Dubai threat to hit back (UAE Threatens Against Boeing and US Bases Support)

The Hill.com ^ | March 9, 2006 | Roxana Tiron

[Jhohanna]

it's brown skin that's the problem here.

No, Howlin, it's not, and you should know better. This is about violence, security, and the appearance of impropriety. It has nothing to do with the color of their skin, because last time I checked, they were pretty much the same color as you and I.... they just tan darker. Maybe it is a religion thing, I dunno... but the UAE has not had a great track record on human rights, terrorism (Bangledesh has done more to arrest leaders in the W0T than the UAE has), and propogating extremism.

NOW, that doesn't mean that they can't change, however, they have changed VISIBLY for the Islamic Radicalist movement in the past six months, and that is what has had ME spooked, at the very least. Both of their leaders died in January.... and then in February, this? It doesn't look right. We don't KNOW who's in power over there now... and we don't know what they are going to do. But we do know of the presence of Madrassas teaching Wahabiism, and we know of the wholesale wiping out of textbooks to be replaced with 'sanitized' versions. All within the last 4 months.

Caution should have been exercized at the very least. Why Congress didn't wait the 45 days, I don't know. I just know that on the outside, this whole thing looked like a hornet's nest, and that's what we got. I am happy that it appears to have an amicable solution. Even if it involves Halliburton! *laugh*

And you're damn right they better do something about immigration, and how!

[austinaero]

I agree with you, living in Texas and having lived in Southern California.

You know, this DPW move was smart on their part. It could have been handled better here, that's for sure. However, I think it's reasonable for them to have whatever negative reaction they will have. It's a disappointment to them, to put it mildly. If they are going to act up on a grand scale because of this small(in the context of their global operations) deal, then perhaps their motives were not as clean as was being presented. So what they lose 9 ports in the US? In the grand scheme of things, this does not seem that huge. Let them threaten, they have the right to. The bottom line is, it's business, if you listen to how it's portrayed. They don't need the ports here and they aren't going to suffer tragically if they don't get them. Let them do what they will. These are consequences I can live with.

[Borax Queen]

I have noticed that typically the open borders group lives far away from the border states. These anti-sovereignty people don't see the constant roll-overs, the crowded emergency rooms and highways, the trashed with needles and human waste national forests, the stress of identity theft, and in general the extreme toll to Americans.

Of course, in this post-nationalist era, the value of an American life doesn't mean much anymore. It's all about what "racists" and "xenophobes" we are to ask our employees to enforce the nation's laws.

[.cnI redruM]

You can always say "no". Just whine if the consequences aren't pleasant. After all, Jimmy Carter said "no" to The Shah. It was great moment of moral courage, and of profound geopolitical stupidity.

I guess, now that I think of it, the consequences weren't so bad; if you were rooting like heck against Carter in 1980.

[Cold Heat]

I take positions that I believe strengthens the integrity and perpetuity of the U.S. as the world leader

You have ignored all the historical data on isolationism and the results of it.

You can try to paint it what ever color you like, but in the end the isolationist ideals wreak havoc to any country that employs these policies.

Putting nationalistic lipstick on that pig does not change the smell.

[bondjamesbond]

Hate America first. Disgusting.

I don't hate America. I love America. It's the idiots in Congress I don't have much patience with.

[tertiary01]

Foreign country, has it own laws, not beholding to the US Constitution, the list of differences is endless.

[austinaero]

I just love it when articles quote an anonymous source like- "A source close to the deal said members of Dubai’s royal family are furious at the hostility both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have shown toward the deal."

puhleeez

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

I wouldn't.

And I fail to see how the egregiously incompetent manner in which we've handled homeland security up to this point justifies a maneuver that-at best-does not improve it and-at worst-potentially emperils it at some time in the near or remote future.

[TigersEye]

Then, I went on to state that the UAE will not go through the divestment because they couldn't stand the hit from losing multiple billions from the US. Did you read that last point before you wrote to me?

Yes I did. They are only divesting themselves of the American portions of the deal. It won't amount to multiple billions.

[mlc9852]

You can always learn something on FR. You may not agree with it, though.

[Jhohanna]

They might be interested to read THIS.

Sexually abusing everyone. Including each other. There's no way it's been ended. Especially if it's an old-age practice. *shudder*

And they wonder why we are concerned!!

[jdm]

If a stock advisor was telling me I could double my money by renting an office building to a Middle Eastern state run company founded in 2005 where the state is run by Emirs at least some of whom are friends with Osama bin Laden, I would get a new stock advisor.

If I then found out that the guy who is advising me to do this and who is signing off on the deal stood to personally profit from the deal I would try to have him arrested.

/s

[justshutupandtakeit]

Old labels are irrelevent. The proper terms now are "Rational" and "Irrational"

[Sweetjustusnow]

You are astute. ;)

[rlmorel]

I'm not sure I follow you. Why would I think we are bullet proof and how does that relate to the trade deficit? I'm not being a wise guy, I simply don't follow...could just be me.

[Borax Queen]

:)

[Junior_G]

I see you and Howlin are both playing the race card now. LOL getting desparate?

This should really be seen as a serious issue in its own regard. Part of the Bush legacy will be the fact that in order to come to his defense, his followers were forced to start attacking conservatives who oppose illegal immigration and who oppose the ports deal as racists. I think that from this point forward we will see them use the race card whenever possible. It's a sleazy leftist tactic, but hey-----it often works.

[teawithmisswilliams]

This is leftwing driven hysteria. It's most certainly NOT grassroots anything.

Wrong. It's actually the conservatives, as opposed to the "Bush always knows best"-types who raised the uproar over this. The Dems may be piling on because they're political opportunists, but it's the conservative grass-roots who have driven this issue.

[Howlin]

You'll have to pardon me, as I have been here seven years longer than you have.

I know who is against what and why they're against it.

Doesn't matter how you dress it up, that's what it's about.

And there will be NO meaningful immigration legislation -- why, you ask?

Because the public doesn't want it.

See how that works?