Henry,

I've been looking at that for sometime now. Everyone and their brother wants it for reasons you've already mentioned. However; the number of people who are wanting it will be a problem. It's like money, it takes it to make it. Energy is no different. We will in a nearer future than most realize, be effectively out of fossil. The energy problem with fossil is not so much a problem as people would think either. There have been numerous options available for years and years. The biggest problem with oil is getting off of it. Oil is the economic crack cocaine of nations. From a realistic standpoint, the technology to be rid of it has been around a while, but the entire worlds economy thrives on it.
Just the act of making a true concentrated effort to get off of it will create wars. The countries who don't have much else but oil, are only something while they have it. The middle east doesn't have a whole lot of resources other than oil, anyone who thinks they will just stand around idle while their power is supplanted by a new energy technology is sadly mistaken. Iran for instance, does it really need nuclear power? Not really, but they will continue to get it, as well as advance centrifuges and other devices to enrich uranium in an effort to get the nuclear bomb. My opinion is, it is not so much a religious problem as it is a realization by Iran that within a couple of hundred years they will have nothing if they don't have the force to make the world take notice of them.

Then there are the oil giants, trillions of dollars worth. They will not just stand by while their respective companies are reduced to a garage sale of old nearly useless equipment.
These companies have the political clout and money to squeeze any given economy. Just look at the opportunistic hit we took after katrina.
they give us this song and dance about how much it cost them, yet year and year they hit new record profits. Usually a company that suffers a lose of key equipment and hardships gets a subsequent reduction in the profit margin, but not the oil companies. It went the other way with them.

Now we come to the H3. If that takes hold, there will be a race to claim the moon as you've already deduced. There will be the eventual wars over this. Wars in which a nuclear bomb is no longer essential in destroying a nation. Just use a large mag rail powered by one of these fusion plants on the moon to launch a few hundred tons (earth normal) object fast enough to escape L1 orbit and start sliding down the earths gravity well. Aim it right and the kinetic energy alone will be equal to a small nuclear bomb without the need to pollute the atmosphere with high level radionuclide's.

Anyone who thinks that can't happen should look at maglev
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev_train
or this one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
The former can use linear motors (magnetic motors) to get the train moving. There are several examples already built around the world.
The later is solely designed to move an object to extremely high velocities departing kinetic energy to it.

What stands in the way of much larger versions? The copious amounts of electricity needed to run them. 

In comes H3 fusion reactors.

A mag shot from the moon powered by a H3 reactors and we are now in another arms race.

The Chinese government and our own have already looked into this possibility.
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_RailGuns,,00.html
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel4/20/15929/00738373.pdf?arnumber=738373

Consider what would happen if you could launch one of these in L2 orbit without having to overcome the moons gravity.

All in all "the moon for sale" stands a good chance of becoming the obituary for earth.
Considering all factors, economic mitigation, technological deficiencies, and others, countries such as Iran and North Korea will be looking at the rest of the world with these developing technologies and thinking to themselves "we are screwed anyway, may as well make them bleed".
Look at Pyongyang,  Kim Jong-il is a perfect example of this mentality. Even though China threatened them they still tested a nuke, and multiple missiles.
Someone like that will pull the pin before going down in history with a whimper, despite the untold suffering it would create.

Now I am in full agreeance with space exploration, and in an ideal world those concerns would be a mute point.
In my opinion every nation in the world should have a piece of it. The risk of alienating one or the other country is just to high for continued good health of the planet.
Therefore it's my belief that no one country should have exclusive rights to any product of the moon. It should be treated like neutral ground and as owned by all nations of the world. Doing anything else is carving the head stone for the earths grave.

On the other hand, the moon if all governments of the world could come to an agreement, could be used as a springboard to points much farther out for areas that could be claimed by each nation without directly threatening earth itself. Utilizing the H3 in smaller reactors to power hall effect motors, ion motors, and especially a plasma thruster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodeless_plasma_thruster

In short, the supply of H3 on the moon could be used to gain a limitless supply of energy for all, not to mention elbow room and technological advancement of the human race.

It could be done in under 40 years with a concentrated multinational effort.

On one thing we agree, it's coming whether anyone wants it or not. We need to be smart about how it's handled. Otherwise it could kill us all.

Regards,
Gerald

yeah but I seen it before you so f*** off :), no seriously, what you are talking about has to be kept out of private hands. Think about it!