So Climate change is a different, yet equally important threat, equal to China.
So where is the Order of Battle on Climate Change (List of military forces and capabilities)? Where has Climate Change stated its Geo Political objectives and intentions. What is Climate Change’s industrial base for equipping and sustaining military operations?
Of course it has none of these. Climate change is not a military threat. The primary mission of the DOD is to deter foreign aggression through demonstrated combat readiness and capabilities; and where deterrence fails, to close with, and defeat, the enemies of the United States through superior maneuver and overwhelming fires on any battlefield. The CCP is not diverting resources from its military expansion to climate change.
The climate of this planet is cyclical, with variations in solar thermal inputs being the main driver. So of course the climate is always in a state of change. And contrary to politically motivated alarmists there are no current climate driven imminent hostility indicators present anywhere on the planet at this time. The only element at DOD who should be spending time and funding on potential military threats driven by climate change influenced resource competition is the theoretical future conflict planning element.
So your question line is simply an attempt to tee up an argument that a theoretical future threat, with no current IOH indicators present, anywhere in the world, is equal to the imminent growing threat of hostilities with China. And the China threat has reached the level of weekly, if not daily, open and routine discussion, on the international level, of the growing IOH, And there are many indications of imminent hostility from China. The type that can only be met by expansion of our surface combatant and tactical aircraft fleets. China is expanding both of these at a rapid scale, and not for deterrence. They are building their forces to use them, not to maintain the status quo.
I do invite you to list the IOH indicators, currently present anywhere in the world right now, for a climate driven conflict.
No- Many militaries (including our own) are examining and preparing for numerous outcomes of AGW that can affect national security. I can give examples if you’d like?
For the first time, the Joint Doctrine of the Indian Armed Forces acknowledges that the “environment has emerged as a critical area of the security paradigm,” and warns that if environmental degradation and related issues increase security risks, the military will need to respond.
Despite a long history of confrontation and simmering tensions, three senior retired military leaders from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India urge the nations of South Asia to unite around a common rising threat in a new report.
Lt. General Tariq Waseem Ghazi of Pakistan, Maj. General A.N.M. Muniruzzaman of Bangladesh, and Air Marshall A.K. Singh of India, members of the Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change, write that India’s nearly two-year-old drought is just the “first hint” of destabilizing climate challenges to come.
For the first time in the history of the history of the world - possibly the universe - there is an industrialized civilization releasing gasses into the atmosphere far in excess of any natural, non-industrialized process.
It is an absurdly significant and unprecedented change in the natural atospheric equilibrium.
You don’t think that could change things?
A few times in history things similar to this happened - singular disruptions to the equilibrium of the atmosphere.
The plot of the newest Battlefield game is interesting. Basically climate change (specifically sea level rise) has caused the world’s largest refugee crisis since World War II. These refugees are basically stateless. There is a proxy war going on in the third world between Russia, the US, and China. Many of their client states (where the wars are happening) start drafting these refugees into their militaries.
The soldiers you play as are climate refugees forced to fight for these client states. That said, some of the refugees support expanding the conflict and dragging the major powers into a nuclear conflict since it will destroy their societies. Other refugees want to stop being used as pawns. I’m not the biggest AGW guy in the world, but it is a pretty interesting concept considering the relative wokeness of the concept.
Of course not. The OP may have a point regarding whether or not this should be the purview of DoD, but climate change is a threat to national security.
