Dubai Ports Deal
I know this a little late, but the Dubai ports deal was a complete mess on all parts.
1. The Bush administration should have realized that this was going to be a frontline issue. They didn't recognize this situational factor and it came back to bite Bush in the end.
2. Both the Democrats and the Republicans that rejsected the deal are doing it for politcal gain and political gain only. The Democrats are trying to gain a foot in the door on National Security which has ben traditionally a Republican thing. The Republicans voted no so they would look like they weren't giving up on National Security.
Even though this has nothing to do with Security.
I like how Sen Hillary Clinton and Representative Chuck Schummer handled this, idiots! These two people are the same two people that, after Sept. 11, said we couldn't racially profile against people in the airport security lines. So when an Arab country wanted to buy a few terminals in a few ports they said NO! Sure seems like racial profilling to me!
One fact I'd like to put out there, since I was a Merchant Marine, they weren't "buying" the port security, they weren't even "buying" the port, they were buying a few terminals in a few ports! It's like El Al airlines owning a terminal at JFK airport, they don't own the security and they surely don't own the port!
Port Security will still be done by the Coast Guard and Customs.....
What a MESS!
Oh by the way a Dubai company, ISS, already owns port deals for the US Navy and deals with US Navy ships schedules, food and fuel deliveries. Often they have te ships schedule well in advance! Now why isn't that on the front page news?
1. The Bush administration should have realized that this was going to be a frontline issue. They didn't recognize this situational factor and it came back to bite Bush in the end.
2. Both the Democrats and the Republicans that rejsected the deal are doing it for politcal gain and political gain only. The Democrats are trying to gain a foot in the door on National Security which has ben traditionally a Republican thing. The Republicans voted no so they would look like they weren't giving up on National Security.
Even though this has nothing to do with Security.
I like how Sen Hillary Clinton and Representative Chuck Schummer handled this, idiots! These two people are the same two people that, after Sept. 11, said we couldn't racially profile against people in the airport security lines. So when an Arab country wanted to buy a few terminals in a few ports they said NO! Sure seems like racial profilling to me!
One fact I'd like to put out there, since I was a Merchant Marine, they weren't "buying" the port security, they weren't even "buying" the port, they were buying a few terminals in a few ports! It's like El Al airlines owning a terminal at JFK airport, they don't own the security and they surely don't own the port!
Port Security will still be done by the Coast Guard and Customs.....
What a MESS!
Oh by the way a Dubai company, ISS, already owns port deals for the US Navy and deals with US Navy ships schedules, food and fuel deliveries. Often they have te ships schedule well in advance! Now why isn't that on the front page news?
1 Comments:
I think Republicans changed their minds for several reasons. 62-2 vote here! One: they want re-elected this year. Dead on the mark there...this is about votes. Two: Bush's ratings are at all-time lows. If they side with him now, then they may be brought down by that. Most republican leaders looking for a possible Presidential run cannot afford to have this "lack of national security" hanging over their heads for Democratic ammunition.
Here's a thought: Most Republicans want to drill in ANWR (Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge). So does Bush. This was proposed in December and passed by the House, but the Senate knocked it down 56-44. Incidentially, All Democrats voted against except 2. All Republicans voted for except one. There was no partisianship here. They needed 60 votes to pass it and Bush would be knocking over CIA agents to rush to sign this thing. They have been trying to pass this for years (since 1980 I think)
So, if the Republicans can just maintain their seats and pick up a few more...as soon as the election is over...present the bill again to get it passed before Bush leaves. Mark my words...if Republicans maintain and get a few more seats...this will happen before Bush leaves in 2008.
Now, who benefits from drilling in Alaska? Well, for one Alaska does. Two, I just don't know yet. But I am researching because if this happens, it would be a good idea to invest in oil and equipment companies that will get these contracts. No doubt Halibourton will be involved, but don't know who else yet. If I was a rich real-estate venturists, I might consider looking at real-estate near the biggest cities up there because they will be somewhat of boom-towns eventually.
Post a Comment
<< Home