Thank You, Dubai Ports

Publiuspundit.com ^ | 6/20/06 | A.M. Mora y Leon

[Valin]

Remember Dubai Ports International?

The first-rate Emirates-based firm that, fair and square, tried to buy the operations of several U.S. ports? They were reviled as terrorists, a public outcry followed and then U.S. Congress stuck its nose into the whole business, baselessly condemning the company for no good reason until they were ignominously forced to withdraw from those plans. It was totally unfair to them, they didn’t deserve that kind of treatment, and it sent an incredibly bad message to the rest of the world that the U.S. was flamingly hypocritical. That whole debacle made me ill.

Anyway, this setback hasn’t driven the good company down. Today, Dubai Ports has gotten a new contract to develop Puerto Callao, in Peru, creating a vibrant container terminal where none existed, so that Peru can export its natural gas reserves and anything else would like to export, and get rich doing it. After all, they’ve got a free trade pact with the U.S., they might as well use it!

This port is extremely critical for Peru’s development and will serve as a beachhead from which Peru can challenge the energy export supremacy of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez and his little Bolivian minime, Evo Morales. From this new port, tons of new energy will flow to the U.S.’s, Mexico’s and Asia’s markets, adding to world supply, driving down the prices, and in the end doing its part to put these dictators out of business.

Thank you, Dubai Ports International.

[CMAC51]

Next I'd love to know how you use a container terminal to export natural gas?

LNG - Liquified Natural Gas

[muawiyah]

Glad you agree. BTW, the Administration, though, has been consistent. Duncan hasn't. There's always a reason for that.

[Valin]

...who had kicked us out of their country.


Source please. That's not the way I remember it.

[Paul Ross]

"Being unable to vet" DOES NOT MEAN "there is a security risk".

Sorry. That is just purely ignorant.

[muawiyah]

No, it's a matter of language and what words mean.

It also has to do with logic.

And we continue to discuss gantry cranes ~ which are a rather small part of the issue once the ship is in the harbor!

[Paul Ross]

Source please. That's not the way I remember it.

Kicking out was not in the open, in a big spat. But it really happened. The withdrawal (really an eviction) from Prince Sultan Air Base was at Saudi "request". Done under cover (diplomatic face-saving) of simply redeployment of our aircraft...[but after we just spent somewhere around a billion dollars building up the damn thing]?

Saudi Base to Close; Ops Center Moves to Qatar. FDCH Regulatory Intelligence Database April 28, 2003. Available online at:
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mth&an=32W3454501378

U.S. Aircraft Leaving Saudi Arabian Airbase. FDCH Regulatory Intelligence Database April 29, 2003. Available online at:
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mth&an=32W0967014044

The following snippets are from these:

"On April 29 2003, Donald Rumsfeld announced that he would be withdrawing US troops from the country stating that the Iraq War no longer required the support. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz had earlier said that the continuing US presence in the kingdom was putting American lives in danger. The announcement came one day after the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) was shifted from Prince Sultan Air Base to Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar."

"U.S. officials transferred control of most portions of Prince Sultan Air Base to Saudi officials at a ceremony on 26 August 2003. The base had been home to about 60,000 US personnel over time. Roughly 4,500 US troops were redeployed from Saudi Arabia to Qatar, leaving a scant 500 in Saudi Arabia, primarily at Eskan Village."

We had been told in no uncertain terms that the Saudi Royal's would not be able to prevent a revolution if we stayed, that we had to lower our "footprint" and get out.

[Paul Ross]

LNG is not containerized. Its bulk transported in one of these:

[Paul Ross]

We have Chicoms running ports left, right and sideways in this country

And do you think that is a good thing? Do you defend it openly?

..yet a hissy fit gets thrown when a business from a nation providing vital logistic support to our military effort wants to invest here.

It turns out that it was really Saudi money backing DPW (kind of a laundering operation)...which was and still is, an arm of the UAE government. A state-owned entity.

[muawiyah]

This business of withdrawing from Saudi had been known since Saddam's first threat to Kuwait.

It was designed to be quite temporary, albeit with some fine buildings that could be moved into or out of at will.

Saudi didn't order out the advisors and contractors providing training to the Saudi army and to the National Guard, so it's not like Americans were ordered out.

[muawiyah]

Turns out every rail line in Europe is state owned. Turns out nearly 100% of all the containers that go through or originate in Europe are handled by state owned rail, and those same rail lines own (or directly mortgage) the containers themselves.

When they show up here they've not been in private hands for a long time.

If they show up at the Port of New York they don't get into NGO hands until they're out there in somebody's parking lot at a shopping center.

State ownership is not, in and of itself, relevant to this particular debate.

[CMAC51]

LNG is not containerized. Its bulk transported in one of these:

Aluminum Now Vol.7 No4 July/August 2005

Great Balls of Gas!

Burgeoning LNG Import Market Bodes Well for Growth in Aluminum Containment Spheres

Slowing U.S. gas production coupled with growing domestic demand is providing an opportunity for manufacturers of the giant aluminum spheres used to transport liquefied natural gas (LNG) from overseas.

The containment spheres are the most popular method for shipping large quantities of LNG across the ocean, and their ranks could swell in the future as LNG receiving facilities are approved for construction in the U.S. and elsewhere. Currently, 40 such facilities are under consideration in the U.S. alone.

[1rudeboy]

FALSE Rule^® in play.

Help Stop Conservative Misinformation

You can join Media Matters for America in the fight against conservative misinformation in the media. We regularly provide action items based on our real-time monitoring of the media and conduct action campaigns to prevent the spread of conservative misinformation.

Thousands of activists like you take advantage of these tools to hold the media accountable for spreading conservative misinformation.

Media Matters for America Presents Top Media Myths and Falsehoods on the Bush Administration's Port Deal.

[Toddsterpatriot]

You don't suppose Paul is David Brock? It would explain a few things.

[Paul Ross]

Containment SPHERES are not the shipping containers alluded to in the concept of a container-handling terminal. Rather decisive and clear difference. Don't let the happenstance coincidental use of "contain" in your little snippet confuse you.

[Paul Ross]

Do you have a substantive issue with any points made?

No? I thought not.

[Paul Ross]

Who the heck is David Brock? Friend of yours?

[1rudeboy]

Do you have a substantive issue with any points made?

Yeah, why do you think we should care what a bunch of leftists say on FR? Substantive enough for you, comrade?

[Paul Ross]

Yeah, why do you think we should care what a bunch of leftists say on FR?

The post I made wasn't from your site, albeit it appears there is some derivative overlap.

Substantive enough for you, comrade?

No. Ad hominems make you stupid. You communists never quit.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

I would have taken it personally.

I had a business deal get derailed by politicians mucking around.

I took it personally. But I didn't get mad.

I got even.

[1rudeboy]

Try this substantive question, instead. Why is it that, whenever a protectionist/isolationist/brigadier/whatever quotes something without attribution, the vast majority of times it's from a leftist source?