Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (32487)	12/9/2003 5:15:55 PM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

You don't play by our rules, you don't play. The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying the step "is necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States." The directive, which was issued by the deputy defense secretary, Paul D. Wolfowitz, represents perhaps the most substantive retaliation to date by the Bush administration against American allies who opposed its decision to go to war in Iraq. The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying the step "is necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States." The directive, which was issued by the deputy defense secretary, Paul D. Wolfowitz, represents perhaps the most substantive retaliation to date by the Bush administration against American allies who opposed its decision to go to war in Iraq. The administration had warned before the war that countries that did not join an American-led coalition would not have a voice in decisions about the rebuilding of Iraq. But the administration had not previously made clear that French, German and Russian companies would be excluded from competing for the lucrative reconstruction contracts, which include the rebuilding of Iraq's infrastructure and equipping its army. Under the guidelines, which were issued on Friday but became public knowledge today, only companies from the United States, Iraq and 61 other countries designated as "coalition partners" will be allowed to bid on the contracts, which are financed by American taxpayers. Among the eligible countries are Britain, the closest American ally in Iraq, as well Poland and Italy, which have contributed troops to the American-led security effort. But the list also includes other nations whose support has been less evident, including Turkey, which allowed American aircraft to fly over its territory but barred American forces at the last minute from using its soil as a staging point to invade Iraq from the north in March. The directive by Mr. Wolfowitz does not spell out a precise argument for why allowing French, German and Russian companies to join in the competition for the contracts would hurt American security interests. But it suggests that the main motivation is to use the contracts as a reward for countries that participate in the American-led coalition and contribute troops to the American-led security effort. "Every effort must be made to expand international cooperation in Iraq," the directive says, noting that the number of troops provided by non-American countries has increased from 14,000 to 23,700 in recent months, while the number of American troops has declined by about 12,000. "Limiting competition for prime contracts will encourage the expansion of international cooperation in Iraq and in future efforts." ... from nytimes.com For anyone who doubts that the hegemony plan will be pursued during a Bush second term, note the above "future efforts". JMO lurqer

To: lurqer who wrote (32487)	12/10/2003 12:11:00 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 89467

And my guess is that the Bush Admin will react poorly to ridicule - and shoot themselves in the foot. I sincerely hope so. It's hard to say what the media will do. They maliciously destroyed Gore in 2000, but they seem to be offering Dean much more of a positive coverage this year. I'm wondering if I'm seeing what I think I'm seeing, because obviously Bush has totally corrupted himself on behalf of the large media conglomerates. Bush, Murdock, Immelt, Eisner, Malone and Redstone are a perfect circlejerk operation. I don't see how Dean fits neatly into this cluster.... Clearly the moguls have more to gain by retaining Bush? I would think so.