Who says that Trump is not out to serve the financial interests of the American oligarchs and Power Okole?

Why is no one talking about who is taking control of the Panama Canal?

The title of the thread is about conflict and Panama/China and war was brought up.  The USA will not go to war with Blackrock as they are not a country. You need to ask why isn't the fake news making this a huge story?  Why don't they also tell the people how much land they own inside the USA and which politicians they fund?

My guess is that Trump is appeasing Black Rock for the same reason he is appeasing Israel.
He already took a bullet and doesn't want to conduct his presidency from a bunker.

Because nobody cares.

The ports are still under the control of government.  Blackrock is paying a fee to become a concessionaire who operates 2 ports.  No different than a dry cleaner paying to operate on a military base at the local Post or Base Exchange.  if a concessionaire isn't living up to the contract or is getting too many complaints from customers, the government can either replace them immediately under breach of contract or wait for the current contract to lapse and award it to someone else.

So, according to you, all that propaganda of Chinese companies running the ports of the Panama Canal and threatening the national security of US empire is all hogwash now?

Also, based on your logic, Panama can kick out Blackrock when their current contract ends and bring back Chinese firm right?

So, according to you, all that propaganda of Chinese companies running the ports of the Panama Canal and threatening the national security of US empire is all hogwash now?

Also, based on your logic, Panama can kick out Blackrock when their current contract ends and bring back Chinese firm right?

I'm sorry.  You've obviously confused me with Google.

if you have questions, try looking up the answers yourself.  Any answers I give you will just perpetuate this useless diatribe.

So, according to you, all that propaganda of Chinese companies running the ports of the Panama Canal and threatening the national security of US empire is all hogwash now?

Also, based on your logic, Panama can kick out Blackrock when their current contract ends and bring back Chinese firm right?

Just to add context, the Chinese company only owned one set of locks. The canal has multiple sets of locks meaning China didn't control the canal and companies/countries could use the other locks to make the crossing.

Any answers I give you will just perpetuate this useless diatribe.

What a way to sweep the real truth under the rug.

Now that Blackrock has control and will make untold billions of dollars in the foreseeable future, it clearly appears the whole Panama charade was nothing but US imperialism in practice: Take over a sovereign country's assets using false pretenses and distribute the loot to the oligarchs of that empire.

Just to add context, the Chinese company only owned one set of locks. The canal has multiple sets of locks meaning China didn't control the canal and companies/countries could use the other locks to make the crossing.

Would control of 1 lock mean that others cannot pass without your approval?  What I'm getting at is that it takes all locks to agree to let a vessel pass.  So control of 1 lock does mean there is control of the "entire canal".

What a way to sweep the real truth under the rug.

Now that Blackrock has control and will make untold billions of dollars in the foreseeable future, it clearly appears the whole Panama charade was nothing but US imperialism in practice: Take over a sovereign country's assets using false pretenses and distribute the loot to the oligarchs of that empire.

Truth?  All you post now are your opinions.  That's not truth unless you can accurately predict what will happen.

So far, your predictions have all been way off base.  That's not truth.  That's just criticizing and demonizing.

As for truth, who selected Black Rock?  Was it not the Panamanians?

So far, your predictions have all been way off base.  That's not truth.  That's just criticizing and demonizing.

Really...

Was I wrong about the US empire conducting a proxy war against Russia via Ukraine?

Apparently, you were.

As for truth, who selected Black Rock?  Was it not the Panamanians?

Stop insulting the Panamanians since if they were not forced to select Blackrock by the US empire, they would still be using a Chinese company to operate its ports.

Just to add context, the Chinese company only owned one set of locks. The canal has multiple sets of locks meaning China didn't control the canal and companies/countries could use the other locks to make the crossing.

hypothetically, since the US is the largest user of the Canal, should a China-loyal company managing one lock stop allowing US shipping through, the time for US-bound ships to traverse the Canal would increase by 33%.  If the canal that's denying US access happens to be the largest lock, some US ships may not be able to use the remaining two locks.

Look up Panamax, New Panamax and Super Panamax size limits.  One of the locks is the largest of the three, meaning the largest ships are not able to use either of the other two locks.  In most cases, there are only a couple of feet clearance between the ship's sides and the walls of the canals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panamax

In a nutshell, only one of the locks can handle the largest ships of today.  if China controls that one, the other two would not be sufficient, even if the US controlled both.

The other issue is that the largest ships going in opposite directions through the Canal must travel though the locks in alternating fashion.  It's basically like a one-lane bridge where traffic must take turns crossing.  Imagine if only non-US ships are allowed to use the locks before any US-related ships are allowed to continue.

Really...

Was I wrong about the US empire conducting a proxy war against Russia via Ukraine?

Apparently, you were.

When you throw spaghetti at a wall, one or two noodles are bound to stick.  You've made that accusation in other conflicts (Panama being the latest), but nothing stuck.  Same with North Korea and Syria.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


Stop insulting the Panamanians since if they were not forced to select Blackrock by the US empire, they would still be using a Chinese company to operate its ports.

What?  What insult?  You're tripping, dude.

There's a new Emperor in town.  His name is Donald Trump.  All your anti-US-Empire comments are no longer valid.

Would control of 1 lock mean that others cannot pass without your approval?  What I'm getting at is that it takes all locks to agree to let a vessel pass.  So control of 1 lock does mean there is control of the "entire canal".

No, the locks provide different access points to the river. If you didn't want to use the Chinese owned locks you could go to the next one. If you look at the satellite photos you see two different locks to enter the lake/river system.

hypothetically, since the US is the largest user of the Canal, should a China-loyal company managing one lock stop allowing US shipping through, the time for US-bound ships to traverse the Canal would increase by 33%.  If the canal that's denying US access happens to be the largest lock, some US ships may not be able to use the remaining two locks.

That is a possibility but it is Panama's decision.

That is a possibility but it is Panama's decision.

And if their decision is a threat to US shipping and national security, we have the right to negotiate with Panama to settle on terms that are in our favor -- not China's.

Somehow you seem to think we are coercing Panama into deciding to not let China manage the canal and its ports.  But China is negotiating with Panama in good faith.

You have no evidence either of those assumptions are correct.

There's a new Emperor in town.  His name is Donald Trump.  All your anti-US-Empire comments are no longer valid.

Unfortunately, such comments have just begun with the unprecedented chaos Trump has unleashed to everyone on the planet that no one could have predicted.

And if their decision is a threat to US shipping and national security, we have the right to negotiate with Panama to settle on terms that are in our favor -- not China's.

It was still never proven how Panama's decision to let Chinese companies manage their ports was a clear and present danger to the US empire that required strong arming Panama to relinquish port control to the American people's favorite conglomerate Blackrock of all companies.

Somehow you seem to think we are coercing Panama into deciding to not let China manage the canal and its ports.  But China is negotiating with Panama in good faith.

Judging by how many nations are signing up to join BRICS as well as China's Belt and Road Initiative, I'd say China is a better business partner that acts in good faith than the US empire especially now with Trump tariffing every nation that he feels deserves one.

It was still never proven how Panama's decision to let Chinese companies manage their ports was a clear and present danger to the US empire that required strong arming Panama to relinquish port control to the American people's favorite conglomerate Blackrock of all companies.


Judging by how many nations are signing up to join BRICS as well as China's Belt and Road Initiative, I'd say China is a better business partner that acts in good faith than the US empire especially now with Trump tariffing every nation that he feels deserves one.

First, you haven't proven that Panama didn't use a decision to contract ports to China as a bargaining position to get more from the US.  First rule of negotiations is to have more than one bidder for what you're offering.  Worked great when negotiating my salary.

Second, how many "other nations" ar joining BRICS doesn't prove anything other than China is offering acceptable deals to those nations.  Once China is involved, i'll be hard to switch to someone else, so China can raise what they charge.  Incumbents always have an advantage over the competition when bids are being considered to renew contracts.

And if their decision is a threat to US shipping and national security, we have the right to negotiate with Panama to settle on terms that are in our favor -- not China's.

Somehow you seem to think we are coercing Panama into deciding to not let China manage the canal and its ports.  But China is negotiating with Panama in good faith.

You have no evidence either of those assumptions are correct.

Panama deciding what to do with their own canal is not a threat to the USA. It's not like when Russia was putting up nukes on our back door in Cuba.

I am all find with negotiation, we can certainly boycott them and put a big dent in their canal income alone. Lots of options there, but military action because Panama doesn't want to let us use their canal is unjustifiable.

I have no evidence? Trump casually implied he might use military action if it didn't get its way. I know you didn't miss that bit of news. I never said China was negotiating in good faith BTW

Panama deciding what to do with their own canal is not a threat to the USA. It's not like when Russia was putting up nukes on our back door in Cuba.

I am all find with negotiation, we can certainly boycott them and put a big dent in their canal income alone. Lots of options there, but military action because Panama doesn't want to let us use their canal is unjustifiable.

I have no evidence? Trump casually implied he might use military action if it didn't get its way. I know you didn't miss that bit of news. I never said China was negotiating in good faith BTW

Panama deciding what to do with their own canal is not a threat to the USA.

Wrong!  if the decisions they make affect US shipping, it directly threatens commerce and national security.

Your statement is analogous to: Cuba deciding to let Russia base nuclear weapons there is not a threat to the US.  It's Cuba's decision.

Panama deciding what to do with their own canal is not a threat to the USA. It's not like when Russia was putting up nukes on our back door in Cuba.

So you can use nukes as an example, but I cannot.  We call this being a h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e. Thanks for playing.