[AirBorn]

This " issue " at first has a Knee-Jerk reaction to it--but if everyone takes the time to digest-and research this Issue--you will see things in a different light and ( as I am sure any other intelligent-worldy-wise-and Economically World-Experienced and Commerce people already know ) realize later how much complicated it is to fully explain this--and how complicated it is to explain President Bush's Reasons for supporting this.

I may not approve of his handling of this and it's presentation to the American people 9 harriot Myers Syndrome )--or his Too strong threats of support for this--but in the long run--after the 20 or so items entailed in this-I think it should be put through--but with alot more safe-gaurds.

Listen to RUSH LIMBAUGHS's earlier show today too--he touches on some of the issues that are at the MEAT of this issue.

DAB

p.s.--I work for an import/export MAJOR corp too--there's alot more here than meets the eye!

p.s.s. President Bush should have made his FIRST Veto over Mexico and against AID to North Korean Food Aid!! if anything at all!

[jonrick46]

I am with you. The knee-jerks have chased another rabbit down the rabbit hole. The reality is that we are bringing an Arab country in partnership with the security of our port system. This comes when the United Arab Emirates invests billions in the ownership component of the partnership. They will have a huge stake in the security of their holdings and that means the best possible situation for America's security. The UAE is also uniquely positioned to help with the War on Terror given their connections in the Arab world. What you have is an ally who has an economic interest in one of the more vulnerable parts of our economy: our port system. This was made even more apparent with Katrina.

The United Arab Emirates would be the last to let someone sabotage a port facility if it meant the loss of billions of dollars. Why do the conservatives have a hard time understanding this simple point?