Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

After a few days of fact finding and debate, do you now support or oppose the Dubai Ports deal?
FR Poll ^

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


TOPICS: Announcements; Free Republic; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dubai; ports; uae
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 541 next last
To: Jim Robinson

Support! In fact, foreign owners already run those ports. Anytime the MSM is against something, I am for it! We all know on what side the MSM is on, and it is not for our Country or our President.

UAE has done more for our Country than any of our normal so called friends in the world. We all scream innocent until proven guilty, why not give the UAE the same benefit of dought we give all others when dealing the same in the same business deals.

The security will NOT change, and have in fact, been increased over the deal. What more do we want? Americans will still be in charge of the security, and Americans will still be doing the same work as they now are doing. Nothing will change, except the businessmen now in charge of operations.


21 posted on 02/24/2006 12:27:23 PM PST by standing united (82nd ABN 1/508th BN Bco 1st Sqd. Alpha Fireteam Leader: "fury from the sky" 8-Duce on the Loose!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Support.

I also support making Michelle Malkin write "I will not engage in rhetorical hyperbole that is contrary to fact" 1,000,000 times on the blackboard after class.


22 posted on 02/24/2006 12:27:26 PM PST by BeHoldAPaleHorse (Tagline deleted at request of moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Perturbed the first day, sanguine thereafter.

Support.


23 posted on 02/24/2006 12:27:34 PM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Support, but needed to find out the facts. Besides, it is now clear that the dems could truly care the less who owns the ports and are only doing this to try to appear like National Security hawks.


24 posted on 02/24/2006 12:27:43 PM PST by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Support.


25 posted on 02/24/2006 12:27:56 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I do not oppose.

Support is a strong word, since pretty much anyone would prefer to see an American firm get the business.

But I'm not against a legitimate business transaction.

26 posted on 02/24/2006 12:28:12 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Support

Nothing will be any different from the current situation.

27 posted on 02/24/2006 12:28:14 PM PST by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Oppose. There are things, like crucial infrastructure and major military contractors, which should be off-limits to all but [maybe] the most trusted allies - and even then these allies could be allowed only minority interest. If one is to substitute "Lockheed Martin", "Newport News shipyard" or the "Pantex nuclear explosives plant" for the ports in question, the same meaning would be thrown into more stark relief.
28 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:19 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Oppose.
Although Democrats' sudden "terror-warrior" stance keeps making me want to change my mind.
God, I hate being on the same side of an issue as those imbeciles, even if their opposition is the height of hypocrisy. These same scumbags who don't want us to "surveill" al-Qaeda all of a sudden are concerned about security?


29 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:39 PM PST by threeleftsmakearight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Support. Nothing new in this deal; it's been happening a long time - and not just with our ports. Bush isn't selling security to the highest bidder.


30 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:45 PM PST by loreldan (Lincoln, Reagan, & G. W. Bush - the cure for Democrat lunacy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

oppose:
mainly because i belive that america should be ran by america
not by a bunch of foreigners
people in the u.s. need jobs
give it to them
we need to help our own people
before we start just giving things away


31 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:52 PM PST by ziggy_dlo (definition of treason: picture of albore right next to it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Oppose, and I also oppose China running ports, so my vote isn't just about Dubai.

I know the ports are primarily, if not entirely, American worker operated, but the foreign influence of a port still exists.


32 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:53 PM PST by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Oppose, but only because I would oppose any foreign company operating our strategic ports.
If the choice is UAE or the English - I don't think it matters. UAE is a different group of folks than our enemies.

GE
33 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:53 PM PST by GrandEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I'm OK with it.


34 posted on 02/24/2006 12:29:58 PM PST by Rakkasan1 (Muslims pray to Allah, Allah prays to Chuck Norris.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

It's a PR mess.

I support it.


35 posted on 02/24/2006 12:30:20 PM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Hillary is against it. Jimmy Carter is for it. Does... not... compute... I wonder if even W.O.P.R. could come to a conclusion on this one... LOL! Still undecided. There are good arguments on both sides.
36 posted on 02/24/2006 12:30:32 PM PST by dfwright (The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left (Eccl. 10:2, NIV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

SUPPORT!

Leary at first. But, not now.


37 posted on 02/24/2006 12:30:34 PM PST by SomeCallMeTim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Support


38 posted on 02/24/2006 12:30:40 PM PST by River_Wrangler (Nothing difficult is ever easy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I have no problem with this transaction. If something gets into this country it will not be because of the simple fact of Dubai's involvement with this company. Maybe the argument could be made that we will more closely scrutinize port security, but then we would just go ahead and do that in full view of the world, followed by shrieking about weaknesses, real and imagined, and then a demand for more spending and that would be foolish.


39 posted on 02/24/2006 12:30:50 PM PST by Bahbah (An admitted Snow Flake and a member of Sam's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Support.

The Brits are simply doing business.


40 posted on 02/24/2006 12:31:12 PM PST by Glenn (There is a looming Tupperware shortage. Plan appropriately.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 541 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson