Maybe you MAGA geniuses can explain this one to me
Trump can do no wrong, so it must be the right policy.
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/21/us/politics/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
Replies to: “Maybe you MAGA geniuses can explain this one to me”
"U.S. is not going to reach any agreement w any country...that leads to risk of proliferation" Rubio
Never, ever trust the NYT. They have lied and mislead so many times. This is just another example of fear mongering...in this case a distraction working against Trump on the eve of efforts to pass the Save America Act.
If the Arabs were indeed allowed a pathway to weaponization (a complex pathway w several bottle necks btw), I would be dead set against it. In fact, I am against it with any other country, but most especially with any country in the volatile middle east.
But that is not what is really going to happen here. I trust Trump, but I trust Rubio even more...he is very level headed.
I call BS once again by the NYT. Their headline is purposely inflammatory, and no such deal that allows them a pathway to nuclear weapons will be allowed.
Link: https://www.newsmax.com/world/globaltalk/trump-saudi-arabia-nuclear-program/2026/07/22/id/1263672/
NYT piece may have TDS. But US-UAE 123 agreement is gold standard for non proliferation nuclear deal
Any nuclear deal includes this one with Saudi Arabia, if below that gold standard, is not acceptable.
Maybe the best way to constrain Iran and Israel is a third threat. Or, maybe it is a power plant
(no message)
Then a fourth threat, Turkey wants nuclear. Then a fifth one, Greece wants nuclear….
(no message)
There would definitely be an arms race.
(no message)
The vast majority of countries with nuke plants do not have nuke weapons
As of 2025, there are 416 operational nuclear reactors worldwide with a combined net capacity of 376,261 MWe, and 63 reactors under construction totaling 66,190 MWe
Nuclear energy contributes roughly 9% of global electricity and over 20% of low-carbon electricity, making it the second-largest source of low-carbon power
Gee, is that right? Tell me more.
(no message)
God is in the details. Majority don’t & are not allowed to enrich uranium domestically.
We have well established enriched uranium trade market. Go to buy it if you want to use nuclear energy.
The phrase is "the devil is in the details." Insiginificant detail for you, I'm sure.
(no message)
In my context the details (the restrictions) are GOOD. It should be “God is in the details”, I think
(no message)
It’s wrong! Nuclear non-proliferation is a fundamental pillar of US national security/foreign policy
Trump is fucking wrong. Let’s hope congress reject it.
Only way that is good is if it is a bluff to get Iran to negotiate.
If we let Iran get nukes, it was inevitable that Saudi Arabia would get them, too, so that was already the Democrat plan ... and it is still a bad plan even if Trump does it.
I'm willing to say an idea of Trump is bad. Are you willing to say an idea of a Dem president is bad?
Consider: Non-proliferation was already abandoned as a strategy. Clinton failed to stop N.Korea and even gave them a reactor. Obama failed to stop Iran and even paid them and gave them a timeline for getting them. Ukraine and Libya were both punished severely for turning over their nukes. Too bad our leaders couldn't/wouldn't pull it off. Maybe non-proliferation was a pipe dream, but postponing proliferation seemed like an admirable goal that we jettisoned a bit soon.
Interestingly, the Biden Adm was pushing this plan w the Saudi's though 94 said nothing then
Whatabout whatabout whatabout
Talking to you fucks is like pissing into the wind.
I didn't know about this then - which did not go forward - or I would have opposed it.
I have a solution since you don’t like talking to us fucks. The ignore poster button works
Great. You can talk with the people you choose that think exactly like you. It’ll be one big liberal circle jerk.
Also, this is a football website not a fucking political think tank. Deep political conversations are not the specialty, it just so happens to be a large portion of the threads and has driven many good posters away. Being on the protected list also helps certain people who seem to have free rein.
Why didn't you know then, but know this now? Take notice of your MSM puppet strings.
I will bypass posting your own recent whatabouts and then your claims of Totally Differentism.
I agree that there is no way that I want any Arab nation being able to enrich uranium and developing their own nuclear weapons program.
I do not believe this Adm - esp this Adm - would allow that. I am not assuming the worst as you always do wrt Trump Adm. I take Rubio at his word.
Lots of ideas of Democrat presidents have been bad.
That is called a "whataboutism" - not sure you heard of it. But it's how morons and soviets discuss things.
Why? And this is a serious question. Would any explanation that would be supplied change your mind?
It’s obvious you just don’t like anyone who you consider MAGA and truthfully, the feeling is mutual. Why ask a question when you really don’t give a shit about the answer and will only call the people who answer morons or mouth breathers?
Cheeks said it best - you guys are Blue MAGA. This board is a perfect example of this world. Split by political party with an over watch who protects one side. Now I’m sure this will be taken down and you won’t be able to answer or just flat out won’t.
As much as you don’t admit it, you’re a lot like Trump. Name calling, celebrating someone’s death and clearly one sided. I know it sucks, but it’s true.
Dems specifically claimed Climate Change was the number one threat to the US & world. What happened?
See my post above wrt this particular plan. But notice how the change from fossil fuels to nukes is no longer even a second thought to them. It was always political.
Beat me to it
(no message)
No doubt pay to play worked. The Saudi's have always been such a great friend ....
Consent Management