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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yulya who wrote (68592)	8/21/2006 7:26:13 PM
From: regli	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Are you wretchard or do you post material as if it were yours without attribution? fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com

To: Yulya who wrote (68592)	8/21/2006 8:02:21 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 110194

IMO the U.S. is looking at the "Iranian problem" incorrectly. The primary reason Iran wants nuclear energy is because it's cheaper than oil - then they can export the oil to raise hard currency. The side benefit (from their perspective) is they can build a nuclear weapon. If the U.S. would take the leadership on alternative energies, the U.S. would have an easier time of arguing against Iran building nuclear plants. The U.S. could then offer these alternative energies to other countries. Perhaps nuclear energy would be part of the solution - then the U.S., Russia, China and Western Europe should form a consortium to offer other countries the best/safest plant designs and a reliable source of fuel. There are designs that are efficient and not suitable for weapon development. This would be in all of our interest and would discourage the development of nuclear weapons (one of the U.S.' main goals). First step, change the mindset in Washington.