Liberal confessional here.

[Art]

Originally posted by E-Dog Night

I'll apologize for nothing. The George Bush administration is wrong, this war is wrong, and it doesn't make a bit of difference that the elections went off without violence.

Why does this change the fact that we've spent $400 billion already on this war? Why does it change the fact that we went there for the wrong reasons? Why does it change the fact that Halliburton and the Cheney-led oil interests stand to make billions off this war, and that's the real reason why 1,000+ US soldiers are dead?

It doesn't change any of that. This election is just a distraction to divert attention for the real reasons we are there so we can all feel good about what we've done.

Apologize? Don't think so. If anyone is due an apology, it's the rest of the world for this administration. Sorry world, there are at least 56 million of us Americans who loathe George Bush just as much as you do.

Oh, my.

We went to war so Halliburton could make billions?

I had no idea. Thanks for clearing it up for me. Now that I know you have given the idea a lot of thought and paid close attention to the situation, I'll be sure not to make general statements like, "Liberals are just living in a dream world."

Now that you've set me straight that such a thing is not the case and all. .

[NoCalMike]

I do have a question regarding Post-Occupation Iraq/Haliburton though. It is clear that Haliburton was put there by our government, whether for kosher reasons or not, however what happens once America is gone. Haliburton's work there will long outlast our militaries(ideally of course), but what if when our Military leaves, the Iraqi government wants Haliburton and any other american corporations out too. Will they be overuled, or is there some agreement between our government and the new Iraqi government to keep them there and to have they employed by Americans. It just seems weird that Iraq is experiencing a large amount of unemployment when seemingly there are a lot of jobs Haliburton has, that many Iraqis are capable of doing if given the oppurtunity.

[Art]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

I do have a question regarding Post-Occupation Iraq/Haliburton though. It is clear that Haliburton was put there by our government, whether for kosher reasons or not, however what happens once America is gone. Haliburton's work there will long outlast our militaries(ideally of course), but what if when our Military leaves, the Iraqi government wants Haliburton and any other american corporations out too. Will they be overuled, or is there some agreement between our government and the new Iraqi government to keep them there and to have they employed by Americans. It just seems weird that Iraq is experiencing a large amount of unemployment when seemingly there are a lot of jobs Haliburton has, that many Iraqis are capable of doing if given the oppurtunity.

I imagine when there's a permanent Iraqi government in charge of signing contracts for work in the country they will determine which companies they want there doing the work, whether it's one of our companies or a French company.

I also imagine if one of our companies has signed a 10-year contract with the interim government that the contract will remain valid even if the permanent government would not wish it so. Like I'm comfortable saying we may enter into permanent base agreements with THIS government so no matter what the next one wants we don't have to leave. Like in Cuba .

[SnyderShrugged]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

I do have a question regarding Post-Occupation Iraq/Haliburton though. It is clear that Haliburton was put there by our government, whether for kosher reasons or not, however what happens once America is gone. Haliburton's work there will long outlast our militaries(ideally of course), but what if when our Military leaves, the Iraqi government wants Haliburton and any other american corporations out too. Will they be overuled, or is there some agreement between our government and the new Iraqi government to keep them there and to have they employed by Americans. It just seems weird that Iraq is experiencing a large amount of unemployment when seemingly there are a lot of jobs Haliburton has, that many Iraqis are capable of doing if given the oppurtunity.

I'd have to think that Haliburton would have to leave if the Iraqi govenment tells them too.

You know, Haliburton isnt the "Evil Corporation" that many think it is. Yes, they are a large and successful company, but that can be said for many.

Remember the good things they have done as well sometimes.

Haliburton isnt the only company to get no bid contracts, and they also should be commended for taking the risks that many companies just won't do.

[Thiebear]

There are only like 4 companies in the world that do what they do.... I doubt all the replacements have been hiding in Iraq waiting for an interview.

[NoCalMike]

Originally posted by skin-n-vegas

I'd have to think that Haliburton would have to leave if the Iraqi govenment tells them too.

You know, Haliburton isnt the "Evil Corporation" that many think it is. Yes, they are a large and successful company, but that can be said for many.

Remember the good things they have done as well sometimes.

Haliburton isnt the only company to get no bid contracts, and they also should be commended for taking the risks that many companies just won't do.

Never said they were an evil company, but that doesn't make no-bid contracts RIGHT.

Also, it is kind of vague to say "the company" is taking risks.

The contractors are brave sure the ones actually over there doing the work, but they also are making excellent wages,and are under good conditions for the most part. On tax payer dollars, mind you. I mean if their effort is being funded by tax payer money, then it should be public records of their finances and stuff like that. The people should have access to this information.

[Art]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

Never said they were an evil company, but that doesn't make no-bid contracts RIGHT.

The contractors are brave sure, but they also are making excellent wages, I mean really excellent wages, and are under good conditions. On tax payer dollars, mind you.

Of course no bid contracts are right. Do you even understand the scope of the contract and the work? Do you understand when you are concerned about oil well fires and actually rebuilding a nation's infrastructure you can't wait for a two-year bid process?

Emergency contracts that require time sensitive work such as this are handed at all the time. Saying it's not right is like saying if there's a fire at your neighbor's house, there should be a government bidding process to determine who should put it out. You know that's nonsense.

Clinton gave this SAME company no bid contracts because it is one of only a handful that can do the type of work. In the case of Iraq it may be the only American company capable of doing the work.

[The Alchemist]

Originally posted by E-Dog Night

Why does it change the fact that Halliburton and the Cheney-led oil interests stand to make billions off this war, and that's the real reason why 1,000+ US soldiers are dead?

Where do people come up with this crap? It amazes me when I hear this because people actually believe it. What's your justification for this? Is there any proof? Use your brain people and quit talking nonsense. I'm glad stupidity isn't a communicable disease or we would all be screwed.

[Commander PK]

Originally posted by The Alchemist

Where do people come up with this crap? It amazes me when I hear this because people actually believe it. What's your justification for this? Is there any proof? Use your brain people and quit talking nonsense. I'm glad stupidity isn't a communicable disease or we would all be screwed.

I second this.

[Mad Mike]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

I do have a question regarding Post-Occupation Iraq/Haliburton though. It is clear that Haliburton was put there by our government, whether for kosher reasons or not, however what happens once America is gone. Haliburton's work there will long outlast our militaries(ideally of course), but what if when our Military leaves, the Iraqi government wants Haliburton and any other american corporations out too. Will they be overuled, or is there some agreement between our government and the new Iraqi government to keep them there and to have they employed by Americans. It just seems weird that Iraq is experiencing a large amount of unemployment when seemingly there are a lot of jobs Haliburton has, that many Iraqis are capable of doing if given the oppurtunity.

There is a very practical reason for using Haliburton vs Iraqis. It would be a HUGE security risk, You just can't ignore the posibility that the terrorists could infiltrate the system and say... poison the food supply... drive bomb laden trucks through the gates....

[Mad Mike]

Just reported on MSNBC...

The Iraqi's are so pissed at President Bush... the Mayor of Baghdad want's to erect a statue of him in the middle of the city :laugh:

[NoCalMike]

Originally posted by Mad Mike

There is a very practical reason for using Haliburton vs Iraqis. It would be a HUGE security risk, You just can't ignore the posibility that the terrorists could infiltrate the system and say... poison the food supply... drive bomb laden trucks through the gates....

How about showing through evidence or documents that Haliburton is the ONLY company in the world that is capable of doing this. Followed by a complete or at least good sized list of what jobs they are doing, and why only americans are qualified to be doing this.

You can follow that with the list of 7000 candidates on the Iraqi ballots and what, oh I dunno 2000 of them stood for. When you can do that, and then also show any proof that this newly elected official has power to run his country indepedent of U.S. Military/Government control seeping in to create a Corporatopia, then I suppose I can get on board.

[SnyderShrugged]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

How about showing through evidence or documents that Haliburton is the ONLY company in the world that is capable of doing this. Followed by a complete or at least good sized list of what jobs they are doing, and why only americans are qualified to be doing this.

You can follow that with the list of 7000 candidates on the Iraqi ballots and what, oh I dunno 2000 of them stood for. When you can do that, and then also show any proof that this newly elected official has power to run his country indepedent of U.S. Military/Government control seeping in to create a Corporatopia, then I suppose I can get on board.

You are not this clueless. I still believe in you!!!

You do understand that this election was actually 18,000 candidates for roles in the creation of their constitution, right?

Also that they will assign representatives on a temporary basis to perform this function and no other without another democratic election?

also that the delegates will be chosen as a % of the vote. IE: if 25% of the vote is for Sunni representation, then they have a 25% voice in the creation of their new laws of the land, bills of rights, entire structure of government, etc.

If you voted as an iraqi in this election, you would most likely have had one ofthe most powerful voices in the world today. Imagine your vote having that much responsibility to an entire nation? An entire way of life?

[NoCalMike]

Originally posted by skin-n-vegas

You are not this clueless. I still believe in you!!!

You do understand that this election was actually 18,000 candidates for roles in the creation of their constitution, right?

Also that they will assign representatives on a temporary basis to perform this function and no other without another democratic election?

also that the delegates will be chosen as a % of the vote. IE: if 25% of the vote is for Sunni representation, then they have a 25% voice in the creation of their new laws of the land, bills of rights, entire structure of government, etc.

If you voted as an iraqi in this election, you would most likely have had one ofthe most powerful voices in the world today. Imagine your vote having that much responsibility to an entire nation? An entire way of life?

Assuming America is still calling the shots. I mean come on, don't tell me you honestly think people are compentantly looking through a list of 18,000 candidates.

[Mad Mike]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

How about showing through evidence or documents that Haliburton is the ONLY company in the world that is capable of doing this. Followed by a complete or at least good sized list of what jobs they are doing, and why only americans are qualified to be doing this.

You can follow that with the list of 7000 candidates on the Iraqi ballots and what, oh I dunno 2000 of them stood for. When you can do that, and then also show any proof that this newly elected official has power to run his country indepedent of U.S. Military/Government control seeping in to create a Corporatopia, then I suppose I can get on board.

I have a better Idea. It's a shame though, that I cant voice it without being banned.

[SnyderShrugged]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

Assuming America is still calling the shots. I mean come on, don't tell me you honestly think people are compentantly looking through a list of 18,000 candidates.

Mike!!! PLEASE STOP NOW!!!

Look up the details of this election before you post more man! Yiu have it totally confused as to the nature and purpose of this election. It is not an american style election the way you are familiar with.

[Prosperity]

Iraqi politcal system is now based on a parliamentary democracy like Israel. There are a 100+ parties people can vote for and each party has a list of candidates. The parliament (or whatever they call it) will be based poroportionally like you said. So technically you can say there are 10000+ candidates but unlike here in the US the actual candidates are less important than the party that they belong to.

[SnyderShrugged]

Originally posted by Liberty

Iraqi politcal system is now based on a parliamentary democracy like Israel. There are a 100+ parties people can vote for and each party has a list of candidates. The parliament (or whatever they call it) will be based poroportionally like you said. So technically you can say there are 10000+ candidates but unlike here in the US the actual candidates are less important than the party that they belong to.

Awesome synopsis!!

[Art]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

How about showing through evidence or documents that Haliburton is the ONLY company in the world that is capable of doing this. Followed by a complete or at least good sized list of what jobs they are doing, and why only americans are qualified to be doing this.

You can follow that with the list of 7000 candidates on the Iraqi ballots and what, oh I dunno 2000 of them stood for. When you can do that, and then also show any proof that this newly elected official has power to run his country indepedent of U.S. Military/Government control seeping in to create a Corporatopia, then I suppose I can get on board.

It's not only Americans qualified to do this work. Any member of the coalition with a company capable would be qualified. And only America has companies that would qualify. And the company that got it -- the same company that got no-bid deals with Clinton -- is the country's best at this work.

[NoCalMike]

"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting. According to reports from Saigon, 83 percent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong. A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam."

- New York Times, September 4, 1967

[Art]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting. According to reports from Saigon, 83 percent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong. A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam."

- New York Times, September 4, 1967

Exactly, Mike.

And we learned our lessons from Vietnam, didn't we? We can't let liberals derail the process of freedom. We can't abandon a people struggling to be a democracy. We can't let liberals mislead the public into thinking things going well are not going well so they thing we should leave.

You will be contacting your representatives, I'm certain, asking them to stop calling for a removal of our troops because they should know from history in Vietnam that we can't abandon a country.

Maybe you're getting it after all.

[Ghost of]

No, no he's not.

Better that we abandoned Indochina to the Stalinist North Vietnamese and to the homocidal and bizarre Khmer Rouge(thanks to education at the finest French universities

[Art]

Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

No, no he's not.

Better that we abandoned Indochina to the Stalinist North Vietnamese and to the homocidal and bizarre Khmer Rouge(thanks to education at the finest French universities

I know he's not, Ghost.

I just was giving him an out. He took the out with Zarqawi and admitting he was Al Qaeda. He now knows when a house is on fire, one doesn't wait 2 years to put it out while there's a government bidding process. We're working on him slowly.

And, soon, just for the fun of it, I'll show the article about how we were losing the peace in post-war Germany .

[Mad Mike]

Another little history lesson...

Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap

Born: 1912

Place of Birth: An Xa, Vietnam

Military University: none

Wars Fought:

-World War II

-First Indochina War(French-Indochina War 1946-1954)

-Second Indochina War(Vietnam War 1965-1972)

-Third Indochina War 1979-81

Vietnam War:

Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.

In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.

By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68 was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet '68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to negotiate a surrender.

At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of America.

According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA. They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead, they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month, eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end of 1967, beginning of 1968.

(From 1969 till the U.S. left Vietnam 15,315 more U.S. soldiers lost their lives.)

Sure americans have the right to protest, but let's not pretend that the only consequences are the ones we intend.

[Ghost of]

mad Mike

Not only was my father drafted, but my mother was, for a time, a socialist who did attend a peace march or two.

TRUST ME, a large percentage of the protestors(then as now) did not merely want an "end" to the war, but were actively supporting(be it trips to Hanoi like Jane Fonda or Tom Hayden or Chomsky to coordinate propaganda) or rooting for a Communist victory.

That people pretend otherwise only shows you that people will deceive so long as it achieves their objectives. In fact, that's Lenin's mandate.

He was also the cat who said a "lie told often enough becomes the truth." Indeed, VI. Indeed.