I base the thread on a response to AF I gave that was buried under some babbling idiot's posts that I ignore. Scaring anyone isn't necessarily their purpose. The "red-scare" increased military funding after WWII. Korea and Vietnam kept the fire burning. Even afterward, we had the "Cold War." Since the demise of the Soviet Union, we've had to "scare" the public into believing that increased military funding remains a priority because 9/11 could repeat itself, and the best way to prevent Islamist Extremism is to destroy Extreme Islamists. Frankly, I see no way anyone can argue with this point. However, the "War on Carbon" cannot be fought without similar "scare" tactics, and MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY, the ensueing funding from DOE to reduce CO2 emissions: Thus there is an "Army, Navy, Ariforce, and Marines".....a plethora of industries that have sprung-up depending on government grants to "fight the war against global warming." The code for this is converting everything to "sustainability." Industries are "sustainable" because they operate independently of carbon emmitting fossil fuels, which are presumed "unsustainable," and very dependently on DOE grants.