There is such a thing as a disproportionate concern. An example of this would be a person worrying about a hangnail while a tiger is trying to eat their leg. It's important to be able to set priorities, especially in warfare, even more so when a nation is literally fighting for national survival - like Israel has been doing, really since 1948, but much more so since October 7th, 2023. That's why it's concerning to see the Jerusalem Post reporting on a study that is seemingly asking Israel to allow the Hamas and Hezbollah attacks to eat their leg while worrying over the hangnail of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)'s CO2 emissions. Yes, really.
A new global study revealed that the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions generated in the initial 60 days of the Israel-Hamas conflict surpassed the annual emissions of 20 countries identified as highly vulnerable to climate change.
The report, published last week on the Social Science Research Network, tried to analyze the war’s effects on carbon emissions. The researchers found that from October 7, when Hamas attacked Israel, to December 4, 281,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide were released. This is equivalent to burning 150,000 tons of coal annually in 75 coal-fired power plants.
Some 99% of these emissions were attributed to Israel’s aerial and ground operations against Hamas in Gaza.
The report cited doesn't rest on blaming only Israel; Hamas comes in for its share of finger-wagging, as well. One would suppose that we can, at least, give the study's authors credit for being even-handed.
The study also included emissions generated by Hamas to build its 500-kilometer underground tunnel network, estimated to be an additional 176,000 tons – more than the island nation of Tonga emits annually.
Benjamin Neimark, a senior lecturer at Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) and a co-author of the study, told The Jerusalem Post that it was nearly impossible to get an understanding of emissions by Hamas because of the “ad hoc nature of Hamas’s offensive capabilities.” It is not clear how Hamas resupplies its weapons, he said.
The correct answer from Israel, of course, would be, "And therefore what?"
It's becoming more and more apparent that some, if not most, of these climate activists are, quite literally, unhinged. They rush presidential candidates, they block roads, and they propose "Green New Deals" that would wreck the economy.
See Related: WATCH: Climate Protester Finds Out It's Bad Idea to Rush a Stage With Ron DeSantis on It
And now they would appear to be proposing that Israel should, what? Pull back and abandon crushing Hamas because of the IDF's carbon emissions?
Fortunately, Israel is making the correct response.
“Israel is defending itself against a murderous terror organization that commits war crimes and crimes against humanity and sexual crimes against Israeli women and holds 136 hostages for over 100 days,” Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lior Haiat told the Post in response to the study.
“This responsibility of the government of Israel is for the security of its citizens, and we will continue to fight against Hamas under international law until we eliminate Hamas from the Gaza Strip and release every one of the hostages,” he said.
Well put.
It's a good thing these climate activists weren't much in evidence in the mid-20th century. I can't begin to imagine the CO2 emissions of the fleets of strategic bombers flying over Germany produced, or in the Pacific by the oil burners of the US Pacific Fleet, the largest assemblage of combat ships in the history of mankind. The Allies would not have won the Second World War without the profligate use of every resource, including aviation gasoline and diesel fuel, oil and coal, and plenty of it; there was, no doubt, plenty of CO2 emitted, but the Allies were literally engaged in a war over the continued direction of the civilized world, and so nobody - correctly - worried about that.
Israel, likewise, should not be worrying about the IDF's carbon emissions. Crushing Hamas and Hezbollah should be the only thing on Israel's mind at the moment.
Here's the thing: Today's "climate change" alarmists, like many unhinged activists, grew out of what was once a legitimate movement. I'm old enough to remember the early '70s when people routinely tossed empty pop cans, bags of fast-food wrappers, and other such trash out of car windows. In the late '60s, rivers were actually catching fire in the United States. Everyone wants clean air and water, and it was advances in technology and, yes, changes in attitudes towards things like littering that changed all that. But it is in the nature of social movements like this that they cannot accept victory; they instead, in order to keep those donations flowing, keep right on agitating over smaller and smaller issues, until they finally achieve irrelevance.
Like, say, someone asking the Middle East's only functioning democracy to rein in their response to a vicious, savage attack out of concern over their military's carbon emissions. Fortunately, Israel has enough national self-awareness to tell the activists to get stuffed. I wonder how the current American government would react in similar circumstances.
