RE: RE: Any port in the terrorist storm

These deep-water ports are a strategic asset. By their own admission, security forces are only able to control a small fraction of what happens in the ports. They are completely dependent on the management company to do their job. The issue isn't the UAE or Dubai. The issue is whether a company owned by the government of any foreign country should be in control of a strategic asset in the US. This is the same myopic stupidity the Bush Administration exhibits with regard to the borders. He either sees no evil or potential for evil in the governments of countries he considers to be our "friends," or he is so dedicated to the idea of a world socialist order, that giving up a strategic asset in furtherance of that goal seems a small matter.

Capitalism is not a suicide pact. I have no problem with the government forcing the ownership of these ports to be held by an American company. If the British company really needs to get out of the port business and the government specifies that it be owned by an American company or at least by one that is not wholly owned by a foreign government, then the price will reach a level that is attractive for such a company to buy.