What's the big deal?

[rsmit212]

So the UAE would run some of our ports. They're peaceful allies. It's not like we're giving the ports to gun-runners and people-smugglers.

Yeah, thought we'd forgotten that little bit, didn't ya?

Comments

[docwebster.livejournal.com]

"Oh, wait. Look over here - Clinton did this! Yeah!"

[rsmit212.livejournal.com]

And seriously, what is the big deal? The UAE are allies. Never been a problem and will still be operating under the laws of the US in regards to our ports. We have NO SUCH REGULATION in place in regards to the Long Beach facility. None. It's effectively SOVEREIGN CHINESE soil during the lease.

So, what's the beef? Seriously, I don't see the issue here, in regards the UAE. Is it because their, ooooo, Arab? The big bad boogy man of the day? Bitching about this is rather two-faced when you didn't bitch about the Long Beach facility.

[docwebster.livejournal.com]

Did you just call me a racist?

You goddamn well know I'm not two faced, so kindly take that little insult elsewhere. Besides, how the blue hell do you KNOW I didn't bitch about the Long Beach facility back then? Huh?

Try this on for size:

A major part of the story, however, has been mostly overlooked. The company, Dubai Ports World, would also control the movement of military equipment on behalf of the U.S. Army through two other ports. From today’s edition of the British paper Lloyd’s List:

[P&O] has just renewed a contract with the United States Surface Deployment and Distribution Command to provide stevedoring [loading and unloading] of military equipment at the Texan ports of Beaumont and Corpus Christi through 2010.

According to the journal Army Logistician “Almost 40 percent of the Army cargo deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom flows through these two ports.”

Thus, the sale would give a country that has been “a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Lybia” direct control over substantial quantities U.S. military equipment.

(Now look me square in the eye and tell me you want a foreign country having anything to do with controlling the ports that ship out equipment to the troops, never mind the rest of it?)

[rsmit212.livejournal.com]

Did you just call me a racist? Did I state *you* were a racist? I do believe that this sensationalist journalism *is* playing the race card.

You goddamn well know I'm not two faced, so kindly take that little insult elsewhere. Besides, how the blue hell do you KNOW I didn't bitch about the Long Beach facility back then? Huh? Because I specifically remember you and one or two others telling me *I* was over-reacting when *I* bitched about it. This is part of the reason Ali doesn't talk to me any more. So, *that's* how I know.

Try this on for size:

A major part of the story, however, has been mostly overlooked. The company, Dubai Ports World, would also control the movement of military equipment on behalf of the U.S. Army through two other ports. From today’s edition of the British paper Lloyd’s List:

[P&O] has just renewed a contract with the United States Surface Deployment and Distribution Command to provide stevedoring [loading and unloading] of military equipment at the Texan ports of Beaumont and Corpus Christi through 2010.

According to the journal Army Logistician “Almost 40 percent of the Army cargo deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom flows through these two ports.”

Thus, the sale would give a country that has been “a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Lybia” direct control over substantial quantities U.S. military equipment.

(Now look me square in the eye and tell me you want a foreign country having anything to do with controlling the ports that ship out equipment to the troops, never mind the rest of it?)

(Looking square in the eye) Considering I work for a telecom that has *major* defense contracts *AND* is foreign owned, yeah, I got no problem with it as long as security is held to it's needed level. This sensationalist knee-jerk reaction to everyday business is exactly why nothing is getting *done* any more in Washington. People scream for globalization of services and then bitch and moan when it starts happening. Stop politicizing every little thing happening and start *working* to fix the things that are wrong. Not removing a person that you don't agree with. Convince people with facts about a subject, not a person. Stop making/taking everything a personal attack.

[docwebster.livejournal.com]

Try this on for size:

A senior executive of Dubai Ports World in charge of its European and Latin American port operations, David Sanborn, was named by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration. The agency advocates for the U.S. maritime industry under the Department of Transportation. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-02-21-united-arab-emirates_x.htm)

Rank cronyism or bringing everything in-house, only time will tell. The proof of that pudding will be to see how many sweetheart deals DPW gets with Sanborn in charge, or lack thereof.

I think what astonishes me most is that an administration that's spent the past five years training people to suspect anyone wearing a kaffiyeh is so shocked when they want to drop the contract in the lap of a country that even indirectly was the home and financial base for so may terrorist operations. NO, I'm not saying the UAE directly funded terrorists, thus the use of the word "indirect". It just astonishes me they didn't see this backlash coming after the past five years.

(Damn, I love a good political dustup - gets the blood going.)