I'm not a "globalist," but I know some.
I'm not a "globalist," but I know some.
Hey Vic, it also pointed out the gaping holes in our national security umbrella. Would we have let anyone control our ports during WW II? If not, then why now when we have a global war on terror?
ping
Which begs the question: "What else will we "trade off"?
If we start down the road of depending on foreign sources for much of our food supplies, as we now depend on foreign sources for much of our oil supplies, when will we start depending on foreign sources for much of our laws as well?
Can you tell me what this has to do with national security? Importing things has nothing to do with allowing Islamic nations to control our points of entry. This is the same kind of goofy argument we had on the Meirs nomination. Name calling is always easier than confronting a problem.
This is such a tough call to me because Dubai is everything Hanson has said and more. Having been there three times, I can tell you that Dubai is nothing like people would expect. It is a beautiful, modern, liberal cosmopolitan city. I have fond, fond memories of the place and would recommend a visit to Dubai to anyone who wants to enjoy a great time. I hope dearly that the Pentagon can smooth over this ugly event and American servicemen and women can contiune to enjoy liberty in Dubai --which is a little bit of paradise for those of us who find ourselves in the Middle East.
That being said, I just can't come to terms with a Muslim entity controlling our ports.
The drumbeat in the media and from many uninformed (or lying) politicians referred to "owning the ports." The reality was owning the right to lease some terminals and run the loading and unloading operations there. Too bad we Americans can't at least debate issues based on facts.
Slap, slap, slap.....
Take that FReepers.
No it isn't.
Dubai is merely a luxurious little country-club community for the OPEC princelings.
The LAST thing in the world these pissant little oligarchs want is a government that resembles democracy.
ping
Nice piece, but beyond the playing nice with a loyal Arab nation he missed this important nuance.
The president has to walk a narrow line between 1) convincing the Muslim world that this is a War on Terror as opposed to a War on Islam and 2) maintaining national security. On this issue he was really in a Catch-22, since he really couldn't explain this logic publicly for fear of showing his hand to the Muslim world- This ultimately is a War on Islam.
The west cannot afford to fight 1.2 billion Muslims now, so the best hope is to "divide and conquer" ala Julius Caesar vs. the Celts in the 1st century BC and many others since then. To that end, the president is currently going after the more radical elements of Islam (terrorists) with the WOT with the hope of westernizing future generations of Muslims given the time and access to do so. In the mean time he tries to encourage the more moderate Islamic nations (like UAE) and treating them fairly in trade is one way to do that.
This strategy is truly our only hope unless we're prepared to engage in mass genocide. You have undoubtedly noted how easy it is to rally the relatively uneducated Muslim masses into a violent frenzy over the silly cartoon issue and I expect they would do far worse if they knew the west were engaged in a War on Islam. The Muslim culture is not easily assimilated into a western society, so this will be a supremely difficult challenge. If we can't figure out how to do it, we're doomed to death by submission, dhimmitude (as we're seeing indications of in Europe), or a lot of innocent blood on our hands.
Finally, the RATS saw an opportunity to play political chicken with an issue prior to the midterm election and got most pubbies to play along. As this blog points out "Follow the money and you'll find the truth." Click here!
Hell, many HERE still refer to the issue as "handing the arabs the "port" security, when it was never ports nor security!
Good post, No. 4. I suppose now we'll be treated to attacks on VDH.
We should go collectively insane about something much more important....closing our southern border.
Good grief! I missed your ping to this one!
Let me read this NOW!
Folks talk about needing foreign investment. I'll take the heat, and others will as well for our view. But I am looking at why we need that foreign investment. Could this be a case of the means justifies the end??