Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:52:00
He’s willing to wait for the miracle, what else is he gonna do?
With apologies to Mark Cohn for the title.
President Bush said Tuesday that the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it.
“After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward,” Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. “I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We’ll treat you fairly.’”
What the hell? Bush never met a spending bill he didn’t like. He never met a new law he didn’t like. The man simply never excercises his power to veto Congressional nonsense.
But now...this...an issue of national security, an issue that has Democrats and Republicans and Libertarians and Greens and half the damn country UNITED IN ONE MIND to say “No, bad idea,” this is where he draws a line in the sand?
As Ace put it..."For this he threatens a veto.”
Crazy man, crazy.
There are those who say the opposition to Dubai securing 6 American ports is based in racism. The fact is the UAE was a transfer point for the 9/11 terrorists both physically and financially. There’s reason to be suspicious.
It comes down to one simple idea: Trust but verify.
If Bush thinks for a New York minute that he has earned the right to say “Trust me!” and have us not laugh in his face, he’s delusional. Maybe we can trust the UAE. TELL US WHY. Talk to us, George. Explain to us why we can trust Dubai to make the right decisions. Explain it to us. We deserve an explanation.
My gut said this was wrong the moment I read about it. I immediately thought up a half-dozen ways that radicals could exploit a UAE-controlled company and create a terror incident on our shores.
Fact: almost every terror act in my lifetime carried out by a foreigner against another nation is committed by someone of Arabic descent. Not all Arabs are terrorists: most terrorists are Arabs. It’s a lot easier for someone of Arabic descent to penetrate Arab-controlled security than it is for an Arab to penetrate security staffed by Brits or Americans. It only takes one small, dedicated group of terrorists to create death and destruction.
It’s simple: We have to be lucky, every day. They only have to be lucky once. Why are we making it easier?
This is obviosuly a realpolitik. We need a friendly in the region. The UAE is a friendly. We need to grease our friend’s palm. I get it. This is not the way. Or, conversely, if it is the way, they explain to the American people why it is the way.
Do your goddamned job, George. Talk to us.
Lastly, uhh...why aren’t we spending a little cash and doing this ourselves? Why can’t we take some of those billions Bush likes to spend on lunacy and spend it on a program to train security and management and whatever else is needed? You know...Americans guarding and managing their own. It could create jobs and invest those workers with a sense of duty...they’re guarding their own country, working with and for their own people. It’s their friends and family, from the boss to the lowliest dock security guard, who pay if something goes wrong.
Let’s say that Dubai Ports World is the best qualified. Let’s say there is no chance, ever, that security could be breached due to their involvement. For the sake of argument, we’ll grant those two items as true.
Are they ever going to care as much as U.S. Ports of America would?
I’m not willing to wait for the miracle. In this case, the miracle is either Bush comes to his senses and says “Oops” or he explains to us why this is a good idea.
Never happen.
*UPDATE*
“What could possibly go wrong? Cleopatra and Egypt are our allies who continue to send us large shipments of grain. The fact that they have helped and financed terrorists such as Marcus Antonius should not be a factor in our decision making,” future Emperor Octavius was quoted as saying.
Brilliant. And more here:
Saudi Arabia claims to be our ally today. Would you give them the keys to the Port of NY?
Pakistan, with its nuclear weapons, claims to be our ally. But they are probably one assassination away from becoming an open enemy.
And so it goes. No vetting today can guarantee what the government of Dubai’s relationship will be with us tomorrow. And our own secret agencies and experts have been notably awful at predicting events in the middle east.
Bill’s on it. Why should we trust George’s word, and by extension the word of agencies that so fouled our security that the World Trade Center towers no longer exist? If we can trust them, why aren’t we being told exactly how and why?
I’m fed up with Bush’s “Trust me” routine.
For the last word (at least in this post) we turn to Chris Muir from Day by Day:
That’s what I’m sayin’.
Posted by JimK at 06:52 PM on February 21, 2006
Permalink | Trackbacks (1) | Email to a friend |
Categories: News, Politics, The Federal Government, The Middle East, War
Tags:
Technorati: Dubai port Bush politics
Comments:
#2 Posted by JimK 
on 02/21 at 10:00 PM -
Maybe you’re right.
Why isn’t my President telling me this stuff?
#3 Posted by celestial on 02/21 at 10:27 PM -
We all know what a great and consistent communicator our President is.
#4 Posted by celestial on 02/21 at 10:38 PM -
Given his record and your conservative nature, I would suppose you generally want to assume the best about Bush, as he hasn’t done anything irreversible to date, and he has done ALOT of good things.
-He needs to close the southern and northern borders and I mean like now, every day he doesn’t, I get a little angrier. I will feel betrayed if he leaves office with illegals and the Mexican army still ignoring the darn border.
-Of course, he needs to stop letting politicians spend so much.
-He has to stop trying to please people that don’t matter, like liberal Democrats.
And on this issue, he needs to just friggin’ communicate. I trust him, but gosh, he can be so pathetic at times.
#5 Posted by JimK on 02/21 at 10:40 PM -
We all know what a great and consistent communicator our President is.
His own worst enemy...He ain’t no Reagan or Clinton, that’s for sure. He’s always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Every time he’s taken five minutes to talk to We the People, his rating go up. You’d think they’d learn by now...we like it when you ‘splain it, Loocey. An’ you not gonna come to da club.
(No, I don’t know why I broke into Ricky Riccardo.)
#6 Posted by celestial on 02/21 at 10:49 PM -
Because it’s one of the funny things that’s fun to do when you need to use the word “explain” differently.
#7 Posted by CommandoCody on 02/22 at 01:00 PM -
Turns out the wheel greasing goes both ways.
On the one hand, I don’t find it too surprising that representatives of coastal areas have Longshoreman money coming to them. The amounts, for the most part, seem to me less than what it would take to get a member of Congress solidly in your pocket, but the editorial does raise an interesting point.
Just saying that some of the opposition to this might not be for completely innocent and defensible reasons. Seems to take some of the sting out of the “There is bipartisan concern about the security so there must actually be some security problem” angle.
Regardless, I agree with you that Bush should be talking more openly about this. It would spare us the trouble of having to drag it out of his administration with a grandstanding congressional investigation.
But, I think you should make it clear that this deal does not involve the handing over of port security or the dumping of American dock workers in exchange for Arabs. Not that you’ve actually said as much, but it comes off as heavily implied to me.
If there is something outrageous about this deal, it’s going to be found in the “stipulations” the company agreed to, if any, in order to get the deal approved. Everything else is just hot air.
#8 Posted by CommandoCody on 02/22 at 01:04 PM -
Here’s a nice summary of some of the issues involved.
#9 Posted by jo-jo on 02/22 at 02:39 PM -
He has to stop trying to please people that don’t matter, like liberal Democrats
yeah, fuck that almost-half-country. they certainly don’t matter! GWB’s only president of that portion of the United States that voted for him!
#10 Posted by celestial on 02/22 at 07:36 PM -
Well by trying to make everybody happy, he’s making NOBODY happy, jo-jo.
#11 Posted by celestial on 02/22 at 08:13 PM -
Raise your hand if President Bush made you smile within the last two months!
-arms fall off-
#12 Posted by Drumwaster on 02/22 at 10:11 PM -
I am not against this deal NOT because they are Arabs. I am against this deal because they are NOT Americans.
Controlling all ports of entry to the country is the Constitutionally-defined responsibility of the Federal Government. Period.
I’m not bitching if we are leasing them dock and warehouse space to run operations, etc., but “operational control” is solely the purview of the Government.
And just imagine if anything happens through these ports at any point in the future. Even if the Dubai company is utterly blameless, how’s it going to look for the GOP? And even an attempt would drive a wedge between us and any Arab allies, no matter how many asses get kissed and rubber chicken dinners get eaten.
#13 Posted by Sean Galbraith 
on 02/23 at 01:22 AM -
Drum: Just as an FYI, not a criticism of your position:
(via Washington Monthly)
As the Financial Times reports, state-owned companies already operate terminals in the U.S., including China Shipping at the Port of Los Angeles and APL (owned by Singapore’s state-owned NOL) in Oakland. “The US container port industry would be unworkable without companies controlled by foreign governments,” says a British analyst. Furthermore, DPW and Singapore’s state-owned PSA are the third and fourth largest port operators in the world, and China’s Hutchison Ports already refuses to invest in the U.S. If all of these firms are shut out of the country, we lose access to some of the best and most efficient port operators in the world.
celestial: “Raise your hand if President Bush made you smile within the last two months!”
He’s made me smile for the last 5 years. Though, it is more of a laughing smile.
RSS (Subscribe)
Tip jars (Donate today!)
#1 Posted by celestial
on 02/21 at 09:42 PM -
The entire port will still be controlled by the USA, the UAE basically just provides equipment.
Do you want to know why this isn’t a threat to security?
Given an oppurtunity like this, the UAE should care MORE than the US about keeping an incident from occuring.
I have a weird metaphor.
Imagine peaceful outer-space aliens made contact with Earth tomorrow and a bunch of hicks started firing guns at at their ships. The rest of Earth would then be bending over backwards to show the Aliens that things aren’t really so pathetic.
The UAE company has so much at stake on this.