MJ

I have no stong objections to your last statement, much like when my children demonstrate such behavior. However, what's its relevance? Is it an a priori attitude? (I think I know the answer.)

quote:Originally posted by THOTH:OK OK - so he is an idiot too...well i already knew that...I still see him as an American hero...anyone who stirs it up like he does is a hero in my eyes...it needs to be done and he is doing it...so he lacks style (well he does have a certain stlye...LOL)...and he doesn't have all of the facts...sure nobody is perfect...he is a rabble rouser in the great American dissenting spirit...and thats what counts IMO - we need more like him...to hell with all of the sheep... Dude, You have a lot of soul searching to do. One would think that at your age, you should've passed through that stage, though.

quote:Originally posted by Raffi Kojian:Sip, Ok you got me, he knows ALL the relevant foreign policy facts! :-) (tough crowd I tell ya!) I was talking about his summary of what US foreign policy has done over the past few decades when I said he knows the facts... Better? :-) So what has it done?

quote:Originally posted by Raffi Kojian: quote:Originally posted by Sip: quote:Originally posted by vava:1. There is virtually NO ONE in America (talk radio nutters and Fox News aside) who is gung-ho to go to war. Trust me on this one. Walk out of the White House and on to any street in America and try to find five people who are PASSIONATE about wanting to kill Iraqis. YOU WON'T FIND THEM! Why? 'Cause NO Iraqis have ever come here and killed any of us! No Iraqi has even threatened to do that. You see, this is how we average Americans think: If a certain so-and-so is not perceived as a threat to our lives, then, believe it or not, we don't want to kill him! Funny how that works! He is very wrong in this. I think he should step out of his comfy beverly hills home and go and talk to some real Americans. Right or wrong, the fact is that more than 70% of the Americans do support this war.Now now, lets not play spin doctor. He says very clearly that nobody is GUNG-HO, he does not say that nobody supports it. Also, I find it telling that most of the polls regarding Iraq tend to ask whether people support the removal of Saddam, a very different question than whether they support the war. Media spin doctoring... Dear Raffi, But which developed nation wants war? Why should one try to prove here that Americans, including the governement, want war? No one wants it. But if war is forced upon America, no one should have doubts on her willingness to win it.

Halliburton Opts Not to Bid on Iraq Reconstruction Tuesday, April 01, 2003 WASHINGTON — Vice President Dick Cheney's former company has decided not to enter a controversial bidding process open only to a few experienced and well-connected firms for major Iraq reconstruction projects. Instead, Halliburton Co. will focus on becoming a secondary contractor. Halliburton, where Cheney was chief executive officer from 1995-2000, said this week its KBR subsidiary "remains a potential subcontractor for this important work." Officials of the Houston-based company would not say whether the decision was related to questions of favoritism and cronyism concerning the firm. Meanwhile, the head of the State Department's Agency for International Development has defended the expedited procedure that invited only a small group of well-experienced -- and politically active -- companies to apply for prime reconstruction contracts. Whether or not Halliburton receives work as a subcontractor, the KBR subsidiary (Kellogg, Brown & Root) already has business in Iraq under a previous Defense Department contract to extinguish oil well fires. The firm hired subcontractors Boots & Coots International Well Control Inc. and Wild Well Control Inc., both also from Houston, to handle the firefighting work. Contract controversy began before the fighting in Iraq started, when USAID sent a detailed "request for proposals" to a handful of companies for construction work that that could total up to $600 million over 21 months. The construction contract is one of eight solicitations for work in postwar Iraq. Agency officials said they were prohibited by law from identifying the invited firms, but The Wall Street Journal said they included KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary; Bechtel Group Inc.; Parsons Corp.; Louis Berger Group and Fluor Corp., two companies that have joined together for this effort, and Washington Group International. The Center for Responsive Politics, an organization that tracks political donations, said the companies and individuals associated with them have made $3.5 million in contributions from 1999 to 2000, with two-thirds going to Republicans. Rep. Henry Waxman of California, ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, has asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to explain the selection of KBR for the oil fires contract. "The only rationale offered ... is that the contract work involves the implementation of a contingency plan for extinguishing oil well fires," Waxman wrote the Corps. "It is not clear, however, whether any other companies were asked to submit similar plans." Bathsheba Crocker, who works on Iraq reconstruction at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said, "If you separate out the Cheney issue, it makes a lot of sense" to choose a firm with postwar reconstruction experience. "But at the same time, you can't separate out the Cheney issue as a political matter," she said. "It's obviously why they're in political hot water." Andrew Natsios, the USAID administrator, has defended the fast-track contracting system that is designed to circumvent a normal bidding process that takes six months. He said speed was essential to rebuild deteriorated schools, water systems, hospitals and other buildings, and the invited bidders already possessed the necessary security clearances. In a column Monday in USA Today, Natsios denied any cronyism or favoritism. "If you need a surgeon, a lawn service, a real estate agent or a college, you seek out the names with the reputation for quality and the ability to get the job done," he wrote. The multinational firms have handled reconstruction projects after conflicts in Bosnia and Haiti, Natsios said, contending the expedited system not only was legal but showed common sense for the United States' image abroad. "We want to quickly show the world, especially Muslim countries, that we care about the Iraqi people and are ready to use our tax dollars to improve their lives," Natsios said. He also addressed a budding controversy over whether the United States would hog the reconstruction work. "Up to 50 percent of the work may be subcontracted to U.S. and foreign firms," he said. USAID signs primary contractors, who in turn choose the subcontractors. The role of non-U.S. firms in rebuilding Iraq has generated its own controversy. President Bush and others in his administration believe there should be a U.S.-run military and administrative transition toward democracy. France and Russia are championing a U.N. role, and the French -- worried they could be shut out of postwar business deals -- are drawing up plans to win their firms some of the reconstruction business. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82872,00.html

Azat, I can guarantee you that this is a very small contract (6-7 wells), at a below commercial rate, during a war-time, and the service needs to be on the ground in the shortest period of time. In general, there are less than 4-5 companies, I think that can do the job, and for most of them it would make no economic sense – at least due to economy of scale considerations. Have you considered that the subsidiary of the Halliburton might have agreed to do it as a favor or as an act of patriotism? Also, how long do you think will it take to bring together a tender and identify a winner, theoretically speaking?

Azat, Do you have info on the size of the contract, the list of potential competitors and the time they would require to get ready for the action?

quote:Originally posted by Sasun:MJ, you sound like a spoiled kid. LOL )) OK. But you sound like another debil.

quote:Originally posted by sen_vahan:In the same way many-many armenians get or try to get US citizenship writing letters against their own country, such as they were harrased there for different reasons. And that is all not true. This tells me that we are people with no sense of the state and a country, just a banch of ****** pretending to be the center of the universe. This is something that needs to be changed in our minds. Another example is those **** making protests against Armenian elections , etc in different countries. Debil.

quote:Originally posted by Azat:True, but then who can afford an apartment in Manhattan? It is true that real estate in Manhattan is very expensive. But one can live at much lower cost outside Manhattan and commute to work for about 25-45 minutes. Besides, the compensation in New York is also higher then elsewhere, and a cost of living adjustment is built in the employment packages.

quote:Originally posted by THOTH:http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/st...,918746,00.html no comment. Yes, Thoh, this is what the "disagreement" was about from day one, and it had nothing to do with "pacifism."

quote:Originally posted by Azat: The answer to that question is elementary - to let them and others to tear Israel apart.

You may also consider moving to NY. Then, you can use the train system.

There may be several reasons, Azat. In an article that I posted yesterday, I think I had provided some arguments about the skepticism of the market towards being able to adequately build inventories. In reality, the market expects only bad news as far as the gasoline is concerned. The price of gasoline depends not only on the crude oil price, but also on few additional factors. Every now and then, it happens that the crude oil prices will go down, but the gasoline prices still would go up. This is primarily related to the lack of sufficient refining capacity. In the last 30 years or so, there have been no new refineries built in USA. In the summer time, primarily, the refineries start operating at a full capacity and may not be sufficient enough to meet the demand. Especially, sometimes one or two refineries may go down (last year there were fires, for example), and then you would have a huge problem. This is all in general. As far as your concrete question is concerned, one possible explanation is that the market reacts to bad news quicker than to good news. It is a public information that the crude oil inventories are at a historic low levels in US. Therefore, even if the crude prices go down for the next month, it will take a while to fill the storage facilities. Therefore, the gasoline prices still may stay at a high level. I think you should not expect significantly lower gasolin prices till the end of the summer, while the crude oil prices may continue to go down. Sorry, it is a late hour, and I am a little tired.

Azat, With your permission, to supplement your note, I would like to introduce some small accents: The US government strongly believes that “over the long run Iraq may and will proliferate weapons of mass distractions” (I am quoting the official line) and will possibly pass it to Al-Qaeda and other affiliated terrorist organizations or, more likely, much like Libya in the past, will use its secret service agents to deliver these weapons to the American shores. There is no question in the international community, including amongst the UN Security Council members, that Iraq has not provided evidence of having destroyed its chemical and biological weapons, which earlier had been proven to exist, which it had taken obligation to destroy. This obligation, among other things is what had stopped USA in 1991 from marching towards Iraq. Of all the countries in the world, USA (and Israel) is the frontline of the receiving side of the potential terrorist attacks. Therefore USA has a different perception of the urgency of the Iraq disarmament and regime change than any other nation. There has been a comment, today, on “preemptive strike.” If you believe that your enemy has weapons of mass distraction, when the enemy has a record of using them against its own people, among others, when you have evidence that the enemy is working on the delivery systems, when you know that well-known leaders of terrorist organizations reside in that country, get treatment there (note also that a very high profile terrorist in hiding for more than a decade, unfortunately don’t remember the name, was detected in Iraq about a year ago, and when it was requested to extradite him, he was found in a “committed suicide status”), and if you have responsibility for the security of your nation, you do apply to preemptive strikes – you don’t wait till the enemy uses biological or other weapons, for example, against you, and then you react. One of the most outrageously stupid concepts advanced by the opponents in UN, lately, was the concept of “smoking gun.” The gun smokes when it is used. Then, you may not be around to retaliate. I have utmost admiration for pacifists. Years ago, Mahatma Gandhi was my hero. I do know some real pacifists who are against this war and I have utmost respect for their position. Some of my friends have been amongst the antiwar demonstrators of protest in New York, last month. But I also see ideologically charged people who pretend to be antiwar, but if the war was against USA, for example, with a possibility to win, they would have jumped up and down cheering it all day long. That’s why I have great skepticism towards their “anti-war” position. Also, to pretend that the real motives of many in this position are not evident is to pretend being blind. They are not concerned as much about the war against Iraq as against the role of USA in the world and its relationship with EU and others. While this may be a legitimate issue, the current tangling of that issue with Iraq, and not noticing of the real motives of France, Germany, Russia and China, in particular, and occupying this “high-moral ground” is simply dishonest. Finally, as a matter of general argument, I would like to note the following: there is type of people operating in a hypothetical world. They have their own theory in advance. Then they search for the “evidence” that would support their theory. (By the way, this kind of mentality exists even in pure science.) They usually have some strongly held beliefs, which may or may not have anything to do with the reality. They make some strong assumptions in advance, and then build a whole “framework of evidence” around it. And they are not able to listen. They are out there just to discharge their negative emotions. I think this is unfortunate. Frequently, these may be good people with good intentions, but they confine themselves in such a small world and push themselves into such a small corner that it becomes very hard to get out of such corner. One can notice that by doing so, they are not trying to address some external issue, in reality, but are struggling with some internal issue, which under proper circumstances may lead to outstanding spiritual result, but under some other circumstances may simply destroy even a very good person. Time will put things in a proper perspective, I think.

OK. I won't be sorry.

Domino, I honestly think that you are close to being dumb. I am not saying this to insult you. I am just sadly constituting my perception, which has been formed over a couple of years period of time. I didn't mean to say this. You just forced me to do it. I am sorry. This is why I think it is pointless to try to explain you anything. I apologize again for being this direct.

Azat, To echo you, I would like to make a couple of comments. Maybe you can shed some light on what I don’t understand. I am puzzled at this stupid USA bashing - especially on the grounds of the "lack of intelligence." It is some kind of expression of lack of security and stamina by those who speak on this subject. Perhaps it makes them feel important in their own eyes. It doesn't take a lot of effort from someone who has learned how to build archives based in Internet materials to learn that USA represents the most advanced country in the areas of technology, medicine, biology, chemistry, physics, it is the most creative country in the areas of music, art, it hosts the majority of world's most outstanding universities, and so on. This list can go on and on. I think the elementary intelligence and the elementary common sense require that a person, especially one who contemplates on the subject of "stupidity and smartness" of others, can demonstrate some restrain and not make himself to look as stupid as he usually does. Is it me who doesn’t understand it or is it some others?

Ayo, Movses, shat skhal es. Du kartsum es te mi anhat e galu u hrtsere lutselu e. Aidpisi anhat chka. Mer aisorva dzhbkhtutiunneri mi mets batjare hents na e vor kartsum en te anhatneri harts e sa. Oriank, Hayastani bolor kaghakakan kazmakerputiunnere mi kani anhatneri shurjn ein kazmakerpvats ev derevs aidpes el ka. Dra hamar el system chi steghtsvum. Ev erb vor anhatn el "anpokharineli" e darnum,aid anhatin tkhkatsnum en ev "hartsere lutsum." Mius hartse vor du skhalvum es, da "zhogovurde pokhelu" hartsn e. Menk shat lav zhoghovurd unenk. Parzapes 2000-5000 takankner brnazavtel en aid zhoghovurdi huise apagaii nkatmamb. Aid zhoghovurde durs e ekel vitjake pokhelu, baits ain angraget u hantsagorts takanknere voronk dartsel en ais iskhanutian (ev masamb nakhord ishkhanutian) miak henarane da tuil tal chen uzum. Isk inch verabervum e ko aracharkats "miasin khndirnere lutselun." apa da amenaankap aracharkutiunn e. Inchpes es du patkeratsnum miasin khndir lutsele erb probleme hents ko aracharkats "lutsoghneri" mi masn e? Yes kez karogh em vstahetsnel vor mer amenavtangavor ev kortsnarar tshnaminere mer harevannere chen. Tshnaminerin do petk e mer mech pntres.

quote:Originally posted by Domino:

quote:Originally posted by Domino: quote:Originally posted by MJ: BTW, why don't you shave your mustache? Are you spying at me ? Don't take yourself so serious. It will help you to live a more tranquil life.

I owe you nothing, Domino. BTW, why don't you shave your mustache?

I know that you have missed, Gamavor. In the last 12 years, UN has come up with about 17 Resolutions demanding certain things from Iraq. The first of them, I think Resolution 678, has articulated the terms of the ceasefire which Iraq had signed and violated. The Resolution 1441 has articulated “serious consequences” if Iraq dose not immediately and unconditionally comply with the terms of disarmament. I wouldn’t like to comment on the rest.

quote:Originally posted by gamavor:Saddam is an idiot, cruel dictator and the whole World knows that. The question is whether preemptive military strikes, motivated by preemptive, forward, circumstantial, baseless, and generally illegal decisions could cure the illness. Tomorrow we may witness another self-declared "chosen" of God to preempt somebody else, and the World will be messed up again. Yes, preemptive strike can cure the problem, as many will witness soon. And it is not based on a baseless and illegal decision. It is based at least on two UN resolutions.

SAS; Ko voghormeliutian masin yes meknabauntiun anelu karik chem tesnum. Chem karogh aid hartsum kez gerazantsel.