I have written before about how I view the Kyoto Accords specifically and plans to reduce global warming in general with a great deal of suspicion. First you have to get every single country in the world to sign on (impossible), and then you have to figure out a way to enforce the agreement if any country decides to ignore the treaty (double impossible).
According to this news item, India is telling it like it is. Their delegate to a UN conference on climate change currently being held in Bonn said that priority one was combating the crushing poverty under which a significant portion of India’s population suffers. The admission is that only way to do that is to increase emissions and pollution, not reduce them.
The Indian delegate, of course, tried to deflect criticism by calling on “rich nations” to take the lead on reducing pollution. Read between the lines and industrialized nations are supposed to cripple their own economy while India builds up their own. I have a hard time envisioning any government forcing even a portion of their currently middle-class population into poverty just so developing nations can lift up their own downtrodden masses.
What is completely disingenuous is how the author portrays the position of the United States.
U.S. chief climate negotiator Harlan Watson reiterated that Washington has no plans to rejoin Kyoto, which President George W. Bush quit in 2001, saying it would cost jobs and wrongly excluded developing nations from a first round.
(Emphasis mine. – James)
Thanks to the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, the US never signed on to Kyoto in the first place. How can you “quit” or “rejoin” something that you had nothing to do with from the first?
Can someone explain to me how this isn’t a vicious, bald-faced lie intended to smear the US and our President?