So what's all the fuss about this secret Iranian uranium enrichment plant???

It's for "peaceful" nucular energy, which is sooooooo cool right?

Name one person that has been killed by this peaceful Iranian uranium enrichment plant.

Just one...

:evilgrin:

You know the old story, if you're hiding something there's something wrong.

so we hear...

:evilgrin:

:evilgrin:

:rofl:

Now, if Iran were building secret underground wind and solar farms...

...THAT would be cause for alarm...

:evilgrin:

secret underground nuclear stuff is a dime a dozen - you don't even get to sit at most tables at the UN unless you have some.

On the other hand, if you can get underground wind and solar to work...

ya know. ;)

That's what "some say"!!!1111

:evilgrin:

Is this really, really, really, really a topic worth discussing with a person who is in favor of banning nuclear science.

This may come as a surprise to anyone who might be an armchair racists, who claim that Muslims are not allowed specific technologies because the US doesn't like them, but Iran participated in a dangerous fossil fuel war in the 1980's that killed a million human beings.

How come there are ZERO anti-nukes who call for banning oil refineries in Iran because of the observed phenomena of dangerous fossil fuel war, but all of them want to make a big deal about their fears?

Could it be that the anti-nuke cults can't live without fear, sort of like Dick Cheney?

:rofl:

He said all of humanity has a right to nuclear energy.

Specifically. Clearly.

I'm not putting words in his mouth fundie boy. You are.

What part of your inability to comprehend simple language is confused about the words, "All nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy?"

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hpGvbPqgm3J32HXxjgaNJXsD6wOQD9AUE7F00

The dumb fundie anti-nuke community is famous for distorting things.

As usual, fundie boy, just as you can't understand the difference between power and energy, and don't evoke the difference between napalm and gasoline, (although both are noxious), you can't tell the difference between nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

In fact, though, I believe the President would have a better case if the US didn't have nuclear weapons.

In fact, fundie boy, the only way to destroy nuclear weapons is to fission or denature plutonium, which is only possible in nuclear reactors, sort of like the reactors that consumed metric ton quantities of former Soviet U-235 in the 1990's under the Clinton administration.

You know who President Clinton was, fundie boy, don't you?

But anyway big boy, what is the fundie solution for this "problem" of your imagination.

Let me guess. You want to ban uranium, right?

In fact, fundie boy the uranium deposits that have been under Iran for many hundreds of millions of years can only be destroyed in one way: Fission it.

But having never opened a science book in your pathetic life, hating nuclear science because it's a science, you wouldn't know that, would you?

"a person who is in favor of banning nuclear science."

sickfuckery at its worst

:rofl:

Do you then think that Iran should be allowed nuclear capability if they don't use it for power generation?

Do you then think that Iran should be allowed nuclear capability if they don't use it for power generation?

is that the United States does not wish to have Iran put the monkey wrench to the current US/Israeli nuclear hegemony in the mid-east.

But then, I refused to clap for Tinkerbell too.