Are You A Sexpat Or Do You Ride The Backwards Morality Train?

[webfact]

China to 'comprehensively' assess new U.S. defence act

 

U.S. President Donald Trump holds up the National Defense Authorization Act after signing it in front of soldiers from the U.S. Army's 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, New York, U.S., August 13, 2018. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

 

BEIJING (Reuters) - China's Commerce Ministry said on Tuesday it will comprehensively assess a new U.S. defence act that strengthens the role of a key committee tasked with reviewing proposed foreign investment, and called for fair treatment of Chinese investors.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump signed a $716 billion defence policy act on Monday that authorises military spending and includes watered-down controls on U.S. government contracts with China's ZTE Corp and Huawei Technologies Co Ltd [HWT.UL].

 

The National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, strengthens the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviews proposed foreign investments to weigh whether they threaten national security. That measure was seen as targeting China.

 

In a short statement, China's Commerce Ministry said it had noted the inclusion of CFIUS in the act and would "comprehensively assess the contents", paying close attention to the impact on Chinese firms.

 

"Chinese and U.S. companies have a strong wish to deepen investment cooperation, and the potential is enormous," the ministry added.

 

"The governments of the two countries should listen to the voices of the companies, and provide a good environment and stable expectations," it added.

 

"The U.S. side should objectively and fairly treat Chinese investors, and avoid CFIUS becoming an obstacle to investment cooperation between Chinese and U.S. firms."

 

(Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Additional reporting by Andrew Galbraith in Shanghai; Editing by Sam Holmes)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-08-14

 

[zydeco]

Note: It's "defense act," not "defence act." It even says so on the main Reuters page. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump/trump-signs-defense-policy-bill-with-watered-down-china-measures-idUSKBN1KY249

[wwest5829]

2 hours ago, car720 said:

get a look at the kids in the photos.  Not much more than children.

But dangerous children and with guns.

Not much more than children and US citizens continue unending warfare, sending them to their deaths. Not Defense Department...reality is closer to the original titles ... War Department.

[sammieuk1]

Looks like agent orange as been dropped on the lectern ?

[Tug]

It’s another cash cow for the defense contractors and I’m sure Donald will get his turn feeding at the trough here’s a thought stop killing people find common ground and build on that

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, zydeco said:

Note: It's "defense act," not "defence act." It even says so on the main Reuters page. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump/trump-signs-defense-policy-bill-with-watered-down-china-measures-idUSKBN1KY249

Actually Reuters has the name of the bill wrong.

It's John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act.

But Trump is still so mad at McCain for voting against the repeal of ACA that he cannot say McCain's name in the bill title.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/13/politics/donald-trump-john-mccain-defense-spending/index.html

Trump remains a vindictive bully.

[Trouble]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

Actually Reuters has the name of the bill wrong.

It's John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act.

But Trump is still so mad at McCain for voting against the repeal of ACA that he cannot say McCain's name in the bill title.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/13/politics/donald-trump-john-mccain-defense-spending/index.html

Trump remains a vindictive bully.

The CNN article is a convoluted piece of bad reporting.  The bill might have had McCain's name in the title but McCain had little to do with the passage of the bill since he has been away from Congress for some time now.  The whole article is really nothing more than an attack on Trump as there is nothing about the bill or what it does.  It's just meant to be inflammatory, nothing more.

[timendres]

17 hours ago, webfact said:

"The U.S. side should objectively and fairly treat Chinese investors, and avoid CFIUS becoming an obstacle to investment cooperation between Chinese and U.S. firms."

Of course, because China is so open and fair to US firms trying to invest in China. Oh, wait...

[mrwebb8825]

Glad to see China getting reined in for a change. About time we had a president that isn't afraid of them.