Energy Bulletin has posted a US Army study on Peak Oil and impqct mitigation for Army Installations

http://www.energybulletin.net/docs/EnergyTrendsAndTheirImplicationsForUSArmyInstallations.pdf

Hmmm.  That is interesting.  I wonder how seriously they are taking it?
     I would say pretty seriously.  For background, see also http://www.energybulletin.net/newswire.php?id=7701 regarding the USAF.  
     I work for a major defense contractor, with both Army and Air Force contracts, and knew the writing was on the wall for me when this was posted.  Of course, to listen to the management and, sadly enough, most of the people I work with, "the future's so bright, we have to wear shades"...
     However, existing programs are just now starting to be "restructured" (can you say cut?) and a certain amount of uneasiness is becoming evident.  This causes me to feel both anger and sadness--  I have been followng Peak Oil for maybe 18 months or so, and only because I like to pay attention to what's going on in the world.  Why aren't more of the bright, well-educated people I work with ready for this?  Then I look at the most oblivious ones, and it seems like they're the nicest ones I know-- young engineers just starting families and previously savvy "old-timers" looking forward to a guaranteed retirement involving spoiling their grandkids.  However monstrous the organization is, the military-industrial complex employs a lot of bright, kind and good-hearted people that are going to suffer along with the rest of us.  
     Big Gav at Peak Energy has more about the US military and their PO awareness/mitigation today.
I'm so amazed that the military actually can see what is happening and has the balls to issue a report saying that present policies of consumption are "unsustainable" and damage the image of the US in the world (not to mention putting the military mission in jeapardy) - I mean, I find this whole report so unbelievably rational and realistic and the fact that such an honest assessment of the energy situation and such overt disagreement with administration policy on energy is in print - that my first reaction to reading it was that it must be a joke.  That this report must have been issued by some PO junkie, not the US Govt.  

But if true - and it sure looks legit - I cannot understand why it's not on the front page of every paper and the subject of the most heated discussion.   Instead, we hear nothing in the MSM.   It seems like we must be living in some sort of Alice in Wonderland time period.

The military often issues reports that seem, well, rather daring.  They will research anything.  For example, the Navy investigated the possibility of using psychics to spy on our enemies.  The Pentagon issued that report last year about how global warming was going to starve and drown us all.  

But whether the mainstream in the military really act on it is something else.  Despite that global warming report, we aren't doing much about it.

They will research anything.

No direct quarrterly numbers to meet will do that for ya.

And a broad mandate of 'protection' lets 'em.

They are worried about the reacation of other huamn beings to the changes that are a-comming.  

I do not know why you are surprised to see an intelligent document from the U.S. Army. I have been fortunate to know large numbers of enlisted noncoms and also many officers of various ranks in all branches of the services for the past fifty years, and on the average I'd say they are somewhat smarter and far more in touch with the real world than are their civilian counterparts.

Note that it is not the generals who screwed up the Vietnam war, it was their civilian superiors. President Eisenhower was smart enough not to touch Vietnam with a ten-foot pole (and seriously pissed off the French by not coming to their rescue at Dien Bien Phu in 1954), but "smart Harvard lawyer" JFK and his McNamara/bean-counter Sec. of Defense and the Dean Rusk brain trust of lawyers got us into what was a disaster and quagmire ten times worse than Iraq.

Before invading Iraq, the highest-ranking Army guy
says, "Hey it is going to take 400,000 American troops to do the job," and so the politocoes force him out because that is not the Gospel accoding to the straight-shooting;-) Cheney and Co., guys who truly are ignorant of military history. I cannot figure out Rumsfeld, who actually served in the military, how he can have said and done the stupid things he has. It is a big puzzle to me. And how could he not have had the honor to resign after the revalations of mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners? This is a BNG, Big National Disgrace. Also, why did not Bush have the guts to fire Rummy? Misplaced loyalty? The conventional wisdom is that Bush is dumber than spit and merely a puppet dancing on strings pulled by the Big Money Boys, but I do not think this is the whole story, and I think it will probably take historians fifty or a hundred years to figure out an accurate account of what is actually happening now.

I read that Profumo just died.  He resigned like a good Brit, but Americans seem far less likely to resign in the face of scandal.  I wonder if, not being aristocrats with plenty of land and old money, they simply need the steady income.  

Some days, I'd love to resign and spend more time with my family.  Can't afford it.

Bush is not stupid, but IMO he is willingly being handled by some really sharp, calculating characters that are in every way a lot smarter and better informed than him.  It saddens me, but a lot of people I know, members of my family, see nothing wrong with what the US has done at Gitmo or Abu Ghuraib.  I think their sense of immunity is sort-sighted.

The only thing worse than those navy clowns running a land war is for the army clowns running a naval war. God, when I think about the war of 1815 I cringe. It's like, they just don't get it.
Kennedy's knifefighter instincts were perfectly suitable to running a PT boat, and he no doubt would have made a wonderfull privateer captain, but if you want to fight a land war in Asia you have to understand farmers.
At West Point from about 1880, among the first 100 Commandmants the first three are:
1. Do not become involved in a land war on the Asian land mass.
2. Do not become involved in a land war on the Asian land mass.
3. Do not become involved in a land war on the Asian land mass.

IMO JFK was an ignorant and arrogant a-hole who tried (egged on by little brother Bobby) to kill Castro at least six times, enthusistically did the dumbest things imaginable, damn near got us into World War III through really stupid mistakes, bungled the Bay of Pigs Invasion bigtime, was the only U.S. president ever to use full-time the services of a high-class pimp, and was so addicted to drugs that he had a hard time reading his speeches.

His image and the whole Camelot thing was a total fantasy created by spin doctors and fawning journalists. IMO he bears most of the problem for us getting inot the Vietnam fiasco.

God rot his soul in hell.

He got in Marilyn's pants.  Couldn't be all bad.  Had a sense of humor too.  And he was Irish.
Right.  Fifty or a hundred years.  Like anyone will care then.
The US military has a long history of tackling all sorts of issues, from technology to social issues. The US Army was integrating at a time when the rest of the US had separate bathrooms for blacks and whites. If you are surprised at such a report, I'd suggest you re-acquaint yourself with the US military itself instead of the bozos who've been elected to direct it.
I just want to put in a small plug for the military.  I had my military experience, as brief as it was inglorious, at the tail end of WW2.  What I experienced  there impressed me deeply.  The navy took a bunch of hillbillies (me) and street sweepings from various ghettos, and in no time shook them all into the right holes in the organization and gave them the miminal  training to do what needed doing.  We all worked together marvelously. The bunch I was with ( fixing radar and such) were as smart a group as ever I found in later life.  Our carrier set  various fleet records for performance, and our destroyers were absolutely dead-eye on any incoming - two shots and boom-splash! (proximity fuses).  It was all organization and competent leaders- by that time most all the screw-ups were dead or bumped down to the bilges.

And by the time we got out, we could brush our teeth, swim, read , and feel good about being able to do  at least something.

My father, who saw heavy action in both big wars, told me the first thing to do in a real fight was to shoot all the peacetime parade ground tyrants because they were the ones that would get you dead.  Too bad that hasn't been done in DC.