• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Serious Before you scold Pinky Loong - LKY was the key designer of TPP

Pinkieslut

Alfrescian
Loyal
Reflections on Lee Kuan Yew
C. Fred Bergsten (PIIE)
March 31, 2015 10:00 AM


In his eulogy for Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of modern Singapore, who died on March 23, President Obama said that Lee was "hugely important in helping me reformulate our policy of rebalancing to the Asia Pacific." That was no exaggeration, as I can attest from personal experience. Lee in essence persuaded the President to reverse his initial policy of resisting trade agreements by entering into negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which is on its way to becoming the largest trade agreement in history, with major foreign policy and indeed national security as well as economic benefits for both the United States and most of Asia. I doubt that anyone else on the face of the planet could have achieved that outcome.

Lee's effort at persuasion was set in motion at the first event during his visit to Washington in October 2009,
which was a small lunch hosted by David Rubenstein, cofounder and managing director of the Carlyle Group. As several of us listened, Lee described his plan to politely advise President Obama on the following day that the United States would have to take new economic initiatives in Asia or "cede the region to China." The problem was that the new President had taken no trade initiatives at all up to that time, and he fervently wanted to avoid those issues because they were so politically divisive (especially within his own party and constituencies, as we are now seeing so clearly). I urged the Prime Minister to be forceful rather than polite and leave no doubt about the alternatives facing the United States.

The next day, Lee did so and was hugely successful. Lawrence Summers, then the chief economic adviser in the White House, called immediately after the meeting to ask us to host a dinner for him at the Peterson Institute on the following day to discuss what a new US strategy could comprise. Our recommendation was to rejoin and thus relaunch the negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership. The President announced his decision to do so in Tokyo, on the first stop of his first trip to Asia, a couple of weeks later.

The TPP will in fact be the culmination of a dream that Lee had nourished for almost 20 years. I first sought the counsel of the Senior Minister (as he was then called after stepping down as prime minister in 1990) during my initial trip to Singapore in early 1993 for the founding meeting of the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) created by the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum to recommend an action program for that new organization (created in 1989). We immediately agreed that the ultimate goal should be free trade in the entire Asia Pacific region, and the former Prime Minister, unknown to me, decided to promote that idea by instructing his people to make sure that I became chairman of the new EPG; I was deeply honored to acquire such an esteemed campaign manager! Our group did indeed make such a recommendation, and the APEC member economies adopted it at their first two annual summits (which our EPG also proposed) in Seattle that fall and in Indonesia a year later. Today's TPP is the lineal descendant of the strategy inspired by the former Prime Minister almost a quarter century ago in pursuit of his bedrock long-term goal of maintaining an active US presence in Asia to balance the rise of China.
 

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Pinky Loong is no loonger worth our time to criticise him. His leadership is confirmed and provened a huge disaster. Look at the jobless rate in Singapore, and none of his minister care or worry about whether Singaporeans have enough rice to put on the table for the family. I am utterly dissappointed with the whole Labour Union and Manpower minister in Singapore. The acted like it was none of their business after being voted in.
 

Cottonmouth

Alfrescian
Loyal
That's why the dishonourable son is tugging on to it like the holy grail.
He's lost without Daddy, he has not fucking idea of his own what to do next without TPP.
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Now that kuan yew is dead,i hope singapore can have a renaissance or second awakening whereby the people spit on everything that's kuan yewism,just like they spat on Margaret Thatcher's grave when she died.
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
What a joke,just because u persuaded a president to change his mind means u are the architect of a great plan?u merely informed the incumbent that his house is on fire that's all.whether the plan would work or the measures u take would even be effective is an entire matter totally.its like a fortune 500 company saying they would destroy all their competitors and all the other fortune 500 companies.easier said then done,china already has a major economic presence in every continent in the world while america is still playing with their pseudo economics and their half baked trade partnerships.

Lky u are not Napoleon Bonaparte or even Vanderbilt that conquered America's shipyards and railways,ur just a smelly fucker multi headed medusa forked tongue.
 
Last edited:

cuckoldoolittle

Alfrescian
Loyal
Reflections on Lee Kuan Yew
C. Fred Bergsten (PIIE)
March 31, 2015 10:00 AM


In his eulogy for Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of modern Singapore, who died on March 23, President Obama said that Lee was "hugely important in helping me reformulate our policy of rebalancing to the Asia Pacific." That was no exaggeration, as I can attest from personal experience. Lee in essence persuaded the President to reverse his initial policy of resisting trade agreements by entering into negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which is on its way to becoming the largest trade agreement in history, with major foreign policy and indeed national security as well as economic benefits for both the United States and most of Asia. I doubt that anyone else on the face of the planet could have achieved that outcome.

Lee's effort at persuasion was set in motion at the first event during his visit to Washington in October 2009,
which was a small lunch hosted by David Rubenstein, cofounder and managing director of the Carlyle Group. As several of us listened, Lee described his plan to politely advise President Obama on the following day that the United States would have to take new economic initiatives in Asia or "cede the region to China." The problem was that the new President had taken no trade initiatives at all up to that time, and he fervently wanted to avoid those issues because they were so politically divisive (especially within his own party and constituencies, as we are now seeing so clearly). I urged the Prime Minister to be forceful rather than polite and leave no doubt about the alternatives facing the United States.

The next day, Lee did so and was hugely successful. Lawrence Summers, then the chief economic adviser in the White House, called immediately after the meeting to ask us to host a dinner for him at the Peterson Institute on the following day to discuss what a new US strategy could comprise. Our recommendation was to rejoin and thus relaunch the negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership. The President announced his decision to do so in Tokyo, on the first stop of his first trip to Asia, a couple of weeks later.

The TPP will in fact be the culmination of a dream that Lee had nourished for almost 20 years. I first sought the counsel of the Senior Minister (as he was then called after stepping down as prime minister in 1990) during my initial trip to Singapore in early 1993 for the founding meeting of the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) created by the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum to recommend an action program for that new organization (created in 1989). We immediately agreed that the ultimate goal should be free trade in the entire Asia Pacific region, and the former Prime Minister, unknown to me, decided to promote that idea by instructing his people to make sure that I became chairman of the new EPG; I was deeply honored to acquire such an esteemed campaign manager! Our group did indeed make such a recommendation, and the APEC member economies adopted it at their first two annual summits (which our EPG also proposed) in Seattle that fall and in Indonesia a year later. Today's TPP is the lineal descendant of the strategy inspired by the former Prime Minister almost a quarter century ago in pursuit of his bedrock long-term goal of maintaining an active US presence in Asia to balance the rise of China.


Looks like LKY's influence on Obama is no “flash in the pan”.
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Looks like LKY's influence on Obama is no “flash in the pan”.

No he is a very highly accomplished snake oil salesman.like u see in those ancient kings and emperor's legends,those soothsayers and holistic gurus and brahmins that whisper wicked evils into the kings or emperors or Obamas ears.obama is a weak man,easily influenced by sweet buttery maple syrup of the devil's words.ask lky to try that shit on Putin and see how fast he cuts his nuts off and stuff it in the old man's gaping surprised fuckface.
 
Last edited:

Pinkieslut

Alfrescian
Loyal
Looks like LKY's influence on Obama is no “flash in the pan”.

That is why LHL went to US early this year to wack blackie Obama to quickly force through TPP in US Congress. But he forgotten that Blackie Obama is like most Americans good at talking poor in implementation.
 

Pinkieslut

Alfrescian
Loyal
The Bush family, the Saudi Royal family, Osama Bin Laden’s family and Donald Rumsfeld’s inner circle – these are just some of the high profile figures who have played a direct role in the rise of one of the most powerful and influential and secretive firms in Washington.

The company is called The Carlyle Group. And in the wake of the events of September 11th and the invasion of Iraq, its power and influence have become significantly stronger.

The company operates within the so-called iron-triangle of industry, government and the military. Its list of former and current advisers and associates includes a vast array of some of the most powerful men in America and indeed around the world.

This program exposes the history of the Carlyle Group, from it’s inception as a private equity firm to it’s precent status as one of the largest defense contractors in the world.


LKY is working with the Illuminati.
 

Pinkieslut

Alfrescian
Loyal
nytimes.com
What Would Lee Kuan Yew Do?
Ali Wyne
Lee Kuan Yew with President Obama in 2009. Gerald Herbert/Associated Press

WASHINGTON — With China accelerating its military modernization, Russia continuing its slow-drip incursion into Ukraine, and an expanding section of the Middle East devolving into chaos, it has once again become fashionable to argue that the United States is in decline. Strangely, Americans are often far quicker to accept this diagnosis than their counterparts abroad.

One of the most vigorous dissenters from this pessimism was the founding father of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, who died on Sunday at age 91.

Although Mr. Lee will be most remembered for his achievements at home — transforming a poor, corrupt, fledging city-state into a first-world commercial and diplomatic hub — he was also an astute observer of world order, widely regarded as the Henry A. Kissinger of the East.

Mr. Lee was uniquely situated to assess the governance and foreign policies of the United States and China. He advised every American president since Richard M. Nixon and every Chinese leader since Deng Xiaoping, who, incidentally, sought Mr. Lee’s counsel when he was about to embark on the economic reforms of the 1980s that have propelled China’s rapid growth.

So what might Mr. Lee’s assessment of the United States look like today?

He would most likely note America’s economic recovery and the far-reaching economic and strategic benefits it stands to gain from trends in the global energy market. The United States Energy Information Administration forecast this month that American crude oil production would average 9.5 million barrels per day next year, just shy of the record high set in 1970.

Mr. Lee would also point to America’s demographic advantages. Three years ago he wrote that the United States could well emerge as “the slowly aging leader of a rapidly aging world,” a reality that owes much to the country’s growing Hispanic population; while America’s overall median age is 38, the median age of American-born Hispanics is just 18.

Moreover, English is now the world’s lingua franca, and the American system of higher education attracted over 886,000 students in the 2013-14 academic year, nearly a fifth of all globally mobile college and university students. America’s corporate culture still assimilates the world’s talent more creatively and productively than that of any other nation, despite residual and increasingly imprudent visa restrictions on talented immigrants.

As forcefully as Mr. Lee rejected the declinist narrative, however, he didn’t have a blinkered view of the United States. After the global economic collapse of 2008, he became increasingly outspoken in arguing that America’s ability to sustain its pre-eminence in world affairs would depend on the resilience of its footing in the Asia-Pacific.


While the United States has largely focused on strengthening its military and diplomatic ties there, China is primarily using its economic heft and a roster of geo-economic initiatives — ranging from its Silk Road infrastructure fund to its proposal for a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific — to draw neighbors into its orbit.

These countries may be wary of a China-led regional order, but they cannot risk losing the Chinese trade and investment upon which their economies increasingly depend. Unless the United States can compete with China economically over the long term, its position in the Pacific is likely to weaken. The more that position weakens, in turn, the more compelled America will feel to take pre-emptive measures to exclude China from its regional efforts, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership; partner with its democratic allies to isolate China diplomatically; or, worst, attempt to constrict China’s rise through naval deployments.

Mr. Lee warned that the United States would have to contend with a resurgent China, not only according it a growing role in shaping the norms and arrangements of world order but also, in time, accepting it as an equal player on the global stage.

He would most likely offer at least two other pieces of advice. First, the United States will be unable to sustain its reorientation to the Asia-Pacific if it continually allows crises outside that theater — whether a grisly war of attrition in Syria or atrocities by the Islamic State — to command comparable priority.

In December 2011, a month before the Obama administration formally unveiled its “rebalancing” policy, I was present at a meeting with Mr. Lee. “Americans seem to think that Asia is like a movie and that you can freeze developments out here whenever the United States becomes intensely involved elsewhere in the word,” he explained. “If the United States wants to substantially affect the strategic evolution of Asia, it cannot come and go.”

Second, Mr. Lee would urge Republicans and Democrats to overcome their toxic ideological divides and adopt economic policies that rein in America’s debt, which he believed could “strike at the heart of America’s global leadership” if left unchecked.

While Mr. Lee was certainly no proponent of Western-style democracy, it is too facile to describe him simply as a champion of “Asian values” — generally understood as putting the community before the individual and privileging order over freedom.

In leading Singapore, he was, above all, a pragmatist. And as it confronts turmoil abroad and gridlock at home, the United States could use a dose of Mr. Lee’s coolheaded analysis and wisdom.
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Oy vey,the amount of self suck and auto fellatio in this article is beyond John tan's ability to swallow a 12 inch cock.and I thought Straits times propaganda was bad.
 

johnny333

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
nytimes.com
What Would Lee Kuan Yew Do?
Ali Wyne
Lee Kuan Yew with President Obama in 2009. Gerald Herbert/Associated Press



Although Mr. Lee will be most remembered for his achievements at home — transforming a poor, corrupt, fledging city-state into a first-world commercial and diplomatic hub — he was also an astute observer of world order, widely regarded as the Henry A. Kissinger of the East.


:eek::eek::eek:

Who is this Ali Wyn:confused:
LKY is probably THE wealthiest man in Singapore, JB, and some say Batam :biggrin:

An "honest" civil servant wouldn't have gotten all that $$$ without abusing his position :rolleyes:
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If Lee arse loong cannot even run a simple small economy properly for the benefit of his emissaries,what makes u think they can design a TPP that's effective in Asia?let's face it america has grown fat lazy and complacent,just like their predecessors the Romans they will fall.world domination is just a vanity for them now and no longer a reality.the fat lazy Americans are barely putting any economic effort into developing Asia or Africa but they want to fight China?

U can have the birds eye view of everything doesn't mean u can do anything about it,old fart needs to sit down and shut up.talking is one thing,doing is another,america needs to fade away into the background like Germany and Japan.
 
Last edited:

Pinkieslut

Alfrescian
Loyal
If Lee arse loong cannot even run a simple small economy properly for the benefit of his emissaries,what makes u think they can design a TPP that's effective in Asia?let's face it america has grown fat lazy and complacent,just like their predecessors the Romans they will fall.world domination is just a vanity for them now and no longer a reality.the fat lazy Americans are barely putting any economic effort into developing Asia or Africa but they want to fight China?

U can have the birds eye view of everything doesn't mean u can do anything about it,old fart needs to sit down and shut up.talking is one thing,doing is another,america needs to fade away into the background like Germany and Japan.

LKY ruled Singapore was very successful due to it as a key hub for US petro-dollar economic system. He is paranoid that with the emergence of BRICs and as well as neighbours becoming economically more assertive, US petro-dollar system will fade off. I believe it is his last attempt (together with the US corporate elite AKA Illuminati) to hold on control to this system.
 
Top