what is your opinion about iran's nucluar Energy?
89666
Iran is no different from Iraq.  They have lied before, they are lying now, and they will lie again.
209187
Iran has NOT allowed the IAEA inspectors to do their jobs. If Iran's intentions were as they say, they should have no problem with the Russian offer to have the enrichment facilities in Russia.\n\nGiven the Iranian government's statements regarding Israel and "causing harm and pain" to the US because they got referred to the UN Security Council, how can we think for one minute that their efforts are peaceful. Their rhetoric sounds like it could have very easily come from Bin Laden or another Islamo-fascist zealot bent on murdering anyone whose views differ from their own.\n\nThe asker asks why Iran cannot use nuclear energy. The world has no issue with this. Iran is welcome to use nuclear energy to bring electricity to its people. You can be damn sure, however, that the world isn't going to turn a blind eye while a fundamentalist state enriches uranium against UN and IAEA requests.
1026362
Alright, check this out.  I work in the oil field, and alot of the work I have been doing lately is drilling wells for a natural gas power plant about 80 miles away.  It's asinine.  Nuclear power, with the right planning and infrastructure, makes great sense.  All of our currently running nuclear plants were built more the 27 years ago, we have much better, more efficient, and safer technology now.  We've exported much of our expertise in this field to France.  They get almost 80% of their electricity from nuclear power, never had a problem.  Waste is an issue, but if we were to develop a repository in a geologically inert place, separated from any local aquifer, it's fine.  The newer breeder reactors (like we've built in France), generate less then half of the lower level waste then the ones were currently still using, and about a tenth of the high level waste.  If we were to dig a system of caverns in the Canadian Shield (an area that covers most of north central Canada), this mass of gneiss has been geologically inert for 2.6 billion years, is far away from any major population center, and is not a source of any aquifers (except for some minor faulting, but with proper engineering, that's not a problem).  We really should be looking towards the future, and I believe that nuclear energy could carry the US for a  couple of centuries of its energy needs.
309336
It may be the only option to tackle climate change. Iran shouldn't be denied this technology because of the fears of the west. In any case their enrichment isn't anywhere near that required to make nuclear bombs (70-90%). Lets all work together for a peaceful future.
1062670
Minimal. Iran think about possibly looking to get a nuclear power station and threats are made. N korea displays that it has intercontinental capabilities and US says they want to negotiate.\n\nN korea would never use a nuclear weapon. Their weapon just gives them a chip to bargain at the big boys table
101288
in iran?  i don't know.  it seems to be heading that way, but i think that iran will probably end taking the russian's proposal and have their uranium enriched in russia and shipped back to iran for fuel.  They have said that they are considering this option again, after having taken it off the table.  I think they would only bring the option back if they were probably going to do it.  I think they will not risk a war, especially without the support of russia and china.  If it was only the US, they would risk a war, but the rest of the world is against them.  I think their bluff has been called - they wanted to see who would align with and against them and nearly everybody voted to send them to the security council.  Its not the end of the issue, but I don't think there will be war.
148306
Why does Iran, one of the largest producers of oil in the world need nuclear energy?  They should stop trying to make nuclear weapons.
424832
The people of Iran are for the most part very similar to those in the U.S. Over the last decade, there have been countless pro-democracy rallies held and up until the most recent presidential elections, these were for the most part encouraged and allowed. The real problem comes from the most recent President and the clerical leadership. As a political science enthusiast, I feel as if I am have enough knowledge on the subject to state my opinion which is that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons for two main reasons. The first is that the middle-east is currently in a deadlock due to Pakistan, India and Israel. The concept of a nuclear Iran throws this entire balance out of whack and as a result cannot be tolerated. The second and unfortunately the more important issue is oil. Although the U.S. no longer purchases oil from Iran, many countries still do, in particular China. Due to recent fall in the U.S. status as a the sole hegemony, I cannot imagine the fluctuations and the potential leverage that Iran could place on the oil markets if they were able to obtain nuclear weapons. I know that this is a material and shallow reasoning, but unfortunately it is the truth and as a result the U.S. cannot risk the potential constraints and inflation that this would cause on the world markets. The world is more globalized than ever, and each country fits into the puzzle in their own unique way and although it may be fair that Iran gets to have nuclear power (which we are willing to allow as long as it is enriched in Russia) I cannot imagine any responsible elected official allowing this scenario to unfold (regardless of political parties). I hope this was helpful and I invite further discourse and criticisms to my opinions. Thank You.
1093288
well science & technology has so many things to talk 'bout ,theres no specific thing.......regarding nuclear technology i feel itz a really good move as it causes no pollution ,renewable ,& will help in consrvation of depletable energy resources......we will benifit greatly 4rm it once itz developed to itz full potential......only problem is regarding safety as itz very dangerous if something goes wrong ........but if we are able to find a way 4r this .......then our energy problems will be solved 4rever
170042
Nuclear energy was originally designed to kill. It got the USA out of WW11 sooner than most expected. It has been killing ever since. Did you know we have not built a new Nuclear Power Plant in app. 30 yrs. why? It's a detrement to society. Do you want a Nuclear Waste Storage Facility in your backyard? No, of course not. Iran for that matter I believe NO Country should be allowed to ever build anything again that creates Radioactive Waste. Did you know your Microwave is Radioactive? Try taking one to the scrapyard. Most scrapyards have Geiger Counters in place now days. Why can't we all ride the green wave? Solar,Wind,Wave Action. To most people it's still a novelty but one day it will be common-place if we can keep the powers that be from destroying this Planet we call Home.Think GREEN! Peace to all.
1113941
I would continue the nuclear program.As long as it's OK for other countries to have nuclear energy(cos i don't think they are building weapons of mass destruction) it's OK for Iran to have it too
1111004
Actually there are plenty of Iranians here where I am, I think the largest population is in California.  They tell me what you hear on the news isn't the right picture, many Americans do business with Iran everyday.  The invited me to find one thier offices and watch how many Americans and all others have business there.\n\nThey also tell me the biggest reason they are against having fuel produced outiside their jurisdiction is because they don't want a foriegn government to have price controls over them - it's about money.  But they do believe their president is a real loon.\n\nOne other thing, when this first started they were happy that someone finally stood up to the United States.  Then, later they told me, you know what?  We are Americans now, we have no interest in what happens over there.  What will happen is everyone will get the bomb and one loser will start WWIII.
327935
Are you serious?Iran is the world's fourth largest oil-exporter.If the international community does anything to Iran the latter will stop exporting oil and then what do you think will happen to the world economy?It'll burst like a party balloon.And that's worse for the world isn't it?This whole is issue is politically motivated and once oil-prices start feeling the heat it'll all be sorted out amicably.Its all about the money my friend-noone gives a fu-k about whether or not our Yiddish friends are feeling secure down there.In any case Iran won't have the balls to stir up some nuclear bullsh*t with the Israelis-if they do Mossad will have Teheran levelled before you can say "Zionist Crusader"!
405216
Experts say it still remains unclear how close Iran is to completing a nuclear-fuel cycle. But nuclear experts point out that Iran has proceeded with its enrichment process much faster than many expected and, despite skipping steps along the way, may have passed a point of no return in terms of rolling back its nuclear program. \n\nThe Iranians removed seals from enrichment equipment at their Natanz reactor in January and, within a span of two weeks, developed a cascade of 164 centrifuges. Given the new political facts on the ground and Iran's recent announcement, most experts admit that the most likely option now, especially if the UN Security Council fails to take strict action, is for Iran merely to freeze its nuclear program, not completely dismantle it. \n\nOthers, including the International Crisis Group, have even called for sanctioning a "limited enrichment" program, provided it is coupled with intrusive inspections. CFR President Richard Haass says in a new interview with cfr.org's Bernard Gwertzman that a very limited enrichment program could be permitted as part of a diplomatic package that combines incentives with the threat of military force. Any limited military strike, Haass argues in the FT, would not be "small or quick" and "would not remain limited for long."
331570
It is evident that Iran's efforts are focused both on uranium enrichment and a parallel plutonium effort. Iran claims it is trying to establish a complete nuclear fuel cycle to support a civilian energy program, but this same fuel cycle would be applicable to a nuclear weapons development program. Iran appears to have spread their nuclear activities around a number of sites to reduce the risk of detection or attack. \n\nIran does not currently have nuclear weapons, and would appear to be about two years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. By some time in 2006, however, Iran could be producting fissile material for atomic bombs using both uranium enriched at Natanz and plutonium produced at Arak. The Natanz facility might produce enough uranium for about five bombs every year, and the Arak facility might produced enough plutonium for as many as three bombs every year.
625577
Iran saying that they are enriching uranium for power generation. Security council should closely monitor the pace in which they are enriching. I dont think Iran has much power demand.\n\nyes its ok if the are using nuclear power for peaceful means & for their nations security. Because every nation has the right to protect themself.
68997
Are you serious? Iran's current president SAID he wants to destroy the US and ISRAEL!!!  Why does he need a nuclear power plant when his country is soaked in oil???