Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (170935)	9/19/2005 9:59:44 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) of 281500

Neolib, did you understand my point about the pipeline taking hydrocarbons OUT of the country? If they think they might be short of energy, why would they export it and replace what they export with nuclear energy? That is illogical. IIRC, sending hydrocarbons out of the country is the only major export of a number of ME countries. They lack dynamic economies. What else are they going to do? IMHO, they would at a minimum be better off sending only refined HCs out, thus picking up somewhat on industrialization. Trading HC dollars today to build an energy system that will produce once the oil runs dry is simply prudent (I'd say mandatory of any ME leader not literally an idiot). Unfortunately in the case of nuke energy & some of those regimes, it is also a big security problem. I'd be pumping petro dollars into solar energy like there's no tomorrow, as well as looking at solar desalination. But thats because I have an environmental bent. You'll note that Bush does not, and would rather push Nukes. If the shoe fits, where it applies here. Bush cannot maintain that nuke energy is good for the USA, but bad for Iran.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next