Skip to main content

In an effort to justify their environmental agenda, the Obama Administration has repeatedly equated climate change to the threat of radical Islamic terrorism.

Yesterday, President Obama at the COP21 climate change conference in Paris predicted environmental doom and conflict stating: “Submerged countries. Abandoned cities. Fields that no longer grow. Political disruptions that trigger new conflict, and even more floods of desperate peoples seeking the sanctuary of nations not their own.”

Likewise, Secretary of State John Kerry has labeled climate change as “the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.” And yesterday, when the President’s Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes was asked which posed a greater risk, ISIS or global warming, he flatly refused to answer. “I’m not going to rank them because they are different,” Rhodes said.

President Obama and his Administration obviously have a very distorted view of the threats facing our nation.

To make matters worse, the President’s environmental beliefs are now impacting our military strategy against ISIS. Last week, former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell claimed the Administration held off bombing ISIS controlled oil fields to avoid ‘environmental damage.’ If true, this Administration is putting environmental concerns above conducting a robust fight against ISIS—a sadistic terrorist regime that has murdered Americans, enslaves people, and wishes to carry out even more attacks against the West.

With this rhetoric, the White House hopes to negotiate a climate change deal in supported by nothing more than a massive slate of regulations that will reduce the reliability and affordability of the energy that powers our lives. Meanwhile, our fight against ISIS continues halfheartedly, as the Administration allows only a paltry number of airstrikes that aren’t defeating the enemy, according the House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce (CA-39).

America can’t win with such senseless priorities.