Should the U.S. federal government take over the ports..?
84811
No. I think the government is stretched thin. I think that it would a good idea to have the ports privately owed. \n\nHmmm..... I think our national security should be a top priority. Obviously, we don't want all our ports owed by a country in a volatile region. I guess I would say no. Our ports should be controlled by US companies, with a lot of experience in security. Obviously, we respect Dubai but we need to be careful on who owns our ports.
509800
YES ABSOLUTELY. I beleive that the USA should build a wall across the US/MECICAN boarder and patrol that boarder with the US MILITARY. I also belive that compusery military service should be inacted. Everybody, male and female, should serve at least 3 years in a branch of the military, either in the reserves or active by the age of 25 as a condition of US Citizenship. Then, with the additional manpower, patrol both boarders using the military. This can be done using a combination of manpower and drones.
873936
You are correct. Instead of a foolish Middle East Adventure, we could have invested money to secure our ports and make sure that containers are properly searched, we could be investing in enough baggage screening machines to do the job at every major international airport in the country, we could have already built the wall between the US and Mexico, and we could install the new "sniffer" capable stoplights available from such companies as Optisoft.\n\nBut no...instead our government wants to spread freedom to people who singularly don't deserve it.\n\nSomeday our Administration will remember they represent the American people.
865956
Hey!!! Are you  ok,,,You could walk to Mexico, not to the others countries. Do you mean that the US government should make their government pay for their transportation. Yes,,, I do agreed with you.. even though the US government had try it and those country have refused. Like China, they don't even accept their own citizen back and the USA get stuck with the illegal Chinese.
436172
No.\n\nThe US can do it to itself.
252297
I would reservedly agree with you. I think it is human nature to want control and exploit...governments have the money and power to do so and they always want more of both.
223846
Probably not but in the absence of American companies financially able to do so as long as security is not outsourced as well. Foreign companies already own and run some very large corporations within our borders. It is a global economy these ports serve, goods we import and products we export help keep the American economy afloat.\nStop for a moment and consider how many foreigners work as civil servants in our military bases worldwide. That's one reason they allow us to be there, it helps their economy.
479443
pro: They know their ports....clean, efficient, better service.\ncon: Every ararbic country seems to hav donated either a terrorist or money to terrorists (exception Kuwait?)...  makes you wonder if one of those terrorists will take advantage of the port deal.
350374
Absolutly not!! We wouldn't take the states if bush wrapped it up and  gave it to us with a bow. The states would screw up our economic triumphs and social gains. The us would only be a step in the wrong direction.
333057
What a load of crap, answ3r3r.  If the Feds won't enforce the laws, and if the lack of enforcement places an unfunded burden on the states, they are well within their rights to take action.  This is a federal system of government, where the states cede limited power to the central government...in the absence of action, they are obligated to protect their citizens.  I'd suggest doing a little reading on your part, starting with the 10th Amendment of the Consitution.
222585
have you seen a neighborhood jiffy store owned by middle eastern people. well think of it that way these ports are still watched and secured by us and worked by us they own paper i believe in free trade however if a country has acsess to our business then we should be alloowed the same.\nif we slam our doors then we are doing the same thime the terrorists are trying to do it means they have won a battle
95969
You must be referring to the recent deal with Dubai Ports World, a firm owned by the government of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.  This is not a company owned by the Saudis. The issue is question is one of port management, not a complete sale.  I expect that many people will give a knee-jerk reaction.  Often our responses cause the exact opposite reaction that we hope for.  I believe that we need to take an open minded review of this process before we give the thumbs up or thumbs down.  If the issue is the security of our nation let’s not boil the response down to a “heck no” without some real review.\n\nUnfortunately during this time there is anti-Arab sentiment with many people in the US.  If we want to see a more secular, pro-western population in the Middle East we are going to have to engage in business enterprises with companies based in those countries.  If we boycott the legitimate businesses over there they will fail which will further isolate the populations of these countries.  Freedom generally comes much faster with open markets.  \n\nI personally think that security in post 9-11 America is not much better that pre 9-11 America.  The fact that this entire deal slipped past the current administration shows that we have a lot of work to do here in America.  I am not in favor of the proposed deal in its current form.  Since the executive branch was asleep on this one I would like to here more from Congress on the issue.
920817
Yes, I agree with you. The U.S government should legalize the prostitution. I can't believe that America is still super conservative, and the religious fanatics still influence on the government. Gosh!!!
83329
The security of the ports in question would still be the responsibility of the USA (Coast Guard, Customs, etc.) and the employees would still be US citizens (stevadores, etc.)  Presently, port security begins overseas where cargo sent to the USA must be examined in foreign ports.  The main concern may be that foreign nationals may become too familiar with our security measures and a few might abuse their knowledge (here rather than overseas).
1022890
It'd be an almost impossible task, maybe they could take over a small part-like Hawaii, or Alaska (again Herculean), well and the US has weapons of Mass Destruction and are not denying them, rather using that leverage to control the world.\n\nIn case of such an eventuality happening, that particular invading country is gonna have the whole world after it's as.s, and will have to run, that is assuming that the local Americans don't start using their arsenal of weapons that their gun laws permit them to own, the other country is gonna get their as.sholes pasted on the wall\n\nA note to end - I am not an American and I am not from that fairy Blair's country, and have always been critical of US  in most of my posts pertaining to them. The vulgar expressions (they are a part of most humans' bodies though) are meant not as an insult but to explain, to stress that under the present circumstances what you are asking is practically impossible.\nChill out!\nst
167057
Bush isn't selling the ports ... they already belong to a British company that is selling them to a company from the UAE.\n\nAnd US always has and will continue to be responsible for security at the ports, regardless of what company owns them
80945
Arguementally,allowing the Arabs to buy and control our ports would be like selling our soul to the devil.\nThis will be allowing another 9/11 incident that much more possible to happen in the near future somewhere in our country,watch and see if I'm right or wrong as time moves on.