An editorial in today's NYT about how the pentagon is trying to become more green. The title of the Op-Ed is: The U.S.S Prius http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/opinion/19friedman.html?hp
The military has been pointing out for years...sadly without much media attention...what national security nightmare our energy policy is and how much worse it is going to get. I don't think this is about "green" as much as it is about addressing a problem that gets them shot at and bombed while we whine about the cost of filling up our 2-ton status symbols.
It is a great step forward. The military knows more than anyone about the cost of transporting fuel and power.
Yeh, if we could just reframe the whole environmental debate into one about national security, we'd finally begin to get somewhere. Right now: Environmentalist = liberal = soft on national security = unpatriotic So being an environmentalist is unpatriotic.
Making it stick is the hard part. It's always been a whole bunch of talk with little-to-no action. Here are a few examples: In seven of GWB's eight State of the Union Addresses, he mentioned energy dependence and/or addiction to oil and/or unstable suppliers of oil and/or weening the US off petroleum. I know, as much as anyone, that he was an oil guy and the chances of acting on those empty words were pretty slim. Hopefully even the military is finding that they can't keep doing business as usual.
Yep ... the ex cia director now drives a hybrid, and wishes Bush wouldn't have been so slow to admit we are sponsoring terrorism with the lion's share of each petro doller we spend. Bush, on the other hand, still gets driven around in an extra heavy caddy limo. That's the difference, between actions and words. Former CIA Director: Kick Oil Addiction 2/17/07 | abc7news.com I was fortunate to hear Mr. Woolsey give a talk about the very stupid direction our country is going, as long as we sponsor terrorism. We are doing too little, too slowly.
