Port Security Poll

Whats your stance on the new Port Security concept

  • Total voters
    41
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
Larry Gude said:
...to ownership and control of ANY US ground by a foreign government.
Click to expand...
Then why opposition to this? They will not own the port, they will fulfill a contract to operate State or City owned ports.
 
aps45819

aps45819

24/7 Single Dad
Larry Gude said:
...to ownership and control of ANY US ground by a foreign government.
Click to expand...
I agree,
but what's that have to do with DPW having a contract to supply services?
 
B

Bruzilla

Guest
dems4me said:
Most people think that as a result of this new change, security will be affected. I concur.
Click to expand...

Hey Dems... can you quickly outline the specific security concerns that this new setup will create? What will our enemies be able to do tommorrow that they can't do today?
 
ylexot

ylexot

Super Genius
Toxick said:
Me, I'm on the fence. My first impression was that of flabbergasted shock that the idea was even considered, but after I've read more on the subject, I'm less and less horrified by the idea.

My problem, now, is the entire concept of ANY foreign company (not just this particular one) controlling United States ports, even if US Customs and DHS are in charge of maintaining national security. I was unaware of this practice until this issue brought it to the spotlight.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat: I'm with you Tox.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Not if I have...

MMDad said:
Then why opposition to this? They will not own the port, they will fulfill a contract to operate State or City owned ports.
Click to expand...


...anything to do with it.

No ownership or CONTROL by a foreign government.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
It ain't about Seacurity...

Bruzilla said:
Hey Dems... can you quickly outline the specific security concerns that this new setup will create? What will our enemies be able to do tommorrow that they can't do today?
Click to expand...

...a little pun there, he he he...

How about Pakistan? Can Libya do this? Maybe the Russians? I had a fit when Bubba let the Chicoms in. How about Hugo Chavez, he's a portly bastard. He might run things REAL good...
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
Larry Gude said:
...a little pun there, he he he...

How about Pakistan? Can Libya do this? Maybe the Russians? I had a fit when Bubba let the Chicoms in. How about Hugo Chavez, he's a portly bastard. He might run things REAL good...
Click to expand...
Well fortunately we don't allow any of Chavez's government oil company into the U.S.

We never see Citgo here, do we.
 
Railroad

Railroad

Routinely Derailed
The popularity of container ships, with the accompanying security vulnerabilities, makes our ports huge security risks nobody can get their arms around to control. If it were possible to inspect all of these trojan horses, I'd feel a lot better. With them out of control, it almost doesn't matter who owns the companies that manage the ports. You can fit a lot of destruction into a container. But as a matter of principle, the fewer Arab-owned things the better. Jihad is, after all, Jihad.
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
Larry Gude said:
...to ownership and control of ANY US ground by a foreign government.
Click to expand...
Should the US play by the same rules? Should our government give up ownership and control of all foreign soil?
 
B

Bruzilla

Guest
Railroad said:
The popularity of container ships, with the accompanying security vulnerabilities, makes our ports huge security risks nobody can get their arms around to control. If it were possible to inspect all of these trojan horses, I'd feel a lot better. With them out of control, it almost doesn't matter who owns the companies that manage the ports. You can fit a lot of destruction into a container. But as a matter of principle, the fewer Arab-owned things the better. Jihad is, after all, Jihad.
Click to expand...

And you've identified the core of the problem RR - the risk to the US is NOT who controls the ports, but what's being loaded aboard ships coming to the US. And who manages the ports means nothing because they have no say over port security... that's our folks.

I hope Larry's "PARANOIA WILL DESTROY YA" alarm is going off. :lmao:
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
MMDad said:
Can someone who believes that this a security problem please clarify one thing:

What would this allow someone to do to threaten our security that is not possible if the port were operated by an american company?

Can you give a scenario?
Click to expand...

:tap:
 
D

dems4me

Guest
MMDad said:
Anyone who would like to answer the question would be great. It doesn't need to be you, unless you want to.
Click to expand...


Please don't take offense to this but, I've thrown out all expectations and hope of having any meaningful or rational dialog with you. I would recommend that you progress to the next victim on your "indiscriminate spewing off of idiocy to" list, I'll pass on your question. No offense :huggy: :flowers: :huggy:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top