Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone?

I'd say an episode of ATLAS SHRUGGED the TV series.

Long past time for a regime change in SA

Was this negotiated over another one of them sword dances?

Tell me again why we like these people?

We're giving one of the world's most radical, primitive Islamic states the material to make nuclear weapons.

re: #4 Iron Mike

Tell me again why we like these people?

They give our politicians and academics money.

re: #5 savage_nation

Excuse me, but did I see this right? Enriched uranium?

Tell me this is a lie.... please!

Not only enriched, but new and improved. Large economy size.

“What they’re saying to us is ... Saudi Arabia does not have customers that are making requests for oil that they are not able to satisfy,”

It's not that the customers aren't making requests, it's that the saudis don't give a rat's ass.

But the Saudi have magnanimously agreed to share their school books with American children.

The White House said Washington and Riyadh were also to sign an agreement on nuclear cooperation that would clear the way for Saudi Arabia to receive enriched uranium for its reactors, without the need to master the fuel nuclear cycle itself as Iran has done.

They won't even need to enrich the uranium themselves. We're handing it to them.

Are we stupid or suicidal? Both?

Anyone who expected the Saudis to actually do anything to lower oil prices has been smoking some funny stuff.

re: #10 savage_nation

Are we gonna give them our nuclear weapons blueprints too?

Why should we, the Chinese probably already have.

Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone?

That was my thought too when I saw this. It makes no sense what-so-ever to give these twits any sort of uranium or anyother radioactive material at all. First, we give it to them, them they'll give it right back in the form of dirty bombs (or worse).

re: #6 Charles

We're giving one of the world's most radical, primitive Islamic states the material to make nuclear weapons.

They need nuclear power to generate electricity. How else are they gonna do it?

/s

re: #17 Honorary Yooper

That was my thought too when I saw this. It makes no sense what-so-ever to give these twits any sort of uranium or anyother radioactive material at all. First, we give it to them, them they'll give it right back in the form of dirty bombs (or worse).

Well at least it will easier to identify then.

ANWAR,,,,,,, NOW

GULF OF MEXICO ,,,,, NOW

The States should have worked on oil independance (coming the Middle East that is) a long time ago.

Enriched uranium. I am still not sure where the bigger fools live. Europe or The United States....

The article doesn't say- does Congress have to approve this deal?

Not that Congress is much help.

re: #16 Nevergiveup

Why should we, the Chinese probably already have.

Enriched Uranium!? You don't need bloody plans.

re: #12 Charles

They won't even need to enrich the uranium themselves. We're handing it to them.

Which can be used to make the extremely simple gun configuration nuclear device.

re: #18 unrealizedviewpoint

They need nuclear power to generate electricity. How else are they gonna do it?

/s

Solar arrays and banks of batteries.

This reminds me of 'The Sum of All Fears,' when Baltimore is destroyed via a nuke in a vending machine, and when the CIA finds out where the uranium came from, the analyst says, 'right here in the good 'ol USA.' F*cking insane.

No uranium unless they kick down some oil.

why would they willingly do anything for us? it's an uneasy relationship that has nothing to do w/ our well being. in fact they probably enjoy seeing the infidel coming, cap in hand.
that approach needs to stop.

Please let the only enriched uranium that ever reaches that place do so on top of a polaris missile....

Is that over the top? Really, what are these people thinking? What possible good could come from this - the logic has to be that we're sending a message to Iran, but couldn't this happen to a nicer country?

Are there any in the region that would be worse candidates?

Chavez linked to Colombian guerillas

Gee, so all that hand holding and Kissing Bush has done with That Saudi King(or is he a prince?) was for nothing? I am on a jazz board with a very liberal political forum. and anytime I post some outrage from Saudi Arabia, they pull out that photo of Bush walking hand in hand with the Saudi big wig....it's one of the few times they leave me at a lose for words...what can you say?

To be fair to the Saudi's they are going to need nuclear power...they have so little natural resources under their sand....

They know, and anybody who deals with commodities knows, that it takes considerable excess of supply to depress prices and they have no intention of doing that. If you think prices are high now, just wait 'til an actual shortage develops.

al Qaeda just canceled all plans to leave Saudi Arabia. They figure with Obama in office, when they make their move on the oil ticks, Barry O will nod approvingly before getting back to his waffle.

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

Dear God- I hope this isn't Bush's idea of how to make the iranians nervous.

re: #25 savage_nation

And start developing that massive oil shale field beneath North Dakota and Montana. NOW

The point at which developing that oil would become cost effective has long been said to be $50 a barrel. Even if you consider the drastic drop in the valuation of the dollar, that point has long since passed. Let's start digging.

re: #32 savage_nation

And windpower along their east coast.

Use hydrolysis to generate hydrogen and export it to ... let's not give them ideas...

re: #21 sattv4u2

ANWAR,,,,,,, NOW

GULF OF MEXICO ,,,,, NOW

I really hope and pray the 3 candidates will be pounded on these two topics! I want Americans to hear all three say we need to drive slower, get tiny cars, to deal with China and India becoming the biggest consumers of oil...

Unfortunately, Some think that aiding Saudi in an arms race with Iran is a good idea. Personally I think between Israel and the US we have Iran pretty well covered if we wanted to act on it. Not sure anyone is interested in acting on it though. Looks like we just cant learn from our mistakes. We are always shocked when our former "allies" use our former assistance against us like in Iraq and Afghanistan. We will add Saudi to that list within 10 years, trust me.

re: #37 Charles

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

It's time to start the Lizard Party. Are you up to running in 2012?

re: #27 The Other Les

Solar arrays and banks of batteries.

But, that ain't the good stuff. You want our good stuff, we want your good stuff.

So now we need be concerned, focused on preventing this good stuff, in the hands of another unstable dictatorship leaders control, from falling into terrorists hands. We really are in Bizzaro World.

re: #37 Charles

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

Clearly you don't understand what is going on. The Saudi's are only interested in peaceful, domestic power production. It isn't like they have a lot of resources themselves...

...uh, wait.

Hit me again...cause it feels soooo good when you stop!

Don't worry they'll return our uranium in the form of a bomb delivered by Saudis with student visas.

re: #37 Charles

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

You would hope there are some safeguards included in this deal? Hope hum, who keeps saying that? I don't know whether to laugh, cry or get drunk?

Keep in mind that the enriched uranium is not weapons grade enrichment. It's certainly the Low Enriched Uranium used in commercial light water plants, which is unusable for weapons. Furthermore, I think the idea is to have the whole plant's fuel cycle under the control of the western nations, with the idea that it will slow or prevent them from taking Iran's route to Nuclear Power.

I'm not sure what to think about this, it has it's plusses and minuses, but it is not necessarily crazy.

What really pisses me off is not the Saudis, its our own government. This mess with fuel prices was predictable, even by the most shortsighted, and our government has done almost nothing, and continues to do almost nothing to encourage any real improvement. And I'm not talking about silly assed band aids like Jimmah tried and ethanol, which will never work. I mean telling the leftist morons who don't give a damn about this country to get screwed and get some nuclear power plants on line, get synfuel on line, allow drilling in a responsible way in areas that have oil. All they do (and Johnny McClueless is included in this group) is talk. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have 2 kids in college, and $4.00/gal+ fuel is gonna hurt bad. Yet, our "leaders" sit around and scratch their overpaid asses and talk about being responsible to the environment, global warming/climate change and all that bullshit.

McCain, you shameless ass.

re: #37 Charles

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

Charles, insane doesn't begin to describe it.

"Absolutely fucking nuts" comes close.

Protecting the oil fields, that's a good idea.
Enriched uranium? OK, now I have BDS as well.
What did they do? Take the alien mind control device from the Kaaba and hit Bush with it?

I do hope, though, we send them a big fat bill for it tied to the price of oil.

This enriched uranium isn't going to be weapons-grade, (I hope!), but it could still make dirty bombs.

re: #35 abu_garcia

They know, and anybody who deals with commodities knows, that it takes considerable excess of supply to depress prices and they have no intention of doing that. If you think prices are high now, just wait 'til an actual shortage develops.

Ever notice that in the last 5-6 years, every little tropical storm, wave, whathaveyou, causes oil prices to jump? sure didn't seem to happen in the past. And imagine another Katrina at this point!

re: #12 Charles

Stop the hysteria folks,

Let's be clear about what is meant by "enriched uranium". Fuel grade uranium is enriched to 5%. Weapons grade uranium is enriched to over 90%. The point of this deal is that the Saudi's won't build their own enrichment process, so they can't take the 5% fuel uranium and make 90% weapons grade EU. This is a good thing.

The real problem is the fact the Saudis may well already have a few nukes. They funded the Pakistani nuclear program. What do you suppose the Pakistanis gave the Saudis in return? Nukes.

re: #43 ziggyelman

I really hope and pray the 3 candidates will be pounded on these two topics! I want Americans to hear all three say we need to drive slower, get tiny cars, to deal with China and India becoming the biggest consumers of oil...

All the more reason to drill in Anwar. We sell to thre Chinese and eliminate the trade deficit in what ,,,, 12-18 MONTHS ?

re: #58 Kenneth

Stop the hysteria folks,

Let's be clear about what is meant by "enriched uranium". Fuel grade uranium is enriched to 5%. Weapons grade uranium is enriched to over 90%. The point of this deal is that the Saudi's won't build their own enrichment process, so they can't take the 5% fuel uranium and make 90% weapons grade EU. This is a good thing.

The real problem is the fact the Saudis may well already have a few nukes. They funded the Pakistani nuclear program. What do you suppose the Pakistanis gave the Saudis in return? Nukes.

Well that makes me feel better? But you are probably right. That has been reported before.

Do we have any reasons to believe that John McCain will as cozy with the Saudis as Bush has been?

re: #58 Kenneth

Stop the hysteria folks,

Let's be clear about what is meant by "enriched uranium". Fuel grade uranium is enriched to 5%. Weapons grade uranium is enriched to over 90%. The point of this deal is that the Saudi's won't build their own enrichment process, so they can't take the 5% fuel uranium and make 90% weapons grade EU. This is a good thing.

The real problem is the fact the Saudis may well already have a few nukes. They funded the Pakistani nuclear program. What do you suppose the Pakistanis gave the Saudis in return? Nukes.

What makes you think the Saudis won't build their own enrichment process to boost it to weapons grade? They may not be able to use the material as is, but it's a hell of a head start.

re: #6 Charles

We're giving one of the world's most radical, primitive Islamic states the material to make nuclear weapons.

What level is it enriched to? Weapons grade is significantly more enriched than what is needed for power generation.

That fact aside, WTF are we doing giving them anything?

re: #51 Nevergiveup

I don't know whether to laugh, cry or get drunk?

I'm opting for drunk- the laughing and crying will flow naturally from there.

re: #39 song_and_dance_man

And even simpler is this.

That was Heinlein's big worry when he wrote Solution Unsatisfactory.

re: #37 Charles

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

Just natural forward diplomatic progress, following the sale of advanced military aircraft and weaponry last year.

/

re: #52 Noah's Arrrgh

Keep in mind that the enriched uranium is not weapons grade enrichment. It's certainly the Low Enriched Uranium used in commercial light water plants, which is unusable for weapons. Furthermore, I think the idea is to have the whole plant's fuel cycle under the control of the western nations, with the idea that it will slow or prevent them from taking Iran's route to Nuclear Power.

I'm not sure what to think about this, it has it's plusses and minuses, but it is not necessarily crazy.

And after it is used in reactors, plutonium can be easily extracted.

Are we turning into France?
/sarcastic Osiraq reference

re: #25 savage_nation

And start developing that massive oil shale field beneath North Dakota and Montana. NOW

Total Saudi reserves? In the neighborhood of 280 Billion barrels.
North American Oil Sand and Shale? 8 TRILLION barrels.
At current price the extraction is cost effective.
The Bakken find in North Dakota we just announced? 200 Billion Barrels.

Crash program. Drill ANWAR and Bakken. Free of SA in 24 months.
5 years bring sand and shale on line.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE WAITING FOR?

re: #37 Charles

Seven years after 9/11, we're handing enriched uranium to the country that sponsored and inspired the plot.

This is insane.

But the President did get a nice sword.

re: #62 Ringo the Gringo

Do we have any reasons to believe that John McCain will as cozy with the Saudis as Bush has been?

I seriously doubt that John McCain will be any different in this regard.

re: #58 Kenneth

True, but low-grade uranium can be used for "dirty bombs". Even if it cannot be used for typical weapons, I still don't think giving them this is a good idea.

As for the Saudis having a few nukes via Pakistan, that could be more trouble. Damn A Q Khan.

re: #70 jcm

Total Saudi reserves? In the neighborhood of 280 Billion barrels.
North American Oil Sand and Shale? 8 TRILLION barrels.
At current price the extraction is cost effective.
The Bakken find in North Dakota we just announced? 200 Billion Barrels.

Crash program. Drill ANWAR and Bakken. Free of SA in 24 months.
5 years bring sand and shale on line.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE WAITING FOR?

What about the newly discovered rerserves in Brazil?

I wonder if Bush will do the sword dance again?

dee dee dee you have just entered the moonbat zone.

my magic 8 ball says this cant be good. what a story to wake up too

re: #76 Ringo the Gringo

I checked the pics. No sign of sword dancing yet.

re: #73 Charles

I seriously doubt that John McCain will be any different in this regard.

I hope you're wrong, but I think you're right.

Gee, it'd be nice if we'd build some pebble bed reactors AND USED THAT FUEL OURSELVES FOR ELECTRICAL POWER!

Fast-tracking the Saudi's nukes to counter Iran?

re: #6 Charles

We're giving one of the world's most radical, primitive Islamic states the material to make nuclear weapons.

why not just give em a few nukes. man it is way to early to start drinking

Perhaps we're lookin' to ensure Saudi assistance in advanace of war with Iran?
Scary savior faire.

re: #63 Charles

They might do try to do that, but the point of this agreement is that they agree not to do it. (Yes, I know, "trust but verify" comes to mind.) Also included in the deal is the arrangement to take the spent fuel away for reprocessing. This is the same sort of deal the US, EU & Russians each offered to the Iranians, only to be refused.

re: #70 jcm

Total Saudi reserves? In the neighborhood of 280 Billion barrels.
North American Oil Sand and Shale? 8 TRILLION barrels.
At current price the extraction is cost effective.
The Bakken find in North Dakota we just announced? 200 Billion Barrels.

Crash program. Drill ANWAR and Bakken. Free of SA in 24 months.
5 years bring sand and shale on line.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE WAITING FOR?

Is that true? 8 Trillion Barrels? We all know oil prices are way above what it needed to make it feasible.....is it environmental concerns at this point?

Okay? What are we missing here? Why is this being done? What's the goal of this administrations actions supplying enriched uranium? Could it simply be they threatened to enrich it themselves and we really have no way of stopping them?

When did common sense get outlawed in DC?

re: #22 gordonshandling

The States should have worked on oil independance (coming the Middle East that is) a long time ago.

That should've been declared on 9/12, the beginning of the end of oil dependency. The U.S. should've started drilling that very day as well as organising exclusive contracts with non-Islamic countries, so that not one dollar goes towards Jihad.

The West has had nearly EIGHT years to get alternatively powered cars on to the road and all we have to show for it is a few crappy hybrids.

Who Killed The Electric Car?

Other countries will buy Saudi oil? Then *accidentally* set fire to their oil fields.

Damn. I wish I didn't have to go back to work... this subject opens alot of doors better left locked.

Even the radioactive waste from a nuclear reactor could be used in a dirty bomb. Do we, dare we, trust the Saudis to safegard it?

re: #88 ziggyelman

Is that true? 8 Trillion Barrels? We all know oil prices are way above what it needed to make it feasible.....is it environmental concerns at this point?

I've come to the conclusion that "environmental concerns" is a nice way to say F**k humanity.

Scare mongering.

Similar to the "depleted uranium making people sick" stories.

BETCHA,
R

re: #9 Sharmuta

The insane price of oil is not being created by increased demand;rather its a mess being created by commodities traders and the vise-like grip of oil company monopolies. Speculation & greed not demand is why I am being bent over at the gas pump. So in a sense the Saudis are correct and they sit over in that sh*thole of a country laughing all the way to their swiss banks.

I was reading an article on breeder reactors recently that said that the enriched uranium could be "tainted" in such a way that it could never be purified for use in a nuclear device. I'm hoping, repeat hoping, that this is the case here.

re: #85 BuddyG

Perhaps we're lookin' to ensure Saudi assistance in advanace of war with Iran?
Scary savior faire.

Good point. But I'm fairly certain we have their assistance in this matter.

There is clearly a major problem with who we define are our strategic allies and reality.

If we ever send nuclear material over there, it should be delivered by ballistic missile. As to the oil, we need to stop asking them for it, and start compelling them. In light of the fact that we're propping up their worthless monarchy, and preserving what little stability they enjoy in that region at great expense in US treasure and blood, I believe that a 15% tax on all Saudi oil revenues would be reasonable. I'm also pretty sure that the Saudis would agree to it, were the case made strongly enough.

re: #75 MandyManners

What about the newly discovered rerserves in Brazil?

I read somewhere the technology doesn't yet exist to get the oil out....in fact, it's so hot at the depth the oil is, metal melts!

No Uranium For Oil!

re: #74 Honorary Yooper

Many other isotopes can be used more effectively than uranium for dirty bombs. If the Saudis wanted to make some dirty bombs, they will have them already. They don't need US uranium fuel rods. The point of this deal is a careful accounting of all uranium delivered & returned for reprocessing.

Trust but verify is a very good principle to apply here.

re: #95 The Other Les

I've come to the conclusion that "environmental concerns" is a nice way to say F**k humanity.

Well, the fascist left does support eugenics.....which is yet another way to say "F**k humanity".

We should be putting the uranium to good use in our own power plants.

It's starting to look like Bush is selling his country, his party, and his reputation out for his oil buddies.

re: #103 buzzsawmonkey

No Uranium For Oil!

another rotating title nominee

re: #90 Athos

Sometime in the 1780's.

Or, shortly after the DC Beltway was built.

PICK
EM,
R

re: #7 The Other Les

They give our politicians and academics money.

Also, since 9/11 we have had a good man as President who lost the birth lottery by being born to an oil soaked family. He says what is in his heart in Israel, but his load is that he's grown up with "Uncle Abdullah" and just can't see the reality of the deatheating gangs in the Middle East. He just can't seem to cross over into the space of facing down people like the Saudis against the wishes of his family and people like Jim Baker. I guess he's done the best he can with it (and has certainly enjoyed the perks of the $$), but I think it will be good to have a leader not tied in knots over the people who raised people flying airliners into office buildings. I hope he doesn't do another war dance with them on this visit.

Bush is shooting for an 80% disapproval rating. The Jimmy Carter of the GOP. November is going to be a bloodbath for Republicans. Deservedly so.

re: #81 Kalak

Gee, it'd be nice if we'd build some pebble bed reactors AND USED THAT FUEL OURSELVES FOR ELECTRICAL POWER!

Good idea but have you ever tried to build ANY type of industrial facility in the US? I have. You will need 10,000 man hours of top notch lawyering before you touch a shovel.

re: #74 Honorary Yooper

True, but low-grade uranium can be used for "dirty bombs". Even if it cannot be used for typical weapons, I still don't think giving them this is a good idea.

As for the Saudis having a few nukes via Pakistan, that could be more trouble. Damn A Q Khan.

Look, the Saudis already have all kinds of fancy medical equipment that produces radioactive waste which can be used for dirty bombs. Our own hospitals manage to lose track of the stuff fairly regularly, so I suspect that if somebody really wanted to divert the stuff in the Magic Kingdom, that could happen.

Refusing to sell/give them low-grade uranium is not going to do squat as far as preventing them from making a dirty bomb tomorrow if they want one.

re: #70 jcm

The just released USGS report estimated technically recoverable oil in the Bakken at between 3 to 4.3 billion barrels.