Cap and trading national swecurity

James Lyons:

Advocates for cap-and-trade legislation are trying to make their case on a trumped-up national security issue based on the premise that global climate change will increase the potential for global conflict.

Hogwash! There is no question that if Congress passes cap-and-trade legislation, there will be a significant adverse impact on our military forces. Cap-and-trade will force such restrictions on U.S. energy producers and our economy as a whole that our current and potential enemies probably would not believe their good fortune.

Remember, conflict can assume many forms, from multi-theater combat to our current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to hit-and-run acts of piracy in the Indian Ocean, to modern cyber attack and economic exploitation.

Last March at the Warfare Analysis Laboratory, for example, the Defense Department gamed various scenarios involving international attempts to wage economic warfare. According to news reports, this apparently first-of-its-kind war game involved the United States, Russia, China, East Asia and "all others." Of those "participating," China was proven to be best economic warrior, with Russia not far behind.

One attendee said at the conclusion that a key lesson learned from the exercise is that military action will need to be better coordinated to respond to economic threats from abroad.

The high costs and draconian regulations associated with cap-and-trade will undermine any such coordination. According to studies by the Congressional Budget Office and others that have received due attention from the media, this legislation could force U.S. energy producers to close facilities and cut production to comply with its mandates.

Foreign energy producers would only stand to benefit from this resulting shortfall in domestic production. Energy production is a cornerstone to our economic growth. How would cap-and-trade legislation improve our capability to meet our global commitments or continue our fight against global terrorism while at the same time continue to deter emerging powers such as China and Russia? Suffice to say it is less than clear.

...

The globo warmers have been trying to sell their theory based on fear and this is just another aspect of their campaign for a theory that most Americans remain skeptical of. It is not at all clear that a warmer climate would destabilize the world. In many cases it would improve the climate and make areas like Russia and Canada more productive for agriculture. It has also been suggested that it could actually turn the Sahara green again.

Anyway, I am not buying the suggestion that global worming or climate change will make things worse for everyone.