Rep. Ron Paul: Reaction to nuclear crisis 'overblown', page
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 17-3-2011 @ 01:16 PM by Jazzyguy
Source



Much of the reaction to the nuclear power crisis in Japan is "overblown," but the U.S. seems unlikely now to build another nuclear power plant, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Tuesday night.

"My guess is, when the dust settles, it won’t be nearly as bad as some of the scare tactics we have been reading about in the past couple of days," Paul, an advocate of nuclear power, told Fox Business Network. "Nuclear power is very dangerous, but it is also the safest form of energy we have.”

Interesting choice of words there, not too many people die there, very dangerous but safest form of energy, scared to death they are going to quit building nuclear power plants, not as bad as some of those scare tactics.

The way he expresses his opinion, he really undermines this accident. Does it make you wonder, is he a shill or not?


reply posted on 17-3-2011 @ 01:24 PM by WhizPhiz
reply to post by Jazzyguy




"My guess is, when the dust settles, it won’t be nearly as bad as some of the scare tactics we have been reading about in the past couple of days,"
And what is his guess worth?


"Nuclear power is very dangerous, but it is also the safest form of energy we have.”
Oh yeah, it's much safer than other forms of energy, now name one Paul.

edit on 17-3-2011 by WhizPhiz because: add specificity



reply posted on 17-3-2011 @ 01:28 PM by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by Jazzyguy



Of course he's a shill. Can you name a politician who isn't?

However, on this case, he's not shilling. He's just another politician playing the "spew whatever comes to mind in an authoritative tone and hope for the best" game. Really, nine out of ten politicians only have experience shuffling papers and kissing butt. Ron Paul isn't any expert on nuclear energy, any more than he's an expert on Bavarian poetry forms.



reply posted on 17-3-2011 @ 01:30 PM by inforeal
reply to post by Jazzyguy



Ron Paul’s foreign policy views, and domestic human rights [not civil rights where he has problems] are very good and humane, but his domestic ideas are typical rich man Republican—let the rich do what they want—philosophy.


reply posted on 17-3-2011 @ 01:31 PM by Caji316
I think Ron should watch this Video then...Bakersfield Calif. just hit with Radiation Clouds....www.youtube.com...

According to the Black Cat Private Radiation detection Stations..
edit on 17-3-2011 by Caji316 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 17-3-2011 @ 02:07 PM by WhizPhiz
reply to post by Blueracer




He named more than one. Drilling for oil, coal mines, gas explosions.
Well lets compare, do you think the Deepwater Disaster was worse than the Chernobyl Meltdown? Does a gas leak/explosion case damage to life over huge areas? And how is it the safest? What about wind and water fueled generators? Solar panels? Or if the world wasn't so god damn broken we might have a machine capable of harvesting zero point energy. We would at least have something better than the obsolete crap we have today.

EDIT: Actually, it's hard to tell if the Deepwater Disaster was worse than the Chernobyl Meltdown imo. That makes normal oil/petrol generators just as bad as nuclear energy generation. Both are terrible in their own way.

edit on 17-3-2011 by WhizPhiz because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 17-3-2011 @ 03:11 PM by WhizPhiz
reply to post by James1982




How many nuclear disasters have we had? 3 including japan? Total death toll is nowhere near how many people have died from coal and oil.
Deaths can happen without there needing to be a disaster. I'm sure the number of workers that have died from radiation poisoning due to working in nuclear plants is also quite high. Mining is always dangerous, coal or not. Coal and oil are crap, as is nuclear energy. It's all very dangerous.


But I know nuclear power is the scary boogey man so run and buy your iodine pills that wont do anything in this situation and read about the radiation in the US, even though it's nowhere near enough to be dangerous. You are exposed to radiation every second of every day, it's the amount that's the problem. And the amount in the US from Japan is not enough to be a problem.
I completely agree, but a large area of Japan will be affected in the event of a meltdown. This has lead to the evacuation of an entire area. Is that really safe? I am far from some ignorant fool who thinks nuclear energy is the "boogey man", I have studied nuclear physics in school. I just realize how dangerous it is.

edit on 17-3-2011 by WhizPhiz because: (no reason given)


Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Ron Paul Didn\'t Bully Anyone Or Do Drugs in High School!
  Posted 17 days ago with 26 member flags
Mitt Was A High School Bully
  Posted 18 days ago with 20 member flags
Vale Don Ritchie: the angel of the gap
  Posted 13 days ago with 18 member flags
Obama: \'Sometimes I Forget\' Magnitude of the Recession
  Posted 17 days ago with 16 member flags
One of these politicians is not like the others
  Posted 3 days ago with 16 member flags
5 Big Accomplishments of President Obama
  Posted 6 days ago with 9 member flags
Obama Campaign Uses Mother’s Day to Raise Cash
  Posted 15 days ago with 7 member flags