Originally Posted by rubenandthejets

One last thing about money.

The last US president refused to sign the Kyoto protocol (at the time the US ws the largest emmitter of greenhouse gases ) because the price tag of 350 billion dollars was seen as too expensive. He did however manage to find 3.5 trillion dollars for a war in Iraq.

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

I think we should really stop posting these threads.

No one is convincing anyone, and it usually turns into a slugfest between people with existing animosity.

Originally Posted by rubenandthejets

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that Kyoto isn't a waste of money.

Originally Posted by Aramike

Let's then just say, for the sake of argument, that Iraq isn't a waste of money.

See how your logic (comparing Iraq to Kyoto) can go around in circles? I thought my first post would have illustrated that but alas...

Originally Posted by Aramike

Let's then just say, for the sake of argument, that Iraq isn't a waste of money.

See how your logic (comparing Iraq to Kyoto) can go around in circles? I thought my first post would have illustrated that but alas...

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Except Iraq was useless unless you are in love with Iran gaining that much free power.

Originally Posted by Bewolf

The lack of a propper nuclear waste solution is one reason there are no new nuclear power plants build here, and haven't been build for over two decades when this showed to be a real problem. Those that still run are planned to be shut down in the decade to come and only because of contracts with the industry signed decades ago are still up and running.