Judy Woodward.
Thanks Rex for your well-researched posts. It's extremely sad to me how ill-informed and susceptable certain people are to the lies and mis-information perpetuated by oil, gas and coal industries who have spent millions to confuse people about the issue. The billionaire Koch Brothers have played a key role in this effort. See Koch Brothers Exposed documentary. Meanwhile, I have just personally witnessed the worst Colorado wildfire season in history with thousands of acres and over 500 homes destroyed. And my question is to the naysayers, what if you're wrong? Why do you continue to support a non-renewable source of energy? Why are you letting China and other countries be the world leaders in wind and solar while we continue our petty arguments? And how will you feel if we do nothing and we could have really made a difference? What will your grandchildren and their grandchildren say about what we did or didn't do? Will we choose to save our planet for future generations or will we continue to do little or nothing because politics and $$ trumped our sanity?
The Earth dies remember that. Mother Nature is a big girl, she can take care of herself. To equate environmentaism as this grandiose concept of bringing salvation to the planet's natural cycles to "save it" is false. This is a false equivalency. The planet was here before us and shall exist long after our race is gone. So there is no planet saving, we're talking about ourselves. Keep in mind that just because the Earth keeps spinning around that doesn't mean we can live on it. It doesn't mean we exist, again mother nature never dies we however, do.
The life of this world is cyclical and osilates between periods of great warmth and outrageously cold, it is just part of the Earth's fundamental existence. These changes develop over millions of years all on their own. It can not and should not be stopped. Climate change is real, and it is happening and will continue to happen no matter what. So it's not will we have to deal with it it's when and how we will tackle these problems.
No matter how one feels about hte influence of human activity on this aforementioned cycle is not important. Climate change will happen and we should take the time we have to plan for that. It's just that simple. Luckily global climate change will not ravage human populations with sever atmosperic events in the near future. Thus it is more advantageous of us to be concermend about the drugs we put into bodies, the chemicals in the food we eat, the harmful fume levels in metropolitan areas, and the chemicals in our supply.
On China they are not only a leader in solar energy they also are cornering some overlooked markets both for drilling and sales. China is the number one investor in oil rich lands in subsaharan africa. Bet ya' didn't know that.
We need to get this nation's education system back together unless we want China to go unchecked in their acquisition of future oppurtunities. The right needs to stop trying to fight education and dems need to stop playing floor mat routine so we can get back on the ball.
Energy consumption in America is a huge deal for our kids and grand kids and precious time is being wasted. We are at or near Peak world oil production while the BRIC's get more industrialized producing 200 million more cars in this decade. Please take a look at the ballistic missile arms race too in the Middle East. Iran getting a nuclear bomb and many long ranged ballistic missiles will mean Egypt, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia will get their own ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons.
Smaller countries will invest in cruise missiles and short ranged ballistic missiles with GPS guided warheads, possibly even chemical weapons like nerve gas (sarin, tabun, and VX). All of the oil infrastructure could easily be destroyed if Iran shoots off all of its ballistic missiles and Chinese made cruise missiles. Supertanker traffic could be disrupted. In the end the U.S. could beat Iran but that is not the point, Iran can destroy much of the oil infrastructure in the Persian Gulf region something America can not stop. Oil will be $200 per barrel under such a scenario. The media does not talk about the ballistic missile arms race in the Middle East/Persian Gulf region but it goes on. A war between Israel and Iran will mean $8 to $10 fuel in America the next day. A nuclear armed Iran means a nuclear armed Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia all with their own ballistic missiles. This sort of hair trigger environment could mean a huge war that will change the big energy consuming ways in America forever.
Iran isn't on track to get long range missiles and the sanctions on their program are making most of their people hesitant in moving forward. The regime will have to deal with that, keep in mind there is still a revolutionary mood growing against the Ayatollahs that we saw a few years ago.
The Iranians will never move to shutdown any oil production or attack any drilling infrastructure over there 'cuz guess what they like to export most? Oil. Attacking the Arab league would be economic and likely literal suicide. The desire of the Iranian regime to cause harm is far, far less than they like to pretend. You're following for their desperate tactics. They will likely slow pursuit of those weapons in exchange for sanctions otherwise they have no hope of survival. This president and this country is committed to denying Iran the ability to attack us or our only true ally in the region Israel.
A nuclear armed Iran will never be tolerated by anyone.
Iran will never attack the Arab league. It would do nothing but destroy them. If they ever made such a move the people there would rise up and topple the Ayatollah. The people in Iran really aren't stupid or crazy like their leaders are.
Logic does not always trump religious and cultural based beliefs or ethnic or tribal hatreds in the Middle East. I can remember PHD's talking about the "peace dividend" at the end of the Cold War War with the implosion of the Soviet Union in the early 1990's. Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and 20 years on the U.S. military is still dealing with that Iraqi threat alone, even though Saddam and his army are long gone just like the "Peace Dividend" is long gone. Iran is another sore spot. Iran has several thousand short ranged ballistic missiles and cruise missiles that can rapidly destroy the oil infrastructure and shut down Persian Gulf tanker traffic. Iran also is replacing these warheads with GPS guidance system for greater accuracy making these missiles much more lethal threats. A small number of these missiles can now hit specific buildings knocking them out with much greater probability. Precision guided missiles can bring a modern city to its knees by stopping electrical power, destroying water and sewage facilities, destroying key transportation infrastructure, all of this will bring commerce and normal economic life to a halt quickly.
Israel may very well attack Iran if Iran develops nuclear weapons. But Israel does not of the strategic bombers or carrier based aircraft necessary to destroy the Iranian nuclear infrastructure. The Shahab-3 missile can reach Tel Aviv but they do only have a small number of these presently, but many more medium ranged ballistic missiles are planned including missile silos to keep them safe from air strikes. However, do not underestimate the volatility that a ballistic missile arms race, nuclear program, and chemical warhead programs can cause in the Middle East.
The only way we are ever really going to know any peace from warfare, terrorism, and wild oil price spikes that gut our economy is to completely eliminate the need for importing OPEC oil. Until this linkage is ended the U.S. will no more send its troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan then we will just have to send them all back again. Maybe next time it will be Iran or Yemen or the Horn of Africa. But as long as we keep importing OPEC oil we will just be waiting for the next terrorist attack or the next ballistic missile war streaking towards cities dealing death on a widespread scale. The Middle East today is like a Balkans pot waiting to have a Sarajevo event causing it to boil over. With increasing numbers of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, terrorist groups, and nuclear and chemical weapons countries in the Persian Gulf region will be living in a hair trigger environment. As long as America imports OPEC oil, we will just be between wars and terrorist attacks with no real long term peace until we are financially broke and mentally exhausted. German ICE trains, solar panels, and wind farms are the best way forward for America period.
I understand your point about the volatility of the mid east terrorist controlled oil market. But your none the less mistaken about a few things like the fact that Israel not going to attack if Iran makes nukes, that's ridiculous. They'll attack before then otherwise that would defeat the point of attacking, and if they attack we the U.S. will also attack because they'll be shooting at us too anyway.
Again you greatly over estimate Iran's willingness to cause harm, just as they would like you too. Mark my words no far right theocratic regime be it the Tea Party in this country or the Ayatollahs of Iran are ever as devout as they say they are. I think you fail to see that there's no part of that scenario that benefits them. Why attack? Just to destroy themselves? Again the people of Iran are not happy with the government and that regime is losing control. They know that.
As far as the primitive cultures of the middle east they've been cutting each others heads off by the rule of nobles and clerics for thousands of years and ti has always been this volatile. Don't forget how uncivilized this region has always been because of the continuance of this feudalistic system of governments. Long range missiles, chemical weapons, and nukes are there and deployable as we speak. They have not been used, why? Because there's no benefit for these nations to use them. The kings and the priest hate chaos. Chaos=arab spring aka revoultion aka say bye bye to the palace and hello to the hague mofo's.....kings like being king their instinct is to continue that cycle not disrupt it.
We need our own energy because independence is always prefferable to any other way of operating. The mid east is always a boiling pot seconds from disaster but the powerful wicked interests of the ruling class there and the terrorist collaborating conglomerates here will see to it that nothing much changes.
I'm just waiting for the republicans these wildfires were all started by Obama using socialist sorcery to draw up support for global warming
Chemical weapons were used in great volume in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980's that killed upwards of one million people. Ballistic missiles were used to bombard cities during this war and the 1991 Persian Gulf war. Iran has been substantially upgrading its short ranged ballistic missiles with GPS warhead. Iran is ruled by radical clerics who are reactionary and quite capable of strong retaliation if Israel attacks them. Iran is developing nuclear weapons and the State Department has said Egypt, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia would all develop their own nuclear weapons if Iran develops a nuclear weapon. If Israel hits Iran we need understand that a regional war will immediately commence with ballistic missiles and possibly weapons of mass destruction. Iran will hit back hard at Israel if it strikes fomenting a terrorist and ballistic missile war that would target oil infrastructure and shipping in the Persian Gulf region. Here is a study you can look at from the Center for Strategic and International Studies:
Source: Abdullah Toukan and Anthony H. Cordesman 2009. "Study on possible Israeli Strike on Iran's Nuclear Facilities." Center for Strategic and International Studies website.
I'm not going to be reading any of your stupid study just as you apparently didn't read anything I wrote...like apart about we need dnergy independence no matter what or the of course the market is volatile.
Israel won't make a unilateral strike on Iran, we may not like to but it will have our assistance. More importantly because Israel can't even hit the targets since Iran has planned on their hostility. Iran will not strike first ssince they know that option would be suicide. If Israel attacks Iran the Arab league won't ride to Iran's rescue, they hate Shiite Persian Iran. They are Sunni Arabs they do not have a friendship with Iran.
If Israel attacks Iran which they will most likely not do without us a regional war will not take place. What it'll be like a bar fight? Saudi Arabia will just hit Egypt because it can? I would question the validity of any study suggesting otherwise. Don't worry your little head the apocalypse is not coming, atleast no fater than usual.