Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (147686)	6/17/2002 3:26:41 AM
From: ptanner	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580042

ted, re: "it seems to me that blowing up a nuclear power plant would have far more serious impact on this country than almost any other target. We would have a Chernobyl on our hands." First, I don't consider the threat of completely blowing one up to be very realistic short of a nuclear device. And even if you did blow it up it would not the same as Chernobly which was a very large reactor with a lot of fuel mixed with combustible material which caught fire and resulted in a lot of distribution. This is just my opinion though I have some background in the area. wrt dependence on oil (and oil imports) it would be beneficial for the US to diversify its energy sources and encourage efficiency. So far the government seems more focussed on further development of domestic sources of oil and natural gas. Of course, you and I use our petroleum (and energy) resources wisely, right? <g> Are we really building silos in Alaska? Missile silos? Are we targetting polar ice floes? -PT