387 karma · joined June 18, 2022
>While Pahlavi's authorities were happy with this project and its advancement away from the eyes of the US in their view, Israel had carefully duped Pahlavi to secure its interests. According to Israel's plan, during this project, contrary to what Iran's top officials think, Iran would only achieve obsolete technology.
and in the original source [0]:
>A very senior source in the Israeli Ministry of Defense reveals that the weapons deal with Iran was fraudulent. With each of the six joint proj-ects, the Israelis planned to deceive the Iranians by providing them only an outdated version of the weapon in question, while using Iranian money to build a new generation for Israel's exclusive use.
[0] https://books.google.com/books?id=NkxZcHL1xdYC&pg=PA6&redir_...
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Project_Flower
You may want to look at the Netherlands, the Nordic countries, and Canada.
>For example, in the U.S., they’ll receive paid coverage for 6 months. We’ll also accelerate their stock options vesting through January 2027 and extend equity exercise options for up to two years.
It's genuinely disappointing that using the Microsoft Authenticator app is a mandatory requirement for work, especially since they introduced the tap the correct number thing.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/Outlook/comments/1m4wp7h/microsoft_...
[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/4376965/...
>This policy has been alleged by the U.S. Government to be a form of debt-trap diplomacy; however, the term itself has come under scrutiny as analysts and researchers have pointed out that there is no evidence to prove that China is deliberately aiming to do debt-trap diplomacy.
>Research from Deborah Brautigam, an international political economy professor at Johns Hopkins University, and Meg Rithmire, an associate professor at Harvard Business School, have disputed the allegations of debt-trap diplomacy by China and pointed out that "Chinese banks are willing to restructure the terms of existing loans and have never actually seized an asset from any country, much less the port of Hambantota".
>Academic Jeremy Garlick concludes that there is no reason to believe the BRI framework is worse for developing countries' debt than Western lending frameworks.
[1] https://store.steampowered.com/franchise/playstationstudios
Admittedly, I could have framed the question more politely about the origins of his aversion.
You indiscriminately share links from the internet, including sinophobic YouTube videos, to reinforce your arguments. However, when presented with a counterargument supported by similar sources such as the IMF or other news outlets, you dismiss it as CCP lies.