Delingpole: Trump Is Right – Germany’s Green Energy Suicide Is a Threat to the West

VIKTOR DRACHEV/AFP/Getty

President Trump has warned at a NATO summit that German dependence on Russian gas poses a major security threat to the West. It’s about time somebody said it!

This problem has been brewing for decades. In fact it goes right back to the communist era of the Soviet Union, when the Russians saw the burgeoning green movement as the perfect way to undermine their enemies in the free West.

Originally, the Soviets funded the “Peace Movement” in Western Europe mainly as a way of promoting the campaign for nuclear disarmament (in the West, that is, not behind the Iron Curtain). They were especially successful in Germany.

As Rupert Darwall writes in his book Green Tyranny – as discussed on Curt Schilling’s show – one of the leading figures in the German Green movement Petra Kelly was actually dating a Soviet agent. Ostensibly, her lover Gert Bastian was an ex-NATO general who had quit to head the Peace Movement’s Generals for Peace and Disarmament. In reality, he was a Stasi spy – and when the details were about to emerge in the early 90s after German reunification, Bastian shot first Kelly then himself.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Gaia Beats Mars: How Our Military Are Being Turned into Green Eco-Wussies

Yes. That makes sense. Clearly one of the main priorities in any war of attrition should be to do everything possible to protect your enemies’ lives, wellbeing and resources.

Some might argue that a merciless death cult which now controls swathes of Iraq and Syria and a population of around 10 million, which makes $2 billion a year from oil and extortion, which rapes and enslaves girls as young as eight, tortures and kills prisoners, chucks gay men off buildings, and is committed to the destruction of Western civilisation, ought not to be treated with kid gloves.

But wiser souls in the Obama administration and at higher levels of the US military have clearly taken a more enlightened, eco-sensitive position: yes, Islamic State may behave inappropriately on occasion, but that is definitely no excuse to engage in tactical bombing operations which may cause serious damage to infrastructure, make the sand in the area all oily and black and sticky for miles around, and release into the atmosphere particles which not only could give nearby jihadis asthma attacks but could also drastically increase the Syria region’s carbon footprint, possibly causing global warming to increase by 0.0000000000000000000000001 degree c by the end of the century.

If only the Allies had applied a similarly enlightened policy in World War II we’d all be in a much better place I’m sure.

It would have meant, for example, that there would have been no environmentally insensitive bombing of oil refineries like the ones in Romania. Some Germans – including fighter ace Adolf Galland; head of the Luftwaffe Hermann Göring; and armaments minister Albert Speer – believed that without the Oil Campaign Hitler might have won.

But in environmental terms, perhaps a Nazi victory would have been for the best. Apart from modern day California, Nazi Germany was almost certainly the most eco-friendly state on earth: the first to ban smoking on public transport; the first to take animal rights seriously (Göring once threatened to send people found guilty of animal experimentation to the death camps); the first to pass national environmental laws; the first to champion organic food and vegetarianism.

Nazi Germans also put a great deal of thought about what to do with the population problem – and, at Wannsee, how to solve it. They really cared about open spaces and overcrowding (Lebensraum).

And they weren’t afraid to put their money where their mouth was, either: if the Germans had won the war, you can bet your bottom Reichsmark that there would be no pussy-footing around at next week’s Paris eco-summit. It would be a case of reduce your carbon emissions, schnell – or off to the death camps.

Read the rest at Breitbart.