Reply #7: You are both right and wrong.

[kristopher]

The ad does link war to a green message, but you have cause and effect backwards.

To appreciate the intent you must first realize that there are two fundamental values that motivate people to take action on energy issues - the external environmental costs and energy security. While most people possess both values, they prioritize them differently. They end up forming distinct sets of beliefs that are often at conflict; but sometimes there are common goals that can be the basis for joining forces. For example, those who push nuclear energy are primarily motivated by the high value they place on energy security, but they recognize that with the increased awareness of the effects of CO2 they can use an appeal to environmental values to increase support for a technology that should be rejected by those who place high emphasis on environmental values,

The goal of the producers (as I see it) is to co-opt the support of those who place a high value on energy security for abandoning the use of fossil fuels. To that end they are using the perceptions of those who are oriented towards security to make their point.

Fox rejected the ad (IMO) because it goes against their commitment to fossil fuels.