» News

Doha climate conference set to sock it to the USA

Home - by - December 9, 2012 - 19:00 America/New_York - 10 Comments

American Thinker

Ever since global warming conferences have been around, there has been an effort by corrupt, and very poor states to extort money from the industrial west as “compensation” for “damages” due to global warming.

The US has continously rejected such a preposterous notion, seeing the concept as an open ended invitation by the poor countries to enrich themselves at our expense.

Now it appears that the US delegation at the Doha climate conference is going to allow language in the final draft that will acknowledge the principle of damages as legitimate.


There has been a historic shift in the UN climate talks in Qatar, with the prospect of rich nations having to compensate poor nations for losses due to climate change.

The US has fiercely opposed the measure – it says the cost could be unlimited.

But after angry tussles throughout the night the principle of Loss and Damage is now in the final negotiating text.

Small island states at risk from inundation say they will walk out if the US vetoes the proposed deal.

The political stakes are high. The EU’s position is not yet well defined, but soundings suggest that it can live with the text.

The US will be seeking support from other big polluters – like Canada – likely to face liability for climate damages.

If the US is left alone fighting against the chair’s text, its negotiators face a dilemma – either to bow to the majority and accept that the nations which caused climate change bear a moral responsibility to other nations damaged by it, or to refuse to sign.

If the US vetoes the text, President Barack Obama will be accused of hypocrisy and failure after re-committing himself to tackling climate change since his re-election.


Saleem ul-Huq, from the think-tank IIED, told the BBC: “This is a watershed in the talks. There is no turning back from this. It will be better for the US to realise that the principle of compensation is inevitable – and negotiate a limit on Loss and Damage rather than leave the liability unlimited.

“[President Obama] has just asked Congress for $60bn (£37bn) for the effects of Sandy – developed nations are already having to foot the bill for loss and damage of their own.”

I don’t think there is a chance in a million years that any US Congress would support such a scheme. And no country is getting any US money without it first being appropriated by the Congress.



  1. Left Coast Dan

    December 9th, 2012

    Political stakes are high, my foot. If US walks out, strongly-worded letters are written and people complain how mean USA is. So? Or we can hand over tens of billions of dollars. Right now, I don’t have a high level of trust in my government to not do the latter.

    Thumb up +4

  2. Name Redacted™

    December 9th, 2012

    Lord Monckton punked the U.N. meeting in Doma, with hilarious results. I love that man!


    Thumb up +5

  3. Name Redacted™

    December 9th, 2012

    [Doha- oops]

    Thumb up 0

  4. RosalindJ

    December 9th, 2012

    Most people don’t have the time to pay attention to the length of a video like this, but I promise you, it’s worth the time. Plus it’s completely on-topic for the thread: it’s all of a plan – Agenda 21.


    I’ve put a period directly after the link, so if it shows as a bandwidth-sucking vid, please advise what I need to do to avoid that happening.

    Thumb up +2

  5. Wyatt, Insensitive Progressive Jerk

    December 9th, 2012

    We have enough trouble with our brain dead public officials spending our money; we don’t need corrupt bureaucrats from corrupt third world nations spending our money as well. We have more than our share of blood sucking parasites in this country.

    And if the U.N. and these third world countries don’t like it, then there is $100 billion dollars right over there – next to a bunch of Abrams tanks and guarded by a bunch of well trained military people who have been told that if they lose it, it comes out of their pay.

    Thumb up +4

  6. Unneutral

    December 9th, 2012

    As for the UN….phuck the phucking phuckers.

    Thumb up +3

  7. MemphisRebel

    December 9th, 2012

    The irony is sickening… The EPA has to be the most Orwellian environmental regulatory agency on the planet, yet the US is a “big polluter”. You think those 3rd world nations, or even the old soviet bloc countries for that matter, give a rats ass about how much raw industrial waste they have pumped into the lakes and rivers for the last hundred years? Take a peek at how gold is mined from rivers in Africa and South America and guess how much Mercury is making it into the water.

    Just more proof that global Warming is nothing more than doublespeak for redistribution of wealth.

    Thumb up +8

  8. Nutjob

    December 9th, 2012

    Just wait and see, with these methane spewing morons in office before long next to your heating bill or electric bill with all of the taxes and surcharges there will be a UN climate tax.

    Thumb up +4

  9. Boobie the Rocket Dog

    December 9th, 2012

    “Saleem ul-Huq, from the think-tank …”

    Wait a minute. There’s a “think tank” with a Saleem al Huq in it? Sounds like something Jimmy Kimmel’s writers would come up with.

    Thumb up +3

  10. Billy Fuster

    December 10th, 2012

    We must raise taxes on everyone to pay for these unfortunate countries. Keep sending your dollars to the IRS.

    Thumb up +1