are u for or aginast nuclear weapons/energy

although nuclear weapons are a threat to humanity, nuclear energy is still very help. it produces massive amounts of energy but a accidental mistake can lead to a huge disater.

so wat do u guys think, im really interested in opions.

p.s. despite the threats im pro nuclear energy use. its a neccesity for humanity's progression

>>40
Shit, I thought this rifle was for hunting intimidating and potentially dangerous animals such as squirrels and geese!

A village in Alaska (Gambell, IIRC) is considering installing a small nuclear reactor to replace their existing diesel fuel electrical generators. It's going to be the smallest nuclear reactor in North America.

jim bob

>>8

>>7 didn't even answer any questions. I hate when these guys go off on these soap-box tangents. Fuck, just give us the rebuttal already! This isn't your high school debate club!

We need to produce nuclear weapons so that we can deal with enemies who have them later. That way we don't find out when we need them the hard way. Also if we didn't have nukes we'd all be communist or french by now.

I'm for the maintenance of some kind of nuclear arsenal for national defense.  I'm against any government subsidies or government funding for nuclear energy.  If the private sector wants to handle it, let them.

nuclear weapons are retarded, don't we have enough of them to keep the entire world in a constant state of MAD by now?

nuclear energy is alright, especially with the pebble bed modulator reactors, they keep the meltdown risk at like, none. as long as it's financially durable i'm for it.

There's not much that can be done about Nuclear weapons.  We've opened pandora's box and we can't change that.  Perhaps one day, in the distant future, we'll be able to disarm the world.  But for now nukes are a problem we'll just have to deal with.  For the sake of maintaining the advantage America should really consider investing in Metal Gear, or something like it.  (ok, j/k about that last part, fags).

As far as nuclear energy, it's a necessity for the growing populations of the world.  And while America might have found places to stash away the waste products, what about the other nations using nuclear power?  How do we know they won't fuck up?

Also, why not send nuclear waste into space?  It's not like we can pollute Venus or the astroid belt.  Even if it's an expensive process, wouldn't be safer than just burrying it?

did any of you hear about the story with the bureaucracy posting instructions to making a nuclear by accident online?

>>48
People don't like the idea of attaching plutonium isotopes to 20 tons of rocket fuel. When will they ever learn?

HAI GUYS I JUST CAME UP WITH A GREAT IDEA, WHY NOT USE NUCLEAR WASTE TO PRODUCE NUCLEAR WEAPONS! DID YOU KNOW THAT NUCLEAR WASTE DECAYS FASTER WHEN CONVERTED INTO NUCLEAR WARHEADS? PROBLEM SOLVED!

bump