• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

GOP votes to block port deal

Yes, I admit that I am not all that knowledgeable on the issue and appreciate the links so that I can read up on it....but I have to laugh at some of the arrogant responses suggesting that I am the only ignorant person who doesn't know all the facts.
All I can say is, I am humble enough to admit that I don't know everything and humble enough to take the time to educate myself.

But it doesn't change my position. Giving up control of the ports is a stupid idea, whether it is done by Democrats or Republicans.
 
disneydude said:
Yes, I admit that I am not all that knowledgeable on the issue and appreciate the links so that I can read up on it....but I have to laugh at some of the arrogant responses suggesting that I am the only ignorant person who doesn't know all the facts.
All I can say is, I am humble enough to admit that I don't know everything and humble enough to take the time to educate myself.

But it doesn't change my position. Giving up control of the ports is a stupid idea, whether it is done by Democrats or Republicans.

Why is it stupid? The same security forces monitor it, regardless of who owns it.
 
Kelzie said:
Why is it stupid? The same security forces monitor it, regardless of who owns it.

It's not stupid at all, because Americans will most likely allow greed to get in the way of safety, hate to say it, but they will. They will ask their buddies in Washington to lighten up on them, I can hear them now "Hey partner, that 9/11 stuff is behind us now, do I really have to buy all these radiation sniffing devices, huh....buddy, here, my wife baked you this apple pie", we all know what's under that apple pie!:roll:

No, these Arabs have the money to spend, and they would have spent it, now we are less safe, and all for political reasons. It's not as if any American company was even putting a bid in, we just screwed the pooch kids, and we lost a good friend, I think, I hope not!:roll:
 
So why did the British government OK Dubai running some of their ports?
 
Stinger said:
So why did the British government OK Dubai running some of their ports?

Because they are not miserable dumb asses.:roll:

Not to mention hypocritical assheads!:roll:
 
And now the U.A.E. has said they are going to pull out all of their American investments and invest with our competitors, that's not chump change people, so for all of you isolationist, protectionist, xenophobic misinformed, sheep, and for all of those people who were against this simply, because the President was for it, good job assholes.
 
On its own, the decision to transfer operations management of a handful of our ports to a US entity is likely to make little difference commercially, even for DPW itself. In terms of national security, any benefits will probably be limited to a bit more funding for port security and safety.

Set against this is the damage that members of Congress have done to our standing in the world. Until the deal's leading opponents write their memoirs, it will unclear just how many were motivated by political opportunism and misguided, if genuine, security concerns, rather than old-fashioned protectionism.

What is undeniably clear, however, is that they have handed a gift to opponents of globalization. Congress was plainly more than willing to change the rules to block an already approved deal. That not only undermines the appeal of the US as an investment destination, but also makes it easier for other nations to do the same.

Benjamin Franklin once observed that 'no nation was ever ruined by trade'. It is a lesson that Congress would do well to remember in the aftermath of this kerfuffle. As always, there will be unintended consequences for us to deal with in the future.
 
Last edited:
I'm just glad it's finally over.

The whole thing seemed blown out of proportion to me. The democrats just used it as an opportunity to bash Bush, and the republicans not wanting to seem weak on homeland security, joined the media circus.

It is a serious matter, but it was totally hyped by the media. The security of our ports is in the hands of the Coast Guard and the Department of HS and that won't change just because of some deal.
 
Last edited:
Rachel said:
I'm just glad it's finally over.
This one is over, to be sure. But what will the next scandal be? Two weeks ago was the hunting accident. This week it was Dubai. What will the hate agenda put front and center next week?
 
Yeah, that's exactly what I mean.

They just take some issue which can get people riled up without giving them a chance to hear all the facts (the last thing you want is for people to hear all the facts!), and then they turn it into a circus!

I'm sick of it!
 
Rachel said:
Yeah, that's exactly what I mean.

They just take some issue which can get people riled up without giving them a chance to hear all the facts (the last thing you want is for people to hear all the facts!), and then they turn it into a circus!

I'm sick of it!
Stay tuned. Monday is coming. Howard Dean has something up his sleeve, I'm sure.
 
This one is over, to be sure. But what will the next scandal be? Two weeks ago was the hunting accident. This week it was Dubai. What will the hate agenda put front and center next week?
i don't think it would be right to make this into a party political issue. Bith democrat and republican people have opposed this deal (i belive wrongly). i don't think it has anything to do with a liberal bush-bashing liberal media or anything like that. i think it comes down to a political posturing from both sides with a hint of xenophobia thrown into the mix
 
Willoughby said:
i don't think it would be right to make this into a party political issue. Bith democrat and republican people have opposed this deal (i belive wrongly). i don't think it has anything to do with a liberal bush-bashing liberal media or anything like that. i think it comes down to a political posturing from both sides with a hint of xenophobia thrown into the mix
I'm actually glad this issue is going back to the drawing board, but I am concerned with the Islamophobia perception around the world.
 
We slapped our best ally in the middle east in the face.......I hope it does not come back to bite us.........
 
Rachel said:
I'm just glad it's finally over.

The whole thing seemed blown out of proportion to me. The democrats just used it as an opportunity to bash Bush, and the republicans not wanting to seem weak on homeland security, joined the media circus.

It is a serious matter, but it was totally hyped by the media. The security of our ports is in the hands of the Coast Guard and the Department of HS and that won't change just because of some deal.

It's not over the U.A.E. is pulling out all of its investment from the U.S. and they're going to halt any further investment and invest with our competitors, it's going to severly hurt the economy.
 
Check this out from the Department of Homeland security god congress and the American sheeple are fuc/king retarted:


UAE/Dubai Ports World Acquisition
DP World will not, nor will any other terminal operator, control, operate or manage any United States port. DP World will only operate and manage specific, individual terminals located within six ports.

  • The recent business transaction taken by DP World, a United Arab Emirates based company, to acquire British company Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company (P&O) does not change the operations or security of keeping our nation’s ports safe. The people working on the docks also will not change as a result of this transaction.
  • This transaction is not an issue of controlling United States’ ports. It is an issue of operating some terminals within U.S. ports.
  • DP World will operate at the following terminals within the six United States’ ports currently operated by the United Kingdom company, P & O:
    o Baltimore - 2 of 14 total
    o Philadelphia - 1 of 5 (does not include the 1 cruise vessel terminal)
    o Miami - 1 of 3 (does not include the 7 cruise vessel terminals)
    o New Orleans - 2 of 5 (does not include the numerous chemical plant terminals up and down the Mississippi River, up to Baton Rouge)
    o Houston – 4 of 12 (P&O work alongside other stevedoring* contractors at the terminals)
    o Newark/Elizabeth – 1 of 4
    o (Note: also in Norfolk - Involved with stevedoring activities at all 5 terminals, but not managing a specific terminal.)
    *Stevedoring – provides labor, carries physical loading and unloading of cargo.


  • P&O and DP World made a commitment to comply with current security programs, regulations and partnerships to which P&O currently subscribes, including:
    o The Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT);
    o The Container Security Initiative (CSI);
    o The Business Alliance on Smuggling and Counterfeiting (BASC); and,
    o The Megaports Initiative MOU with the Department of Energy.


  • All P&O security arrangements will remain intact, including cargo security cooperation with CBP, compliance with USCG regulations (ISPS and MTSA) regarding port facilities/terminals, and foreign terminal operations within CSI ports.

  • Dubai was the first Middle Eastern entity to join the Container Security Initiative (March 2005). As a result, CBP officer are working closely with Dubai Customs to screen containers destined for the U.S. Cooperation with Dubai officials has been outstanding and a model for other operation within CSI ports.
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0865.xml
 
KCConservative said:
This one is over, to be sure. But what will the next scandal be? Two weeks ago was the hunting accident. This week it was Dubai. What will the hate agenda put front and center next week?
I'm not sure they have new one. Here's the latest email though:
Dear Simon,

It’s time to find out who the leader of the Democrat Party really is.
Is it Howard Dean, who compares the United States to Iran? Or John Kerry, who worries about American soldiers terrorizing women and children in the dead of night? Or Hillary Clinton, who has likened the Republican management of the House of Representatives to that of a plantation?
Play “Find the Leader” in our latest web video on GOP.com.
If you still don’t know who the leader is at the end of this video - don’t worry, neither does Harry Reid, the Democrat “leader” in the Senate.
If you liked this video, e-mail it to all your friends and family. And make a contribution to the Republican Party, so we can spread the word about this and future videos to every voter in America. Once again, thank you for your tireless support.

Sincerely,
kensig.gif

Ken Mehlman
Chairman, Republican National Committee
P.S. After watching the video, please help spread the word by e-mailinggenerous support.
 
Navy Pride said:
Where is the outrage from the left over the fact that the Port of Los Angeles is controlled by the Chinese Communists? Oh wait that deal was signed under the Clinton administration so it does not count........:roll:

I don't like any of our ports being controlled by foreign companies. Period.

Obviously China hasn't attacked us, and the deal went down pre- 9/11
 
KCConservative said:
This one is over, to be sure. But what will the next scandal be? Two weeks ago was the hunting accident. This week it was Dubai. What will the hate agenda put front and center next week?

The Bush administration does remind me of Side Show Bob from the Simpsons, running into the rake every week or so...

BobRake.jpg
 
hipsterdufus said:
I don't like any of our ports being controlled by foreign companies. Period.

Obviously China hasn't attacked us, and the deal went down pre- 9/11


And the UAE attacked us when?:confused:
 
Navy Pride said:
And the UAE attacked us when?:confused:

The UAE transferred $ to the hijackers on 9/11/01 and several of the hijackers lived in the UAE.
 
hipsterdufus said:
The Bush administration does remind me of Side Show Bob from the Simpsons, running into the rake every week or so...


That's because you guys blame something new on him that has nothing to do with him every week.

Let's see Katrina = State and Local fuc/ked up both Dems.

Mine Explosion = accident, blame it on him anyways.

Port Deal = Your media blew it way out of proportion and lied thus straining our relationship with one of our only allies in the middle east.
 
hipsterdufus said:
The more I think about this, the more this smells like Rove. Think about it - Rove lets the GOP stand up on an issue that sucks for Bush anyway.

It seems like my intuition was working on Rove calling this shot if you believe Kristol today. Hipster pats himself on the back and grabs a smoke...

Yesterday, President Bush described Dubai Ports World’s announcement to sell its U.S. operations as a decision made by the company under pressure from Congress:

I’m sure that the decision by DP World was a difficult decision, to hand over port operations that they had purchased from another company. My administration was satisfied that port security would not have been undermined by the agreement. Nevertheless, Congress was still very much opposed to it.

The media has largely bought into that narrative. But according to Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, the White House instructed DP World to concede. Appearing yesterday on Fox News, Kristol said Karl Rove canceled the deal with a phone call on the night of March 8:

He made that veto threat then he went on the trip to India and went silent basically. Karl Rove calls the people in Dubai two nights ago and tells them pull the plug on the deal, and I think as a result, the president looks weak, frankly.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/11/rove-dubai/
 
hipsterdufus said:
I don't like any of our ports being controlled by foreign companies. Period.

Nor do I. However, ports are controlled by Port Authorities, all of which are American operations.

Terminals within a port, wherein inventory is loaded and unloaded, using cranes that are either owned by the inventory handling agency or rented from the port, may be operated by other entities.

The UAE was purchasing terminal operations, not ports.

As much as I despise how this all went down, I have to hand it to the Republicans for their deft end-run around the Democrats. They squashed the deal before the Dems even inked an amendment.

So much for the Dems going to the right of the Republicans on National Security. They remain impotent, even when they played the xenophobia card.
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone has come out of this well. The media looks bad for stirring it up, the politicans look bad for rising to the bait and the president looks weak for backing down. A sad day for the states
 
Back
Top Bottom