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

Skip to comments.

Dubai Ports World to divest itself of all American interests
CNN

Posted on 03/09/2006 10:42:42 AM PST by navysealdad

Dubai Ports Worls to divest itself of all American interests


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: 1ratherkneejerks; 2thankneepads; ahyesweare; allergictoislam; antiamericanbots; aqinfiltration; areyoujerkshappynow; bds; bigotsrus; blameall; blamecongress; blameme; blameyourselves; botsonsuicidewatch; boycottisraelus; bushbotrage; bushbotsbluedresses; byeusnavalports; cantweallgetalong; carrybushwater; cfius; clintonendorsment; conservativeisevil; democrats; dontsellamerica; dowhatbushtellsme; dpworld; dubaiisdisneyworld; dubaiportsworld; embarrassment; everyoneizdumb; frflamewar; gohalliburton; gotoheluae; happyhappyjoyjoy; hystericalbushbots; ignorantrus; iloveusa; imhysterical; infidelsrus; iran; islamophobia; israel; itsdeadjim; koolaid; lifegoeson; locksteppers; minoritycreators; monarchists; moonbats; nationalsecurity; nuclearblackmarket; plentycooledoff; port; portdeal; portgate; ports; republicans; rightwingracecard; screwcongress; seasonschange; sidedwithtaliban; stepandfetchitrush; talibanports; tantrum; thankyoudpw; thankyouuae; theiqofbush; thesunroseagain; theworldisnotending; treatywithiran; uae; uaelovesbigmoney; uaetantrum; usaisgreat; viperpit; wearethetaliban; whathappenedon911; whinerselectdemos
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 861-866 next last
To: Riverman94610

I think you've got a point.

The fact is that a national government has more money and leverage then a private company. we can essentially sell every major port/airport/manufacturing facility to foriegn governments because they can afford it.

It makes sense strategically for them, because they will make money off of the US, and own a vital commercial vein.

Thats why China owns stuff on the western shore etc.

I'm skeptical of any government ownership of anything, whether its the government run schools, tollways, or ports.
Whether it's our government or someone elses.


221 posted on 03/09/2006 11:31:57 AM PST by KOZ.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: al baby
Yes and no, they (individual(s)) will be connected to DWP and it will be issued in individual shares. When American companies merge they'll issue the individual shareholder the primary companies shares at the adjusted value but corporate shares are different which won't apply here. Someone will own some investment from over there for the American company. It's simple on the surface but issuing the shares become a bit more complicated because they have to separate individual from company in order to divest the company.
222 posted on 03/09/2006 11:32:15 AM PST by Wasanother (Terrorist come in many forms but all are RATS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Which begs the question; why is Dubai so interested in obtaining a concern that is NOT a "profit center"?


223 posted on 03/09/2006 11:32:34 AM PST by threeleftsmakearight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: OKIEDOC

"Personally I am glad to see a majority of Americans stand up for something whether I agree with them or not."

huh? The majority of Americans are ignorant and only know what the sound bites at 6:00 feed them. Well done, Americans!

Wonder what they will "stand up for" next?? I can hardly wait!


224 posted on 03/09/2006 11:32:44 AM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman
If it fractures our diplomatic relationship with the UAE it could very well hurt our ability to project our forces into the ME as well as our ability to gather intel there.

And that's it in a nutshell. That's what all the "War on Islam" folks just don't get. Heaven forbid we actually have a bit of strategy. Heaven forbid we actually try to use the Middle East against itself.

This whole thing makes me sick. I thought at least on FR there'd be more rationale than in the general public. I guess when it comes to hysterics, everyone is susceptible, even the "intellectuals".

225 posted on 03/09/2006 11:33:01 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Sounds like Bush picked up the phone and told them it's over and this is their revised plan. I guess this "issue" is off the table now. If Bush was smart he would use this as an opportunity to educate and chastise the Congress about how ignorant they are.


226 posted on 03/09/2006 11:33:12 AM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Quilter
From an article in today's WSJ:

Int he 1970s and 1980s, U.S. flag shipping lines, carring high labor costs and tax and regulatory burdens, faced increasingly tough competition from foreign companies, which employed low-cost Asian crews and operated under flags of convenience from countries with mroe relaxed regulatory and tax policies. Over time, several American companies were bought by foreign owners. In 1997, APL was bought by Singapore's NOL. In 1999, CSX Corp. sold Sea-Land to AP Moller-Maersk, the Copenhagen-based operator of the largest container-shipping network in the world.

The American divestment was driven partly by economics in an industry where margins are historically low. . . .

At the same time, the foreign ship lines were securing leases to operate container terminals in the US and buying terminal-operating companies. West Coast port authorities in particular were eager to lock in the foreign ship lines by leasing them terminals so thatthe ship lines had a reason to stay and were less able to play one port against another to try to get the best deal.

I've learned more than I ever wanted to know about how ports run!

227 posted on 03/09/2006 11:33:43 AM PST by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
...there's a reason no American firm bid on them.

Labor costs? Out-the-wazzoo regulations? Razor-thin profit margins?

228 posted on 03/09/2006 11:33:55 AM PST by HKMk23 (Tengo una remera del Che y no se por que.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman; 1rudeboy
Saudi Arabia and Yemen are also "allies" in the War on Terror as well, but that sure didn't stop those sailors on the U.S.S. Cole from getting killed, or the mostly Saudi hijackers from pulling off 9/11, did it?

Let's get real, these "allies" of ours in the ME aren't really friends, we're allies because we need each other, even though we hate each other's guts.

The government of the UAE may well not harbor nasty intentions towards us, but that isn't the point at all, and it's amazing how many people stubbornly don't get it.

229 posted on 03/09/2006 11:34:56 AM PST by jpl ("We don't negotiate with terrorists, we put them out of business." - Scott McClellan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Echo Talon
"Intel works off cooperation"

Damn right it does. Don't think our military is being allowed to use their ports and bases out of the goodness of their hearts. They are getting something out of the deal. They wanted the ports deal and the American public didn't. For whatever reason that's what it boils down to. Sell 'em a Pizza Hut or a Starbucks or something. In a post 911 world the American public just isn't ready for this deal no matter how many times they are called dumb, stupid, uninformed racists.

230 posted on 03/09/2006 11:35:19 AM PST by blaquebyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Foreign involvement is nothing new [COSCO Chinese gov't co runs terminals]
sfgate.com ^ | February 23, 2006 | Kathleen Pender

Posted on 03/03/2006 1:45:42 PM EST by syriacus
Most terminal operators at U.S. ports are foreign companies and some are owned in part by foreign governments.

APL, which manages terminals in Oakland, Los Angeles, Seattle and Alaska, is owned by the NOL Group, which is majority owned by the Singapore government.

The Chinese government owns part of a company that operates a terminal at the Port of Long Beach.

That company, Cosco Container Lines, a division of China Cosco, caused a stir similar to the current one back in 1998.

Cosco ships had been calling on the Port of Long Beach for many years, using a public terminal. In the late 1990s, it wanted to build its own terminal at the former Long Beach Naval Station, says Howard Finkel, a senior vice president with Cosco.

The deal raised national-security concerns and Congress passed a bill that effectively scuttled it.

A few years later, other tenants at the port vacated space and Cosco was able to build its own terminal, says Art Wong, public information office for the Port of Long Beach.

That terminal is operated by a joint venture between Cosco and a U.S. company, Stevedoring Services of America. "Cosco is the majority lease holder with 51 percent, says Wong.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...

231 posted on 03/09/2006 11:35:20 AM PST by dennisw (Muslim's biggest enemy is the founder of Islam, Muhammad. Muslims are victims of this conman-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

Comment #232 Removed by Moderator

To: teddyballgame

Quite honestly, Bush has to take some responsibility for this mess. He needs to C O M M U N I C A T E with the people who elected him.

I'm over his mis-handling of event after event. Ok, so UAE is an ally - tell us more !!!

Ok, so the war in Iraq is going well - tell us more !!!

I SOOO want to back him up but time after time, everyone one but HIM has to come out to defend things.


233 posted on 03/09/2006 11:36:04 AM PST by Mayflower Sister (DEMOCRAT: THE PARTY OF COWARDS AND TRAITORS, and I almost forgot... BABY KILLERS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: threeleftsmakearight
Which begs the question; why is Dubai so interested in obtaining a concern that is NOT a "profit center"?

I think it turns a profit. My point was that no US Company will buy it unless they think THEY can turn a profit at it.

Business 101.

234 posted on 03/09/2006 11:36:05 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
This is the consequence of our government allowing the take over of our ports by any foreign country in the first place. The government does something crazy and gets itself in a jam, and because of that we are suppose to let it go on and on. The truth is that if we had had a policy of no ports controlled by foreign country's in the first place then none of this would be happening. Nobody would be unhappy. Funny how much of a trap globalism is. We created this Genie and now it controls us.
235 posted on 03/09/2006 11:37:16 AM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blaquebyrd
Damn right it does. Don't think our military is being allowed to use their ports and bases out of the goodness of their hearts. They are getting something out of the deal. They wanted the ports deal and the American public didn't. For whatever reason that's what it boils down to. Sell 'em a Pizza Hut or a Starbucks or something. In a post 911 world the American public just isn't ready for this deal no matter how many times they are called dumb, stupid, uninformed racists.

We have been using their ports for a long time since before the 1st gulf war.

236 posted on 03/09/2006 11:37:16 AM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
This deal probably had 15 scenarios of the "what ifs" and they probably got down to a #6. Bush probably didn't have to pick up the phone because they have CSPAN over there and saw the idiot congressmen all freaking out.
237 posted on 03/09/2006 11:37:26 AM PST by Wasanother (Terrorist come in many forms but all are RATS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: NordP

Our Congressmen and Senators are a bunch of spineless cowards - I will NEVER vote for one for president if this is how they work!


238 posted on 03/09/2006 11:38:00 AM PST by areafiftyone (Politicians Are Like Diapers, Both Need To Be Changed Often And For The Same Reason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Two points:

1) Agreed! European socialism is inherently stupid.

2) The word terrorism is getting awfully overused. It would be challenging NOT to have higher birth rates than the European nationals. They are sowing the seeds of their own demise. To call outpacing their birthrates terrorism gives a little too much credit to the Europeans.

And Muslims are not a race. People are not born Muslim.


239 posted on 03/09/2006 11:38:42 AM PST by mjwise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Soul_of_Chogokin

You should be checking out Jihad watch and Faithfreedom each day. The forums at FaithFreedom are something else

http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum.htm
http://jihadwatch.org/


240 posted on 03/09/2006 11:38:53 AM PST by dennisw (Muslim's biggest enemy is the founder of Islam, Muhammad. Muslims are victims of this conman-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 861-866 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