Bush will veto attempts to stop Dubai based company run our ports

[Puffy2]

the Democrats are engaging in racial profiling

No, the Democrats are against having foreign entities guard our boarders or ports. Legislation sponsored by them would prevent all foreign nations.

Uh...try 15 of the 19

and in fairness, it was two. An additional fifteen were from Saudi Arabia (Bush's other "good friends").

 

[Caradana]

Have you guys been to Dubai? The UAE bears little resemblance to the rest of the Middle East.
It's about the least devout Muslim place in the Arab world. It's rich people who have investments in American markets and every interest in continuing their growth, considering the US overwhelmingly buys their major export (oil). It's lush green golf courses and five star hotels and people smiling at Americans in the airport - very little poverty, and only 4M citizens - less than the population of Colorado. I stopped in Dubai on the way to Lebanon and was blown away by the place. If we're going to have one ally in the Middle East - and I myself think that's a more than decent idea at this point - the UAE is a top contender. They're even educated - they have over 90% Arabic literacy and free wireless access in the capital.

There's a smaller consideration - this country is built on the free market economy and hesitates to step in to a legitimate commercial deal. That being said, I think that apprehension about this deal is knee-jerk on the part of most, and politically calculated on the part of Congressmen. For once, I think Bush might have a good point with this. I'm sure his arm is also getting twisted like heck by the British, and I'm sure we owe war-related favors to the UAE that no one below high security clearance will ever learn about. Finally, break out a world map and take a look at the UAE's geographic position. It's extremely strategic. What's across the Arabian Gulf? If you were thinking that a war with that country was a real possibility, would you want a strong alliance with the rich, relatively secular country across the water? What if they were willing to open their bases to you?
Hmmm ... eh?

Here's the UAE - it's not quite the desert home of bloodthirsty ragheads, is it?
http://www.dubai-city.de/

 

[bsnyder]

As usual, Dawn, you're completely incorrect in your attempt to bring Democrats down to the level of your chosen party. "Racial profiling" is the practice of labelling a certain section of society based solely on physical traits. The difference here is that we (should) know we can't trust the government that owns this company. Let me state it again, so that you might understand it: they acknowledged the Taliban. What more evidence do you need that this is not an entity that should be entrusted with something this important?

Your definition of racial profiling is incorrect. In certain instances it may include physical traits, but that's not a comprehensive explaination.

From the dictionary:

the consideration of race when developing a profile of suspected criminals; by extension, a form of racism involving police focus on people of certain racial groups when seeking suspected criminals

By your definition, picking out Arab sounding names from an airline manifest wouldn't be racial profiling?

 

[DVCPAT]

No. Whether he vetos it or not is immaterial. His veto will be overturned by Congress in this matter (the republican rats are already deserting Bush's ship)

My only point is that politically, it is a stupid thing to do.

Maybe not…. If they shed some light on the review process and the security arrangements, we could make a lot of new Arab friends.

 

[Caradana]

Bet, in all fairness, I think we generally share a common definition of racial profiling, and I even think that most of us secretly agree that it's not a halfway bad idea under certain circumstances. I think wvrevy might've oversimplified a bit for speed, but we're all talking about the same thing here.

 

[Tiziminchac]

By the way, isn't Dubai where Michael Jackson lives now? Do you think they will try and sneak him back in through our ports!

 

[bsnyder]

Have you guys been to Dubai? The UAE bears little resemblance to the rest of the Middle East.
It's about the least devout Muslim place in the Arab world. It's rich people who have investments in American markets and every interest in continuing their growth, considering the US overwhelmingly buys their major export (oil). It's lush green golf courses and five star hotels and people smiling at Americans in the airport - very little poverty, and only 4M citizens - less than the population of Colorado. I stopped in Dubai on the way to Lebanon and was blown away by the place. If we're going to have one ally in the Middle East - and I myself think that's a more than decent idea at this point - the UAE is a top contender. They're even educated - they have over 90% Arabic literacy and free wireless access in the capital.

There's a smaller consideration - this country is built on the free market economy and hesitates to step in to a legitimate commercial deal. That being said, I think that apprehension about this deal is knee-jerk on the part of most, and politically calculated on the part of Congressmen. For once, I think Bush might have a good point with this. I'm sure his arm is also getting twisted like heck by the British, and I'm sure we owe war-related favors to the UAE that no one below high security clearance will ever learn about.

Here's the UAE - it's not quite the desert home of bloodthirsty ragheads, is it?
http://www.dubai-city.de/

Wise woman, as usual.

 

[Independent]

and in fairness, it was two. An additional fifteen were from Saudi Arabia (Bush's other "good friends").

OOps. You are totally correct. I better go make a pitcher of Margaritas and study the map

My apologies to DawnCT.

 

[bsnyder]

Bet, in all fairness, I think we generally share a common definition of racial profiling, and I even think that most of us secretly agree that it's not a halfway bad idea under certain circumstances. I think wvrevy might've oversimplified a bit for speed, but we're all talking about the same thing here.

I don't secretly agree. I'll agree out loud. But wvrevy won't. Except for this deal, which he's against. And which he'll claim is not racial profiling.

 

[Caradana]

Dude, I wrote and then while I was editing, Bet quoted me, and now I look like a flake. hee hee

 

[MoniqueU]

Republican checking in as being against this.

 

[bsnyder]

Dude, I wrote and then while I was editing, Bet quoted me, and now I look like a flake. hee hee

You, flakey? Not a chance!


It also doesn't make a lot of sense that these folks would make a major, multi-billion dollar investment, and then blow it up.

 

[DawnCt1]

Do you support the UAE buying the ports?

I haven't heard enough from the side that supports the purchase yet. I need to hear more to make that decision.

 

[DawnCt1]

Uh...try 15 of the 19

Most were Saudi. I believe 14 were from Saudi Arabia.

 

[DawnCt1]

Have you guys been to Dubai? The UAE bears little resemblance to the rest of the Middle East.
It's about the least devout Muslim place in the Arab world. It's rich people who have investments in American markets and every interest in continuing their growth, considering the US overwhelmingly buys their major export (oil). It's lush green golf courses and five star hotels and people smiling at Americans in the airport - very little poverty, and only 4M citizens - less than the population of Colorado. I stopped in Dubai on the way to Lebanon and was blown away by the place. If we're going to have one ally in the Middle East - and I myself think that's a more than decent idea at this point - the UAE is a top contender. They're even educated - they have over 90% Arabic literacy and free wireless access in the capital.

There's a smaller consideration - this country is built on the free market economy and hesitates to step in to a legitimate commercial deal. That being said, I think that apprehension about this deal is knee-jerk on the part of most, and politically calculated on the part of Congressmen. For once, I think Bush might have a good point with this. I'm sure his arm is also getting twisted like heck by the British, and I'm sure we owe war-related favors to the UAE that no one below high security clearance will ever learn about. Finally, break out a world map and take a look at the UAE's geographic position. It's extremely strategic. What's across the Arabian Gulf? If you were thinking that a war with that country was a real possibility, would you want a strong alliance with the rich, relatively secular country across the water? What if they were willing to open their bases to you?
Hmmm ... eh?

Here's the UAE - it's not quite the desert home of bloodthirsty ragheads, is it?
http://www.dubai-city.de/

DH has been to Dubai and it looks more like Europe than it looks like the Middle East. A very different oasis than what most envision. I can clearly understand the thinking of the administration and while it may seem unpopular because most are reacting to "arabs controlling the ports", in actuality, it may be an ideally strategic move.

 

[punkin]

I haven't heard enough from the side that supports the purchase yet. I need to hear more to make that decision.

Translation: Bush's handlers haven't told me what I should think about it yet, so I have to wait for tomorrow's press release before I can answer that question.

 

[bsnyder]

Translation: Bush's handlers haven't told me what I should think about it yet, so I have to wait for tomorrow's press release before I can answer that question.

That's pretty rich, considering you haven't said whether you are for or against it.

 

[momof2inPA]

Below is a quote from the 2006 Index of Economic Freedom, which clearly states that for a company to import or export in the UAE, they must be 100% UAE owned. For a company to operate in the UAE, it must be 51% UAE owned. So much for the free trade argument, but I'm happy they have nice golf courses. That's relevant to the discussion. Besides, we aren't talking about a private company controlling our ports, we are talking about a foreign government, an Arab government with terrorist links, operating our ports.

"Foreign investment in the UAE is restricted. "Except for companies located in one of the free zones," reports the U.S. Trade Representative, "at least 51 percent of a business establishment must be owned by a UAE national. A business engaged in importing and distributing a product must be either a 100 percent UAE owned agency/distributorship or a 51 percent UAE/49 percent foreign limited liability company (LLC)…. There is no national treatment for investors in the UAE. Non-GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] nationals cannot own land…. 22 out of 53 stocks on the UAE stock market are open to foreign investment. Ministry of Economy and Planning rules allow foreign investors to own up to 49 percent of companies on the stock market." Branch offices of foreign companies must have a national agent unless the foreign company has established its office pursuant to an agreement with the government. There are no controls or requirements on current transfers, access to foreign exchange, or repatriation of profits. Foreign ownership of land and stock is restricted. Based on evidence of discrimination against foreign investment, the UAE's capital flows and foreign investment score is 1 point worse this year."

Link:

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=UnitedArabEmirates

 

[DawnCt1]

Translation: Bush's handlers haven't told me what I should think about it yet, so I have to wait for tomorrow's press release before I can answer that question.

If that is what you think, than you would be wrong. I think most Americans would like and expect an American company to to handle this; that makes sense to most people, however, an American company hasn't been handling this, the Brits have. I also think that Caradana made an excellent point, with regard to the UAE. Those things should all be a consideration. To merely kill a deal because it "doesn't sound right", doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I need reason beyond "its the USA so Americans need to own the docks".

 

[MAKmom]

Translation: Bush's handlers haven't told me what I should think about it yet, so I have to wait for tomorrow's press release before I can answer that question.

That's not fair to say. I'm just happy Dawn is still undecided.