Economic Implications of Iran having the bomb

Discussion in 'Politics' started by mschey, Apr 11, 2006.

  1. fhl

    fhl

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but socialism is the ultimate in cronyism. Look at any country that practices it. The bigger the gov't, the more the expenditures find their way to friends of high officials.
     
    #11     Apr 11, 2006
  2. First,

    I don't remember saying anything about socialism. So you're off topic there.

    Second, can you provide some backup for that assertion as it sounds to me like you are just shooting from the hip.
     
    #12     Apr 11, 2006
  3. Excellent Commentary All
    ..................................................................................................

    ssternlight wrote:

    I disagree that the US "needs" the money "that" badly. It could always start a few less wars or give a few less tax breaks to the wealthy... basically give up crony capitalism as a way of managing the government.
    ...................................................................................................
    Yeah good points...

    But you know things are heating up in Venezuela....

    http://english.eluniversal.com/

    Chevez is currently kicking out large oil companies that are not in compliance with the new government rules...is training civilians...even women how to shoot rifles....is taking over land ownership and forming coops....forming closer alliances to Iran...etc...harassing the US Ambassador...etc....

    Chavez is buying his military stuff from Russia not the US....
    .............................................................................................

    In my humblest opinion high oil prices are high because of war drums and those responsible for beating them...
    ............................................................................................

    If the US were to have spent the kind of money that has been spent on the Iraq war on alternative energy....many new and lasting industries and US jobs would have been created...and this money would have dwarfed the gains made in Iraq....and would have actually created more peace and wealth for all the worlds people....

    War never was/is/will be a solution for a solid and well founded alternative energy program....

    The Bush/Cheney fiasco has set the US back over 20 years with regards to alternative energy.....

    To Bush..the US is just a country club....Both he and Cheney think they are going to walk away scott free....Maybe so...maybe not...To Cheney...it´s a substantial deferred payment plan...

    With a substantial alternative energy plan....oil would go down very substantially and quickly.....$20 to $30.....
    ...............................................................................................

    Thus the economics of Iran having the bomb simply feeds the ¨war drum¨pricing obeyance in an enduring high mode...and if oil were at a solid $50 floor...Chavez could possibly brag he has the number one position in reserves etc...He would like to fix $50 for the reason of making this statement...Number One in the world ..ahead of Saudi Arabia in reserves...etc...

    The actual use of such a weapon would only bring the industry to ruin...as it would be this if anything...to start the alternative energy revolution...

    The biggest catch 22...and the real reason that Bush/Cheney were so important in starting it is that it would take taxing subsidies to keep it alive long enough to get the products into the marketplace where they could swim alongside $25 oil.....

    This is where the ball has been dropped big time ....
     
    #13     Apr 11, 2006
  4. An ever increasing oil (and consequently gold) price will give the overissued USD a boost in that foreigners will be forced to hoard even larger stockpiles to pay for their energy supplies -- until everybody gets tired of subsidizing the USA's profligate spending and make alternative arrangements to pay for their oil in other currencies.
     
    #14     Apr 11, 2006
  5. taodr

    taodr

    #15     Apr 11, 2006
  6. Further enriching 110 tons of 3.5% enriched uranium is enough to make 20 nuclear bombs, and shoudn't take more than 1-2 years maximum, if iran ever decide to take that path

    Anyhow thanks to russian and chinese allies making this achivement to become true
     
    #16     Apr 11, 2006
  7. Don't worry, Henny Penny. They need thousands of centrifuges to produce enough U-235 in two years time. The sky ain't falling quite yet, so don't waste your precious time on this nonsense.

    Banging 700% per year at Bright and you're honestly asking ET why the market sold off?

    Iran enriched the uranium using a cascade of 164 centrifuges that spin uranium hexafluoride gas at supersonic speed. This process extracts U-235—usable in power reactors and nuclear weapons—from the gas. The enriched uranium that Iran produced cannot be used in a nuclear weapon because it contains just 3.5% U-235, whereas a nuclear weapon typically requires highly-enriched uranium (HEU) that contains more than 90% U-235. Assuming Iran has perfect luck with the centrifuge, it would need to operate this cascade continually for more than five years to produce enough HEU (15-20 kg, roughly the size of a basketball) for a crude nuclear bomb.
     
    #17     Apr 17, 2006
  8. traderob

    traderob

    Clinton puts out on Iran though: "Bill Clinton’s remarks at Davos last year: “Iran today is, in a sense, the only country where progressive ideas enjoy a vast constituency. It is there that the ideas that I subscribe to are defended by a majority.” That’s true in the very narrow sense that there’s a certain similarity between his legal strategy and sharia when it comes to adultery and setting up the gals as the fall guys. But it seems Clinton apparently had a more general commonality in mind: “In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own.”
     
    #18     Apr 17, 2006
  9. They do not have any bomb, only the very basic stages of production, that's why for the last 50 years they have NOT had it.

    . Why don't you cover the Economic implications of such nice, sane nations like N. Korea, russia, china, india, pakistan and the most same and rational folks of them all - Isreal - having the bomb, first?

    Edited to read: don't forget the religious hardliner extremists in USA who think the 10 Commandments do not apply to them, who actually WILL use nukes to destroy humanity and our environment. Well, at least big phama can make money on selling cancer drugs to all those in the area...
     
    #19     Apr 17, 2006