Chirac picks his nose

I love the picture in this story.

Ah, U.S. Big Business were thrown a big fat doggy bone today...Must be a thank you for all those campaign contributions.

Used to be French leaders had their hands in their shirts.

Edit: Shirts, shorts, whatever.

Ah, U.S. Big Business were thrown a big fat doggy bone today...Must be a thank you for all those campaign contributions.

Which companies contributed, and how much did they contribute?

The story actually only talks about potential bidders - not any companies getting work yet. My opinion is that if you don''t want to the part in the hard part, why should you get any of the reward? We are talking about American tax dollars here. Everyone keeps talking about how we have ""lost"" our allies - well, let''s start acting like it!

The reaction from those excluded is priceless:

Germany, who said that supporing war against Saddam was unacceptable, said:

It would not be acceptable. It would not be in agreement with the spirit that both sides have signaled, to look into the future and not into the past.

We certainly have learned lately that Germans hate to be reminded of the past...

Russia''s response:

in Soviet times Russia was a major player in Iraq. It built much of the country''s infrastructure and over the years had $40 billion in oil contracts with Baghdad.

Russia was still owed $8 billion by Iraq

So the Soviets loaned a lot of money to Saddam and built up his infrastruture? Well, the Soviets can take it up with Saddam - hey, maybe the Soviets can find Saddam. Of course, that means finding some Soviets first...

And my favorite. From Jacques Chirac, who did his best to keep the Iraqi people, murdered by the hundreds of thousands, under the bootheel of Saddam:

It ought to be [about] what is the best thing for the people of Iraq.

I guess a lack of appreciation for irony is a prerequisite for Head of State these days...

"ralcydan" wrote:

My opinion is that if you don''t want to the part in the hard part, why should you get any of the reward?

First of all, I don''t think big businesses were the ones doing the hard part...That would be the soldiers. And they don''t get a reward. They get their benefits cut.

Second, since when did the reward for invading Iraq come in the form of fat contracts for our big businesses? I thought it was all about WMD...I mean al Qae...I mean democracy, or something like that...

First of all, I don''t think big businesses were the ones doing the hard part

What do you think a ""big business"" is? Is it a huge building, diabolically forcing people to come into it every day and toil so it can hoard up money to make itself seem more important than the other buildings?

A business is nothing more than a group of people who have come together to make a product or offer a service. a ""big business"" is one that does so better than others. That''s it. And in this case, the businesses who are going to be receiving access to American tax dollars in the form of contracts are those operated by citizens of countries who supported America in the first place.

I honestly will never understand the hostility people have towards ""business"". They are really showing their hositility towards other people - since a business is no more nor less than its people. The funiest part is when someone rails against ""business"" and then complains that there aren''t enough jobs...

My opinion is that if you don''t want to the part in the hard part, why should you get any of the reward? We are talking about American tax dollars here.

I can''t believe it. Ralcydan is r.. rr...rrr..right.

Canada didn''t send troops to Iraq but we did kick in a few bucks. It''s not cool that we can''t send our beavers out to help rebuild. Our beavers are losing billions of dollars in revenues to filthy Italian beavers!

Oh, I didn''t know we were talking about beavers. I like all kinds of beavers. Here in Oregon there are beavers all over the place. Hell, I live right by Beaverton.

Canada has troops?

Italy has beavers?

Apparently the issuance of the RFP''s has been postponed for now. I doubt it has anything to do with the objections raised by the restricted countries, but anything''s possible I guess.

I think that the restricted countries shouldn''t expect to be chosen if they didn''t back the war. That''s politics. But I think that they should be allowed to bid if they want to.

The goal here is to help the Iraqi reconstruction right? If so shouldn''t we be looking for the bids that can provide the most benefit at the best cost, regardless of politics?

Rat Boy: I think there are beavers in Italy, they''re probably all shaved though.

Canada should be allowed to bid.

"Ockham" wrote:

I think that the restricted countries shouldn''t expect to be chosen if they didn''t back the war. That''s politics. But I think that they should be allowed to bid if they want to.

Isn''t that a bit like requiring NFL teams to interview black coaches, when they are going to go ahead and hire a white one no matter what?

Actually, this is a fine idea. Let''s make German, Russian and French companies bid, string them along, causing them to waste time, money and resources, and then reject their bids for political reasons.

That''s even crueler than banning them. I love it!

"ralcydan" wrote:

Actually, this is a fine idea. Let''s make German, Russian and French companies bid, string them along, causing them to waste time, money and resources, and then reject their bids for political reasons.

That''s even crueler than banning them. I love it! :D

I noticed you didn''t say Canada. Canada''s nice, they kicked in some money to help us out. I agree with Ulairi, let''s give the beavers a chance.

Oh, and you are a spiteful, spiteful man!

who could have thought that author of ""How To Win Friends And Influence People"" is american...

And...Canada? Sit back quietly and watch - my Latvia did back US and held Bush`s hand firmly while you sent a simple paycheck. We even sent about 150 troops (and those 3 million bucks have nothing to do with our motivation).
I suspect that we are entitled to some hefty contract as well. Something along the lines of million bucks for each troop?

OT: I just read over the board and noticed quite a few posts where I thought ""wth when did I write this? This couldn''t have been me. Have I gone insane?"", after a close look I noticed Ockham uses my avatar and I was relieved :).

On the topic: I don''t think Germany should protest. Your government said this would happen from the start, so it did not come as a surprise.

Actually, this is a fine idea. Let''s make German, Russian and French companies bid, string them along, causing them to waste time, money and resources, and then reject their bids for political reasons.

That''s even crueler than banning them. I love it!

Just a thought. If we contract with these countries they would have to send their own troops over to protect their workers (targets). We just don''t have the manpower.

I''m trying to understand how countries think we''re keeping them from helping Iraq by not using U.S. taxpayer dollars to hire their construction companies. Nobody said they can''t hire their own construction companies to come help out in Iraq. Hell France and Russiave have great experience in building up defensive systems for Iraq...maybe they could do that on their dime.

"ralcydan" wrote:

A business is nothing more than a group of people who have come together to make a product or offer a service. a ""big business"" is one that does so better than others. That''s it. [snip]

I honestly will never understand the hostility people have towards ""business"". They are really showing their hositility towards other people - since a business is no more nor less than its people. The funiest part is when someone rails against ""business"" and then complains that there aren''t enough jobs...

You know, I don''t think most people have a problem with a business providing a service or a product. It is after all what they exist to do. Nor do they have problems with other people in general. It''s just that when a business grows very, very big, it also becomes powerful. Its leaders gets into a position to put a lot of pressure on politicians (and provide handsome bri...errr campaign contributions) to make things go their way. Some people feel this is Not a Very Good Thing. Especially not in a democracy. So those people feel some amount of hostility towards ''business''.

Hope that cleared things up for ya.

after a close look I noticed Ockham uses my avatar

Sorry man! I couldn''t resist Bob Dobbs.

hey no problem at all. After all who can resist the mighty Bob, except for the Pinks.

Sorry man! I couldn''t resist Bob Dobbs

It is confusing though. Ockham, maybe you could useLou Dobbs,instead.