granted the terms are mixed, but the point is one of hypocrisy. We don't want China to own our oil companies; we don't want the French to tell us how to deal with terrorists; we don't want the UN to mess in our affairs; we want to protect our homeland. But then the administration, although we control the security, gives the control of the ports (management) to Dubai, who has allowed terrorists to pass through its borders, and funded terrorist organizations. The Bush administration is essentially proving Michael Moore's point. I am sure other more reputable allies in the war on terror would be available.
LOL, oh my...
Bleep wrote:
"granted the terms are mixed, but the point is one of hypocrisy. We don't want China to own our oil companies; we don't want the French to tell us how to deal with terrorists; we don't want the UN to mess in our affairs; we want to protect our homeland. But then the administration, although we control the security, gives the control of the ports (management) to Dubai, who has allowed terrorists to pass through its borders, and funded terrorist organizations. The Bush administration is essentially proving Michael Moore's point. I am sure other more reputable allies in the war on terror would be available."
When did the Bush admistration suggest that "a twinkie an hour" was a good idea?
In a perfect world? Sure.
In this world? The President has to work with who and what he's got.
Dubai is the expert in this type of port coordination. They have worked with our military for some time. I guess they're good enough for our brave heroes but not good enough for us? Wow, that's some message to the troops!
I guess we expect the President to just sit there and sulk and only deal with all the perfect democracies in the Middle East. Sorry to break it to you, but the President doesn't have that choice; he has to play the hand he's dealt, and make the best of it. That's what he's doing--engaging on the level he can. The alternative is to not deal with anyone in the region, and then people will be bitching that he's not making any inroads into the Middle East.
I just thank God the adults are in charge.
The Chinese-state company, COSCO, wants to help manage our terminals.
They're the shippers who carried smuggled arms into the US, and, later, got preferential treatment from the Clintons (our dual presidents).
Get over it. Terrorists are bad people and sometimes the good guys are not responsible for them.
On the other hand, we are talking about CHUMPCHANGE when it comes to shipping.
The Port of New York has hundreds of terminals of the sort UAE's company was going to buy. This is for 22 similar terminals at 6 different ports.
There's only $8 billion at stake. The total investment in terminals in the United States is at least a trillion dollars, or a thousand times as much.
They don't even own the terminals ( warehouses ) they manage; they lease them. The ports, themselves, are OWNED by the states and cities where they are located.
If one was to use your description of Dubai and substitute America, it would be just as true; as far as it goes.