Posted on 03/16/2006 5:02:26 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
In retrospect, America went collectively insane over the possibility that a company owned by Dubai's government would operate several of our ports.
Rarely has reason been so routed by pure emotion. Dubai is a Westernizing state that long ago left the eighth century and accepts the modern world of globalized commerce and finance. This member of the United Arab Emirates has -- especially after Sept. 11 -- passed on intelligence, hosted our fleet and provided a foothold in the gulf near Iraq and Iran.
For a country that is addicted to imported petroleum, hooked on cheap imported goods and eager for illegal-alien labor, and which has hundreds of military bases abroad, it is a little late to worry about dangerous foreign ganglia.
. . . the Dubai port deal shows how at odds are American perceptions and reality. For the past half-century, we have been living in a complex interconnected world of mutual reliance.
Soon we will import more food than we grow. We already burn more oil than we pump. For years we have bought more than we export, and we borrow far more than we lend. To justify these precarious dependencies, America assures foreign business leaders, investors and lenders that our markets remain open and immune to the distortions of xenophobia and provincialism.
Americans may not like that devil's bargain, but it was made long ago and, for better or worse, we are long past being an agrarian republic.
The resulting singular affluence of the American consumer derives from just these trade-offs in our autonomy -- and the trust we receive from those who loan and sell us things we cannot immediately pay for. So rejecting the Dubai port deal is not only hypocritical, but in the end dumb.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
The R party seems to have just cut it's own throat. Just when they had it all. In an attempt to pander to a public fear.
But there's no chance they'll gain D voters. We all know that. And now they've alienated Bush supporters.
Should be an interesting fall.
All our allies have to be vetted by you, now? When did this start?
Spain was a US ally during the Cold War. Fascist dictator Franco didn't institute many democratic reforms.
The Soviet Union was a US ally in WWII. Communist dictator Stalin didn't institute many democratic reforms.
Since the UAE is the ONLY deep water port big enough to take our aircraft carriers, we'd ALL better hope the ports deal does not impact that at least.
Not just ignorant of current events, this group we are fighting.
Or the result of an uninformed public.
You're obviously against the deal so tell me, should the US Navy cancel it's contracts with a Dubai owned company to service our ships? Should we shut down the UAE owned passenger and cargo terminals at JFK?
Nice piece, but beyond the playing nice with a loyal Arab nation he missed this important nuance.
The president has to walk a narrow line between 1) convincing the Muslim world that this is a War on Terror as opposed to a War on Islam and 2) maintaining national security. On this issue he was really in a Catch-22, since he really couldn't explain this logic publicly for fear of showing his hand to the Muslim world- This ultimately is a War on Islam.
The west cannot afford to fight 1.2 billion Muslims now, so the best hope is to "divide and conquer" ala Julius Caesar vs. the Celts in the 1st century BC and many others since then. To that end, the president is currently going after the more radical elements of Islam (terrorists) with the WOT with the hope of westernizing future generations of Muslims given the time and access to do so. In the mean time he tries to encourage the more moderate Islamic nations (like UAE) and treating them fairly in trade is one way to do that.
This strategy is truly our only hope unless we're prepared to engage in mass genocide. You have undoubtedly noted how easy it is to rally the relatively uneducated Muslim masses into a violent frenzy over the silly cartoon issue and I expect they would do far worse if they knew the west were engaged in a War on Islam. The Muslim culture is not easily assimilated into a western society, so this will be a supremely difficult challenge. If we can't figure out how to do it, we're doomed to death by submission, dhimmitude (as we're seeing indications of in Europe), or a lot of innocent blood on our hands.
Finally, the RATS saw an opportunity to play political chicken with an issue prior to the midterm election and got most pubbies to play along. As this blog points out "Follow the money and you'll find the truth." Click here!
Schumer is more of a danger to our nation than a bunch of UAE managed ports.
They have a hard time accepting that a lynch mob is the perfect example of the will of the majority in action.
Polling results of lynch mobs are overwhelmingly in favor of hanging the guy. Those opposed number in the single digits.
Your point illustrates perfectly that you don't understand this.
Control of the terminals just means that you control the unloading of stuff at that terminal. You don't control what enters the port in the first place, because its obviously been loaded overseas.
So now this ship with a nuke hidden on board comes steaming into New York Harbor, and detonates. That's your scenario, right?
At that point, does who is unloading the ships even matter? At all?
I'm a bit torn about this. We're told that Dubai already has a terminal in Miami.
Should we run them out?
Back about 1997, X42 gave a generous terminal deal to the ChiComs on the grounds of the de-commissioned Long Beach Naval Base.
How come no brouhaha over that?
Not that I'm in favor of either, but doncha think that the idiotic democRATs looks a little silly with their inconsistency?
Hell, many HERE still refer to the issue as "handing the arabs the "port" security, when it was never ports nor security!
No sillier than the idiots posing as republicans. Peter King and Duncan Hunter appealed to the emotions of people who don't have a clue...and I hope it comes back to bite them in the @ss. While they're posturing over security of our ports and the evil DP World "controlling" infrastructure, they've been silent as church mice about the other 80% of port operations owned by foreign companies.
They rationalize their treachery with poll numbers and compalints about the Mexican border.
A candid few will admit to changing their minds once they educated themselves on the subject. The vast majority will remain ignorant and opposed and resentful of anybody pointing out their ignorance.
After four and a half years of successful leadership the president had a right to expect more loyalty than he got.
I used to be, for most of my adult life.
Now I have to describe myself as an America First! nationalist conservative.
That's because the GOP has morphed into something that no longer represents my interests.
I guess that's why you're changing it's name to the "R" party...
LOL! What a pathetic display of revisionist doublespeak!
July 4th 1776
LOL - so, I'm surious, were Franco and Stalin "acceptable" as allies to you?
No.
surious = seriously curious ; )
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.