You mean uranium one is BS

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Fine, but it wasn't 20% of reserves, that's an indisputable fact. Please, by all means, resort to insults but that doesn't change the fact that you're wrong, again. Or, form your opinions on your alternative facts and assume you're right.

If it's $hit came out, then I suppose that it's $hit went in.
You're fake facts
And that's the surrender flag.
Haven't you embarrassed yourself enough for today?
LOL. Keep sticking with the 20% of reserves claim. Please, say it again. It's funnier the more you say things that are completely wrong.
Uh huh
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by RiverguyVT »

TheH2 wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Fingers in ears...nah! nah! nah! .... Hillary!'s foundation took no money (because the amount reported is wrong) :lol:

Uranium is swapped around just like corn.

Uh, yeah. ....No.
Fact, Uranium is a commodity that is traded, there is even a traded price. Mined uranium is not going to blow anyone up. Hell, it can't even be used in nuclear reactors. It is not suitable for nuclear weapons until it is enriched to 90%, maybe 96/97% (google to verify). It's really difficult to get that last few percent. Iran had likely not yet achieved it prior to the nuclear deal.


Never said Hillary took no money, but carry on with not valid points to make your point.
So, you're saying Hillary!'s foundation did in fact take money for this deal?
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

RiverguyVT wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Fingers in ears...nah! nah! nah! .... Hillary!'s foundation took no money (because the amount reported is wrong) :lol:

Uranium is swapped around just like corn.

Uh, yeah. ....No.
Fact, Uranium is a commodity that is traded, there is even a traded price. Mined uranium is not going to blow anyone up. Hell, it can't even be used in nuclear reactors. It is not suitable for nuclear weapons until it is enriched to 90%, maybe 96/97% (google to verify). It's really difficult to get that last few percent. Iran had likely not yet achieved it prior to the nuclear deal.


Never said Hillary took no money, but carry on with not valid points to make your point.
So, you're saying Hillary!'s foundation did in fact take money for this deal?
I'm not disputing the fact that the Clinton foundation took money from people. I don't know that it has anything to do with the deal.
I'm suspicious for a few reasons:
The "facts" cited to make the case were wrong. See ag's 20%. That should call this into question. Let the facts speak for themselves, when discredited, don't continue to run with them.
I don't see why IEA or any other agency wouldn't approve the deal. This isn't a national security threat.
Boy who cried wolf.
People who know, know.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

The last word, by ag.
awesome guy wrote:Uh huh
People who know, know.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by ip_law-hokie »

TheH2 wrote:The last word, by ag.
awesome guy wrote:Uh huh
Danville.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:The last word, by ag.
awesome guy wrote:Uh huh
I had the first and best ones too
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:The last word, by ag.
awesome guy wrote:Uh huh
Danville.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's not fair. Tunstall Sr. High has produced some terrific graduates. There's a lot of good in Danville.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by ip_law-hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:The last word, by ag.
awesome guy wrote:Uh huh
Danville.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's not fair. Tunstall Sr. High has produced some terrific graduates. There's a lot of good in Danville.
Uh huh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

HokieFanDC wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:The US may be legally denied access to it's uranium during war. It's 20% of the reserve and not trivial as you falsely assert.
It's not 20% of reserves. It was estimated at 20% of licensed capacity, which is far different from reserves. Again, please use actual facts, not AG facts. In 2015 it was less than 5% of U.S. production, a trivial amount.
The "20% of the reserve" claim is the flashing neon sign that screams "I'm a LIV".
No, questioning why it's a strategic asset whose use should be strictly controlled is what screams LIV.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:The US may be legally denied access to it's uranium during war. It's 20% of the reserve and not trivial as you falsely assert.
It's not 20% of reserves. It was estimated at 20% of licensed capacity, which is far different from reserves. Again, please use actual facts, not AG facts. In 2015 it was less than 5% of U.S. production, a trivial amount.
The "20% of the reserve" claim is the flashing neon sign that screams "I'm a LIV".
No, questioning why it's a strategic asset whose use should be strictly controlled is what screams LIV.
I didn't question that goofball.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:The US may be legally denied access to it's uranium during war. It's 20% of the reserve and not trivial as you falsely assert.
It's not 20% of reserves. It was estimated at 20% of licensed capacity, which is far different from reserves. Again, please use actual facts, not AG facts. In 2015 it was less than 5% of U.S. production, a trivial amount.
The "20% of the reserve" claim is the flashing neon sign that screams "I'm a LIV".
No, questioning why it's a strategic asset whose use should be strictly controlled is what screams LIV.
Questioning something doesn't make someone LIV, seems like the opposite would be true. I've provided some information that questions whether it is really a strategic asset. It seems your response, if it's so obvious, should be a little more than because because because because because.......
People who know, know.
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:The US may be legally denied access to it's uranium during war. It's 20% of the reserve and not trivial as you falsely assert.
It's not 20% of reserves. It was estimated at 20% of licensed capacity, which is far different from reserves. Again, please use actual facts, not AG facts. In 2015 it was less than 5% of U.S. production, a trivial amount.
The "20% of the reserve" claim is the flashing neon sign that screams "I'm a LIV".
No, questioning why it's a strategic asset whose use should be strictly controlled is what screams LIV.
I didn't question that goofball.

Sorry, that wasn't directed at you.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:The US may be legally denied access to it's uranium during war. It's 20% of the reserve and not trivial as you falsely assert.
It's not 20% of reserves. It was estimated at 20% of licensed capacity, which is far different from reserves. Again, please use actual facts, not AG facts. In 2015 it was less than 5% of U.S. production, a trivial amount.
The "20% of the reserve" claim is the flashing neon sign that screams "I'm a LIV".
No, questioning why it's a strategic asset whose use should be strictly controlled is what screams LIV.
I didn't question that goofball.

Sorry, that wasn't directed at you.
A Ok.
Post Reply