Don’t think I can do a more succinct job than this.
As I stated before, Intel isn’t going to help solve climate change. Hell, Intel wasn’t even used in the production of the report. Apparently the only reason it is classified at all is for international-political reasons (“Country X is run like Monty Burns’ nuke plant” – or words to that effect). If you were going to develop a top-11 list of wasteful, political uses of Intel, this evolution would be in the top three, easy. Why use the IC instead of, say, the EPA? Well, science is OK, but secrets make everything better, right? Oh, wait …
Climate change may drive or exacerbate conflict; so could ethnic strife, political upheaval, or the shortage of some precious resource (not climate driven) … this is more or less the natural state of the world. If we were going to focus our nat-sec energies on the impact of climate change, a better use might to a study on how to best (re)configure our military and aid strategies and capabilities, etc., to deal with the resulting fall-out.

Comments (1)
I wondered what you were going to say about it when I saw that this morning. My favorite line is definitely:
“When Hoekstra asked why the U.S. Intelligence Community would write an major analysis of low to medium confidence that contained no intelligence, Fingar answered, “because you [Congress] told us to.”“
That’s the sort of comment I could never get away with…
Posted by jeff
|
June 26, 2008 7:00 PM
Posted on June 26, 2008 19:00