[WMCoolmon]

Australia to India: "No nuke for you!"

Interesting that Australia has 40% of the world's uranium. I'll have to keep a closer eye on those kangaroo-lovers from now on.

[Kosh]

Politician Keeps Election Promise

That all by itself is worth of being in the headlines.


But seriously, I doubt India has any intention of signing the NPT, and they haven't been keeping their desire to bulk up their nuclear arsenal any secret.

[karajorma]

Well I was hoping this was about the politician who made the 40,000 blowjobs promise but this is good news too.

[IPAndrews]

I'll have to keep a closer eye on those kangaroo-lovers from now on.

Clearly you've played RISK then.

[Janos]

Politician Keeps Election Promise

That all by itself is worth of being in the headlines.

I've seen that quite often before.

"When elected, my party will buy more oil and cut social security, also cut taxes from the rich people and dry 50 lakes just for the hell of it". They're the promises that are kept, quite consistently if I may add as well!

[Corsair]

Well I was hoping this was about the politician who made the 40,000 blowjobs promise but this is good news too.

wait, WHAT?

[vyper]

You know, maybe cutting off a major customer isn't the smartest move in the world...

[WMCoolmon]

Either
A) Nukes fall into the hands of somebody who's displayed a lack of willingness to police nukes

or

B) Some country has an excuse to claim that there are nuclear weapons at large.

Either way, it seems like you have a reason to not want them shipped. Especially when it's riskier to start shipments and then stop than to not ship uranium at all.

[Kosh]

You know, maybe cutting off a major customer isn't the smartest move in the world...

Probably because they haven't signed any kind of binding treaties, so there's really no telling what they might do with more of them, and also because they have not signed said treaties, there's no way you can go in there to find out. At least with the NPT, you have something you can work with (and bludgeon them over the head with).

[vyper]

Either
A) Nukes fall into the hands of somebody who's displayed a lack of willingness to police nukes

or

B) Some country has an excuse to claim that there are nuclear weapons at large.

Either way, it seems like you have a reason to not want them shipped. Especially when it's riskier to start shipments and then stop than to not ship uranium at all.

I love how America falls into both category A and B

You know, maybe cutting off a major customer isn't the smartest move in the world...

Probably because they haven't signed any kind of binding treaties, so there's really no telling what they might do with more of them, and also because they have not signed said treaties, there's no way you can go in there to find out. At least with the NPT, you have something you can work with (and bludgeon them over the head with).

They'll simply get the uranium elsewhere. If you keep selling it to them, you can control the flow and the price (in a limited way).

[WMCoolmon]

If they have other sources, then what's to stop them from simply turning to those sources in addition to the over-the-table ones in any case?

[Kosh]

They'll simply get the uranium elsewhere. If you keep selling it to them, you can control the flow and the price (in a limited way).

How can you control the flow if they are just going to get it from somewhere else?

[karajorma]

Well I was hoping this was about the politician who made the 40,000 blowjobs promise but this is good news too.

wait, WHAT?

http://www.seo-expert-blog.com/blog/40000-blowjobs-a-political-campaign


And to think, Belgium has a reputation for being boring.