Do you support the sale of 6 major U.S. ports to the United Arabe Emirites?
113747
I do not object to this sale.  Please TRY to understand: Those ports are NOT being sold at all.  They will still be owned by Americans; Americans will still provide security; Americans will still work at the ports.  All that is being sold is the company (P&O) that manages freight handling at the ports.\nWe are not being sold down the river.  The government of Dubai will not receive classified info on our military shipments from the ports.  Who cares if they know how many Barbie dolls and sneakers are being shipped to the US?\nShutting Muslims out of the US business community for no good reason only serves to alienate them, and hinders our ability to fight terrorism.
95795
We don't run any of our eighty ports.  The sale is actually between Great Britian and the UAE.  \n\nI do have my concerns, but we aren't selling the ports
133965
The UAE has had finacial links to certian terriost groups and that concerns the congress. I am in no way advocating that the UAE has close ties to terriost groups, but in time or war it wouldn't be the smartest idea to allow this to happen. The UAE already runs ports in the middle east & orient. If they had our ports, where is the check & balance? If we could ensure that every container was to be x-rayed and checked that arrived on our shores, then there would probably not be a huge issue. Unfortuantly, only about 10% of the containers are checked. It is better to be safe than sorry.
141295
No one is selling our ports.  This is merely about a contract with a port operations company to continue with day to day port operations.  Security will continue to done by U.S. officials.
166172
There are only six affected by the Dubai Ports Worldwide takeover.  You should also know that the company isn't taking over the entire port.  They're only managing some of the terminals.  The number in parentheses shows how many they'll be operating in each port if the deal goes through)\n\nBaltimore (2 of 14)\nHouston (4 of 12)\nMiami (1 of 3)\nPhiladelphia (1 of 5)\nNew Orleans (2 of 5)\nNewark, NJ (1 of 4)\n\nHope that helps ya!  Don't forget to rate the best answer!\n\n\nEDIT: LOL, Loco!  Reminds me of when I was in science class in 8th grade.  The teacher put the question: "Name the four states of matter" on the test.   Then he wrote on the board:\n\n"States that matter: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Key West."
294207
This illustrates our (American) emotional irrationale of Arabs.  Ask any high ranking Navy official, the Dubai ports in the East are the safest ports on the planet.  We, here in America have unfairly targeted DP AFTER allowing them to bid on this business.  We are shamefully hippocritical sometimes.  I'm a conservative, and am ashamed of my government at this point.
121551
I am surprised that the U.S. was giving any aid to the Palistine Authority as we do not support terrorism and Yassir Afrifat was considered one of the foremost terrorist leaders in the world 40 years ago.  The Palistine Autority has agreed to return the Money.  You say shame on the U.S. for asking for this money back, yet Hamas wants Israel driven into the sea, which is against the policy of the U.S. foreign policy.  Hamas has said they do not want to change their belief's that Israel should not exist and the U.S. asked for the return of our money.  Fundimentalist Muslims want the destruction of the U.S. because we support Israels right to exist.  Does it make sense to you that we should support those who are against our policy?  Foreign Aid is for those countries that support our policies in principal.  The Palistine Authority understands this and has agreed to return the money.  Everybody says it is Allah's will that the U.S. must be destroyed, however in the meantime they all want to spend our money.  Do you see a conflict here?
244585
We weren't.  What happened is that the British company that held the contract to manage the ports was purchased by Dubai World Imports, a port management company owned by the UAE.  This led to worries that the UAE would use access to the ports as a way to sneak terrorists into the country. Congress was simply trying to decide wether to get out of the contract and go with another company or maintain the status quo.\n\nThe ports are still owned by the United States and security is handled by the Coast Guard.  The management company only handles day to day operations.\n\nWe are looking for a management company now, because the UAE has withdrawn any claims to that contract.
217299
I quit years ago and see no value in it. The Dubai Ports deal has nothing to do with illegal domestic spying ( opposed ).\nThis question reads like a non sequitor.\n\nOn the Dubai ports deal, I find it deliciously ironic that after years of beating the drums about terrorism and 9/11 by the Bush Admin , the American public has a large number of rabid xenophobic folks that blokced this deal.\nWhat did he expect having had this thing happen in secret?
126305
Well, first off, the company is owned by the UAE government, which, while I wouldn't exactly say is a close friend of the U.S., is an ally.  Second, all the company is doing is taking over managing the ports -ownership will still belong to the various port authorities in each city.  The managing of the port will not involve controlling security -again, that responsibility belongs to the port authorities, to the Coast Guard, and to U.S. Customs & Border Protection.\n\nIt should also be noted that the government has been aware of a possible takeover of P&O by Dubai Ports World since last fall.  The only real reason a stink was suddenly raised was after some union members complained to the mayor of Miami.  The White House has said extra security precautions were taken in vetting this deal, but it was still approved.  Some maritime security experts also agree, since DPW will not have any control over security procedures.  What it's really about is politics & shoring up union support for the Democrats (plus to look like they're actually beating the GOP on national security for once), while for some Republicans, it's about either supporting their constituents, or attempting to "claim their independence" from Bush, whatever that means.\n\nFinally, after having perused the Gulf News (a major English-language daily in Dubai), I get the impression that they generally associate this sort of complaint with the GOP or "American rightists", but they are especially angry at the New York Times, since they generally see the Times as a paper which tries to counter cultural hatred or whatever.\n\nSo, it's not really a "takeover", since the ports will still be under U.S. ownership -rather, it's who they hire to handle the day-to-day operations.  The longshoremen's unions are freaked out because they don't want to lose any jobs -something that I doubt would happen, but union guys are particularly paranoid about that in my experience, to the point where they make it more inefficient to get work done.  But, I think were we to stop this deal simply because they're an Arab country, it would send the wrong message to the Middle East & the world in general.  So, yes, I think Bush is actually doing the right thing.
85754
The UAE is not really an Arab country in the way most Americans think of Arab States. Many American Citizens live there. Now the timing is bad just because we are so scared that even countries that are allies are hurt. It is a shame.\n\nPeople from the USA will still be running our ports. The workers are all from the USA. The reason we are scared is because the word Arab is in the name of the country. They are an economic powerhouse. They have _no oil_. They gained power through the free market like the USA.\n\n*The UAE is what we want Iraq to be.*\n\nIt should be investigated as the climate we are in calls for that. The congress should have been clued into this before. The secretive nature of this Bush administration is very worrysome. There is no reason to deny them other than their location in the world. It makes me wonder if something else is going on. He claims he had not known untill it was to late. How could he not know! I do not accept this. It makes me very nervous.\n\nThe investigation must be done, but a decision must be made fairly speedily or countries around the UAE will use it against the USA to turn more people in that region away from us.\n\nUPDATE:\nWow, I just heard the senate hearing on this. Appearantly, Bush was giving Dubai some breaks with this deal. He did not require them to make copies of business files in the USA, where they would be subjected to court orders from us. Also he did not designate a US citizen to make sure they were in compliance with US terms. This is so shady!
175175
It is totaly idiotic. We need to not let our infrastructer be sold off to the highest bidder, especially one with ties to 9/11. The govt. needs to top wasting our time and money in this BS war and use that money to buy back America.
143929
Absolutely not. In fact, Americans should try to buy more. We shouldn't let those ignorant fanatics bully the Denmark government into restricing freedom of speech.
305460
Can't you just buy some women with the millions of American oil dollars you have? Or is it all tied up in building another resort in the ocean?
611896
My hope is that the future will show that, yes, it is worth it.  Not only to the Iraqis, but also for the entire region as well as to us.  If we can build allies in the region, it stands to reason that it will benefit us in the future.  Libya has been taken off of the list of terrorist nations.  Freedom and Democracy can be contatious.  Kuwait is a great example.
601443
yes\nyes \nand YES\nit would help us out a lot...\nbuy only stuff made in the USA..\nkeep the USA alive please
769129
Are you asking a question or are you preaching?  The discourse above sounds more like a sermon than a question.\n\nAt one point the US did support Iraq, and Saddam (when they were fighting Iran).  However they were never allies of ours.  The relation ship we had with them was more an "enemy of my enemy" thing.\n\nI doubt seriously that Israel ever trained the Taliban, much less in Pakistan.\n\nI am skeptical about the US "giving $6 billion to Al Qaeda,"  unless you are referring to indirectly through the purchase of oil.\n\nAs for the rest, it seems that it is the sermon part.