1. United Nations — Russia and China proposed to the United Nations Security Council that it ease some economic sanctions against North Korea, according to a U.N. resolution obtained by CBS News on Monday.... 2. Some people may point out that China can circumvent the US sanctions by reselling or donating to North Korea any food surplus from its purported agreement to buy $50 billion worth of US agricultural goods annually. After all, won't China be the new owner of the agricultural products after paying the US with its hard-earned money? The problem for countries or companies that trade with the US is that in the eyes of Uncle Sam they still do not have full ownership of the goods even though they have paid for them. It's the same case with any country or company that pays for US technology or components used in their manufactured goods. Hence, as in the case of Huawei, any country or company that dares to resell or donate any US-related item to North Korea or Iran will face the full wrath of Uncle Sam. In conclusion, we can imagine what kind of mad, mad world we would be living in if every item in our home still does not belong to us but to the sellers regardless of the amount paid.
When a country buys bulk agricultural commodities it's not like going to the local feed coop with cash to get a thousand pound pallet of feed corn and use it for deer bait. It's in thousands of tons and complex contracts are signed. Seller and buyer, after affixing signatures, are limited to the terms agreed upon.
Sanctions are punishment... like standing in the corner, simply making things more expensive for NK is undermining sanctions. Therefore should be "no sanctions" or "sanctions", not "sanctions with on-sell/third party buy" options
In such complex processes, the buyers have to pray that they have enough time to dispose of the huge quantities of farm goods before they get rotten.
I'm in basic agreement with your sentiment, just two thoughts: 1) Never issue an order that cannot be enforced. 2) Deed restrictions are legal. Nothing new in the concept, contract law. Enforcement beyond one's jurisdiction is problematic.
Why can’t NK change their political and economic system so they can produce their own food and not have to rely on the generosity of others?
Not if you got a billion plus people who gotta eat. But I think that's why they took pork bellies off the trading floor -- an electrical outage makes them worthless quick while feed corn and wheat last and last if they are just kept dry.
1. Each year, millions of Americans are impacted by hunger and food insecurity. In 2017, 40 million people struggled with hunger in the United States. 2. My great friend, you and other Americans have to ask Trump what the XXXX is going on in the US when a lot of people are struggling with hunger but he is interested only to try selling $50 billion worth of farm goods annually to China in order to win US farmers' votes for his 2020 re-election.
My great friend, the problem for the "billion plus people who gotta eat" is that they have no money to gotta pay -- just like millions of hungry people around the world including a section of US population.
Yes, that's why it is better to dump rotten food surpluses into the sea to construct artificial islands.
A billion plus people who gotta eat are not the problem of the USA. The scope of that problem is limited to their own country, which is doing very well.
I agree, but at issue is, the dems will not help anyone either. This situation has been going on for years. Why? Why are both sides turning their backs on their 'children'? I don't want to take anything away from others who are much worse off, but we have to take care of our own, first. I just don't understand. If it is regulations that make it so difficult for our own and easier to just give it away to others, change them. That's what the HoRs is supposed to do. Dems are in charge there. What's wrong with our leaders?
