We've heard the often-quoted remark about how the generals are always fighting the last war. In a way it reminds me of the recently passed farm bill with massive subsidies to wealthy sugar growers and large soybean farmers among others.

I don't think it's simply because Congress is stupid, corrupt or both. It has a lot to do with inertia, familiarity, and the path of least resistance. It's probably not unlike what the Pentagon does in many cases, preparing for the "one before."

John Robb, a futurist, who writes about "asymmetrical" warfare and military subjects, is the author of Brave New War. He believes the nation-state will have an increasingly difficult time defending itself against a new type of enemy, which can adapt to change faster than a central government, create new information systems rapidly, and in many cases set up a parallel government quite capable of confronting the "legitimate" institutions.

Examples already exist, such as Lebanon at the present time, parts of major cities like Rio de Janeiro, regional drug cartels in Mexico, and the oil field in Nigeria.

These alternative governments/communities have the ability to recede into the background and reemerge sometime later, in some cases having created an entirely new structure. They have the ability to not only destabilize their own country but neighboring regions as well.

Forgetting everything else, climate change has the potential, it seems to me, to multiply significantly the inability of many governments to maintain order and control, and ultimately legitimacy. I think we're going to hear a lot more about terms like system disruption ... decentralized platforms ... and self-organizing futures.

The Pentagon spends a good deal of time analyzing future threats and developing contingency plans. As we learned several months ago, the Pentagon has been studying climate threats and the U.S. national interest. But adapting to and making the necessary changes are easier said than done.

It has, once again, a lot to do with bureaucratic inertia and of course, vested interests. Apparently high tech stuff, expensive weapon systems, and even a new class of submarine are what continue to drive the defense establishment. An interesting article worth reading is Climate Ripe For Military Budget Overhaul.

A number of new studies have appeared recently, suggesting that man's contribution to global warming is the driving force at the present time. The British journal Nature, after reviewing hundreds of papers published in peer-reviewed journals, going back some 30 years, has concluded, "only man-made warming could be the culprit." Go to New Study Amplifies Warning on Climate Change.

Scientific American has published an article entitled Man-Made Warming Altering Nature's Clock. This is based on an analysis in Nature assessing 829 geologic phenomena.

Scientists analyzing Antarctic air bubbles that go back some 800,000 years have determined that greenhouse-gas concentrations are higher today then they've been in "hundreds of millennia." Go to Ice Cores Reveal Climate Secrets.

The journal Science published a study recently, conducted by the Leibniz Institute of Marine Science in Germany and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California. They have concluded that "dead zones" are spreading across tropical oceans because of warming seawater due to climate change. This could have a serious impact on sea life because of a lack of oxygen. Contributing factors also include agrochemical runoffs and coastal algae bloom.

In terms of the United States, it won't be easy to rapidly conceive of totally new ideas or new strategies. An engaged public, anxious to debate serious topics, would be a good beginning, and ideally guided and encouraged by highly imaginative leadership.

We have however reason to be highly skeptical at this point. We Americans could once again shoot ourselves in the foot with ever increasing disastrous consequences.