Countries excluded from Iraq's reconstruction hit back

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Without much fuss? Turkey screwed the US at the start of this operation.

Turkey had a real concern about a kurdish state. If it had of allowed the US to attack from its end, it would have had severe internal repurcussions, and Turkey has as many Kurds as Norther Iraq -- many just champing at the bit to secede and join a Kurdish state. As an ally the US would have taken this circumstance into consideration.

[Skippy1]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Bush for good or ill.. is the worst diplomat, the worst statesmen, to ever hold Presidential office in the history of the USA. period.

I don't know about the entire history of the Presidential office, Djinn, but he is definitely the worst statesman to hold office in recent history. At least, it looks that way from the outside looing in. Even though I support Bush, this is the biggest criticism I have of him.

After 9/11, America had unified, global sympathy and support. And in less than 18 mos, we had at least half of that support completely eroded and replaced with anger and bitterness.

As for the information from the Pentagon about the contract-blocking, Bush's official statement was that he was very angry about the timing of the statement, but he admitted that he had agreed to (and signed off on) the proposal. I will give him credit for not lying about that, for standing up and saying "Yes, I agreed with that decision". Just for the record, the decision was NOT made by President Bush. It was made by a Pentagon committee. But the proposed decision had to be submitted to Bush for his approval before it could be carried through.

I hope that - someday - information will be revealed or released that helps to explain a lot of the decisions George Bush has made in the last year. There are volumes of classified intelligence information regarding Iraq, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden and Al-Queda...information that the media and generally public don't have access to at this time. Maybe he is making the best decision he can in a bad situation...but from the outside, it certainly looks as if he simply has no diplomatic skills whatsoever. [/QUOTE]Well spelt out Cerek. I did mention in an earlier post that we don't get to hear what goes on behind closed doors. I don't suppose that we will have access to all the imformation for many years to come though. There is intelligence from WW2 only now starting to see the light of day as it was far too sensitive to be released before-hand. Most of the current intelligence will be still relevent for many years, and it's release would only make the work that still needs to done that much harder. Better to sacrifice one man (Bush) than loose important information. Having said that, after the capture of Saddam, Georgies Presidential campaign has recieved a timely boost.

George could certainly do with polishing up his public oratory skills though. I can't help cringing most of the time when he is making a speech on the TV. He comes across as a backwoods hillbilly, and not the leader of the most powerful nation on earth.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Without much fuss? Turkey screwed the US at the start of this operation.

Turkey had a real concern about a kurdish state. If it had of allowed the US to attack from its end, it would have had severe internal repurcussions, and Turkey has as many Kurds as Norther Iraq -- many just champing at the bit to secede and join a Kurdish state. As an ally the US would have taken this circumstance into consideration. [/QUOTE]Good point, Timber. I was going to address the original post earlier but haven't had time to get back to it.

Plainly stated, Turkey did not "screw the U.S." at the start of Operation Iraq. They originally said the U.S. could send ground troops through their country. This was going to be the primary launching point of the U.S. troops from the North, but then Turkey retracted that offer. As Timber pointed out, allowing their country to be used in this manner by the U.S. troops could have had a very serious backlash against Turkey from within it's own population. In the end, they managed to "straddle the fence" as best they could by allowing the U.S. to use it's air space. A token gesture (since the U.S. air strikes were being launched almost exclusively from the South) that allowed them to show their "support" for the U.S., but didn't give the internal factions anything concrete to really complain about.

[pritchke]

Originally posted by khazadman: Pritchke, just who do you think pay the taxes in this country? It's damn sure not the poor. The top 5% of earners in this country pay more than 53% of taxes collected. Let me put it this way, the bottom 50% pay less than 4% of taxes. So the "filthy rich" as you call them will be paying more taxes if they're filling their pockets. By the way Pritchke, just what do you consider rich?

[img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]
You failed to capitalize on the word filthy. An example of filthy rich is Martha Stewart, Enron executives or someone who has a large amount of control over the pentagon while owning companies or large amounts of shares in companies that will bid on the construction of a country that you went to war with. Why not start a war then profit hugely from it, and I am not talking about Bush here. To be in a position of power like this you should immediately sell, or give away companies you own as soon as you are in a position of government power. It would be unethical if you tampered with government policy for profit as Soldiers are expendable. It is not about being rich, but the wheeling and dealing you do to get to that point, and to go beyond that makes you filthy or not and Rumsford is one filthy bugger, kind of has the stench of used car sales men. If you are a straight arrow than you probably deserve everything but if you lie, wheel and deal at the expense of others to get more than you have, or can achieve, than that person deserves the toe of someone's boot with a free trip to hell. Saddam is considered filthy rich as well. Bush is only a pawn for the likes of Rumsford, and a few of those other fellows.

As with your stats it would be far better to look at a percentage of a persons salary paid, and how much they have left over to spend, as opposed to who pays what. I am sure the middle class probably pays more when it comes to portion of their salary and what they end up having left. Those that are paying 53% of the taxes will probably still have the third car, or summer mansion, with plenty to spare, so living like that there is no need for complaints, yet they still have the gall to complain they need more money or about taxes. While the middle class actually doing the work need to stay out of debt, so buying a second car may not be an option even if both parents work. It is better to judge ones standard of living as opposed to salary, or who pays what in taxes, to see a disparity in wealth while some misfortunes may piss there hard earned cash away many work there asses off to make ends meet and save when they can. Personally I don't care what they own, It does bother me if they are living high on the hog and complaing, or if they are sleazy lying people who abuse the system to make more money the same as the few on welfare because they are just plain to lazy to work and yet they decide to have 15 kids bothers me. My only concern is if I will be able to save enough for RRSP's at the end of the year, and a yearly checkup at the dentist, not taxes and not if some hockey jock will buy his third Ferrari this year because he skates around like a pansy for half the year.
[img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]

Oh! and as for the question of who pissed in my cornflakes this morning? One of my fiancés dogs did, at least on the bedroom floor, and twice last night in the living room.


[ 12-15-2003, 12:55 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[Djinn Raffo]

...and Saudi Arabia? Why are they not banned from the bidding process?

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by khazadman: Pritchke, just who do you think pay the taxes in this country? It's damn sure not the poor. The top 5% of earners in this country pay more than 53% of taxes collected. Let me put it this way, the bottom 50% pay less than 4% of taxes. So the "filthy rich" as you call them will be paying more taxes if they're filling their pockets. By the way Pritchke, just what do you consider rich?

Since that top 5% of earners own more than 90% of the nations capital, and therefore benefit the most from all governmental services such as highways, I'd say they're not paying their due by about (90-53=) 37%, using your numbers.

It may hurt (painfully, each payday) to be in a high tax bracket, but I don't try to bulls**t others with the "I pay for it" righteousness -- erm, well I try not to (I do sometimes succumb).

[pritchke]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: ...and Saudi Arabia? Why are they not banned from the bidding process?

They obviously are not a security risk. At least that was the reason given if you can believe anything that comes out of the pentagon these days. Canada is a security risk due to the mutant beavers with a genius IQ that could be used to spy on other countries.

[ 12-15-2003, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]