• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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.

Should the Bush Administration have approved the sale of 6 U.S. port to Arabs?

Should the Bush Administration have approved the sale of 6 U.S. port to Arabs?

  • Yes

    Votes: 7 31.8%
  • No

    Votes: 12 54.5%
  • I still think this is biased.

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • I hate Saboteur

    Votes: 2 9.1%

  • Total voters
    22

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Despite my love of being called "stupid and biased" I've decided to repost my original question. It's new and improved!:2razz:

Currently, President Bush and his administration have approved the sale and control of 6 U.S. ports to Arab owned Dubai Port World. Congress, including many house republicans, are concerned that doing so would be a threat to national security as our shipping ports are already our weakest link in the chain of defence. They are currently working to block the sale of the port but President Bush says he will veto anything that comes to him that is against the approval of selling the ports to the Arab Co..

I for one don't think that this is a very good idea. We might as well invite Osama and freinds over to visit one of our water resivoirs and let Iran have nuclear weapons. I say this because I know that Saudi Arabia has, as recently as 2004, harbored terrorists and their government has, in the past, granted them amnisty and that Arabs are known to be the biggest financial supporters of terrorism.

Mods may delete previous poll at their leisure.
 
Last edited:

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Sorry for the multiple threads. Please use this one to vote!
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yes, for the following reasons:

1. Dubai will have no control over the port security. They're just taking over the commercial aspects.
2. Dubai is not a generic Arab country replete with terrorists. It's an oasis of modernity in a desert of...well...desert.
3. The ports are already managed by a British company...a country known to harbor Islamic terrorists.
 

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Kandahar said:
Yes, for the following reasons:

1. Dubai will have no control over the port security. They're just taking over the commercial aspects.
2. Dubai is not a generic Arab country replete with terrorists. It's an oasis of modernity in a desert of...well...desert.
3. The ports are already managed by a British company...a country known to harbor Islamic terrorists.
I suppose... But I still don't like it and I think that if people (not you) are going to accuse someone of supporting terrorism because they disagree with torturing prisoners or don't agree that the U.S. should have invaded Iraq, they shouldn't be supporting the sale of ports to a country that is perhaps a little higher risk.
 

Synch

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
564
Reaction score
16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
1. The Bush administration already approved of the deal.
2. Bush didn't know about it until after his administration approved it. :doh
3. Bush is going to veto a bill that vetoes the deal
4. There's no good reason other than racist bigotry that we should not seal this agreement.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
According to the articles, Bush wasn't aware of this until after the green light was given :confused:
 
T

The Real McCoy

What are we supposed to say to them? "Sorry, we're all for free trade and everything, just not with you" What a great way to build alliances in a region where we lack many.

The U.A.E. is probably the most westernized country in the Arab world. Talk to almost anyone in the Navy who knows and ask them where the safest port is in the Persian Gulf. They'll tell you Dubai.

Who cares if 2 of the 9/11 hijackers came from there? Timothy McVeigh came straight out of America.

I say let them have the ports and allow their economic interests to grow here in America.
 

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
SixStringHero said:
According to the articles, Bush wasn't aware of this until after the green light was given :confused:
I know. To me this makes it even more of a mistake. But he's not going to back down on it because if he did it'd be a mistake.
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
I voted no. If congress is going to question whether or not it is okay for microsoft, google, and yahoo to censor their products for China due to the fact that China is not a democracy which supports civil rights then clearly congress should have say in whether or not we allow Dubai to "run" our ports. While everyone loves to state how westernized Dubai is that is simply not true. Being "more" tolerant than other Arab nations is a far cry from being "westernized."
 
Last edited:

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Synch said:
1. The Bush administration already approved of the deal.
Just because the administration already approved doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

2. Bush didn't know about it until after his administration approved it. :doh
Even more of a reason to question this.

3. Bush is going to veto a bill that vetoes the deal
But congress does still have the ability to try and stop it. The House and Senate are the peoples' representatives and they say that the people don't like it. Yet the President will ignor the people.

4. There's no good reason other than racist bigotry that we should not seal this agreement.
If a biological or chemical weapon comes through one of those ports I'll come looking for you.
 

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The Real McCoy said:
What are we supposed to say to them? "Sorry, we're all for free trade and everything, just not with you" What a great way to build alliances in a region where we lack many.

The U.A.E. is probably the most westernized country in the Arab world. Talk to almost anyone in the Navy who knows and ask them where the safest port is in the Persian Gulf. They'll tell you Dubai.

Who cares if 2 of the 9/11 hijackers came from there? Timothy McVeigh came straight out of America.

I say let them have the ports and allow their economic interests to grow here in America.
Are you still going into the Navy?
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
The Real McCoy said:
What are we supposed to say to them? "Sorry, we're all for free trade and everything, just not with you" What a great way to build alliances in a region where we lack many.
Why? They don't have problems restricting us.

"Investment laws and regulations are evolving in the UAE and are expected to become more conducive to foreign investment. At present, the regulatory and legal framework favors local over foreign investors. There is no national treatment for investors in the UAE, and foreign ownership of land and stocks is restricted."

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/ifd/2005/42194.htm
 

doughgirl

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
1,619
Reaction score
60
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Talloulou said, “If congress is going to question whether or not it is okay for microsoft, google, and yahoo to censor their products for China due to the fact that China is not a democracy which supports civil rights then clearly congress should have say in whether or not we allow Dubai to "run" our ports. While everyone loves to state how westernized Dubai is that is simply not true. Being "more" tolerant than other Arab nations is a far cry from being "westernized."
Very good point.

Personally I can’t believe Bush did something like this. To have blind faith that they will not turn against us is insane. (At this point I wouldn’t trust Canada to run a port. Our friend, yea right.)

Bushs decision reminds me of something that happened right after 9-11. Maybe you remember this....

Consider two moderate Muslim leaders Abduahman Alamoudi who is President of the American Muslim Council, and Muzammil Saddiqi, spiritual leader of the Islamic society of Orange County. These two clerics were chosen by the U.S administration to represent moderate Islam to the American masses after 9-11. They appeared with Bush as Bush so carelessly stated that Islam was a religion of peace not hate. Both men joined the president three days after the terrorist attack in a televised memorial service at the National Cathedral in Washington D.C, where in fact Saddiqi was given the honor of offering the opening prayer.

BUT............ These so called moderates :doh who were selected to calm us down over Islamic terrorism, were later shown on television days later (Fox News videotape) at a Washington D.C. rally supporting terrorist organizations and openly denouncing the United States. This was on TAPE. I quote Alamoudi, "Hear that Bill Clinton: We ALL are supporters of Hamas. Allahu akbar. I am a supporter of Hizbullah. Anybody supports Hizbullah here?" After these remarks Saddiqi said and I quote, "The United States is directly and indirectly responsible for the plight of the Palestinian people. If you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come..."

Now you tell me... if these two guys say they represent moderate Muslims in America, then how do they differ from radical Muslims?
Seems to me they uttered the same words as the 9-11 terrorists did before crashing the airplanes into the buildings........Allahu akbar.
Did not Osama make the same threat to the U.S for its support of Israel? :confused:

No way… we can’t turn our backs for one second. They might never do anything against us…..but can we take the chance, are we positive nothing will ever happen?

Look who Bush selected to offer the opening prayer………..he sure got that wrong and I am positive he got this one wrong too.

What surprises me however is the fact that the libs and the Democrats seem to be against this sale. I would have guessed they would have applauded Bush. They say Islam is peaceful, Iraq did nothing to deserve the war, we shouldn’t wiretap….no one is guilty……..so why would they deny this sale to people who have done nothing to us? Hmmmm Seems to me it’s a double standard in their thinking.

Saboteur said, “If a biological or chemical weapon comes through one of those ports I'll come looking for you.”

I am NOT FOR THE SALE BUT…. playing devils advocate here, what did they ever do to us that would make us deny them the sale?
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
The problem concerning our relations with the Arab world is an old one. The royal families are portrayed as friends and alies to the US and perhaps they are. However the people of the Arab world do not have the same feelings towards the US as the Arab Royal families and why should they? They don't benefit from good relations with us the way the Royal families do. At the same time the Royal families walk the line of being our friend while at the same time making it appear to their own people that they are not REALLY our friends in order for the Royal families to somewhat appease the people and remain in control. Imagine what will happen if these royal families start loosing control over there?

Obviously I stated a very complex situation in very simple terms but I believe that is the root of all our problems. That is why we are friends with Bin Laden's family while he is the most wanted terrorist in the world. Bin Laden has turned his back on his royal family and his intentions are to unite the Muslim world against all the Arab royal families and the US.

Does anyone agree?
 
Last edited:

Captain America

Jedi Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
22,520
Reaction score
12,790
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
WASHINGTON - 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. <snip>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11494815/

:doh

You'd think they would have consulted him about it, no?

 
T

The Real McCoy

talloulou said:
Why? They don't have problems restricting us.

"Investment laws and regulations are evolving in the UAE and are expected to become more conducive to foreign investment. At present, the regulatory and legal framework favors local over foreign investors. There is no national treatment for investors in the UAE, and foreign ownership of land and stocks is restricted."

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/ifd/2005/42194.htm
That's their policy, it's not like they single us out which is what we'd be doing to them by not allowing this deal to go through.
 

Captain America

Jedi Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
22,520
Reaction score
12,790
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The Real McCoy said:
Yea... why?
Good on you McCoy. The Navy rocks!

I wish for you fair winds and following seas mate.

It's not just a job, it's an adventure. True dat. Make some Waves buddy (IF you catch my drift.;) )

Captain America
FC1
USN
 

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The Real McCoy said:
Yea... why?
Well you brought up the Navy and it reminded me that you said you were going and I was just wondering if it was still on your plate. Not sure if you took the oath yst or still had a chance to change your mind that's all. Anyway, cool I am glad you're committed to your decision.:smile:
 

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Perhaps the message the Arab world needs to hear is that even those with peaceful intentions has had their credibility damaged by the actions of the likes of Osama Bin Laden. Maybe he'd mysteriously turn up instead of possibly being granted money and amnisty.
 

Saboteur

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
134
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Captain America said:
WASHINGTON - 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. <snip>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11494815/

:doh

You'd think they would have consulted him about it, no?

Hey the president is busy doing ummmmmmmmmmm.......... stuff?
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
The fact that the Dubai company is "STATE OWNED" makes a big difference. It's not just a regular business deal. We have a more rigorous review process for approving State Owned Foreign companies to operate on our soil. It's not clear that the review board did the in depth lengthly review they're supposed to.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,534
Reaction score
16,308
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Saboteur said:
Despite my love of being called "stupid and biased" I've decided to repost my original question. It's new and improved!:2razz:

Currently, President Bush and his administration have approved the sale and control of 6 U.S. ports to Arab owned Dubai Port World. Congress, including many house republicans, are concerned that doing so would be a threat to national security as our shipping ports are already our weakest link in the chain of defence. They are currently working to block the sale of the port but President Bush says he will veto anything that comes to him that is against the approval of selling the ports to the Arab Co..

I for one don't think that this is a very good idea. We might as well invite Osama and freinds over to visit one of our water resivoirs and let Iran have nuclear weapons. I say this because I know that Saudi Arabia has, as recently as 2004, harbored terrorists and their government has, in the past, granted them amnisty and that Arabs are known to be the biggest financial supporters of terrorism.

Mods may delete previous poll at their leisure.
I do not give a **** what country Dubai Port World company is from,every aspect of an American port should be controlled by Americans only.
 

Inuyasha

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
58
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Before I can really have an opinion there are a few questions I need answers to.

1. What exactly are the duties and the job of DP going to be?

2. Will the employees be American citizens? Even at the executive level?

3. Why are there not American companies seeking this contract?

4. What are the benefits for the US in this?

5. Is this situation commonplace throughout the world? Do we also control ports in other countries in this manner?
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Inuyasha said:
1. What exactly are the duties and the job of DP going to be?
They're going to contract with local labor to manage the day-to-day operations of some of the port terminals. They have nothing to do with port security.

Inuyasha said:
2. Will the employees be American citizens? Even at the executive level?
Most of the dock workers will be American, obviously. At the executive level I'd doubt it...it is, after all, a foreign company.

Inuyasha said:
3. Why are there not American companies seeking this contract?
Because Dubai and Singapore underbid any other possible competitors by a large margin.

Inuyasha said:
4. What are the benefits for the US in this?
Having a well-managed company with the lowest bid do the job it's paid to do...the beauty of capitalism.

Inuyasha said:
5. Is this situation commonplace throughout the world? Do we also control ports in other countries in this manner?
Controlling ports isn't really America's thing, so the answer to your second question is probably no (although I don't know for sure that we don't control ANY).

As for the first question, it's VERY commonplace. Dubai Ports World operates ports in 18 other countries. 30% of American port terminals are operated by foreigners.
 
Top Bottom