I support this...

[ylexot]

See, that is the hot button with this issue. Even Larry got trapped in it. MIDDLE EASTERN COMPANY WILL CONTROL OUR PORTS!!! Then you start to look at it and think about it. You look into what "control" really means. By the time you are done, you realize there is no real "control" of our ports and that any worry about our ports doesn't require a company to control it to inflict any damage. Our ports are about as open as they come...

I admit when I first saw it my reaction was, "WTF!"... but I stepped back and tried to think about it. I couldn't see if there could be issues. In fact, until a day or two ago I was still pretty much on the fence on whether it was good or bad. I looked at it more and I have come to the conclusion what could they really do that can't already be done easily? Nothing.

DING! DING! DING!

 

[Tonio]

See, that is the hot button with this issue...

You make an excellent argument. In my case, I feel uneasy with any foreign company operating our ports, although my unease has no basis in reality.

And yes, the Middle Eastern thing is based in emotion instead of logic. Too many Arabs resent the US for political and economic reasons as well as religious reasons. We've seen recently how tyrants and radical clerics can use that resentment to incite their countrymen to violence over an idiotic cartoon. It's a more sinister version of Al Sharpton tapping into black resentment to further his own power.

 

[vraiblonde]

MIDDLE EASTERN GOVERNMENT WILL CONTROL OUR PORTS!!!

:fixed:

I hope that none of us are so unsophisticated that the idea of a foreign company owning a business in the US sends us into a tizzy. My tizzy isn't because of a foreign company - it's because of a foreign government. I don't think the UAE should own anything in this country. I don't think ANY foreign nation should - not so much as a 7-11.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well good...

See, that is the hot button with this issue. Even Larry got trapped in it. MIDDLE EASTERN COMPANY WILL CONTROL OUR PORTS!!! Then you start to look at it and think about it. You look into what "control" really means. By the time you are done, you realize there is no real "control" of our ports and that any worry about our ports doesn't require a company to control it to inflict any damage. Our ports are about as open as they come...

I admit when I first saw it my reaction was, "WTF!"... but I stepped back and tried to think about it. I couldn't see if there could be issues. In fact, until a day or two ago I was still pretty much on the fence on whether it was good or bad. I looked at it more and I have come to the conclusion what could they really do that can't already be done easily? Nothing.

So, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, whomever has the bling can 'not' control our ports to their hearts content, yes? I'm sure this 'non' control that the UAE is seeking is damn near charity work, like maybe standing around and waving as the ships come and go, right?

Why, they probably will have so little ' non' control that they'll have to pay some longshoreman $125 an hour to do the waving for them.

Hell, I'll bet they don't even get any legal, actual control over even the broom closets. Or the brooms.

You all are deliberately ignoring the term 'foreign government control' and substituting 'security control' as though you can't read for comprehension. The TV is doing the same thing to sell this turd. "Well, security wise..."

THAT IS NOT THE POINT

In some sort of global crisis, the potential economic disruption of screwing up a port, either through scheduling, re-routing, order of unloading, nevermind terror, is HUGE. Now add in the unpredictable.

Now, you can all go back to explaining how there is NO threat and NO problem whatsoever with a foreign government and their interests interfering with ours and the normal operations of a port.

Go ahead and then explain, if they have so little control, if they can't influence a THING that would cause us even heartburn, then what do they want the control for? So they can steal from the Coke machines at night?

This is a simple concept; US sovereignty.

 

[FromTexas]

:fixed:

I hope that none of us are so unsophisticated that the idea of a foreign company owning a business in the US sends us into a tizzy. My tizzy isn't because of a foreign company - it's because of a foreign government. I don't think the UAE should own anything in this country. I don't think ANY foreign nation should - not so much as a 7-11.

Any socialist based countries company that has business in the US is pretty much at the whim of their governments whether they put a phoney wall up between them or not. China has a ton of investments in companies on our soil. We own a lot more on everyone elses soil though.

Now, UAE has always been a fanatic backer of our Middle Eastern policies for the most part. UAE is always in disputes with Iran (they don't like them very much) because Iran occupies portions of what the UAE considers their territory. The UAE isn't involved in the bitter politics of the Middle East for the most part either. They aren't the impoverished masses that cozey up to Muslim and terrorist masses in other Middle Eastern countries. They are a rich state where almost everyone owns a piece of the pie. They could care less what those other Muslims are getting into a fit about because they have a good life.

On top of that, only 40% of the UAE is Arab... 50% is South Asian.

Now, back to the point of the dispute with Iran. Iran wants to own the islands which pretty much should belong to the UAE. Iran lives under the principle that everything in the gulf belongs to Iran because they are Iran... it should be that way. It was galvenized to hold on to this land during the 70s period with the Shah because they failed at taking Bahrain. This land is very important because it is the islands that control the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic point to control of the Gulf. Now, would you want to slam our continuing ally who cares less about the rest of Middle Eastern politics and is the rightful controller of the most strategic point of control for the Gulf legally over a non-issue or would you rather look at the scope of politics in the region and recognize the potential significance of supporting someone who can snub Iran while also providing easy access?

 

[FromTexas]

So, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, whomever has the bling can 'not' control our ports to their hearts content, yes? I'm sure this 'non' control that the UAE is seeking is damn near charity work, like maybe standing around and waving as the ships come and go, right?

Why, they probably will have so little ' non' control that they'll have to pay some longshoreman $125 an hour to do the waving for them.

Hell, I'll bet they don't even get any legal, actual control over even the broom closets. Or the brooms.

You all are deliberately ignoring the term 'foreign government control' and substituting 'security control' as though you can't read for comprehension. The TV is doing the same thing to sell this turd. "Well, security wise..."

THAT IS NOT THE POINT

In some sort of global crisis, the potential economic disruption of screwing up a port, either through scheduling, re-routing, order of unloading, nevermind terror, is HUGE. Now add in the unpredictable.

Now, you can all go back to explaining how there is NO threat and NO problem whatsoever with a foreign government and their interests interfering with ours and the normal operations of a port.

Go ahead and then explain, if they have so little control, if they can't influence a THING that would cause us even heartburn, then what do they want the control for? So they can steal from the Coke machines at night?

This is a simple concept; US sovereignty.

Soveriegnty is hardly involved in a country buying the company that manages the ports. They do not own the ports.

 

[FromTexas]

US operations represent ten percent of P&O's world-wide operations and consist primarily of cranes and terminals

This is from P&O, the previous company which has been sold to the UAE. Cranes and terminals... OMG! FREAK OUT TIME! The interest in the ports is a leasehold interest FYI... We always own the port.

 

[Larry Gude]

My God...

Any socialist based countries company that has business in the US is pretty much at the whim of their governments whether they put a phoney wall up between them or not. China has a ton of investments in companies on our soil. We own a lot more on everyone elses soil though.

AND THAT MAKES IT OK??????????????????????????????????

Name ONE thing, besides military bases and embassies, that our government owns and controls on ANYONE elses soil. I'm prepared to be educated.

If a business is, as you say, the same as a government, then you won't mind making me happy by specifically excluding foeing governments from owning sqaut in our country, yes? All the same, right?

Now, UAE has always been a fanatic backer of our Middle Eastern policies for the most part.

BASED ON WHAT???????????????? How many troops they got on the ground in Afghanistan? Iraq? Name me one of these 'fanatical' backers, without googling, like Tony Blair. They wanna be our lil helpers in quiet ways because it might look bad locally then they surely understand why we have the same problem here.

On top of that, only 40% of the UAE is Arab... 50% is South Asian

I don't care if they are all from New England originally; they are a FOREIGN government with their own interests to look after.

you want to slam our continuing ally who cares less about the rest of Middle Eastern politics

I think it's just grand that you can speak for an entire nation and that they all think alike and have the same motivations. We don't even have that HERE. <<<<<<<<<<<<<CLUE*CLUE*

 

[Larry Gude]

Nope...

Soveriegnty is hardly involved in a country buying the company that manages the ports. They do not own the ports.

...they're probably coming to enjoy the beaches. That's it! It's probably just an image thing, being in control of a port or two...

 

[FromTexas]

Of course, every person who lives there all have their own thoughts and feelings. Tim McVeigh had his own thoughts and feelings, too. When I speak of the UAE I speak of the conglomerate of states. A business and government isn't the same in a capitalist country, but our businesses do dominate over ownership of foreign countries in ours. So, you want to define it.. fine. People of a country tend to represent their countries values either way though. Not 100% of them do... but lets face it, if you are American you tend to hold American beliefs. If you are Russian, you tend to hold Russian... whether the country owns your business or not.

You are right. The UAE does not scream out follow the Americans and down with the rest of you. They do it in a more quite and subdued manner. They depend on us greatly. They do a lot more than the Saudis ever have. We say jump, they jump. But they are not suicidal... so they aren't going to scream it out over and over again.

You can continue on this tirade if you want. In the end, I am surprised you are jumping through the red scare like hoops the media and others want to sell you.

 

[FromTexas]

...they're probably coming to enjoy the beaches. That's it! It's probably just an image thing, being in control of a port or two...

And you say Ken King has a hard time admitting he is wrong... Sheeesh.

Foreign Control of US Industry

Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industry 69%
Plastics and Rubber Manufacturing 47%
Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 43%
Pipeline Transportation 38%
Financial Securities Companies 36%
Machinery Manufacturing 32%
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 30%
Chemical Manufacturing 30%
Mining 29%
Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 27%
Heavy Construction 22%
Publishing Industry 21%
Printing 20%
Food Manufacturing 18%
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing 17%
Insurance Carriers 17%
Primary Metal Manufacturing 15%
Total Across All Industries 13%

Foreign control equals a 50% share or greater of the company involved.

 

[Larry Gude]

There we go!

If China ain't a good enough reason, why, Tim McVeigh, mass murderer, there's a REAL DAMN good reason to turn over control of a bunch of ports to a foreign government. Good thinking there.

When I speak of the UAE I speak of the conglomerate of states. A business and government isn't the same in a capitalist country,

HOLY SH1T! A ray of sunshine! Now, the next step; National interest.

Conflict. They ain't gonna own it for show. They WILL be in a position to mess us up. An unnecessary position, a risky position.

People of a country tend to represent their countries values either way though

Oh, so they ARE like a capitalist country after all? Good. No prob. Have a business buy it replete with all the rules and regulations international commerce falls under...that nations DON'T.

You can continue on this tirade if you want. In the end, I am surprised you are jumping through the red scare like hoops the media and others want to sell you.

Tirade?

You: "Foreign government control of US ports is nothing to get bothered about."

Me: "Foreign government control is madness."

I'll stand where I am with my tirade. You sell the country to another country.

What's next? Who's next? When do we give foreign nations who own alot political representation? Why not? No danger here. No conflict of interest. How about a shadow Senator? Maybe a non voting member of the House to start with?

 

[Larry Gude]

This is USELESS...

And you say Ken King has a hard time admitting he is wrong... Sheeesh.

Foreign Control of US Industry

Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industry 69%
Plastics and Rubber Manufacturing 47%
Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 43%
Pipeline Transportation 38%
Financial Securities Companies 36%
Machinery Manufacturing 32%
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 30%
Chemical Manufacturing 30%
Mining 29%
Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 27%
Heavy Construction 22%
Publishing Industry 21%
Printing 20%
Food Manufacturing 18%
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing 17%
Insurance Carriers 17%
Primary Metal Manufacturing 15%
Total Across All Industries 13%

Foreign control equals a 50% share or greater of the company involved.

Foreign governments, GOVERNMENTS own and operate all that, right?

There is no point arguing with a person who does not hear what I am saying.

 

[FromTexas]

So, you are okay with a foreign capitalist company managing the ports?

 

[FromTexas]

There is no point arguing with a person who does not hear what I am saying.

Thats the same problem I have at the DU. They don't want to talk to me if I don't agree with them. :snicker:

Have a business buy it replete with all the rules and regulations international commerce falls under...that nations DON'T.

Where did you ever get the idea that a business run by a foreign government gets a different set of rules than a business not run by a foreign government?

 

[Tonio]

I hope that none of us are so unsophisticated that the idea of a foreign company owning a business in the US sends us into a tizzy. My tizzy isn't because of a foreign company - it's because of a foreign government.

I agree. Suppose fundamentalist extremists topple the UAE's secular government in a 1979 Iran-style revolution.

Although, a foreign company owning a US business would be a concern if the business was involved in national security matters.

 

[Larry Gude]

So...

So, you are okay with a foreign capitalist company managing the ports?

...you have not read a DAMN word I've written on this?

YES, foreign capital is just peachy with me. The interests of commerce are DIFFERENT than those of governments.

 

[FromTexas]

I agree. Suppose fundamentalist extremists topple the UAE's secular government in a 1979 Iran-style revolution.

Although, a foreign company owning a US business would be a concern if the business was involved in national security matters.

Then we simply revoke their management of the leasehold. Sheesh. It won't be the first time we booted someone out of something because their country changed control.

 

[FromTexas]

...you have not read a DAMN word I've written on this?

YES, foreign capital is just peachy with me. The interests of commerce are DIFFERENT than those of governments.

No, I have read exactly what you're saying. So, Saudi Arabia has some private Saudi firms. They are employed with muslim Arabs. They can buy the management of the ports?

 

[Larry Gude]

Ok...

Thats the same problem I have at the DU. They don't want to talk to me if I don't agree with them. :snicker:



Where did you ever get the idea that a business run by a foreign government gets a different set of rules than a business not run by a foreign government?

So, if your going to start insulting me, may I presume that's the end of your argument?

As far as a company being different than a nation, you've truly left me speechless. Again, what does Washington run in the UAE? What do we take over and when? By your logic, should be NO problem.

For the sake of argument, I'll hand you a few easy ones;

Differences:

Capital.
Labor.
Environmental issues.
Manufacturing standards.

In each and evey step of the way a business, any business, must aquire capital, deal with labor, respect the environment and conduct business to international norms and standards, from equipment safety to best practices to rules and regulations.

A corporation must answer to its nation. It is NOT a fully independent entity operating with no one to anser to. A government utlimately answer onlt to itself.

I can't believe you want this spelled out. You own stock in some ports, right?