Thanks for the intrest and viewpoints!
You have a point here, money spent on rebuilding infrastructure can't just be given away. At the time, with no real stability the vital and most neccesary work must be done immidiatly.
It is being done, there are over 100,000 civilian contractors there, who is paying them? We are, the Iraqis have no money. The assumption that the contracts should be open for bid is ridiculous. American companies have the technology and expertice to do all of the work and we are paying for it, why should anyone else be even consulted?
I don't think anyone should take over from the Iraqis. Not in the long run. If American and Brittish oilfield technology is superior they will probably buy that?
Really? How are the Iraqis going to get the one thing that they have that anyone wants to buy from them? British and American oil companies were the ones that discovered and set up the equipment to start drilling for it in thr first place with legal permission, they payed to go in and do it. It was only after the oil was pulled out and the potential wealth was realized by the Middle Eastern governments that they stole those rights back and took over the oilfields. Just as what would happen to Israel if the Palestinians took over or California if the Mexicans took it over, it became shit. Without the people that built it to keep it running right it falls apart. And that is what has happened to the oilfields of Iraq. Saddam hasn't kept up with technology or even done the maintenance needed to keep those fields truely productive, he didn't care and also didn't know how. Watch for the same thing to happen to Chavez's follies.
They don't owe you anything.
Why not? We liberated them from a tyrant, we are helping them form a government that will allow them to live in this century, their little girls are going to school, their Olympic team is competing without the threat of death, the one industry that they have to make money with is being repaired and updated. I would feel very indebted to the Coalition if I was an Iraqi.
Either you fought a war against terror - your reward is a safer world for you.
They will be safer too, you will be safer, the world is safer without Saddam and with a free Iraq.
Or you fought a war to liberate the people of Iraq - Not much of a liberation if you are going to hold them in debt.
Not being privy to the information the President has I can't say for sure but I know their were many Iraqis that were in exhile from their country that wanted our help, the Kurds wanted our help. The government that was voted in by the people has asked for us to stay and help them. All that help isn't free.
Or you fought a war to conquer land and natural resources - Then you owe the Iraqis.
You know better, if we get a drop of their resources we will be paying for it, we always have. The United States has never been a holder of other lands, talk to the older European countries for that.
Is that an important reason for invading a country? How it chooses to administer its natural resources? Maybe yes. But is it valid? Anyway it was done, the reasons were what they were.
What is an important enough reason? How much incredible environmental damage did thid guy have to do before the World acted against him? How many people, his own, did he have to kill? He tried to assaninate a former President of ours. He broke the cease-fire agreements numerous times for 12 years. He was actively working on and stockpiling extremely dangerous WMDs and was unstable enough to sell to terrorist states. And America finally got a President with enough nalls to do something about him.
I have no doubt that the average Iraq will be better of now.
Congratulations, you are different from the idiots of the world that can't or won't see that.
