Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » teryang » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
teryang's Journal
Posted by teryang in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed Jan 31st 2007, 09:15 PM
Rumsfeld opposed the Agreed Framework of 1994. It is more likely that he played a role implementing the interminable delays in breaking ground and laying the foundation for the nuclear reactor site.

People are mixing up apples and oranges when it comes to nuclear power and proliferation. Nuclear power is capital and thus represents economic and political power. In the case of a country such as N.Korea, the electrical power deficit and dependency on foreign imported energy was crippling its entire national infrastructure, industrial and agricultural. The agreement to furnish the light water reactors in 1994 was accompanied by agreements to furnish fuel oil as well to help alleviate N.Korean energy deficits. ABB, prospectively breached the agreed framework by failing to meet the 2001 milestone on construction of the foundations of the reactors. It was obvious by then that the US had no intention of meeting its obligations under the agreement. To do so would undo the iron grip of the economic embargo placed on N.Korea by the U.S., meant to topple the regime, even if it involved contributing to the mass starvation in that country.

Comparatively, Iran is swimming in energy. Yet, the huge capital investment in nuclear electrical power would free up a correspondingly huge amount of petroleum products for exports and unleash a cash flow that would empower Iran, economically and politically, to a higher level. Israel would be left behind Iran in terms of relative political and financial influence in the mideast and around the world. In fact, should Iran develope peaceful nuclear power plants, its future of increasing political and economic might is virtually assured, unless it is militarily attacked.

The impact of nuclear weapons is insignificant compared to the political and economic impact of peaceful nuclear power plants. Peaceful nuclear power plants generate huge amounts of power, cash flow and commerce every day. Nuclear weapons are not intended to be used, ever. They sit in a vault unused. The only ramification of their use is the assured anihilation of the user. Nuclear weapons do not generate cashflow, develope commerce, power industries, or generate further compound economic developement and capital investment.

The political and economic significance of huge power generating installations is simply bypassed in the mainstream analysis of why unsupported charges of nuclear weapons development have been made agaisnt Iran. Power is well, power.
Discuss (2 comments)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.