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

Skip to comments.

ABU DHABI SHIPBUILDING COMPLETES ITS FIRST U.S. NAVY SHIP REPAIR CONTRACT (UAE)
Northrop Grumman ^ | June 24, 1997 | Jerri Fuller Dickseski

Posted on 02/22/2006 11:23:59 PM PST by demlosers

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 last
To: cva66snipe
Some of us prefer erroring on the side of caution and remember mistakes of the past. Others simply think oh well things happen I guess.

Yeah, sadly so. I expect more from conservative types however. Thanks.

81 posted on 02/23/2006 3:41:27 PM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
ADSB received the contract from Newport News Shipbuilding (NYSE: NNS), Newport News, Virginia, USA, a major shareholder in ADSB.

Imagine that!

82 posted on 02/23/2006 3:44:07 PM PST by operation clinton cleanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jess35
I thought of that as well but quickly discarded it. I'd say former Brit owners had the same likelyhood of infiltration....given their PC "must kiss terrorist butt" general attitudes, as this particular company.

If they want to kill us, there are easier and far cheaper ways. This is about making money, that's all.

Yes, that's why I said it's "negligible". Either way this "Portgate" goes, letting DPW run the US terminals, or they do not, inherently the ports will neither be more safe or less safe.

If DPW wanted to attack the US through the shipping industry, they probably could come up with an inside job since they do know the business - a lot cheaper than $6.8 billion

83 posted on 02/23/2006 3:49:10 PM PST by demlosers (Kerry: "Impeach Bush, filibuster Alito, withdraw from Iraq, send U235 to Iran, elect me President!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: All
The “hauling up” ceremony for the Enlisted Surface Warfare Specialist (ESWS) and Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist (EAWS) pennants occurred shortly after Vinson moored pierside in the United Arab Emirates’ port of Jebel Ali near the city of Dubai.

I want to clarify something on the CARL VINSON mooring pier side at Jebel Ali. IF an emergency had occurred the ship would not have been able to get underway out of port right then and there on it's own power. Meaning tugs are required.

The advantage defense wise for anchoring off shore is the immediate within two minutes time to have the ship actually moving underway and completely on it's own power & steering with no help needed. A carrier can do it I saw mine do it in 1977 anchored off the coast of Yugoslavia. The deck houses and anchor was being hoisted the same time the screws were being engaged.

One last point if anyone thinks MARDET would have provided security, MARDET was eliminated I believe sometime in the early to mid 1990's from the carriers. MARDET means Marine Detachment which was the carriers security force used to repel boarders and threats to the ship.

84 posted on 02/23/2006 4:04:11 PM PST by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: jess35

I guess it will be OK for their employees at the ports to be potential terrorists. Some of these ports have huge military shipments. It's a question of Murphy's Law. And no, unlike President Bush, I don't regard the UAE as an equivalent ally to Britain.


85 posted on 02/23/2006 8:53:44 PM PST by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: sheik yerbouty
Terrorists could infiltrate a British company just as easily as they could infiltrate a UAE company. Do you really think they need to spend 6 Billion dollars just to get terrorists in our country? For the price of a plane ticket and a few hundred for a coyote, they can get a terrorist into the country and to ANY port through Mexico.

This deal is going to make our ports safer. DP World is going to increase already existing company security. They've agreed to more extensive container checks. They have agreed to go above and beyond what the Brits did. Let's go back to that 6 billion figure. How many terrorist attacks could they launch with that amount of money? How many tankers could they load with explosives and destroy each and every one of our ports with that kind of money?

Y'all just aren't making any sense on this issue.

86 posted on 02/23/2006 10:52:44 PM PST by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

Yemen does not border the UAE. It borders Oman and Saudi Arabia


87 posted on 02/23/2006 11:36:53 PM PST by weegie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: weegie
Yemen does not border the UAE. It borders Oman and Saudi Arabia

Thanks,Your right but the point is still the same. Under the current threat levels we do not need to be doing U.S. Naval yard work over there. A shipyard is where a ship is most vulnerable both to attack and the compromising of classified material which includes some equipment.

88 posted on 02/23/2006 11:56:54 PM PST by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 last

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.

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