Boghos Posted March 31, 2003 Report Share Posted March 31, 2003 More often than not US bashing passes for "analysis" in many parts of the world. Moreover dire predictions of a world on fire and other calamitous consequences hardly ever materialize. Sure terrorism might escalate, but more as a result of the economic conditions rather than anything else. We have seen that time and again, remember Europe in the 70s ? The question that we are faced with is not whether the US will remain the hegemonic power for decades to come, but how this will play out. There is a certain feeling of despair as the war was not over in a matter of hours, now the US government is trying to manage expectations by saying that it might last much longer than anticipated. It may, but most likely it will not. Selling a quick war was a way to appease public opinion, it was not realistic or expected. By all counts this has been a succesful campaign, we don´t even know if Saddam is alive. I am not saying that it will be easy, but is it reasonable to expect that Saddam will remain in power ? I don´t think so. Is it going to be easy to run Iraq after the war ? No. But it will not be a disaster either. Will the US move swiftly into other countries ? Most likely not. The current campaign might even go according to plan, but US public opinion might become more suspicious of furher acts. And in any case N Korea excepted, there are no obvious or pressing issues at present (except maybe for the domestic economy...). People should just relax a bit. BTW Sip Velcro was invented in Switzerland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted March 31, 2003 Report Share Posted March 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Boghos:... BTW Sip Velcro was invented in Switzerland.Wow thanks. I had no idea! In any case, strike that stupid thing off the list. I just read "Velcro’s® name is derived from the French velours (velvet) and crochet (hook)." ... I think we should call it "freedom ties". (just joking of course ) [ March 31, 2003, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: Sip ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted April 1, 2003 Report Share Posted April 1, 2003 I think the other factor ignored has been the effectiveness of old Soviet weaponry, particularly small arms. These were designed to be effective while not maintained for extended periods of time and are extremely reliable and durable, meanwhile the standard issue US special forces rifle (M4 Carbine) has more serious faults than one has fingers. Soviet (Russian) armour and aircraft also follow the same tradition. For example, unlike their NATO counterparts, both the MIG-29 and SU-27 can land on their fusalage (in case of emergencies) without any chance of the fuel tanks igniting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted April 1, 2003 Report Share Posted April 1, 2003 Boghos - good post. Of course one cannot say that this war is going entirely by "the plan" can we...I mean after all the Iraqi's werent even suposed to fight at all. they were to be "shocked and awed" into submission and give up as our tanks rolled into Bahgdad...and clearly that has not happened. I also think that the US has underestimated/ignored the Arab mind set on all of this. No matter if it is a quick war or a long drug out?Vietnam like one - I fear we have stirred the Arab hornets nest yet again and this can only amount to more wasps flying out to sting us...and folks have been known to die by bee stings you know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJ Posted April 1, 2003 Report Share Posted April 1, 2003 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 3, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2003 What about this? http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/31/human.rig...ghts/index.html Do you commend the U.S. for caring to point out the failures of its allies (Israel and S. Arabia) or do you criticize the U.S. for not treating the two in the same way it treats Iraq?Will someone please show me Iraq is linked to al Qaeda? The closest you can get to al Qaeda in Iraq is the group al Ansar, which is the opposition of the Iraqi government and in fact thrives in the no-fly zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted April 4, 2003 Report Share Posted April 4, 2003 Dear Stormy,I suggest you do not ask for proof when you are not ready to see or hear it. You want proof here is proof for you. http://winstars.free.fr/english/images/bush/Reasonable_Link.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 4, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2003 The Panama Deception - should be interesting. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ThePanamaD...069/preview.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 4, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Azat:Dear Stormy,I suggest you do not ask for proof when you are not ready to see or hear it. You want proof here is proof for you. http://winstars.free.fr/english/images/bush/Reasonable_Link.jpgReminds me of the "Mr. President, our biggest problem doesn't start with an I and end with a Q!" It does. IQ. Bush's that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted April 4, 2003 Report Share Posted April 4, 2003 Self explanatory.... http://www.smh.com.au/ffxMedia/urlmedia_id_1048354520447_margonews.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 Colony... http://www.bbc.co.uk/business/programmes/m...chive/oil.shtml A bit old, and some new things have happened and been said since. However......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 All that for what, now? U.S. Finds No Weapons of Mass Destruction in IraqSun Apr 6, 8:23 AM ET Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo! AS SAYLIYA CAMP, Qatar (Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Sunday it had not yet found any weapons of mass destruction and it believed there was a diminishing threat that Iraq (news - web sites) might use them as U.S.-led troops take over more territory. "The places it's most likely to be found we haven't even gotten to them yet," Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks told a briefing at Central Command in Qatar. Brooks said the farther the U.S.-led forces moved into Iraq, the less opportunity there was for Iraq to use any weapons of mass destruction it might have. Washington launched a war against Iraq on March 20, vowing to disarm it of weapons of mass destruction that Baghdad denies it has. "The closer we get ... there are fewer and fewer options on what can be used to deliver weapons of mass destruction." "As we continue to advance more areas are taken away. We are pleased that it hasn't been used to date but not satisfied that the threat has gone," Brooks said. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._usa_weapons_dc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fadi Posted April 6, 2003 Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 http://www.iraqometer.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 9, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 (edited) Maybe this belonged in the humour section, but... New Iraqi Dinar: http://www.iranian.com/Anyway/2003/April/Images/dinar.jpg http://www.iranian.com/Anyway/2003/April/dinar.html Aha, aha, aha, ahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Edited April 9, 2003 by Stormy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fadi Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 ehe...ehe...ehe...ehehehehehe... Thats him a right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 Maybe this belonged in the humour section, but... New Iraqi Dinar: http://www.iranian.com/Anyway/2003/April/Images/dinar.jpg http://www.iranian.com/Anyway/2003/April/dinar.html Aha, aha, aha, ahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa! LOL ))) Who is in the watermark on the left side? Looks like Jimi Hendrix... but that doesn't make sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 it's Ronald McDonald Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 That is the omnipotent US symbol of currency Uncle Ron.No, not Reagan. It is Ronald McDonald. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 Who is Ron McDonald? Why is he a symbol of US currency? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 hahahaha, Who is Ron McDonald? Why is he a symbol of US currency? Ronald McDonald - founder of the McDonalds chain, now a symbol of American capitalism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 Not exactly founder... just some sort of mascot - he's got his own SITE and even his own house Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 hahahaha, Who is Ron McDonald? Why is he a symbol of US currency? Ronald McDonald - founder of the McDonalds chain, now a symbol of American capitalism. Not at all. The founder is Ray Kroc. Ronald on the other hand is one of the mascots/characters of McDonald's. he is a clown. They also run Ronald McDonald houses for kids who are terminally ill. You can see more here: http://www.ronald.com/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On another side not, I have actually worked on a Ronald McDonald character animation and Voice recognition application as well that was for 170 kiosks in Philippines. To allow customers with smart cards to expedite orders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted April 10, 2003 Report Share Posted April 10, 2003 Oh Ok. I thought he was the founder (as well as a clown - LOL) hence 'McDonanlds' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted April 10, 2003 Report Share Posted April 10, 2003 Thanks guys. Now I remember that I have seen this clown before on the TV or something. But it would be cool if it was Jimi Hendrix instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted April 12, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2003 Excellent. http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/asia/stor...,182731,00.html? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.