Depending on the party affiliation of the politician or talking head you ask, either "climate change" or "the war on terror" is the most pressing issue facing the
U.S.. Some rare birds like Rand
Paul are exceptions but they are pretty lonely exceptions to this phenomena. It
might seem like these two issues are completely different, one being an
environmental/"scientific" issue and the other a military/ideological
issue but what the two seemingly unrelated issues have in common is that both
are driven by fear based in using intentionally vague statements.
As I have said before, climate change is the perfect term because it means essentially nothing. The climate never has been static. It is not like it is 70 degrees and sunny everyday for centuries on end. Of course the climate is changing. The question really to be asked is two-fold. Is that an inherently bad thing? Is the change we see (or don't see) now a natural event or primarily the result of mankind? If you buy into the notion of a world that is billions of years old, which I do not, then the earth has undergone innumerable changes to the climate, some more drastic than others, and the vast majority, like 99.999% occurred prior to widespread human industrialization. For example, in one of the silliest examples of the climate change farce, the Washington Post ran an article, That's Heavy, warning of giant flying boulders because of megastorms thanks to climate change. No, seriously. Think Sharknado but with giant boulders instead of sharks. They wonder why people don't take "climate change" seriously but what do you expect when so called "scientists" seem to be just making stuff up out of thin air to support this theory. One part of the article that stood out amidst the silliness was this:
The idea is that Earth’s climate went through a warming period just over 100,000 years ago that was similar in many ways to the warming now attributed to the actions of man. And the changes during that period were so catastrophic, they spawned massively powerful superstorms, causing violent ocean waves that simply lifted the boulders from below and deposited them atop this cliff.
So these scientists are basing a theory and giving out a warning of potential Bouldernado that is just like a warming period 100,000 years ago. So who exactly was causing THAT warming period? It wasn't like there were giant coal fired plants or fracking going on. So even if we are going through a similar warming period, why wouldn't it just be cyclical and naturally occurring like the similar one 100,000 years ago? Ah it can't be because then there wouldn't be a need for climate conferences, huge research grants for "climate scientists", new regulations and tax payer funded bags of money being given to politically connected "green energy" companies that mysteriously tend to go bankrupt with some regularity.
The war on terror uses the same strategy for picking the pockets of Americans present and future. We are fighting an amorphous, impossible to define or pin-down enemy that is constantly morphing. We kill a terrorist with a drone strike (or maybe hit a hospital, it is hard to keep track) and five more pop up. We push the Taliban out of
replace them with a corrupt government and then negotiate with the Taliban to
give them the country back. We invade Iraq for no reason other than a son's
desire to finish what his dad started and then get dragged into a costly guerrilla
war that leaves thousands of Americans dead or maimed and hundreds of thousands
of Iraqi citizens killed in the crossfire. Into the power vacuum created by
the fall of Iraq, the
"Arab Spring" and the U.S.
campaign against al-Qaeda we get ISIS, a group
that makes al-Qaeda seem restrained and civilized in contrast. It doesn't
really matter though because this war on terror means a blank check for Washington to spend billions on military gear we don't
really need under the guise of "keeping America safe". Behind closed
doors in Washington
you can be sure that Congressmen and defense contractors are lighting cigars
and gigging like school girls every time a new "defense" bill comes
up. If the policies enacted by the government actually cause more terror, all
the better because that just means more spending. The Christmas season for
military contractors is whenever Congress is in session.
The formula is simple. Scare people with dire warnings and they will support whatever spending you want no matter how much debt it takes. Politicians line their pockets, retain their elected office and gather personal influence and power. Special interest groups on either side get tax-payer money funneled through
and never have to really deliver anything other than constant reinforcement
that the threat is greater now than it has ever been!
If you are naive enough to think that most of the vocal advocates for either issue are motivated by something other than being able to leverage public fear into goodies to keep the campaign donations flowing in from favored supporters which in turn keeps them in office, wealthy and powerful, then you know very little about our political system and human nature. When you hear dire warnings about terrorism or climate change always ask yourself if the people shouting the loudest are also the people who benefit the most from the "threat". Chances are you will find that is almost always the case.