"China threatens Australia" Topic

🤔

"In January 2026, China escalated diplomatic and economic threats against Australia, warning of "forceful intervention" and retaliation if the Albanese government moves to forcibly reclaim the 99-year lease of the Port of Darwin from Chinese company Landbridge. China's ambassador signaled potential trade sanctions, citing obligations to protect Chinese corporate interests.

Key details regarding the rising tensions include:
Port of Darwin Dispute: Ambassador Xiao Qian warned that taking back the port, which was leased to Landbridge in 2015, could harm bilateral trade and investment.

Trade Sanctions Risk: The threat includes potential, unspecified economic repercussions similar to previous sanctions, which could affect Australian exports, reported The Nightly.

Taiwan and Steel Tariffs: China has also pressured Australia regarding its stance on Taiwan's reunification and has cautioned against new tariffs on Chinese steel imports, according to YouTube and YouTube.

Australian Position: The Australian government has reiterated its intention to review the port lease for national security reasons, despite Beijing's warnings.

These threats represent a significant freeze in the previously thawing diplomatic relationship between the two nations, noted streamlinefeed.co.ke. "

I think China is threatening everyone is Asia. Japan is under a ton of pressure too.

It seems as if China looked at the hatred Japan earned in WWII, shrugged and said "Hold my beer!"

The PRC is always threatening Australia, "punishing" us by imposing tariffs, banning imports, arresting Chinese-Australians silly enough to visit China, etc. The mining magnates and agricultural conglomerates go screaming about how the economy will be wrecked, jobs (aka votes) will be lost, etc, and how they'll withdraw their political donations unless the government becomes "reasonable". Not too different from what I see in other countries, where money doesn't just talk, it screams and rants.

If the government had the 'nads to say "OK, we'll stop exporting anything to the PRC." then the PRC might rethink its position- and Twiggy and his mates . But I really doubt it.

The PRC is always threatening Australia

Well not always, the last major threat was after the prime minister demanded an inquiry into COVD19.

"punishing" us by imposing tariffs

Which is why it was shocking that our supposed "ally" did the same thing last year, and it wasn't even retaliation for anything we'd said or done.

if the government had the 'nads to say "OK, we'll stop exporting anything to the PRC."

How do you think our economy would go if we shut off 1/3 of our export income?

The port of Darwin issue is a problem of our own making. We shouldn't have leased it, but having done so we should live with it and not renege on the contract. That's banana republic stuff.

@ Shardik.

Threats over tariffs seems the preferred tool of authoritarian regimes now. China, the US.

Big Business re-negotiates contracts all the time, so I'm OK with cancelling the lease. There'll be a financial penalty involved but that's fair.

As for not trading with China – that's delusional. I believe OZ has started diversifying after the last time. Like Canada has found, it is wise not to get too chummy with bully-neighbours.

ochoin

TDS strikes again. You think of Trump more than the average American.

We cannot trust the CCP. They fund and are behind many initiatives to destroy the US. They only respect strength. They play the long game … they will continue to try to undermine the US. No matter how long it takes …

OSCS +5

Shardik, not all threats are economic. There have been a number of threats to shoot down/sink Australian aircraft and ships (not all of them were RAAF or RAN, either) for "violating China's sovereignty" over the SCS. There's also been some dangerous stunts pulled- visible lasers used to dazzle flight crews, dumping flares or chaff in front of aircraft, trying to white-noise flood GNSS systems. Lastly, how many Australian citizens are currently held in Chinese gaols, still awaiting information on why they're being held?

I agree- the port should never have been leased, but privatising assets, or leasing them, seems to be a favourite of parties when they're trying to pork-barrel an election. A mistake on the NT and Fed governments' part, and there's no reason why they shouldn't correct that mistake.

As for stopping exports, it would be painful. Diversifying our trading partners would be worth it, as it would ease most of the uncertainty our overseas trade currently has to factor in. If that means Target can't buy jeans for $2.00 AUD in the PRC, and sell them here for $40.00 AUD, who cares? (Apart from the company's board and shareholders?) Perhaps the threat of cutting trade may also make the PRC rethink their approach- though I strongly doubt that.

As for not trading with China – that's delusional.

Why? We did without them until the 1980's, and dropped some long-time trade partners so that the new PRC markets could be fully exploited. It's also a favourite excuse used by the few who would be hit hardest (Twiggy and Gina should have enough money by now), and is right up there with "re-regulating banks would stifle the economy" as a self-serving scare tactic.

Here's a similar situation from history- do you think Pig-Iron Bob was right to keep selling steel and iron to the Japanese in 1941?

The ones hit hardest would be the now unemployed hundreds of thousands of miners, providing ore for the Chinese market, and the average Australian consumer when the economy goes belly-up.

Sorry, Dal, this "Economics: 101". Diversify is sensible. Find other markets before you cut off your enemies (or "allies").

And threatening (then backing off when your bluff is called) is the stupendously unsuccessful tactic of the Leader who loves using the 'tariff weapon". Guess who?

@ Oscs74

TIS strikes again. You leap to his defense even when it's indefensible. BTW if that's all you have to add – a puerile barb-
I may as well "grey box" you as well. It's interesting how a number of grey boxes doesn't seem to marr a thread at all. I guess it's dependent on the "boxees". So, a few cogent & polite arguments (if you have them in you) would be welcome.

OSC, Legion, Dal +1

"But today there is no day or night
Today there is no dark or light
Today there is no black or white
Only shades of gray" 😉

Sorry, Dal, this "Economics: 101". Diversify is sensible. Find other markets before you cut off your enemies (or "allies").

Good point, but only if there are no possible alternative markets. They are out there, they may not be as profitable, however- and that's all that matters to the magnates. Profit. But how are we going to make lazy magnates look for fresh markets, Ochoin? Some, such as the agricultural sector, did start looking for new markets after Morrison offended the PRC by speaking the (unpalatable to them) truth. But all the mining sector could do was moan about how hard things were and why couldn't we grovel to China, so they could get back to making their billions. Stopping exports of strategic minerals to the PRC would technically do less damage, especially job losses, but the PRC would probably ban all Aussie imports if we tried that. They are likely to ban Aussie imports again, in any case.

Agreed. Threatening and not following through is a kindergarten trick. So the threat to stop exports must be real (return to line 1). Though I doubt it, the PRC may actually want to talk and avoid that happening.

So which way do we go? Supply at the PRC's pleasure, and ignore their foot on our economic necks? Or look for alternatives and tell the PRC to shove it?

I fail to see how you could think that a government uses a trade ban that cast many Australians into unemployment is a useful tactic. And if this put the wealthy technocrats against them, how would such a government win the next election?

You lead a sulky horse by its nose, not by flogging its rear end. Find markets, sign deals & *then* comes the weaning. Look at what the exceptional Mark Carney, who has the same problem of trying to shift trade from a different bully, is doing in Canada. There's India, the EU & smaller democracies if you don't want to trade with the authoritarian states. But you need a deal first.

I don't know about you but I've had a few jobs I didn't like much. I made sure I had lined up another before I quit.

As far as I am concerned, TDS is following him and believing him.
If not believing him is DH worthy as TDS, then believing him, and proclaiming him, should be equally DH worthy. Fair is fair.
Triumphantly condemning TDS is just plain silly.

Thanks, John. It's just a silly insult.

Not nearly as good as my favourite insult:

"You're upside down. Your feet smell & your nose runs."

(acknowledgement to the great Marx Bros.)

In ‘Murica, lčse-majesté should NOT be a DH offense. But, apparently in some quarters it is.

I fail to see how you could think that a government uses a trade ban that cast many Australians into unemployment is a useful tactic.

Short term it's a shocker. In the long term which would you prefer:

1. Remain under Chinese economic domination? Or

2. Get some of the economic eggs into different baskets and diversify our trade partner relationships?

And if this put the wealthy technocrats against them, how would such a government win the next election?

There's the rub, Donald. While the big companies have that level of influence over the pollies then they can, and to a certain extent do, run the country for their benefit. How many people were charged and tried after the financial services Royal Commission (RC)? Why was the proposed RC (or was it just an inquiry?) into mining in WA stillborn?

I agree- it would be better to look for a landing place before we jump. But that jump will never happen until the will to step out from under China's boot is more important than "campaign donations" for the next election.

I made sure I had lined up another before I quit.

Not bragging, but I've rarely searched for a job since I retired from the army. The jobs came asking for me- which wasn't always a good thing (JP20**……). It happens when you have the right qualifications and experience in (what was) a niche technology.

Like civilised human beings, Dal, we'll end this here on good terms.

I am not convinced by your arguments & you are not convinced by mine. But that is political debate…..unless you're small-minded & petty enough to sink to name calling.

By the way…

Is China really developing a space supercarrier?

link

Armand

Like civilised human beings

Well, if you're going to insist on being reasonable…. [where's that bleeding *sulking* icon?]

unless you're small-minded & petty enough to sink to name calling.

Any particular name you'd like me to use, mate?

I get worried, Donald. The US has been a relatively benign world power. Going by China's current behaviour in Tibet and Hong Kong, I don't doubt they'll be anything but benign.

Bnign. Beten. Beeleven.

(apologies)

Call me anything you like except "English".
For obvious reasons. 87)

The US has been a relatively benign world power.

Has been. Hopefully it will change course and revert back to that position.

Call me anything you like except "English".

Not even I would do that, mate. The shade of my McKinney grandmother would be peeved.

Has been.

I was ambivalent, mate, until his recent remarks about the US allies in Afghanistan. Now I try to avoid the subject.

Also, whatever you feel about the current administration: "This to shall pass".

What some here and many elsewhere don't get or don't want to admit …

It seems the POTUS is thinking a few moves ahead. There were a number of reasons why the US went to get Maduro. But one of the primary reasons was to not allow the Chicoms to get Venezuelan oil. Yes e.g. we cut off oil, etc. before WWII to Japan to stop their imperialism. Cut off your enemies' supplies, he can't wage war… effectively … and eventually not at all.

The US did that … and in turn the IJFs attacked and invaded a number of key locations in the Pacific. To get the supplies they need, e.g. oil, etc., to continue their imperialism. E.g. Pearl Harbor, Wake, the PI, East indies, etc., etc.

So along with the other positives that came out of the US Raid in Venezuela. Cutting off the Chicoms oil supplies was one of them.

Along with that putting tariffs on India who is supplying oil, etc. to China. Is part of that plan.

As well as the Iran card has not been played … yet. Iran sells oil, etc., to our enemies. So, by the old islamist regime being taken of the board. Would also be part of the overall plan.

Tariffs are a bargaining tool … period … If one thinks otherwise, they don't understand how it works. Or hate the POTUS so much nothing he does is good …

A few years ago, a movie was made based a x Chinese invasion of Australia. Not a bad movie. It shows that they are not discounting the possibility.

Let's hope sanity is re-instituted, Grattan54. I'm not sanguine.

If you mean "Tomorrow, When the War Began", this sci-fi flick had an indeterminate Asian enemy. Indonesians? Indians?Japanese? A coalition of Asian nations? Or it might have been fictional sci-fi?? The author of the seven books in the series, author John Marsden deliberately kept the enemy anonymous to avoid encouraging racist interpretations, stating, "I don't want people to use the books to justify some kind of racist belief they might hold".

Lets' consider 'Red Dawn' with a Russian invasion of the US & Chinese, replaced by North Korea in the re-make.

We talking history or Hollywood fantasy/xenophobia?

Legion, what purpose was served by insulting the Allies who fought in Afghanistan?

Considering the effective range of the Chinese navy, I don't think we needed to worry about them getting the oil and safely transporting it. Trump wanted the oil, he took it. It's about wealth.

"Due to U.S. sanctions and shifting geopolitical alliances, several countries that previously imported significant amounts of Venezuelan oil have ceased or significantly reduced their reliance on it, with Cuba being the most immediate example of a recently severed supply chain. While the U.S. was once the largest buyer before 2019 sanctions, it now receives much less, and other historically reliant nations have struggled with purchasing due to the collapse of Venezuelan production and political instability.
The New York Times

Cuba: Formerly the largest recipient of discounted Venezuelan oil, shipments to Cuba were stopped following U.S. pressure and the ousting of Nicolas Maduro, leading to severe energy shortages."

You can add China as well.

Now this is from a nice liberal source, of course written to depreciate any Trump accomplishments. But they are saying NOT for the oil. Of course even liberals disagree with each other when trying to depreciate the President. 😂

"Ideas from the Yale School of Management
Politics and Policy
Social Impact
Data and AI
Alumni
Technology
Faculty Viewpoints
Oil Isn't the Real Reason Behind the Venezuela Operation
The oil industry is in the midst of a supply gut, producing millions of barrels per day above demand. Prices are low and major companies in the sector are contracting. According to Prof. Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, these economic facts undercut President Trump's intimations of an oil bonanza in Venezuela.

The economic state of the oil industry

In terms of incentives, the oil industry currently suffers from a massive supply glut. The International Energy Agency predicts that supply will exceed demand in 2026 by an astounding 3.85 million barrels per day, the equivalent of around 4% of global demand. Plus, OPEC production is soaring, Chinese energy stockpiles are filled, Saudi Arabia plans to increase their oil output by a third, and the oil stored on tankers has risen in recent weeks to its highest point since April 2020, when consumption tanked as a result of COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns.

Because of this supply glut, oil prices are almost half of what it was last year. And with WTI oil prices at $57 USD per barrel (just a fraction of the $380 USD per barrel worst-case forecast by JP Morgan after Russia's invasion of Ukraine) there is little incentive for this invasion to be linked to oil supply needs.

Despite Trump's chants at pep rallies, there has been no "drill baby, drill" zeal in the oil industry. In fact, it's much the reverse. For instance, the oil services company Baker Hughes has cut its number of oil rigs to their lowest since September 2021 And the industry-wide oil and gas rig count declined by about 5% in 2024 and 20% in 2023 as lower U.S. oil and gas prices prompted energy firms to focus more on boosting shareholder returns and paying down debt rather than increasing output.

The surge in supply is largely due to increased OPEC production, especially that of the Saudis which had been voluntarily cut by a third during the Biden years despite the paradoxical high prices then.

But rather than being energized by Trump's "drill baby, drill" chants at pep rallies, the U.S. oil industry has gone into retreat. Many U.S oil giants such as Chevron, Exxon, ConocoPhillips, and Occidental have been forced to lay off thousands of workers over the past year. ConocoPhillips announced plans to cut up to 25% of its global staff. Chevron also announced plans to lay off up to 20% of its workforce by 2026. Halliburton also announced they would be reducing their workforce last year. Lower oil prices have made 22 public U.S. producers in total—not including Exxon or Chevron—cut their capital spending by $2 USD billion. Many U.S. producers are waiting for oil prices to increase before they raise production, requiring between $70 USD and $75 USD a barrel to put rigs back into operation…. "

Cant have any accomplishments 😱😂

🤔 maybe we can use the free oil to replenish the Biden depleted oil reserves. 😏

He's done an about turn on the Brit's selling Diego Garcia too

The US president can do what he wants, Smithy. He's irrelevant to me, unless he decides to "Greenland" Australian territory (Pine Gap, NW Cape, Darwin, etc). He's not interested in my opinions and doings, nor I in his.

There's a (half-baked) thought- considering the strategic importance, is Leased-for-Free Diego Garcia going to be "Greenlanded"? Plus the "Destroyers For Bases" deal ends in 2039, only 13 years away. Most of the bases closed after WWII, but I wonder if there's plans to "Greenland" some of them, as well? After all, getting them would partially atone for the piss-poor NATO+ efforts in Afghanistan, etc. </sarcasm>

Legion, what purpose was served by insulting the Allies who fought in Afghanistan?

I'll freely admit, I have no idea. I don't see any reason why he did that. I of course disagree with and condemn it. He says and does some things that I may not understand, or can discern why it was said, etc.

Look I'm don't blindly agree with everything Trump does or says. However, if for nothing else. He did a few of very important things. Number 1, IMO is closing the border and start mass deportations. That was an invasion supported, allowed, sanctioned, etc. by the last POTUS, his Admin, many in Congress.

We know why they did it. It was illegal, unconstitutional, etc., etc. It was an insidious plan to change the voting districts, get illegal aliens the ability to vote, etc., etc.

So I look at things from that POV, from that perspective, etc. As defeating this plan that was created to "fundamentally change America" … An America that the majority don't want.

If the POTUS says somethings that may not be very diplomatic, etc. I'll generally give him as pass.

As the USA cannot let a POTUS and admin, etc. get back in the WH like the previous POTUS, admin, etc. The US would not survive … It will cease to be America …

Thanks for the honest answer, mate. Not that I ever expect anything but honest answers from you- except the odd sarcastic remark or two (which I probably earned).

Politicians. The only good argument for a return to feudalism….

Stay well, old mate.

35th, I am happy that Maduro is gone, hoping that Venezuelans will find reasons to stay in their own country, presumably now safer under US rule.

But oil remains profitable as always, just not reaching the pandemic period record levels. It is not a question of need, or even cutting off Cuba or China. Supply and demand goes up and down, we have been periodically gouged to the brink for decades, then let off the hook for a while.

It is about wealth. POTUS sees this through a business lens. That's what it means. Miller may give him additional reasons. But taking personal control of the oil money, as POTUS, and banking it in Qatar as the Trumps work huge real estate deals there must tell you something. Throw in the gift of an airliner.

Think about the POTUS actions to derail wind and solar energy. Put this together with the push to promote and continue reliance on fossil fuels despite the cost and the environmental issues. And taking over Venezuela. It's about controlling wealth.

And my opinion on this is not related to my personal feelings about Trump's character and integrity. He has done some things I agree with, as on the border. He has forced Europe to start paying for NATO. Gone after Iran. But IMO he is on shaky ground pushing the powers of the Executive branch beyond the founding principles of America.

Dal +1

BTW My sarcasm is more like an attempt at humor. Which not all appreciate …

OVI +1

And taking over Venezuela. It's about controlling wealth.

Maybe on the surface … However, as I have and others said before. It actually a multi-level action.

1) To stop the Chicoms from getting oil from Venezuela.

2) Stopping many of the drugs coming into the USA killing Americans. Add to that stopping many gang members sent by Maduro to cause crime, death and destruction in the USA.

3)Making Venezuela no longer, a Chicom, Russian, islamic terrorists, etc. friendly, safe place for the USA's mortal enemies. In the Western Hemisphere. Our back yard.

4) Denying Maduro's support to Cuba. Another long-term mortal enemy to the USA. Only 90 miles off the US'S coast.

5) Capture Maduro and his wife both hardened criminals. Who was supported by China, Russia, militant islamists terrorists. Plus the support for drug cartels and gangs in his country. There were warrants, etc. out for both of Maduro and his wife's arrests.

Frankly I don't understand what many seem not to get about this move by the POTUS/US Gov't. It has so many positive initiatives, etc. That are only good for the USA and its people. Of course, there are those that hate the POTUS, his cabinet, staff, etc. For a variety of reasons. To mention their names would be a waste of time …

Think about the POTUS actions to derail wind and solar energy.

No matter how much those ancillary power sources are pushed. E.g. by the Biden Green New Deal … The War on fossil fuels. Which BTW 95% of everything runs on. Or uses in some from to an extent.

The Go Green paradigm. Which advocated electric vehicles. Which the tech is not there to be that effective … on a large scale. BTW … where doe most of the electricity comes from to charge all those vehicles ? Even with that for EVs to be effective, there would have to be a power hook up, next to at least 1/3 of all parking places … everywhere. Where is all that $ coming from ?

The global warming narrative and agenda, which many scientists, etc. disagree with. And the "looming" weather Apocalypse that will be a global extinction level event. Which is much more hype than reality.

Wind and solar power until the tech somehow gets better, more efficient, less invasive, expensive, etc., etc. It really can only be effective and efficient on a small scale and in limited locations. IIRC those two power sources only account for 6% of all the power the US uses. If tech, etc. get better, will that go to 10-12% ?

What does normal look like in Caracas one month after the Maduro operation?

link

link

Armand

Wind and solar will never get better if they are not supported. Some countries now get half their energy from them. I am not on the Green bandwagon or the disaster is around the corner bandwagon. I am pragmatic. But I am not looking to get rich quick and let the future pass us by.

You know I want diverse energy sources to protect America from foreign embargoes as part of a common sense strategy. What is the goal in actively opposing them? Why not lead on this? We look at history here – nothing stays the same. It is not 1890. Steam ended. Gasoline will end. From finding oil and pumping it, transporting it processing it, storing it, promoting it, retailing it is not some sort of energy gift to the masses, nor is it the future on the battlefield. As you know, it has to be hauled around and it explodes pretty well, too.

We cannot just get rid of oil without pushing better options. The Chinese navy has one hand tied behind its back because of oil. They are are working on nuclear for next generation carriers. They know solar and wind far better than we do, as does Europe, and will leave us behind sooner than later.

There is plenty of money to re-build infrastructure. We are the richest nation in history. Except in leadership. And we have grifted and wasted enough money in the last couple of generations to reconfigure the entire power grid.

And I was glad to see Maduro gone, as I said. I hope the mullahs get what's coming to them. And all their proxies. The biggest shortage of all in every part of the globe these days is justice.

Tort the point was, his opponents are so driven to depreciate anything he does, they argue against each other. One group: it's all about oil! The other: the oil is not important and not needed!

It is that way with everything. Go back if the posts are still here, for cease fires, peace treaties, bombing of Iranian nuclear sites….. and on and on. Go searching on the web.

The only thing the media and politicians have not opposed, was the closing of the border. Why? Because they were for it? 😂🤣 After they fought him forv4 years of his first term over it? Impeding everything he did for the border tooth and nail, even the wall.

NO.
He just did it so quickly, it was done before they could even organize opposition!

They have opposed every thing since, in the news, on Capitol Hill, in the schools and on the streets. Now even the SAVE act, which almost 80% of the population is for. Even Somalia passed a voter id law!

"Somalia just implemented a new program issuing voter ID cards to every voter. This is to ensure every voter can only vote once – An ID is mandatory for voting"

What is the evil SAVE act you ask?

H.R.22 — 119th Congress (2025-2026)

"This bill requires individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.

Specifically, the bill prohibits states from accepting and processing an application to register to vote in a federal election unless the applicant presents documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. The bill specifies what documents are considered acceptable proof of U.S. citizenship, such as identification that complies with the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates U.S. citizenship.

Further, the bill (1) prohibits states from registering an individual to vote in a federal election unless, at the time the individual applies to register to vote, the individual provides documentary proof of U.S. citizenship; and (2) requires states to establish an alternative process under which an applicant may submit other evidence to demonstrate U.S. citizenship.

Each state must take affirmative steps on an ongoing basis to ensure that only U.S. citizens are registered to vote, which shall include establishing a program to identify individuals who are not U.S. citizens using information supplied by certain sources.

Additionally, states must remove noncitizens from their official lists of eligible voters.

The bill allows for a private right of action against an election official who registers an applicant to vote in a federal election who fails to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.

The bill establishes criminal penalties for certain offenses, including registering an applicant to vote in a federal election who fails to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship."

😱😱😱😱

Back to results from Venezuela and in the ousting of Maduro.

Cuba:

CNBC

"The update cuts off a significant source of revenue for Cuba's beleaguered government.

It also comes shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened tariffs on any country that supplies Cuba with oil.

Russia, which holds friendly ties with Cuba, described Havana's fuel situation as "truly critical."

The Cuban government said international airlines can no longer refuel there due to fuel shortages after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened tariffs on any country that supplies the communist country with oil.

The island nation's leadership said Sunday that Cuba will run out of aviation fuel from Monday, likely disrupting airlines operating there, according to EFE news agency, citing two sources. The kerosene shortage is expected to persist for the next month, with all of Cuba's international airports affected.

Cuba's Foreign Ministry and the Cuban Embassy in London did not immediately respond to a CNBC request for comment.

The Trump administration has sought to tighten the U.S. chokehold on Cuba since Jan. 3, when it conducted an audacious military operation to depose Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, a longtime ally of Cuba's government.

Trump, in an executive order issued at the end of January, said the Cuban government constituted "an unusual and extraordinary threat," which required a national emergency declaration.

The U.S. president said Cuba's ties to countries including China, Russia and Iran, human rights violations, and communist leadership destabilize the region "through migration and violence."

As part of the announcement, Trump said U.S. tariffs may target countries that provides any oil to Cuba, whether directly or indirectly.………."

So again, more than just oil for the U.S.

Oil is for the oil business. The cash will go where?
Yes there were other benefits for the US. Many Realpolitik explainers here. Trump can and does declare emergencies unilaterally. So we have to speculate based on his statements, which has been known to be problematic. Surely people are aware the close ongoing business ties to Qatar.

Tort that will depend on who you want to believe. 🙂

"For a start I believe nothing on here, and very little that comes from the WH."

🤨 Well why read it then? Just continue to read your sources. The sources sited are pretty much from the news spectrum, except for MSNBC or MSNOW or whatever they call themselves now.

My last was CNBC.

+1 goibinu

I believe very little from some here ! 😎 Especially if they don't live in the USA and are not Americans.🌍

I believe very little from some here ! 😎 Especially if they don't live in the USA and are not Americans.🌍

I'd be offended if I wasn't too apathetic and lazy, Legion.

You do have the option *not* to read poorly written & badly reasoned posts – full of bad grammar, poor vocab., incomplete sentences & mindless emojis, goibinu. Stifle is a useful option to cut out the background noise.

It is really interesting how threads that have stifled posts from the worst offenders still make perfect sense, despite the grey boxes. Probably more sense…..

We all know why you really read them. 😏

Spin what? Economic leverage.

🤔
Of course we could have all those divisions and squadrons we have on the new 51st State's border, preparing for their liberation, just blow it up. 😉

As to the other, suffering from a non curable case of "United States Envy" and TDA… We live free in your head mate, 24/7. 😏

You can hear POTUS all the time, never stops talking, no matter what media outlet. He does have issues with contradictory statements, nothing new.

"You can hear POTUS all the time, never stops talking, no matter what media outlet. He does have issues with contradictory statements, nothing new."

Even his cabinet meetings broadcast. Forces the media (with one exception) to broadcast what he says live, as opposed to their interpretations of what he says. Well at least if you watch them live and don't wait for their spin… I mean interpretations later. 😉

But I know many don't. 😏