Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pentagon; Global Warming is Job #1...?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Funny thing is in some areas the presence of the military is ecologically positive when compared to the alternative. Places like Camp Pendleton, is what came to my mind. That's a large USMC base that separates San Diego from Orange County and takes up 17 miles of coastline and 125,000 acres total that are sparsely populated and used for training, beach landings etc. If the base wasn't there it'd be absolutely packed with housing, malls, all the usual stuff that the rest of Southern California is full of, and the resulting carbon footprint would be a lot greater. There would be no space between the border and Ventura county north of LA that would be open land to speak of. I'm sure there are other bases like this which just by existing reduce the human pollution, so as far as I'm concerned the military's already doing their part. I'd hate to see them curtail training to cut back on carbon emissions.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by andrewza View Post
      Kind of crazy? I mean i am all for the military looking after the environment. In South Africa the army had to remove trees for a parad. So they replacet them. Thats common sense. But the USA DoD would probaly cancel the parrad because the diffrint vehicles would fail some imistion test.


      With just cleaninh up after our self larg rural SANDF bases act as sort of game reserves. I am sure the USA DoD would stop useing some training centers becausr it might hurt the environment thats only there because it is training area.
      Nah.

      The US military has a long and honored tradition of paying lip service to governmental decrees.
      Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Steve573 View Post
        Funny thing is in some areas the presence of the military is ecologically positive when compared to the alternative. Places like Camp Pendleton, is what came to my mind. That's a large USMC base that separates San Diego from Orange County and takes up 17 miles of coastline and 125,000 acres total that are sparsely populated and used for training, beach landings etc. If the base wasn't there it'd be absolutely packed with housing, malls, all the usual stuff that the rest of Southern California is full of, and the resulting carbon footprint would be a lot greater. There would be no space between the border and Ventura county north of LA that would be open land to speak of. I'm sure there are other bases like this which just by existing reduce the human pollution, so as far as I'm concerned the military's already doing their part. I'd hate to see them curtail training to cut back on carbon emissions.
        I have also heard that the DMZ is the closest thing that either Korea has to a decent wildlife refuge.

        I also hear that military vehicles are not subject to EPA regs. The reason is because you don't want to make a vehicle less efficient when its a life or death ride.
        But, it could also explain why you don't see any surplus HumVees on the streets, the cost of conversion would make it prohibitive.
        "Why is the Rum gone?"

        -Captain Jack

        Comment

        Latest Topics

        Collapse

        Working...
        X