Elaine: "You know, admitting another man is attractive doesn't mean you're gay."
George: "It doesn't help."
Having a foreign-government-owned or partially foreign-government-owned company anywhere near the controls of a major part of American infrastructure does not sit well with this conservative. It's especially unsettling when the governments involved (or its population) is hostile to the West in general, or to America specifically.
I didn't like it when COSCO took over in Long Beach, and I don't like this company taking over now. That there are no American companies willing to take on this business because they can be more profitable doing other things is not an argument for foreign companies to manage our ports---it's simply further proof that capitalists of any nationality are in business to make money. No capitalist is going to take on this sort of business, and lose money, because of altruism.
"No capitalist is going to take on this sort of business, and lose money, because of altruism."
Why could an American company not take on this contract and be profitable? Just seems like another move to help bolster an Islamist nation's economy. We're already doing plenty of that in the crude import biz, IMHO.
No capitalist is going to take on this sort of business, and lose money, because they have a suicidal tendency to spread Islamist Jihad.