War on Terror v. Climate Change
September 23, 2014
Despite President Obamas support for global cooperation on the pressing crisis of climate change, he was back at the more destructive and distressing business of cobbling together a new coalition of the willing for the latest expansion of the war on terror, as Danny Schechter notes.
By Danny Schechter
On Sunday, the world came together to demand climate justice with massive marches of solidarity and positivity. On Monday, the UN prepared for its global climate summit with more than l00 Heads of State, some there as ornaments, others as advocates for changes in environmental conditions that threaten the survival of many nations and peoples.
On Monday afternoon, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called climate change Washingtons No. 1 priority. On Monday night, I was in New York with the visiting President of South Africa marking 20 years of freedom in that country after the overthrow of apartheid. I saw no American officials present.
The jihadists are already vowing retribution, according to SITE, the pro-Israeli intelligence website that is relaying all of their videos, no doubt to frighten us more.
Washington claims support from 40 nations. The Christian Science Monitor reports, Americans can be forgiven if this reminds them of the coalition of the willing President George W. Bush claimed to have when the US invaded and occupied Iraq 11 years ago.
Adds political scientist Michael Brenner: the so-called coalition of the willing will not amount to much except for its contribution of money to anti-IS forces of various hues, and the aforementioned American airstrikes. So long as no regional states are prepared to send in competent troops, their military role will be marginal at best. In regard to drying up IS supply of recruits from places beyond Syria and Iraq, the prospects are not promising.
How fast weve moved from peace to war, from hope to despair.
Of course, like so many reports about U.S. military action, there was no mention of civilian casualties or other collateral damage. It was assumed by a press that marches in lockstep with the Pentagon that the strikes were surgical, hit their targets and damaged an enemy that earlier in the week released a video almost inviting such a strike, perhaps to show how bad and powerful they claimed to be.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/09/23/war-on-terror-v-climate-change/