You mean uranium one is BS

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote: But they're not close. Maybe the FBI informants mentioned this (link?)? We still have uranium in the U.S., there is still plenty of uranium in Canada we can access. I don't know how much uranium Australia has.
:roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:
That certainly solidified your point. LOL. I hope that one day you're as bright as you think you are, that would be someone to behold rather than the current silly and stubborn person we have now.
Thanks for your contribution to the thread. The thought, reason, and thorough response to the information provided has given me a lot to think about. Have a good weekend!
People who know, know.
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:
awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote: But they're not close. Maybe the FBI informants mentioned this (link?)? We still have uranium in the U.S., there is still plenty of uranium in Canada we can access. I don't know how much uranium Australia has.
:roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:
That certainly solidified your point. LOL. I hope that one day you're as bright as you think you are, that would be someone to behold rather than the current silly and stubborn person we have now.
Thanks for your contribution to the thread. The thought, reason, and thorough response to the information provided has given me a lot to think about. Have a good weekend!
No problem, your points were and have been discredited for a while so I got to the heart of why you can't see or admit your errors.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
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 »

TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote: But they're not close. Maybe the FBI informants mentioned this (link?)? We still have uranium in the U.S., there is still plenty of uranium in Canada we can access. I don't know how much uranium Australia has.
:roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:

Settle down Krugman. National Security issues are not and never should be based solely on fuzzy economic theory.
"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
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by RiverguyVT »

No need to read this whole thread.
Paraphrased, Summarized:

The US has nearly 7000 nuclear warheads.
As such there is no US shortage of nuclear warheads.
Russia has a bunch of nuclear warheads.
As such, Russia has no shortage of warheads.
Other countries have warheads too.
This means that nuclear warheads are a commodity, akin to wheat or barley.

If Hillary!'s corrupt foundation had been illegally paid $144,999,999 for her arranging warhead shipment to Russia, by Russian operatives, and (gasp!) FoxNews!FoxNews! (pant-pant) has incorrectly reported the kickback as having been $145,000,000 this means no corruption took place because "fake news"


I know this is a paraphrasing, but that's pretty much where the discussion stands. Nothing to see here. Move along. :lol: :lol: :lol:
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.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieHam »

RiverguyVT wrote:No need to read this whole thread.
Paraphrased, Summarized:

The US has nearly 7000 nuclear warheads.
As such there is no US shortage of nuclear warheads.
Russia has a bunch of nuclear warheads.
As such, Russia has no shortage of warheads.
Other countries have warheads too.
This means that nuclear warheads are a commodity, akin to wheat or barley.

If Hillary!'s corrupt foundation had been illegally paid $144,999,999 for her arranging warhead shipment to Russia, by Russian operatives, and (gasp!) FoxNews!FoxNews! (pant-pant) has incorrectly reported the kickback as having been $145,000,000 this means no corruption took place because "fake news"


I know this is a paraphrasing, but that's pretty much where the discussion stands. Nothing to see here. Move along. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Yup.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

RiverguyVT wrote:No need to read this whole thread.
Paraphrased, Summarized:

The US has nearly 7000 nuclear warheads.
As such there is no US shortage of nuclear warheads.
Russia has a bunch of nuclear warheads.
As such, Russia has no shortage of warheads.
Other countries have warheads too.
This means that nuclear warheads are a commodity, akin to wheat or barley.

If Hillary!'s corrupt foundation had been illegally paid $144,999,999 for her arranging warhead shipment to Russia, by Russian operatives, and (gasp!) FoxNews!FoxNews! (pant-pant) has incorrectly reported the kickback as having been $145,000,000 this means no corruption took place because "fake news"


I know this is a paraphrasing, but that's pretty much where the discussion stands. Nothing to see here. Move along. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Might be time to read up on uranium.
Is uranium a commodity? What is the enrichment level of the uranium? Is this highly enriched uranium? This is as much of a national security risk as Smithfield being sold to a Chinese company.

Answer the questions I posed and explain how you come to a different conclusion? Or, you could freak out, ignore the economics, and think yellowcake is scary because you watched a movie with Steve Carrell and The Rock!
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 »

HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote: But they're not close. Maybe the FBI informants mentioned this (link?)? We still have uranium in the U.S., there is still plenty of uranium in Canada we can access. I don't know how much uranium Australia has.
:roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:

Settle down Krugman. National Security issues are not and never should be based solely on fuzzy economic theory.
What is the national security threat? Seriously? Uranium shortage? Domestic production? Domestic inventory?
People who know, know.
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:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote: But they're not close. Maybe the FBI informants mentioned this (link?)? We still have uranium in the U.S., there is still plenty of uranium in Canada we can access. I don't know how much uranium Australia has.
:roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:

Settle down Krugman. National Security issues are not and never should be based solely on fuzzy economic theory.
What is the national security threat? Seriously? Uranium shortage? Domestic production? Domestic inventory?
Control is the issue, you have to control what you need. I really hope this is an act and you're not as silly as you present yourself.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote: But they're not close. Maybe the FBI informants mentioned this (link?)? We still have uranium in the U.S., there is still plenty of uranium in Canada we can access. I don't know how much uranium Australia has.
:roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:

Settle down Krugman. National Security issues are not and never should be based solely on fuzzy economic theory.
What is the national security threat? Seriously? Uranium shortage? Domestic production? Domestic inventory?
Control is the issue, you have to control what you need. I really hope this is an act and you're not as silly as you present yourself.
So, because of this sale, you believe U.S. companies do not control enough uranium?
People who know, know.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by RiverguyVT »

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.
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.
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 »

TheH2 wrote:
So, because of this sale, you believe U.S. companies do not control enough uranium?
We should control ALL of our uranium. End of story.
"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
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

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.
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 »

HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
So, because of this sale, you believe U.S. companies do not control enough uranium?
We should control ALL of our uranium. End of story.
Why?

What if Canada controlled the mine?
People who know, know.
Mcl3 Hokie
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by Mcl3 Hokie »

This reminds me of the iron neodymium magnet story. The US Gov’t allowed the sale of the one facility that made iron neodymium magnets to the Chinese. The Chinese proceeded to shutter the plant in Anderson, IN and moved the technology to mainland China. It wasn’t until then, the US Gov’t realized they neede these extremely strong magnets for missile guidance systems. Guess what, the govt funded a new plant to start making these magnets again.

I’m sure someone got greased to facilitate the sale to China. Just like I’m sure someone got greased to facilitate this sale to Russia. However, the uranium deal has a side kicker with the trucking company expanding its export license. Tells me someone got paid twice.

We like to make fun of the bribery and outright corruption in other governments when all we do is hide it so the American public doesn’t know the players in the game.
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:
awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
HokieJoe wrote: :roll:

We should let Russia have it. It's a commodity! Like going to the farmers market and buying yellow cake.
No, it's morel like going to the farmers market and buying crude oil. And, you don't mine yellowcake, it is converted to yellowcake after mining. Significantly more enriching is required to go from yellowcake to nuclear weapons.

Is there a shortage of u3o8?
Does Russia have a shortage of u3o8? Keep in mind, in the 90s and aughts, Russia was decommissioning nukes and converted the nukes back to uranium that could be used for power.
Does U.S. have a shortage?
Sure, be outraged. Ignore all relevant information. :roll:
:roll:

Settle down Krugman. National Security issues are not and never should be based solely on fuzzy economic theory.
What is the national security threat? Seriously? Uranium shortage? Domestic production? Domestic inventory?
Control is the issue, you have to control what you need. I really hope this is an act and you're not as silly as you present yourself.
So, because of this sale, you believe U.S. companies do not control enough uranium?
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.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
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 »

Mcl3 Hokie wrote:This reminds me of the iron neodymium magnet story. The US Gov’t allowed the sale of the one facility that made iron neodymium magnets to the Chinese. The Chinese proceeded to shutter the plant in Anderson, IN and moved the technology to mainland China. It wasn’t until then, the US Gov’t realized they neede these extremely strong magnets for missile guidance systems. Guess what, the govt funded a new plant to start making these magnets again.

I’m sure someone got greased to facilitate the sale to China. Just like I’m sure someone got greased to facilitate this sale to Russia. However, the uranium deal has a side kicker with the trucking company expanding its export license. Tells me someone got paid twice.

We like to make fun of the bribery and outright corruption in other governments when all we do is hide it so the American public doesn’t know the players in the game.
H2 buys office supplies at Staples and so sees this as the same type of situation. "Just go to the radioactive material store and buy some more!" Haha
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

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.
People who know, know.
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:
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.
LOL, you don't comprehend facts. "Why don't they just use Mr. Fussion like in Back to the Future?"
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy 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.
LOL, you don't comprehend facts. "Why don't they just use Mr. Fussion like in Back to the Future?"
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.
People who know, know.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

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".
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

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".
Exactly. It's very good signaling.
People who know, know.
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:
awesome guy 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.
LOL, you don't comprehend facts. "Why don't they just use Mr. Fussion like in Back to the Future?"
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
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 »

awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy 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.
LOL, you don't comprehend facts. "Why don't they just use Mr. Fussion like in Back to the Future?"
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.
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:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy 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.
LOL, you don't comprehend facts. "Why don't they just use Mr. Fussion like in Back to the Future?"
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?
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 »

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.
Post Reply