no, you still need rare erath metals, you need good quality silicon
That does not compare in the least to the environmental damage and resource depletion that mining uranium causes. Unlike solar or wind power plants, nuclear power plants must constantly be fed a fuel that is only available in limited quantity, while the power source for renewables is realistically infinite (for our purposes). Uranium-235 is way scarcer than natural gas or oil, so power generation through nuclear fission is almost by definition less sustainable than even fossil-fuel power generation.
Finally, there is the matter of nuclear waste, which accumulates over the lifetime of a power plant and does not get smaller, but rather larger every year that the power plant is in operation. Getting rid of this waste is so difficult because it will radiate for thousands of years, and you can’t guarantee that its containers will last that long, so you need geological structures that are 100% known to remain stable into the far future. These are difficult to find. I want to underline that this problem is already here, and for every new fission power plant you build, it gets worse. There is no reverse direction this process can be taken.
Thus, I would even go so far to say that this statement of yours: “everything is better than fossil fuel for practical purposes.” Is wrong. Even natural gas would be preferable over nuclear, FAR preferred, in fact. In Germany, nuclear fission was successfully phased out for cleaner natural gas, without adverse effects on power grid stability, and with cost savings in the long run (natural gas comes with its own problems, I am aware, especially with regard to the supply chain, but that is not much different with regard to uranium).
There’s trash and then there’s even trashier trash. The Saudi government is definitely trashier than the American one.