Dubai company gives up on ports

[ALLAN]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,187307,00.html

:D

[Paladin]

I think we need to find an American company that has the resources to run our ports.

Hmmmmm, let's see, what company might have worldwide capabilities, lots of experience, and could take them over with little or no disruption?

Can you say Halliburton! LOL, I can hear the Dems screaming now.

[gonzoSS]

-http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif

[White trash wagon]

Game over...........

Scott

[TexasDevilDog]

Good. I am trying of hear Tony Snow back the decision of the president, saying that we would piss off our ally if it didn't go through. Well, we don't need friends that we have to give tribute to. :rolleyes:

[ALLAN]

UAE is mad at us..lol

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/030906/news1.html

[Michaelb303]

Fuckem

[TexasDevilDog]

Fuckem

X2

[Paladin]

Game over...........

Scott

I am curious of how you would feel if somehow Halliburton did get into the mix.

[Fobra]

Good. I am trying of hear Tony Snow back the decision of the president, saying that we would piss off our ally if it didn't go through.

he's right, the terrorist will use this as more ammo against us and will say something along the lines that we don't like arabs, but probably more radicalized than that. I can guarantee that most of the politicians saying no to this are politically motivated since it's election season. the republicans are afraid of losing on the national security issue and so they jump on the democrat bandwagon against bush....typical politicians :rolleyes: we need the UAE regardless of some of the reports saying that there were a couple al quada sympathizers, those couple can't impact the decision making. It's rather amusing how all the democrats started this big ordeal about selling out our nation security via ports to a foreign country when foreign countries have owned the ports for quite some time (not on security of them, just for shipping) and they never seemed to mind. who owns the ports on the west coast? that's right, china, the UAE has been far cooperative with our interests than china.

[D]

This dead horse has been beaten so bad that he will come back as Ru Paul in the afterlife.

[Fobra]

This dead horse has been beaten so bad that he will come back as Ru Paul in the afterlife.
:D there is that possibility :eek:

[White trash wagon]

I am curious of how you would feel if somehow Halliburton did get into the mix.

At least Haliburton in not associated with a government that officially recognized the Taliban. Only 3 governments on the planet have actually recognized the Taliban: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and........you guessed, it the UAE.

Bush was about to be embarrased by his own party, the Republicans. Yesterday morning Congressional Republican leaders informed Bush they had 62 to 2 vote against this port deal, so they could have overridden his veto. If this had happened, Bush would have gone on record of only having ONE veto against a Republican controlled Congress, and it would have failed. So when the UAE dropped the deal 3 hours later..........lucky for Bush.

To put that in DFWStang lingo, Bush nearly got bitch slapped by his own party.

Scott

[Vertnut]

I have to TOTALLY agree with WTW, for once. Close call for Bush...he has been "saved"... ;)

[TexasDevilDog]

If this had happened, Bush would have gone on record of only having ONE veto against a Republican controlled Congress, and it would have failed.Scott

Bush has never use a veto, at all, while president, but he threaten to use it for the first time on this. He is picking the wrong fights.

[D]

I've been researching the ins and outs of this whole deal for about a week and a half and made the decision on Monday that I am firmly against this deal. I would never want any Middle East country operating our ports. I don't care if the security is the same as it would have been with the DP World deal. I still don't like them sneaky fockers running anything having to do with our borders.

[def1eppard]

Has anyone seen that picture of the U.S. map showing all the ports and which countries own them? It's pretty interesting to see that the majority is all foreign. However, Middle Eastern countries should definitely not be running our ports.

[D]

Has anyone seen that picture of the U.S. map showing all the ports and which countries own them? It's pretty interesting to see that the majority is all foreign. However, Middle Eastern countries should definitely not be running our ports.

A lot of countries who constantly import stuff here run our ports, i.e. Japan, China, etc. My dad works in the international import/export busniess for a Chinese company called Air Tiger Express, so I keep current on the ports situations just so I know what's going on with his business.

[White trash wagon]

Bush has never use a veto, at all, while president, but he threaten to use it for the first time on this. He is picking the wrong fights.

I believe that's what I said..........

Scott

[D]

I believe that's what I said..........

Scott

I believe... (see sig :D )

[TX21]

Fuckem

X3 in the ass

[Paladin]

At least Haliburton in not associated with a government that officially recognized the Taliban. Only 3 governments on the planet have actually recognized the Taliban: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and........you guessed, it the UAE.

Bush was about to be embarrased by his own party, the Republicans. Yesterday morning Congressional Republican leaders informed Bush they had 62 to 2 vote against this port deal, so they could have overridden his veto. If this had happened, Bush would have gone on record of only having ONE veto against a Republican controlled Congress, and it would have failed. So when the UAE dropped the deal 3 hours later..........lucky for Bush.

To put that in DFWStang lingo, Bush nearly got bitch slapped by his own party.

Scott

This decision by Bush bothered me, but the fact that Republicans stood up for what was right and did not cater to a President solely on party lines has convinced me that being a Republican is a wise choice. Lord knows that the Democrats had MANY chances to do the right thing while Clinton was in office and never did. This is but another example of Republicans doing the right thing IMO. I also think Bush does what he believes is right, not what is politically expedient. This is very confusing for the typical Democrat since there are no Democratic leaders who act that way. Bush will be wrong occasionally, but I honestly believe he is doing what he thinks is right. I know that thought boggles the average Democrats mind.

Your answer on Halliburton was pretty weak considering how most Democrats were calling for an American company to run the ports as opposed to a foreign owned company, but better than I would have thought. I just love putting people in a position to make a hard choice and seeing how they respond. You do it better than the average Democrat, I will give you that.

[White trash wagon]

This decision by Bush bothered me, but the fact that Republicans stood up for what was right and did not cater to a President solely on party lines has convinced me that being a Republican is a wise choice. Lord knows that the Democrats had MANY chances to do the right thing while Clinton was in office and never did. This is but another example of Republicans doing the right thing IMO. I also think Bush does what he believes is right, not what is politically expedient. This is very confusing for the typical Democrat since there are no Democratic leaders who act that way. Bush will be wrong occasionally, but I honestly believe he is doing what he thinks is right. I know that thought boggles the average Democrats mind.

Your answer on Halliburton was pretty weak considering how most Democrats were calling for an American company to run the ports as opposed to a foreign owned company, but better than I would have thought. I just love putting people in a position to make a hard choice and seeing how they respond. You do it better than the average Democrat, I will give you that.

Not sure what you mean by "weak", But I'm not a Democrat, never voted a straight ticket in my life, and I've been voting for 26 years. Just because I don't like Bush doesn't mean I'm a Democrat, or any other label. So is calling for an American company to run American ports somehow "liberal"?

We all know there has been some crooked deals with Haliburton getting government contracts that were never even put up for bids. But that is no comparison to contracting administration of our ports to a government controlled company of a known terrorist- friendly nation. The very idea was just ludicrous, and smells of a political favor. But I'll quote a board member I have some respect for:
I am a Bush supporter, no doubt about it. But fuck him in this scandalous sellout, fuck him and his handling of illegal immigrants, and fuck people that stand behind him without using a lick of God-given common fucking sense.
__________________

I do find it funny how most the Bush supporters on this board were OK with the Dubai ports administration deal at first, only to change thier minds later. Seems to indicate an initial reaction that is totally partisan, but at least most were capable of a re-think, I have to give credit for that.

Scott

[TexasDevilDog]

I believe that's what I said..........

Scott

Why do you keep repeating what I say before I say it? That's the last time I try to agree with you.

[White trash wagon]

Why do you keep repeating what I say before I say it? That's the last time I try to agree with you.

Ok....be that way :D

Scott

[01WhiteCobra]

So when do we kick the Chinese out of running terminals in LA or Singapore compnies from running terminals in Oakland?

Are we also going to require the US Navy to stop docking in Dubai?

But hey... make sure you invest that 600 billion you'll receive for your oil in FRNs and US Treasuries over the next few years. No hard feelings.


And of course, Inchcape Shipping Services has been owned since January by a UAE firm. Clients include the US Navy and has extensive interests in the US for years.

ISS does tug boats, pilots and dock workers for shipping companies and works with the US Customs service in NY, NJ and San Fran.

Keep drinking the kool-aid, it will all be over soon.

[Vertnut]

I have this strange feeling this will come back to haunt us. Like, maybe, $85 a barrel oil? We cost them some money, they will cost us some money...we need to be willing to make that trade.

[TexasDevilDog]

I have this strange feeling this will come back to haunt us. Like, maybe, $85 a barrel oil? We cost them some money, they will cost us some money...we need to be willing to make that trade.

Why not? We trade $billions of military spending to protect the oil. Anything to tries to destablize the oil supply of the world, we are there to bomb it.

[01WhiteCobra]

I have this strange feeling this will come back to haunt us. Like, maybe, $85 a barrel oil? We cost them some money, they will cost us some money...we need to be willing to make that trade.

Oil will be partly responsible for the downfall. This month Iran will startup (looks like it has been delayed a little) its oil trading exchange and will only exchange in euros. Sort of funny how we now consider Iran the prime threat in the world...

For a very long time oil has traded primarily in dollars, as such, creates an artificial demand for the dollar. Probably one of the main reasons why this country can support its record deficits and not have a total collapse in the dollar.

If Iran is successful in setting up its exchange the demand for US dollars will diminish.

I've moved some money over into commodities and will continue to play the oil market because I can see oil over $100 barrel in the foreseeable future. $60/barrel is a pretty safe place to buy. Natural disasters (hurricane season coming up) + global political tension = $$$$$.

If the US (or the world) goes to war with Iran you will see oil at $150 which would translate to roughly 5-5.50 a gallon for gas. 40% of the worlds oil travels through the Straight of Hormuz... controlled by Iran (the straight is better known for the infamous location where the USS Vincennes shot down the Iran Air passenger plane).

World is going into the shitter and the best place to be in is commodities. I've made more money trading oil/gold/sugar (for some odd reason) and dollars in the past 6 months than I made in the stock market over the past 3 years.

[Vertnut]

Man, I hope you're at least a little wrong, but it scares the shit out of me. At least I do have some money in oil and refining (my wife is with a refining company), so that $5 gas might at least help my pocketbook. I build custom homes (not the huge ones), and fuel prices are already affecting material costs' because of the transportation involved. I'm up about 8% (in cost) in the last 6 months, and I think this is just the beginning...

[black01gt]

Bush has never use a veto, at all, while president, but he threaten to use it for the first time on this. He is picking the wrong fights.
He is good at picking the wrong fights.

However, "wrong fights" is a relative term. What's wrong for the American public may not necessarily be wrong for his Fraternity of Billionaire Buddies (Arab or not).
This Great Nation is ours to lose. oops...what a "liberal" statement! I must be liberal cause personnaly, Bush etal can kiss my ass!!!

[Paladin]

So is calling for an American company to run American ports somehow "liberal"?

We all know there has been some crooked deals with Haliburton getting government contracts that were never even put up for bids.


I do find it funny how most the Bush supporters on this board were OK with the Dubai ports administration deal at first, only to change thier minds later. Seems to indicate an initial reaction that is totally partisan, but at least most were capable of a re-think, I have to give credit for that.

Scott

I just find it funny that alot of liberals have a real problem with a UAE based/owned company running the ports but when you mention Halliburton, they still object. Sounds like it is more of whatever Bush asks for they object to, not legitimate concern. Just my opinion though.

I hope you realize Bush is not the only President to give no bid contartcs to Halliburton. I also would like to know the name of the other companies that could give complete service like they do, please list them for me.

I reserved my judgment on the decision and still do. When we ban all foreign companies other than Great Britain from owning or controlling ports or airports then I will oppose this measure fully.

[D]

If the US (or the world) goes to war with Iran you will see oil at $150 which would translate to roughly 5-5.50 a gallon for gas. 40% of the worlds oil travels through the Straight of Hormuz... controlled by Iran (the straight is better known for the infamous location where the USS Vincennes shot down the Iran Air passenger plane).

Which makes things even worse. The straight of Hormuz, if I'm not mistaken, produces the largest concentration of crude oil in the world. If gas reaches what you estimated, I'll be sporting the shoe leather express and a Huffy. I do, however, believe that Iran has posed a bigger threat to the U.S. than Iraq for a long time. Saddam is a sick individual, but he was not a big threat to us. Even if he had nukes, he wouldn't have used them against the U.S. because he knew the consequences. A lot of people say the same shit about Iran now that they used to say about Iraq. They're a bunch of crazy, unstable, Jihadists. I feel pretty strongly that Iran has nukes and they aren't afraid to use them. With us not doing the deal with DP World, for all we know, the U.A.E. could be digging in to their deep pockets to pay some Iranian to do something crazy. Who knows...

All I know is that I was always a little skeptical of the DP World thing. Sometimes I thought it was a good idea and might open up some new doors. But after careful thought an analysis I decided I was against it purely because, as politically incorrect as it is, I don't trust people as a whole from the Middle East even if they are our "friend". These people seem on edge all of the time. Even the ones who claim to be sane seem like they could just Mr. Hyde on us all of a sudden. Unstability is not something we need running our ports, regardless if the security portion is still being run by the U.S.

[D]

Sounds like it is more of whatever Bush asks for they object to, not legitimate concern.

And that is a pretty accurate statement. Tonight on the Colbert Report, his guest was Al Franken. They had a "caller" call in and ask Franken why he hated our troops. Colbert answered saying something along the lines of: He hates our troops because he wants them to fail in Iraq, which would make Bush look bad. Anything that would make Bush look bad the Liberals are for.

[black01gt]

Tonight on the Colbert Report, his guest was Al Franken. They had a "caller" call in and ask Franken why he hated our troops. Colbert answered
:D