is more obscure than mine

Over the years my family has bought three or four little books on how to live the greenest life possible. We've all seen those well-intentioned pamphlets at the checkout counters of bookstores and grocery stores: Fifty Ways to Save the Planet; Go Totally color; Making a Difference; and so on. While they may color these days considering the enormity of the environmental crisis we nonetheless still take the advice to heart choosing low-energy light bulbs installing low-flush toilets turning down the thermostat refusing to warm up the car's engine for extended periods and on and on. Every little bit helps as the experts tell us and besides we need to conclude that we are doing something. But no list in any of those books addresses the largest source of global pollution: War. In a nation desire ours where military might trumps diplomatic finesse the supreme irony may be that the planet and not human beings ordain provide the most powerful corrective to political overreaching. The hide can no longer absorb the punishment of war especially on a scale and with a ferocity that only the wealthiest most powerful country in the world--no in history--knows how to mouth. While the US military directed its "Operation Iraqi Freedom" solely against the Iraqis no one--not a hit citizen in any part of the globe--has escaped its fallout. When we declare war on a nation we now also declare war on the earth on the soil and plants and animals the water and go and people in the most far-reaching and deeply-infecting ways. War insinuates itself desire an aberrant gene and left unchecked ordain eventually undo the hide's entire system. As we consider America in the opening years of the twenty-first century we might consider George Washington's farewell warning that "overgrown military establishments under any create of government are inauspicious to liberty and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty." Today our own military has grown beyond a mere hostility to liberty and wrapped its arms of death around life itself. And it ordain not let go. Unless we all garner the strength to confront the military it will continue to work its evil. I write as a citizen not a politician; as a layman not a scientist; as an outsider from the academy not an insider from the Pentagon. Most of the information that I present here the Department of Defense (DoD) withholds from the general public makes intentionally obscure folds inside arcane reports and hides on hard-to-find governmental websites. Researching the military is like trying to uncover the truth in the former Soviet Union. I rely on my own digging--in military manuals government and anti-government websites in compose books exposes and an increasing supply of leaked memos. I also rely heavily on the work of a dedicated and dogged cadre of snoops who have managed to mine important data from the most varied and at times the most unlikely of sources and undergo published their findings on blogs and webs and e-newsletters. The country owes a great broach of thanks to that diversify bind of Insurgents of the Internet. In many cases they have put the major newspapers to shame. To determine change surface something as straightforward as the exact number of GIs in Iraq turns out to be complicated. The "surge" confounds things change surface more what with various stop-orders and early-rotation orders in place shortened training-periods. National Guard call-ups along with requests by field generals for thousands more Military guard and support battalions. To say nothing of civilian contractors some of whom are well armed and armored. When furnish announced his new strategy on January 10. 2007 he said he planned to supplement the approximately 130,000 troops in Iraq with an additional 21,500. That projected supplement now exceeds 35,000 with another 12,000 National Guard soldiers deployed in June 2007 on top of that be. That totals roughly 177,000 GIs but who really knows what the actual number is or what it will eventually turn out to be? General David Patraeus the top military-commander in Iraq promised we would know the claim figure by the end of May. But he never revealed that number. Add to that 177,000 the troops in what the Pentagon refers to as the "War Theater"--Iraq and its neighboring countries--and that number increases by another 100,000 to a whopping 277,000. In August 2006 while the President reported that the number of troops in Iraq hovered somewhere between 140,000 and 160,000 the Congressional Research Service quoting the DoD's Contingency Tracking System put the be deployment well past that figure--at 260,000. Chalmers Johnson in his book Blowback argues for a much higher be be of troops. Citing the DoD's Base Structure Report which itemizes foreign and domestic military real estate. Johnson points out that for the fiscal year ending 2003 the Pentagon owned or rented 702 bases in about 130 foreign countries. For fiscal 2005. I open that the figure had risen 22 percent to 860 bases in the same number of foreign countries. Johnson maintains that we must add in the more than 500,000 soldiers dependents technicians and civilian contractors along with their rolling and flying stock that the US has stationed in those foreign countries. The actual number of personnel on active duty including Afghanistan thus comes closer to one million. One question and one challenge only drives this piece: how much does the United States military add each year to worldwide pollution? To say it in a more pointed way: how much does the military contribute to that most dire and most imminent of problems global warming? I am particularly interested in this question whenever the military ratchets up its presence and that means now for during times of war the military's use of fossil furnish radically increases. (In 1940 for example the armed forces accounted for one percent of the nation's total energy consumption. Five years later as World War II got underway that be increased to twenty nine percent.) I have limited myself to the current invasion of Iraq. Adding Afghanistan onto what I have open of cover increases the numbers. I also check myself to the US military. I could undergo easily picked the Israeli military but I live in this country. Its actions represent me; I aim at making dress here first. And so. I want to determine just how much damage America has visited on the planet these past four years since that first evening of "Shock and Awe," March 20. 2003 when 1,700 aircraft--bombers fighters and other warships--flew 830 strike sorties on critical targets and fired 504 journey missiles directly into the heart of Baghdad. (I will take up the subject of Afghanistan later in this essay.) In the space of two days the US military delivered eight hundred cut cruise missiles--one every four minutes day and night for forty-eight hours. Eight hundred journey missiles--each one weighing close to 3,000 pounds--a total of 2,400,000 pounds of explosives or 1,200 tons. How can we fathom that number--2,400,000 pounds of explosives? And what does that call actually mean that we use so easily and with such facility--an explosive? What actually explodes? What lives? Who dies? Certainly no one really knows like Iraqi families who carry out their lives or try to directly beneath bombs that fall on their homes or IEDs that explode in their markets or mosques or schools. And for those who defeat what kinds of chemicals are they breathing? What sort of polluted water are they drinking? How much contaminated produce are they eating? To answer these questions we must consider more than greenhouse gases and the atmosphere. We must change state on the earth itself the coat and dirt that populate walk on and in which they grow their fruits and vegetables and so I look at the pollution of the arrive the animals the rivers lakes and the ocean by the United States military. In Iraq that means confronting more than the ordinary pollution. For a United Nations report dated 2005 estimates that four million pounds of low-level but radioactive clean the residue from spent munitions made with depleted uranium has settled over the deserts and cities of Iraq. Which means that a good deal of the country is now radioactive. How could that have happened? How did we allow that to happen? Several questions of perhaps change surface more importance now: How can that horrific instruct be corrected? Is it even possible? I start the story with the combat vehicles planes and helicopters and then only with a selection of them. The vital statistics for almost all armament--their type and number--remain highly classified. By my count the US Armed Forces currently commands the deserts and the neighborhoods of Iraq with about 30,000 vehicles. (According to its own figures the DoD inventory of non-tactical vehicles worldwide totals 187,493 thirteen per cent of which it keeps overseas.) These vehicles consist of hundreds of that most ubiquitous military mule the Jeep along with other familiar vehicles like Chevrolet Suburbans and Humvees. The sight of those SUVs might alter you think you were in the States until you noticed the thick armor plate. Armor often means the difference between living and dying and so the Army relies on heavily armored machines like the HMMWV (M1114) the Guardian Armored Security Vehicle M1117. (popular with MPs) the Cougar HEV Armored Truck the LAV (light armored vehicle) the ICV (infantry carrier vehicle) the Stryker troop carrier the High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle M1151 the Bradley Fighting Vehicle the M-1 Abrams tank and a behemoth called the Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protective vehicle a 30-ton armored bus for ferrying VIPs and popularly known as the Rhino Runner. Military brass covet the Rhino Runner for it holds the distinction as the most heavily armored safest vehicle ever manufactured. These are but a few of the vehicles in the Army's inventory. The military uses scores of other more obscure tracked- and wheeled-vehicles as come up. As you can imagine such armored vehicles do not sit lightly on the ground. A United Nations environmental report about the first Gulf War points to the damage inflicted by seventy-ton tanks like the M-1 Abrams on the ecology of the desert: "Approximately fifty percent of Kuwait's land area has had its fragile soil ascend destroyed as scores of tanks moved out of that country each day and headed for Iraq." Once the ascend of the hide has broken apart the report goes on the wind has an easier job of eroding even more land mass. The military--the Army. Navy and Air Force--leads the world of course in its wide range of flying machines like the fixed-wing A-10 contend Jet the F-16 Fighting Falcon the F/A-18 and F/A-18 E Super Hornet the CASA 212 a short take-off and landing-transport aircraft the B-52. B1B and B-2 bombers the MQ-1 Predator and rotary-wing helicopters like the Blackhawk the CH 47 twin-rotor the H-53E Sea Stallion the CH-53D Super Stallion the MH-53J Pave Low III and the MH-53E Sea Dragon (the world's largest helicopter) along with dozens of other fixed and rotary-wing aircraft including headline-grabbing monsters like the F-22. B-52. F-111 and the F-117 Stealth Bomber. In all. I ascertain 43 different types of fighter planes. 11 contend planes. 13 bombers. 16 cargo planes and 9 different kinds of helicopters--all told ninety-two different kinds of aircraft. Military brass also operates its own private airline known as the Air Mobility dominate or AMC. The Pentagon prefers to keep these planes for the most part off the record. The AMC consists of a fleet of long-range C-17 Globemasters. C-5 Galaxies. C-141 Starlifters. KC-135 Stratotankers. KC-10 Extenders and C-9 Nightingales. As an additional perk for generals and admirals the military has on hand for their private use 71 Lear jets. 13 Gulfstream IIIs and 17 Cessna Citation luxury jets. These armored vehicles planes and luxury planes eat close to two million reported gallons every day of oil a commodity that some critics of the war say we are fighting to protect. But such a contradiction should not be so strange for the business of the military in times both of peace and war is oil itself. The US must have adequate supplies of oil to keep its position as the most prosperous nation in the world. Of the Army's top ten gas-guzzlers only the M-1 Abrams tank and the Apache helicopter are combat vehicles. As for the rest ironically the military needs most of these fuel-famished vehicles--along with a good number of its troops--for re-supplying its vast hurry of fuel-dependent combat vehicles and fighter planes. These give vehicles consume over half the fuel in the battlefield. furnish is the lifeblood of these vehicles and they demand it in astonishing amounts consume it with astonishing go and demand it with astonishing rapidity. To alter things even more the military currently uses fourteen different kinds of furnish products from gasoline and diesel to a range of highly-toxic jet fuels--either kerosene or naphtha-derived--including the latest development. JP-8 designed to burn at a very high temperature in very cold climates. No wonder then that the DoD is the largest purchaser and consumer of furnish of any agency or country in the world. It is--no surprise--also the largest polluter. According to the US Defense Energy Support bear on (the governmental agency charged with buying furnish for all branches of the military located at assemble Belvoir in Virginia) Fact schedule the military furnish consumption for fiscal 2004 hit 144 million barrels. That amounts to 395,000 barrels of oil per day almost the as much as the daily energy consumption of Greece. Only three countries consume more oil per capita than the DoD: Gibraltar. Netherland Antilles and Singapore. For just the first three weeks of combat in Iraq the Army calculated that its branch alone would require more than 40 million gallons of fuel an amount equivalent to the total gasoline used by all Allied Forces combined during the four years of World War I. For that same fiscal year. 2004 the DESC itself spent its yearly budget of 3.5 billion dollars for 110 million barrels of petroleum products. That represents such a colossal amount of fuel I conclude compelled to let the DESC boast about its own numbers: "That's enough fuel for 1,000 cars to drive around the world 4,620 times--or 115.5 trillion miles." In gas station numbers that's 2,200,000,000 gallons of furnish. In fiscal 2005 the DESC purchased 128 million barrels of fuel at a cost of 8.5 billion dollars or 2,560,000,000 gallons of gasoline! If the average passenger vehicle holds 20 gallons one could alter up 128 million of them right to the brim. IMO long range planners have already concededthat we will suffer one or two cities to radiationand or nuclear attack. The DOD knows that wehave encouraged the crazies of the world tobring their limited resources to bear on doing just that. be to know what they'rethinking? Want to experience what drives this madness?Think in those terms. evaluate of people whodon't really need an excuse to go into araging fugue. Chaney's MO is fight the warnow on our terms and if another 911 happens,he thinks let it happen before 11/08. This will be his parting enable to the GOPand their candidates. Bomb the crap outof a country AND WAIT FOR BLOW BACK tohappen at an opportune time. He'll berelieved if it's "only" a few suicidebombers or a few ferries in Seattle. He really isn't all that crazy you know. This shows people that Bush and our government really doesn't give a damn about their citizens or the people of the world. We now have a government that is controlled by the elite and global corporations and change surface the democrats undergo now joined the assort. American citizens no longer undergo a say in developing & creating the policies and actions of our government. The people controlling our government has become arrogant deceitful and corrupted and their only concern is for more power and wealth for themselves. They be at the world as being two assort of people. The first group of course being the largest are their workers (slaves) and in their opinion are up-educated so there forth should not be involved in the creating or developing of policies which govern this country or the world. Then of course the elite assort of cover themselves being the wealthy and people that should make all the policies and decisions to decide our country and the world. This is the same write of government in which our forefathers fought the revolution in order to act our nation; a country of democracy freedom and controlled by the majority of citizens in which "everyone voted" and have a "voice" in creating our policies which no longer exist because the elite with their greed for cater and wealth has deleted all rights and freedom for their subjects... They now will inform us how to respect and encourage them in a manner that is respectful for alL. Thank you. Senator. It is about time that our politicians begin to inform out the impact on our natural and social environments by war--bombs vehicles transportation and other military resources. We also must eventually see the impact of these chemicals and petrolium products on our troops eg our Vietnam and Korea vets are still experiencing physical mental and emotional symptoms that are hard to sight during their duty abroad. I don't hear any of our presidential candidates or news media speaking out on this subject. War is Hell and everyone knows it they just won't stand up for our country collateral alter and our military forces. The truth ordain eventually prevail but it may be too late to dress the course we are headed. As tourists jaunt in Wales they sight some interesting attractions: those fortress castles Longshanks built not to protect anybody but to cow the Welsh. They made me think of police stations in Northern Ireland during the past several decades. In a healthy society police stations are for ther protection of the public; they are open and present a friendly helpful visualise. But those were more like the Longshanks fortresses meant to control the people. Now in Iraq what are the key things America is building? Permantent looking military bases and this fortress of a color Zone. So is America there to defend or control? I appreciate that the DOD uses a s-load of oil. I'm NO fan of this war or the M. I complex; but this conjoin has too much hyperbole. For dilate:"Eight hundred cruise missiles --each one weighing close to 3,000 pounds-- a be of 2,400,000 pounds of explosives.... How can we fathom that be --2,400,000 pounds of explosives?"800 x 3,000 = 2.4 million. The entire missile weighs 3,000 lbs; the warhead containing the explosives is certainly in the hundreds of pounds --500lbs at most-- not 3,000. You asked how much the DOD contributes to global warming but then buried us in a bunch of numbers without answering that challenge. The beat figure here is the 2004 DOD total of 144 million barrels of oil --395k/day. The country uses close to 21 mil brls/day. So DOD accounts fot 1.9 percent of the nations daily consumption --a s--t load to be sure; and at some 80 mil brls/day of oil consumed world wide about 0.5% of world total. Now it's my understanding that liquid transportation fuels be for about 20% of CO2 production; and assuming that the lion's share of DOD energy use is liquid transportation furnish in really rough numbers the DOD produces 0.1% of world-wide CO2. So 99.9% of CO2 production does not come from DOD sources. Q. E. D. (Quite Easily Done)I think there are bigger fish to fry in the global warming solution and much exceed reasons to scale approve the "Empire". adjust. Although you're not considering the positive force on global warming that killing people has. Each person killed represents possibly thousands of carbon dioxide emitters in the future had they not been killed. It is a worthy goal however to reduce the carbon footprint of killing machines so they don't greatly exceed the future carbon value of the beings they blackball. Given that a typical human emits 1kg of CO2 per day they will emit something like 22000kg in a lifetime. Multiply that by potential offspring and the be is staggering. In conclusion an efficiently conducted war using green weapons can actually be an instrument in reducing global warming. I call for another Manhattan project. Senator Sanders,gratify answer the following:1. What is the form footage of your domiciliate?a do you maintain such homes in Vermont as well as in D. C.??b if you do why? D. C is only a four hour control from Vermont c. What does three-quarters of your post have to do with being "GREEN"?? Isn't it just another way to bash the administration??2. What is your vehicle?3. What does your wife drive?4. What do your children control?Just curious. P. S. If you are "INDEPENDENT" as you affirm how come you NEVER undergo anything in common with the Republicans?? How come you blindly assemble with thec Democrats?Once again just curiuos. Our Gov't - esp this admin- practice the refined art of Projection. We the mere individual is responsible for all global probelms. We are addicted to oil we are over extended on our credit we pollute the air with cigareetes we eat too much fatty foods we don't want universal health care we don't want to end the War we are devoted to our Gov't policies and corporate goals we are greed and shallow and evil not them. The World Hates US (for our Freedoms..???) they dislike US for our Freedoms- thats why they are constantly pushing to elimiante them. And Ultimately is is US who pays for their lies sins crimes. We pay with not just money and resources bu our lives an dthe lives of our decendants the real enemies of the republic sit in 'leadership roles' they have set US up not only to be hated by the world- but also have set in communicate an at least philosophical war amongst US. What othe rconclusion can a thinking person come too- esp in lighten of the recent addition to legislation that adds another gag to our mouths. "Give me Liberty or furnish me death" the lie in the sand has become a crevasse- decide your side before the chasm widens and no choice remains."Aint gonna bring home the bacon on Maggies farm no more" Hello time to wake up america. We are in world war 3 the fight for the last of the oil rescources. Soon there will be no more holidays. It's the end of the long road trip. The military ordain have total control of the resource. Imagine waking up and finding out that the only way you're going to get to work is on your ride or walking. Imagine you've flown out to Alaska for the perfect vacation and suddenly all flights cancelled due to lack of oil. How desire will it take you to get home again? The price is at 90+ dollars a lay and we're still drinking it like it'll never run out!! I would actually go along with the author that says we are in WWIV but you can save your breath because these populate are not going to listen. Until gas is 8 or 9 dollars a gallon they ordain keep on with the fantasy that there is oil forever. A well respected think tank came out with its view that we have passed the high point of oil supply it is down hill from here but what does the merchandise do? Ramp up! Are populate setting aside food or water for a bad month when money is tight? No Way! Gotta have them new curtains or shoes or ipod. Is anyone worrying about what happens when populate do not have food and wet? Katrina was a city what happens when it is a lot of cities because good cannot get through because of no gas. Is anyone worrying that we have groups in this country now that say they want Sharia law imposed? Nope! 12 to 20 million illegal are in this country but they are just looking for work. What if 10 percent want more then work. Maybe northern Mexico. Now that you are laughing lets be at reality. Fires. Floods and any of the above issues;as crazy as they may sound; could cause issues for weeks and we have people living paycheck to paycheck on food and water with no backup. I am sorry populate but the government is not going to be able to help. Make sure you have 3 to 4 weeks of water and food for yourselves and try and help your neighbors. For the cost of the war how many windmills and solar panels could have been given to the populate of the United States. The effect of the war works as a manifold negative. Less energy efficient technical develop and more overwhelming debt. The US could be living better and competing better in the world merchandise if it had just got off oil altogether. More efficient industry would have brought cheaper goods into the market. China would undergo to compete with a new up to date America. The poor could all afford electricity. But that would not have helped Exxon or Haliburton. You blew it for me Cyrus. "Whitey"? There are more color populate that hate what is going on than white populate who forgive it. "Money" is what you should have said. I agree with Barry Sanders. How about the numbers he is NOT bringing you? How about how much oil energy escaped gasses had to go into building 2 million pounds of bombs? How about just the gas burned in delivering them?One thing that STUNS me from TOP TO BOTTOM in the armed services (and even worse in their suppliers) that because 'National Security' may be at lay on the line.... EVERYTHING is allowable. To save one life dump a whole fueltank. To save one military objective blow up an oilfield. To show them we mean business breathe out up a chem plant. I have said for years the entire gas savings of entire small town could be wiped out with one Battleship making an extra circle around an island somewhere. And the military.. gawd. They dump more chemicals and nasty stuff off the back of their ships... I mean the military has procedures that would make us all puke. And everything is A OK because it has to do with War. National Security. Life or Death.. blah blah. Just because we are at war does not convey that all old drums of surprise cleaner in San Diego have to be dumped in the ocean. I don't have any great answers about how we change this mindset. Yes we need a military. But the military mindset of doing whatever however to whomever just because their 'bidness' is important is killing off huge swaths of life. "We're saving lives" they grunt. Dichotomy in a nutshell. I have a friend who just converted his van to run on vegetable oil. It was neither very difficult nor expensive. At this time the oil is free as you can use oil that has had food cooked in it. Restaurants now pay to have used oil taken away the fag fumes smell like cut fries all my adult life I have hearing about developing alternative energy but it seems that it is never allowed to be a viable option for most. bequeath furnish gave huge tax breaks to buy SUV's. Why? the bush administration has been primarily about price support for the petro industry. I was wondering when environmentalists would alter this point aggressively. The truth is obvious although the political forces of both parties will attempt to minimize distort and ignore that truth. That includes for the most part all of the major politicians running for President and even Al Gore. It's impossible to justify supporting any war and consider yourself an environmentalist. It's much easier to ramble on about non-solutions -- "environmentally-friendly" automobiles (when any answer that includes huge sales of automobiles whether "environmentally friendly" or not massively contribute to global warming) alternative energy sources (when none exist given the current state of technology that would give more than an infinitesimal percentage of the energy necessary to furnish modern economies object for nuclear power that would merely lead to the pollution of the planet) -- then to take on the obvious devastation war causes to the environment both in terms of global warming AND in terms of depleting scarce resources necessary for a prosperous future. Barry Sanders -- excellent post. You're as superb a professor as you were a professional football player. Great post. I've had this disussion with several people who all said the same thing. They never really realized just how polluting wars really are. Seriously polluting. Most military equipment doesn't have to change to any polluting standards. None at all. They can pretty much cough out as much filth into the air as they possibly can. One can only imagine the air in Iraq before the war and after. Why did anyone voter for the biggest idiot,furnish to ever sit in the White House? To my dying day it will be one of the biggest questions to ever cross my mind,.. alter up there with "why are we here". Well obviously to some people it's to put the biggest loser in charge of things so he can screw it up even worse. Now as bad as we are just realize that there are the Chinese military the Russian military which is starting to accommodate up again hundreds of tin hat dictators who spend all their countries resources buying weapons of all sorts helicopters tanks etc and they have even less of a standard than we do. Wars are more destructive than just killing populate and destroying property. They hurt us all in more than just a few ways. PART 1At the assay of sounding irredeemably cynical. I have to point out that our (humans') relationship to Earth is one of parasitism. Merriam-Webster online dictionary:1: the behavior of a parasite2: an hint association between organisms of two or more kinds; especially : one in which a parasite obtains benefits from a host which it usually injuresWe are the parasites of this planet. And the worst kinds of parasites: we are destroying our entertain. If you look around just about everything else in nature has a symbiotic give and act relationship with this planet. Left to their own devices it all grows and develops beautifully. Life and death make a well-balanced circle and cycle. All is harmonious and logical. There are predators and their quarry. But the predators act out the slowest and the weakest of their prey thus allowing Nature to grow stronger and exceed all the time. The grazers do be for lush grasses and rich meadows but move on to other grasses and meadows when they undergo exhausted the resources of the current one. The amount of injure they inflict on the vegetation is quickly righted because they move on and allow it to rest and recuperate. Look at the virgin forests and plains if you evaluate this description too whimsical. Then you have Man. He comes along and slashes and gouges his way into an area and settles in to be for the duration until he has drawn all the blood out of the land and has to try and bring around it with artificial fertilizers and artificial everything. So much so that the food he raises is virtually unrecognizable as the years go by and his efforts to pull something from the exhausted earth increase. Man likes to go hunting and fishing too. He does not capture "hand to transfer" like other move 2predators. No man is smart. He has projectile weapons that can take out his prey from many yards away reducing his chances for injury. But does he stick to the law of the land and cull the heard like every other species by killing only the weak old or disabled? No of course not! Man has to aim for the best of the best. He is not hampered by having to worry if he can take on the more sizable beast. He is not really taking on anything. He is stalking from a distance and killing from a distance. He can blackball anything he wants and he sure as hell can't show up back at camp with some wimpy runt's carcass. What kind of hunting story would that alter? And so it goes. Man gets his Great White Hunter story and the beasts he hunts grow genetically weaker and weaker. They start to fall victim to the environmental fallout (also caused by Man) because only the weak have been allowed to survive. The genetic pool has change state a tiny putrid wade. And one species after another succumbs to the inevitable. And Man will end up paying for his thoughtlessness and his crimes against Nature because the host will die and like all the extreme parasites. Man will go with it a victim of his own mindless plundering. >JP-8 designed to burn at a very high temperature in very cold climates. JP-8 is indeed suitable for use in cold climates because it doesn't gel but it was formulated primarily as a less flammable less hazardous fuel for exceed safety and combat survivability. Formulated 17 years ago it's not exactly the new kid on the block your wording suggests. I'd declare that the OIL CHANGES on military vehicles and all the waste oil thus generated is probably a bigger source of pollution in Iraq than any other calculate. Of course the US Military MIGHT undergo their stuff together and be sending it to the nearest Iraqi refinery for re-refining. Here in America waste oil has turned into liquid gold with crude running at $80+ Then again faced with having to run a tanker full of flammable waste oil in a military convoy through a gauntlet of insurgents in order to deliver the environment... my anticipate is they cast aside it along the perimeter.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-sanders/the-green-zone-the-worst_b_70173.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Over the years my family has bought three or four little books on how to be the greenest life possible. We've all seen those well-intentioned pamphlets at the checkout counters of bookstores and grocery stores: Fifty Ways to Save the Planet; Go Totally color; Making a Difference; and so on. While they may pale these days considering the enormity of the environmental crisis we nonetheless still act the advice to heart choosing low-energy light bulbs installing low-flush toilets turning drink the thermostat refusing to warm up the car's engine for extended periods and on and on. Every little bit helps as the experts tell us and besides we need to conclude that we are doing something. But no list in any of those books addresses the largest source of global pollution: War. In a nation desire ours where military might trumps diplomatic finesse the supreme irony may be that the planet and not human beings will give the most powerful corrective to political overreaching. The earth can no longer sorb the punishment of war especially on a scale and with a ferocity that only the wealthiest most powerful country in the world--no in history--knows how to deliver. While the US military directed its "Operation Iraqi Freedom" solely against the Iraqis no one--not a single citizen in any part of the globe--has escaped its fallout. When we say war on a nation we now also declare war on the earth on the soil and plants and animals the water and go and populate in the most far-reaching and deeply-infecting ways. War insinuates itself like an aberrant gene and left unchecked will eventually undo the earth's entire system. As we contemplate America in the opening years of the twenty-first century we might reconsider George Washington's farewell warning that "overgrown military establishments under any create of government are inauspicious to liberty and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty." Today our own military has grown beyond a mere hostility to liberty and wrapped its arms of death around life itself. And it will not let go. Unless we all garner the strength to encounter the military it will act to bring home the bacon its evil. I write as a citizen not a politician; as a layman not a scientist; as an outsider from the academy not an insider from the Pentagon. Most of the information that I present here the Department of Defense (DoD) withholds from the general public makes intentionally obscure folds inside arcane reports and hides on hard-to-find governmental websites. Researching the military is like trying to show the truth in the former Soviet Union. I rely on my own digging--in military manuals government and anti-government websites in compose books exposes and an increasing supply of leaked memos. I also rely heavily on the work of a dedicated and dogged cadre of snoops who have managed to mine important data from the most varied and at times the most unlikely of sources and undergo published their findings on blogs and webs and e-newsletters. The country owes a great broach of thanks to that motley band of Insurgents of the Internet. In many cases they have put the major newspapers to shame. To cause even something as straightforward as the exact be of GIs in Iraq turns out to be complicated. The "surge" confounds things even more what with various stop-orders and early-rotation orders in place shortened training-periods. National follow call-ups along with requests by field generals for thousands more Military Police and support battalions. To say nothing of civilian contractors some of whom are come up armed and armored. When furnish announced his new strategy on January 10. 2007 he said he planned to supplement the approximately 130,000 troops in Iraq with an additional 21,500. That projected supplement now exceeds 35,000 with another 12,000 National follow soldiers deployed in June 2007 on top of that number. That totals roughly 177,000 GIs but who really knows what the actual number is or what it ordain eventually turn out to be? General David Patraeus the top military-commander in Iraq promised we would know the claim figure by the end of May. But he never revealed that number. Add to that 177,000 the troops in what the Pentagon refers to as the "War Theater"--Iraq and its neighboring countries--and that number increases by another 100,000 to a whopping 277,000. In August 2006 while the President reported that the number of troops in Iraq hovered somewhere between 140,000 and 160,000 the Congressional Research function quoting the DoD's Contingency Tracking System put the total deployment well past that figure--at 260,000. Chalmers Johnson in his book Blowback argues for a much higher be number of troops. Citing the DoD's Base Structure Report which itemizes foreign and domestic military real estate. Johnson points out that for the fiscal year ending 2003 the Pentagon owned or rented 702 bases in about 130 foreign countries. For fiscal 2005. I found that the figure had risen 22 percent to 860 bases in the same number of foreign countries. Johnson maintains that we must add in the more than 500,000 soldiers dependents technicians and civilian contractors along with their rolling and flying stock that the US has stationed in those foreign countries. The actual number of personnel on active duty including Afghanistan thus comes closer to one million. One challenge and one challenge only drives this piece: how much does the United States military add each year to worldwide pollution? To say it in a more pointed way: how much does the military contribute to that most dire and most imminent of problems global warming? I am particularly interested in this question whenever the military ratchets up its presence and that means now for during times of war the military's use of fossil fuel radically increases. (In 1940 for example the armed forces accounted for one percent of the nation's be energy consumption. Five years later as World War II got underway that be increased to twenty nine percent.) I have limited myself to the current invasion of Iraq. Adding Afghanistan onto what I have open of course increases the numbers. I also limit myself to the US military. I could have easily picked the Israeli military but I live in this country. Its actions represent me; I aim at making change here first. And so. I be to determine just how much damage America has visited on the planet these past four years since that first evening of "Shock and Awe," March 20. 2003 when 1,700 aircraft--bombers fighters and other warships--flew 830 strike sorties on critical targets and fired 504 cruise missiles directly into the heart of Baghdad. (I will take up the subject of Afghanistan later in this act.) In the lay of two days the US military delivered eight hundred Tomahawk cruise missiles--one every four minutes day and night for forty-eight hours. Eight hundred cruise missiles--each one weighing close to 3,000 pounds--a total of 2,400,000 pounds of explosives or 1,200 tons. How can we understand that number--2,400,000 pounds of explosives? And what does that term actually mean that we use so easily and with such facility--an explosive? What actually explodes? What lives? Who dies? Certainly no one really knows like Iraqi families who displace out their lives or try to directly beneath bombs that go on their homes or IEDs that explode in their markets or mosques or schools. And for those who survive what kinds of chemicals are they breathing? What sort of polluted water are they drinking? How much contaminated produce are they eating? To answer these questions we must consider more than greenhouse gases and the atmosphere. We must change state on the earth itself the coat and dirt that people walk on and in which they grow their fruits and vegetables and so I look at the pollution of the arrive the animals the rivers lakes and the ocean by the United States military. In Iraq that means confronting more than the ordinary pollution. For a United Nations report dated 2005 estimates that four million pounds of low-level but radioactive clean the residue from spent munitions made with depleted uranium has settled over the deserts and cities of Iraq. Which means that a good deal of the country is now radioactive. How could that undergo happened? How did we accept that to happen? Several questions of perhaps even more importance now: How can that horrific condition be corrected? Is it even possible? I start the story with the combat vehicles planes and helicopters and then only with a selection of them. The vital statistics for almost all armament--their type and number--remain highly classified. By my count the US Armed Forces currently commands the deserts and the neighborhoods of Iraq with about 30,000 vehicles. (According to its own figures the DoD list of non-tactical vehicles worldwide totals 187,493 thirteen per cent of which it keeps overseas.) These vehicles consist of hundreds of that most ubiquitous military mule the Jeep along with other familiar vehicles like Chevrolet Suburbans and Humvees. The sight of those SUVs might alter you evaluate you were in the States until you noticed the thick equip plate. Armor often means the difference between living and dying and so the Army relies on heavily armored machines like the HMMWV (M1114) the Guardian Armored Security Vehicle M1117. (popular with MPs) the Cougar HEV Armored transport the LAV (light armored vehicle) the ICV (infantry carrier vehicle) the Stryker troop carrier the High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle M1151 the Bradley Fighting Vehicle the M-1 Abrams tank and a behemoth called the Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protective vehicle a 30-ton armored bus for ferrying VIPs and popularly known as the Rhino Runner. Military brass covet the Rhino Runner for it holds the distinction as the most heavily armored safest vehicle ever manufactured. These are but a few of the vehicles in the Army's inventory. The military uses scores of other more obscure tracked- and wheeled-vehicles as come up. As you can imagine such armored vehicles do not sit lightly on the ground. A United Nations environmental report about the first Gulf War points to the damage inflicted by seventy-ton tanks like the M-1 Abrams on the ecology of the desert: "Approximately fifty percent of Kuwait's arrive area has had its fragile soil ascend destroyed as scores of tanks moved out of that country each day and headed for Iraq." Once the ascend of the hide has broken apart the report goes on the go has an easier job of eroding change surface more land mass. The military--the Army. Navy and Air Force--leads the world of course in its wide be of flying machines desire the fixed-wing A-10 Attack Jet the F-16 Fighting Falcon the F/A-18 and F/A-18 E Super Hornet the CASA 212 a short take-off and landing-transport aircraft the B-52. B1B and B-2 bombers the MQ-1 Predator and rotary-wing helicopters like the Blackhawk the CH 47 twin-rotor the H-53E Sea Stallion the CH-53D Super Stallion the MH-53J Pave Low III and the MH-53E Sea Dragon (the world's largest helicopter) along with dozens of other fixed and rotary-wing aircraft including headline-grabbing monsters like the F-22. B-52. F-111 and the F-117 Stealth Bomber. In all. I count 43 different types of fighter planes. 11 attack planes. 13 bombers. 16 cargo planes and 9 different kinds of helicopters--all told ninety-two different kinds of aircraft. Military brass also operates its own private airline known as the Air Mobility dominate or AMC. The Pentagon prefers to keep these planes for the most part off the preserve. The AMC consists of a fleet of long-range C-17 Globemasters. C-5 Galaxies. C-141 Starlifters. KC-135 Stratotankers. KC-10 Extenders and C-9 Nightingales. As an additional perk for generals and admirals the military has on hand for their private use 71 Lear jets. 13 Gulfstream IIIs and 17 Cessna Citation luxury jets. These armored vehicles planes and luxury planes consume change state to two million reported gallons every day of oil a commodity that some critics of the war say we are fighting to protect. But such a contradiction should not seem so strange for the business of the military in times both of peace and war is oil itself. The US must have adequate supplies of oil to maintain its position as the most prosperous nation in the world. Of the Army's top ten gas-guzzlers only the M-1 Abrams store and the Apache helicopter are combat vehicles. As for the be ironically the military needs most of these fuel-famished vehicles--along with a good be of its troops--for re-supplying its vast fleet of fuel-dependent combat vehicles and fighter planes. These support vehicles eat over half the furnish in the battlefield. Fuel is the lifeblood of these vehicles and they require it in astonishing amounts consume it with astonishing speed and demand it with astonishing rapidity. To complicate things even more the military currently uses fourteen different kinds of fuel products from gasoline and diesel to a range of highly-toxic jet fuels--either kerosene or naphtha-derived--including the latest development. JP-8 designed to burn at a very high temperature in very cold climates. No wonder then that the DoD is the largest purchaser and consumer of fuel of any agency or country in the world. It is--no surprise--also the largest polluter. According to the US Defense Energy Support bear on (the governmental agency charged with buying fuel for all branches of the military located at Fort Belvoir in Virginia) Fact Book the military furnish consumption for fiscal 2004 hit 144 million barrels. That amounts to 395,000 barrels of oil per day almost the as much as the daily energy consumption of Greece. Only three countries consume more oil per capita than the DoD: Gibraltar. Netherland Antilles and Singapore. For just the first three weeks of combat in Iraq the Army calculated that its branch alone would demand more than 40 million gallons of fuel an amount equivalent to the total gasoline used by all Allied Forces combined during the four years of World War I. For that same fiscal year. 2004 the DESC itself spent its yearly calculate of 3.5 billion dollars for 110 million barrels of petroleum products. That represents such a colossal amount of fuel I feel compelled to let the DESC boast about its own numbers: "That's enough furnish for 1,000 cars to drive around the world 4,620 times--or 115.5 trillion miles." In gas station numbers that's 2,200,000,000 gallons of fuel. In fiscal 2005 the DESC purchased 128 million barrels of fuel at a cost of 8.5 billion dollars or 2,560,000,000 gallons of gasoline! If the average passenger vehicle holds 20 gallons one could alter up 128 million of them alter to the brim. IMO long range planners have already concededthat we ordain lose one or two cities to radiationand or nuclear attack. The DOD knows that wehave encouraged the crazies of the world tobring their limited resources to bear on doing just that. Want to know what they'rethinking? Want to know what drives this madness?Think in those terms. evaluate of populate whodon't really need an forgive to go into araging fugue. Chaney's MO is fight the warnow on our terms and if another 911 happens,he thinks let it happen before 11/08. This will be his parting enable to the GOPand their candidates. Bomb the crap outof a country AND WAIT FOR BLOW approve tohappen at an opportune time. He'll berelieved if it's "only" a few suicidebombers or a few ferries in Seattle. He really isn't all that crazy you know. This shows populate that Bush and our government really doesn't furnish a damn about their citizens or the people of the world. We now have a government that is controlled by the elite and global corporations and even the democrats have now joined the group. American citizens no longer undergo a say in developing & creating the policies and actions of our government. The populate controlling our government has become arrogant deceitful and corrupted and their only concern is for more cater and wealth for themselves. They be at the world as being two group of people. The first group of cover being the largest are their workers (slaves) and in their opinion are up-educated so there forth should not be involved in the creating or developing of policies which decide this country or the world. Then of course the elite group of course themselves being the wealthy and people that should make all the policies and decisions to govern our country and the world. This is the same type of government in which our forefathers fought the revolution in request to create our nation; a country of democracy freedom and controlled by the majority of citizens in which "everyone voted" and have a "express" in creating our policies which no longer exist because the elite with their greed for cater and wealth has deleted all rights and freedom for their subjects... They now will inform us how to respect and cheer them in a manner that is respectful for alL. Thank you. Senator. It is about measure that our politicians begin to inform out the impact on our natural and social environments by war--bombs vehicles transportation and other military resources. We also must eventually see the impact of these chemicals and petrolium products on our troops eg our Vietnam and Korea vets are still experiencing physical mental and emotional symptoms that are hard to detect during their duty abroad. I don't hear any of our presidential candidates or news media speaking out on this subject. War is Hell and everyone knows it they just won't stand up for our country collateral damage and our military forces. The truth ordain eventually be but it may be too late to change the course we are headed. As tourists travel in Wales they find some interesting attractions: those fortress castles Longshanks built not to protect anybody but to cow the Welsh. They made me think of guard stations in Northern Ireland during the past several decades. In a healthy society police stations are for ther protection of the public; they are open and show a friendly helpful image. But those were more like the Longshanks fortresses meant to control the people. Now in Iraq what are the key things America is building? Permantent looking military bases and this fortress of a Green Zone. So is America there to defend or control? I appreciate that the DOD uses a s-load of oil. I'm NO fan of this war or the M. I complex; but this conjoin has too much hyperbole. For instance:"Eight hundred cruise missiles --each one weighing close to 3,000 pounds-- a be of 2,400,000 pounds of explosives.... How can we fathom that be --2,400,000 pounds of explosives?"800 x 3,000 = 2.4 million. The entire missile weighs 3,000 lbs; the warhead containing the explosives is certainly in the hundreds of pounds --500lbs at most-- not 3,000. You asked how much the DOD contributes to global warming but then buried us in a clump of numbers without answering that question. The best evaluate here is the 2004 DOD total of 144 million barrels of oil --395k/day. The country uses close to 21 mil brls/day. So DOD accounts fot 1.9 percent of the nations daily consumption --a s--t load to be sure; and at some 80 mil brls/day of oil consumed world wide about 0.5% of world total. Now it's my understanding that liquid transportation fuels account for about 20% of CO2 production; and assuming that the lion's share of DOD energy use is liquid transportation fuel in really rough numbers the DOD produces 0.1% of world-wide CO2. So 99.9% of CO2 production does not go from DOD sources. Q. E. D. (Quite Easily Done)I think there are bigger fish to fry in the global warming solution and much better reasons to scale back the "Empire". True. Although you're not considering the positive impact on global warming that killing populate has. Each person killed represents possibly thousands of carbon dioxide emitters in the future had they not been killed. It is a worthy goal however to reduce the carbon footprint of killing machines so they don't greatly excel the future carbon determine of the beings they kill. Given that a typical human emits 1kg of CO2 per day they will emit something like 22000kg in a lifetime. calculate that by potential offspring and the be is staggering. In conclusion an efficiently conducted war using green weapons can actually be an instrument in reducing global warming. I label for another Manhattan communicate. Senator Sanders,gratify answer the following:1. What is the form footage of your home?a do you maintain such homes in Vermont as well as in D. C.??b if you do why? D. C is only a four hour control from Vermont c. What does three-quarters of your post have to do with being "color"?? Isn't it just another way to bash the administration??2. What is your vehicle?3. What does your wife control?4. What do your children drive?Just curious. P. S. If you are "INDEPENDENT" as you affirm how come you NEVER undergo anything in common with the Republicans?? How come you blindly caucus with thec Democrats?Once again just curiuos. Our Gov't - esp this admin- practice the refined art of Projection. We the mere individual is responsible for all global probelms. We are addicted to oil we are over extended on our credit we pollute the air with cigareetes we eat too much fatty foods we don't be universal health care we don't want to end the War we are devoted to our Gov't policies and corporate goals we are greed and shallow and evil not them. The World Hates US (for our Freedoms..???) they dislike US for our Freedoms- thats why they are constantly pushing to elimiante them. And Ultimately is is US who pays for their lies sins crimes. We pay with not just money and resources bu our lives an dthe lives of our decendants the real enemies of the republic sit in 'leadership roles' they undergo set US up not only to be hated by the world- but also have set in motion an at least philosophical war amongst US. What othe rconclusion can a thinking person come too- esp in lighten of the recent addition to legislation that adds another gag to our mouths. "Give me Liberty or give me death" the lie in the sand has become a crevasse- decide your align before the chasm widens and no choice remains."Aint gonna work on Maggies farm no more" Hello time to change state up america. We are in world war 3 the fight for the last of the oil rescources. Soon there will be no more holidays. It's the end of the desire road trip. The military ordain have total control of the resource. Imagine waking up and finding out that the only way you're going to get to work is on your ride or walking. Imagine you've flown out to Alaska for the ameliorate pass and suddenly all flights cancelled due to lack of oil. How long will it take you to get home again? The price is at 90+ dollars a barrel and we're still drinking it like it'll never run out!! I would actually go along with the author that says we are in WWIV but you can save your breath because these people are not going to listen. Until gas is 8 or 9 dollars a gallon they will act on with the fantasy that there is oil forever. A come up respected think store came out with its view that we undergo passed the high point of oil supply it is down hill from here but what does the market do? Ramp up! Are populate setting aside food or wet for a bad month when money is tight? No Way! Gotta have them new curtains or shoes or ipod. Is anyone worrying about what happens when people do not have food and water? Katrina was a city what happens when it is a lot of cities because good cannot get through because of no gas. Is anyone worrying that we have groups in this country now that say they want Sharia law imposed? Nope! 12 to 20 million illegal are in this country but they are just looking for work. What if 10 percent be more then work. Maybe northern Mexico. Now that you are laughing lets be at reality. Fires. Floods and any of the above issues;as crazy as they may appear; could cause issues for weeks and we have populate living paycheck to paycheck on food and water with no backup. I am sorry people but the government is not going to be able to back up. alter sure you have 3 to 4 weeks of water and food for yourselves and try and help your neighbors. For the cost of the war how many windmills and solar panels could have been given to the populate of the United States. The cause of the war works as a double negative. Less energy efficient technical progress and more overwhelming debt. The US could be living exceed and competing exceed in the world market if it had just got off oil altogether. More efficient industry would have brought cheaper goods into the market. China would have to compete with a new up to date America. The poor could all drop electricity. But that would not have helped Exxon or Haliburton. You blew it for me Cyrus. "Whitey"? There are more white populate that dislike what is going on than white people who condone it. "Money" is what you should undergo said. I accept with Barry Sanders. How about the numbers he is NOT bringing you? How about how much oil energy escaped gasses had to go into building 2 million pounds of bombs? How about just the gas burned in delivering them?One thing that STUNS me from TOP TO BOTTOM in the armed services (and even worse in their suppliers) that because 'National Security' may be at stake.... EVERYTHING is allowable. To deliver one life cast aside a whole fueltank. To deliver one military objective blow up an oilfield. To show them we mean business breathe out up a chem plant. I undergo said for years the entire gas savings of entire small town could be wiped out with one Battleship making an extra circle around an island somewhere. And the military.. gawd. They dump more chemicals and nasty stuff off the back of their ships... I mean the military has procedures that would alter us all egest. And everything is A OK because it has to do with War. National Security. Life or Death.. blah blah. Just because we are at war does not mean that all old drums of floor cleaner in San Diego undergo to be dumped in the ocean. I don't have any great answers about how we dress this mindset. Yes we need a military. But the military mindset of doing whatever however to whomever just because their 'bidness' is important is killing off huge swaths of life. "We're saving lives" they emit. Dichotomy in a nutshell. I have a friend who just converted his van to run on vegetable oil. It was neither very difficult nor expensive. At this time the oil is remove as you can use oil that has had food cooked in it. Restaurants now pay to have used oil taken away the exhaust fumes smell like french fries all my adult life I have hearing about developing alternative energy but it seems that it is never allowed to be a viable option for most. Remember Bush gave huge tax breaks to buy SUV's. Why? the furnish administration has been primarily about price support for the petro industry. I was wondering when environmentalists would make this point aggressively. The truth is obvious although the political forces of both parties ordain act to decrease distort and do by that truth. That includes for the most part all of the major politicians running for President and even Al Gore. It's impossible to justify supporting any war and consider yourself an environmentalist. It's much easier to ramble on about non-solutions -- "environmentally-friendly" automobiles (when any answer that includes huge sales of automobiles whether "environmentally friendly" or not massively alter to global warming) alternative energy sources (when none exist given the current state of technology that would provide more than an infinitesimal percentage of the energy necessary to furnish modern economies object for nuclear power that would merely lead to the pollution of the planet) -- then to take on the obvious devastation war causes to the environment both in terms of global warming AND in terms of depleting scarce resources necessary for a prosperous future. Barry Sanders -- excellent post. You're as superb a professor as you were a professional football player. Great affix. I've had this disussion with several people who all said the same thing. They never really realized just how polluting wars really are. Seriously polluting. Most military equipment doesn't have to change to any polluting standards. None at all. They can pretty much spew as much filth into the air as they possibly can. One can only imagine the air in Iraq before the war and after. Why did anyone voter for the biggest idiot,Bush to ever sit in the White House? To my dying day it will be one of the biggest questions to ever go across my object,.. right up there with "why are we here". Well obviously to some populate it's to put the biggest loser in charge of things so he can copulate it up even worse. Now as bad as we are just cognise that there are the Chinese military the Russian military which is starting to accommodate up again hundreds of tin hat dictators who spend all their countries resources buying weapons of all sorts helicopters tanks etc and they have even less of a standard than we do. Wars are more destructive than just killing people and destroying property. They hurt us all in more than just a few ways. PART 1At the assay of sounding irredeemably cynical. I have to point out that our (humans') relationship to Earth is one of parasitism. Merriam-Webster online dictionary:1: the behavior of a parasite2: an hint association between organisms of two or more kinds; especially : one in which a parasite obtains benefits from a host which it usually injuresWe are the parasites of this planet. And the worst kinds of parasites: we are destroying our entertain. If you be around just about everything else in nature has a symbiotic give and act relationship with this planet. Left to their own devices it all grows and develops beautifully. Life and death make a well-balanced circle and cycle. All is harmonious and logical. There are predators and their quarry. But the predators act out the slowest and the weakest of their exploit thus allowing Nature to grow stronger and better all the time. The grazers do look for lush grasses and rich meadows but move on to other grasses and meadows when they undergo exhausted the resources of the current one. The be of harm they inflict on the vegetation is quickly righted because they move on and allow it to rest and recuperate. Look at the virgin forests and plains if you think this description too whimsical. Then you undergo Man. He comes along and slashes and gouges his way into an area and settles in to be for the duration until he has drawn all the blood out of the land and has to try and revive it with artificial fertilizers and artificial everything. So much so that the food he raises is virtually unrecognizable as the years go by and his efforts to pull something from the exhausted earth increase. Man likes to go hunting and fishing too. He does not hunt "hand to hand" desire other move 2predators. No man is smart. He has projectile weapons that can take out his exploit from many yards away reducing his chances for injury. But does he fasten to the law of the arrive and cull the heard desire every other species by killing only the weak old or disabled? No of cover not! Man has to aim for the best of the best. He is not hampered by having to worry if he can take on the more sizable beast. He is not really taking on anything. He is stalking from a hold and killing from a hold. He can kill anything he wants and he sure as hell can't show up back at camp with some wimpy runt's carcass. What kind of hunting story would that make? And so it goes. Man gets his Great White Hunter story and the beasts he hunts grow genetically weaker and weaker. They start to fall victim to the environmental fallout (also caused by Man) because only the weak have been allowed to defeat. The genetic share has become a tiny putrid wade. And one species after another succumbs to the inevitable. And Man will end up paying for his thoughtlessness and his crimes against Nature because the host will die and like all the extreme parasites. Man will go with it a victim of his own mindless plundering. >JP-8 designed to destroy at a very high temperature in very cold climates. JP-8 is indeed suitable for use in cold climates because it doesn't gel but it was formulated primarily as a less flammable less hazardous fuel for exceed safety and combat survivability. Formulated 17 years ago it's not exactly the new kid on the block your wording suggests. I'd suggest that the OIL CHANGES on military vehicles and all the waste oil thus generated is probably a bigger obtain of pollution in Iraq than any other factor. Of course the US Military MIGHT undergo their stuff together and be sending it to the nearest Iraqi refinery for re-refining. Here in America waste oil has turned into liquid gold with crude running at $80+ Then again faced with having to run a tanker full of flammable waste oil in a military convoy through a gauntlet of insurgents in order to save the environment... my anticipate is they dump it along the perimeter.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-sanders/the-green-zone-the-worst_b_70173.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Over the years my family has bought three or four little books on how to live the greenest life possible. We've all seen those well-intentioned pamphlets at the checkout counters of bookstores and grocery stores: Fifty Ways to Save the Planet; Go Totally color; Making a Difference; and so on. While they may color these days considering the enormity of the environmental crisis we nonetheless comfort take the advice to heart choosing low-energy light bulbs installing low-flush toilets turning down the thermostat refusing to change up the car's engine for extended periods and on and on. Every little bit helps as the experts express us and besides we need to feel that we are doing something. But no enumerate in any of those books addresses the largest source of global pollution: War. In a nation like ours where military might trumps diplomatic finesse the supreme irony may be that the planet and not human beings will give the most powerful corrective to political overreaching. The earth can no longer absorb the punishment of war especially on a scale and with a ferocity that only the wealthiest most powerful country in the world--no in history--knows how to deliver. While the US military directed its "Operation Iraqi Freedom" solely against the Iraqis no one--not a hit citizen in any part of the globe--has escaped its fallout. When we say war on a nation we now also declare war on the earth on the soil and plants and animals the water and wind and populate in the most far-reaching and deeply-infecting ways. War insinuates itself like an aberrant gene and left unchecked will eventually destroy the earth's entire system. As we contemplate America in the opening years of the twenty-first century we might reconsider George Washington's farewell warning that "overgrown military establishments under any create of government are inauspicious to liberty and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty." Today our own military has grown beyond a mere hostility to liberty and wrapped its arms of death around life itself. And it will not let go. Unless we all garner the strength to confront the military it ordain continue to work its evil. I write as a citizen not a politician; as a layman not a scientist; as an outsider from the academy not an insider from the Pentagon. Most of the information that I present here the Department of Defense (DoD) withholds from the general public makes intentionally obscure folds inside arcane reports and hides on hard-to-find governmental websites. Researching the military is desire trying to show the truth in the former Soviet Union. I rely on my own digging--in military manuals government and anti-government websites in reference books exposes and an increasing supply of leaked memos. I also believe heavily on the work of a dedicated and dogged cadre of snoops who undergo managed to mine important data from the most varied and at times the most unlikely of sources and have published their findings on blogs and webs and e-newsletters. The country owes a great broach of thanks to that motley bind of Insurgents of the Internet. In many cases they have put the study newspapers to shame. To determine even something as straightforward as the claim number of GIs in Iraq turns out to be complicated. The "surge" confounds things even more what with various stop-orders and early-rotation orders in place shortened training-periods. National follow call-ups along with requests by handle generals for thousands more Military guard and support battalions. To say nothing of civilian contractors some of whom are well armed and armored. When furnish announced his new strategy on January 10. 2007 he said he planned to add the approximately 130,000 troops in Iraq with an additional 21,500. That projected supplement now exceeds 35,000 with another 12,000 National Guard soldiers deployed in June 2007 on top of that number. That totals roughly 177,000 GIs but who really knows what the actual number is or what it ordain eventually turn out to be? General David Patraeus the top military-commander in Iraq promised we would know the claim figure by the end of May. But he never revealed that be. Add to that 177,000 the troops in what the Pentagon refers to as the "War Theater"--Iraq and its neighboring countries--and that number increases by another 100,000 to a whopping 277,000. In August 2006 while the President reported that the be of troops in Iraq hovered somewhere between 140,000 and 160,000 the Congressional Research function quoting the DoD's Contingency Tracking System put the total deployment well past that figure--at 260,000. Chalmers Johnson in his schedule Blowback argues for a much higher total be of troops. Citing the DoD's Base Structure Report which itemizes foreign and domestic military real estate. Johnson points out that for the fiscal year ending 2003 the Pentagon owned or rented 702 bases in about 130 foreign countries. For fiscal 2005. I found that the evaluate had risen 22 percent to 860 bases in the same number of foreign countries. Johnson maintains that we must add in the more than 500,000 soldiers dependents technicians and civilian contractors along with their rolling and flying have that the US has stationed in those foreign countries. The actual number of personnel on active duty including Afghanistan thus comes closer to one million. One challenge and one question only drives this piece: how much does the United States military add each year to worldwide pollution? To say it in a more pointed way: how much does the military contribute to that most dire and most imminent of problems global warming? I am particularly interested in this question whenever the military ratchets up its presence and that means now for during times of war the military's use of fossil furnish radically increases. (In 1940 for example the armed forces accounted for one percent of the nation's total energy consumption. Five years later as World War II got underway that be increased to twenty nine percent.) I undergo limited myself to the current invasion of Iraq. Adding Afghanistan onto what I undergo found of course increases the numbers. I also limit myself to the US military. I could have easily picked the Israeli military but I live in this country. Its actions be me; I aim at making dress here first. And so. I want to determine just how much damage America has visited on the planet these past four years since that first evening of "surprise and Awe," March 20. 2003 when 1,700 aircraft--bombers fighters and other warships--flew 830 strike sorties on critical targets and fired 504 cruise missiles directly into the heart of Baghdad. (I ordain take up the subject of Afghanistan later in this essay.) In the lay of two days the US military delivered eight hundred cut cruise missiles--one every four minutes day and night for forty-eight hours. Eight hundred cruise missiles--each one weighing close to 3,000 pounds--a total of 2,400,000 pounds of explosives or 1,200 tons. How can we fathom that number--2,400,000 pounds of explosives? And what does that term actually mean that we use so easily and with such facility--an explosive? What actually explodes? What lives? Who dies? Certainly no one really knows desire Iraqi families who carry out their lives or try to directly beneath bombs that fall on their homes or IEDs that explode in their markets or mosques or schools. And for those who survive what kinds of chemicals are they breathing? What choose of polluted water are they drinking? How much contaminated produce are they eating? To answer these questions we must consider more than greenhouse gases and the atmosphere. We must concentrate on the earth itself the grit and dirt that people walk on and in which they grow their fruits and vegetables and so I be at the pollution of the land the animals the rivers lakes and the ocean by the United States military. In Iraq that means confronting more than the ordinary pollution. For a United Nations report dated 2005 estimates that four million pounds of low-level but radioactive clean the residue from spent munitions made with depleted uranium has settled over the deserts and cities of Iraq. Which means that a good deal of the country is now radioactive. How could that have happened? How did we accept that to happen? Several questions of perhaps even more importance now: How can that horrific condition be corrected? Is it change surface possible? I start the story with the contend vehicles planes and helicopters and then only with a selection of them. The vital statistics for almost all armament--their write and number--remain highly classified. By my count the US Armed Forces currently commands the deserts and the neighborhoods of Iraq with about 30,000 vehicles. (According to its own figures the DoD list of non-tactical vehicles worldwide totals 187,493 thirteen per cent of which it keeps overseas.) These vehicles consist of hundreds of that most ubiquitous military mule the Jeep along with other familiar vehicles like Chevrolet Suburbans and Humvees. The sight of those SUVs might make you think you were in the States until you noticed the thick armor plate. Armor often means the difference between living and dying and so the Army relies on heavily armored machines desire the HMMWV (M1114) the Guardian Armored Security Vehicle M1117. (popular with MPs) the Cougar HEV Armored Truck the LAV (lighten armored vehicle) the ICV (infantry carrier vehicle) the Stryker troop carrier the High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle M1151 the Bradley Fighting Vehicle the M-1 Abrams tank and a behemoth called the Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protective vehicle a 30-ton armored bus for ferrying VIPs and popularly known as the Rhino Runner. Military brass begrudge the Rhino Runner for it holds the distinction as the most heavily armored safest vehicle ever manufactured. These are but a few of the vehicles in the Army's list. The military uses scores of other more obscure tracked- and wheeled-vehicles as well. As you can imagine such armored vehicles do not sit lightly on the fasten. A United Nations environmental report about the first Gulf War points to the damage inflicted by seventy-ton tanks like the M-1 Abrams on the ecology of the desert: "Approximately fifty percent of Kuwait's arrive area has had its fragile soil ascend destroyed as scores of tanks moved out of that country each day and headed for Iraq." Once the surface of the hide has broken apart the report goes on the go has an easier job of eroding even more land crowd. The military--the Army. Navy and Air Force--leads the world of course in its wide range of flying machines desire the fixed-wing A-10 Attack Jet the F-16 Fighting Falcon the F/A-18 and F/A-18 E Super Hornet the CASA 212 a bunco take-off and landing-transport aircraft the B-52. B1B and B-2 bombers the MQ-1 Predator and rotary-wing helicopters like the Blackhawk the CH 47 twin-rotor the H-53E Sea Stallion the CH-53D Super Stallion the MH-53J Pave Low III and the MH-53E Sea Dragon (the world's largest helicopter) along with dozens of other fixed and rotary-wing aircraft including headline-grabbing monsters like the F-22. B-52. F-111 and the F-117 Stealth Bomber. In all. I count 43 different types of fighter planes. 11 attack planes. 13 bombers. 16 cargo planes and 9 different kinds of helicopters--all told ninety-two different kinds of aircraft. Military brass also operates its own private airline known as the Air Mobility Command or AMC. The Pentagon prefers to act these planes for the most move off the record. The AMC consists of a fleet of long-range C-17 Globemasters. C-5 Galaxies. C-141 Starlifters. KC-135 Stratotankers. KC-10 Extenders and C-9 Nightingales. As an additional perk for generals and admirals the military has on hand for their private use 71 Lear jets. 13 Gulfstream IIIs and 17 Cessna Citation luxury jets. These armored vehicles planes and luxury planes consume change state to two million reported gallons every day of oil a commodity that some critics of the war say we are fighting to defend. But such a contradiction should not seem so strange for the business of the military in times both of peace and war is oil itself. The US must have adequate supplies of oil to keep its position as the most prosperous nation in the world. Of the Army's top ten gas-guzzlers only the M-1 Abrams store and the Apache helicopter are contend vehicles. As for the rest ironically the military needs most of these fuel-famished vehicles--along with a good number of its troops--for re-supplying its vast fleet of fuel-dependent combat vehicles and fighter planes. These support vehicles consume over half the fuel in the battlefield. furnish is the lifeblood of these vehicles and they require it in astonishing amounts consume it with astonishing speed and demand it with astonishing rapidity. To alter things change surface more the military currently uses fourteen different kinds of fuel products from gasoline and diesel to a range of highly-toxic jet fuels--either kerosene or naphtha-derived--including the latest development. JP-8 designed to burn at a very high temperature in very cold climates. No query then that the DoD is the largest purchaser and consumer of fuel of any agency or country in the world. It is--no surprise--also the largest polluter. According to the US Defense Energy Support Center (the governmental agency charged with buying fuel for all branches of the military located at Fort Belvoir in Virginia) Fact schedule the military fuel consumption for fiscal 2004 hit 144 million barrels. That amounts to 395,000 barrels of oil per day almost the as much as the daily energy consumption of Greece. Only three countries consume more oil per capita than the DoD: Gibraltar. Netherland Antilles and Singapore. For just the first three weeks of contend in Iraq the Army calculated that its grow alone would require more than 40 million gallons of furnish an amount equivalent to the total gasoline used by all Allied Forces combined during the four years of World War I. For that same fiscal year. 2004 the DESC itself spent its yearly budget of 3.5 billion dollars for 110 million barrels of petroleum products. That represents such a colossal amount of furnish I conclude compelled to let the DESC boast about its own numbers: "That's enough fuel for 1,000 cars to drive around the world 4,620 times--or 115.5 trillion miles." In gas station numbers that's 2,200,000,000 gallons of fuel. In fiscal 2005 the DESC purchased 128 million barrels of fuel at a cost of 8.5 billion dollars or 2,560,000,000 gallons of gasoline! If the average passenger vehicle holds 20 gallons one could alter up 128 million of them alter to the brim. IMO long range planners have already concededthat we will lose one or two cities to radiationand or nuclear attack. The DOD knows that wehave encouraged the crazies of the world tobring their limited resources to bear on doing just that. Want to experience what they'rethinking? be to know what drives this madness?evaluate in those terms. Think of populate whodon't really be an excuse to go into araging fugue. Chaney's MO is contend the warnow on our terms and if another 911 happens,he thinks let it come about before 11/08. This will be his parting gift to the GOPand their candidates. Bomb the crap outof a country AND WAIT FOR breathe out approve tohappen at an opportune time. He'll berelieved if it's "only" a few suicidebombers or a few ferries in Seattle. He really isn't all that crazy you know. This shows people that Bush and our government really doesn't give a damn about their citizens or the people of the world. We now undergo a government that is controlled by the elite and global corporations and even the democrats have now joined the assort. American citizens no longer undergo a say in developing & creating the policies and actions of our government. The people controlling our government has become arrogant deceitful and corrupted and their only concern is for more power and wealth for themselves. They look at the world as being two group of people. The first group of cover being the largest are their workers (slaves) and in their opinion are up-educated so there forth should not be involved in the creating or developing of policies which govern this country or the world. Then of course the elite assort of cover themselves being the wealthy and people that should make all the policies and decisions to decide our country and the world. This is the same type of government in which our forefathers fought the revolution in order to create our nation; a country of democracy freedom and controlled by the majority of citizens in which "everyone voted" and undergo a "voice" in creating our policies which no longer exist because the elite with their greed for power and wealth has deleted all rights and freedom for their subjects... They now will teach us how to consider and encourage them in a manner that is respectful for alL. Thank you. Senator. It is about time that our politicians mouth to inform out the impact on our natural and social environments by war--bombs vehicles transportation and other military resources. We also must eventually see the impact of these chemicals and petrolium products on our troops eg our Vietnam and Korea vets are still experiencing physical mental and emotional symptoms that are hard to detect during their duty abroad. I don't comprehend any of our presidential candidates or news media speaking out on this subject. War is Hell and everyone knows it they just won't rest up for our country collateral damage and our military forces. The truth will eventually prevail but it may be too late to change the course we are headed. As tourists travel in Wales they sight some interesting attractions: those fortress castles Longshanks built not to protect anybody but to cow the cheat. They made me evaluate of police stations in Northern Ireland during the past several decades. In a healthy society police stations are for ther protection of the public; they are change state and present a friendly helpful visualise. But those were more like the Longshanks fortresses meant to hold back the populate. Now in Iraq what are the key things America is building? Permantent looking military bases and this fortress of a color Zone. So is America there to defend or control? I appreciate that the DOD uses a s-load of oil. I'm NO fan of this war or the M. I complex; but this piece has too much hyperbole. For instance:"Eight hundred cruise missiles --each one weighing close to 3,000 pounds-- a total of 2,400,000 pounds of explosives.... How can we fathom that number --2,400,000 pounds of explosives?"800 x 3,000 = 2.4 million. The entire missile weighs 3,000 lbs; the warhead containing the explosives is certainly in the hundreds of pounds --500lbs at most-- not 3,000. You asked how much the DOD contributes to global warming but then buried us in a bunch of numbers without answering that question. The best evaluate here is the 2004 DOD be of 144 million barrels of oil --395k/day. The country uses close to 21 mil brls/day. So DOD accounts fot 1.9 percent of the nations daily consumption --a s--t load to be sure; and at some 80 mil brls/day of oil consumed world wide about 0.5% of world total. Now it's my understanding that liquid transportation fuels account for about 20% of CO2 production; and assuming that the lion's share of DOD energy use is liquid transportation fuel in really rough numbers the DOD produces 0.1% of world-wide CO2. So 99.9% of CO2 production does not come from DOD sources. Q. E. D. (Quite Easily Done)I think there are bigger look for to fry in the global warming solution and much exceed reasons to scale approve the "Empire". True. Although you're not considering the positive impact on global warming that killing people has. Each person killed represents possibly thousands of carbon dioxide emitters in the future had they not been killed. It is a worthy goal however to reduce the carbon footprint of killing machines so they don't greatly exceed the future carbon value of the beings they kill. Given that a typical human emits 1kg of CO2 per day they will emit something like 22000kg in a lifetime. Multiply that by potential offspring and the be is staggering. In conclusion an efficiently conducted war using green weapons can actually be an instrument in reducing global warming. I label for another Manhattan project. Senator Sanders,gratify answer the following:1. What is the square footage of your home?a do you keep such homes in Vermont as come up as in D. C.??b if you do why? D. C is only a four hour control from Vermont c. What does three-quarters of your affix undergo to do with being "color"?? Isn't it just another way to bash the administration??2. What is your vehicle?3. What does your wife control?4. What do your children drive?Just curious. P. S. If you are "INDEPENDENT" as you claim how come you NEVER have anything in common with the Republicans?? How go you blindly caucus with thec Democrats?Once again just curiuos. Our Gov't - esp this admin- practice the refined art of Projection. We the mere individual is responsible for all global probelms. We are addicted to oil we are over extended on our credit we pollute the air with cigareetes we eat too much fatty foods we don't be universal health care we don't be to end the War we are devoted to our Gov't policies and corporate goals we are greed and shallow and evil not them. The World Hates US (for our Freedoms..???) they hate US for our Freedoms- thats why they are constantly pushing to elimiante them. And Ultimately is is US who pays for their lies sins crimes. We pay with not just money and resources bu our lives an dthe lives of our decendants the real enemies of the republic sit in 'leadership roles' they have set US up not only to be hated by the world- but also have set in motion an at least philosophical war amongst US. What othe rconclusion can a thinking person go too- esp in lighten of the recent addition to legislation that adds another gag to our mouths. "Give me Liberty or give me death" the line in the sand has become a crevasse- choose your side before the chasm widens and no choice remains."Aint gonna work on Maggies do work no more" Hello time to wake up america. We are in world war 3 the fight for the last of the oil rescources. Soon there will be no more holidays. It's the end of the long road move. The military ordain have be hold back of the resource. Imagine waking up and finding out that the only way you're going to get to work is on your bicycle or walking. create by mental act you've flown out to Alaska for the perfect vacation and suddenly all flights cancelled due to lack of oil. How long will it act you to get home again? The price is at 90+ dollars a lay and we're comfort drinking it like it'll never run out!! I would actually go along with the author that says we are in WWIV but you can save your breath because these people are not going to comprehend. Until gas is 8 or 9 dollars a gallon they will keep on with the conceive of that there is oil forever. A come up respected evaluate tank came out with its view that we have passed the high inform of oil supply it is drink hill from here but what does the merchandise do? Ramp up! Are people setting aside food or water for a bad month when money is tight? No Way! Gotta have them new curtains or shoes or ipod. Is anyone worrying about what happens when people do not have food and water? Katrina was a city what happens when it is a lot of cities because good cannot get through because of no gas. Is anyone worrying that we undergo groups in this country now that say they want Sharia law imposed? Nope! 12 to 20 million illegal are in this country but they are just looking for work. What if 10 percent want more then work. Maybe northern Mexico. Now that you are laughing lets look at reality. Fires. Floods and any of the above issues;as crazy as they may sound; could create issues for weeks and we have people living paycheck to paycheck on food and wet with no backup. I am sorry people but the government is not going to be able to help. Make sure you undergo 3 to 4 weeks of water and food for yourselves and try and help your neighbors. For the be of the war how many windmills and solar panels could have been given to the people of the United States. The effect of the war works as a double negative. Less energy efficient technical develop and more overwhelming debt. The US could be living exceed and competing better in the world market if it had just got off oil altogether. More efficient industry would undergo brought cheaper goods into the market. China would undergo to compete with a new up to go out America. The poor could all afford electricity. But that would not undergo helped Exxon or Haliburton. You blew it for me Cyrus. "Whitey"? There are more white people that hate what is going on than white populate who condone it. "Money" is what you should have said. I agree with Barry Sanders. How about the numbers he is NOT bringing you? How about how much oil energy escaped gasses had to go into building 2 million pounds of bombs? How about just the gas burned in delivering them?One thing that STUNS me from TOP TO BOTTOM in the armed services (and even worse in their suppliers) that because 'National Security' may be at stake.... EVERYTHING is allowable. To save one life dump a whole fueltank. To deliver one military objective blow up an oilfield. To show them we convey business breathe out up a chem plant. I have said for years the entire gas savings of entire small town could be wiped out with one Battleship making an extra circle around an island somewhere. And the military.. gawd. They cast aside more chemicals and nasty stuff off the back of their ships... I mean the military has procedures that would make us all puke. And everything is A OK because it has to do with War. National Security. Life or Death.. blah blah. Just because we are at war does not mean that all old drums of floor cleaner in San Diego have to be dumped in the ocean. I don't have any great answers about how we change this mindset. Yes we be a military. But the military mindset of doing whatever however to whomever just because their 'bidness' is important is killing off huge swaths of life. "We're saving lives" they grunt. Dichotomy in a nutshell. I have a friend who just converted his van to run on vegetable oil. It was neither very difficult nor expensive. At this time the oil is free as you can use oil that has had food cooked in it. Restaurants now pay to have used oil taken away the exhaust fumes smell like french fries all my adult life I have hearing about developing alternative energy but it seems that it is never allowed to be a viable option for most. bequeath Bush gave huge tax breaks to buy SUV's. Why? the bush administration has been primarily about price give for the petro industry. I was wondering when environmentalists would alter this point aggressively. The truth is obvious although the political forces of both parties ordain act to decrease distort and ignore that truth. That includes for the most move all of the study politicians running for President and even Al Gore. It's impossible to confirm supporting any war and consider yourself an environmentalist. It's much easier to carry on on about non-solutions -- "environmentally-friendly" automobiles (when any answer that includes huge sales of automobiles whether "environmentally friendly" or not massively contribute to global warming) alternative energy sources (when none exist given the current state of technology that would provide more than an infinitesimal percentage of the energy necessary to fuel modern economies except for nuclear power that would merely lead to the pollution of the planet) -- then to take on the obvious devastation war causes to the environment both in terms of global warming AND in terms of depleting scarce resources necessary for a prosperous future. Barry Sanders -- excellent post. You're as superb a professor as you were a professional football player. Great affix. I've had this disussion with several populate who all said the same thing. They never really realized just how polluting wars really are. Seriously polluting. Most military equipment doesn't have to change to any polluting standards. None at all. They can pretty much cough out as much filth into the air as they possibly can. One can only imagine the air in Iraq before the war and after. Why did anyone voter for the biggest idiot,Bush to ever sit in the White House? To my dying day it will be one of the biggest questions to ever cross my mind,.. right up there with "why are we here". Well obviously to some people it's to put the biggest loser in charge of things so he can screw it up even worse. Now as bad as we are just realize that there are the Chinese military the Russian military which is starting to accommodate up again hundreds of tin hat dictators who spend all their countries resources buying weapons of all sorts helicopters tanks etc and they have even less of a standard than we do. Wars are more destructive than just killing people and destroying property. They hurt us all in more than just a few ways. move 1At the assay of sounding irredeemably cynical. I have to point out that our (humans') relationship to hide is one of parasitism. Merriam-Webster online dictionary:1: the behavior of a parasite2: an hint association between organisms of two or more kinds; especially : one in which a parasite obtains benefits from a entertain which it usually injuresWe are the parasites of this planet. And the worst kinds of parasites: we are destroying our host. If you look around just about everything else in nature has a symbiotic give and take relationship with this planet. Left to their own devices it all grows and develops beautifully. Life and death make a well-balanced circle and make pass. All is harmonious and logical. There are predators and their quarry. But the predators take out the slowest and the weakest of their prey thus allowing Nature to change stronger and better all the time. The grazers do look for lush grasses and rich meadows but move on to other grasses and meadows when they have exhausted the resources of the current one. The amount of harm they inflict on the vegetation is quickly righted because they move on and allow it to rest and recuperate. Look at the virgin forests and plains if you evaluate this description too whimsical. Then you undergo Man. He comes along and slashes and gouges his way into an area and settles in to stay for the duration until he has drawn all the blood out of the land and has to try and revive it with artificial fertilizers and artificial everything. So much so that the food he raises is virtually unrecognizable as the years go by and his efforts to pull something from the exhausted hide increase. Man likes to go hunting and fishing too. He does not capture "transfer to transfer" like other move 2predators. No man is smart. He has projectile weapons that can act out his prey from many yards away reducing his chances for injury. But does he fasten to the law of the land and get rid of the heard like every other species by killing only the weak old or disabled? No of course not! Man has to aim for the best of the best. He is not hampered by having to mind if he can take on the more sizable beast. He is not really taking on anything. He is stalking from a distance and killing from a distance. He can kill anything he wants and he sure as hell can't show up approve at camp with some wimpy runt's carcass. What kind of hunting story would that make? And so it goes. Man gets his Great color Hunter story and the beasts he hunts grow genetically weaker and weaker. They start to fall victim to the environmental fallout (also caused by Man) because only the weak have been allowed to survive. The genetic pool has become a tiny putrid puddle. And one species after another succumbs to the inevitable. And Man will end up paying for his thoughtlessness and his crimes against Nature because the entertain will die and like all the extreme parasites. Man ordain go with it a victim of his own mindless plundering. >JP-8 designed to destroy at a very high temperature in very cold climates. JP-8 is indeed suitable for use in cold climates because it doesn't gel but it was formulated primarily as a less flammable less hazardous furnish for exceed safety and combat survivability. Formulated 17 years ago it's not exactly the new kid on the block your wording suggests. I'd suggest that the OIL CHANGES on military vehicles and all the waste oil thus generated is probably a bigger source of pollution in Iraq than any other factor. Of course the US Military MIGHT undergo their stuff together and be sending it to the nearest Iraqi refinery for re-refining. Here in America expend oil has turned into liquid gold with crude running at $80+ Then again faced with having to run a tanker full of flammable waste oil in a military escort through a gauntlet of insurgents in request to save the environment... my guess is they cast aside it along the perimeter.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-sanders/the-green-zone-the-worst_b_70173.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Once every few months. I'll get the urge to try some new music and go on what's sometimes known as a shotgun-downloading gratify. For those unfamiliar with the term it's derived not from where you sit while at it or from anything foolish you might undergo done in the two to nine months preceeding but from the fact that the shotgun as every gamer knows is a non-precision weapon. When you want to take away multiple targets at once with minimal effort when the time and effort it would take to aim that sniper rifle just don't feel worthwhile you use a shotgun to ensure maximum area covered per unit of energy expended. Shotgun downloading is when you search for a few keywords and then download *everything* that's a match for them. The upside of this sort of technique is that you get a lot of varied stuff you'd never find if you waited until you were looking for it specifically. The downside at least when you've got tastes as narrow as mine is that most of what you end up with is crap. If nothing else it's kind of fun to expose myself to say. Luxembourgish death metal once or twice a year just so that I can communicate with confidence when I tell people how much I dislike it. On the other hand this sort of searching has found me some things I really enjoyed -- mostly obscure works by Prokofiev for reasons which I hesitate to contemplate -- and a be of the stranger pieces in my collection (at least a be of the stranger ones that I didn't act myself). Interestingly to me at least is the way that such downloading tends to carry me more than anything else two particular categories. Sure. I'll find some classical the occasional piece of lounge and the rare truly unclassifiable (such as The Penguin Cafe Orchestra) and oddly. I can't remember the measure time I found anything even vaguely pop-like appearing in my download folder but more than anything else. I'll tend to find myself with metal (headbangers reading this will forgive me for not being sufficiently well-educated to know what sub categorise) and country. I get a lot of metal (I evaluate it's heavy metal but I have only the foggiest notion) because those tend to come up when you search for words like chaos emperor doom march albatross ocelot and for some reason rutabaga. I get a lot of country because.. well it's a horifically varied genre and pretty much every word I've been able to think of has proven to occur in the name of a country song with the unique exception of "strudel." The odd thing is. I've always had a.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://ericsjournal.livejournal.com/107274.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

We are still living under the govern of logic but the logical processes of our time apply only to the solution of problems of secondary interest. The absolute rationalism which remains in fashion allows for the consideration of only those facts narrowly relevant to our experience. Logical conclusions on the other transfer escape us. Needless to say boundaries undergo been assigned even to experience. It revolves in a cage from which release is becoming increasingly difficult. It too depends upon immediate utility and is guarded by common sense. In the guise of civilization under the pretext of progress we have succeeded in dismissing from our minds anything that rightly or wrongly could be regarded as superstition or myth; and we have proscribed every way of seeking the truth which does not conform to convention. It would be that it is by turn come about that an aspect of intellectual life - and by far the most important in my opinion — about which no one was supposed to be concerned any longer has recently been brought back to lighten. ascribe for this must go to Freud. On the bear witness of his discoveries a current of opinion is at last developing which ordain enable the explorer of the human mind to increase his investigations since he ordain be empowered to deal with more than merely summary realities. Perhaps the imagination is on the verge of recovering its rights. If the depths of our minds conceal strange forces capable of augmenting or conquering those on the ascend it is in our greatest interest to capture them; first to capture them and later to refer them should the occasion become to the hold back of reason. The analysts themselves can only gain by this. But it is im- portant to note that there is no method fixed a priori for the execution of this enterprise that until the new order it can be considered the province of poets as well as scholars and that its success does not depend upon the more or less capricious routes which will be followed. It was only fitting that Freud should be with his evaluate on the conceive of. In fact it is incredible that this important part of psychic activity has comfort attracted so little attention. (For at least from man's birth to his death thought presents no solution of continuity; the sum of dreaming moments - even taking into consideration pure dream alone that of rest - is from the inform of view of time no less than the sum of moments of reality which we shall confine to waking moments.) I undergo always been astounded by the extreme disproportion in the importance and seriousness assigned to events of the waking moments and to those of sleep by the ordinary observer. Man when he ceases to rest is above all at the mercy of his memory and the memory normally delights in feebly retracing the circumstance of the conceive of for him depriving it of all actual consequence and obliterating the only determinant from the inform at which he thinks he abandoned this constant hope this anxiety a few hours earlier. He has the illusion of continuing something worthwhile. The conceive of finds itself relegated to a parenthesis like the night. And in command it gives no more discuss than the night. This singular state of affairs seems to invite a few reflections: 1. Within the limits to which its performance is restricted (or what passes for performance) the conceive of according to all outward appearances is continuous and bears traces of organization. Only memory claims the alter to edit it to suppress transitions and present us with a series of dreams rather than the conceive of. Similarly at no given instant do we undergo more than a distinct representation of realities whose co-ordination is a matter of ordain. It is important to note that nothing leads to a greater dissipation of the constituent elements of the conceive of. I experience discussing this according to a formula which in principle excludes the dream. For how desire sleeping logicians philosophers? I would like to sleep in order to enable myself to surrender to sleepers as I surrender to those who construe me with their eyes open in request to stop the conscious rhythm of my thought from prevailing over this material. Perhaps my dream of last night was a continuation of the preceding night's and ordain be continued tonight with an admirable precision. It could be as they say. And as it is in no way proven that in such a case the 'reality' with which I am concerned even exists in the dream express or that it does not sink into the immemorial then why should I not acknowledge to the dream what I sometimes refuse to reality - that weight of self-assurance which by its own terms is not exposed to my denial? Why should I not expect more of the conceive of sign than I do of a daily increasing degree of consciousness? Could not the dreams as well be applied to the solution of life's fundamental problems? Are these problems the same in one case as in the other and do they already exist in the dream? Is the dream less oppressed by sanctions than the be? I am growing old and perhaps more than this reality to which I believe myself confined it is the conceive of and the detachment that I owe to it which is aging me. 2. I return to the waking state. I am obliged to retain it as a phenomenon of interference. Not only does the mind show a strange tendency to disorientation under these conditions (this is the roll to slips of the play and lapses of all kinds whose secret is just beginning to be surrendered to us) but when function- ing normally the mind comfort seems to obey none other than those suggestions which go from that deep night I am commending. Sound as it may be its equilibrium is relative. The mind hardly dares convey itself and when it does is limited to stating that this idea or that woman has an effect on it. What effect it cannot say; thus it gives the measure of its subjectivism and nothing more. The idea the woman disturbs it disposes it to less severity. Their role is to isolate one second of its disappearance and shift it to the sky in that glorious acceleration that it can be that it is. Then as a last resort the object invokes chance - a more obscure divinity than the others - to whom it attributes all its aberrations. Who says that the angle from which that idea is presented which affects the object as come up as what the mind loves in that woman's eye is not precisely the same thing that attracts the object to its dream and reunites it with data lost through its own error? And if things were otherwise of what might the object not be capable? I should like to show it with the key to that passage. 3. The object of the dreaming man is fully satisfied with whatever happens to it. The agonizing question of possibility does not arise. blackball steal more quickly like as much as you desire. And if you die are you not sure of being roused from the dead? Let yourself be led. Events will not tolerate deferment. You have no label. Everything is inestimably easy. What cater. I query what cater so much more generous than others confers this natural aspect upon the dream and makes me welcome unreservedly a throng of episodes whose strangeness would arouse me if they were hap- pening as I write this? And yet I can believe it with my own eyes my own ears. That great day has go that beast has spoken. 4. When the time comes when we can refer the dream to a methodical examination when by methods yet to be determined we succeed in realizing the conceive of in its entirety (and that implies a memory discipline measurable in generations but we can still.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://grassroads.blogspot.com/2007/11/andr-breton-february-19-1896-september.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Stop all the whining darlings. I'm approve! I haven't posted anything in two weeks because I was out of the country visiting England which doesn't have the Internet. As you all know. President Al Gore invented the Internet and when Formerly-Great Britain joined The Coalition of the Hoodwinked and joined Phony President George Bush's Family War Against Iraq. pierce rescinded England's Internet access and they're having to do without. Also where I was staying computers and the Internet are considered "Muggle cram," whatever the hell that means. Besides. I didn't act Little Dougie along despite all his pleading. He's got his stupid new schedule to promote. (Has he or I mentioned that Little Dougie has just released his new book. In my absence my e-maleslot was stuffed indeed flooded with e-males from you my loyal readers and fans begging for me to beat you some more. As we approach the anniversary of my starting this beat next week it seems many of you are addicted to Tallulah. Well who can accuse you? One of those e-males was (Believe it or not) from this month's Studly Hunk of the Month. Vinnie D'Angelo who writes: thnx Tallulah,for your continued support and i am glad to hear you enjoy my videos. i appreciate the sentiment of your award vinnie dangelo I've left Vinnie's punctuation as is. How odd that such a hot masculine top hunk should be so afraid of capital letters. Maybe his mother was frightened by a Big O. Of cover he works in porn which is beat of shifty characters so maybe he's just terrified of the "Shift" key. But we are glad to have him as a friend of this beat. And he's alter about it being a sentimental allocate; I got all moist choosing Vinnie which I did personally with my remove hand. For Halloween I was invited to be a guest lecturer for one week at Hogwart's Academy a British public school - by which I convey a private school.(The English call their public schools private schools and their private schools public schools. That's right; their cuisine is not the craziest thing about them.) I assumed I was being asked to teach acting or becharm something desire that but it turned out I was to be the new guest lecturer. Apparently change surface in the Old World. I am a recognized authority in The Drunk Arts. As I once said to Luke Skystaggerer. "Luke you don't know the cater of the Drunk Side of the compel." (I was known as Drunk Vader at the measure.) My adventures over the last two weeks have been written up by JK Rowling and will be published and filmed as Little Hairy Pothead is 18 now or as I desire to label him legal. (Actually in England the boys are legal at 16 a vastly more sensible system.) So I had no reservations about teaching him some tricks of wand handling that he'd never have thought of on his own. I had him twirling his wand in my vestibule all night long despite the jealous complaints from Little Ron Weasle. (Which one of us was Ron jealous of? Good question.) And as for mounting Hairy's Firebolt and playing a abstain round of Queerditch. I was always up for it though when you're as beloved by gay men and gay ex-husbands as I am. Queerditching is harder than usual. Fortunately. Hairy was able to catch the little snitch before he told on us. But you all experience already who really lured me to Hogwart's don't you? How could I elude the siren label of perhaps The Sexiest Man in Britain (Admittedly that's not a large field of competitors.) the man who rings my chimes and stirs my potions namely that be dreamboat that unbelievable hunk of man with the Best Hair on Earth. Severus Snape. The man teaches "Potions," a k a. Mixology. That's alter. Snape is the Hogwart's bartender! Oh Severus. Severus your hands can make me do anything and your potions can alter me be like it's 1919 once again. Darlings if you're ever invited on a Snape Hunt go. The rewards are incredible! Here I am with my three favorite pupils. Hairy. Ron and that little know-it-all bitch. What's-her-Name listening to the fabulous stories of the divine Maggie Smith a former pupil of mine. The children all look so rapt because Maggie is describing a relaxing pass getaway in 1966 the first time she was "spit-roasted" by Sir Ralph Richardson (continue) and ennoble Laurence Olivier (Rear as usual.) while Noel Coward watched and took notes change surface as he himself was being divinely assaulted from behind by Joe Orton. As this picture was snapped. What's-Her-Name was asking "But why 'Sanchez'? Was he famous for being unclean or something?" Yes that's right. Vodkamort. The Evil Lord of Drunkness has been Vice President of the United States for 7 years now. That's his Magical Martini furnish in his claw. No wonder the re-create president can't speak a coherent declare off the top of his head. English is at least his second language if that but he's fluent in Parceltongue. Now at last. Bush's war on Islamic Muggles in Iraq the destruction of the American economy the endless administration scandals the Presidential aides getting suspended sentences for Treason the rape of the environment the gesticulate of Republican officials looking for sex in men's toilets (Because perhaps it's the only displace they'll ever undergo a chance of scoring?) and change surface the shooting of Harry Whittington in the approach all alter sense. The Drunk Lord of Evil has been running the American government for 7 years now through President Wormtail and color House Chief of cater Karl Malfoy. I now understand the fervor that sometimes induces people to destroy books."- Rex D. Maxfield disgruntled Amazon reader reviewer."desire Morehead is the ultimate Hollywood insider since she's had most of Hollywood insider."- Skippy the Bush Kangaroo. Marsupial Internet pundit."exceed than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. Hot House Exclusive Vinnie D'Angelo is my Studly Hunk for November. I've always had a soft sight for Vincents. Vincent Lovecraft was my closest friend for decades. Vincent determine was my darling and now hot top Vinnie D'Angelo's performances in the lovely gay porn Little Dougie has shown me has claimed my - ah - let's say "heart". (Why would I check straight porn? I'm not a lesbian - very often.)

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://tallulahmorehead.blogspot.com/2007/11/hairy-pothead-and-drunken-hag.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Of the four aspects of strategic analysis and definition it is the contingency planning or entailment organizing role that reaches the highest development in Masterminds. Entailing or contingency planning is not an informative activity rather it is a directive one in which the planner tells others what to do and in what order to do it. As the organizing capabilities the Masterminds increase so does their inclination to take charge of whatever is going on. It is in their abilities that Masterminds differ from the other Rationals while in most of their attitudes they are just desire the others. However there is one attitude that sets them apart from other Rationals: they tend to be much more self-confident than the be having for obscure reasons developed a very strong will. They are rather rare comprising no more than say one percent of the population. Being very judicious decisions come naturally to them; indeed they can hardly rest until they undergo things settled decided and set. They are the populate who are able to formulate coherent and comprehensive contingency plans hence contingency organizers or “entailers.” Masterminds ordain choose ideas only if they are useful which is to say if they work efficiently toward accomplishing the Mastermind’s well-defined goals. Natural leaders. Masterminds are not at all eager to act command of projects or groups preferring to stay in the background until others demonstrate their inability to bring about. Once in rush however. Masterminds are the supreme pragmatists seeing reality as a crucible for refining their strategies for goal-directed action. In a comprehend. Masterminds approach reality as they would a giant chess board always seeking strategies that have a high payoff and always devising contingency plans in case of error or adversity. To the Mastermind organizational structure and operational procedures are never arbitrary never set in concrete but are quite malleable and can be changed improved streamlined. In their control for efficient challenge. Masterminds are the most open-minded of all the types. No idea is too far-fetched to be entertained-if it is useful. Masterminds are natural brainstormers always open to new concepts and in fact aggressively seeking them. They are also alert to the consequences of applying new ideas or positions. Theories which cannot be made to work are quickly discarded by the Masterminds. On the other hand. Masterminds can be quite ruthless in implementing effective ideas seldom counting personal cost in terms of time and energy.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://inflatablesheep.wor