GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 329,714
Threads: 115,665
Posts: 2,204,926
Welcome to our newest member, aleispetrovo785
» Online Users: 1,551
0 members and 1,551 guests
No Members online
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-04-2004, 08:01 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Exclamation Iran to Extract Own Uranium

SAGHAND, Iran - Iran will begin extracting uranium from deep under its central desert in less than two years, an official told The Associated Press on Saturday during an unprecedented tour of the country's uranium mine.

Iran maintains its nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful, despite U.S. charges it seeks nuclear weapons, and is pressing ahead with plans to control the whole nuclear fuel cycle from mining uranium ore to enriching uranium to be used in reactors.

Saturday's tour of the Saghand mine, some 300 miles south of Tehran, was the first time Iran has allowed an international news agency to visit a site related to its highly ambitious program to develop the entire fuel cycle, from extracting uranium ore to enriching nuclear fuel. Iran wants to prove it has nothing hide, but serious questions have been raised about its nuclear program.

Iran's critics argue that a country that controls the fuel cycle will inevitably be able to produce a nuclear bomb if or when it decides to do so.

The rest of the article is here: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...a/iran_nuclear
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-05-2004, 02:30 AM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,668
Why the heck would a country so rich in petroleum be looking for nuclear energy unless it was to produce weapons? Starting up a nuclear energy program would have to be FAR more expensive than just building more gas power plants.

I hope that the Israelis are brave enough to drop a few bombs on whatever operations these folks decide to start up.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-05-2004, 04:06 AM
moe.ron moe.ron is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southeast Asia
Posts: 9,026
Send a message via AIM to moe.ron
I'm going to ignore the weapon side of it, instead will concentrate on the benefit of nuclear power over petroleum. Nuclear is a better option then fossil fuel.

Nuclear power is better for the environment and doesn't pollute like petroleum and other fossil fuels like coal.

Yes nuclear waste is bad but it's small and contained. It doesn't spread into the air and shorten people's lives via repiratory diseases, it doesn't cause acid rain, it doesn't put mercury into the air and later into fish, etc.

One tiny nuclear pellet can produce the energy of 100,000 tons of coal.
Think of all the environmental pollution and destruction just to get the coal out of the ground.
Then think of all the pollution after it's burned.

Unforntunately, the first use of nuclear power was the bomb which makes most people scared of it.

Things like Three Mile Island where the radiation released was about the amount from a common chest x-ray get blown out of proportion in the media.

Nuclear waste is not desireable but it's better than burning fossil fuels.
__________________
Spambot Killer
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-05-2004, 09:38 AM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,668
Quote:
Originally posted by moe.ron
I'm going to ignore the weapon side of it, instead will concentrate on the benefit of nuclear power over petroleum. Nuclear is a better option then fossil fuel.

Nuclear power is better for the environment and doesn't pollute like petroleum and other fossil fuels like coal.

Yes nuclear waste is bad but it's small and contained. It doesn't spread into the air and shorten people's lives via repiratory diseases, it doesn't cause acid rain, it doesn't put mercury into the air and later into fish, etc.

One tiny nuclear pellet can produce the energy of 100,000 tons of coal.
Think of all the environmental pollution and destruction just to get the coal out of the ground.
Then think of all the pollution after it's burned.

Unforntunately, the first use of nuclear power was the bomb which makes most people scared of it.

Things like Three Mile Island where the radiation released was about the amount from a common chest x-ray get blown out of proportion in the media.

Nuclear waste is not desireable but it's better than burning fossil fuels.
No one is questioning that nuclear power is a good source of electricity. They are, however, questioning the downside of trusting a state led by nationalist-religious extremists to be responsible stewards of it.

I think it's a very legitimate objection.

If Iran were a Democracy, I might feel differently.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-05-2004, 10:59 AM
Tom Earp Tom Earp is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Kansas City, Kansas USA
Posts: 23,584
Thumbs down

Great, while Nuculer fueling is more efficient, in the hands of the wrong people, there is a major problem. NOt them building a bomb, but who the waste can go to WHO will build a bomb of some form.

No one wants the nucular waste stored in their state.

It is funny, no one wants wind turbines for truely natural energy in their back yards. Looks ugly.

Solar has become passe'!
__________________
LCA


LX Z # 1
Alumni
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-05-2004, 11:09 AM
Rudey Rudey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Taking lessons at Cobra Kai Karate!
Posts: 14,928
Nobody says nuclear energy isn't great. But all signs post to this not being simply about energy. Everything from the specific radiation levels found to the fact that they have resisted global initiative to monitor the work. In fact the IAEA has admonished them for this. This is no longer about energy.

As for who should stop them? It should be the world. The fact that Pakistan and North Korea aided Iran alongside Russian, Chinese, and other European companies is sad. This isn't an Israel issue. Their newest missiles will be capable of targetting beyond Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia and Europe and America will soon be within reach. A country like Israel with such a limited budget and population should not by privately encouraged and publicly spanked when it makes remarks about eliminating the nuclear threat.

-Rudey


Quote:
Originally posted by moe.ron
I'm going to ignore the weapon side of it, instead will concentrate on the benefit of nuclear power over petroleum. Nuclear is a better option then fossil fuel.

Nuclear power is better for the environment and doesn't pollute like petroleum and other fossil fuels like coal.

Yes nuclear waste is bad but it's small and contained. It doesn't spread into the air and shorten people's lives via repiratory diseases, it doesn't cause acid rain, it doesn't put mercury into the air and later into fish, etc.

One tiny nuclear pellet can produce the energy of 100,000 tons of coal.
Think of all the environmental pollution and destruction just to get the coal out of the ground.
Then think of all the pollution after it's burned.

Unforntunately, the first use of nuclear power was the bomb which makes most people scared of it.

Things like Three Mile Island where the radiation released was about the amount from a common chest x-ray get blown out of proportion in the media.

Nuclear waste is not desireable but it's better than burning fossil fuels.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-05-2004, 12:28 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,668
In the past, Rudey (remember the Iraqi reactor?), Israel has been one of the only countries that had the courage to act alone when the world refused to do what was in its own good interest when it came to terrorist states attempting to arm themselves with nukes.

A couple of bunker buster missiles on these mine sites should do the trick.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-05-2004, 12:37 PM
moe.ron moe.ron is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southeast Asia
Posts: 9,026
Send a message via AIM to moe.ron
I was just answering your question about "Why the heck would a country so rich in petroleum be looking for nuclear energy unless it was to produce weapons?" Did not intend to say that they would not try to used it as weapons. I know Indonesia is looking into nuclear energy to boost their electrical powers. It is much more efficient and enviromentally safer (notwithstanding a melt down, which is why you want to make sure professionals and not nike type workers running the show) to have it.

Of course not all is rosey. What nuke boosters play down of course is the fact that the waste from nuclear power plants stays deadly for a quarter-million years and must be disposed of somehow. The hundreds of plants around the world are producing tons of this stuff every year when just a few micrograms of plutonium in your lungs is enough to kill you. Transporting the stuff to disposal sites is highly risky, so you also have to trust those in charge of handling it never to have an accident. Can you say Chernobyl, by the way?
__________________
Spambot Killer
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-05-2004, 05:21 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
I find environmental concerns disingenuous. If Iran was that concerned about the environmental impact of petroleum, they shouldn't export the stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-06-2004, 04:50 PM
Rudey Rudey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Taking lessons at Cobra Kai Karate!
Posts: 14,928
Quote:
Originally posted by ktsnake
In the past, Rudey (remember the Iraqi reactor?), Israel has been one of the only countries that had the courage to act alone when the world refused to do what was in its own good interest when it came to terrorist states attempting to arm themselves with nukes.

A couple of bunker buster missiles on these mine sites should do the trick.
Israel's air force is one of the top in the world. The operation was one of its amazing stories that is retold over and over.

Check out this link: http://www.alisrael.com/tamuz/

But also look at what happened to Israel immediately following this. First of all Israel's peace talks with Egypt were put on a sacrificial plate. Second of all, the world was ready to put Israel over the fire for this. Look at what the US ambassador said. The moron compared this to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Can you believe that?? The world has yet to thank Israel.

This is not just a middle east issue. People need to wake up and see what years of nuclear technology from around the world combined with a world that wants to make money and has no backbone will do. Iran will be the terror that nobody can imagine. You people just don't get it. When Iraq was attacking Iran and had huge minefields set up, do you know what Iran did? Iran's whole Islamic revolution had left it with little weapons except for one thing. Imagine children walking across minefields in unison. That will be nothing compared to missiles capable of reaching around the world armed with nuclear material.

-Rudey
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-06-2004, 08:06 PM
Optimist Prime Optimist Prime is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: somewhere in richmond
Posts: 6,906
I don't think we should stop other countries from having nukes. The U.S. didn't ratify the weapon limit treaty, so now it bites us in the ass. Thanks a lot Republicans.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-06-2004, 08:36 PM
PhiPsiRuss PhiPsiRuss is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Listening to a Mariachi band on the N train
Posts: 5,707
Send a message via ICQ to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via AIM to PhiPsiRuss Send a message via Yahoo to PhiPsiRuss
Quote:
Originally posted by Optimist Prime
I don't think we should stop other countries from having nukes. The U.S. didn't ratify the weapon limit treaty, so now it bites us in the ass. Thanks a lot Republicans.
Maybe we also shouldn't stop them from floating a nuclear device, in a cargo container, into Norfolk.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.