Well, he's back in country and the shit storm intensifies after an all too brief lull.
For a more positive outlook than mine, check out Garrison Keeler's op-ed here:http://www.startribune.com/garrison-keillor-dear-mr-president-back-so-soon/425332553/.
"A Crime Against the Future" No problem, just add it to the long list of USA war crimes.
Yes indeed----worse than "colluding with Russia"!
But we must keep the context---i.e. how we got here with Trump et al.
I know this is falling into the trap of believing history actually repeats itself instead of people acting the same throughout the ages but sometimes history actually does seem like it is repeating itself much like a broken clock is still right twice a day.
In Trump's case, doesn't it seem like he is attempting to provoke people into unrest and in effect destabilizing the American (and to a lesser extent the world's) people and their society and then enacting draconian measures to allegedly restore and maintain control? Similarly, Trump's bombastic talk and his aggressive actions seem to be ramping up the cause of war by evoking responses from others? Suddenly strongman autocrats are being encouraged. Even bullying tactics by followers and compliant politician's upon dissenting voices.
History doesn't usually repeat itself ... unless somebody is trying to make it do that.
The era when these tactics and such were common was one of the worst in human history. Trump could have at least chosen a less horrendous model to emulate if that is his plan. There are still people alive today who lived through the first age of strongman dictators and autocrats. I hope that I am wrong because the future will be who suffers most as people's needs under catastrophic climate change will grow greater and draconian measures to control them will become more onerous.
History may not repeat itself, but it often rhymes in a cyclical manner - the same as many other natural processes. And it repeats itself because people, sadly, act the same - at least since the Bronze age of so...
According to Friends of the Earth president Erich Pica, if Trump leaves the agreement he " will make the US the world's foremost climate villain."
Nothing will about it!
The world does not need nor want the USA, and this decision will assure the US continues on the path of both social and technological marginalization - the worlds biggest impoverished backwater...
Why are you repeating what I said to me? Please reread the first sentence in my post where I specifically said people act the same.
If Trump pulls out of the Paris Climate Agreement it would not be that much different than what George W. Bush did. Bush left the UN process that included the legally binding Kyoto Protocol that had been going on for years and set up his own process based on strictly voluntary agreements. The lesson should be that in this dire situation you simply cannot elect a Republican president as long as that party is dominated by climate deniers. American voters have made a disastrous choice, largely I think based on ignorance, and the result is likely to be that the Earth will be largely uninhabitable for thousands of years. Basically electing a Republican, Trump, loaded the dice more in favor of this almost unthinkable future.
It is not at all sufficient, but for now, most of the US's modest GHG emissions reductions so far have been because of a switch from coal to natural gas (mostly fracked shale gas) for electric generation.
And the right - "grassroots" or whatever - are the architects and full-throated supporters of gerrymandering and erecting obstacles to poor people voting. We have no common ground with them.
Acting the same does exclude (you wrote "instead of") history repeating itself too - something many historians would agree happens to some extent (often as tragedy the first time, farce the second, as Marx quipped). A uniform process, with which there is stochastic variability, leads to cyclic phenomena.
Exactly. The Paris Agreement is a meaningless piece of fluff and PR meant to provide cover for the ruling elites. It works quite well as is evidenced by the "outrage" among the lib/prog/left lesser evil media.
There's no doubt that Republicans are more enthusiastic about destroying Life on Earth than Democrats (Chomsky has said the Republican party is the most dangerous organization in history).
But there may be something constructive about ripping this fig-leaf. Due to U.S. government pressure, the accord was watered down to virtual meaninglessness. Not only emissions cuts, but even monitoring is completely unenforced under its terms. James Hansen calls it "just bullshit." But don't take Hansen's word for it. What do corporate predators think of the Paris Accord? From CNN:
In recent months, big business has lobbied fiercely in favor of the deal, which aims to end the fossil fuel era. Even major oil firms like Chevron and ExxonMobil back it.
There's something fishy about environmental groups and fossil fools backing the same agreement.
I agree about Trump being a leading criminal in the World. But it's good to remember that FOE has been a fairly consistent shill for lesser evil Dems, making their analysis suspect. Most NGOs have been co-opted by private and govt funding. They do not even attaempt to build a mass base. FOE is one of those. But the work pays well, so what the hell.
You seriously need to try reading for comprehension. I suggest reading the whole sentence this time.
"A uniform process"? Is that how you see history and human nature?
Some people say coal is worse for emissions and some say fracking. I think it is clear that coal is worse for CO2 emissions. While CO2 is not as powerful a GHG as methane it lasts many times longer in the atmosphere. Also when it comes to pollution of toxic substances including mercury coal is far worse. Fracking does cause a lot of local pollution but so does stripped mined coal. Another difference is that when coal is burned particles are emitted that form aerosols in the atmosphere which block sunlight and therefore have a cooling effect. If coal burning is ended then the aerosols will quickly be eliminated which will have a warming effect. Burning methane does not produce these aerosols. I would say overall coal burning is worse than burning natural gas from fracking because carbon dioxide lasts so long in the atmosphere and coal burning causes so many health problems over a wide area and even affects fish that many people eat.
The only future DJT sees is sitting on his gilded throne counting his money in Trump Tower while the rising oceans fill the bottom half of the monolith. He cares not about his son's future or those of his grandchildren let alone all life on the planet. He will be above the fray with wars being waged over food and water outside his tomb. "Soylent Green" with Mr. NRA himself, Charlton Heston and the supremely talented actor, Edward G Robinson are the stars of this horrific science fiction film (1973)...many themes of the film are being played out in the present.
Yes, the Paris agreement is very flawed, except in one respect. Until that, the US was not on board with any talk, let alone action, regarding addressing climate change. Trump is just jumping us back to square one, or better yet back into the starting square , not even on the board. You may rightly argue that these are small distinctions devoid of significant meaning, but there was a chance that we were going to cooperate and get involved.
The evidence is mounting, majority opinion is solidifying, and talk may eventually lead to action. Or is this similar to that scene from the Hobbit where the trolls sit around arguing about how they're going to prepare and eat their prisoners until the sun rises and they turn to stone? OK, I'll just stfu now.