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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: philv who wrote (23695)	10/28/2005 11:41:03 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81068

Re: Iran doesn't need a nuclear reactor for power generation. They have plenty of oil. Likewise, Russia's got plenty of oil and gas. So why does she cling to thousands of nuclear warheads... 15 years after the end of the Cold War?

To: philv who wrote (23695)	10/28/2005 5:33:34 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 81068

Phil > I am very suspicious that ultimately, nuclear weapons is the goal It may well be, I certainly don't know, but even if it is many/most large countries today have nuclear weapons. In fact, the world is packed with nuclear weapons. For example, I believe anyone can/could buy them in the Ukraine? Certainly, that was the case some while ago. > Iran doesn't need a nuclear reactor for power generation. They have plenty of oil. That's the Israeli argument and, if you don't mind me saying, it's absurd. Today, every country, even the oil-rich ones, have to do what they can to make themselves self-sufficient in energy and also diversify their energy sources. For example, what would you say if Iran decided to use solar-heating or wind-powered generators in a big way? Is that stupid because they have oil? Further, Canada, US, UK and Russia come to mind as oil-rich countries which have nuclear power stations. Should they now close those power stations because Israel says countries with them want to make atom bombs? Or is it only the countries that Israel doesn't like who shouldn't have them? > Like India first and then Pakistan, they will use their nuclear reactors to produce fissionable material in my opinion. There was/is an agreement that Russia would do the enrichment so that explosive grade material wouldn't be available. Even SA offered to do that. > I still think those statements were stupid to the extreme Yes, in our opinion, as we sit snugly in Canada and SA, we can say they were but what would you do if you were in Iran's shoes? Would you simply submit to the dictates of Israel and the US? The same way that Saddam did? thenation.com

To: philv who wrote (23695)	10/29/2005 7:31:46 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81068

Phil > Iran doesn't need a nuclear reactor for power generation (2) Russia and China say it does. mehrnews.ir >>Russia and China hold a favorable stance toward Iran’s nuclear issue, First Vice President Parviz Davudi said on Thursday. Davudi noted that during his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Russian side had promised to develop all-out ties with Iran. “Putin stressed that Russia is a friend for Iran and will always support the Islamic Republic. Iran’s stances on economic ties and nuclear fuel were also discussed.” “The Russian president and the Chinese prime minister stressed Iran’s right to master a nuclear fuel cycle.” <<