Conquer Club

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23578542/

Does this piss any other Americans off? Why is so much of our money going into Iraq right now when they are expecting to post a massive surplus? They are expecting to exceed their projected oil profit target by about 25 billion dollars, so why has the US spent 45 billion dollars there to restore infrastructure? I'm curious what others think about this. All I have to say is that the US Congress had better have a response to this. I think it's time for the Iraqis to start paying for their own recovery a bit, now.

wow that's fucking beautiful, now I'm pissed off even more

Well the money from the USA is going into construction, ask yourself which companies are benefiting from this - Bush is using your tax dollars to line his buddies pockets ! If the Iraqi government pays for the projects it might just use different contractors, this might mean that a few people have to tighten their belts back in Texas.

nothing makes rich people richer than a good ol' war!

Now you know why the terrorists want to kill us and kick us out. Think how great of a war they could wage against all non-believers if they had the 35billion for themselves...instead of the natives of Iraq who need it. They could finally finish their goal of killing all non-believers.

Colossus wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23578542/

Does this piss any other Americans off? Why is so much of our money going into Iraq right now when they are expecting to post a massive surplus? They are expecting to exceed their projected oil profit target by about 25 billion dollars, so why has the US spent 45 billion dollars there to restore infrastructure? I'm curious what others think about this. All I have to say is that the US Congress had better have a response to this. I think it's time for the Iraqis to start paying for their own recovery a bit, now.

I always suspected that they were holding out on us. But if things play out in the race to the whitehouse, then they'll have Iran to worry about. The only good thing Obama and Clinton are good for I guess, insuring that the wheel rolls over Iraq worse than our troops did in '91 and '03 combined. Hope they bought their umbrellas.

bedub1 wrote:Now you know why the terrorists want to kill us and kick us out. Think how great of a war they could wage against all non-believers if they had the 35billion for themselves...instead of the natives of Iraq who need it. They could finally finish their goal of killing all non-believers.

No, I'm pretty sure the reason they don't want the US in their country is because they are sick of living under occupation by a foreign country.

Also, clearly 35 Billion dollars would not be enough to 'kill all non-believers' - seeing as the US has spent atleast 10 times that and hasn't even been able to win a war against one country.

bedub1 wrote:Now you know why the terrorists want to kill us and kick us out. Think how great of a war they could wage against all non-believers if they had the 35billion for themselves...instead of the natives of Iraq who need it. They could finally finish their goal of killing all non-believers.

Has it occured to you that if you were not there in the first place nobody would be trying to kick you out, if your country was occupied would you be happy ? I have given up trying to figure out why exactly Bush went into Iraq but it certainly wasn't just to fight terrorism !

well i suppose you could say that money could fight terrorism so we don't have to fight over there and keep iran off.

I missed this one somehow... that situation is more than mildly irking...

Quoting from the article:

"They ought to be able to use some of their oil to pay for their own costs and not keep sending the bill to the United States," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat.

Although it might seem irksome at first glance, do people not realise exactly why those 'costs' were incurred in the first place? I'll give you a clue: It rhymes with 'tinvasion, then a botched job rebuildink' but the first and last letters are I and G respectively. To be honest, I they have every right to expect us to foot the bill, and even dispite that the article did say that they haven't spent it because the government system cannot decide where to spend it, rather than not wanting to. It's not that big a deal in my opinion.

Guiscard wrote:Quoting from the article:

"They ought to be able to use some of their oil to pay for their own costs and not keep sending the bill to the United States," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat.

Although it might seem irksome at first glance, do people not realise exactly why those 'costs' were incurred in the first place? I'll give you a clue: It rhymes with 'tinvasion, then a botched job rebuildink' but the first and last letters are I and G respectively. To be honest, I they have every right to expect us to foot the bill, and even dispite that the article did say that they haven't spent it because the government system cannot decide where to spend it, rather than not wanting to. It's not that big a deal in my opinion.

Your sig really makes it difficult for me to concentrate on what you are actually saying.

Anyhow, the last section is what really gets me.

'The Government Accountability Office estimates that the U.S. has designated $6 billion to rebuild Iraq's energy sector and $300 million to develop Iraq's government ministries. But GAO contends that the U.S. does not have a strategic plan on how to accomplish either goal.

The State Department told investigators it believes the Iraqis should be responsible for devising such a plan. GAO disagreed.

"In our view, it's a shared responsibility. U.S. taxpayer money is involved," Walker said.'[/b]