Surely if there are Iraq companies gung-ho to rebuild something, there is plenty of rebuilding of other things they can dig into w/o getting in the way. That said, the current situation can only be seen as a positive thing for the people. There will be more participants involved in rebuilding things of all natures. Problem solved!
Surely if there are Iraq companies gung-ho to rebuild something, there is plenty of rebuilding of other things they can dig into w/o getting in the way. That said, the current situation can only be seen as a positive thing for the people. There will be more participants involved in rebuilding things of all natures. Problem solved!
That's great that you form your opinions around speculation. Real smart.
But since I'm so nice, I'm going to lend you a hand in whipping your view around to line up with the real world
They may feel they can do it but it does not mean they can. You know, like, I work with a guy that thinks he does a good job but the fact is we'd be better off paying him not to come in.
But I'm still looking for the whole "America getting rich" answer.
That first paragraph actually made me laugh. That is, I thought it was funny.
I guess it's only a select few that are getting richer while the rest of us pay a lot of taxes. It's a stretch to say it's planned or the true motive of the war, but it's not out of the realm of possiblity to say that it is being done at the expense of properly reconstructing. Bush making the best for his friends out of a bad situation.
Good idea: the privatisation of Iraq as outlined in that article is a perfect illustration of what 'terrorism', 911, the WOT and Iraq occupation are really all about.
These things are, and always have been, mutually interdependent. Forget 'evildoers' and 'terrorists' who 'hate our freedoms'. The fact is that the history of the west (of which the US is merely the latest historical torch-bearer) is one of enriching itself by keeping resource-rich nations underdeveloped in order to exploit those same resources for it's own benefit.
Or the history of the entire rest of the world over the entire history of mankind. But, of course, the US/West wanting to better their standing = bad.
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
This has been going on for centuries and the Arab/ME region is merely the last remaining area available for such exploitation. That's why the
the Islamic fundamentalists are fighting so hard (I don't include the Israel/Pal issue in this btw as that has a different root) and that is why they 'hate the west'.
Or one could as strongly argue that the Arab/ME region is merely the first and original area of such exploitation. Birth plave of civilization and all that. The fact that they are currently on the receiving end doesn't erase history. As much as you like to blame others for their misfortune, and undoubtably there is blame enough to go around, blaiming it all on western exploitation is a bit simple. They 'hate the west' has been bred, taught and instructed for centuries..even when the Mohamadeans were the rising power in the world.
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
It is the last stand and that's what all the 'terror' is about. It's why someone like Obl can exist and enjoy popular support. It is religious only to the degree that the people scheduled for 'colonisation' share a common faith and this is obviously useful as an empowering mechanism. It has always been this way in terms of a colonised people resisting Imperialism.
Last stand my ass. It's a continuation of an ages old war that is allowed to continue by teaching those that have less that is the fault of others, and that is an easy lesson to teach when building upon centuries of 'us-against-them' instruction, 'them' being all the non-believers.
OBL enjoys support not just from people living in 'colonial regions'. Recruites come from all walks of life. John Walker Lindh wasn't exactly a victim of colonialism.
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Imo, we are actually at a 'clash of civilizations' scenario and it is one that the west cannot win and even is doomed to fail. That is not to say that I think fundamentalism (of any religious stripe) will win but that something sane and rational will replace both. I just hope it's soon.
And here we agree. But the current clash is just a resumption of an ages old division. 'Us-against-them'
Find something else to build. It's that simple. Maybe there's opportunities for subcontracting in there, as well, once things get rolling.
Man! This is ridiculous! "Maybe there's opportunities for subcontracting in there." Maybe? 'Maybe' as in 'randycat99 forms his opinions on speculation?' And 'in there?' Most local-level capital reconstruction subcontracts for things like repairing Al-Tawa Parking Lot and Al-Quasi Elementary have gone to local businesses, like Ali's One-Stop Asphalting, Ltd. All of the large leadership and planning contracts, as well as almost all of the large-scale subcontracts, are held by non-Iraqi companies, primarily US, Saudi and Kuwaiti ones.
'Maybe' you could just inform yourself a little before arguing with people. If you want to learn about it, that's good. But arguing about something know so very little about is simply weird. What do you hope to accomplish?
Evidently these notions pose questions that you don't have clear answers to (especially when you cannot find it in print to validate it in your own mind). That seems to threaten you.
Once again you have retreated to, "Your knowledge is inferior, therefore my point of view is the gospel." I've only offered my humble opinions on the matter. You, OTOH, wish to assert that only you have the correct answers, and anything else that conflicts that viewscape must be inherently wrong. Hey, no skin off my nose. That's your bag, I guess. I'll continue to express my views, and you'll undoubtedly continue to endeavor with your rants on how mislead the rest of the world is (according to yourself, that is).
Iraq can be self-sufficient, no doubt, never once have I said that won't happen.
But there is no controlling authority. Iraq was able to do it before because Saddam was the controlling authority. I fully believe that Iraqis could do 99.99999% of the actual work required to rebuild the country. But when it comes to mass-scale rebuilding efforts the most important thing is capital.
Who will pay these people to do the work?
Who will supply them the materials?
Who will have the final say in what mechanical/electrical standards are used?
There is no government or security structure in Iraq if the US just heads out. It is entirely possible that the US drives the rebuilding effort for a time and then turns it over to Iraq to carry on as a strong, prosperous and hopefully somewhat democratic nation.
oh yes....people need money to build a country. Sure.....as if money always existed. As if the little promisary note is needed....please.. is this the best thinking that is produced in the US?
oh yes....people need money to build a country. Sure.....as if money always existed. As if the little promisary note is needed....please.. is this the best thinking that is produced in the US?
Well the country is already built. You've got land, people, borders and a flag (Eddie Izzard reference).
I'm thinking of physical infrastructure; water treatment plants, complex buildings, modern electricity production facilities and accompanying means of getting it around the cities reliably, educational facilities with modern equipment
And yes, those things require physical capital; money and actual materials. They also require a minimum controlling authority to establish standards and organize production.
Unless one can create all these things through sheer force of self-righteous outrage. Because if you can then I'm way off and you might be able to supply everything they need.
I'm thinking of physical infrastructure; water treatment plants, complex buildings, modern electricity production facilities and accompanying means of getting it around the cities reliably, educational facilities with modern equipment
And yes, those things require physical capital; money and actual materials. They also require a minimum controlling authority to establish standards and organize production.
A couple of options were discussed on the previous page that covers, in some ways, all of these issues. Did you get a chance to look at them?
Yes, I read the cooperativeresearch link and it mostly discusses how contracted firms aren't using enough Iraqi labor, and I agree with that 100%.
Unless there is no alternative, an Iraqi should be hired for whatever job is being done in Iraq. But there is more to rebuilding than who will do the actual work.
Unless there is no alternative, an Iraqi should be hired for whatever job is being done in Iraq. But there is more to rebuilding than who will do the actual work.
I can't disagree with this. But, if ownership is available as well, it should be found inside Iraq, just like the labor.
Well the country is already built. You've got land, people, borders and a flag (Eddie Izzard reference).
I'm thinking of physical infrastructure; water treatment plants, complex buildings, modern electricity production facilities and accompanying means of getting it around the cities reliably, educational facilities with modern equipment
And yes, those things require physical capital; money and actual materials. They also require a minimum controlling authority to establish standards and organize production.
Unless one can create all these things through sheer force of self-righteous outrage. Because if you can then I'm way off and you might be able to supply everything they need.
Wilson made a good point in his TPM interview. We have no national police force and no extensive experience in building one. Countries like France do and are very good at it. Instead of bringing them in, the Bush admin gave the contract to DynCorp, which specializes in child prosititution and drug-running. Real smart.
Also, while we are on the topic of money, where's that $220-240 billion for the first two years coming from? I see the argument that the Iraqis can't provide it, but we also can't either.
Comments
Originally posted by giant
Yeah, loin cloths and grass skirts.
Those are your own impressions, not mine.
Surely if there are Iraq companies gung-ho to rebuild something, there is plenty of rebuilding of other things they can dig into w/o getting in the way. That said, the current situation can only be seen as a positive thing for the people. There will be more participants involved in rebuilding things of all natures. Problem solved!
Originally posted by Randycat99
Surely if there are Iraq companies gung-ho to rebuild something, there is plenty of rebuilding of other things they can dig into w/o getting in the way. That said, the current situation can only be seen as a positive thing for the people. There will be more participants involved in rebuilding things of all natures. Problem solved!
That's great that you form your opinions around speculation. Real smart.
But since I'm so nice, I'm going to lend you a hand in whipping your view around to line up with the real world
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/w...contracts.html
The fact is, by a large margin the biggest contracts have gone to American companies, and this includes the leadership contracts.
Find something else to build. It's that simple. Maybe there are opportunities for subcontracting in there, as well, once things get rolling.
Bottomline still is, more people can now be in there building stuff, as opposed to less.
Originally posted by Scott
They may feel they can do it but it does not mean they can. You know, like, I work with a guy that thinks he does a good job but the fact is we'd be better off paying him not to come in.
But I'm still looking for the whole "America getting rich" answer.
That first paragraph actually made me laugh. That is, I thought it was funny.
I guess it's only a select few that are getting richer while the rest of us pay a lot of taxes. It's a stretch to say it's planned or the true motive of the war, but it's not out of the realm of possiblity to say that it is being done at the expense of properly reconstructing. Bush making the best for his friends out of a bad situation.
Originally posted by segovius
Good idea: the privatisation of Iraq as outlined in that article is a perfect illustration of what 'terrorism', 911, the WOT and Iraq occupation are really all about.
These things are, and always have been, mutually interdependent. Forget 'evildoers' and 'terrorists' who 'hate our freedoms'. The fact is that the history of the west (of which the US is merely the latest historical torch-bearer) is one of enriching itself by keeping resource-rich nations underdeveloped in order to exploit those same resources for it's own benefit.
Or the history of the entire rest of the world over the entire history of mankind. But, of course, the US/West wanting to better their standing = bad.
Originally posted by segovius
This has been going on for centuries and the Arab/ME region is merely the last remaining area available for such exploitation. That's why the
the Islamic fundamentalists are fighting so hard (I don't include the Israel/Pal issue in this btw as that has a different root) and that is why they 'hate the west'.
Or one could as strongly argue that the Arab/ME region is merely the first and original area of such exploitation. Birth plave of civilization and all that. The fact that they are currently on the receiving end doesn't erase history. As much as you like to blame others for their misfortune, and undoubtably there is blame enough to go around, blaiming it all on western exploitation is a bit simple. They 'hate the west' has been bred, taught and instructed for centuries..even when the Mohamadeans were the rising power in the world.
Originally posted by segovius
It is the last stand and that's what all the 'terror' is about. It's why someone like Obl can exist and enjoy popular support. It is religious only to the degree that the people scheduled for 'colonisation' share a common faith and this is obviously useful as an empowering mechanism. It has always been this way in terms of a colonised people resisting Imperialism.
Last stand my ass. It's a continuation of an ages old war that is allowed to continue by teaching those that have less that is the fault of others, and that is an easy lesson to teach when building upon centuries of 'us-against-them' instruction, 'them' being all the non-believers.
OBL enjoys support not just from people living in 'colonial regions'. Recruites come from all walks of life. John Walker Lindh wasn't exactly a victim of colonialism.
Originally posted by segovius
Imo, we are actually at a 'clash of civilizations' scenario and it is one that the west cannot win and even is doomed to fail. That is not to say that I think fundamentalism (of any religious stripe) will win but that something sane and rational will replace both. I just hope it's soon.
And here we agree. But the current clash is just a resumption of an ages old division. 'Us-against-them'
Originally posted by Randycat99
Find something else to build. It's that simple. Maybe there's opportunities for subcontracting in there, as well, once things get rolling.
Man! This is ridiculous! "Maybe there's opportunities for subcontracting in there." Maybe? 'Maybe' as in 'randycat99 forms his opinions on speculation?' And 'in there?' Most local-level capital reconstruction subcontracts for things like repairing Al-Tawa Parking Lot and Al-Quasi Elementary have gone to local businesses, like Ali's One-Stop Asphalting, Ltd. All of the large leadership and planning contracts, as well as almost all of the large-scale subcontracts, are held by non-Iraqi companies, primarily US, Saudi and Kuwaiti ones.
'Maybe' you could just inform yourself a little before arguing with people. If you want to learn about it, that's good. But arguing about something know so very little about is simply weird. What do you hope to accomplish?
Originally posted by Randycat99
Oh..."Cooperative Research", again... Whatever...
Run, Randycat! Facts! Run, before you actually have to deal with reality! Watch out for those big scary facts!
Once again you have retreated to, "Your knowledge is inferior, therefore my point of view is the gospel." I've only offered my humble opinions on the matter. You, OTOH, wish to assert that only you have the correct answers, and anything else that conflicts that viewscape must be inherently wrong. Hey, no skin off my nose. That's your bag, I guess. I'll continue to express my views, and you'll undoubtedly continue to endeavor with your rants on how mislead the rest of the world is (according to yourself, that is).
Originally posted by groverat
bunge:
Iraq can be self-sufficient, no doubt, never once have I said that won't happen.
But there is no controlling authority. Iraq was able to do it before because Saddam was the controlling authority. I fully believe that Iraqis could do 99.99999% of the actual work required to rebuild the country. But when it comes to mass-scale rebuilding efforts the most important thing is capital.
Who will pay these people to do the work?
Who will supply them the materials?
Who will have the final say in what mechanical/electrical standards are used?
There is no government or security structure in Iraq if the US just heads out. It is entirely possible that the US drives the rebuilding effort for a time and then turns it over to Iraq to carry on as a strong, prosperous and hopefully somewhat democratic nation.
oh yes....people need money to build a country. Sure.....as if money always existed. As if the little promisary note is needed....please.. is this the best thinking that is produced in the US?
oh yes....people need money to build a country. Sure.....as if money always existed. As if the little promisary note is needed....please.. is this the best thinking that is produced in the US?
Well the country is already built. You've got land, people, borders and a flag (Eddie Izzard reference).
I'm thinking of physical infrastructure; water treatment plants, complex buildings, modern electricity production facilities and accompanying means of getting it around the cities reliably, educational facilities with modern equipment
And yes, those things require physical capital; money and actual materials. They also require a minimum controlling authority to establish standards and organize production.
Unless one can create all these things through sheer force of self-righteous outrage. Because if you can then I'm way off and you might be able to supply everything they need.
Originally posted by groverat
I'm thinking of physical infrastructure; water treatment plants, complex buildings, modern electricity production facilities and accompanying means of getting it around the cities reliably, educational facilities with modern equipment
And yes, those things require physical capital; money and actual materials. They also require a minimum controlling authority to establish standards and organize production.
A couple of options were discussed on the previous page that covers, in some ways, all of these issues. Did you get a chance to look at them?
Unless there is no alternative, an Iraqi should be hired for whatever job is being done in Iraq. But there is more to rebuilding than who will do the actual work.
Originally posted by groverat
Unless there is no alternative, an Iraqi should be hired for whatever job is being done in Iraq. But there is more to rebuilding than who will do the actual work.
I can't disagree with this. But, if ownership is available as well, it should be found inside Iraq, just like the labor.
Originally posted by groverat
Sondjata:
Well the country is already built. You've got land, people, borders and a flag (Eddie Izzard reference).
I'm thinking of physical infrastructure; water treatment plants, complex buildings, modern electricity production facilities and accompanying means of getting it around the cities reliably, educational facilities with modern equipment
And yes, those things require physical capital; money and actual materials. They also require a minimum controlling authority to establish standards and organize production.
Unless one can create all these things through sheer force of self-righteous outrage. Because if you can then I'm way off and you might be able to supply everything they need.
actual materials: yes
money (capital): no.
Money is an artificial "need."
Also, while we are on the topic of money, where's that $220-240 billion for the first two years coming from? I see the argument that the Iraqis can't provide it, but we also can't either.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/sept0302.html#090903228am