Posted on 02/24/2006 12:20:23 PM PST by Jim Robinson
FR Poll: After a few days of fact finding and debate, do you now support or oppose the Dubai Ports deal?
Support
Oppose
Undecided
Support and always have
Support.
BTW, it's always been that many. It's just the opponents when they originally screamed kept saying "6", and it stuck. More misinformation. That information about the company has been on its web site all along, there is no mystery in this company as it is publicly traded.
Even the buyout is public, since it has to be for stockholders to determine whether to sell their stock or not.
Of course, operations information is not public, just the contract for purchase.
I've noticed that among the opposition, a lot of people say they want the "contracts" to be sold to halliburton, or a u.s. contractor. Hopefully they are just using shorthand, and understand that the "contracts" are not currently being offered for sale, they were sold in 2000. What is being sold is the company that OWNS the contracts, and the issue is whether we allow the current owner to transfer rights and responsibilities to a new company.
Also, a lot of opponents oppose because they want the ports to be american-owned. If there was an actual choice between DP World and an american company, I would vote for the american company. But their isn't. There isn't even a "choice" between DP World and the existing company, since DP World is BUYING the existing company in any case.
I wouldn't be surprised if in the end DP World doesn't simply extend this "no operational control" offer they made buy setting up a U.S. board to give a little more "independence" to the U.S. operator which currently manages the holdings of the P&O company in our country. I'm not saying they will, or they should, just I could see that as an easy way out for them at least for the next couple of years or until after the election.
I "support" the deal, in the sense that I support allowing one foreign company's stockholders to sell their company to another company -- so in fact what I support is the process by which the administration determined that there is no security concerns.
Our country has no responsibility to "approve" the deal or not, that was a stockholder decision. We were to evaluate security, so my answer is that I believe the people who are responsible for protecting us did their jobs, and trust their judgment.
Oppose.
Although I do not believe the UAE business people themselves have malevolent intentions.
It may well be that security of the ports will be unchanged with the Dubai ownership, but the PERCEPTION among the American people is that we are taking an unnecessary risk. In politics, perception, not necessarily reality, is what matters. I'm amazed that the White House is so tone-deaf on this.
I oppose this deal because this is not a private company, but a government owned company and although it may be friendly to us today, that part of the region seems extremely vulnerable to extremist Islamist elements taking it over.
I oppose this deal also because of how it was attempted to be rammed down everyone's throats. I see nothing wrong with a 45 day review with all the facts on the table.
What about Jimmy Carter's strong support of it?
Too bad far too many conservatives are blind to the fact that the Party of Treason/Treason Media NEVER tell the truth. Glad you use the same evaluative procedure as I and immediately assume it is a Dan RAther special.
Support.
Oppose...because it was done in secret, okayed only by the Cabinet heads, and because they lied when they said it was only 6 ports. Today we found out it is 21 ports. Wonder what it will be tomorrow.
Support.
Oppose - it just doesn't make sense and bowing to the altar of free trade seems a lot to me like bowing to the altar of PC.
On the other side of the coin I remember the late '80s when the Japanese were buying up real estate right and left and the fear was that in time the Japanese would own us lock, stock and barrel. Not only did that not happen but it turns out they lost their shirt as well as their economy. So I realize that the world will, in all likliehood, not stop spinning if this deal goes through, but I'll stick with what I said up top.
You opposed because of control, but then said you heard (and apparently believed) that we actually keep control of the ports and are just leasing them.
But that is exactly true in this case as well. We own the ports, and signed LEASE agreements with P&O. Now P&O stockholders want to sell to DP World, and our government is simply trying to rule on whether that sale effects our port security. DP World will have leases to ports that we own and control. We will have security, not them. They will have to follow our rules, will have to submit to our security procedures. Their people will have to go through our background checks, they will have to keep the same records as everyone else.
So the UAE, or DP World, will not control our ports if this deal goes through.
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.