Not a good Idea

I've heard more on this subject, and still don't like it.
One thing I've noticed that hasn't been mentioned....

Everybody seems to agree that we need to get away from oil dependency
in the mid-east.
This seem to be just adding on other/more dependency. :confused:

Seems counter productive in that area to me.
 
I also keep hearing some people on the news saying it won't affect our
security because they won't be in charge of the port security, or loading/unloading...

So what if they just dock the ship, and then a 100 megaton bomb (or more) goes off before
it's unloaded?
 
What if they dock a ship, flagged under the UAE, at a port run by the NY Port Authority? A bomb doesn't care who the management is.
 
I'll have to submit, you have a point there.
It just seems it'd be easier with them in charge, but I'm not sure of all
the ins, and outs on that. That's part of the problem. Not much information
on how the security is Really being handle all the way down the line.
At this point I have more faith in the union workers, than HS. :confused:
 
As virtually every talking head cares to point out, repeatedly, we inspect less than 5% of the incoming containers. The union guys are just making a paycheck & unless they stumble onto something by accident, we're fucked, regardless.
 
I still can't get my head around the actual problem with this situation.

The US Coast Guard provides Security, not Dubai.

China, England, Denmark, to name a few, run other US ports.

The UAE is among the most western Arab regions. They are richh capitalist pigs with malls & Taco Bells & Best Westerns. Hardly a fundamental Islamist mecca.

The deal allows them to control less the 30% of the port, sharing space with other operators.

They're willing to part with six billion dollars. That's not chicken feed anywhere.

Ships will dock there from friendly ports & neutral ports. What's different?

No American company applied for the bidding.

Both sides of the aisle are worked up because it's an election year.

On the other hand, the UAE won't recognize Israel & called the Taliban the proper Afghani government.
 
Actually Gonz, Dubai bought out P&O, an English based company which had been running the ports. My problem with the whole business is this.

Why should we use these guys who knowingly stonewalled investigative efforts into al-qaeda and knowingly handled multiple financial transactions for them and other known terrorist organizations?

I don't like it, I don't think most of the American people like it and I find it wildly unlikely that the administration can convince us that there's nothing wrong with it. If they persist in this folly I think there will be a lot more democrats in Congress next year.
 
chcr said:
I don't like it, I don't think most of the American people like it and I find it wildly unlikely that the administration can convince us that there's nothing wrong with it. If they persist in this folly I think there will be a lot more democrats in Congress next year.
Click to expand...
:NailOonHead:
yep

They say they are worried it will hurt relations with the UAE. If that's all it takes
to turn they from so called allies, to whatever....that's not to strong of an allie.
The main thing "I" think they are looking at is we'll have to fork out the 6 billion
if we turn them away.
I REALLY hope this just opens eyes that we need to redo the workings of how
the ports are Run, and by how many of whom. (US people)
The way I understand it, there only has to be 1 US citizen in there, and
they didn't even get the wording right there.

OH, We HAVE to have some More oversight on this, and all these situations.

IMO our HS has a piss poor record ATM to be rushing This deal through.
 
chcr said:
I don't like it, I don't think most of the American people like it
Click to expand...

I don't much like it but I've not been presented with anything to hang my hat on. Some of the terrorists also came thru Canada. Money is being laundered thru the US, today. The fact that the highjackers were primarily Saudis doesn't damn Saudi Arabia (there is plenty of other stuff for that).

This deal looks fishy & allowing a Muslim country to run our ports seems out of line but so does allowing China.

Maybe what I'm having problems with isn't so much who is running the show as its why is any non-American running show. If we allow China why not Dubai. China is our absolute worst intelligence risk in the world & we're allowing them (COSCO) to run Long Beach.
 
I don't disagree with anything you said, Gonz. The fact is that the right (that's the group the administration hangs their collective hat on) has been sowing distrust if not downright antagonism against all things Islam ever since 9-11 (or before). Most Americans will only recognize that this is giving the keys to the "enemy." I see it more as an AIDS issue. I'm certain that Sheik Maktoum bin Rashid Al Maktoum is one of our staunchest allies, but we're now supposed to trust everyone he trusts? I agree that China is a much more dangerous intelligence risk, but the Muslims have actually attacked us. It'll never fly with the American people.
 
I just don't like this statement.

"People don't need to worry about security," Bush said Thursday. "We wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security of the United States of America."
Click to expand...

I think we DO need to worry about security. All of it. Any of it.
This isn't over seas, this is HERE.
 
I can't seem to find the exact quote online so I'll have to paraphrase Stephen Colbert from last nights Colbert Report...

almost Stephen Colbert said:
I know the facts say this is fine, but it feels wrong, in my gut. Going with the facts isn't what the Bush administration does best, why start now?
Click to expand...
 
catocom said:
So what are they in charge of? What do they get for the 6.8 billion?
Click to expand...

Another reason I'm not running in panic from this. They're managing part of the port. They are the money brokers looking to get their cut of the pie. Nothing changes, other than the name in the Pay to the Order of line. If they're paying $6.8B, it must be a big pie.

I heard one theory that kind of makes sense. The reason we're allowing so many non-US entities to run the ports is to weaken & eventually kill off the long-shore unions. In that case, I'm all for it.
 
Gonz said:
Another reason I'm not running in panic from this. They're managing part of the port. They are the money brokers looking to get their cut of the pie. Nothing changes, other than the name in the Pay to the Order of line. If they're paying $6.8B, it must be a big pie.

I heard one theory that kind of makes sense. The reason we're allowing so many non-US entities to run the ports is to weaken & eventually kill off the long-shore unions. In that case, I'm all for it.
Click to expand...
About the "nothing changes" part, how long is that for?

I'm not a fan of the unions, but if I have a choice between them, or foreigners,
I'll take them every time.

There's way too many questions still, for me to jump onboard yet.
 
You know, one of the most disappointing and perhaps scary things about this situation is how surprised the administration is by it. How far out of touch with the country do you have to be to not realize what a shit storm this was bound to be. They probably still think we basically have faith in Homeland Insecurity.
 
Moving this into the light & opening discussions is great. EXCEPT...its open season on anything & anyone (re-elections coming) & what should be a security matter will become a political hot potato.
 
Gonz said:
Moving this into the light & opening discussions is great. EXCEPT...its open season on anything & anyone (re-elections coming) & what should be a security matter will become a political hot potato.
Click to expand...

So does everything else. I keep telling you guys, marketing, not ideology.
 
I keep telling you that there are more if us (ideological purists) than there are of them (politicians). Marketing changes, ideology doesn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top