27 Nov
1999
27 Nov
'99
11:44 a.m.
I agree, fundamentally, with what you say. I just don't see how letting
what's essentially becoming a third-world nation after fifty years of being
a technological leader, freeze because it displeases US for them to run
their flawed reactor, for which they've already paid, is gong to help
anyone, especially since they can't just build a replacement with any
technology.
Surviving to get there is more important than having a pristine "there" to
get. It doesn't matter if we're all surely going to die if we're already
dead.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, November 27, 1999 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] They're restarting Chernobyl?
<It's just a different outlook, doncha know . .
. they're looking at a
reall
<cold winter for which they need the power to
survive. If they don't
<survive, it's not going to help them that their grandchildren will have a
<cleaner planet, since their grandchildren will freeze too.
Well, what you don't know. Chernobyl is 4 plants, one crashed due to
operator error. It was a hell of a mess that will take a long time to
disappear. In the meantime people are cold and hungry. Maybe it's not
right but, neither is sick people. Right now that country is trying to
make it as something other than communist I think they have enough right
at that.
Allison
27 Nov
27 Nov
3:06 p.m.
They aren't a threat of nuclear war anymore than they were before and they
should have the "gist" of safety with reactors down now so they'd be about
as
much a problem or risk as our reactors or missiles here (ignoring 3 Mile Island
of course).
Richard Erlacher wrote:
I agree, fundamentally, with what you say. I just
don't see how letting
what's essentially becoming a third-world nation after fifty years of being
a technological leader, freeze because it displeases US for them to run
their flawed reactor, for which they've already paid, is gong to help
anyone, especially since they can't just build a replacement with any
technology.
Surviving to get there is more important than having a pristine "there" to
get. It doesn't matter if we're all surely going to die if we're already
dead.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, November 27, 1999 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] They're restarting Chernobyl?
<It's just a different outlook, doncha know
. . . they're looking at a
reall
><cold winter for which they need the power to survive. If they don't
><survive, it's not going to help them that their grandchildren will have a
><cleaner planet, since their grandchildren will freeze too.
>
>Well, what you don't know. Chernobyl is 4 plants, one crashed due to
>operator error. It was a hell of a mess that will take a long time to
>disappear. In the meantime people are cold and hungry. Maybe it's not
>right but, neither is sick people. Right now that country is trying to
>make it as something other than communist I think they have enough right
>at that.
>
>Allison
>
9109
days inactive
9109
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
edick＠idcomm.com -
rhblake＠creative-net.net