Tim Blair

He's the man.

The Washington Post is also deeply offended.

A good start.

Israel is also ineligible for contracts. I suspect that most Yuuripeens would not be as outraged. Actually, I suspect this is one of a media industry scandal. The media loves this stuff and they can write big dramatic headlines and the talking heads can talk all night long. Actually, I kind of like it too.

The policy itself was set a long time ago and it's only official now and, much as I like it, it'll probably get watered down considerably.

Are there any Chocolate factories in Iraq that need rebuilding? Are the neutral Swiss on the blacklist?

Sorry for the mangled syntax above. I noticed that the Independent called this scandal over the contracts 'the spoils of war' debate (scare quotes in the original).

If these are 'spoils of war', why are the members of the peace camp so upset about being left out? What happened to their principled stand against the bloody war profiteer Bush?

Would the cunning linguists out there please help. I need to send urgent messages to some folks overseas and would like to know how to say the following phrases in french, german, russian and canadian:

"fuck you"
"what did you expect"
"you picked the wrong side"
"change your government, then we can talk"

Many thanks in advance

E

just incredible - the level of discourse. only australian right-wing degeneration can come up with so much space wasted for no content.

i mean, having a reactionary opinion is one thing. but becoming emotionally involved with it at a tabloid level is just too telling.

right-wing intellectualism was/is/stays a contradiciton in terms. ever read a book, tim?

Not true, serge. Euro-weenie left-wing hypocrisy consumes loads more pixels and print than aussie right-wing degenration.

Serge,

The word is spelled "contradiction", not "contradiciton" and it means asserting what is internally disproved.

Typical attempt at lefty intellectual superiority there serge. Also classic pinko tactics of attempting to tar the right with the very characteristics which define the lefties: emotional, reactionary opinion

But its OK, we understand.

I love cowboys. Go, Dubya!

Part of this seems to be motivated by the thought that the now-barred companies that would get contracts would be the same ones who profited by cheating during the sanctions.

Also, they would be working with (and giving power and influence to) their old cronies, who were the associates and supporters of Saddam.

No soup for you!

surg say true! ASTRALIAN WING DAGENATION AS TABALIOD

I notice that Puce gives his email address as "bush@hitler.com."

Let's give Puce credit where it's due. His little rant (?) is about as articulate as his group gets.

Nice, Puce.

I could never write that well when I was stoned. How do you do it?

I believe Puce was being sarcastic.

Wonderful Tim. Missing from Germany, France and Russian whining is the source of money for those contracts. The U.S. tax-payer.

I think they will find a strong revulsion to allowing tax-payer's to reward the reprehensible policies of those countries. Whining about it now is pretty funny and Bush's reaction treated it with all the respect it deserved.

The U.S. media is out of touch with the U.S. citizens to largest extent that I have ever seen. The leadership of the Democratic Party in the United States has decided that they have to be the Green Party (which is a left wing splinter party over here that has never received 5% of the vote and has no Statewide let alone national offices). If the majority of the public were paying attention right now (which the aren't), the strange positions and rhetoric of the Democrats would be quite puzzling.

This is going to be a very interesting election year here in the states. I think Bill Clinton might vote Republican (probably not). He certainly has more in common with Bush than he does with Dean!

Sewerage

Geeeeet faaaarrrkkked

Luuuuv

Murph

If any European or Australian reading this or our big media here in the US and thinks that the American people are going to care at all about this, they are fooling themselves.

Not only did our "allies" reveal themselves to be cowards, they also showed themselves to be what, in American terms, is a vital insult: useless.

If the Euros/Aussie-left is pissed now, just wait another 20 years for the next inevitable European Death Camp (TM) to get up and running a la Srebrenica.

Guess who is *not* coming to stop you oh-so-sophisticated types from fucking murdering each other by the thousands next time round?

And you're worried about contracts! Ha!

I'm tempted to give those who are shocked, appalled and disgusted by this remarkable decision a break. One gets so used to hearing the language of the nattering nabobs that a little moral clarity _is_ shocking. I have a good friend who never fails to register his contempt for those who refer to "freedom fries". To me, its a rather mild and, for the most part, good humored response to what was, in fact, an outrageous betrayal. I also find the blustering and high horsing of the offended nations delightful.

Uh, guys, you do realize that "Puce" is a running Web-joke, right?

The relentless Euro-weenie hypocrisy could nearly stop up a black hole. It's so sad they can't generate private profit from the aftermath, soooooo sad.

Actually, they can profit. It's just the big, plum "prime contracts" that are off-limits for those countries. The smaller contracts, which, taken together, will probably total more than the prime contracts do.

I have no concern for those who profited off Saddam Hussein and now want to profit off of the American (+ others) liberation of Iraq. They still have the opportunity to profit -- they can take their whine elsewhere.

thanks for the correction - I should have said "major profits". I'm offended they can reap *any* profit from my tax dollars.

"George Bush poured fuel on the flames of the Iraq contracts dispute yesterday with a sneering dismissal"

Since when has the Indy been against sneering?

E:

Living so close to Canada, I have picked up some of their language. Here is my take:

"fuck you, eh ?"
"what did you expect, you hosers !"
"you picked the wrong side, you hopeless weenies !"
"Rollback decades of Trudeauism and get over that anti-American chip on your shoulder, then we can make speaks with each other"

Kofi Annan commented that he thought that Germany, France and the US had hoped to forget the past and get on with the future. If this is the case then how on earth can he explain the fact that neither of them put up a franc/deutschmark for post-Saddam Iraq? What's the matter? Were they thinking about history when they made their "generous offers" of sweet bugger all? If by the same logic they are saying that things are too chaotic to commit money to the country then why are they squealing about this in the first place. I mean if the government is refusing to invest anything then by rights they are indicating that their companies shouldn't either.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "spoils of war" a term representing booty or gain obtained by the victors from waging war at the expense of the losing country? The billions to be spent on these contracts come from American taxpayers. If anything, these "spoils of war" are a heaven sent (ironic, eh?) gain to the people of Iraq.

The Independent really should know better than to use such blatantly incorrect terms. They really should. But then maybe they do.

Perhaps my favourite Puce-ism:

'hey Irak is done, lets tacos'

The going ROI on the main contracts is supposed to be something in the mid 3% range, which isn't bad. As another commenter mentioned, a huge amount of cash will be doled out in subcontracting, so restricting primary contracts is useless and won't make that much of a difference on who gets the money.

'George Bush poured fuel on the flames of the Iraq contracts dispute yesterday with a sneering dismissal '

'"International law? I'd better call my lawyer," the American President joked '

Joking is sneering? Is it a sneery joke or a jokey sneer?

It's an embarrasing (for Kofi) reminder that "international law" is a friggin' joke, ignored by the people and countries most in need of law. "International law" is whatever the biggest and toughest say it is, and always has been.

Except, possibly, for the "laws of the sea", which pretty much everyone abides by.

Hey, if this violates international law and all, does this mean that France has to let Lockheed and Boeing bid on fighter contracts?

Bob wrote:

Kofi Annan commented that he thought that Germany, France and the US had hoped to forget the past and get on with the future.

I entirely agree. Let's start with France, Russia, and Germany "forgetting" about the money Saddam owed them. :-)

d. cheney...play along and we'll all get richer.

SINCE IT WILL BE OUR MONEY THAT REBUILDS IRAQ(AND YOU KNOW IT WILL BE OUR MONEY), WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO KEEP THE PERVERSE OPPORTUNISTS SUCH AS FRANCE, FROM SNEAKING UP FROM BEHIND AND REAPING THE BENEFITS OF OUR HARD WORK AND SACRIFICE.

GEORGE W. IS ONLY STATING WHAT THE MAJORITY OF THIS COUNTRY FEELS, SO TO SHOOT THE MESSENGER IS POINTLESS. WE SAVED BOTH GERMANY FROM IT'S SELF DESTRUCTION AND FRANCE FROM IT'S RUIN IN WORLD WAR II, AND THEY CONTINUALLY INSULT US WHILE HOLDING OUT THEIR HANDS FOR LARGE DONATIONS. I SAY THAT WE TAKE THE STATUE OF LIBERTY AND AIR-DROP IT IN FRANCE, SO THAT WE CAN BUILD AN AUTHENTIC AMERICAN STATUE OF LIBERTY, AND THEN CUT OFF FOREIGN AID, EXCEPT IN CASES SUCH AS AFRICA AND SOUTH AMERICA, WHERE DROUGHT AND FAMINE CAUSE PEOPLE TO STARVE. THEY ARE MUCH MORE APPRECIATIVE OF OUR ASSISTANCE AND GOOD WILL.

Dude, your caps-lock key is stuck.

Frank,
Speak in a big boy voice please.

And Frank,

Money given to Africa is gratefully accepted... by the kleptocrats who run the African countries, who can then fatten their Swiss bank accounts.

Money sent to Third World countries seldom reaches the point of intent, or of greatest utility.

I suppose in a sense that famine does cause starvation, but famine/starvation is generally not caused by drought, but politics. Notably the politics of the kleptocrats fattening their Swiss bank accounts with foreign aid money.

We saved both Germany from its self destruction and France from its ruin in World War II, and they continually insult us while holding out their hands for large donations. I say that we take the Statue of Liberty and air-drop it in France

Well Frank F, why don't you do a thorough job of it. Purge the American language of all the words of German (spit) or French (spit) origin.

Better bomb Washington while you are at it. The town planning was done by a Frenchman (spit).

Remove all the books in your libraries written by German (spit) or French (spit) authors.
Perhaps you could burn them all in Opera Square in front of the Met.

And naturally, refuse to use anything invented or developed by the French (spit), the Germans (spit) or the Russians (spit).

It's indisputable that because their governments are a bit off, the entire popoulation should be vilified.

What's your favorite brand of chaw, Peggy? They got all kinds here.

And please do invest in a fine spittoon.

Yeh, the subcontracts are the real crux. If the Axis of Weasels can bid them, the program is lost.
Necessary to limit subcontracts to keep people like Chretien's son-in-law (oil CEO/major stockholder) from profiting.
Remember Canada is in this group in spades.

I have seen French stories , Papillion, count of monte cristo, the three musketeers, the messenger.
If we were to drag the French movies and novels out to build a bonfire, the first reaction of the general populace would be a markedly less morose attitude. If French movies and novels didn't aim at making people so fucking depressed they would kill themselves, maybe someone would watch them. As it is burning a French novel is sort of anticlimax, since no one read it to start with.

Elephant translate Most European languages at this site Although it is strangely useless on British old English.

"fuck you" = "va te faire foutre"
"what did you expect" = "ce qui vous vous a attendu"
"you picked the wrong side" = "a sélectionné le côté faux"
"change your government, then we can talk" = "changement votre gouvernement, alors nous pouvons parler"

Also if you want to bad mouth French ninnies in a direct forum Pave France has a good supply, and they mostly speak English.

Serge wants the names of conservative intellectuals. Where to start...and so little space. Roger Scruton, our own Bunyip, Greg Sheridan, Paul Johnson, Mark Steyn, Gerard Jackson. And may be even Christopher Hitchens, who seems to have have had, like Paul Johnson, a Damascus experience. And these are up against the likes of Bob Brown, Mark Latham, Dennis Kucinich. Stone me - no wonder the left is moribund and desperate.

Really is just common sense. What could they really have expected?

galling, isn't it that these countries refuse to provide men and money and yet have no shame in demanding US taxpayer dollars!

http://www.khanreport.com/content/121203.html

Read the rest at:
Iraq War Foes Carping Needlessly Over Pentagon’s Reconstruction Limitations
December 12, 2003

The hysterical shrieks from rejected nations and the Democratic Party over the Bush administration's Iraq reconstruction ban is classic political posturing.

Cynics who have wasted little time in assailing the decision as unfair, unhelpful, and unnecessary will not admit that the Pentagon’s new policy (revealed through a memo by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz) does not prohibit the excluded countries from bidding on subcontracts--a logical option since the US contract winners have subsidiaries in these nations. This means that prime contractor KBR, subsidiary of Halliburton, can legitimately subcontract work out to a German firm. But the German firm would be excluded from prime bidding unless Germany decides to send troops and money for Iraq.

A vindictive administration would have promoted an outright ban at all levels of bidding. Such is not the case.

The policy has two main goals: One, Washington is formally registering displeasure with the dissenting nations, hitting them where it hurts the most—in the wallet. Bush is arguing-—and the American people will not disagree--that countries that have refused to provide men and money have no right to protest the decision or attempt to profit at the expense of the US taxpayer or soldier.

White House spokesman Scott McLellan put it plainly: $25 billion worth of contracts are being funded by the US taxpayer, so it is appropriate that the US government determines who benefits as a result.

In the same memo, Wolfowitz (rightly) redefines the banned nations as a security risk to the United States.

Russia sold Iraq IGLA missiles in violation of UN sanctions; China built a fiber optic network (again in violations of UN laws) that enabled Saddam to target coalition aircraft (which Bush bombed in January 2001, much to the chagrin of Russia, France, and China); France and Germany opposed moves to dislodge a dictator that was openly funding terrorist groups that espouse a “death to America and Israel” philosophy.

The White House is warning these nations that they have somehow managed to channel their policy disagreements with Washington into overt support for regimes hostile to the United States.

The second objective is to draw these countries into the reconstruction process. In his memo, Wolfowitz espouses a carrots and stick strategy. He says that war foes can rejoin the bidding process by providing human capital and dollars to the effort, voicing hope that the Pentagon’s restrictions would serve as encouragement for these nations to abandon their reckless ways and join the American-led coalition.