Subject:
|
Re: Bush defends exclusion order on contracts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:58:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
291 times
|
| |
|
|
Hmm. One would think that open competitive bids would be in the best interests
of US tax payers and Iraq citizens?
Heard the latest:
Oil firm ‘overcharged’ US in
Iraq
Scott A
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=13332930
“It is very simple. Our people risk their lives. Friendly coalition folks risk
their lives. And, therefore, the contracting is going to reflect that. And
that is what the US taxpayers expect,”
Surprise, surprise, the invasion was more about control than terrorism.
And then:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s1008494.htm
“...after barring major European countries from bidding for the most lucrative
reconstruction contracts in Iraq, President Bush is now asking those same
countries for help in forgiving Iraq’s debt.”
Is that incredible optimism, incredibly bad timing, incredible arrogance, or
incredible stupidity?
ROSCO
|
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Bush defends exclusion order on contracts
|
| (URL) is very simple. Our people risk their lives. Friendly coalition folks risk their lives. And, therefore, the contracting is going to reflect that. And that is what the US taxpayers expect," Surprise, surprise, the invasion was more about (...) (21 years ago, 12-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
