Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
India And US Reach Landmark Nuclear Deal  
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2252 posts, RR: 6
Posted (8 years 10 months 3 hours ago) and read 2313 times:

On the first full day of his stay in India as part of his visit to the Indian subcontinent, US president George Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have announced that the two countries have arrived at an agreement on Indian access to nuclear fuel and technology from the Nuclear Suppliers Group cartel, formalizing a plan first announced during Singh's visited to the US in July 2005.

In exchange, India will put some of its two dozen nuclear reactors under international safeguards, formalize de facto policies in place to prevent horizontal nuclear proliferation, and will provide opportunities for major international suppliers like Toshiba-Westinghouse and Areva to bid for multibillion dollar contracts to build additional nuclear power generation facilities for a fast growing economy, which is slated to grow 8.1% in the current fiscal.

Negotiations were deadlocked over the subject of India's fast breeder reactor program, which intends to convert India's vast thorium supplies into fissile Uranium for power and weapons development. India insisted upon not opening these to safegards, and they remain out of bounds as part of the deal, since they are an important part of the process of producing weapons grade uranium. Instead, fourteen conventional reactors from the power generation grid will be open to inspection, and the research and weapons programs will run separately.

Joint Statement by PM Singh and President Bush
Singh, Bush agree on landmark nuclear separation deal
Fast breeder reactors not open for inspection
Nuclear deal with India a victory for Bush (AP)
India, US agree to landmark nuclear pact (CNN)


U.S. President George W. Bush, left, puts his arm around Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at the conclusion of a joint press availability with at Hyderabad House in New Delhi, India Thursday, March 2, 2006. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)


India, cricket junior and senior world champions
40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 3 hours ago) and read 2309 times:

Quoting BarfBag (Thread starter):
U.S. President George W. Bush, left,

oh bush is on the left! ah.... glad that was pointed out


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 2289 times:

A win-win situation for both.

A shining example of Condi Rice's efforts over the past 5 years to change the Indo-US landscape. While the usual cabal of assorted noisemakers (the Indian left, the communists, nationalists of every stripe, Islamists, Arundhati Roy (go back to writing novels, Ms Roy because you're really good at it)) will protest, I suspect this deal will go through.

Not surprisingly, polls taken in India this past January showed that the US had an approval rating of over 70% among all Indians. That, apparently, puts it on par with British sentiments. Lets hope that the vestiges of India's prickliness when it came to the US will vanish.


User currently offlineMdsh00 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4130 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 2278 times:

Question to those in the US right now. How is the public (the ones that are actually aware) reacting to this? I get the feeling that the media is really focusing more on the protests (which arent really that significant), rather than the deal.


"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3646 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 2274 times:

Quoting Mdsh00 (Reply 3):
Question to those in the US right now. How is the public (the ones that are actually aware) reacting to this?

Positively. Most see it as what it is- a good thing.


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 2266 times:

Quoting Gary2880 (Reply 1):
Quoting BarfBag (Thread starter):
U.S. President George W. Bush, left,

oh bush is on the left! ah.... glad that was pointed out

 rotfl  I know, it would have been difficult to figure that out!


User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2252 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 2265 times:

Jaysit: Rice indeed had a big role to play in a larger way. The nuclear deal and validation of India's weapons program is part of the realignment from Europe to Asia. There was a related recent announcement of manpower cuts in US embassies in Europe, with the two largest staffing increases being in Beijing and New Delhi.

There's been little political opposition to the deal, except from the Commies. That's to be expected considering Beijing's surprise (and quite likely horror) at the recent revelations of how much larger India's weapons grade stockpile is than was previously presumed. Most of the recent debate was centered on the very valid inputs from the likes of DAE head and advisor Anil Kakodkar, who were among those who ensured the strategic weapons program remained untouched while allowing the needless cover over the civilian nuclear program to be opened up to market forces.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineLH477 From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 584 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months ago) and read 2253 times:

I have mixed feelings on the deal.

On one hand, I am glad the Indian Nuclear program has "Legitimacy". I am hoping Manmohan Singh was also able to negotiate American support for Indian permanent seat on UN security council. I have a feeling the two are linked. India is more deserving of seating on security council then some of the current members. As representative of 1/6 of the world population it deserves a seat more then Brazil, Japan, Pakistan, etc. It makes my Indian blood more cheerful on this cold dreary day.

On the other hand, it sets a bad precedant for the overall objective of reducing profileration of Nuclear technology and arms. My last readings on the issue was that the current US administration wasn't too keen on renewing the 1970's treaty. I imagine Pakistan too want legitimacy. Iran's case of Nuclear technology gains a little more legitimacy by US admin double standards. Personally, I don't believe either Pakistan or Iran are deserving, they have not shown the level of restraint in action or talk that India has shown (I'll surely be flamed for being biased).

Moral of the story.....Do your tests, the World gets mad,sanctions are issued, 5-10 years down the line, all is forgotten, and you become fast friends.

I guess India can say bye bye to Iran Natural Gas.



Come on you gunners......!!!!!
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2252 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2240 times:

The current non-proliferation framework is flawed. It can only be effectively imposed on nations who either have an incentive to stay under a P-5 umbrella or cannot stand up to pressure to end their efforts.

India's stand on proliferation remains that our commitment to halting *horizontal* proliferation (between nations) remains within the spirit of NPT, and we neither have any interest in arming others with nukes, nor have done so. However we absolutely will not accept any sort of restriction on how many weapons we can develop (i.e. the so called vertical proliferation). That will be decided by us based on our own threat perceptions, not by some geezers in an alphabet soup organization in Geneva or Vienna.

All the bellyaching about proliferation is a red herring - a symptom of the fact that it was a framework created 3.5 decades ago when the world was a different place. India's weapons status and that the NPT mandates are mutually exclusive, and the NPT is essentially unenforeable on India. The best option therefore was to change the nuclear P5 into P5+1, and that is what has happened:

Bush Ushers India Into Nuclear Community
Reversing decades of U.S. policy, President Bush ushered India into the world's exclusive nuclear club Thursday with a landmark agreement to share nuclear reactors, fuel and expertise with this energy-starved nation in return for its acceptance of international safeguards.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2223 times:

Quoting LH477 (Reply 7):
Moral of the story.....Do your tests, the World gets mad,sanctions are issued, 5-10 years down the line, all is forgotten, and you become fast friends.

I guess India can say bye bye to Iran Natural Gas.

It's called the art of realpolitik.

Besides, I doubt if the Iranian natural gas line deal is dead. It may slow down and we may see nothing for the next 5 years. However, Washington is also of the opinion that the Mullahs will not last in Iran forever, and that India can pressure Iran to behave itself in the region.

What I do find amusing is the gushiness of the hyperbolic Indian press. Many have proclaimed that India is no longer a 3rd World nation as of March 2, 2006. They must be blind to reality. This treaty symbolizes the US' tacit cooperation in accelerating India's move from Third world status and a virtual end to the old Nehruvian anti-US, anti-capitalist drivel, but it does not negate the fact that over 600 million people need to be yanked out of poverty.


User currently offlineTexdravid From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2215 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 2):
A win-win situation for both.

A shining example of Condi Rice's efforts over the past 5 years to change the Indo-US landscape. While the usual cabal of assorted noisemakers (the Indian left, the communists, nationalists of every stripe, Islamists, Arundhati Roy (go back to writing novels, Ms Roy because you're really good at it)) will protest, I suspect this deal will go through.

Not surprisingly, polls taken in India this past January showed that the US had an approval rating of over 70% among all Indians. That, apparently, puts it on par with British sentiments. Lets hope that the vestiges of India's prickliness when it came to the US will vanish.

Agreed. Well said.
However, the reaction from the old line communists/socialists is difficult to hear. These dinosaurs need to realize their way has failed, and that the liberation of the economy that began in the early 1990's by P.V.N. Rao is continuing and making India a real world economic power. I am encouraged that these market reforms are bipartisan, supported by the Congress and BJP.

May this agreement cement the relationship between the U.S. and India. More power to both.



Tort reform now. Throw lawyers in jail later.
User currently offlinePbottenb From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 431 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2203 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 9):
but it does not negate the fact that over 600 million people need to be yanked out of poverty.

Perhaps, but it recognizes the 500 million who are living in the first world. This is more that the population of the US...


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4318 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2196 times:

Quoting Pbottenb (Reply 11):
Perhaps, but it recognizes the 500 million who are living in the first world. This is more that the population of the US...

Really? My friend that backpaced to India with his girlfriend, and went to some sanctuary there (only westerners mostly go there), showed me pictures of India.

Some of the big cities seem to be developing, but those pictures seem to have missed most of those 500 million people living in the 1st world! Granted it was three years ago, but still...

That said I admire India like few countries for being so vast, populous, and ethnically diverse and being in such an unstable region, yet remaining democratic. Honestly, that's a remarkable achievement.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlinePbottenb From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 431 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2188 times:

Quoting Derico (Reply 12):
Some of the big cities seem to be developing, but those pictures seem to have missed most of those 500 million people living in the 1st world! Granted it was three years ago, but still...

Its probably hard to recognize if you have never seen one before...


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4318 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2184 times:

Quoting Pbottenb (Reply 13):
Its probably hard to recognize if you have never seen one before...

Hmmm. Ok. But I do know that tourists usually don't go around the areas where the more well off live, those areas of town are usually off-limits. So I realize it was probably a biased 'picture'.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2166 times:

Quoting Pbottenb (Reply 11):
Quoting Jaysit (Reply 9):
but it does not negate the fact that over 600 million people need to be yanked out of poverty.

Perhaps, but it recognizes the 500 million who are living in the first world. This is more that the population of the US...

That is a vastly over-stated number.

I would say that about 50-60 million or so people in India have a lifestyle that is equivalent to those living in the West in terms of creature comforts, average life expectancy, etc (by this I don't mean Beverly Hills trust fund babies, but the lifestyle of a middle class American family). Many of these people do, however, live in teeming cities like Mumbai where a 1000 sq ft flat in a highrise goes for close to $ 500,000. This highrise may be next door to a squalid slum. To the average Westerner used to seeing clearly demarcated lines between rich neighborhoods and poor, this may be unsettling - and rather confusing.

Then you have another 100-150 million people or so who are the aspiring middle class. These people have a lifestyle equivalent to say, the lower middle class in an ASEAN tiger nation like Thailand. These people - I think - are the future of the country, because they see that they have less in terms of creature comforts (good housing, clean water, good schools, etc.) than those with the same educational levels and aspirations in other developing countries, and are in a position to work hard for it and - for the first time - obtain it (quite unlike those who toiled during the socialist regimes of Indira Gandhi and her successors, who just worked hard and had little to show for it afterwards).

Below them you have the aspiring urban and semi-rural poor, who for the first time in their lives have been exposed to the outside world by television. They see the rich in India enjoying a lifestyle similar to what they see on "The Bold and the Beautiful" (dubbed in Hindi, of course), and are ticked off that the government has been slow and corrupt in delivering the goods. These people are largely responsible for throwing out the prior government, and are willing to throw out any government that is slow to deliver, and is riddled with corruption.

You then have another 500 million or so people living in abject poverty in both rural and urban India, abject poverty that is beyond the imagination of not only anyone in the West, but anyone in SE Asia or even China or Latin America.

So, please, press reports (both Western and especially Indian) that prattle on to no end as to how India is filled with nearly 500 million American style consumers are to be taken with a huge grain of salt. For several decades to come. Yes, India by its sheer size will add millions to its aspiring middle class each year if growth continues at this Sino-style level, but it still has a long way to go.


User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2161 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 2):
A win-win situation for both.

 checkmark  I agree completely.

This is something that has been left behind by other administrations, but I'm glad to see that something was reached over these past couple of days.

Quoting Mdsh00 (Reply 3):
How is the public (the ones that are actually aware) reacting to this?

From what I understand, the part that actually is paying attention to the talks....keep in mind, a very small minority....is very pleased. The ones who are just taking a blip from Headline News might or might not know what's going on. But, I think the majority of those who know what's happening are very happy with the deal.

However, this deal will likely open up more concerns from both China and Pakistan. The job is definitely not finished yet.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2252 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2143 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 16):

However, this deal will likely open up more concerns from both China and Pakistan. The job is definitely not finished yet.

Well, the Chinese issued a condemnation, urging India to give up nuclear weapons and work towards peaceful relations  Yeah sure The Indian ministry of external affairs ignored it, probably because they were doubled over laughing.

Seriously, why would the concerns of a) a totalitarian quasi-socialist police state that crushes its own people with tanks and ruthlessly stifles dissent and information even on the internet and b) a military dictatorship rife with islamist terrorism and run by a despot who deposed his democratically elected predecessor in a coup, be so prominent as to warrant such regard ? The parties involved in this deal, on the other hand are a) the world's oldest and most powerful democracy and b) the world's largest and most diverse democracy, in a region where democracy is for most part conspicuous by its absense. This sort of political correctness is downright ridiculous.

All this deal does is legitimately integrate the Indian nuclear program, that has been in existence since the first reactor went critical in the mid-1950s, with the regular commercial framework, including the controls built into it. That can only be a good thing. There are no proliferation concerns, either in terms of past rogue behavior, or any compulsion on our part to do so. The only people who see it as proliferation are those who presume they can determine India's right to bear nuclear arms. Our weapons program isn't going anywhere. This deal merely accomodates it after decades of denial.

It is extraordinary that there are special interest groups in the US and elsewhere in the western world who would willingly squander huge amounts of diplomatic capital towards needlessly antagonizing a fellow democracy, and that too one in a generally unstable part of the world filled with anti-west forces, in the pursuit of a tunnel-visioned view of geopolitical power that is stuck in a world from four decades ago. History has shown that rising powers need to be accomodated within the existing power framework, and rejecting them only heads to conflict. The world's changing, and there's nothing bigger happening than two fast growing Asian powers, and their increasing needs will have to be fitted in.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2112 times:

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 17):
This sort of political correctness is downright ridiculous.

Its not political correctness. Its just that China over the past 25 years captured the imagination of the West, and is now in a symbiotic relationship with it. As far as Pakistan goes, those still bearing a cold war mind are loathe to give up a long term cold war ally.


User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2106 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 18):
Its not political correctness.

 checkmark  Again, I agree. There is nothing about political correctness in anything that's been discussed.

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 17):
The world's changing, and there's nothing bigger happening than two fast growing Asian powers, and their increasing needs will have to be fitted in.

Yes, but that's a hell of a lot different than those powers forcing their way in without regard to the rest of the world. They may be up and coming, but they still aren't the big kids on the block yet. China is on a crash course right now if it wants to keep the political system, or lack thereof, that it has. The economy will only last so long without change in the government before the whole thing implodes. That being said, they have reason to worry when India starts getting more nuclear technology. I don't really care about China's opinion and fully support India's up and coming presence in the world, but to disregard China completely is foolish.

Pakistan is a key element here because of the need for control over its borders in the war on terror. You know better than anyone that you can't just push them aside either, especially since they just test fired a new short-range ballistic missile.

My point is, I understand that China and Pakistan both have a ways to go before seeing their relations with the rest of the world improve like India is, but you can't just ignore their concerns. You know they are watching these talks more closely than anyone else and will be listening for anything that gives them a reason to worry. The last thing we need is to piss off anyone by siding with India too much.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineMdsh00 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4130 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2089 times:

another question. Is it most likely that the US congress will approve of this? Otherwise this is nothing but a gesture.

[Edited 2006-03-03 05:23:31]


"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2076 times:

Quoting Mdsh00 (Reply 20):
another question. Is it most likely that the US congress will approve of this? Otherwise this is nothing but a gesture.

This is one of the President's few unsullied foreign policy successes. Why on earth would a Republican led Congress oppose it. Plus, there are enough Democrats in the India caucus to shush the Ayatollahs of the NPT.


User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2252 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2061 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 18):
Its not political correctness.

Let me put it this way - I never saw a mention of anyone looking to ensure India's concerns were accounted for when the nuclear plant deal between the Chinese and Westinghouse was negotiated. Nor did either Pakistan or China solicit, much less defer to, Indian concerns when they clandestinely transferred weapons between each other. After all, doing so was expressly meant to target India.

Lets be realistic - neither of those countries have a record of 'playing by the book', and both are the biggest culprits of the very proliferation that we have endlessly accused of by the geriatric ayatollahs of the non proliferation kind. We do not owe their opinions any regard. As far as the weapons themselves go, despite the usual suggestions of India and Pakistan running an arms race, our own strategic posture is specifically targeted at PRC, something that would be evident if you read the output of geopolitical policy experts in New Delhi. Regarding Pakistan, it is to be expected that as a military dictatorship ru n by someone with a tenuous hold on power, the natural course of action would be to threaten nuclear holocaust if he's under pressure, just as the likes of Kim Jong-Il and Gaddhafi have done. Have you ever heard an Indian PM say he'll nuke Pakistan, or even China ?

Our only public statements have been a reiteration of our strategic doctrine - that we will never be the first to use nuclear weapons, but will reserve the right to build an arsenal that can inflict unacceptable damage on a second strike against any would be attacker, even as a Samson Option in an imaginary MAD scenario against China.

Therefore I don't see any reason to presume that their opinion matters. I do understand that the US, because of its own economic and military compulsions, will have a different view. But from an Indian viewpoint, even the official response, or rather the lack of one, to statements by Beijing and Islamabad underlines the fact that they don't care.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineIncitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4070 posts, RR: 13
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2026 times:

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 8):
That will be decided by us based on our own threat perceptions, not by some geezers in an alphabet soup organization in Geneva or Vienna.

Shouldn't all countries think similarly? Now India gets recognition - then Brazil, Israel, South Africa, Pakistan, Iran, Bangladesh, Saudi etc, etc, etc, should all pursue their own nuclear deterrent until even Monaco has their own bombs. Your reasoning is pretty flawed.

The US is making a mistake - a serious one that will have consequences for decades. India's accession as a permanent member of the UN Security Council should be conditional on dismantling its military program.

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 17):
History has shown that rising powers need to be accomodated within the existing power framework, and rejecting them only heads to conflict.

India's economic growth has nothing to do with nuclear capability.



Stop pop up ads
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7966 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2021 times:

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 23):
Now India gets recognition - then Brazil, Israel, South Africa, Pakistan, Iran, Bangladesh, Saudi etc, etc, etc, should all pursue their own nuclear deterrent until even Monaco has their own bombs. Your reasoning is pretty flawed.

Flawed yes, but India gets recognition only to keep China in checks and balances so to speak. Hence the Chinese protest. They, the Chinese, know very well that the west does not only envy Chinese economic growth numbers but is also suspiciously whatching their military power. Japan and South Korea are too small to form a counterweight.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 23):
India's economic growth has nothing to do with nuclear capability.

In fact it has when it comes to building strategic alliances against China.



I support the right to arm bears
25 Incitatus : China is a convenient excuse to the Indian government's mistaken view that nuclear capability beams them out of the third world. I don't think the We
26 Mdsh00 : Why? If that were the case, then all permanent members of the security council should do the same. Try living next to two hostile neighbors and you w
27 BarfBag : We'll be happy to give up our deterrent when the Chinese do. It's really as 'simple' as that. As long as we have a hypernationalist police state next
28 Aseem : It is not without reason that you have been in my Respected list for long. rgds VT-ASJ
29 Incitatus : China and India may get at small border wars but the idea that India needs nuclear bombs to stop China has no credit. Even though India has a booming
30 Aseem : Could you please explain in economic terms how doing away with bombs help achieve those targets!! Are you sure that it'll eventually happen!! Are acc
31 BarfBag : That is quite false. Four decades of concerted strategic initiative by India to maintain a deterrent argues otherwise. Your own presumptions are at o
32 Planeboy : I think by recognizing India's N status, US wanted to send some serious messages to the International community in general and India's neighbors in pa
33 SATX : Where are we going to store the waste from all this new nuclear development down the road? Oh, wait, I'm using logic again. Silly me. Fission first, a
34 Post contains links BarfBag : Are you familiar with the terms of the deal and the technical background ? India does not intend to build its nuclear industry on the conventional LW
35 SATX : Every nuclear facility ever built creates nuclear waste and even the core of the facility itself will eventually have to be decommissioned, disassemb
36 BarfBag : A permanent location is not 'required'. It is a question of economics - as long as storage mechanisms can continue to handle with any waste, and the e
37 SATX : What is the cost of storing anything for hundreds of thousands of years? How can you know if it's better in the long run when you don't even know how
38 BarfBag : Absolute cost is does not matter. Relative cost does - relative to the positive benefits of nuclear energy as a fuel for economic growth. From a car
39 Jaysit : Isn't that a bit like saying that France's ability to stay as a member of the US Security Council should be conditional on it dismantling its militar
40 SATX : And therein lies the rub. I'd rather we stop our rampant experimenting on the one planet we do possess because if we screw this one up we don't have
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
India - US Nuclear Deal posted Tue Jun 27 2006 18:44:47 by HAWK21M
Senate Endorses India Nuclear Deal posted Fri Nov 17 2006 04:38:43 by Aseem
Nuclear Test Ban Agreed: India And Pakistan posted Sun Jun 20 2004 10:05:23 by Andz
No Strike: MLB And Mlbpa Reach Deal! posted Fri Aug 30 2002 18:31:17 by USAirways737
Dubai World Ports Delays US-part Of P&O Deal posted Fri Feb 24 2006 21:06:25 by ME AVN FAN
The Aruba Boycott And US Carriers posted Sun Nov 13 2005 05:25:12 by Afrikaskyes
NHL And Players Reach An Agreement In Principle posted Wed Jul 13 2005 18:54:42 by Tom in NO
Egypt And Israel Sign Natural Gas Deal posted Fri Jul 1 2005 22:12:02 by RJpieces
Cultural Differences Between Iraqis And US Marines posted Sat Jun 25 2005 02:07:30 by MD11Engineer
Britain And US Announce Iraq Exit Plans posted Mon Jan 31 2005 22:22:33 by Corey07850