Letter to the Editor

Iran’s intentions

Los OsosDecember 5, 2013 

In the Dec. 3 Tribune, in the “Pro & Con” opinion piece, a professor of law at Ohio State, John B. Quigley, wrote an article entitled, “Agreement might help, but entire area — even Israel — must be de-nuked.”

Apparently Mr. Quigley doesn’t have a clue about Iran’s intentions to placate the United States and others over their production of weapons grade plutonium. They have said they will stop and that they only need nuclear power for energy — what a crock. Why do they even need nuclear power with their vast amount of oil? If they needed nuclear power for only energy, why not use thorium, as it has a “shelf life” of only 300 years as opposed to uranium’s 1,000 years, and thorium can produce power but cannot be used to produce plutonium, especially weapons grade?

As for Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons, how long do you think Israel could defend itself against the surrounding Arab nations without a nuclear deterrent? As in the Cold War, having the “big stick” of nuclear weapons has kept the big nations from attacking each other. It is a known fact that once started, a nuclear war has no real winner.

The Tribune is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service