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: jttmab who wrote (170939)	9/19/2005 6:22:24 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) of 281500

The choice isn't sell the hydrocarbons for cash or burn it. You imply that it would be flared for no value. It should be used in Iran, burned for cash, a lot more cash than it would get from delivery to India as the pipeline and toll charges would have to be paid for out of the cash. Those costs wouldn't apply if it was used in Iran. This is so obvious that I am amazed that 3 people can't understand it. Iran wants nuclear bombs. That's what it's about. Not energy. It's very simply to figure out. They have got huge stocks of energy. If they need energy in 20 years, they could build a reactor about 2020. Or, more likely, they could cover some desert in photovoltaics. They don't want that of course because photovoltaics can't be used to blow up New York or Tel Aviv. Mqurice

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next