Why say "could" and "critics say" when everyone agrees this is true? Some things are actual facts. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/plans-to-increase-exports-of-liquefied-natural-gas-could-accelerate-fracking-boom-critics-say/2013/05/12/a758abe8-bae0-11e2-b537-ab47f0325f7c_story.html …
-
-
En réponse à @saeverley
@saeverley@scottlincicome@ed_crooks those aren't energy exports - they're minerals. I agree political conflict, but legal basis may differ2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @levi_m
@levi_m but I agree: technically they're minerals, but no difference as far as WTO's concerned (unless u raise natsec)@saeverley@Ed_Crooks2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @scottlincicome
@scottlincicome@saeverley@ed_crooks my understanding is may be difference between US, Chinese obligations due to WTO accession specifics2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime
En réponse à @levi_m
@levi_m HOWEVER, in rawmats the US challenged licensing in violation of GATT art XI. Absolutely no diff there. @saeverley @Ed_Crooks
13:27 - 12 mai 2013
0 réponse
0 Retweet
0 j'aime
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.
RTS. You didn't read the article, did you?