Republicans strip Iraq anti-profiteering provision

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Pinto, Nov 5, 2003.

  1. Pinto macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #1
    link

    More of the same. The Whitehouse is rotten to the core, and to think almost half of you people voted for these pirates.

    America gets the Government it deserves.
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    somebody get me a bucket.

    the corruption of this administration is so ****ing transparent. can anyone defend this? or are we too concerned about how reagan looks in his mini-series?

    code101? g5man? does this make you proud of bush? is this how the republicans make america better? are the iraqi people more free now?
     
  3. jonapete2001, Nov 6, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  4. ColoJohnBoy macrumors 65816

    ColoJohnBoy

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #4
    Excuse me? WHAT CORRUPTION?!?! Have you been alive for the past four years?!?! I cannot believe how ignorant some people are.
     
  5. jonapete2001, Nov 6, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  6. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #6
    we need a name for this tactic. the ol' "it's happened before, so it's allowable now" defense.

    which completely ignores the severity of the issue, btw.
     
  7. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #7
    I will not defend any actions by any Administration which will protect the crooked and encourage wasteful spending of our tax dollars.

    The Iraqi people are more free now, by the way. There have been over 150 newspapers created.
     
  8. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #8
    Count me as a conservative who would like to see some form of anti-corruption law built into any public-private deal.

    Not knowing the text of the Leahy Amendment, I have no way of knowing how broadly it defined "corruption" or how enforceable it would have been.

    Has anybody gone to the Congressional website and tracked down the number of the Senate Bill, and its amendments? That would help to determine if the amendment was meaningful.

    'Rat
     
  9. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #9
    These companies are doing the work of the American people and should make a profit. Dick Cheney was smart enough to use his connections to get a job at Haliburton so why shouldn't he give a little back. I call that smart. Haliburton invested A LOT of money in Cheney so they have to be able to recoop that investment somehow.
     
  10. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #10
    Profiting is fine by me. Profiteering is not. There's a difference.
     
  11. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #11
    If the vice president's company thinks that's the correct price to pay then I think we ought to get behind the president and pay up. They got the no-bid contracts fair and square.
     
  12. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #12
    Fudge that.

    Ever hear of "market price"? Ever hear of a contracting bid?

    Halliburton was awarded contracts without having a bidding process to determine who could offer the best price. With public funds, several offers must be considered to find the offer that represents the best deal both in terms of quality and price.

    By bypassing the bidding process and awarding the contract to Halliburton, this administration was pandering to its friends and funders in corporate America. They sure weren't looking out for what is best for either the American people or the Iraqi people. Had they been, they would have considered the numerous other options available to them (including international contractors).

    Taft
     
  13. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #13
    That's a fair assesment of the process underway; there's one word (intentionally?) missing from the above para: Iraq.

    I find it grotesque that the US are dividing the spoils and sequestering the assets of a country they have invaded under the guise of liberation.

    The decent thing to have done would have been to award short-term contracts to get the very basic infrastructure working to enable elections to be held within the next few months, then allow the Iraqi government to decide who they want running their industries and benefiting from exploiting their resources.
     
  14. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #14
    did you get hit in the head? this doesn't sound like you.
     
  15. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #15
    I'm assuming wwworry has his tongue firmly planted in his cheek.

    If the language of Leahy's amendment was so terrible he wouldn't have got the support of republicans getting it out of committee. I'm going to have to find the "offending" language.
     

Share This Page