Should I be losing all faith in GWB?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Should I be losing all faith in GWB? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:27:02 AM EDT

I have stuck behind his decisions all along, and do realize he has had some of the toughest decisions to make in the history of this country. This port acquisition has me all in knots. Should it? It just seems so fvcking hypocritical to take the fight to terrorism half-way around the world, then give the UAE the go ahead to purchase major US ports? I'm sitting here staring at my GB 2006 calendar wondering if I have made a huge mistake in supporting him. I'm open to being flamed on this one.....

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:28:27 AM EDT

[#1]

I'll admit that I don't understand WTF he's thinking on this, but I don't have all the facts, so...

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:28:39 AM EDT

[#2]

The US could take the ports back over if it became an issue of national security.

I'm more worried about the border issue with Mexico.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:28:58 AM EDT

[#3]

He's spending money like Hillary wishes she could have, and he's let the Christians (edited by EdSr) hijack the Republican party.

Editing Note:Knock off the attacks on the Christians EdSr

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:29:17 AM EDT

[#4]

No, you should not be losing faith in GWB. Whether we are or not because of his actions or inactions is a completely different story.

I'm gonna prepare for next election...

Chavez/Clinton '08

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:30:51 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
I have stuck behind his decisions all along, and do realize he has had some of the toughest decisions to make in the history of this country. This port acquisition has me all in knots. Should it? It just seems so fvcking hypocritical to take the fight to terrorism half-way around the world, then give the UAE the go ahead to purchase major US ports? I'm sitting here staring at my GB 2006 calendar wondering if I have made a huge mistake in supporting him. I'm open to being flamed on this one.....

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:30:54 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
The US could take the ports back over if it became an issue of national security.

I'm more worried about the border issue with Mexico.

doesn't do us much good when they bring in a nuke through a port they control.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:32:33 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
The US could take the ports back over if it became an issue of national security.

I'm more worried about the border issue with Mexico.

The problem that I have is that an Arab country's state-run company will be in charge of port operations, and thus will have detailed knowledge of all aspects of security there.

This can't be a good idea.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:33:02 AM EDT

[#8]

Between the port decision and our ~~borders~~ revolving doors, I think the captain has lost his compass.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:34:17 AM EDT

[#9]

"Christian Taliban".

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:35:54 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
I'll admit that I don't understand WTF he's thinking on this, but I don't have all the facts, so...

Just remember that all security and customs stuff is still in the hands of DHS, and the folks working at those docks will still be americans.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:38:03 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
He's spending money like Hillary wishes she could have, and he's let the Christian Taliban hijack the Republican party.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:38:05 AM EDT

[#12]

Who do you plan on putting your faith in?

Kerry?

Gore?

McCain?

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:38:36 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll admit that I don't understand WTF he's thinking on this, but I don't have all the facts, so...

Just remember that all security and customs stuff is still in the hands of DHS, and the folks working at those docks will still be americans.

yup.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:41:37 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
He's spending money like Hillary wishes she could have, and he's let the Christian Taliban hijack the Republican party.

I resent your equating Christianity with the taliban.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:42:04 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
He's spending money like Hillary wishes she could have, and he's let the Christian Taliban hijack the Republican party.

So people who are against abortion are now on the same level as people who made women dress in head to toe burkas, considered women to be the property of their husbands, refused to allow male doctors to operate on women, declared Islam to be the only religion allowed in the country, completely banned alcohol, publicly executed anyone and everyone that they did not like or who violated one of the laws of Islam and forced the people to essentially to live in the stone ages? It seems that you know very little about recent history or reality.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:47:08 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
and he's let the Christian Taliban hijack the Republican party.

Posted: 2/20/2006 6:54:32 AM EDT

[#17]

honeslty at this point i think i am going to have to vote third party, both main partys are full of it,

i mean why should we care about the ports being controled by another country when we dont care about our borders, hell the minute men where demonized for doing somthing. it just doesnt make sense anymore

even with the dems having no plan what so ever, Hillery is a shoe in, it sucks but America is ignorant and will forget all of her anti American statements, her and Bill should be tried for treason for there dealings with China,

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:03:33 AM EDT

[#18]

I don't know what the hell to think about our President anymore.

I am not a "Bush basher" that blames the President for every
single thing that happens in the world, and I am by no means
a kool-aid drinking Bush apologist like some of the people here
that condone him no matter what he does (or fails to do).

I am just somewhere in between. He is not doing the job I thought he would do
when I voted for him.

I know one thing, I am sick and tired of hearing him talk about
threats to our country, need for the Patriot act, etc. when he completely ignores
armed troops escorting illegals and drug-runners across our southern border,
not to mention the hordes that get through without armed escorts.

He dropped Social Security reform like a hot rock, and caved to the democraps
completely on that issue when that was one of the major issues he promised
to tackle.

And the administration has spent OUR MONEY like drunken sailors
at a Manilla whorehouse, just to name a few issues.

I am not happy, but like my sigline says courtesy of Airwolf,
he sure as hell beat the alternative.

Let's just pray McCain doesn't get the Republican nomination
in 2008. I am tired of voting for the lesser of the two evils.

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:15:05 AM EDT

[#19]

As a former security manager for a major U.S. port I just don't understand it. First of all Customs and Border Protection, and ICE are not responsible and do not have jurisdiction over the physical security of port facilities. CBP has jurisdiction only in regards to cargo. Basically they inspect by various means less than 5% of incoming containerized cargo.

DHS via the U.S. Coast guard are the regulating authorities over port security however they only set guidelines via the Maritime Transportation Security Act and inspect for compliance. They do not provide security for port facilities. The port operator is responsible for maintaining port security operations and more importantly has access to shipping manifests that describe the contents and point of origin of cargo.

The fact that mostly U.S. citizens will be working at these facilities is just not a valid argument. We currently have U.S. citizens of the Islamic culture serving long sentences in federal prison for terrorist acts. Just Google "The Portland seven", one of these individuals previously worked in the mayor's office for the city of Portland. In addition, with the exception of the roughly 5% or less that is inspected visually or radiologically by CBP, containerized cargo is not opened by anyone except the end user. Doing so is a violation of various international and federal laws.

Longshoreman can discharge several thousand containers from a single ship in a very short period of time. For a whole lot of good reasons they are not privy to the contents of any container. This is a real complicated issue but my opinion is that the Bush administration is putting the security and welfare of the american people on the back burner. Why? I couldn't even begin guess, but I believe it has been going on for a while. Politics as usual and we are going to pay the price.

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:21:46 AM EDT

[#20]

With the Republicans finally in control of both houses and the White House, I naively expected better things.

I'm with GWB on Iraq, but I wish he'd drop the "spreading democracy" pap and call it what it is - securing our oil supply, intimidating Iran and Syria and keeping the jihad on foreign soil.

I'm very disappointed in the direction the Republican party has taken re government intrusiveness, religious zealotry, growth and spending.

I may be throwing my vote away on the Libertarian Party next election.

What happened to the political system that produced Washington and Adams?

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:25:19 AM EDT

[#21]

what difference does it make?

what port security do we have now?

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:30:35 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll admit that I don't understand WTF he's thinking on this, but I don't have all the facts, so...

Just remember that all security and customs stuff is still in the hands of DHS, and the folks working at those docks will still be americans.

yup.

Just remember what Nimrod said:

The problem that I have is that an Arab country's state-run company will be in charge of port operations, and thus will have detailed knowledge of all aspects of security there.

Very stupid decision.

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:32:41 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Who do you plan on putting your faith in?

Kerry?

Gore?

McCain?

Put your faith in someone you can trust--yourself, your friends and family. Put your faith in God if you're the religious type. With the clowns that keep getting elected, I think it's ridiculous to look to politicians as some sort of role-model or courageous leadership.

When Bush attacked the Taliban in retaliation for 9/11 I thought he would wind up making a halfway decent president. I figured out within a couple months after that that he's just another tool.

If Hillary takes it in 2008, or some other Democrat at some point in the future, and you all start howling about her abusing her power or violating your rights or whatever, just remember that a good bit of that power she has to abuse is because of the groundwork that Bush has been laying and exercising for the past 6 years.

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:36:33 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
I am not happy, but like my sigline says coutesy of Airwolf,
he sure as hell beat the alternative.

I beg to differ. With Republicans controlling both houses of congress, they are nothing more than a rubber-stamp committee, which has allowed Bush to put forth all sorts of onerous legislation and spending programs. If Kerry were to try that, Congress would fight him tooth and nail. Much less money would be spent, and we might actually get some decent opposition to the Patriot act or congress raising hell about the leaky borders.

By the way, the UAE is probably the most Westernized/freest country in the Middle East. Arabs come in all types, just as Irishmen, Scottsman, Canadians, Americans and Germans etc. are different.

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:41:25 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll admit that I don't understand WTF he's thinking on this, but I don't have all the facts, so...

Just remember that all security and customs stuff is still in the hands of DHS, and the folks working at those docks will still be americans.

Pvt. Hudson// oh I feel better already// Pvt Hudson

add this to the long list of shit W has fucked up. I'm very disapointed in him, the only thing that comforts me is that kerry would have been worse and Badnarik not electable.

Posted: 2/20/2006 7:43:48 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll admit that I don't understand WTF he's thinking on this, but I don't have all the facts, so...

Just remember that all security and customs stuff is still in the hands of DHS, and the folks working at those docks will still be americans.

Finally a voice of FACT. Pacific and Orient, a UK corporation, ran these ports yet I never saw any British citizens at the ports.

The REAL problem is why would the US government make the operation of these ports so difficult as to eliminate the economic reward for taking on such a burden. This is why foreign corporations won the bid.