critical thinking: which war do we fight?

does anyone else find it ironic that the many of the same people that dismiss global warming are the same ones that bought the rationale for the iraq war?

let’s compare global warming (present tense) and the iraq war (past tense):

both are (were) based on the same premise that something bad might happen that we could stop by taking preventative measures now.

both have (had) “experts” that support the reasoning behind the need to act, and “experts” that deny there is (was) a need to act.

pursuing the iraq war was clearly going to lead to death and destruction, the threat of disrupting the entire volatile middle east region, and alienating many of our allies. being wrong, or lying, about the rationale for war is at least gross incompetence and at most a crime against humanity.

yet that was an easy decision for many to embrace. $300 billion later, iraq is a mess, thousands are dead, terrorists have a new playground, oil prices are through the roof, leaders are dissembling or claiming they didn’t actually say what they actually said, and there’s no end in sight.

pursuing global warming will not lead to death and destruction. it will hopefully lead to lower pollution, cleaner air and water, a vast new renewable energy industry, energy independence (which, as we all should know, makes for better national security) and will have the added effect of weakening the oil companies that have a death grip on our country that adversely affects our foreign policy, economy, and political process.

yet this is heresy to some. instead, they’d prefer to protect the oil industry, which continually chooses profit over american well-being and security. they’d prefer to demonize the scientists that contend there is a problem, which is exactly what the oil industry would have them do. they prefer to demonize the media while failing to address the clear interest the oil and coal industries have in the status quo.

so the reality is there are those that willingly accept the path of death and destruction with unverifiable proof and shaky reasoning, but when it comes to making a positive change that is better for our communities, our country, our political process and our future, no matter what proof exists…well that’s too hard to accept, more proof is necessary.

that, my friends, is almost literally the definition of hypocrisy.

a message to our dear american friends from exxonmobil

don’t trust al gore!

yes, america, here’s someone who is concerned that we may be endangering our future by damaging our eco-system irreparably. sure, maybe he has some “alleged scientists” with so-called “facts” to back up his claims.

but you know what? al gore is obviously a nutjob. he must still be pissed off from that whole 2000 thing. we’ve got a better idea — let’s ignore all the experts in meteorology, oceanography, climatology and so on who spent years getting an education and studying these things. let’s ignore the historical record that proves a climate change is occurring.

there’s no reason to change your habits, america! let’s not let these ‘dead-enders’ and ’sore losers’ convince us that we have to make difficult choices for the benefit of future generations. that’s just defeatist liberal talk. the world is here for us, right now, and we should exploit every last resource we’ve been given by the lord god almighty. to not do so would be denying our devine right as masters of this dominion.

just have faith, and trust us, the oil companies. we’ve been drilling oil for a long time and we’re here to tell you that it will last FOREVER, and our earth is COMPLETELY IMPERVIOUS to EVERYTHING. in fact, the more oil we use, the stronger we make the earth, so just get used to the idea of being dependent on oil until the end of time — which of course, will never come, because our use of oil has actually turned the earth into an INDESTRUCTABLE SUPER-PLANET. you don’t have to thank us. we thank you, the loyal oil consumer. keep up the good work! and remember, al gore is that crazy guy who claimed he invented the internet, so he can’t be trusted.