Re: GlobalismThe beauty part of the "national security" block is that it's almost impossible to refute. Kind of like the "I was afraid for my life" defense that has worked so well in police-involved shootings.
Re: GlobalismNah, that was too close to home... a) B percieved by current administration as an aggressive firebrand and had to be whipped in line , B) Too many eggs in one strategic basket if B would gobble the Q, C) The area is too sensitive to DoD and future advances (refer to A and B)
Re: GlobalismCoincidentally, I just read Prisoners of Geography, so I should refrain from commenting as I now think I'm a mini expert on geo-politics. Obviously, I am not. But I could figure out that these things play out over millenia.
The book's perspective a little bit "British public school boy", but worth a read neverthless:
Re: GlobalismEx-President Bannon was clear that U.S. economic nationalists consider China the biggest threat. Broadcom isn't based in China, but it's close enough as far as that particular group is concerned. "National security" is a convenient reason for this action, but it may not be the primary reason.
https://www.lightreading.com/components/mobile-wireless-components/broadcom-formally-drops-$117b-qualcomm-bid/d/d-id/741416?
The book's perspective a little bit "British public school boy", but worth a read neverthless:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25135194-prisoners-of-geography
Probably technology and geo-politics would be a good subject for a PhD or a career in the commentariat.