Iran begins installing 6,000 new centrifuges

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Dauphin


Mainly because of lack of refineries.

They can't afford refineries...it eats into their centrifuge budget.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Because they're run by a madman?

No they aren't. Stop believing everything you see in Bruce Willis movies.

[SlowwHand]

Say what? Stop believing everything the lollypop queen tells you.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Say what? Stop believing everything the lollypop queen tells you.

It's obvious you don't have a decent response when you can't even make up your own witticisms.

As much as I would like Ahmadinnerjacket to conduct a nuclear first strike on Texas and rid the world of you cow-molesting Lone Star fundies (Verto excepted), that's not going to happen.

After many months of crying and depression I have accepted the disappointing, mundane reality that the world isn't the way I thought it was, can't you?

[Verto]

It's hard to show such outrage (at least not hypocritically) over Iran wanting nukes (but not deserving to have them) when you consider the past behavior of the United States, and other countries (many of which are also nuclear powers).

[SlowwHand]

And I'm assuming you read and realize they have oil out the wazoo? Nuclear is a peaceful thing to them?
Sorry, I call bull****.

[Verto]

I never said Iran is seeking this technology exclusively for peaceful purposes. I'm sure they dohave offensive/defensive military capabilities in mind. They've got plenty of reason to want it.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
And I'm assuming you read and realize they have oil out the wazoo? Nuclear is a peaceful thing to them?
Sorry, I call bull****.

You are utterly mistaken Sloww.

1. Oil sells at the world market price. If Iran wanted to keep oil back to fire its own stations, then it would have to forgo selling it to others, which would probably earn it more money (especially with the price of oil these days). That would be irrational. Venezuela forgoes oil revenues in order to meet social goals. The Iranians have decided not to. There is nothing irrational about that. They have decided that they want the foreign goods they can get by trading the oil more than they want the oil for themselves.

2. If nuclear energy is massively more expensive than oil fired stations, other countries would have forgone nuclear power for oil fired stations. Iran's preference for nuclear power is no less strange than that of other countries. Again, you are committing the fallacy that assumes that oil is cheaper for the Iranians. But it is only cheaper for them if they forgo profit that could be made by selling it at the world market price (i.e. it's a losing deal).

3. It makes no sense to say that Iran doesn't need nuclear power because it has a lot of oil. That makes the unjustified assumption that it is more efficient for the Iranians to use the oil themselves than to trade it with others.

4. The market price of oil is likely to go up, which means that oil fired stations will become more expensive to operate in comparison to nuclear stations.

5. Nuclear power will help Iran fulfil any obligations it has towards any emissions reductions it has undertaken or will undertake. Using its own oil to power the entire country would cause massive emissions. By exporting its oil, Iran gets to export the emissions.

[RGBVideo]

I bet $10 that Sloww doesn't know what a centrifuge is

[MOBIUS]

Re: Iran begins installing 6,000 new centrifuges

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Iran has the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world.
Interested in nuclear power as a replacement? No.

Sloww, if it pisses you off - I say good for them!

[SlowwHand]

It doesn't threaten the USA, Mobius. It's like dip**** countries closer to them, like Wales. Except Wales has nothing to offer or threaten, in any way, shape or form.


And Agathon, I couldn't care less about your opinion of of Texas in general, or me in particular.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by PLATO


So...they want them so that they can use terrorist front groups to export their brand of totalitarianism and to be able to do it with impunity. I see...sure let them have them!!

They certainly want to harm Israel and gain stature in the region, and are funding/controlling terrorist groups to do so. I'm not sure how that translates into "exporting totalitarianism." Further, there seems to be no shortage other brands of totalitarianism available in the ME.

And yes, IMO, let them get their nukes if preventing it means bombing them. I don't think we have any right to prevent it by force. Sanctions are another matter - no one is under any obligation to trade with Iran - and may delay the inevitable.

-Arrian

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Verto
It's hard to show such outrage (at least not hypocritically) over Iran wanting nukes (but not deserving to have them) when you consider the past behavior of the United States, and other countries (many of which are also nuclear powers).

The US continues to fund, train and supply Iraqi's.

[Tattila the Hun]

They should go for wood pellets. Or do they have wood?

One wonders, what would the reaction be, if a small western democracy like, let's say Finland, would drop out of the nuclear proliferation pact, and start it's own weaponization program?

I say, good for the Iranians. You really should try to think things from the perspective of the basic iranian, not whoever happens to lead them.

[Patroklos]

Empires don't roll that way. We told them to "request" our presence.

Why do you hate brown people?