296 comments on DrumBeat: December 5, 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
296 comments on DrumBeat: December 5, 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“What people need to hear loud and clear is that we're running out of energy in America.”
—George W. Bush, May 2001
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Gotta love this part...especially the last paragraph.
George W. Bush has great disdain for intelligence. And no respect for the CIA.
"Bush" and "intelligence" in the same sentence is an oxymoron.
Of course we have to remember that the very notion that this is all a "terrible mistake" is just another phony excuse. The ME is all about the oil and it has been for 100 years. We went into the ME because world oil production is peaking. Period.
But we'll never see that printed in the New York Times.
Never is a very long time. I could see such talk at some point in the distant future, when the NYT is looking back at current time period retrospectively.
Interesting. I can see a world without the New York Times at all.
And not in the distant future.
key word there is "moron"
Over at LATOC, Matt posted an article called
American kids, dumber than dirt
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/10/24/notes102407.DTL
about how student's mental abilities have radically deteriorated over the years. Perhaps kids are being underestimated, though. Perhaps with GHB as a role-model, they know what it takes to succeed in the US.
Yep, Prez'dint GHB, named after the date-rape drug.....
Oops! I guess I find the guy so repugnant I even zoned his name....
This is why we have off-shored all of our manufacturing - because we will have all of these future "knowledge workers" to staff our "knowledge economy."
/sarcanol
He may not be well educated and he may not be much of an intellectual and he certainly has difficulties with speech but it would be a mistake to call him dumb. Don't underestimate him. When pressed he can be very clever about getting his way.
Let’s not be too quick to buy the argument that the new NIE changes everything about Iran. They are continuing with their Uranium enrichment program, which they would need to do if their goal was to develop weapons. They have good reason to develop nuclear power, as are most of the other oil states, so that they can continue to export petroleum and for when it runs out in a few years but they do not need to have their own fuel cycle to have nuclear power.
You can understand their possible concern about getting the fuel they need but there are good options (like Russia, China or France) other than the Great Satan. Investing all that money in enrichment is security based at heart and the option to take it to the ultimate state of producing HEU is certainly a big part of it. They have no need to think about weaponizing until they have the facilities in place to produce enough material to make bombs and then to spin those centrifuges for a few years.
The only thing that is really important about this development is that it probably makes it impossible for Bush to attack them before the end of his term, which is a very good thing.
When countries start building reactors it typically doesn't make sense for them to enrich until they've got about twenty units in operation.
I think besides the obvious defense aspect Iran wants to stay in the energy business as their FF reserves decline. Nuclear is an obvious vehicle for them over solar and wind focus, as it solves the problem of the ongoing gamesmanship in their back yard by the rest of the world as well as being a salable product. Lets not forget the Iranian revolution means to their self determination what the U.S. revolution means to us. We are the overbearing, unjust power in their world view, just as Britain was to us ten generations ago.
Its a darned shame that stuff that is so nice for heating water to drive steam turbines can go b00m! if its highly concentrated. I think the world would be a much different place if this were not the case ...
Yes, this genie has a dark side. But stopping nuclear power will not prevent bombs and building it will not significantly increase the risks of proliferation over the other ways to get these weapons.
Iran might want to get into the nuclear fuel business but they would probably be restricted to selling to other rogue states. Not much of a future in that. They might want to ensure that they could fend off pressure from the West but it is unlikely that they could develop a domestic nuclear power industry without help. Ultimately, enrichment is, for them, about making weapons.
Nuclear weapons are not useful for offense. They could not really attack Israel with its 300 or so nuclear weapons, much less the US. Individuals might be willing to die to hurt us but not an entire nation. But they could deter a US invasion. Of course, that’s what Bush wants to prevent. We cannot control the oil flows out of that region with a big independent regional power there who we cannot intimidate.
Who defines the members of this set of so called "rogue states"? George W. Bush? His successor? Right now we've got two AGW rogue states - the U.S. and Australia. And a quick Google will show how mother nature is treating them ...
The point is that the conventional wisdom of who is a rogue state goes out the window when the dollar of today is worth $0.25, and that day doesn't seem far off. Iran rising with Russia watching their back may very well become an even more significant regional power than they are now. The U.S. savaging their infrastructure would seem to be the only barrier to that, and that whole plan just got torpedoed in a big way.
Nuclear weapons are not usable for offense in today's world view and they very much serve to calcify things. No talk of regime change in North Korea, now is there? When things get really bad the long term concerns over fallout, both political and of the sort detectable with a Geiger counter, may be dramatically lessened. It'll be a progression - a 5kt starter weapon live test here, a subkiloton etiquette lesson there, and pretty soon anything goes.
We need to maintain dominance in the ME to maintain our way of life. Iran needs to come to heel. We can't allow others already at heel to watch them get away with defiance.
Once someone defies the bully without consequence, the bully is no more.
The loss has already occurred. Our armies are stranded in Afghanistan and Iraq, pinned down such that there is no withdrawal unless it is a heavily reinforced one, and even with such an approach they'll get savaged.
We have brought a focused, mechanized infantry to what should have been a long term, low intensity conflict in Afghanistan and we should have had the sense to steer clear of Iraq. But the sensible thing here would not have lined Dick Cheney's pockets ...
i think it helps to listen to leaders even where one disagrees with them
Ahmadinejad in his Columbia speech pointed out with some indignation and national hurt that the US sold them planes then refused them spare parts... let's be honest about it that is pretty terrible behaviour - but more importantly, while airlines are of strategic importance, controlling one's own energy supplies are even more so
they've learned that they cannot trust other major powers for strategically important supplies
Those planes were sold to the Shah before 1979 and are warplanes (F-15s and F-4s, I think). Whether or not it is the US's fault that Iran has been our enemy since then, a country has to be able to change it arms sales policies when governments change like they have in Iran.
I've not read that before. I understood from reading around the time that this referred to civilian airliners.
I have never heard of any airliners but I can tell you that we did supply some of our most advanced warplanes to the Shah's Air Force. After the revolution, we stopped supplying spare parts. I doubt many of them can still fly. Governments do not usually get involved with sales of airliners.
This article mentions "Throughout the 1970s, Iran purchased sophisticated aircraft for the air force. The acquisition of 77 F-14A Tomcat fighters added to 166 F-5 fighters and 190 F-4 Phantom fighter-bombers." Oops, F-14s not F-15s. ;-)
There is definitely an issue with spare parts for civilian aircraft.
This is the first link i pulled out of google. I'm posting it as a reference, certainly not as an endorsment of the point of view... However, the point of view probably is relevant to this line of discussion, and goes some way to justifying Ahmadinejad's point of view (as well as the claim).
link