Foreign Policy Discussion Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (6209)	12/11/2003 7:48:01 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) of 15987

Hawk, you asked who the term "we" refers to. It refers to what Bush represents as the US. So you would prefer that the "we" refer to any company but a US corporation, right? Let the US taxpayer fatten the pockets of French, German, and Russian shareholders, but offer nothing to US companies and the AMERICAN workers who derive a living working for them? Listen pal.. I'm not a big fan of "Money for Nothing".. If the US taxpayer's money has to be spent, I would rather US corporations be the prime beneficiary of those prime contracts rather than boosting the bottom line of some foreign corporation. Charity begins at home.. If Bush is serious and wants the Iraqi people get the best int he world, then he needs to throw it open for all and have the Iraqis pick the contractors for their rebuilding. Ok.. we can wait until they a constitution and/or elected government.. Maybe in a couple of years we can start rebuilding Iraq... right? The largest amount of that money is likely to be spent hiring Iraqi labor to accomplish their contracts. Their labor is cheaper.. bottom line.. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next