You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #34: Are you insane? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-15-08 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Are you insane?
Edited on Tue Jul-15-08 11:58 PM by kristopher
I wrote: "Actually nuclear is most strongly supported by the same folks who brought you Iraq and "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran".

The message you are peddling about nuclear power and renewables has been central to the Republican agenda since Ronnie Raygun. Bush, Cheney and John McSame LOVE nuclear and judging them by their policies, they have no use for renewables.

They envision a world of commercialized nuclear fuel reprocessing where nuclear proliferation is "controlled" not by silly things like international agreements, but by the commercial entities who control the reprocessing of the fuel.

I don't think that will work. All it would do is create and validate the very claim that Iran is now making - they are justified by their right to have energy security in controlling their own refinement and reprocessing of nuclear fuels. Give you your way and every nation on earth will have the same access to material with which to develop nuclear weapons."




To which you respond: In fact, the only people who believed the crap about uranium were people who listened to uranium

propaganda, fundie.

I knew immediately that Cheney was lying. If you are talking about the administration's use of fear of nuclear weapons to promote war with Iraq and Iran, that is different than what I'm saying. I'm talking about their support for widescale deployment of nuclear technology for power generation.

You didn't, which is why you're here talking about a racist attack on Iran. No, I was against the Iraq war from the moment it was mentioned; just as I would be against action aimed at Iran.

I knew Cheney was lying because I understand nuclear technology. I knew Cheney was lying because his lips were moving and because I understand military the difference between a bill of goods and the truth. A skill that comes in handy when dealing with certain people around here.

Mohammed Elbaradei, Egyptian, Nobel Peace Prize Winner, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, knew that Dick Cheney was lying.

You didn't. Again, you are wrong. Why bother with even asking to find out what I thought when you can just make up what pleases you - a talent I've often noticed among right wing "alternate reality" hacks pimping their flavor of the moment.

In fact fundie, Dick Cheney relied entirely on nuclear ignorance of the type that you spew continuously. He couldn't care less about nuclear energy. His business is oil. He simply used your propaganda to kill innocent people. No. Dick Cheney supports building more nuclear power plants and turning to the commercialization of fuel reprocessing to fuel them. It has been a cornerstone of the Republican party for more than 30 years. To date they've been blocked effectively by an aware public, thank goodness.

Heckuva job, fundie. Heckuva job.

This by the way, is a Democratic website. I note with contempt that your fundie anti-nuke position has been rejected by the Democratic nominee. No, it hasn't; but it is common to hear right wingnut dingbats claim that he has. His position is exactly the same as mine. Nuclear is on the table and just as soon as we can solve the problems of waste and proliferation, we can start building plants if it is profitable.

As for the racist claim offered by the anti-nuke fundie religion:

Iranians have a right to nuclear energy. All of humanity does. Under current law they certainly do. That is part of the problem. Obama today spoke of disarmament, locking down loose nukes, and a new global framework that restructures the Cold War era non-proliferation treaty. I have my thoughts about what that might cover, but I'm sure it will address the point of commercialization of fuel reprocessing leading to every country claiming the right to process their own in the name of energy security. It is hard to see how we can address that without a commitment to move AWAY from nuclear power, but there may be some other approach envisioned.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC