I am not sure of that. There are over 1,000,000,000 people all fighting for resources in India. Some of the rivers are open sewers. There is war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and some African countries. When people are fighting for their lives, the environment as an issue goes down the tubes.
Jeff
I was referring more to governmental resistance and secrecy as the main problems. But, you're correct about those other factors.
Bingo. Give that man a cee-gar.
Does the court expect us to believe it is better to let people kill American than for Americans to possibly kill a whale?
The court's opinion on the value of American lives vs. Whale lives is not relevant. The relevant question is, "Do the President and Navy have to follow US law?"
I suggest that you read the court's opinion, which you can find at the website of the 9th circuit's website. In addition, you can find the opinion of the district court. Google can help you find them. In addition, I have provided a link to the circuit court's opinion previously in this thread.
Jeff
Hunt has read nothing about the issue at all. He's too busy.
True, but this particular president doesn't seem capable of understanding of how little is being asked of the Navy.
"Under the court decision, the Navy must maintain a 12 nautical mile no-sonar buffer zone along the California coast, shut down sonar when marine mammals are spotted within 2,200 yards (meters) and avoid whale habitats among other measures."
The ruling relates to training exercises. I'm sure nobody expects the Navy to obey the ruling if they feel an enemy is within that 12 mile limit, although I'm sure someone in this newsgroup will argue this point.
I doubt seriously that it was the president who decided to have the military do this. It was most likely career military officers, some (or many) of whom are Democrats.
If you're not part of the solution.....
You know the rest of that sentence.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required