President George Bush has given the Navy the green light to throw their gum wrappers in the ocean. Okay, maybe that's a little extreme. However, he has exempted them from an environmental law that would have prevented the use of sonar in anti-submarine warfare training.

According to scientists, sonar can be damaging to the ears and brains of marine animals such as whales and dolphins who use natural sonar abilities to hunt for food. Gary Roughead, Chief of Naval Operations, argues the sonar training is absolutely necessary for the training and safety reasons.

"We cannot in good conscience send American men and women into potential trouble spots without adequate training to defend themselves," said Roughead. "The Southern California operating area provides unique training opportunities that are vital to preparing our forces, and the planned exercises cannot be postponed without impacting national security," he said in the Pentagon statement.

Dubya added his own two cents.

"This exemption will enable the Navy to train effectively and to certify carrier and expeditionary strike groups for deployment in support of worldwide operational and combat activities, which are essential to national security," Bush said. Complying with the environmental law would "undermine the Navy's ability to conduct realistic training exercises that are necessary to ensure the combat effectiveness of carrier and expeditionary strike groups."

So if you're George Bush or the Chief of Naval Operations, how do you choose? You have the potential fate of several mammals in the palm of one hand, and the safety and security of an entire country in the other. Eliminate the use of sonar to protect the whales or let it slide to protect the people? Is there a definitive black and white answer or is this another gray area where making a choice that will please everyone (and protect all parites, whales included) is next to impossible?

» Yahoo News