Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (174872)	11/13/2005 9:33:56 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"Experts: Saddam's Uranium Enough for One Nuke" Dumbo, do you realize what it takes to enrich that uranium to the point to where it can be used in a nuke? Do you know that the Manhattan Project employed more people than the auto industry and that just the uranium enrichment facility in Oak Ridge, Tennesee took up 59,000 acres? There's NO WAY Saddam could have hidden that with us all over him. atomicmuseum.com That's not even counting the 500,000 acre plutonium production facility in Hanford, Washington!

To: greenspirit who wrote (174872)	11/13/2005 5:55:08 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I know newsmax is about your speed on both the bias and intellectual depth level. But: most everybody beyond that stage knows that the step from low-enriched uranium to bomb-grade uranium is just about the most difficult step in the nuclear weapons game. I haven't keep up since the early stages, but when I was following this stuff early on, all the alleged nuke finds turned out to have been things inspected and under UN seal, until W got the war of his heart's desire. You may now return to your regular W suckup program.