- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Obama was OK with enrichment for civilian purposes
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:06 pm to boosiebadazz
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:06 pm to boosiebadazz
I always knew you were soft. But I never thought you were Aaron Rupar soft.
0
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:12 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Wtf is going on with this guy.
Its Trump, just wait 5 minutes and he'll say something that is 180 degrees the opposite , without skipping a beat.
Like Lion Ted said: You could hook him up to a lie detector test and he could give you 3 contradictory answers to the same question and he would pass with flying colors
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:12 pm to boosiebadazz
I don't know what point you think you're making. I haven't heard anyone say that Iran can't have nuclear energy. It's the bombs that are the problem.
Trump even offered them free nuclear material for energy purposes a while back. This isn't some startling revelation.
Trump even offered them free nuclear material for energy purposes a while back. This isn't some startling revelation.
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:14 pm to boosiebadazz
Where does he say he's leaving the door open for enrichment?
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:14 pm to boosiebadazz
Obama did everything he could to let them develop bomb capacity.
And thus here we are.
And thus here we are.
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:17 pm to jnethe1
quote:
think everyone would be ok with a country bettering their ability to produce power for their needs.
They dont need nuclear power. They have all the oil in the world. They are just using that as an excuse and you are falling for it.
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:47 pm to Ingeniero
Down voters already on it.
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:50 pm to KCT
I'd wager they do it at the same time then swap Obama's cum between each other's mouths.
Posted on 6/17/26 at 10:55 pm to boosiebadazz
We need to do the necessary and forget about Iran. Iran did what Vietnam did to us in just such a short reality because Trump didn’t have the balls to invade the beaches and submit them—now the US is laughed at for not thinking this through.
Global perception matters because it affects exchange rates, foreign direct investment, and inflation but what do I know?
Global perception matters because it affects exchange rates, foreign direct investment, and inflation but what do I know?
Posted on 6/18/26 at 7:09 am to SoFlaGuy
quote:Yes, he caves often.
Have any of you learned anything about Trump?
Posted on 6/18/26 at 9:11 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
never fails
Well you disagree?
Posted on 6/18/26 at 9:13 am to ScootiniTiger
quote:
They dont need nuclear power. They have all the oil in the world. They are just using that as an excuse and you are falling for it.
That may be true. I’m not falling for it. I simply do not understand why it’s ok for us to stand up against Iran or anyone else when Israel stole our nuclear secrets and they are still our ally. They have given us bad intelligence on so many occasions that has caused us to make some absurd decisions.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 9:15 am to Ingeniero
quote:
Watch out, the MAGA bros are about to get on your arse if you don't think Iran should have a teensy little bit of enriched uranium
Oh how you suffer the slings and arrows
Posted on 6/18/26 at 9:25 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Obama was OK with enrichment for civilian purposes
You do know that uranium suitable for power generation is no where near the same enrichment for weapons don't you?
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:33 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Wtf is going on with this guy.
Yeah, man. You should totally tell him what's REALLY going on in the region and geopolitically. What the hell does he or anyone in his administration know compared to you and MSNBC?
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:35 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
quote:
Good job Obama for setting this up.
never fails
Neither does your daily crybaby TDS bullshite. frick you, nerd.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:38 pm to boosiebadazz
The internets is your friend, before you flip out and cry about muh "enriched uranium for civilian purposes" means Iran has a nuke!!!!! And Trump has failed!!!!! REEEEEEE!!!!
Is there are particular threshold of enriched uranium that is only adequate for civilian purposes verus an amount needed to produce nuclear weapons?
Yes. In broad terms, civilian power reactors typically use uranium enriched to about 3% to 5% U-235, while uranium enriched to 20% or more is generally classified as highly enriched uranium, and around 90% or more is considered weapons-grade.
The key threshold people often cite is 20% enrichment, because that level is close to the point where the remaining work to reach weapons-grade material drops sharply. But there is no single magic number that makes uranium “only civilian” or “only military,” because some civilian research reactors and medical isotope production can use uranium above 20%, and in rare cases even around 90% for specialized purposes.
So the practical answer is:
3% to 5%: typical civilian power-reactor fuel.
20%+: highly enriched uranium, much more sensitive from a proliferation standpoint.
90%+: generally regarded as weapons-grade.
Is there are particular threshold of enriched uranium that is only adequate for civilian purposes verus an amount needed to produce nuclear weapons?
Yes. In broad terms, civilian power reactors typically use uranium enriched to about 3% to 5% U-235, while uranium enriched to 20% or more is generally classified as highly enriched uranium, and around 90% or more is considered weapons-grade.
The key threshold people often cite is 20% enrichment, because that level is close to the point where the remaining work to reach weapons-grade material drops sharply. But there is no single magic number that makes uranium “only civilian” or “only military,” because some civilian research reactors and medical isotope production can use uranium above 20%, and in rare cases even around 90% for specialized purposes.
So the practical answer is:
3% to 5%: typical civilian power-reactor fuel.
20%+: highly enriched uranium, much more sensitive from a proliferation standpoint.
90%+: generally regarded as weapons-grade.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:39 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
What a fricking clown you’ve become
This is hilarious coming from BoozieBitchAzz.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:41 pm to BTROleMisser
I’d love to respond but I just got a PM from an admin telling me to stop
Posted on 6/18/26 at 3:50 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Obama was OK with enrichment for civilian purposes
boosiebadazz
No, just joking, that’s DJT today
Uranium enrichment for civilian purposes was allowed under the JCPOA. It was capped at 3.67% and 300 kg. The problem was the monitoring guidelines weren't sufficiently rigorous to certify that Iran wasn't continuing past those guidelines in alternate locations, so they never were certified as being in compliance during the time JCPOA was in effect.
This post was edited on 6/18/26 at 3:55 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News