And now for something completely different...

[weakwarrior]

I've been pro nuke, even before TMI. It is a modern example of Galileo's house arrest, that is, crushing useful science because of superstitions and fear. Because, radiation is invisible and scary.

I agree with this part and it frustrates me to no end when people discuss the energy ´crisis´when there is a solution sitting right there.

2 points though:
1) The more proliferated nuclear energy becomes the greater the chance that some enriched uranium may end up in the wrong hands/be stolen.

2) What do you do about countries, such as Iran which do not have nuclear weapons but want nuclear energy plants. Of course it´s possible, and perhaps economically profitable, to sell excess energy to foreign countries, however to me it seems immoral to enforce a monopoly by not allowing them to make their own energy, while we make it and sell it to them. So here´s the catch - as long as the U.S. believes (pretends to believe) that nuclear energy is a dangerous way to make energy they can try and prevent other countries from using/developing it. Once they accept it as safe they would be morally (in my opinion) obligated to allow other countries to develop it. They could try and insist countries only use it for energy and not enrich further for the purpose of bombs, but as I understand it is much more difficult to enforce/monitor that.

Yes, China has implemented a harsh policy, but hardly as harsh as waiting for the next war to cull the herd.

I was only partially serious in the first place but I don´t know exactly what you mean here. There is nothing harsh about waiting for a war to cull the herd. I did not say we should make a war to cull the population. I said the war will come whether we like it or not and that will solve the problem. Controlling the population by other means seems irrelevant to whether the war will happen. The war happening, on the other hand, affects whether we need to control the population. As an example people will die of old age which helps with overpopulation and should be considered when coming up with solutions. We wait for this, but as long as we don´t try and rush this process along, I see nothing harsh in including that in our considerations.