Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
First off, let me say one thing... I'm pissed. I don't like the idea of a country that breeds terrorists, or any other country for that matter running our ports. President Bush is a f***in' moron that should be tried and hung for treason in Texas. What the hell is he thinking about? Are his gears rusty? Is his head filled with empty space that has cobwebs in it? If you shine a light through one ear, will the beam emit from the other side?
Let's think about this, the current administration blows $160 some billion on a war to fight terrorism and "keep America safe". Which I don't think we're any safer now as a country than we were yesterday, a week ago, pre-9/11 or any other time for that matter. There's always been risks throughout history, there's always been danger, there's always been enemies both within country borders and outside of it.... But this is just absurd. It makes no sense what so ever... spend $160 billion fighting in the middle east, sell control of our ports to Arabs for $6.8 billion. I'd rather sell control to Microsoft or Google than sell control to an Arab company. I don't think control of our ports should be out sourced to any foreign agency, let alone one as greedy, ambitious and conspiring as the United Arab Emirates.
While were at it, why don't we just hand them the keys to the white house, give up all our seats in congress, and let them have our tanks and fighter jets. Then we can convert all our churches to Islam, and make it law for everyone to face toward Mecca 3 or 4 times a day and pray that someone stands up to these a******s.
Foreign Ports on US Soil
|
Posted By: Normalized Vector Posted on: Feb. 26, 2006 at 4:14 PM  15 Comments
|
2.9 / 5
Based on 12 ratings.
|
*This article was filtered, login or change your preferences to remove language filter.
Anonymous commenting has been disabled, you must login to comment on articles.
Signup for an accountComments:
|
Feb. 26, 2006 at 07:38:49 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| I'd swear the War is costing over double that $160B. You have a reference for it Normalized?
|
||
|
Feb. 26, 2006 at 10:36:17 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Guys bash me just for the sake of bashing me? Granted it's an outdated number, but it still proves my point... even at 160 billion, it's about 23 times less than the cost of the war that their giving up our ports for. No marvel, I don't have a reference for it, and I'm not going to dig one up either, like I said, the number I posted proves my point sufficiently. If you die hard liberals want to dig up the real number, go ahead, I don't give a s*** if you do or you don't. If you do, all it's going to do is support my point even more, and we wouldn't want to do that now would we. June just don't like me and will bash anything I say because I called her a bible thumpin' tree huggin' hippy. Speaking of which, what did you guys do, just look at $160 billion, and decide to bash... God Damn liberals, you guys are useless. |
||
|
Feb. 26, 2006 at 11:01:51 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Norm Norm Norm...It's ok. they do the same to me. They are mad at me and sre taking it out on you. The 160 billion is what has actually been spend to date on the war. that does come from the CBO. I understand you could care less. As for the ports, Norm they have been ran by foreign companies for years, from Singapore to Great Britian. These guys from the UAE do an excellent job and have for years with other piorts for other countries around the world. It would be nice if an Anerican company still did what these guys do. But there are none left. The Government has made it so damn hard for an American company to do this kind of work that it is no longer cost effective. We have to run with so much insurance, have all the OSHA specs up to date and provide so much legal crap that they have run all the American companies into the dirt. The guy who is heading up the deal used to run one of the last in the U.S. and that's why he sold out to the Brits. Be thankful we have someone with experience looking into the deal and running the transision. Could be June or capitanmarvel. |
||
|
|
Feb. 27, 2006 at 10:37:45 AM
|
Rating for this article
|
| I don't like the idea of the British running our ports either, but I like it better than UAE running them. I'm shocked to hear this coming from you AA considering that you are very adamant about the necessity of the war in Iraq to stop terrorism. UAE breeds terrorists, and I would think that would be the last thing you want is a company from some Arab terrorist generating country. I understand that security is handled by the coast guard, and should be handled by the coast guard, but they can't catch everything. With the UAE running the ports, there will be a higher likelihood of smuggling in dirty bombs are terrorists themselves... After all, UAE consists of Arabs that are primarily (if not all) muslims, and of those muslims, there are most certainly going to be radical ones. If there are not radical ones, then after word of taking over the US ports, the radicals will aggressively try to be recruited and put into positions over here in the US on our ports, on our soil. So we're no longer keeping the war would no longer be taking the fight to them, they would be taking the fight to us. *note: I am thankful neither of the 2 above mentioned knuckleheads are running our ports. |
||
|
|
Feb. 27, 2006 at 06:18:27 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Normalized, I get your point but look st it this way, If you banish all Arab countries you are profilling, and we all know how the left hates that. Oh wait, this time it's ok with them. We are not at war with Muslum theology, just a sliver of it that has been hijacked by radicals. That would be no different than us not eating at an establishment ran by white people because fo the KKK. I know what you are saying though. I do not want Iran running things, but UAE is a little different. Some of their people were nuts, no doubt, but this is a business entity that runs ports all over the world. If a terrorist did get though because of their help, they would run the risk of losing all the other contracts around the world. I think they know better what a terrorist looks like anyway. I sure as hell can't tell them apart. |
||
|
Feb. 27, 2006 at 10:02:48 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Touchy, eh, Norm, you beguiling, silver-tongued orator? Fascinating article and I love the dialogue. If you're happy, I'm happy. Ta. |
||
|
|
Feb. 27, 2006 at 10:36:34 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| beguiling... sometimes, orator... Most the time, silver-tongued... Never |
||
|
|
Feb. 27, 2006 at 10:47:30 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| My tongue is gold baby... if you were a hot bodied, 21 years young female, I would invite you over to see it. Oh well, I'll show it to you anyway ... :P |
||
|
Mar. 19, 2006 at 05:15:33 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| "... there's always been enemies both within country borders .... " I think you vectored in on the central point pretty well, Normalized. It's the only solution that fits all of the insane facts. Enough said. |
||
Where'd you get'cha $160 billion cost of the war? The CBO?
Report Abuse