On Jun 15, 2007, at 8:00 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:18:36
-0800:
Hi,
[snip]
My point was not about ethics at all though, merely that pursuit of
nuclear weapons capability is a *stupid* strategy for a country like
Iran.
But how do you know they are pursuing nuclear weapons?
As much as you seem to wish I had said Iran is pursuing nuclear
weapons, I did not. What I did was list some obvious possible follow-
on scenarios, in random order, including the possible scenario that
Iran gets the bomb, or one is used, scenario (e). As much as it
appears you would like to put words into my mouth and convert a
*requested* prediction, provided in my case as a set of energy
related scenarios and an associated guess at a maximum time to a
bump, into an off topic ethno-political argument, I dislike it.
I would much prefer to hear your (and other's) answer to the
question, your predicted time line to the first serious bump in the
energy road, and why:
On Jun 14, 2007, at 6:51 AM, R.C.Macaulay wrote:
Howdy Vorts,
With all the energy info rhetoric eminating out of D.C. and news
sources do you sense the public is expecting too much from the
energy industry?
What is your predicted time line for the first really serious
"bump" in the road ?
Richard
Regards,
Horace Heffner
