Posted on 03/21/2006 6:16:56 PM PST by mr_hammer
Somehow, I have got to shift my thinking around to consider that you know more about than CFIUS.
The reality is that you are just another annonymous poster who is eaten up with bad case of dumbass.
well, Kirk Kerkorian did. And Daimler bought Chrysler.
You have noticed, of course, I'm pulling my punches to avoid letting them embarrass themselves.
Sorry, I forgot to add the phrase "perpetual kiss-ass" to my previous list of descriptive terms.
Carry on.
right, all the CFIUS career beauracrat members are in Mensa - but I am an idiot for asking some basic questions.
Given our experience with Germany over the last 100 years (our REPEATED experience), don't you think that's a tad risky?
Your list of no-ownems is very vague. What is core telecommunications? Dish Network?
The Chicoms already own what UAE can't own.
I am just commenting on how Americans feel about Arabs right now. I know people from the Emirates. They are by far the most Western/moderate of all Muslims in the world, and remarkable businessmen. I agree it is unfair how China gets a total pass, even though they are clearly a future rival/enemy who is undermining us in Latin America even as we speak. But Americans are still angry at the Arabs for 9/11. And my point is that the administration does not seem to "get" this at all, which I find remarkable.
Will the threat be because the UAE would own this facilty in the US or because they would own a facility in Sheffield?
Ad-hominems of the type you have resorted to are the refuge of a loser.
Your hysterics both undermine your position, and belie your motivations. Project much?
Also; the straw-man argument in reference to the Chi-Coms doesn't hold water. Most here are equally opposed to their involvement in strategic infrastructure, security enterprises, and defense technology. Try a new tack. You're headed for the rocks again.
No, the administration "gets it" more than you know.
They just don't blame all Arabs for 9/11 as the ignoramuses do.
But should they "own" it? Can they be trusted with its stewardship? Can Nigeria? I am not so sure. Until 1918, the Turks ruled all of Arabia. We and the British gave them all independence and control over the oil, which we also developed for them. If the Western powers determine the Arabs (and others) can no longer be trusted to own the oil under their lands, we may well be justified in taking that ownership away from them, and putting it in trust of a "quartet" of U.S., E.U., China and Russia, to release to the open market safely and without interference.
The administration lacks the cajones to get the point across...
same argument as I would apply to 'our' border with mexico.
(Except that the administration 'gets it' but refuses to act on it...)
Three decades ago the EEC-the predecessor to the current EU-and the majority of continental Europe-decided that it was in the best interests of their countrymen to acquiesce to Arab-Muslim demands, diplomatically, politically, and economically.
They believed that integrating with the Arab-Muslim Middle East in every conceivable way-and distancing themselves from the United States and Israel by being as hostile to us as they were receptive to the Arab Middle East-was in their best interests.
Not the best interests of Europeans mind you, but in the best interests of the Euro elites that have gradually, but inexorably, supplanted democratic, republican rule.
I happen to think that this was a colossal blunder-surrendering the soul of Judeo-Christian Europe for the allegorical mess of pottage-but that was their decision.
My point is that the United States-which has already emulated Europe's disastrous example to a disturbing degree-should not continue down this primrose path.
A stable oil supply is not worth selling our sovereignty.
A prosperous economy is worthless if it is controlled by people whose values are inimical to our own.
Peace at all costs is not a good strategy to follow, IMHO.
yes, this story has some up before - during the ports deal, this was on the CFIUS list too.
again, if CFIUS was doing its job - what it would be doing here is asking DoD if this company was a sole source supplier for critical components, what those components were, where they came from, whether they could be replaced by an alternative. just for starters.
the US is going to have problems in this area shortly (generally), with respect to semiconductors. so much of it is moving to china, that at some point, DoD is going to have to maintain portions of it as a "cottage industry" in the US - unless we all feel comfortable that without chinese parts, we can't build planes or missiles or laser guided munitions.
You're one to talk.
I'm busting a gut over that one!
Most of the huff-and-puffers on this site weren't even aware of COSCO's role in 14 ports on the West Coast, or that it had been in that role for nearly ten years!
You guys hide behind every transparently phony excuse you can think of.
One of your fellow travelers gave the game away in a post up thread.
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.