Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gemlaoshi who wrote (149937)	8/9/2019 7:34:28 PM
From: carranza2	1 Recommendation Recommended By elmatador Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217764

But to even insinuate the possibility of WMD in a trade spat is sheer insanity. I haven't heard a single anti-Chinese comment and get no sense that there is any anti-Chinese animosity over trade.... Thank you. Spot on. Comments about Trump’s pride and his goal of turning China into a vassal state reek of deeply ingrained TDS. The ad hominem attack I received from Rarebird, same. The only thing that truly matters at a high level are interests. Politicians are merely the vessels of a country’s interests. Some assert them strongly, some weakly. Trump asserts them strongly, something new on the world stage after weak Obama and Bush. The Chinese, hell, the rest of the world, don’t know how to deal with someone so unique. You cannot deal lightly with a guy whose tweets, composed in a 1/2 hour or less, will dominate the global news cycle for days. Or someone who singlehandedly changed the manner in which Presidential elections are conducted in the face of a furious and well-financed opposition. Trump is asserting the US national interest in ways that have not ever been seen before. He really is a phenomenon and, love him or hate him, he will rock the boat in ways that are yet to be seen. Whether he will succeed is definitely open to question. But dismissing him out of hand because of a visceral reaction is really quite stupid. Assigning irrational motives to actions which are more or less mundane aspects of a high level negotiation is even crazier. No, no WMDs as part of a trade spat. Folks need to get a grip. Thanks for an excellent post.

To: Gemlaoshi who wrote (149937)	8/10/2019 3:13:31 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

Right now the USA MNCs are toeing USA laws in all sanction regimes and are deeply cooperating w/ all team USA military initiatives, I trust we have no disagreement on these two points. The corporations may lobby but must obey, is a given. I was too conservative in my original post - team China is already tee-ed up as WMD proliferator, on that we must be in agreement, irrespective of veracity of such accusations (I am still waiting to see from team Bloomberg the allegedly rice-grain sized chip embedded on Apple and Amazon products made in China, and suspect there are none to be seen) worldpoliticsreview.com New U.S. Sanctions on Iran Reveal China’s Growing Role in Illicit Supply ChainsNeil Bhatiya Monday, July 29, 2019 Editor’s Note: Guest columnist Neil Bhatiya is filling in for Stewart Patrick this week. On July 18, in the Trump administration’s first punitive measure since Iran announced earlier this month that it would exceed the levels of enriched uranium permitted under the international nuclear deal, the United States expanded sanctions against Tehran to include a network of international companies it said were linked to procuring materials for Iran’s nuclear program. In announcing the sanctions, U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said his department was “taking action to shut down an Iranian nuclear procurement network that leverages Chinese- and Belgium-based front companies to acquire critical nuclear materials and benefit the regime’s malign ambitions.” ...

To: Gemlaoshi who wrote (149937)	8/10/2019 3:31:43 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217764

Deep-state already stated intentions... Just like the spurious and unsupported charges against team Huawei in the earliest days per spy chip by Bloomberg. We do not need to debate the point but merely observe forward trajectory. We more or less know what be next steps. reuters.com U.S. Defense Secretary says he favors placing missiles in AsiaSYDNEY (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on Saturday that he was in favor of placing ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles in Asia relatively soon, a day after the United States withdrew from a landmark arms control treaty. Esper’s comments are likely to raise concern about an arms race and could add to an already tense relationship with China. “Yeah, I would like to,” Esper said, when asked whether he was considering placing such missiles in Asia. “I would prefer months ... but these things tend to take longer than you expect,” he told reporters traveling with him to Sydney when asked about a timeline for when the missiles could be deployed. The United States formally left the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with Russia on Friday after determining Moscow was violating the treaty, an accusation that the Kremlin has denied. On Friday, senior U.S. officials said that any deployment of such weaponry would be years away. Within the next few weeks, the United States is expected to test a ground-launched cruise missile, and in November, the Pentagon will aim to test an intermediate-range ballistic missile. Both would be tests of conventional weapons - and not nuclear. The 1987 pact banned ground-launched nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 310 to 3,400 miles (500-5,500 km). U.S. officials have been warning for years that the United States was being put at a disadvantage by China’s development of increasingly sophisticated land-based missile forces, which the Pentagon could not match due to the U.S. treaty with Russia. The United States has so far relied on other capabilities as a counterbalance to China, like missiles fired from U.S. ships or aircraft. But advocates for a U.S. land-based missile response say that is the best way to deter Chinese use of its muscular land-based missile forces. “I don’t see an arms race happening, I do see us taking proactive measures to develop a capability that we need for both the European theater and certainly this theater,” Esper said, referring to the Asia-Pacific region. While no decisions have been made, the United States could theoretically put easier-to-hide, road-mobile conventional missiles in places like Guam. Esper did not say where in Asia he was considering placing missiles, but he is expected to meet senior regional leaders during his visit to Asia. ASIA TRIP In a sign of the importance Asia - and countering China - has for the Pentagon, Esper is visiting the region just two months after his predecessor made a similar trip. U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper meets with Egypt's Defense Minister General Mohamed Zaki at the Pentagon in Washington, U.S., July 29, 2019. REUTERS/Tom Brenner In Australia, Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will take part in talks with their Australian counterparts. The meetings come amid heightened Western concern about Chinese influence in the Pacific. In addition to China, the talks and much of Esper’s trip, are likely to be dominated by discussion on what the departure of the U.S. from the INF treaty means for Asia and recent missile tests by North Korea. U.S. President Donald Trump sought on Friday to play down North Korea’s three tests in eight days of short-range missiles, saying they did not break any agreement he had with Kim Jong Un. Asian allies will also have questions for Esper on a U.S.-led maritime force in the Strait of Hormuz. Washington in June first proposed some sort of multinational effort open to all allies and partners to bolster maritime security in the Gulf after accusing Iran of attacking oil tankers around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime chokepoint. On Thursday, Japan said it would not send warships to join the U.S-led coalition but it may send patrol aircraft. “I think we’ll have some announcements coming out soon in the coming days, where you’ll see countries begin to sign up,” Esper said, referring to contributions from other countries on the maritime initiative. Reporting by Idrees Ali; Editing by Tom Hogue and Hugh Lawson

To: Gemlaoshi who wrote (149937)	4/19/2020 12:15:24 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

Re <<Exxon, Boeing, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, etc. etc. are trillion $ transnational corporations that are borderless in a world where fewer than 20 countries have a $1 trillion GDP. They conduct their own diplomacy, make their own deals, and write their own regulatory rules. As Jack Welch said a few years ago, "GE is American in America, German in Germany, and Brazilian in Brazil." I assume GE is also Chinese in China.>> At the moment we can determine which is what belonging mostly to whom by watching to see how they get bailed out. The hardware companies have all been insta-freeze made illiquid / insolvent, and unless bailed out by some measure / in other form / by actions of somebody(s), shall disappear forever. Someone in the past week heard CEO of Airbus say something about Airbus needs to help w/ making sure the airlines get bailed out. I thought, yep, and Airbus get bailed out. As events are going, believe GE will get bailed out, but not by more than one country. Same w/ Boeing. Apple might get bailed out by two, maybe, if they, meaning the two, chose to cooperate.