Why would we let an Arab country run our ports which are already labeled a huge security risk?
115780
Because W doesn't care about homeland security. He's done nothing but lie, cheat, and steal from the American people since the day he took office. This is gonna blow up in his face tho, i bet now they are gonna wish that that guy that Chenay shot would have died so this wouldn't have come into light. P.S. i've been talking about this for almost a week now but nobody seems to care.
148942
Personally, I think it is a poor decision.  However, whether we agree or not, here is some logic to it.  The company is only getting a contract to manage these ports.  Even the hiring is primarily controlled by the unions and the security is controlled by the United States Government.  This company also has heavy experience in this and has demonstrated friendship with the United States.\n\nAs individuals we may not agree that this is a good decision, but cursing President Bush and defining him with expletives does little to change the situation.  If anyone disagrees, look into it and develop some facts that support your suggestions to change it.    Contact your Congressional Representatives and make your point of view known.  Develop lobbying groups in your community and have them all work together to change this situation.\n\nWithout such an effort the current situation will prevail.
125912
The better question is how can Bush and Cheney allow a security company owned by the United Arab Emirates government take over 6 major ports in America?
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.
143295
Most US ports don't make a lot of money - or rather, they didn't many years ago.  The reason P&O first got into the business of managing ports around the world is simply...because they do a very good job of it.\nContrary to popular opinion, Dubai and the UAE are not supporters of terrorism.  On the contrary - they have proven to be some of the US' best allies in the region.  Not all Muslims think alike.\nIt is not a question of ownership of our ports; they are still owned in the US.  It is a question of management.  Cargo handling and port management were farmed out many years ago because there were companies that could do a better job at a lower price.  Do you, as a taxpayer, want to shell out millions of dollars to keep an unproductive port limping along in business - or get new management, and make the port productive and able to support itself?\nWhen was the last time you heard about a dockworkers' strike affecting our ports?  They were almost monthly occurrences in the '50s and '60s.  New management has reined in the excesses of the unions while improving throughput of cargo, thereby spreading prosperity for everyone concerned.
195509
I think we are wary of muslams, it is a normal reaction to and action the way I see it. If 9/11 never happened it might be a differant story. But it did. I think to err on the side of caution is probably the right thing to do. Even though it probably doesn't matter who runs the ports.
477591
1- Petrol\n 70% of the world's production and 90% of it's reserves is to be found in very primitive arab countries (like Saudi Arabia, Quwait, Emerates, Qatar and Lybia). Those so called countries who are not even mature enough to be considered nations are very close to other more important, far more developed, and highly cultured arab countries (like Iraq, Egypt, Syia and Morroco).\n If any super power (let it be the UK or the USA or whoever) wants a steady and secure supply of petrol, then it must make sure that the more developed arab countries will not form a united front (pan arabism) and control the production and sales of the most important resource ever(The commodity that makes armies move, factorys work, etc)\n\nThus, a nation has to be forged to prevent arabs from working as a team by casuing enough trouble to the more developed arab countries, all under acceptable moral cover of course.This nation was Israeil.\n\n2-The Egypt-Syria axis\nAlong history, especialy the past 1000 years,any attempt to unite the arab world had always started by uniting Egypt and Syria(The brain of the arabs). The presence of Israeil right in the middle between the two nations makes such union impossible.\n\n3-Suez Canal\nHe who control the suez canal controls a large percentage of the maritime movement from west toeast and from north to south and vice versa. It is important to have a nation near the canal that can cause trouble to the nation who would missuse it.
543185
Arab countries wont be able to master nuke tech coz they really dont have the brains for it. If they are buildin one then there is only one way trading the knowledge from pakistan or india where they are the masters in Nuke technology!..
534849
Probably alternative fuels.  It would be nice to spend some research and get some other sources to diversify risk.  Right now, if the Middle East embargoes oil, we would be sunk.  If we had other sources, it wouldn't be as big of a deal.
223846
Probably not but in the absence of American companies financially able to do so as long as security is not outsourced as well. Foreign companies already own and run some very large corporations within our borders. It is a global economy these ports serve, goods we import and products we export help keep the American economy afloat.\nStop for a moment and consider how many foreigners work as civil servants in our military bases worldwide. That's one reason they allow us to be there, it helps their economy.
701168
There is no such  thing as security.  Given that your decisions will not be based on fear.  to seek security is a fool's errand and will never lead to sound policy.
163344
Bigotry takes many forms and attempts to disguise itself behind issues that many people can support (i.e., law and order, national security, etc). The issue here has never been about national security. Many people would like us to think that this is the case but it isn't. The truth is that most people are bigoted when it comes to Arab companies owning companies that do business in the United States. Let's look at all of the issues here. First, national security is not threatened by the deal. The company would not control port security nor would it have access to any information that would allow it to bypass security measures which are in place that it couldn't already bypass without purchasing an interest in the port. Second, the company would do financial harm to itself and is very unlikely to risk a sizable investment in our ports to further some ideological agenda of others. Third, any ownership of an interests in ports could jeopardize our national security even if its an American company therefore it makes no sense to discriminate simply because the company is based out of the UAE.
622661
once a country gets the bomb, that is it. they have fully deterence against anyone including US. that is why it is important that we work diplomatically with the international community and not allow them to have it.
18062
Yes, and it's actually really digusting, the amount of nuclear explosives we have. What I don't understand is why is the U.S. trying to keep other countries from having them, yet it is perfectly alright for us to have them claiming "protection"?
977091
because\nmost terrorists\nare arabs\n\nsimple\nits nuttin personal, but a bunch of arabs blew up buildings, trains, schools, embassies, and hospitals all over the world\n\npeace
946163
Other countries tend to enter into territories not their own.  Perhaps this is because they want to contain any "bad" factors that could affect the entire globe.
244037
Having Nuclear Weapons is a very large responsibility and are primarily used as a deterrent.  If your country isn't stable, isn't secure and can't defend it's nuclear stockpiles then it makes it dangerous for the rest of the world for your country to have nuclear weapons.  Because of the likelihood that terrorist groups looking to get their hands on a nuclear weapon would see your country as easy pickings.