the question in my mind is this - if Larry is corrct about the 300 million -and I believe it did send troops -- then why is Bush saying Canada did not help? Because it said unilateral invasion was a bad idea?

I know I was being sarcastic earlier, but this one sincerely puzzles me.

Dana

> Larry,
>
> That is a diffferent pile of money.
>
> My understanding is: that money is open to bids by almost anyone.
>
> It is only the US grants administered through the Pentagon that are
> subject to this restriction.
>
> Jerry Johnson
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/11/03 02:03PM >>>
> At the same time John, these countries have pledged a lot of money for
>
> rebuilding. For instance Canada has earmarked over 300 million for
> Iraq. So
> if Canada is willing to pay to help shouldn't it get some of its
> largess
> back in contracts? Why should all of that money go to enrich the
> pockets of
> Shrub's friends.
>
> larry
>
> At 10:32 AM 12/11/2003, you wrote:
> >The countries in question can still do business with Iraq, they just
> cant
> >bid on the contracts that the US taxpayers are paying for. They can
> be hired
> >as subcontractors for the contracts as well. I dont see why this is
> such a
> >huge deal? Why should the US taxpayers pay french companies to
> rebuild Iraq
> >when they werent willing to support the US efforts in the first
> place?
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:28 AM
> >To: CF-Community
> >Subject: Bush gives the finger to the world again
> >
> >Former top U.S. officials are blasting the Bush administration for
> reopening
> >a rift with Europe by excluding critics of the war from prime
> contracts for
> >Iraq's reconstruction.
> >
> ><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>http://www.
> foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html
> ><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
> >
> >"I thought we were in the process of acquiring support rather than
> >alienating it," former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (search)
> said.
> >
> >So let me get this straight.
> >
> >1. Economy is bad.
> >2. Find a patsy country and accuse them of something unfounded.
> >3. Get called on it by other countries.
> >4. Attack anyway
> >5. Deny reconstruction contracts to countries that wouldn't help in
> an
> >illegal war.
> >
> >And people are complaining? I don't get it. It looks like a perfect
> plan to
> >boost the economy by giving local companies big contracts.
> >
> >-Kevin
> >   _____
> >
> >----------
> >[
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to