Atomic

Darmok and Jalad, on the ocean.

It is a point for them to coexist. It's called plausible deniability.

What exactly are you trying to argue? That it's not a good reason for a country to get a bunch of uranium without raising questions?

There was absolutely no incentive to research more about alternative fuels, uranium and plutonium were materials the nuclear powers wanted. For more than just 1 reason...

If countries REALLY wanted nuclear power without Uranium. They would have researched it. Like China have. But no one else has. Well some have, but they all gave up a long time ago.

Sweden was researching it, but decided to go with Uranium, coincidentally, they just happened to also research nuclear weapons... very strange coincidence that... (Sweden was later encouraged to halt all nuclear weapons research)

Yes. They compete for the same raw material. That's the whole point. Gives you a perfectly good reason to excavate it.

It gives you a reason to access the materials you need for nuclear weapons.

Who is saying they're using the fuel for reactors to make the weapons? Just you.

And not that I count it. But they do infact make weapons from spent uranium. They make artillery shells from it. Buy like I said. I don't even count that.

US experiments were broken off because it gives no excuse to attain materials for nuclear weapons. Same excuse everyone else use.

Arachnids are not insects though.

Insects don't have lungs. It also means their potential size is directly limited by the oxygen content in the air.

Which is why we don't see cat sized insects roaming around.

I try my best to buy as locally as possible.

It doesn't matter how beautiful that beef is, I won't let that sweet sexy attractive beef blind me from buying local when possible.

I know how Australia does things. You still need to prove your identity when you enrol to vote. If you don't have any of the proof they require, you can have a mate that is enrolled vouch that you are you along with your name and address.

The difference is that Australia is capable of keeping track of their citizens and are willing to verify your eligibility for you.

Fair point. Something I did not consider.

Though as far as I can recall, Democrats have done little to actually make voting more accessible. From what I can see, neither party seems interested. A simple step such as holding elections on a weekend or non-working day where the majority is free would go a long way. Not to play whatabout here. The idea of having to prove you're a citizen to vote is reasonable. Your fear is they will make that proof unreasonably difficult to attain is understandable.

I just explained it.

Let me rephrase then. My opinion is that having to provide valid ID to vote in an election is reasonable.

My understanding is they are putting in the step that you need to prove citizenship when registering to vote. By Birth Certificate, US Passport, or naturalization documentation.

Most people should have their birth certificate. And if they don't, you can request it from your government, I've seen that costs 50 dollars, it should be free. I'm sorry it's not.

When you file to change your name, now you also have to file to change your birth certificate, that should be done automatically, I'm sorry it's not.

I don't think the idea, of making sure your voters are citizens and who they say they are, is unreasonable. I'm a bit surprised it already wasn't the case. But yes, I agree that the whole procedure of registering to vote is sub-optimal.

I also think it kind of pales in comparison when you think about how the entire system after votes are cast works. If you're a republican in California or a Democrat in Texas, you might as just not vote. After the opposite party "win the state" your vote no longer matters. That shouldn't be the case. Each and every vote should have equal worth.

Yes... the electoral college is a much bigger issue. Senators each represent vastly different amount of people, yet their voting power are equal.

Two senators from California, representing 39 million people. Have no more say than two senators from Idaho representing 2 million people.

So 39 million people get 2 votes in the senate. And 2 million people also get 2 votes in the senate.

Democrats have had total power under Biden for 2 years. Did they make it any easier to vote? So you can say that only Republicans want "voter ID laws" but neither party gives a fuck about creating a functional system.

If they cared at all. They'd make sure every citizen is automatically registered. And there wouldn't even be a need for what they're pushing now.