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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (13692)	5/25/2004 11:58:38 AM
From: Skywatcher	Respond to of 173976

melbourne.indymedia.org more of the REAL players...they ALL have something to GAIN on the backs of troops and the Iraq nation and ALL have something to LIE about seattlepi.nwsource.com CC

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (13692)	5/25/2004 3:01:57 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

I have a feeling that Bush's plan didn't include the Iraqi people, because Bush's plan doesn't include the American people. Bush as Marie Antoinette? Food? Why do people need food? I heard a few months ago that parts of Ohio had 16% unemployment. That's a scary thought. If we're concerned over a sub 6% unemployment rate (even if the numbers are fudged), we'd be up in arms at 10 times that rate. For the $100K/year we're paying US contractors through the money-laundering schemes called Halliburton and Bechtel, how many Iraqis could we gainfully employ? On top of that apparently the vast majority of the reconstruction money allocated to Iraq is still sitting around. Part of the problem appears to be bureaucratic bungling but I'll bet most of the problem is lack of security. Will 135,000 US troops ever be able to provide real security? If not, will this problem ever be fixed by staying this course?