[Steely Tom]

The Chinese now have military bases at both ends, IIRC.

[DBrow]

“Without the canal expansion, LNG tankers from the US would have to pass around the Cape of Horn at the bottom of South America for deliveries to Asia, adding thousands of miles and increased shipping costs to the journey. “

Or build a pipeline across Nicaragua. Or a line from Texas to the Sea of California.

[Vigilanteman]

Jimbo once boasted that the Panama Canal giveaway was one of his proudest accomplishments for the "Hispanic" community.

Yeah, right. Let the ChiComs colonize them and let them colonize us.

[tanknetter]

Using post-Panamax sized ships to transport LNG through what is arguably one of the top five strategic waterways on the planet ...

What could possibly go wrong?

[Mears]

I’ve never heard it referred to as “The Cape of Horn” before.

.

[steel_resolve]

The Obama administration should help resolve the dispute

Like exactly how? There are cost overruns based on a lowball bid from the spanish group and is currently in arbitration. What exactly is the author suggesting exactly? We should shoehorn our way into the discussion? We should pay for the overruns? What a stupid article.

[thackney]

The is a likelyhood Texas will use the expanded Panama Canal to export crude oil, ... to California.

Texas crude vies with Saudi Arabia for California shipments
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2014/01/29/texas-crude-vies-with-saudi-arabia-for-california-imports/

exas is poised to join Saudi Arabia as a supplier of oil to California as the mounting glut of crude on the U.S. Gulf Coast makes the trade profitable.

Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP, the pipeline operator that’s buying U.S. oil tankers, said it’s in talks to ship Texas crude to California through the Panama Canal. The 4,500-mile voyage would cost about $10 a barrel, broker Poten & Partners Inc. estimates, making Texas crude competitive with imports traveling 11,400 miles from Saudi Arabia, the West Coast’s largest supplier, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

[Hot Tabasco]

It would have been nice to keep the Canal but the reality is that its only use was for cruise liners and small tankers so let the Chinese spend their billions of dollars in widening it, we can't afford it nor do we need it.

Its also true that we had military bases stationed there but such bases were only good for local deployment of forces if necessary. I'm talking about Clayton, Amador, and Howard AFB on the Pacific side and Gulick on the Atlantic...........

With fleets in both the Atlantic and Pacific and the size and speed of todays ships, the canal would never be needed in terms of naval travel.

Since I was stationed there 40+ years ago, Panama City and the country itself has become a hub of international trade and a destination for American Ex-pats........

[dennisw]

Blame Jimmy F’in Carter for giving it away. I was a semi-liberal back then and didn’t like it. We built and paid for it...why are we giving it away?

[Chgogal]

Interesting.

[SZonian]

“Remember the Panama Canal?”

Of course I do, I was raised there. My father worked at Dredging Division, Gamboa, Canal Zone from 1966 until he retired in the mid ‘80s.

I remember what a tumultuous time it was for us living there at the time the Carter administration was pushing the treaty.

What many may not know is that the impetus for turning it over began with some riots in the 1960s. Panamanian activists came into the CZ took down the USA flag and raised the Panamanian flag.

A sovereignty issue to be sure...even though the “Big Stick” was used to gain Panamanian independence from Colombia.

Lots of ex-Zonians have moved back to Panama...it’s the only home many of us have ever had. I hope to move back one day myself. I have no roots here in the states.

[1010RD]

Problem: An international consortium led by a Spanish construction company

Solution: America takes over, again.

[Yosemitest]

This reminds me of an article that all should read.

Sea Gates in Peril

The United States and the United Kingdom once dominated the world's seas. The Bible predicted the rise of these nations' sea power, and offers a sobering warning about their decline.

Vital sea gates—ocean passageways such as the Panama Canal and the Straits of Gibraltar—are changing hands as the 20th century draws to a close. Yet these changes, so critical to global commerce and regional defense, seldom rate front-page headlines.

For nearly two centuries, the United States and Britain (or friendly allies) have controlled nearly all of these important sites. In fact, the possession of these strategic sea gates was directly responsible for the emergence of America and Britain as world powers. Most politicians and Western secular media appear oblivious to the real significance of these changes, yet the Bible provides sobering insights as to why these transfers are occurring and where they will lead. You cannot afford to ignore what is taking place right before our eyes!

(Continued)

Read it all, because it's well worth your time.