... climate-induced crises could topple governments, feed terrorist movements or destabilize entire regions... that could demand an American humanitarian relief or military response...
After all the fiascoes the US response to new problems is the same. But I do not want to discuss that. I want to focus on climate change.
It funny that when the US identifies a problem (Terrorism, AIDS) pretty soon it will become the world's problemo. You could have millions of people dying of TB or water borne diseases but since that does not effect white Americans there will be no money or research for that.
Take malaria. The United States poured money when its soldiers had to fight wars in the Philipines, Korea and Vietnam. But since the early 1980's research money for malaria has not matched the increasing number of deaths since the most of the deaths are in Africa and Asia.
Uptill now developed countries and industries were reluctant to take action on climate change. Usually their argument would be one of these:
- Climate change claims are blown out of proportion OR
- Earth has gone through many such ups and down - the ecosystem will always find its balance OR
- Mankind is too small to impact the climate of the Earth
But is it a good idea to agree to make the bully the class monitor ?