Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Echo Talon

Yes, that's my entire point. Most of FR doesn't understand this: they think the UAE will be directly running the security at these ports--they won't be.

I've been trying to drill that point into a few people's heads, with varying degrees of success.


27 posted on 02/21/2006 9:20:16 PM PST by Terpfen (72-25: The Democrats mounted a failibuster!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Terpfen

Don't bother. The MSM and everyone else running against it has the UAE putting their own people in security at the ports by their own standard. Both of which are crap. This is bigotry pure and simple. Not only that its a setback for us trying to strenghthen ties with the more moderate forces of Islam like the UAE (why do you think Bush is so strong against voiding the deal). London was bombed by people from England so having an english company is no safer. The government of the UAE doesn't support terrorism. Even the Clinton administration held they were serious about counter terrorism. And quite franly if you're going to deliver a bomb by ship why pay 6.8 BILLION when you can maybe pay 6 million to get a few cruise missles from Russia or France, load them onto a freighter, get it within a few hundred miles of the coast and launch away? This plays right into Al-Qaeda's hands.


28 posted on 02/21/2006 9:36:15 PM PST by zaggs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson