Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russian company may get Utah town and uranium
The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | Oct 10, 2010 | JUDY FAHYS

Posted on 10/12/2010 6:07:08 PM PDT by george76

Ticaboo • Syd Auster’s father flew fighter jets to protect American soil, including this dusty company town off a two-lane road to Lake Powell.

But soon the same mineral-rich landscape that Auster’s dad safeguarded decades ago will be largely owned by the country he once guarded against. By year’s end, the Russian mining company Atomredmetzoloto (ARMZ) will have a controlling stake in the Canadian company Uranium One.

When that happens, the town itself, the Shootaring Canyon uranium mill a few miles up the highway, more than 10,000 acres of uranium claims in Utah and holdings in South Dakota, Wyoming and Texas — all of it will be in the portfolio of ARMZ’s parent company, Rosatom, the Russian nuclear agency, which last month provided fuel for Iran’s nuclear power plant.

“That’s kind of scary,” said Auster, who is sure her father and the people who built the mill and the town for its workers never intended their labors to serve the borderless uranium industry of today. “It’s too global when the rest of the world owns our country.”

Canada-based Denison Mines not only mines uranium from its southeastern Utah claims. It also operates a uranium-processing mill near Blanding that is the only active plant of its kind in the nation.

Uranium One, meanwhile, snatched up properties once owned by U.S. Energy Corp., of Golden, Colo., such as the mill, reserves and the town.

Sarah Fields, director of the Moab-based group Uranium Watch, called the situation “rather bizarre,” because uranium mining in the Four Corners area was born in the last century to supply weapons for World War II and later the Cold War.

“It’s an odd, odd situation,”

(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Canada; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia; US: South Dakota; US: Texas; US: Utah; US: Wyoming
KEYWORDS: armz; atomredmetzoloto; clinton; clintoncash; clintonfoundation; energy; g78; hillary; hillaryclinton; mines; mining; nonewstart; nuclear; pages; peterschweizer; russian; stopit; stopthenonsense; uranium; uraniumone
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 10/12/2010 6:07:10 PM PDT by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: george76

Running fat trade deficits for 30 years has consequences.


2 posted on 10/12/2010 6:11:20 PM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan

Fat trade deficits with Russia?


3 posted on 10/12/2010 6:12:36 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Oil son, oil.


4 posted on 10/12/2010 6:20:45 PM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan

Numbers, daughter, numbers.


5 posted on 10/12/2010 6:21:32 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: george76

Our government should stop this but I’m not holding my breath.


6 posted on 10/12/2010 6:33:27 PM PDT by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Another Clinton brokered deal I’m sure.


7 posted on 10/12/2010 6:48:27 PM PDT by Dogbert41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

This smacks of the early American industialists buying land from the Native American Indians...and look what happened to them. Are we all going to end up on “American Reservations”?


8 posted on 10/12/2010 7:16:41 PM PDT by MissyMack66 ("Liberalism is a mental disorder" Michael Savage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

btt


9 posted on 10/12/2010 7:37:44 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Numbers, daughter, numbers.

What - you don't know how to use Google?

Russia is the world's second largest exporter of a fungible (there's a world for your Fisher-Price Dictionary) resource sold in dollars.

Russia has even recently doubled its direct exports to the US.

Me? I'd rather we drill here.

10 posted on 10/12/2010 8:54:39 PM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
I know how to use the internet, thanks. I was just wondering if you did. How much did the interest in this company cost, and how much of the expense can be attributable to U.S. oil imports from Russia?

One would think that you have those numbers at your fingertips, seeing the way you came crying to this thread like a baby.

11 posted on 10/13/2010 6:33:00 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
How much did the interest in this company cost, and how much of the expense can be attributable to U.S. oil imports from Russia?

By year’s end, the Russian mining company Atomredmetzoloto (ARMZ) will have a controlling stake in the Canadian company Uranium One.

Don't you see? If the US didn't import Russian oil, this Russian company could never have bought that Canadian company. It's obvious.

Canada is an exporter of oil, so no one from another country could ever buy a Canadian company. Get it now?

12 posted on 10/13/2010 6:49:07 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

So if we drill here, drill now (as we should), no one will ever buy our stuff? It’s becoming clear to me. I think.


13 posted on 10/13/2010 6:54:13 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
How much did the interest in this company cost, and how much of the expense can be attributable to U.S. oil imports from Russia?

Sorry, you'll have to find someone else to be your information mule.

14 posted on 10/13/2010 7:01:32 AM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
Running fat trade deficits for 30 years has consequences.

In other words, you didn't know what you were talking about when you implied that you did.

15 posted on 10/13/2010 7:05:33 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
In other words, you didn't know what you were talking about when you implied that you did.

Known as the Red Herring Fallacy.

Just because I have neither the time nor interest in accomdating your requests doesn't impact the veracity of my claims.

16 posted on 10/13/2010 7:40:02 AM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
Not a red herring, sorry. If you can't even take a stab at responding to #11, then it is permissible to infer that you have no clue as to the impact of the U.S. trade deficit with Russia on this transaction. For all we know, one had nothing to do with the other.

Now, I'm not saying that's the case . . . just that you brought nothing to the table with what amounts to a knee-jerk reaction in your comment #2. (And the graph you posted has no bearing on the issue.)

17 posted on 10/13/2010 7:53:42 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
...how much of the expense can be attributable to U.S. oil imports from Russia?

I don't know what is more ludicrous, asking this question or expecting an answer.

I'll give you another example of your ridiculous line of reasoning here. A couple weeks back you asked a poster what the percentage of goods sold at Walmart came from China.
1. The only people who know the true answer work for Walmart.
2. The answer is assuredly embarrassing to them so they aren't going to release it publicly.
Thus your target poster has no way of accurately answering your question (I think you are smart enough to know this, but remain disingenuous).

Now from this you reliably infer in follow on posts that the poster doesn't know what he is talking about and so on...

Back to the original point. The world in awash in dollars from our trade deficits. The balance of payments will be made whole whether it is for US goods or assets. In the long term it will be better for the wealth of our nation that is is for manufactured goods.

18 posted on 10/13/2010 11:04:31 AM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
A couple weeks back you asked a poster what the percentage of goods sold at Walmart came from China.

Was that the guy who said he would gladly pay more for a pen if it was made in the U.S.A., and I found him some being sold at Wal-Mart? You're correct, that was ridiculous.

Even more ridiculous is your contention that, because the world is awash with U.S. dollars, this Russian company was able to make its purchase. Well, maybe not . . . you just don't know.

19 posted on 10/13/2010 11:13:01 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Was that the guy who said he would gladly pay more for a pen if it was made in the U.S.A., and I found him some being sold at Wal-Mart?

No, but when did you become a personal shopper?

Even more ridiculous is your contention that, because the world is awash with U.S. dollars, this Russian company was able to make its purchase.

As the US dollar continues its decline deals like this will become a lot more common.

20 posted on 10/13/2010 12:57:23 PM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson