Quantcast

Comments about ‘If Iran truly wants only nuclear energy, it should use this program’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Dec. 6 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

This could happen in the future. The Iranians will all have iPhone after the embargo and you can Facebook the idea to them.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

If Iran (an oil rich nation) sees the writing on the wall (hint... oil is running out)... why can't America also invest in this new, clean, cheap, no C02 emissions, no particulates, etc, form of energy for it's people?

When was the last time WE built a new nuclear power plant?

---

And why are environmentalists fighting AGAINST Utah's first nuclear power plant?

Do environmentalists not realize that if we DON'T build a nuclear plant in Green River... we will probably be forced to build another COAL burning power plant like the huge ones in Huntington and Delta?

If an oil rich nation like Iran can see nuclear power is needed... you would think a smart nation like the United States could get the message and start developing more, and safer nuclear power plants using the new technologies that have been developed since the 1960s.

Nations like France, Germany, UK, and Japan already get most of their power from nuclear (not coal/oil).

19% of US power is nuclear. France gets 74% of it's power from clean nuclear plants.

I know some Utahns still can't get over the 1950s... but try... things have changed since then.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

Who's kidding whom? Of course Iran wants the bomb! They've learned from our actions in the middle east that if they would like to avoid invasion, by the United States or somebody else, the bomb would give them that capability. They also want the bomb because their possession would change the relationship of the United States with Israel, making it more tactical and arms' length, from the passionate embrace it is now. Iran wants the bomb for leverage purposes like every other nuclear and would be nuclear power.

Of course nuclear technology except for medical purposes is dangerous on any level. This is an issue in the background, as is the belief on our part that the only "chosen" people (and those entitled to the bomb) in the area are Israelis. This gets us to the area of myth from which we and the rest of the middle east may never escape.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

Others here have gone somewhat off topic, so here I go. As to the safety of nuclear power I recommend everyone watch the documentary "the Atomic States of America." It is excellent, and anti-nuke. It makes the valid point IMHO that nuke plants are inherently unsafe, they leak, they have a record of polluting aquifers, and they produce cancer clusters around them. For those of you who favor nuclear power let me ask you a question: where have you been during the latest Japanese nuke disaster? Enough said.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

marxist,
Fukushima was a perfect-storm of combined events which are very unlikely to ever happen again, and could NEVER happen in Utah.

1. Magnitude 9. How many magnitude 9 earthquakes have there been in all of recorded history? (Hint... none).

2. The safety mechanisms worked. They shutdown automatically and suffered no damage from the earthquake (that's pretty impressive).

3. Tsunami larger than they have ever experienced, overwhelmed the huge seawall countermeasures.

4. And even that would have cause no incident IF not for human error and even more combined unfortunate events.

The operators thought it was safe to put the system back online (human error, they should have waited). The Earthquake did not break containment. The Tsunami did not break containment. The tsunami damaged other facilities and knocked out all power and flooded diesel backup generators needed to either run the pumps for cooling or put the rods safe storage again.

So all those things
- Mag 9 Earthquake
- HUGE Tsunami
- Human Error
- General Infrastructure failure from the combined natural disasters
all combined to cause the problem. And still... nobody died from the reactor meltdown.

How likely is a tsunami like that in Green River Utah?
How many reactors have no problems?

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The mentality of Iran to give up on matching weapons of war has all the validity of the Missouri people at the Mountain Meadow Massacre.

David
Centerville, UT

Everyone knows that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. So WHY is Obama negotiating this, conceding to allow Iran to retain their nuclear technologies and enriched uranium?

And when Iran obtains nuclear weapons capabilities, will they really use it only for respect? For negotiations? For tactical purposes?

Study the offensive and provocative dialogue coming out of Iran directed against Israel and the US.

Recognize that radical religion (including radical Islam) will do seemingly ridiculous things and justify it based upon religious principles. Iran is just such a radical state, sponsoring terrorism against Israel for decades. What would keep them from using a nuclear weapon against Israel? A feared attack from the US? But what if radicals steal a nuclear weapon from Iran? Or a branch of Iranian government uses it regardless the repercussions?

When has Israel acted colonial to overthrow neighbors, as Saddam did in the early 90's? The only land Israel has taken was during the 6 Day War in 1967 after being attacked by Jordan, Egypt and Syria. Israel is not an unstable neighbor in the Middle East.

Obama, the UN, and the world should not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Period.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

"Recognize that radical religion (including radical Islam) will do seemingly ridiculous things and justify it based upon religious principles." Are you talking about Israel? Seriously, Iran has a complex, substantially western based society, well-educated in western culture and science. Yes they have religious zealots, but such complete for influence with secular interests. Let's start by trying to understand Iran.

David
Centerville, UT

Marxist,

So you would concede to Iran their "right" to obtain nuclear weapons? And that would make the region & the world more stable? If this is your position, I cannot disagree strongly enough.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments