(04-03-2018 02:41 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What was sold to Russia was rights. Not material. And it's not weapons grade material regardless. Not to mention that Russia already has more than enough of the weapons making material, as well as stockpiled weapons already ready to fire.

yes... and of course they don't know how to turn rights into material or ore into weapons grade material... and it begs the question, if they already have so much, why do they need more?

Maybe if we had turned them down and their intentions been 'good' they would have scuttled some of their stockpiles for civilian use? Urnaium hexafloride CAN be converted back to uranium oxide.... probably a lot cheaper (especially in light of your next comment) than mining it.

Quote:Couple that with the guy who donated all the money long abandoning all his interests around the deal, and you have exactly what I said, NOTHING!
The Facts on Uranium One

So you're saying that we knew in advance that the rights were worthless?

C'mon Tom. You don't measure something like this on things you obviously didn't know at the time.

Quote:Additionally, on the whole, the "left" did not blame Russia for the Hillary loss. That's little more than a trump talking point for his minions.

This is an article from the largest newspaper in a county where Hillary won 72% of the vote in a state where she won 62%... and while Hillary isn't the left 'on the whole', she DOES represent a significant portion of them.... and the article was 5/2/2017 and not 'in the heat of the moment' after the election.

“If the election had been on Oct. 27, I would be your president,” Clinton said at the Women for Women event in New York. But she said FBI director James Comey’s letter to Congress announcing that he had reopened his investigation into Clinton’s email practices, combined with the damage Russian hackers inflicted through their disclosure of campaign emails, raised just enough doubt in the minds of voters to cost her the election.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washingt...story.html


We can debate whether or not this is 30%, 50% of 80% of 'the left', but the idea that this is a Trump talking point is pretty obviously nothing more than an "anti-Trump' talking point.

Seriously, you're making it almost impossible to agree with you that this wasn't a big deal by all of the (mostly false) red herrings you're throwing out as justification.

It was rights to mine uranium, not actual uranium.
They already had nukes so what's a few more?

The justification for a deal like this (if there is some) is that it is standard business practices and other governments have done similar transactions with them.

unless they haven't, in which case it IS a RELATIVELY big deal.

Didn't they recently deploy a chemical weapon in the UK? It doesn't have to be 'weapons grade' (as if they don't also posses the ability to turn it IN to weapons grade which is how they got them in the first place) in order for it to be used as a dirty bomb.

Argue it's 'business as usual' all you want... but argue THAT, not THIS.