this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2022
0 points (NaN% liked)
Green - An environmentalist community
204 readers
1 users here now
This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!
RULES:
1- Remember the human
2- Link posts should come from a reputable source
3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith
Related communities:
- /c/collapse
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/eco_socialism@lemmygrad.ml
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- /c/environment@beehaw.org
- SLRPNK
Unofficial Chat rooms:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Currently, it is a higher priority. But I don't think it should be. Or rather, the ways they attempt to ensure the nation's security should change.
Countries don't need a military or at least not such a developed military. Likewise, the surveillance isn't a great idea and has many problems, I would argue more problems than benefits.
Edit: I also don't know how firing loads of missiles and driving massive tanks can be "net-zero". Without offsets of course
I think the war based military will change anyway entirely to drone and anti weapons missile systems. It is still not what people want but it will shift and possible reduce the current carbon footprint. I said possible because you still need to recycle, or create such system which of course needs energy, resources and there is overall the carbon footprint.
Totally get your point tho, war systems including instruments like military is something which humanity hopefully will one day overcome and solve their problems on a more civil manner but giving the fact that we cannot even bring everyone to reduce his own carbon footprint shows that we have a long way to go and enforcing from one day to another to get rid of the entire systems that are actually in work, has a history of - it does not work.