Revelations of selling the management of six of our ports to UAE has stirred up quite a controversy. Strong positions are being staked out on both sides in a curious fashion. Neither side, from what I can tell, is saying they are right. The problem is the other side is wrong.
It sends the wrong signal to allow one company in one part of the world manage the ports and not another from a different part of the world. Or even stronger, it's wrong to be an islamaphobe--it's wrong to be racist--it's wrong to be xenophobic.
And the opposition claims it's wrong allow our ports to be managed by a country with ties to terrorists. It's wrong to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here, yet hold the door open for them.
So this is the choice. Right and wrong is always an easy choice, but when faced with two wrong choices one must decide which is least wrong. Maintain at least one (desperately needed) valuable Arab ally that has demonstrated aide in our efforts to combat terrorism? Granted, they may rub shoulders occasionally with shady characters, don't we all. Or should we be better safe than sorry?