SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 9:42:30 PM
From: calgal  Respond to of 90947
 
Touche!!:)



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 9:43:48 PM
From: calgal  Respond to of 90947
 
Was that spelled correctly?:)



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 9:52:46 PM
From: mph  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
I was wondering whether s/he counted Kerry
among the gullible.<g>



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 10:01:03 PM
From: calgal  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 90947
 
Bush Defends Iraq Reconstruction Policy

Thursday, December 11, 2003

WASHINGTON — A lot of international feathers have been ruffled since the United States announced in a tersely worded message this week that only allies who helped in the Iraq war (search) will be permitted to bid on primary Iraqi reconstruction contracts.



But in his first public comments on the subject, President Bush stood firm Thursday, and left little room for compromise on $18 billion in U.S.-financed Iraq reconstruction aid.

"Men and women from our country, who proudly wear our uniform, risked their lives to free Iraq. Men and women from other countries, in a broad coalition, risked their lives to free Iraq. And the expenditure of U.S. dollars will reflect the fact that U.S. troops and other troops risked their life," Bush said at a year-end Cabinet meeting.

He added that Americans strongly support his stance.

"Taxpayers understand why it makes sense for countries that risked lives to participate in contracts in Iraq," he said.

Countries that have contributed troops include the United Kingdom (search), Spain (search), Italy, Poland, Japan and Australia (search). Countries that would be excluded under the Pentagon directive include Russia, France (search), Germany and Canada, all of whom opposed the war.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz defended the U.S. decision, adding that the tough stance will encourage countries to join the coalition and make them think twice about saying no to such operations in the future.

But government officials say privately that the president is more flexible than he seems. As Bush spoke, former Secretary of State James Baker prepared to go to Europe to ask the Germans, Russians and French to forgive the $20 billion in loans they had extended to deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. He is also headed to the United Kingdom and Italy during what officials described as a "fact-finding mission."

White House press secretary Scott McClellan seemed to indicate that a possible deal could be arranged.

"I'm saying that we welcome the opportunity to discuss this decision with other countries, that if other countries want to participate in the ongoing efforts, then circumstances can change," McClellan said.

Pamela Wallin, Canada's consul general to New York, also told Fox News that Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien received a phone call from Bush on Thursday offering assurances that Canada will not be excluded from the prohibition.

"That's what our prime minister said, that he'd been given assurances," Wallin said, adding that the United States does not have control over all the money because several funds are administered internationally.

Canada may be an exception because it has been a strong supporter in the war on terrorism and still has troops in Afghanistan. McClellan refused to discuss that situation, saying the president called Chretien on his last day in office to wish him luck. Paul Martin takes over the position on Friday, and has said he would raise the issue with U.S. officials.

"Like [Bush] said to other leaders, there'll be open lines of communication on this, we'll be glad to discuss these issues with you, and that's where it was left," McClellan said.

McClellan said companies from anti-war countries could compete for contracts being financed by the international fund the White House estimates will be worth $13 billion. Also, the ban does not prevent companies from winning subcontracts.

The British government said Washington was fully entitled to limit construction contracts to countries that were part of the U.S.-led coalition, but foreign leaders said they were taken by surprise by the decision.

Russia's foreign minister suggested the contract ban could undermine the international campaign against terrorism.

"The activities in Iraq split the international community and reduced its possibilities in the fight against international terrorism," Igor Ivanov said at a news conference in Munich.

United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in Germany meeting with Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, said it's time for more international cooperation, not less.

"I believe it is time we tried to rebuild international consensus and work together and pool our efforts as the chancellor said, to stabilize Iraq," Annan said.

Schroeder added that he didn't know if such a prohibition violates international trade law, a consideration the European Commission said it would look into. Bush shrugged off the complaint.

"International law? I better call my lawyer; he didn't bring that up to me," Bush said.

Bush added that Schroeder had not voiced a complaint during the phone call between the two leaders on Wednesday. The president also spoke Wednesday with French President Jacques Chirac and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Schroeder said "no direct link" exists between the country's willingness to forgive Iraq's debt and the U.S. ban on contracting, but Russia signaled it would take a hard line on restructuring after being excluded from contracts.

"Iraq's debt to the Russia Federation comes to $8 billion and as far as the Russian government's position on this, it is not planning any kind of a write-off of that debt," Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov told reporters. "Iraq is not a poor country."

McClellan said Bush feels that Iraqis should not be stuck with the bill for the palaces and torture chambers of Saddam's regime. Trying to focus attention on the debt-relief issue Thursday, Bush said forgiving Iraq's debt "would be a significant contribution for which we would be very grateful."

As the international stir continues, the United States postponed a conference that was to have taken place Thursday for companies seeking reconstruction contracts in Iraq. The conference, at which the contract requests were to have been made public, is now scheduled for Dec. 19 outside Washington, D.C. The delay was blamed on scheduling conflicts.

Fox News' Wendell Goler, Greg Kelly and The Associated Press contributed to this


URL:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105445,00.html



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 10:19:25 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
From: American Spirit

That argument that Saddam was no danger is just naive.
He was a big danger, just not an imminent threat worth going it alone without a post-war plan.

Kerry was 100% right about Iraq from the beginning. Yes send in the troops, but only invade as a last resort, with UN cooperation, moderate Arab help and a post-war plan.

What was Dean's plan for dealing with Saddam? Bet he didn't even have one.

Message 19569616



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 10:22:59 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
From: American Spirit

Bush
was totally AWOL on terrorism prior to 9-11. He quashed the FBI's investigations into Saudi funding, obsessed on the useless boondoggle SDI, didn't say a single word about terrorism when in Europe, disbanded Clinton's counter-terror programs to start from scratch, ignored warnings of imminent hijackings on 8-5 and let Saudi VIP's including Bin Lauden family members out of the country right after 9-11 without even beng interrogated.
You tell me who's soft on terror. Bush is just a Monday morning quarterback.

Bushies had one major reason for invading Iraq by themselves. OIL.

If Iraq did not have oil, they'd ignore them just like they have North Korea or Myammar. Bushie claims to have invaded for human rights reasons are really laughable. They concealed their real reasons by saying it was because of WMD's and Saddam's alliance with Al Qaida. They also timed the war to swipe the mid-term elections.

Now we know there is no credible evidence any of that existed since the early or mid 90's.

When Bush threw out UN inspectors and dissed the international community he cost this country hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives. It was completely unnecessary as we had Saddam in a tight box where he was practically defenseless. What the Bushies thirsted for was the oil. Not to share but for themselves.
<font size=5>

That invasion had been planned years before by the Cheney
and Wolfwitz right-wing think tank types who hated the
idea of an enemy they could easily beat having so much
oil.
<font size=4>
Yes Saddam was an enemy and a menace, but an imminent threat? Not even close. Don't believe the lies. If you do, you're a dupe and a sucker.

Message 19569607



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (2455)12/11/2003 10:30:17 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 90947
 
"Bush himself said exactly the opposite in his State of the Union address:"

It wasn't the only time. In this speech televised nearly
globally, Bush talked specifically about the threat in
Iraq prior to the war.......


President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat
October 7, 2002

...."The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature
of the regime, itself. Saddam Hussein is a homicidal
dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."


Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the
world. The danger is already significant, and it only
grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has
dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any
sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows
even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?....

....The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm.
America will not accept a serious and mounting threat
to our country, and our friends and our allies"
.....
whitehouse.gov

<font size=4>>IMMINENT : ready to take place; especially : hanging threateningly over one's head <was in imminent danger of being run over>

On 9/10/01, the US was in IMMINENT danger of a terrorist
attack on our soil. Too late to do anything about it
then 'eh?