Davidwell, lots of people talked about the port deal. a united arab emirates owned company wanted to buy a company that ran 6 ports in the u.s.. it was shortly scrubbed after a public furor. president bush wanted to go ahead with the deal. but strangely, pretty much both sides of the political divide were against the deal. so congress actually accomplished something. think about that for a minute.
congress actually did something.
first, the people who are/were for the port deal argue that the only reason not to allow the uae control is racism. it seems like they were trying to make more of a point than to actually weight the postives and negatives of the situation. they claim racism after they point at the virtual lack of any oppostion to britain running our ports.
is that racism? we share lots of defense and security measures with britain. they share theirs with us. if we allowed chinese control of a port, and forbade the emiraties, they might have a point. but because it is britain, who we have enjoyed a ‘special relationship’ with since wwii, the argument holds no water.
port deal. my position. don’t ask yourself if the uae should be allowed. ask yourself if ANY country should be allowed. it’s a simple issue for me. no country but britain. well, maybe australia and canada. but i’m not so sure about canada anymore.
Uh, we DO allow Chinese control of a port. A Chinese company called COSCO operates two ports in California. Oh, and speaking of UAE, you do realize they also own a cargo and passenger airline, don’t you? In a deal almost exactly the same as the ports deal they were attempting, they run terminals in major airports in most of the big cities in the US, like Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, and, surprise surprise, New York. So we have an Arabic country flying planes in and out of NY every day, and no one says a word. But we have a fit about the same country operating shipping ports.
I guess I can understand, though, after that boat got hijacked and sailed into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11th.
This is easy. USA control of all.
i agree. greree, airports have a lot better security. and uae having control of a few gates at an airport is NOT the same thing as them having control of the entire airport!
security at ports needs to be screwed down.
You need to qualify this statement.
canada’s immigration (albeit under the previous administration) policies were incapable of stopping muslim jihadi immigration. it seemed to my eye at least that canada was unwilling to cooperate with us.
i understand they were trying to stay true to their own laws. but from my eyes, it seemed that the past administration was using defiance of the US as a tool to try to win domestic support.
and that defiance was detrimental to the US.
at least with the past admin, canada was in danger of getting lumped into the same group as france.
what the current administration’s stand toward cooperation with the US will be remains to be seen.
I was for the UAE ports deal, and got a bit peeved that everyone went ballistic over it. We can allow the Chinese to run a major port in California, but not the UAE? And they weren’t even going to have a hand in security; that would remain under the auspices of the US. Big f-in deal here. The UAE has been more helpful to us in the GWOT than has been Red China. And the UAE is NOT positioning itself as the main challenger of US hegemony around the world……
Now, change the laws and REQUIRE that US-only firms (using the same rules Congress requires of the military, that being only US nationals allowed to work) run all ports in our country (airports, sea ports, and land ports) for some protectionist reason, then you have a leg to stand on. Only problem is that there aer few companies with the reach and resources to handle this sort of thing: Halliburton anyone? See the Left scream in frustration over that!
I can agree with that Mlah.
I also can admit that Canada acts like the bullied younger brother. Sometimes it’s hard not too. You administration make decisions that cost our economy billions of dollars and then ignore NAFTA panel rulings to counter that damage (softwood lumber). Completely shutting out Canadian beef because of 1 case of BSE (mad cow). I agree that safety is paramount but that went too far. Even with the outbreak in Europe years ago there have still only been a hundred or so cases of CJD (human version of mad cow) worldwide ever. More billions of damage to one of our major industries. Somehow your government also brokered a deal with our government and electrical suppliers that will see us powering California before ourselves in a power shortage…. That last thing that sticks in my craw is our oil. Supposedly Canadian companies recover the oil (be it from oil sand or offshore) and sell it to US companies. We then for some ungodly reason buy it back at inflated prices. I don’t know who worked that deal out but even though Canada could supply it’s own oil with no need to buy any from foreign sources we still pay more for gas than you guys do.
I have disagreed with the policies (towards Canada) of every one of your administrations since I was old enough to care. You guys may not see it but where Canada/US things are involved our government almost always does what will make your government happy. All you guys see are the decisions where our government tries to act tough and independent and all we see are the decisions your government makes that puts hundreds of thousands of people out of jobs and makes us pay more for the things we need.
My post was off-topic…
Where the port deal is concerned everyone is over-reacting. At the same time though, I can’t believe bush thought that it would be allowed after all the fear mongering his administration has done…
And I for one once agree with you, Yup. The brouhaha over the ports deal was pretty silly. If we’re gonna let some of our allies do such things, we should let all of our allies do such things– any discrepancy is indeed racism (dunno if Yup will go out on that limb with me)– good point about all of W’s previous fear-mongering, Sean. I do think it should have already been law that we must take responsibility for all of our own vital infrastructure, buy hey, Free Marketeers demand border-less trade (globalization), right? That’s a conundrum every Conservative has to solve in their own hearts right now. It was hilarious to see W get hit with so much friendly fire over this, hahaha.
Yes, China does the same job on the West Coast. As well, the UAE has already been running ports that our NAVY uses! What do you say to that, sailors?
Read former Senator Bob Dole ripping Congress a new one over this:
http://tinyurl.com/mq9qy
Which ports exactly does the UAE run that our Navy uses gus? Jebel Ali? Been there. It’s their port. And I bet you THEY run it!
Which port does China run? Long Beach? Not quite the same as what the UAE was about to begin running. But then, I’m quite happy taking Long Beach away from the Chinese too.
“Which ports exactly does the UAE run that our Navy uses gus? Jebel Ali? Been there. Its their port. And I bet you THEY run it!”
I dunno, man. Bob Dole said: “The countrys [UAE’s] ports service the largest number of Navy ships outside the United States.” He seems to indicate more than one. The point being that we trust them enough not to mess with us on their own turf, right?
Hey, Mlah, as a Catholic, how did you feel about the Church’s adamant stand that they would continue to help illegals even if it were outlawed. You’re being pulled in so many directions lately!