Posted on 02/22/2006 1:39:33 PM PST by Nasty McPhilthy
Okay, first let’s get a couple of facts straight.
First there is NO American corporation capable of operating our ports. The London based company that was doing this job, Britain’s Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. was one of a very few capable of doing it.
Second, the President has no authority to prevent the sale of British P & O to the Dubai State owned corporation, Dubai Ports World. This is a private business deal. However, the President and his administration do have the power to terminate the contracts with this private corporation to operate our ports.
Sometimes good policy is bad politics and when that is true politics will always win out. In my opinion, the President should delay approval of the deal and call for Congressional hearings and recommendations for a solution to this dilemma.
Given that choice, then the question remains, who’s going to run them? Port operations is a highly specialized endeavor and American industry cannot afford to wait for a new company to come up to speed. The same argument holds for Senator “Microphone Moth” Schumer’s suggestion of using the TSA solution (true to his nickname, he was the first to pop up in front of a microphone to protest this sale). How long will it take for a federal organization to hire and train the necessary employees and get the whole operation up to speed?
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want another federal bureaucracy operating facilities which ought to be run by private companies. Haven’t we learned anything from the USPS, Amtrak, and FEMA? Senator Chucky’s dream deal might be a socialist state, but it’s not mine. If you liked FEMA’s handling of the Katrina disaster, just wait till you see “Hurricane Harbor.”
Do we hire Haliburton to perform this function? They are probably the only American Corporation capable of taking up this function, but would require some time before they had that expertise. Besides, I can hear the Liberals howling now…“Cheney’s rich buddies…”…“Bush’s oil field friends enriching themselves…”…“A plot by Rove to get Haliburton another lucrative contract…” I can hardly wait.
By the same token Mr. President:
How can you be SO tone deaf? Did you really not expect this kind of reaction? Are you truly so out of touch with public opinion? Have you no clue what the American people feel about the Middle East?
Tuesday you stated:
“I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a . . . British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, ‘We’ll treat you fairly.’”
The answer, Mr. President, is that they ARE different. September 11, 2001 changed ALL dynamics with respect to the Middle East. I am astounded that you of all people don’t understand this. The enemy we are fighting DOES have an Arab face.
If 9-11 changed the dynamics, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with the deaths of over 2200 American servicemen and women have cast those changes in concrete. For you not to understand that is a disturbing fact.
I am fully aware that you don’t pay attention to the public opinion polls in making your decisions, and I am in full agreement with that attitude. It worked well for President Reagan and it has, for the most part, worked well for you. Such a philosophy leads to stability in governmental policy compared, for example, to President Clinton’s “finger in the wind” policy. However, there is a difference between independence, which is good, and obtuseness which is destructive.
What are you thinking, Mr. President? After five years you are finally going to use your veto on this? After years of profligate spending bills, only now you are going to use your veto pen?
You need to consider the debt you owe to the Republican Party. I am aware that you have no further political aspirations, but you owe your fellow Republicans some consideration. This may be a business winner, but it is a political loser.
Please wake up. This is not a time for you to stick to your guns. You owe the American people some deference to their feelings on this issue. Even worse, you have provided your political opponents, and those of all Republicans, a ready made issue in this election year.
Mr. President, Lindsey Graham described you as “tone-deaf.” I would describe this decision as your being blind, deaf, and dumb.
Political correctness is preventing our security people from doing their jobs more efficiently by outlawing “profiling.” Now you are allowing your desire to demonstrate your equanimity toward Middle Eastern nations to affect our entire nation’s peace of mind and potentially our security.
I have been an ardent supporter of yours on most issues, but on this issue you are wrong. It is time for you to reconsider and relent. There is nothing in this entire imbroglio that will suffer from a reasonable delay to allow Congress to investigate it.
It would be better, in this case, for America to proceed with a consensus opinion rather that one made unilaterally by your administration.
As for you hyperventilating opponents:
Take a breath, please. Take time to consider what I have stated above, our alternatives in this case are very limited. There are currently no American alternatives to Dubai Ports World. It is easy to criticize the administration on this, but criticism is pointless without a viable alternative, so don’t just whine, offer a solution.
I already know the Microphone Moth’s solution, a new federal bureaucracy like the marginally functional TSA. Do we really want another bureaucratic boondoggle on our hands? I know I don’t.
I also know this, if I were on the Halliburton’s board of directors, I would get my lobbyists activated, and put a team of experts together and come up with a strong port operations proposal immediately.
Who ya gonna call? Port Busters!
And, of course, Citibank has some rather large Saudi investors in itself. Incestuous little world. Will be nice if some scientist can discover a way for us to get away from an oil-based world.
Your point is?
The question was how the UAE/Dubai feel about Israel, not how Joe L. feels about Dubai/UAE.
I'm sure there is, but if you have a family sometimes the pride aside you'll do what you have to. Within legal means of course.
I already posted above that the royal family in Dubai does not like Israel - if that's some litmus test to base foreign policy decisions on, then I think Senator Lieberman's opinion is just as important.
You're welcome - you will note that the press release is dated 11/29/05 - this has never been a big secret, even if most FReepers didn't know about it.
What American corporation is in the business?
SSA Marine, for one - see above thread.
I am amazed that they think their image is so good as to not raise plenty of red flags.
Either they think Americans are truly stupid...or they are truly naive.
See my post #75 - in addition, SSA Marine operates ports in Mexico, Panama, and Chili - and someone else posted they are going to run the Umm Qasr port in Iraq. That being said, I have two points:
1) Shutting down the P&O sale will have ripple effects, including, I am sure, retaliation against SSA Marine in Mexico, Panama, and Chili.
2) SSA Marine did not bid and/or cannot raise $7 billion for P&O.
SSA Marine the world's largest privately held cargo terminal operator and cargo handling company, and the Port of Seattle have joined together to enter into a deal for nearly one million gallons of biodiesel annually beginning in 2006 by converting their entire vehicle fleet to run on Washington-produced biodiesel.
I agree their PR departments should have planned for this better, but it is what it is - there's no way Bush is backing down from this now.
True, but there are lots of ways to defer those taxes, and they get credit for income taxes they actually pay to non-US jurisdictions. The bottom line is that it ain't the US tax system that has brought about this state of affairs; it's the notion that it's OK to outsource just about anything. Let's hope this becomes a teachable moment.
SOMEONE at Citibank should have guessed that too, I agree.
There are probably lots of reasons why DWP is better suited to runs these ports than SSA Marine.
You agree that you said the family "does not like" Israel.
I provided the hard information that the _country_ does not _recognize_ Israel.
Senator Lieberman's views are a red herring.
Size of firm, probably. There might be an American corporation in the business even though SSA Marine is not a public corporation: there may be others that are corporations.
I have not come across any others - Halliburton actually builds ports, but does not run any - definitely none I know of that can take over 7 U.S. ports on March 2nd.
What would a company have to have by way of $ value to undertake this contract? $2 billion? That's how it works in business, in the oil pipeline business for example. The TransAlaska Natural Gas Pipeline contract required the successful bidder to have an interest, either ownership of proven gas reserves or company capital, of several $ billion just to bid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.