What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Whistleblowers Raise Grave Concerns with White House Efforts to Transfer Sensitive U.S. Nuclear Technology to Saudi Arabia (1 Viewer)

rockaction said:
It seems -- to me --  indefensible, that's why.  
Click to expand...
It seems like at some point once a President racks up a few indefensible things like kids in cages, babies representing themselves in court, giving away nuclear secrets to a major hotbed of terrorism and repeatedly avoiding call out NAZIs that maybe that person should have a 5% approval rating and have been tossed out of office. Just a crazy idea. 

 
timschochet said:
Well they probably paid a lot of money. They might have even guaranteed Jared’s building loan. 

So that’s good, right? 
Click to expand...
Good point. Kind of like when SA chopped up that journalist. It was all good because they are buying weapons from us. Like I always say, the customer is always right and that includes the customer murdering journalists or building a nuclear arsenal. 

 
Yeah, if it weren't for Supreme Court justices and some decent speeches, you'd have a case for the 45th President being the worst ever. 

Well, Jackson and Johnson were guilty of much more egregious things, so there's that. Come to think of it, there have been ethically worse presidents as I type this and think about it. But one would figure we could do a whole lot better.  

 
rockaction said:
Yeah, if it weren't for Supreme Court justices and some decent speeches, you'd have a case for the 45th President being the worst ever. 

Well, Jackson and Johnson were guilty of much more egregious things, so there's that. Come to think of it, there have been ethically worse presidents as I type this and think about it. But one would figure we could do a whole lot better.  
Click to expand...
He’s still got time and eventually we will find out all the dirty details. Harding died as a popular POTUS and it was only later when all the dirt came to light that people realized his administration were a bunch of crooks.I could be wrong but I I don’t see Trump’s legacy going anywhere but down from here. 

When judging ethics, it gets complicated. Trump has never owned a slave or personally killed someone or ordered a genocide or dropped a nuke on a city. However, given the circumstances of the time and events, those things were more widely accepted by the electorate than they would be today. Any linking that he has to treasonous activity would be something would not fly in any era and could put him into uncharted territory. If you remove the potential Russia stuff than it’s more of just being a stupid, unqualified, dishonest, populist conman. So I guess that’s his upside.

 
Ilov80s said:
He’s still got time and eventually we will find out all the dirty details. Harding died as a popular POTUS and it was only later when all the dirt came to light that people realized his administration were a bunch of crooks.I could be wrong but I I don’t see Trump’s legacy going anywhere but down from here. 

When judging ethics, it gets complicated. Trump has never owned a slave or personally killed someone or ordered a genocide or dropped a nuke on a city. However, given the circumstances of the time and events, those things were more widely accepted by the electorate than they would be today. Any linking that he has to treasonous activity would be something would not fly in any era and could put him into uncharted territory. If you remove the potential Russia stuff than it’s more of just being a stupid, unqualified, dishonest, populist conman. So I guess that’s his upside.
Click to expand...
Indeed. One could certainly make an argument against my lack of historicism regarding Jackson and Johnson and others.  

 
Decent speeches?  When?

Also, his SC Justices would have been gotten by any GOP candidate...and one was gifted to him by McConnel.  There is still and easy case for worst ever.

 
sho nuff said:
Decent speeches?  When?

Also, his SC Justices would have been gotten by any GOP candidate...and one was gifted to him by McConnel.  There is still and easy case for worst ever.
Click to expand...
Speeches are whatever- totally subjective. I don’t think there’s a speech that will be remembered as great but that’s so subjective. Sticking with Kavanaugh took balls. Maybe it wasn’t what I would have done but he made his choice and defended it all the way. But yeah I don’t think he deserves too much credit for the SC. It’s like the RB scoring from inside the 5. It’s nice but most of the credit should go to the other players who gained the previous 75 yards.  

 
Ilov80s said:
Speeches are whatever- totally subjective. I don’t think there’s a speech that will be remembered as great but that’s so subjective. Sticking with Kavanaugh took balls. Maybe it wasn’t what I would have done but he made his choice and defended it all the way. But yeah I don’t think he deserves too much credit for the SC. It’s like the RB scoring from inside the 5. It’s nice but most of the credit should go to the other players who gained the previous 75 yards.  
Click to expand...
Sure I guess it took balls...but easy to have balls when Congress rubber stamps anything you want.

 
sho nuff said:
Sure I guess it took balls...but easy to have balls when Congress rubber stamps anything you want.
Click to expand...
Fair and he knows his supporters are exceptionally loyal as he’s put them through the ringer testing their paths of fealty. Still, in the heart of the increased recognition and retribution for sexual assault, it was a bold move. 

 
They are bidding out the building of these nuclear power plants to China, Russia, and the US.  They are going to get built.  I would rather we control the technology transfer than Russia or China.  At least we can put in and monitor safeguards.

 
But bold moves seem to be his thing. Like selling the country who produced most of the 9/11 terrorists nuclear secrets. Very bold.

 
jonessed said:
They are bidding out the building of these nuclear power plants to China, Russia, and the US.  They are going to get built.  I would rather we control the technology transfer than Russia or China.  At least we can put in and monitor safeguards.
Click to expand...
Shouldn’t we be stepping in with China and Russia to block this? I thought we had this greatly improved relationship with Russia? Maybe we could threaten tariffs on China if they go through with it? Oh wait 

 
Ilov80s said:
Shouldn’t we be stepping in with China and Russia to block this? I thought we had this greatly improved relationship with Russia? Maybe we could threaten tariffs on China if they go through with it? Oh wait 
Click to expand...
For what reason?  They are allowed to build nuclear power plants.

 
jonessed said:
For what reason?  They are allowed to build nuclear power plants.
Click to expand...
Sure and we are allowed to try to dissuade countries from helping them. There are concerns that nuclear reactors could lead to nuclear weapons. Is that not a legit worry?

 
jonessed said:
They are bidding out the building of these nuclear power plants to China, Russia, and the US.  They are going to get built.  I would rather we control the technology transfer than Russia or China.  At least we can put in and monitor safeguards.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t this Sonny Corleone’s argument for selling heroin? 

 
jonessed said:
They received technology and support from Pakistan, China, and Russia I believe.
Click to expand...
I meant the set-up to monitor their technology which we had support from with several countries, was transparent and was going well. Which Trump cancelled calling it the worst deal ever. Isn’t that not such a good sign for us monitoring SA nuclear tech?

 
Ilov80s said:
I meant the set-up to monitor their technology which we had support from with several countries, was transparent and was going well. Which Trump cancelled calling it the worst deal ever. Isn’t that not such a good sign for us monitoring SA nuclear tech?
Click to expand...
It’s not, but we can’t stop other countries from working with them to build nuclear power plants.  It’s not illegal.  I would rather be involved than cut out of the process.

 
jonessed said:
It’s not, but we can’t stop other countries from working with them to build nuclear power plants.  It’s not illegal.  I would rather be involved than cut out of the process.
Click to expand...
We absolutely can make efforts to stop countries from helping. Does it seem like monitoring nuclear weapons in the ME is a big priority for this administration? Because it doesn't look that way to me after we backed out of the Iran deal. I don't have much faith this administration will follow through or is honestly capable of transferring anything like this safely. 

 
Ilov80s said:
We absolutely can make efforts to stop countries from helping. Does it seem like monitoring nuclear weapons in the ME is a big priority for this administration? Because it doesn't look that way to me after we backed out of the Iran deal. I don't have much faith this administration will follow through or is honestly capable of transferring anything like this safely. 
Click to expand...
We aren’t going to be able to stop those countries from supporting Saudi Arabia in building civilian nuclear power plants.  There’s nothing illegal about it and the IAEA has been working on it for years.

If you are more comfortable with Saudi Arabia working with Russia, or China, or France then that’s fine.  I’m not.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
We aren’t going to be able to stop those countries from supporting Saudi Arabia in building civilian nuclear power plants.  There’s nothing illegal about it and the IAEA has been working on it for years.
Click to expand...
Ok, so what about the claims of this being fast tracked, ignoring ethics and that people behind it are personally benefitting from the transfer? Is this a great time coming off the heels of SA getting a free pass on the murder of a journalist? This administration is a disorganzed mess, is this really the time to open up transfer of our nuclear technology to SA?

 
Ilov80s said:
Ok, so what about the claims of this being fast tracked, ignoring ethics and that people behind it are personally benefitting from the transfer? Is this a great time coming off the heels of SA getting a free pass on the murder of a journalist? This administration is a disorganzed mess, is this really the time to open up transfer of our nuclear technology to SA?
Click to expand...
:shrug:

The IAEA has been involved with this since at least 2017 and their final report just came out last month.  It makes sense that things would speed up now.

The process has gone through the proper international channels and has been completely transparent.  If you think the US should not be part of building the plants because of the Khashoggi murder that’s fine.  I don’t. 

 
jonessed said:
It’s not, but we can’t stop other countries from working with them to build nuclear power plants.  It’s not illegal.  I would rather be involved than cut out of the process.
Click to expand...
From the OP:

multiple whistleblowers came forward to warn about efforts inside the White House to rush the transfer of highly sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia in potential violation of the Atomic Energy Act and without review by Congress as required by law—efforts that may be ongoing to this day.

I think we should all agree the bolded is the troubling part of the story.

 
Amused to Death said:
From the OP:

multiple whistleblowers came forward to warn about efforts inside the White House to rush the transfer of highly sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia in potential violation of the Atomic Energy Act and without review by Congress as required by law—efforts that may be ongoing to this day.

I think we should all agree the bolded is the troubling part of the story.
Click to expand...
The transfer of technology is inevitable.  It’s just a matter of which country helps facilitate it (in conjunction with the IAEA).

What specifically has been done that violates the Atomic Energy Act?

 
jonessed said:
The transfer of technology is inevitable.  It’s just a matter of which country helps facilitate it (in conjunction with the IAEA).

What specifically has been done that violates the Atomic Energy Act?
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with the act, but "potential" violations of law without the required (I assume) Congressional approval should be troubling. People with far more knowledge than me have raised their concerns.  It should be investigated.  You can't overlook the troubling aspect of the administration bypassing laws.

 
Amused to Death said:
I'm not familiar with the act, but "potential" violations of law without the required (I assume) Congressional approval should be troubling. People with far more knowledge than me have raised their concerns.  It should be investigated.  You can't overlook the troubling aspect of the administration bypassing laws.
Click to expand...
Raised their concern about “potential” issues.  That’s just stating the obvious. The transfer has not occurred yet and may never occur if we don’t win the bid.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
:shrug:

The IAEA has been involved with this since at least 2017 and their final report just came out last month.  It makes sense that things would speed up now.

The process has gone through the proper international channels and has been completely transparent.  If you think the US should not be part of building the plants because of the Khashoggi murder that’s fine.  I don’t. 
Click to expand...
That is fair and I do understand your point about wanting to regulate it if it is coming. They have been approved to start contract and building so it's happening. I just don't trust this administratio to handle it securely or without graft and it makes me wonder why the administration has such different approaches to Iran and SA's nuclear programs. 

 
Ilov80s said:
That is fair and I do understand your point about wanting to regulate it if it is coming. They have been approved to start contract and building so it's happening. I just don't trust this administratio to handle it securely or without graft and it makes me wonder why the administration has such different approaches to Iran and SA's nuclear programs. 
Click to expand...
Iran and Saudi Arabia’s nuclear programs are light years apart.

 
Ilov80s said:
In that Iran's is so great and wonderful we don't want to monitor it anymore?
Click to expand...
I’m starting to struggle with this.  I think I’ve fairly answered enough of your questions.  It’s time maybe you do some more independent reading.

 
jonessed said:
I’m starting to struggle with this.  I think I’ve fairly answered enough of your questions.  It’s time maybe you do some more independent reading.
Click to expand...
That is fine. I was being sarcastic with the last comment. I appreciate your input, I was just wondering what the difference between Iran and the SA program are that we want to monitor SA but were fine walking away from Iran. All good though, have a nice day. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Operation Fast & Furious Scandal: Obama Administration's ATF Sent Guns To Drug Cartels (5/27/22 20:22 PST)
Replies
7
Views
536
Max Power
Max Power
GordonGekko
Biden Administration Considering Sending Gas Rebate Cards To Millions Of Americans (6/18/22 19:28 PST)
Replies
43
Views
1K
AAABatteries
AAABatteries
GordonGekko
(Media Optics) Should Biden Apologize To Border Patrol For False Migrant Whipping Claims? (4/19/22 18:50PST)
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
Boston
Boston

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top