posted by Paul Hamill on February 9, 2012 at 2:13 pm
Danielle Ivory / Bloomberg Government
The U.S. military’s appetite for oil may snarl efforts to pare defense spending by about $490 billion in the next decade. The Pentagon, the world’s largest consumer of energy, spent $17.3 billion on petroleum in fiscal 2011, a 26 percent increase from $13.7 billion the previous year, according to Department of Defense data provided to Bloomberg Government.
Amid mounting tensions over whether Israel will carry out a military strike against Iran’s nuclear program, the United States and Israel remain at odds over a fundamental question: whether Iran’s crucial nuclear facilities are about to become impregnable.
Ken Silverstein / Energybiz
Whether it’s the 21st Century’s version of Stars Wars is yet to be seen. But advocates of nuclear fusion are saying that it would be life-changing while politicos are helping to bring it one-step closer to reality.
Michael Evans / The Times
Only 1 per cent of Afghan army battalions trained by Nato forces are capable of operating independently, a senior US commander in Afghanistan said today.
AFP/ The Express Tribune
Pakistan will next week host the leaders of Afghanistan and Iran at a summit devoted to counter-terrorism, the foreign ministry in Islamabad said Thursday
Sen. Jeff Bingaman / The Hill
We don’t have much time. Failure to extend tax incentives for clean energy now will result in jobs lost, reduced U.S. manufacturing competitiveness in a growing, multitrillion-dollar market and a blow to our economic recovery. Despite recent years of solid growth, several industries — including the wind, biofuels and energy efficiency sectors — have already begun cutting workers. Unless Congress acts immediately, more layoffs are inevitable.
The No. 2 U.S. commander in Afghanistan said Wednesday that U.S. military advisory teams will start deploying to Afghanistan this year to help Afghan combat forces as they take a more prominent role in fighting the Taliban.
ANNE GEARAN and JULIE PACE / Associated Press
The prospect of conflict with Iran has eclipsed Afghanistan as the key national security issue with head-spinning speed. After years of bad blood and an international impasse over Iran’s disputed nuclear program, why does the threat of war seem so suddenly upon us?
US missile has killed one of Barack Obama’s top targets in Pakistan, the de facto leader of al Qaeda in the country who was wanted for the deaths of nearly 100 people.
Politicians who invoke threats against other countries to make political points with American domestic audiences deserve scorn, not votes. Unfortunately, there’s a shortage of scorn for those politicians and pundits who casually threaten Iran with military force.
This afternoon, I was reading through ProPublica’s chart of the history of government regulation, “From Gung-Ho to Uh-Oh“. I was very surprised that the first effort at releasing tight natural gas came from a nuclear bomb in 1969. The chart says that in 1969 “The government detonates a 43-kiloton nuclear bomb deep underground in an effort to get at natural gas deposits in Colorado.
The recent news that the Pakistani premier is traveling to Qatar to discuss their role in upcoming talks between the Taliban and the United States is encouraging. Pakistan has not effectively secured its border with Afghanistan which has allowed Al-Qaeda and other elements to survive along the border. However, their desire to be part of the negotiations is significant.
Politics and news aside, when looking at possible attacks on Iran the consequences vastly outweigh the advantages. Attacking Iran is definitely not, to use Matthew Kroening’s words, the least worst option, it is the worst option.
About the American Security Project: The American Security Project is a non-profit, non-partisan public policy and research organization dedicated to fostering knowledge and understanding of a range of national security issues, promoting debate about the appropriate use of American power, and cultivating strategic responses to 21st century challenges.