UAE running our ports?

m21att1 · 02-22-2006, 06:05 AM

Hey all! Just wanted to see what ya'll think about UAE running our sea ports. Honestly I'm not even close to an expert or even educated on this topic, and to be honest again, I didn't even know that it was currently run by a London based company. Personally I don't think any foreign company should be controlling any of our US ports, but I get an eerie feeling when a country that is located in an area of so much controversy has access to our security systems as well as other critical infrastructure and such in US ports. I'd like to get some other perspectives on this topic, let me know what you guys think.

jim schmidt · 02-22-2006, 09:45 AM

I think its a non-issue. It may actually be the third time I've agreed with Bush.

m21att1 · 02-22-2006, 10:12 AM

Really? I mean won't it give them access to our security procedures and such in our port cities?

bush · 02-22-2006, 10:15 AM

I don't really care about it. But I do think it's fucking ridiculous that GW talks so much about national security and fighting an enemy, then he practically offers to hand the UAE ports in a handful of major east coast cities.

But of course, as US citizens, we're expected to believe 100% of what our president tells us. So why should we worry?

kazlab67 · 02-22-2006, 10:19 AM

I like how he defends the stance that the government has fully looked into this and found it is safe, YET, no one in Congress seems to be aware of the Sale...and Bush himself has just admitted he was unaware. So who the hell approved the deal?

"...President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday..."
"

m21att1 · 02-22-2006, 10:27 AM

Yeah I think the thing that bothered me the most about it was that the company is a state company so basically owned by UAE not a privately held company. Perhaps this is a deal with the UAE so we have a strategic point of attack if something happens with Iran? We should just let the mob run all the docks anyway that way if osama fucks with their cash flow he'll be swimming with the fishes.

dualhcsniatpac · 02-22-2006, 10:35 AM

Well im a bush supporter, but not of this issue. Not sure if i know all of the sides on this but all i do know is that UAE has money connections to terrorism, 2 of the 9/11 hi-jackers were from there and i think i heard something else about their government but i cant remember. I why are we dealing with countries linked with terrorism??? IMO we shouldnt even talk with the countries that have terrorism ties, but thats just my opinion

Geowitz · 02-22-2006, 10:51 AM

This is my opinion. I'm not totally sure which side I'm on yet cause I haven't heard everything, but the UAE has always been an ally to the US so while at first the terrorist link may seem bad I think they went through the UAE because of the freindly relations between us and them. I think they were just used in that way, not that the terrorrists were actually a part of the UAE. Also the ports are still run under US law and staffed by us. It's not like a bunch of people from the middle east come over here and run them. They are also not the typical middle easterners. The are very progressive and modern with strong ties to western civilization. I think it's probrably more of a tax haven for investors in the middle east than anything else. There aren't many companies around the world who could handle this except maybe Haliburton. I can only imagine your reaction then.

Geowitz · 02-22-2006, 10:54 AM

And I don't think it's Bush's deal to approve in the first place. It's not his job in the first place. The government is made up of a lot of people and placing blame or credit on just the president is narrow thinking. Is it your boss who makes everything happen or is he really supposed to just lead you.

BusaDave · 02-22-2006, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geowitz

And I don't think it's Bush's deal to approve in the first place. It's not his job in the first place. The government is made up of a lot of people and placing blame or credit on just the president is narrow thinking. Is it your boss who makes everything happen or is he really supposed to just lead you.

I'm currently undecided on this issue and watching how it plays out. I'm definately not placing blame or credit, but Mr. Bush has placed himself squarely in the middle of this so I think it's unrealistic (now ther's a shocker in politics!) to believe he will not be criticized. Interesting that he is threatening his first veto on this issue!

I have had concerns for quite some time about selling off our industry to the highest bidder and shipping our jobs overseas. Beyond that I haven't yet seen any particular reason for this exception. The ports are already run by a foreign entity.

dualhcsniatpac · 02-22-2006, 11:16 AM

Well i hope you are right GEO and if that is the case then i dont think it will be such a bad idea. Like always i think when it comes to GWB most people (people against him and media) are quick to show the links with terrorism and dont show anything else like you just showed us. (as you can see i got my info from the media) stupid Democrats!!! Its like saying someone should be punished for getting their identity stolen for instance. Thanks for the insight.

bugeyed · 02-22-2006, 11:16 AM

Foreigners hold most of US treasury bonds now, underlying those bonds are US assets, just like any other bond. Since US is so massively in debt, and could be expected to default on their interest payments, US assets, including national parks, land, ports will have to be sold off to service the debt. The same thing happened in Argentina after their meltdown, foreign bond holders swooped in and grabbed prime Argentine assets. If they don't begin liquidating these assets then the value of US treasury bonds will fall causing a sharp spike in interest rates, crashing of the dollar and destruction of the US economy.

Welcome to the real world. That's what happens when people don't hold political leaders accountable for their actions, and refuse to educate themselves about the banking system where creation of money is given to private to loan sharks like the Federal Reserve and their stockholding private banks.

segue00 · 02-22-2006, 12:58 PM

What's the big deal?

Great Britain own food distribution
The Japs own golf courses
Mexico owns the manual labor force
What's 6 ports going to the Arabs?

hanglowejohnson · 02-22-2006, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugeyed

Welcome to the real world. That's what happens when people don't hold political leaders accountable for their actions, and refuse to educate themselves about the banking system where creation of money is given to private to loan sharks like the Federal Reserve and their stockholding private banks.

People refuse to educate themselves about the REAL economy.

We go to work, get paid, spend our paychecks, try to save a little, and bitch about gas prices...

If people took the time to REALLY learn how our country magically creates value (i.e- money) to the tune of TRILLIONS of dollars to fight a war WE MADE UP. There would be a coup in this country the likes of which could only be compared to the Civil War.

The current state of government is running this country/economy into the ground on a daily basis.... this country WILL NOT last another 100 years on the path we are on. I would even venture to say another 50 years.

These economic issues have almost ALL surfaced within the last 50 years, so consider how different the country was in 1950 compared to today. We CANNOT continue this cycle. We dont have an option, it has to be stopped.

BUT, the only way it will ever be stopped is for the majority of average citizens to decide "it aint workin". Unfortunately WE are not average citizens because most people that at least take interest in this forum are so far more educated than the rest of the country is frightening.

As much as I love this country, our democracy isnt working. I think the only way to save our country and our way of life (ready.....) is a benevolent dictatorship.

We need a dictator that says, look- we can either continue on our path, and have lots of goods (none of which are produced in this country and ALL of which only increase our debt, but they will make u happy) OR we can devote our resources to finding a new form of energy (like ethanol)

I mean seriously....... lets think about it for a second... congress approves 100 trillion dollars or whatever ONLY for research to create a new energy source... would that ever happen... NOT A FUCKING CHANCE!!!

Yet we can spend it to eliminate a threat that didnt really exist????

bugeyed · 02-22-2006, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hanglowejohnson

The current state of government is running this country/economy into the ground on a daily basis.... this country WILL NOT last another 100 years on the path we are on. I would even venture to say another 50 years.

Oh, I don't give that much time. Another 3-4 years at most, perhaps 5. And that's a conservative estimate.