US Port's to be secured by UAE?

[Makalakumu]

So it becomes a polite cold war of sorts?

Yes. Because eventually, the islamic nations who fund/support/look the other way in regards to terrorism will end up driving the US and others in the West away (assuming that we start ramping up our alternative energy...). This will be a disaster for the nations involved. Deprived of connections to us (our money), these nations would be forced to do what was neccesary in order to rebuild them.

 

[Andrew Main]

I don't understand why we make the rules and then let the rules, rule us. Sure free trade is good and having peace in the world is our goal, but that is a figment of our imagination. The world is a scary place full of people who will literally die to fulfill their "destiny". People who would dance in celebration of our countries destruction.

We are not debating whether a foreign company should or should not run our ports. This is simply a debate of a particular country running our ports. A particular country with terrorist ties. We should discriminate. Discriminate against any country, company or entity that would be questionable for our safety as US citizens.

I never thought that I would say this, but thank god for Congress. They are the only things holding this up. They are acting as a bipartisan group and looking out for the good of the people. It’s about time.

 

[Andrew Main]

Looking out for ones interests, or self-preservation, is neither being culturally blind or racist. Often times these are used as labels to attack people who have differing opinions or views based in self-preservation.

I personally think the deal was a poor choice. To do something like this for the express purpose of "proving" our committment to globalization at the expense of our own self-preservation is in my opinion akin to suicide. We don't have to prove anything to anyone, we should be a little more concerned about our well-being as a country, regardless of how we are percieved by the outside world.

These very people in both of our political parties, our government custodians, would sell their soul for worthless money. Essentially, they ARE selling their posterity off to the highest bidder for their own personal and immediate gains, disregarding the well-being of their posterity.

Just my opinions on the subject.

You speak the truth my friend.....

 

[michaeledward]

Could it be that Bush has outfoxed everyone?

No.

 

[Don Roley]

I don't understand why we would allow this kind of control in our Ports to be under ANY foreign control, whether it is British or UAE, or any other nations. It just seems like common sense that for the security of the nation, pre-9/11 or post-9/11, this is one of those things that would have to be run by a US company. A US company is subject to tighter oversight here at home, than a company based in another nation. If security is a concern, this much seems obvious.

Because who owns the shipping contract is so low on the list of people responsible for security it is not worth thinking about.

The people in charge of national security at the ports are the Coast Guard, border control and the customs authority. The company running the ports is pretty much limited to choosing security guards- and trying to sneak in a few Arabs instead of Americans would be pretty hard to miss don't you think?

I have been reading about this thing here in Japan. The rest of the world looks at this and is seeing sheer xenophobia. This company was one of only two companies in the running in terms of price. The other one was a Singapore goverment run business. Both countries are in the running for international trade and this is part of thier strategy.

This company has the contracts for ports in Britain, France, Belgium, Australia and many other places. They did not scream about Arab terrorists when the sales went through. Nor has their been any indication that there has been any troubles with national security because of it.

But all the typical American seems to hear are the words "Arab" and they don't even bother to read anything about the situation before they start foaming at the mouth.

I am embarrased to be an American right now with this type of blatent xenophobia. Can't this country read the facts before it starts mouthing off about Arab terrorist ties and the like?

More reading on the matter.

http://www.forbes.com/logistics/2006/02/23/dubai-ports-arab-react-cx_daa_0223dubai.html?partner=rss

 

[michaeledward]

I am embarrased to be an American right now with this type of blatent xenophobia. Can't this country read the facts before it starts mouthing off about Arab terrorist ties and the like?

For 5 years, we have been told that we need to fight them because they hate our freedom. One of the freedoms we have been fighting for over the past 20 years is Free Trade.

I believe it says, somewhere, "You reap what you Sow."

So, I guess the answer to your question is, 'No'.

 

[TimoS]

Deprived of connections to us (our money), these nations would be forced to do what was neccesary in order to rebuild them.

Actually I think that it wouldn't really hurt these nations at all. If the US wouldn't buy their oil, you can bet China and/or India will

 

[Makalakumu]

Actually I think that it wouldn't really hurt these nations at all. If the US wouldn't buy their oil, you can bet China and/or India will

That is a good point. However, why wouldn't the extremists turn their attention to the "other" infidels? Why would they want their beloved islamic theocracy dealing with more secularists and infidels (hindus)?

 

[Makalakumu]

I have been reading about this thing here in Japan. The rest of the world looks at this and is seeing sheer xenophobia.

But all the typical American seems to hear are the words "Arab" and they don't even bother to read anything about the situation before they start foaming at the mouth.

I am embarrased to be an American right now with this type of blatent xenophobia. Can't this country read the facts before it starts mouthing off about Arab terrorist ties and the like?

All three of these statements describe how I feel about this issue. It's become a political hammer that is abusing the underlying prejudice against people of middle eastern origin in this country. There must be an election coming soon...

 

[TimoS]

Why would they want their beloved islamic theocracy dealing with more secularists and infidels (hindus)?

Hmm, that might transfer some of the hatred away from the US, but my guess is that they sort of love to hate US. It is such an easy target to blame, because e.g. the support for Israel.

If the US would focus on alternative energies (whatever those might be), then I guess you wouldn't need such a strong presence in the Middlle-East, which might also help in taking away some of the hatred. Anyway, I'm just guessing.

 

[mrhnau]

A foreign country already had control over these particular ports. They happen to be probably our strongest ally. What other country would you be comfortable having control? Let me stick out a few names and see what people might say:

France/Germany
China
India
Turkey
Canada

Just a few random names... another thought. These are 6 ports. I honestly had no idea who controlled them. We have a good many more ports. Who controls those? Are they involved w/ foreign countries too? Should we get up in arms about all aspects of port control?

I've honestly not read/watched enough to get fully educated on the matter. Not enough time yet. I'd love to hear some of the conditions for our governments approval before I make a judgement.

 

[Makalakumu]

If the US would focus on alternative energies (whatever those might be), then I guess you wouldn't need such a strong presence in the Middlle-East, which might also help in taking away some of the hatred. Anyway, I'm just guessing.

So am I, but it seems like a win/win situation.

 

[mrhnau]

Hmm, that might transfer some of the hatred away from the US, but my guess is that they sort of love to hate US. It is such an easy target to blame, because e.g. the support for Israel.

If the US would focus on alternative energies (whatever those might be), then I guess you wouldn't need such a strong presence in the Middlle-East, which might also help in taking away some of the hatred. Anyway, I'm just guessing.

I think its more for our support of Israel. It does not make alot of sense to me that purchasing a product from someone makes them hate us. Then again, not alot is making sense these days I suppose it could be that we seem to constantly meddle in countries internal affairs over there, trying to suggest political paths, but I think its mostly Israel...

 

[michaeledward]

A foreign country already had control over these particular ports. They happen to be probably our strongest ally. What other country would you be comfortable having control? Let me stick out a few names and see what people might say:

France/Germany
China
India
Turkey
Canada

Just a few random names... another thought. These are 6 ports. I honestly had no idea who controlled them. We have a good many more ports. Who controls those? Are they involved w/ foreign countries too? Should we get up in arms about all aspects of port control?

I've honestly not read/watched enough to get fully educated on the matter. Not enough time yet. I'd love to hear some of the conditions for our governments approval before I make a judgement.

Currently, I believe there are several foreign contries that run terminals in American ports, including Singapore, and China. There are three United States companies that run port terminals, however, P&O was looking to sell their entire operation, not just the American portion of it. The six ports in question account for approximately 10% of P&O's operations.

So, even if the US portion of the deal falls through, you may find DPW purchasing the other 90% of P&O. I understand their are lucrative ports in Asia that a big part of the transaction.

Were that to happen, as Bill O'Reilly said yesterday (repeatedly), it would be an insult to the UAE government. And perhaps, pissing off an ally at this time would not be 'prudent'.

And just for clarification ... if it sounds like I am on the side of President Bush, and against all of Congress, it is only because for the last 13 years the American Public has elected people who favor free trade over regulated trade. Based on that principle, allowing the transaction to proceed is the only option. To challenge the deal between P&O and DPW requires challenging the entire concept of Free Trade and Globalization. Which I would gladly do. As I mentioned, I was wrong to support NAFTA. And this is wrong. But our policies dictate that we either, a) accept the deal, or b) reverse our policies.

 

[Cryozombie]

But all the typical American seems to hear are the words "Arab" and they don't even bother to read anything about the situation before they start foaming at the mouth.

Don, I hear ya. They were discussing this in my office and everyone was like "OMG!" so I asked them "Why does it really matter..."

No one really had an answer.

Its one thing to feel that way and at least have a viable reasoning behind it, even if it only makes sense to you... another thing altognether to feel that way for no reason.

 

[Flying Crane]

Because who owns the shipping contract is so low on the list of people responsible for security it is not worth thinking about.

The people in charge of national security at the ports are the Coast Guard, border control and the customs authority. The company running the ports is pretty much limited to choosing security guards- and trying to sneak in a few Arabs instead of Americans would be pretty hard to miss don't you think?

I have been reading about this thing here in Japan. The rest of the world looks at this and is seeing sheer xenophobia. This company was one of only two companies in the running in terms of price. The other one was a Singapore goverment run business. Both countries are in the running for international trade and this is part of thier strategy.

This company has the contracts for ports in Britain, France, Belgium, Australia and many other places. They did not scream about Arab terrorists when the sales went through. Nor has their been any indication that there has been any troubles with national security because of it.

But all the typical American seems to hear are the words "Arab" and they don't even bother to read anything about the situation before they start foaming at the mouth.

I am embarrased to be an American right now with this type of blatent xenophobia. Can't this country read the facts before it starts mouthing off about Arab terrorist ties and the like?

More reading on the matter.

http://www.forbes.com/logistics/2006/02/23/dubai-ports-arab-react-cx_daa_0223dubai.html?partner=rss

I am only commenting here because you quoted my posting earlier when you made these comments.

First off, I am not foaming at the mouth in fear of Arabs. As I stated in my first post, my position is that this is the type of thing that seems logical should remain in the hands of an American company. It doesn't make sense to me that this would be in the control of a company from ANY other country, Arab, UK, or otherwise. Please don't imply that I have an anti-Arab xenophobia.

 

[Bigshadow]

First off, I am not foaming at the mouth in fear of Arabs. As I stated in my first post, my position is that this is the type of thing that seems logical should remain in the hands of an American company. It doesn't make sense to me that this would be in the control of a company from ANY other country, Arab, UK, or otherwise. Please don't imply that I have an anti-Arab xenophobia.

That goes for me too!

 

[Don Roley]

As I stated in my first post, my position is that this is the type of thing that seems logical should remain in the hands of an American company. It doesn't make sense to me that this would be in the control of a company from ANY other country, Arab, UK, or otherwise.

Why not? We are not tallking about something that impacts American security. So why should we care if a company based in England, Dubai or whatever pushes the paperwork? Reading up on the matter it seems that the companies with the most experience tend to have that experience from running a lot of ports and that means some of them are going to be from overseas as well.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Why not? We are not tallking about something that impacts American security. So why should we care if a company based in England, Dubai or whatever pushes the paperwork? Reading up on the matter it seems that the companies with the most experience tend to have that experience from running a lot of ports and that means some of them are going to be from overseas as well.

As stated in the few news shows I have seen on this, no security as Don and others have stated is under control of others.Only the Port Management.

This is like saying we should not allow Diamler to have bought out Chrysler because this some how threatens national security. While I agree it might threaten US jobs in that industry, it does not add to any risk or issues to national security.

So, if we are truly worries about foreign control then why did no one raise the issue when Texas Instruments was bought out/went under. Before that, military parts had to be manufactured in the US, just in case we needed to protect the technology or were at war with the manufacturing country of that item.

Are we next going to say someone who buys fruit from a foreign country that they are unpatriotic? What about a car or a hand gun or a TV or any other piece of electronics. So, if your neighbor has some of these items in their garage or house, are we going to storm their house under the patriot act, as they are a threat?

Are we going to allow terrorism to win, by fearing ever ghost, and closing our borders and ignoring the world?

Well thank for the lead in Don, it is time for me to step down off the :soapbox:.

 

[michaeledward]

Are we going to allow terrorism to win, by fearing ever ghost, and closing our borders and ignoring the world?
.

This is the Straw Man Argument the President used repeatedly within his State of the Union Address. I know of no-one that is calling for closing our borders and ignoring the world. If you are going to ascribe such motives to someone, please identify to whom you are ascribing such claims.

While I happen to think that regulations that make goods and services more difficult to move across borders would be a good thing, even I am not calling for closing the borders. I am calling for regulated trade; fair trade as opposed to free trade.

There are some corporate mergers that should not be allowed to take place. Just as when the major Insurance Companies set up post-office box offices in Carribean Islands to avoid paying income tax in the United States, I think that benefits derived in the United States should be subject to United States Laws.

This goes for UAE, Britian, Singapore, Argentina, and any other companies that wish to do business here.