Originally posted by Greytan49:This article appear in Shin Min Daily - Chinese Newspaper - Thailand canal. Due to political issue.
Zao Bao (Jun - Jul) - forgot the exact date 2009 Front page - Malaysia govt propose to built a bridge at the Straits of Malacca from Malaca to Indonesia. Just need Indonesia Governement agreement only.
So, Singapore Govt hope by yr 2015, Singaporean able to travel to China (Kun Min) through railway - train only.
Dream on, with the Malaccan bridge. I have a few drawing boards at home, would gladly give to the pig brains, for I am no artist and have no use of it. Art and Reality are different issues, only fools and self admitted pieces of shit fail to discern better.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Dream on, with the Malaccan bridge. I have a few drawing boards at home, would gladly give to the pig brains, for I am no artist and have no use of it. Art and Reality are different issues, only fools and self admitted pieces of shit fail to discern better.
Hello, it's written in the newspaper.
Pls, read properly.
Originally posted by Greytan49:
hello, can you just shut up! "Genius".
i mean i am just been logic mah...taking to Kunming will takes you about 3 to 4 days, by that time, i would have finished my kunming tour with extra day extension.
AND WHY MUST I SHUT UP??? Me cannot talk meh!!
Originally posted by Greytan49:
Hello, it's written in the newspaper.Pls, read properly.
Hello, read on, did you miss the word 'propose' on the article or do you need me to 'propose' you go attend more chinese language lessons?
Some americans 'propose' to send vehicles to explore distant stars hundreds of light years away too.
Pls, UNDERSTAND properly.
Originally posted by angel7030:
i mean i am just been logic mah...taking to Kunming will takes you about 3 to 4 days, by that time, i would have finished my kunming tour with extra day extension.
AND WHY MUST I SHUT UP??? Me cannot talk meh!!
It's published in the Chinese newspaper.
Pls give constructive feedbacks.
Originally posted by Greytan49:
It's published in the Chinese newspaper.Pls give constructive feedbacks.
Nevermind lah, you go take the train when it is complete.
Most peoples claim our papers, be it chinese or english are state controlled media but yet they like to read it very much. Contradicting indeed.
Originally posted by Greytan49:
It's published in the Chinese newspaper.Pls give constructive feedbacks.
Going to the stars is also published by no lesser than the popular Washington times.
Pls give constructive feedbacks.
But i will understand if you dont bother, cause its something light years away and the effects wont be felt by anyone of us for a few generations to come.
With due respect, if you are my fellow Singaporean, I am sure you are aware of Msia's bullying tactics and sabre rattling. I share your concerns. I had personally experienced it and gotten used to it over the years not be alarmed.
Of course, one must never be complacent. So long as we elect level headed, go by law persons of integrity as administrators, I believe we can by hook or by crook to ensure our nation survives. 3.2 million lives are dependant on it.
Diplomacy are acts whereby when one plays it, so too can another, and Singaporeans arent stupid at such arenas.
Our forefathers are not inbred natives brought up on priviledge by stepping down on others, but hardworking men of experience and culture with 4000 years of recorded history, and created a multi-racial society where we are all equal, everyone-white or black, rich or poor given equal opportunities to level up with no discrimination, and many had proven themselves capable - white or black and proud to call themselves Singaporean.
Our neighbours can rattle all the sabres they want, but we have the brains either for diplomacy or battles to win. It's in our genes. Take confidence, bro, the reality of what is written here is before your eyes in the real world.
The Malaccan Straits Bridge is another tale of 'a bridge too far', but instead of a war movie, its more an epic farce.
Only the pig brained Malaysians can write and dream up such comedies.
1. The straits is one of the busiest waterways in the world. To build that bridge would means stopping trade flow while construction goes on for years. The world will howl in protest. Its akin to closing the Suez canal. No nation will stand for it.
2. Even if it is built after thorough studies are made and approvals granted, which is almost impossible, the link from Malacca is to Dumai, Sumatra. We know Sumatra is lying between 4 highly active teutonic plates - the sunda,burma, india and australia plates, bumping into each other and causing highly destructive earthquakes, with a general warning of a big one either tomorrow or within 50 years.
Investors would be nuts to partake in this mega farce project. Might as well donate the money to the poor and homeless in KL
3. There are more issues, but i will stop here. Writing epic comedies is never my forte.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Of course, one must never be complacent. So long as we elect level headed, go by law persons of integrity as administrators, I believe we can by hook or by crook to ensure our nation survives. 3.2 million lives are dependant on it.
It's interesting how a person like you emphasize about complacency, when you keep insisting the Thai Canal will not materialize.
You and sgdiehard can continue to sprout 'official' reports from the internet, I am just highlighting the fact that in the maritime industry, this was a big news, one which PSA took it seriously.
If PSA were as complacent as you or sgdiehard, we would have allowed PTP or other ports caught up with us. Instead, we know that complacency must be contained, even when we are the leaders in the industry. Instead, we started a mass acquisition of foreign ports in order to diversify our risk.
So, both of you can continue to sprout 'official' news from the internet and insist the Thai Canal is crap. I will just say that many times, there are things going behind the scenes, that official reports do not have access or comment on.
Originally posted by soul_rage:
It's interesting how a person like you emphasize about complacency, when you keep insisting the Thai Canal will not materialize.You and sgdiehard can continue to sprout 'official' reports from the internet, I am just highlighting the fact that in the maritime industry, this was a big news, one which PSA took it seriously.
If PSA were as complacent as you or sgdiehard, we would have allowed PTP or other ports caught up with us. Instead, we know that complacency must be contained, even when we are the leaders in the industry. Instead, we started a mass acquisition of foreign ports in order to diversify our risk.
So, both of you can continue to sprout 'official' news from the internet and insist the Thai Canal is crap. I will just say that many times, there are things going behind the scenes, that official reports do not have access or comment on.
what 'official' reports did I sprout? the only reports are the ones I read here dated back to 2000 and 2003.
I acknowledged that PTP was a greater threat to PSA, so what complacency are you talking about? PSA probably had spent too much time worrying about the canal that's why PTP took our two major customers away from us.
unless you have access to the things going behind the scenes, what you or anybody said is just speculation. don't agree with you means we are complacent? hmm....
Originally posted by sgdiehard:what 'official' reports did I sprout? the only reports are the ones I read here dated back to 2000 and 2003.
I acknowledged that PTP was a greater threat to PSA, so what complacency are you talking about? PSA probably had spent too much time worrying about the canal that's why PTP took our two major customers away from us.
unless you have access to the things going behind the scenes, what you or anybody said is just speculation. don't agree with you means we are complacent? hmm....
To give you a better picture of the PTP issue since I think you are a better forum poster than xtreyier, the shift of Maersk to PTP is inevitable.
Maersk's business model was shifting from being a pure shipping line, to a connecting hub of ships and their own ports. Maersk's model was to have a growing number of ports that they can ship to anywhere in the world, where they have priority docking benefits, in order to enhance their competitiveness.
As PSA stands as a neutral port operator, it cannot offer Maersk what it wants. A 30% equity in PSA would drive all other shipping lines out of PSA's door.
Evergreen was a case of a shipping line being too greedy for cheap rates. But when they went over, they suffered due to Maersk's priority in using the docks. Ended up, many of Evergreen's containers were offloaded in PTP and then carried over by road to Singapore ports in order for them to keep up with their competiveness. Evergreen's majority of their operations is now back in Singapore.
In fact, if you read PTP's throughput, which is about 4million TEUs, you can see that the majority of the business is from Maersk. Given that we move 20million TEUs a year, the loss of Maersk equates to about 2million TEUs (10%). Therefore, about half or more of PTP's throughput is from Maersk.
The Thai Canal is a major threat. To allow it to even happen will cause a major potential loss of throughput to Singapore. Granted, that shipments to Australia and down under will still go through Singapore even if the canal is built, the loss of the other portion of the throughout (upper Asia) is tremendous. It's a major and serious threat, as far as we are concerned.
I am telling you more details to give you a better view of what exactly is going on, besides those reports. These are analysis from years I have been with the industry. I am upset whenever I hear people treating the Thai Canal as a joke, because it is NEVER a joke. It will wipe out a lot of our livelihood in Singapore, if it ever happens, given that PSA has a > 7000 strong workforce in Singapore.
Originally posted by angel7030:
This one call interesting, in my primary school day in the 90s, already read so many time this type of news about kra Canal, but until now, that place is only good for Singapore political refugees.
What can a Taiwanese "hum" learn in primary school ?
Obviously nothing remarkable entered the brain of the "hum" - considering that it had to make a living in the Bar.
Did the Taiwanese "hum" worked in the bars in Hatyaai and Songkla to have met PAP's Phey Yew Kok - who remained on the run ?
Originally posted by angel7030:
The only problem with older adults is that they alway think that they are smarter and cleverer, and when kids talk abit only, they start to tell us off...yak!!
Has that not been the impressions of an incorrigible "hum" towards its parents and the adults in its family of "hums" ?
Obviously, the Taiwanese "hum" has never learnt to be more circumspect and well behaved in public, but will instead spread its ignorance, and shamelessly expose its "hum" to all and sundry ?
Originally posted by angel7030:
Uncle, tigerairway to kuming on $19, about 6 hrs, you go on train??? wha lau, wu siao bo!!!
Does a Taiwanese "hum" know anything beyond the perimeter of its open "hum" shell that it trap itself in ?
What does it know anything beyond its effort to zip aournd by plane then to appreciate the wonders of an overland travel by train to Kunming ?
The stupidity of the "hum" should be kept within its own shell, as it will be less danger to worthless self.
Originally posted by angel7030:
Nevermind lah, you go take the train when it is complete.Most peoples claim our papers, be it chinese or english are state controlled media but yet they like to read it very much. Contradicting indeed.
Can a Taiwanese "hum" read anything that is newsworthy, when it is bad news that exist in its "hum" ?
The X-rated Fraud never fail to appear on cue to snatch a chance at the spotlight, to make its grand performance on its imaginary stage ?
Originally posted by xtreyier:Dream on, with the Malaccan bridge. I have a few drawing boards at home, would gladly give to the pig brains, for I am no artist and have no use of it. Art and Reality are different issues, only fools and self admitted pieces of shit fail to discern better.
In the typical loud mouth of a X-rated Fraud that never stop to boast of its supreme existence, what more can be expected of all that it can claim ?
Has it not been a common practise for new projects to begin as a conceptual piece of art to be followed by detailed specifications to make "Art" into "Reality" ?
With the pseudo-intellect of a X-rated Fraud, can anyone expect any substance in the hot gassed ignorance of its character ?
Originally posted by xtreyier:Hello, read on, did you miss the word 'propose' on the article or do you need me to 'propose' you go attend more chinese language lessons?
Some americans 'propose' to send vehicles to explore distant stars hundreds of light years away too.
Pls, UNDERSTAND properly.
Can the X-rated Fraud have the ability to make its under stand - to even know that any project must always begin as a "proposal" and before such a "proposal" can become a reality it will require some efforts before success can be reached ?
Does the X-rated Fraud even know how much effort it had expended before it took the first step to even attempt "to 'propose' for anyone to go attend more chinese language lessons" ?
Obviously the X-rated Fraud has no clue that to prepare a "proposal" it will require substance before the proposal can be of any value.
Can the pseudo-intellect of the X-rated Fraud even extend its ignorance to venture beyond the realms of its ignorance to discover what it takes for a "proposal" to become "reality" ?
What does a Fraud know about the development of a "proposal" with a process that begin - ‘From Concept to Reality’ (*1) ?
Originally posted by angel7030:
Uncle, tigerairway to kuming on $19, about 6 hrs, you go on train??? wha lau, wu siao bo!!!
Where and when did i mention taking train from Singapore to China - Kunmin.
I just stated our governement proposed a railway route only.
See, you loved to put words inside others mouth.
Our govt proposed to built and connect a railway from Singapore to Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Combodia, Laos, China by Year 2015 - if i am not wrong.
The main reason - economical benefits, to stop/prevent some countries from building bridges that would affect PSA. Food and beverage is also taken into consideration. That what George Yeo is doing.
The Malyasia bridge was proposed by Dr Mahathir in early 1999.
I am just stating what is written in the newspaper.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Hello, read on, did you miss the word 'propose' on the article or do you need me to 'propose' you go attend more chinese language lessons?
Some americans 'propose' to send vehicles to explore distant stars hundreds of light years away too.
Pls, UNDERSTAND properly.
Propose - bring the matter, etc out for discussion/meeting.
Social, Economical, Technical, etc - their cons and pros would be taken into consideration.
Proposal would be realised (become reality), when both Malaysia and Indonesia governement agreed it's valid and profitable.
Which meant that both government had come to an agreement.
Originally posted by soul_rage:
To give you a better picture of the PTP issue since I think you are a better forum poster than xtreyier, the shift of Maersk to PTP is inevitable.Maersk's business model was shifting from being a pure shipping line, to a connecting hub of ships and their own ports. Maersk's model was to have a growing number of ports that they can ship to anywhere in the world, where they have priority docking benefits, in order to enhance their competitiveness.
As PSA stands as a neutral port operator, it cannot offer Maersk what it wants. A 30% equity in PSA would drive all other shipping lines out of PSA's door.
Evergreen was a case of a shipping line being too greedy for cheap rates. But when they went over, they suffered due to Maersk's priority in using the docks. Ended up, many of Evergreen's containers were offloaded in PTP and then carried over by road to Singapore ports in order for them to keep up with their competiveness. Evergreen's majority of their operations is now back in Singapore.
In fact, if you read PTP's throughput, which is about 4million TEUs, you can see that the majority of the business is from Maersk. Given that we move 20million TEUs a year, the loss of Maersk equates to about 2million TEUs (10%). Therefore, about half or more of PTP's throughput is from Maersk.
The Thai Canal is a major threat. To allow it to even happen will cause a major potential loss of throughput to Singapore. Granted, that shipments to Australia and down under will still go through Singapore even if the canal is built, the loss of the other portion of the throughout (upper Asia) is tremendous. It's a major and serious threat, as far as we are concerned.
I am telling you more details to give you a better view of what exactly is going on, besides those reports. These are analysis from years I have been with the industry. I am upset whenever I hear people treating the Thai Canal as a joke, because it is NEVER a joke. It will wipe out a lot of our livelihood in Singapore, if it ever happens, given that PSA has a > 7000 strong workforce in Singapore.
And just to add on a separate note, PSA is the most lucrative golden goose amongst the 3 golden geese of Temasek (SIA, Singtel, PSA). There are only 3 big shots in the INTERNATIONAL container terminal industry - Hutchison Port Operations (Hong Kong, which we have 20% share), Dubai Ports (which was badly injured after the bidding war with PSA a few years back), and PSA. Therefore its the most lucrative because of the lack of international competition, as compared to SIA or Singtel
PSA's operational revenue is about > 4 billion (you can get this from their website), and about almost 40 - 50% of this is operating profit. In this age of business, where can you find a business where the operating margins are so good? Any business that can hit an operational profit of 15% or more is already considered a good business.
This next comment is my opinion, on why PSA considered IPO, but never did follow through. It's because it makes the most profits, therefore there is no need to share such profits with the public
If you or xtreyier ever continue making a mockery of the Kra Canal, you are in effect being complacent, something which PSA will never be, and which is why she buys into other countries ports so aggressively.
Because she knows that, over time, Singapore's geographic advantage might cease to exist (or at least weaken), in which case, she would be less impacted given her international portfolio.
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
This canal, the kray canal has been on the board for a long time. It would have already happened if it were viable.
Suez canal and panama canal save vessels from going around africa and south america respectively. Both are continents. Kray will save vessels from travelling around the malaya pennisula. Big difference in the economics.
Suez canal save time for vessels from europe to the middle east, strategic for oil supplies and panama for vessels between the east and west coast of the US, and is of strategic importance for the US. does the kray canal has any strategic significance for any country?
Southern Thailand is potentially a problem area for Thailand with the muslim insurgents. The tension there is higher now than ever before. the project will certainly affect port klang and pelapas so I dont' think malaysia is keen to help solve the problem in southern thailand.
If singapore remains competitive as a shipping hub, shippers would still want to use Singapore for distribution to countries in the region and australia. If Singapore remains competitive and efficient as a petroleum refining center, only tankers with cargo with specific destinations would want to go via the kray, if it is economical.
So exactly how much would be the investment and how long it takes to recover the costs, nobody is certain.
If the canal is built, Singapore would be affected, no doubt, IF it is built. I think Pelapas remains a greater threat to PSA .
Personally, given the mega projects that China has been doing i don't really think it's a technical issue that the Kra Canal can't be built. Even then, the Japanese would definitely be interested in giving the technical support for such a project since it imports pretty much all its raw materials and would benefit from a shorter route.
It's only a matter of whether China feels that the Malacca Straits is no longer a secured trade route and wish to opt for a route which is more easily defended and can't be cut off as easily. That is what i feel to be strategically important.
I can see the Kra Canal benefitting 5 countries - China/Japan/Korea/Thailand/Malaysia.
Personally i believe that social unrest stems primarily from poverty and that areas that run along trade routes tend to be more prosperous than those that aren't. Thus it benefits Thailand to have the Canal attract trade and investment into the area and hopefully more non Muslim Thais into the area to stablize the region.
Personally i think Malaysia would also benefit from having a trade route running so close to its Northern border. I went to Trengganu once, and got the impression that it was pretty much a backwater compared to the seemingly more prosperous West Malaysia.It could certainly gain by having goods flowing through the North East.
Of course, that is assuming that the Malaysian government could actually see things that way. But it is my impression that they are more interested in political infighting rather than make decisions of strategic importance.
But right now i think, the decision hinges on the currently cash rich China feeling secured enough with its relation with Thailand to have the Canal. I'm reckoning the recent political turmoil would have turn China off on the idea or perhaps China feels secured enough with its incoming 3 aircraft carriers.
And of course, that we're compliant enough not to give it cause for concern. They could do it, they just haven't got a good enough reason for doing it yet.
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
Personally, given the mega projects that China has been doing i don't really think it's a technical issue that the Kra Canal can't be built. Even then, the Japanese would definitely be interested in giving the technical support for such a project since it imports pretty much all its raw materials and would benefit from a shorter route.
Technology was never an obstacle in this present day, when projects exist to build mega-length suspension bridges or undersea tunnels - across the most violent seas to connect islands and land mass; or to build multi-storyed structures from the deep sea bed to the surface that contain an entire self-contained city off-the mainland.
Carving the Kra Canal is almost as simple as building an enlarged drainage project, but with more features that allow the control of water locks to allow vessels to move over different elevations as needed.
It's only a matter of whether China feels that the Malacca Straits is no longer a secured trade route and wish to opt for a route which is more easily defended and can't be cut off as easily. That is what i feel to be strategically important.
It may not be strategic consideration that will push China or her neighboring countries to consider alternative sea routes that can be secured from disruptions.
China has little choice but to look for alternative routes for her increased needs of energy supplies from the African Continent and the Middle-east which will have to pass through the narrow Straits of Malacca that is getting more congested with the passing of time.
A major catastrophe is waiting to happen when huge VLCC bulk carriers travel in both directions - and where normal land vehicles travelling at 90kmh require braking distance of up to 60 meters to come to a halt, the VLCC travelling at a quarter of the speed will require at least two to three kilometers to come to a complete halt.
I can see the Kra Canal benefitting 5 countries - China/Japan/Korea/Thailand/Malaysia.
The other countries that will receive positive economic fallout from this Kra Canal Project will include Bangladesh and Myanmar in the West, and to the east the states of Cambodia and Southern Vietnam.
The benefits are far reaching and will find more supporters that will give the financiers more incentive to fund the project - which will aslo see the World Bank and Asian Development Bank taking an interest, in partnership with Sovereign Funds.
Personally i believe that social unrest stems primarily from poverty and that areas that run along trade routes tend to be more prosperous than those that aren't. Thus it benefits Thailand to have the Canal attract trade and investment into the area and hopefully more non Muslim Thais into the area to stablize the region.
Idle minds can only create trouble, and this has been the main factor in all the troubled regions on this globe, and more so when these territories are leftover historical baggage that remain unresolved with no attention being given to development.
Personally i think Malaysia would also benefit from having a trade route running so close to its Northern border. I went to Trengganu once, and got the impression that it was pretty much a backwater compared to the seemingly more prosperous West Malaysia.It could certainly gain by having goods flowing through the North East.
The Kra Canal can only enhance the "Northern Corridor Economic Region" that the previous Malaysian PM Abdullah Badawi had advocated to bring development to the northern parts of Peninsular Malaysia.
Of course, that is assuming that the Malaysian government could actually see things that way. But it is my impression that they are more interested in political infighting rather than make decisions of strategic importance.
The continuity in the execution of the economic development plans for Northern and Southern Peninsular Malaysia seems to be supported by the present PM Najib.
With economic development that will benefit the people of the regions, it is unlikely that the rival political parties that are controlling the State Government will not be a party - even as it will attempt to undercut the success that can benefit the Federal Government.
But right now i think, the decision hinges on the currently cash rich China feeling secured enough with its relation with Thailand to have the Canal. I'm reckoning the recent political turmoil would have turn China off on the idea or perhaps China feels secured enough with its incoming 3 aircraft carriers.
Gun boat diplomacy cannot possibly guarantee the investment of any country, as one can see in the US debacle in using military force to push home a political agenda to get rid of Saddam from Iraq - which cost trillions to the US, as well as thousand of young lives lost.
Like it or not, China will have to find an alternative route that will minimise the threat of disruption to its important energy need for crude oil supply, which seems to vulnerable by the congested sea traffic along the narrow Straits of Malacca.
Any single accident of a Very Large Crude Carrier can shut the Straits for an entire week or more.
And of course, that we're compliant enough not to give it cause for concern. They could do it, they just haven't got a good enough reason for doing it yet.
Singapore cannot afford to be thorn in the side of any super power - even as the vanity of the Singaporean political leadership may wish to be "mover of minds" on the global stage - a trait that is imitated by the resident addict to the Art of Plagiarism.
Even if Singapore refused to be compliant to the super powers, it cannot be of any significant consequence to affect their larger political agenda.
Originally posted by soul_rage:
It's interesting how a person like you emphasize about complacency, when you keep insisting the Thai Canal will not materialize.Hello Uncle, did you ever think of security reason or not?? You think countries can cooperate well, especially those indo ah gongs peoples are not to be trusted, we can't even built the new causeway btw Sin and JB at woodland, what are you talking about??? U see the bridge half way, you also want to laugh and shake head. Damn Malaysia
You and sgdiehard can continue to sprout 'official' reports from the internet, I am just highlighting the fact that in the maritime industry, this was a big news, one which PSA took it seriously.
You understand Maritime or not, do you think in 1819, the Brit need not notice these bottle neck at Kra?? and why they choose Singapore?? our water are deep and stable, our capability of offloading and uploading of containers and bunkering is world class. PSA will not shake at all, in fact it help PSA to divert more concentration on the Pacific shipping lines with Aussie, NZ, USA and all other pacific states which they had not been able to do it because of the Malacca shipping line coming in. And this line along the Malacca strait are Pirate invested. Poor owners with lots of liabilities
If PSA were as complacent as you or sgdiehard, we would have allowed PTP or other ports caught up with us. Instead, we know that complacency must be contained, even when we are the leaders in the industry. Instead, we started a mass acquisition of foreign ports in order to diversify our risk.
Complacent is never in PSA, the innovation and technology in PSA can anytime beat any ports in this world, our lead time in unloading containers, perfect wharf, systematic piloting of ships will never fail to attract ships here, and bear in mind, most are here for transition of containers, which we had prove to be trustworthy of property of owners. In PTP alone, there are multi report on containers losses, Maersk management are hold back so tighly that they do not wish to wash dirty laundry on the market of shipping, they had make big mistake and slowly licking their wound. In fact, Maersk diversion had help us to be productive and alert to situation of our own port and shipping business.
So, both of you can continue to sprout 'official' news from the internet and insist the Thai Canal is crap. I will just say that many times, there are things going behind the scenes, that official reports do not have access or comment on.
Malaysia, Thais, viets or even mynmar, aceh, india will want of piece of it, and all these countries can hardly be trusted, they both land of a thousand smiles and also land of a thousand problems, I have doubt that a war may broke out while fighting for the rights of lines. And that will play into Singapore hand better, we just sit and see for ourselves.
Originally posted by angel7030:
You are very naive angel7030, I have never seen a more naive person than you.
The facts are what I am telling you from the maritime industry. Things HAVE CHANGED since 1819. Maritime demand comparatively in 1819 versus now has changed immensely. As the world population increases, so has the need for moving of goods across the world. The congestion in the straits IS a fact. So you can stop arguing about this. Fancy you comparing 1819 versus now...
You are also very complacent in saying that our technology can beat any ports in this world. You are very complacent, because you do not know how dubai and hutchison port operations work. They are not below PSA, in fact they are probably on par. There's a reason why Hutchison is the biggest, followed by Dubai and PSA. YES, we are only the 3rd largest in the world.
You are also overemphasizing on security reasons. In this world, everyone talks about economic benefits. So long as each country agrees on certain criteria for their own security and privacy, things CAN move along if each reaps economic benefits. Otherwise, why do you think there are international organizations, such as the World Bank, IMF, or UN, or EU?
You are also showing arrogance by undermining Malaysia. Malaysia will, and always will remain a risk. One day, if it is able to organize itself with effective leadership, they can and will give us a run for our money. At that time, I fancy you running back to Taiwan and then boasting about your ability to escape from Singapore.
Yes, PTP may lose containers, BUT, they are still increasing their throughput, and as time goes along, they will get better.
Originally posted by Short Ninja:Battle of the angels about to begin today but dont forget ar tomorrow 14th November 2009 Singapore take on Thailand at the National Stadium for the Asian Cup qualifiers.Make sure you 2 also be there!
Originally posted by angel7030:
Originally posted by soul_rage:
It's interesting how a person like you emphasize about complacency, when you keep insisting the Thai Canal will not materialize.Hello Uncle, did you ever think of security reason or not?? You think countries can cooperate well, especially those indo ah gongs peoples are not to be trusted, we can't even built the new causeway btw Sin and JB at woodland, what are you talking about??? U see the bridge half way, you also want to laugh and shake head. Damn Malaysia
Is the Taiwan "hum" attempting to be serious with the limited information that it will depend to engage others ?
Why will the "hum" insist on getting involve in local politics when it has nothing to offer except gossips formed by others to make up its own opinions ?
With its insistence to be flippant in deriding the relationship between Malaysia and Singapore - it can only look at the unnecessary problems created by PM Mahathir, while conveniently forgetting that it was also PM Mahathir that got the Second Link to be constructed.
Only the ignorance of a Taiwanese "hum" immigrant is unfamiliar to the historical facts that there are no differences in the Malaysians and Singaporeans whether in languages and dialects spoken, food, culture, social norms and values.
It is not expected for the Taiwanese "hum" to know that family ties run so deep that no political border can divide the Malaysians and Singaporeans.
You and sgdiehard can continue to sprout 'official' reports from the internet, I am just highlighting the fact that in the maritime industry, this was a big news, one which PSA took it seriously.
You understand Maritime or not, do you think in 1819, the Brit need not notice these bottle neck at Kra?? and why they choose Singapore?? our water are deep and stable, our capability of offloading and uploading of containers and bunkering is world class. PSA will not shake at all, in fact it help PSA to divert more concentration on the Pacific shipping lines with Aussie, NZ, USA and all other pacific states which they had not been able to do it because of the Malacca shipping line coming in. And this line along the Malacca strait are Pirate invested. Poor owners with lots of liabilities
The idiocy of the Taiwanese "hum" is remarkable in the atrocious claims that it will dare to make with its insistence to display its ignorance.
What is the basis for the Taiwanese "hum" to claim that "in 1819, the Brit need not notice these bottle neck at Kra?? and why they choose Singapore?? " ?
Did the Taiwanese "hum" received some additional information that no historian had known since 1819 ?
What new information has the "hum" received that allow it to claim that PSA can "divert more concentration on the Pacific shipping lines with Aussie, NZ, USA and all other pacific states which they had not been able to do" ?
What has the PSA done in the Pacific to serve the shipping lines in Australia, NZ, USA and the other states around the Pacific Ocean ?
If PSA were as complacent as you or sgdiehard, we would have allowed PTP or other ports caught up with us. Instead, we know that complacency must be contained, even when we are the leaders in the industry. Instead, we started a mass acquisition of foreign ports in order to diversify our risk.
Complacent is never in PSA, the innovation and technology in PSA can anytime beat any ports in this world, our lead time in unloading containers, perfect wharf, systematic piloting of ships will never fail to attract ships here, and bear in mind, most are here for transition of containers, which we had prove to be trustworthy of property of owners. In PTP alone, there are multi report on containers losses, Maersk management are hold back so tighly that they do not wish to wash dirty laundry on the market of shipping, they had make big mistake and slowly licking their wound. In fact, Maersk diversion had help us to be productive and alert to situation of our own port and shipping business.
Is the Taiwanese "hum" a mouth piece employed by the PAP Government ?
Complacency may not be a word in the PSA vocabulary - after Maersk Line showed PSA that there are options available.
Unfortunately, it will be the jingoistic smugness in a Taiwanese immigrant "hum" that will surely ruin Singapore and lull Singaporeans into complacency.
So, both of you can continue to sprout 'official' news from the internet and insist the Thai Canal is crap. I will just say that many times, there are things going behind the scenes, that official reports do not have access or comment on.
Malaysia, Thais, viets or even mynmar, aceh, india will want of piece of it, and all these countries can hardly be trusted, they both land of a thousand smiles and also land of a thousand problems, I have doubt that a war may broke out while fighting for the rights of lines. And that will play into Singapore hand better, we just sit and see for ourselves.
It is obvious that a bankrupt mind can be seen behind the bold words printed that cannot possibly be substantiated in any form.
What is the basis for a bankrupt and confused state of mind to state that - "I have doubt that a war may broke out while fighting for the rights of lines." ?
If there is a "doubt that a war may broke out " - how does it result in fighting ?
Or does the Taiwanese "hum" intend to mean that it "has NO doubt that a war may break out that will result in fighting" ?
It is not a surprise that the Taiwanese "hum" is no better then a loser, which explains for its "zero-sum" politics in an attempt to impress on a subject that it has nothing to offer but simply to score more hits for its "hum" record.
Fortunately, the shallow ideas offered by the "hum" so far - has allowed an insight to its character as a mischievious trouble maker, as seen in its daily routine to make all the irrelevant posts in every thread, simply to redirect attention to itself and disrupt any discussion.
Originally posted by Atobe:
Is the Taiwan "hum" attempting to be serious with the limited information that it will depend to engage others ?
Why will the "hum" insist on getting involve in local politics when it has nothing to offer except gossips formed by others to make up its own opinions ?
With its insistence to be flippant in deriding the relationship between Malaysia and Singapore - it can only look at the unnecessary problems created by PM Mahathir, while conveniently forgetting that it was also PM Mahathir that got the Second Link to be constructed.
Only the ignorance of a Taiwanese "hum" immigrant is unfamiliar to the historical facts that there are no differences in the Malaysians and Singaporeans whether in languages and dialects spoken, food, culture, social norms and values.
It is not expected for the Taiwanese "hum" to know that family ties run so deep that no political border can divide the Malaysians and Singaporeans.
The idiocy of the Taiwanese "hum" is remarkable in the atrocious claims that it will dare to make with its insistence to display its ignorance.
What is the basis for the Taiwanese "hum" to claim that "in 1819, the Brit need not notice these bottle neck at Kra?? and why they choose Singapore?? " ?
Did the Taiwanese "hum" received some additional information that no historian had known since 1819 ?
What new information has the "hum" received that allow it to claim that PSA can "divert more concentration on the Pacific shipping lines with Aussie, NZ, USA and all other pacific states which they had not been able to do" ?
What has the PSA done in the Pacific to serve the shipping lines in Australia, NZ, USA and the other states around the Pacific Ocean ?
Is the Taiwanese "hum" a mouth piece employed by the PAP Government ?
Complacency may not be a word in the PSA vocabulary - after Maersk Line showed PSA that there are options available.
Unfortunately, it will be the jingoistic smugness in a Taiwanese immigrant "hum" that will surely ruin Singapore and lull Singaporeans into complacency.
It is obvious that a bankrupt mind can be seen behind the bold words printed that cannot possibly be substantiated in any form.
What is the basis for a bankrupt and confused state of mind to state that - "I have doubt that a war may broke out while fighting for the rights of lines." ?
If there is a "doubt that a war may broke out " - how does it result in fighting ?
Or does the Taiwanese "hum" intend to mean that it "has NO doubt that a war may break out that will result in fighting" ?
It is not a surprise that the Taiwanese "hum" is no better then a loser, which explains for its "zero-sum" politics in an attempt to impress on a subject that it has nothing to offer but simply to score more hits for its "hum" record.
Fortunately, the shallow ideas offered by the "hum" so far - has allowed an insight to its character as a mischievious trouble maker, as seen in its daily routine to make all the irrelevant posts in every thread, simply to redirect attention to itself and disrupt any discussion.
As I said, she has 16800 postings (more than you and I combined), but 90% of them are utter rubbish.
Imagine her commenting on maritime when she has absolutely no idea what is going on... sheesh
Originally posted by soul_rage:
You are very naive angel7030, I have never seen a more naive person than you.The facts are what I am telling you from the maritime industry. Things HAVE CHANGED since 1819. Maritime demand comparatively in 1819 versus now has changed immensely. As the world population increases, so has the need for moving of goods across the world. The congestion in the straits IS a fact. So you can stop arguing about this. Fancy you comparing 1819 versus now...
You are also very complacent in saying that our technology can beat any ports in this world. You are very complacent, because you do not know how dubai and hutchison port operations work. They are not below PSA, in fact they are probably on par. There's a reason why Hutchison is the biggest, followed by Dubai and PSA. YES, we are only the 3rd largest in the world.
You are also overemphasizing on security reasons. In this world, everyone talks about economic benefits. So long as each country agrees on certain criteria for their own security and privacy, things CAN move along if each reaps economic benefits. Otherwise, why do you think there are international organizations, such as the World Bank, IMF, or UN, or EU?
You are also showing arrogance by undermining Malaysia. Malaysia will, and always will remain a risk. One day, if it is able to organize itself with effective leadership, they can and will give us a run for our money. At that time, I fancy you running back to Taiwan and then boasting about your ability to escape from Singapore.
Yes, PTP may lose containers, BUT, they are still increasing their throughput, and as time goes along, they will get better.
I am not been compacent, i got close friend working in PSA and NOL, so dun give me shit of your knowing, keep it to yourself , when 50 years down the road, we are still nos 1 and not even a grass at Kra was removed, then you can eat your words if you are still alive.
I picture you the scenarios when Kra Canal is open, pirates will delighted to trade along the bay of bengal, India will fight for their right for toll, Mynamar will claim the Aceh sea lines to collect tax, so is Indonesia sumatra states, so is Thailand and malaysia, all would want a piece of the cake, and when that happen, as you know in these third world and militants countries, war will broke out leading to more damaging then gain. On the other side of the Kra, the line to east, South China sea, Thailand will be there, so are China, Vietnam, philippines, Malaysia and the Borneo states. It is a opportunity for them to collect toll and taxes if that Canal is open. In it, there are muslim, chinese, thais, mynamar juntas, aceh extremist, you name it.
So i hope you understand that why the Kra was never built in the first place, it is of the utmost national security and peace reason, the japs and koreans are more then willing to tender to built it, so are those western and russian contractors, but they knew that by building it, or before building it, a war will begin. So, dun play play with mei mei hor