Time for tariffs & treaties
After a hectic first few weeks of a few hundred Executive Orders, nominations & appointments, trips to two disaster areas, proclamations & press briefings and the signing into law of his first piece of legislation, President Trump is heading for what he calls "the summer White House": Mar a Lago.
Today is February 1st, the day for tariffs on three countries who in one way or another allowed Fentanyl to enter the US, as well as having a bit of an unfair trading position with the US. Trump is expected to sign the order today imposing hefty new tariffs of 25% on goods from Mexico and Canada and 10% on imports from China. Trump did, however, reference a potential carve out for oil from Canada, saying that tariff rate would be 10% versus the 25% planned for other Canadian imports. The three countries are very anxious about the tariffs, but it is a little too late.
The President is also expected to be meeting with people at his Florida residence and mentioned yesterday that he has already begun a conversation on a deal to end the Ukraine War. The new Secretary of State will be talking to a tinpot dictator in Panama and the Israeli Prime Minister is expected to be visiting this coming week.
Tags
Who is online
47 visitors
Energetically doing the people's business.
The good folks of Maine get 90% of their heating oil from that DEI country to the north ... sounds like he's energetically doing his business on them.
Read somewhere , that oil might not be included in the tariffs , have to wait and see i guess.
my understanding is the US imports crude , and exports refined . that depends on different factors .
but i dont always hear or read everything these days .
We also export our sweet crude (about 4 million barrels per day) while we import about 6 million barrels per day of sour crude. This is largely because most of our refineries were designed to process the historically cheaper sour crude.
So for the last 4 years you have complained, DAILY about the price of goods....trump takes office, increases the price of those same goods by ~25% and you're totally ok with it? Partisan much?
Spin, dance and twist yourself into knots all you want but at the end of the day, the price of goods is going to skyrocket and that's all on trump. Deal with it.
Let's look at this another way....
So for the past four years you said nothing about the heavy increase in goods and services....Trump takes office, and NOW you want to whine about tariffs that may or may not stay, depending on what the targeted country will do.
Spin, dance and twist yourself into knots all you want but at the end of the day, the price of goods and services skyrocketed over the past 4 years and that was all on Biden and his DEI hire VP.[✘]
A duly elected president of a strong ally is a ‘’tinpot dicator’’ WOW, what an amazing comment, the tinpot dicator is Trump.
Of course he will, if he didn’t the price of gas would skyrocket fucking everyone a lot, dropping it to 10% it will only fuck the everyone a little bit. Brilliant stragey.
He is in violation of a treaty.
Of course he will,
For the time being.
No, he isn’t.
Trump making an allegation is not 'fact'. There has been no official violation of the treaty, only allegations ... regarding Chinese firm port access and prices on USA vessels. And that clearly is insufficient grounds for Trump justifying an attempt to 'take back' the Panama canal.
Again, this is where a responsible PotUS (pretty much anyone in our lifetimes other than Trump) would engage in negotiations rather than make braggadocious, counterproductive threats.
Don't just accept whatever Trump says.
It is not necessarily untrue either. FACT:
"In this week's hearing, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz said a new bridge over the canal being built by Chinese contractors, which he said could shut down transit, and the operation of ports on both ends of the waterway by China, constitute "acute" security risks.
"Panama may well be in violation of this treaty," the Texas Republican said after listening to U.S. officials and experts.
"The presence of the Chinese government, Chinese companies, and especially Chinese state companies, but not limited to them, does raise serious issues and concerns for the neutrality of the treaty," George Mason University law professor Eugene Kontorovich, a research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said at the hearing."
Why the U.S. is claiming China’s presence violates the Panama neutrality treaty - The Japan Times
And that clearly is insufficient grounds for Trump justifying an attempt to 'take back' the Panama canal.
The only thing that was insufficient was a valid reason for a POS like Jimmy Carter to give it away.
Yes,Vic, allegations. Your quote illustrates that these are mere allegations (which I had already noted) and do not justify trying to reclaim the canal.
Is there any act of Trump that you will not try to defend?
Which very likely may turn out to be true, just like the FBI falsifying a FISA application and the covid epidemic escaping from a lab in Wuhan.
I'll wait for the facts ....again.
Yes, wait for the fact to emerge that Panama actually violated the treaty at a level that warrants the irresponsible, incendiary rhetoric from Trump.
Would be nice if Trump too would learn to wait until we actually have facts and then plan a rational course of action. But not this asshole; he opens his mouth and creates problems while his loyal supporters lap it up and defend him at every turn.
Don't Forget: The Secretary of State has been dispatched to Panama. I regard that as responsible.
Bombing Panama to smithereens might not be.
After the fact, Vic. After the fact.
The SoS should have gone there well before Trump opened his irresponsible mouth.
Might? Might?!
That's right might. We built the canal; we lost lives over the canal and one dirty pos liberal had no business giving it away.
So you think there are circumstances where it would be responsible for the USA to bomb Panama to smithereens.
Don't you remember Noriega?
What does a dictator have to do with us in 2025 bombing Panama to smithereens. WTF are you talking about?
You asked if there were circumstances for going to war with Panama. I'm showing you that there are many.
Are you confused?
Vic,
First of all no need to be so disparaging of the other side. It doesn't lead to constructive discussion. Second, no one gave the canal away. We had a treaty, the Hay–Herrán-Varilla Treaty made under Teddy Roosevelt (and may I point out that he was a Republican), the treaty granting rights to the United States to build and administer the Panama Canal Zone and its defenses. This treaty gave the US some rights to the canal "in perpetuity", but in article 22 limited other rights to a lease period of 99 years.
And that is where we are today. Trump is wrong in saying that there was some sort of violation. There was a treaty that we are honoring.
That "treaty" was contested at the time by other US leaders, one of which was the man who would replace Carter. They tried to warn Carter that the treaty would harm America's military & economic interests.
Carter signed it anyway and I will always regard Carter as a fool.
To expand the canal to accommodate the post Panamax vessels the canal had to be widened. The financing for that was $2.3 billion dollars and there were I believe 5 major entities involved, one being the US. The contractural agreement states that bid for construction are open to the world, that language is very clear.
Add that to the current costs and the treaty that was signed by Teddy Roosevelt and Trump has a problem, he has no justification to ‘’take the canal back’’ and the use of military force against a good ally and a much much smaller country would bring in other players, IMO china would not stay by and allow that to happen.
As far as the Chinese ability to shut the canal down what good would it to them since they are one of the major container lines that uses the canal.
If they are building a bridge, BFD they are doing cheaper, faster and probably better than any one else.
As much as Trump wants to be the 2nd coming of the Monroe doctrine, he is a day late and a dollar short, Central America, and the rest of the world is far different today then it was during Monroe’s time in office.
Here is where we stand as of today:
Meeting President Jose Raul Mulino, Rubio "made clear that this status quo is unacceptable and that absent immediate changes, it would require the United States to take measures necessary to protect its rights under the treaty," State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said.
Rubio warns Panama of consequences over canal
Not honoring a treaty has no honor, something that the US has done for decades with treaties.
If Raygun was right why in the world have we grown in leaps and bounds since honoring the treaty.
It is about Panama not honoring their end.
Wow, Little Marco is flexing his muscle. When we send in the military to ‘’retake’’ the canal will you be sending your grandkids to fight there, it’s MF because it will end up as a guerrilla war in dense jungle, you grandkids can experience jungle rot, and every disease known to man, oh and of course snipers, claymore's, pungi sticks all the stuff that either kills you or fucks you up for life.
Perhaps Little Marco could be their company commander, talk is cheap Vic, you have to walk the walk.
The photo was taken in Panama, Vic.
totally ridiculous. trumps rocket man boyfriend is a dictator. of course we only bomb people that cant fight back.
id like someone to ask trump to speak for two minutes on how the Panama Canal is hurting us. There is no way on earth he could do that. He couldn't even talk about it for one minute without repeating himself 5 times.
What did they violate, Vic?
You and Trump are starting to sound like the ‘’Gulf of Tonkin’’ selling a false narrative.
Vic, it didn't matter if it was contested, it was still a treaty that was signed in 1903. A treaty is legally binding. What Carter signed was that at the end of the 99 year period. What Carter signed was Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal,
So all Carter did was certify that we retained rights and defended the Canel till the end of the 99 year lease, and after that Panama got back the canal. Nothing had changed from the original treaty.
And I was never a fan of Carter, but he didn't do anything but ratify what was already going to happen. Kind of like what happened with England and Hong Kong. The outcomes of these treaties were short-sighted, but that still does not negate the treaties.
I am talking about 2025 and you are talking about the US taking out a dictator 35 years ago.
Focus, Vic. Your notion of bombing Panama in 2025 has nothing whatsoever to do with us removing a dictator in 1989.
You can be with the Panamanians. I'm with the USA.
a guerrilla war
Guerrilla wars are the price we pay for not invading and absolutely defeating North Vietnam.
You are with Trump.
The USA would not support bombing Panama.
I’m with the USA and hope that that stupid fuck Trump doesn’t follow through on starting wars, and war is something you don’t know anything about.
Vietnam has nothing to do with Panama, since you were never there your advice doesn’t mean shit.
The original treaty: the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty in 1903 did the following:
. The Americans promised to support a Panamanian bid for independence in exchange for the rights to construct the Panama Canal and operate it within a sovereign, U.S.-run Canal Zone.
Why the US Returned the Panama Canal | HISTORY
If you read that article, you will see that it was only over time that US leaders weighed the benefits of the Canal against the wishes of Panama.
So all Carter did was certify that we retained rights and defended the Canel till the end of the 99 year lease, and after that Panama got back the canal. Nothing had changed from the original treaty.
Actually control of the Canal changed hands and the Canal Zone no longer existed. I think that was a big change.
And I was never a fan of Carter, but he didn't do anything but ratify what was already going to happen. Kind of like what happened with England and Hong Kong. The outcomes of these treaties were short-sighted, but that still does not negate the treaties.
IMO he lost Iran and the Canal.
Try and at least read my comments
Correction: Bombing the smithereens out of Panama.
To think we once backed their independence!
I have and they are nothing but maga bullshit.
If you did, you wouldn't have thought I was connecting North Vietnam to Panama.
Intentionally emphasizing an even more irrational element puts your comments further on the extreme.
Iran was lost fundamentally in 1953 with the imposition of the Shah and SAVAK by the CIA.
Impressive. Can't think of another time that a president decided to raise taxes on all Americans by 25%. Instead of starting at $32,000, a Ford Mustang should now start at about $40,000. Something to be proud of?
Boomerang - what he's doing is going to come back and smack everyone in the face. Brilliant move!!!
Trump keeps saying that Americans are overcharge by Panama when using the canal, I wonder how many of our MAGA members have any idea what a fricking lie that is.
First off, American warships pay no fees at all. Second the US doesn’t have a commercial fleet of container ships, the ships transiting the Panama are mostly non American. Each ships pay exactly the same depending on size, tonnage, number of containers etc. These fee are set and each shipping line pay the same.
The comment or so called fact is that 80 % of the cargo ships going through the canal are American, no way at all if it’s 2% that would be a high number. The cargo in the container is mostly destined for or from the US, and the shipping company pays the tolls to Panama.
The US hasn’t had a large international container shipping company since American President Lines was sold to NOL a Singaporean company in the 1990s.
Those are the facts.
I have a theory that it’s easier to solve the problems that aren’t actually problems - or don’t even exist.
A very plausible theory, Tacos.
Start and solve a problem that does not exist. Trump 101.