Re: Neocons destroying America

JF Mezei wrote:
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
I seem to recall that the army tried to restore electric power,
water, etc, only to find that as fast as they fixed things, people
would sabotage the water pumps, steal the carburators off the
generators, etc.


It was well documented that the electric grid in Iraq was already
extremely fragile and had insufficient capacity. Yet, Rumsfeld,
wantintg to prove his gonads were still working, ordered hsi big
fancy high tech bombs to target these facilities as well as all
telecom facilities, and all government buildings except for the oil
ministry.
In terms of reconstruction, it shouldn't be the invador that rebuilds.
The invador should hire local contractors to rebuild.

But the Bush regime spent the money on Haliburton and Blackwater (and
many other US firms) instead of spending the money in Iraq. From a
taxpaper point of view, it means that a lotof the money actually stays
in the USA and until Haliburton moves its headquarters to Dubai, it
still pays taxes to the USA government. However, it doesn't actually
do anything to help rebuild Iraq.

Regarding the previous paragraph:

This is how about 90% (casual empricism) of all foreign aid is done.
Building infrastructure using contractors who are accountable to the
ministry supplying the money, is the only viable method of infrastructure
construction projects in 3rd world countries - period. Anyone who has ever
worked in this area knows this, and so do the governments footing the bill
as international aid.

Your suggestion to "throw money" at local (in this case Iraqi) comnpanies
and expect something to actually get built is ludicrous, and would be
equally ludicrous in about 100+ other countries I can name. Feel free to do
some research on this matter, and you will discover that while contractors
can and do employ local suppliers, labourers, sub-contractors etc, the
infrastructure aid project contracts invariably go to a prime contractor
from the donating coutry. The reasons for this are so palpably obvious that
I will not list them here.

That Iraqis want to blow up the infrastructure that the US companies have
attempted to (re)construct says something about Iraq and the people who live
there, not about Haliburton, Blackwater or Uncle Sam. In the anarchy that
invariably follows the demise of despotic regimes, there are always lots of
"committed" individuals ready to continue the destruction to further their
own power agendas. Iraq is no different here.

The question as to whether the US should have precipitated the demise of the
despotic regime is outside the scope of this response, and irrelevant.

FYI: I have first hand experience and knowledge of this business, generally,
and specifically relating to Iraq, gained through previous employment
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/energy/op/iraq1.htm.

You really have no clue what you are saying here.


Dweeb.
Anyone who has read the newamericancentury.org 1998 memo will know
that everything that has happened since 9-11 had been planned in
advance. 9-11 was the convenient terrorist attack that allows
Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz to implement their agenda. That included
killing the deal with North Korea (which was spun into North Korea not
respecting the deal). Note that "Axis of evil" was actially coined in
that 1998 memo.

You'll also note that following 9-11, Iran had made great advances in
normalising relations with USA and helped secure borders in
Afghanistan etc. But in order to implement the 1998 plan which had
already labeled Iran as part of the axis of evil, the USA simply
found some ship with arms bound for Palestine and accused Iran of
sending arms to Palestinians, and voila, Iran is instantly back in
the list of bad guys.


.

Relevant Pages

  • The Great Iraq Swindle How Bush Allowed an Army of For-Profit Contractors to Invade the U.S. Tre
    ... The Great Iraq Swindle ... How Bush Allowed an Army of For-Profit Contractors to Invade the U.S. ... There isn't a brazen, two-bit, purse-snatching money caper you can ... When things went wrong, KBR simply ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: I have a BAD feeling about this
    ... DOES Iran pose an immenent threat to world peace? ... its money, there is more money to be made through peace then war. ... There are no nukes in Iraq. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Neocons destroying America
    ... But the Bush regime spent the money on Haliburton and Blackwater instead of spending the money in Iraq. ... it doesn't actually do anything to help rebuild Iraq. ... But in order to implement the 1998 plan which had already labeled Iran as part of the axis of evil, the USA simply found some ship with arms bound for Palestine and accused Iran of sending arms to Palestinians, and voila, Iran is instantly back in the list of bad guys. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • private armies, private war
    ... There are 48,000 'security contractors' in Iraq, working for private ... American forces was driving down a street near the Iraqi Interior Ministry. ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • The USA Mercenary Revolution
    ... Flush with Profits from the Iraq War, Military Contractors See a World ... There are now almost 200,000 private "contractors" deployed in Iraq by ...
    (soc.culture.cuba)