 |
|
The us doesn’t own that ship
Posted on: January 15, 2024 at 18:08:17 CT
El-ahrairah BAMA
Posts:
50465
Member For:
22.25 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
That ship came from Asia and wasn’t heading to the us either
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/01/david-stockman/to-hell-with-fighting-the-houthis/
But the truth is, local wars like the extant spat between Israel and its Muslim neighbors do not threaten either the peace or even the commerce of the globe. If it did, then the most immediately impacted parties would be the heaviest shippers and neighbors on the Red Sea.
For instance, Saudi Arabia lives on the Red Sea, with major ports at Jeddah, Yanbu, Jubail and the massive futuristic investment at Neom. Likewise, China sends more containership cargo through the Red Sea by far than any other nation. And, of course, Egypt collects the tolls from the Suez Canel through which the Red Sea traffic transits.
So, has Saudi Arabia, China or Egypt joined Washington’s coalition to bomb the daylights out of the Houthi?
……Hmmmm. We thought so. No they haven’t.
But what is especially rich is all the handwringing from the Washington neocons about the 9% of global seaborne oil traffic that traverses the Red Sea/Suez route. The fact is, however, the US is now a net energy exporter. So higher oil prices would actually be a slight benefit economically.
But actually, despite the entire kerfuffle over the Houthi interdiction of Israel bound traffic, there has been no visible impact on global oil prices, even if you make use of a magnifying glass. So what in the hell, exactly, are they talking about?
Yes, until Israel comes to terms with its neighbors, seaborne traffic from China and the Far East may be diverted into the longer route from Asia around the Cape of Hope. But so what? The distance from Shanghai to Rotterdam through the Red Sea is just under 6,000 miles versus 9,400 miles around the Cape. That adds another third to the trip, but all the bleating from Washington about the extra costs is really too much.
The extra costs are variable costs from slightly more days on the water, but those extra costs are not close to being proportionate to the added mileage. And secondly, we are talking about Chinese commercial traffic to Europe, not California, even as this bogus point is coming from the very same Uniparty politicians that wish to have a war with China over Tiawan, which is none of America’s business, either.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/01/david-stockman/to-hell-with-fighting-the-houthis/
But the truth is, local wars like the extant spat between Israel and its Muslim neighbors do not threaten either the peace or even the commerce of the globe. If it did, then the most immediately impacted parties would be the heaviest shippers and neighbors on the Red Sea.
For instance, Saudi Arabia lives on the Red Sea, with major ports at Jeddah, Yanbu, Jubail and the massive futuristic investment at Neom. Likewise, China sends more containership cargo through the Red Sea by far than any other nation. And, of course, Egypt collects the tolls from the Suez Canel through which the Red Sea traffic transits.
So, has Saudi Arabia, China or Egypt joined Washington’s coalition to bomb the daylights out of the Houthi?
……Hmmmm. We thought so. No they haven’t.
But what is especially rich is all the handwringing from the Washington neocons about the 9% of global seaborne oil traffic that traverses the Red Sea/Suez route. The fact is, however, the US is now a net energy exporter. So higher oil prices would actually be a slight benefit economically.
But actually, despite the entire kerfuffle over the Houthi interdiction of Israel bound traffic, there has been no visible impact on global oil prices, even if you make use of a magnifying glass. So what in the hell, exactly, are they talking about?
Yes, until Israel comes to terms with its neighbors, seaborne traffic from China and the Far East may be diverted into the longer route from Asia around the Cape of Hope. But so what? The distance from Shanghai to Rotterdam through the Red Sea is just under 6,000 miles versus 9,400 miles around the Cape. That adds another third to the trip, but all the bleating from Washington about the extra costs is really too much.
The extra costs are variable costs from slightly more days on the water, but those extra costs are not close to being proportionate to the added mileage. And secondly, we are talking about Chinese commercial traffic to Europe, not California, even as this bogus point is coming from the very same Uniparty politicians that wish to have a war with China over Tiawan, which is none of America’s business, either.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
The us doesn’t own that ship - El-ahrairah BAMA - 1/15 18:08:17
-