## And in comes the money...

 US awards contract for Iraqi port From correspondents in Washington March 25, 2003 THE United States has awarded a $US4.8 million ($8m)contract to manage the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr, which is still only tenuously-held by invading US and British troops. The US Agency for International Development said the contract - the second to be awarded after Washington sought contracts from a select group of US firms - was given to the Seattle, Washington-based Stevedoring Services of America (SSA). "SSA will be responsible for the effective operation of the port, allowing food and other humanitarian and reconstruction materials and supplies to be delivered smoothly and efficiently," USAID said. "(It) will provide an initial port assessment, develop improvement plans to overcome port-imposed constraints, and supply technical expertise to ensure an adequate flow of through shipment." The company would be responsible for port pilots who guide ships to the piers, manage the access of trucking companies to the port and police the facility, USAID added. The deal is the second of eight civilian contracts for the post-war reconstruction of Iraq tendered by USAID on January 31. They are reportedly valued at more than $US900 million. The process has been criticised by some because of its secrecy and the small number of firms involved. No foreign companies were invited to tender. The SSA deal is the second to have been struck. A$US7.1 million personnel contract was awarded to Washington-based International Resources Group on February 21. Agence France-Presse http://www.news.com.au/common/story_...E25778,00.html
Hmph. I guess I'm just cynical, right?
 PhysOrg.com science news on PhysOrg.com >> Galaxies fed by funnels of fuel>> The better to see you with: Scientists build record-setting metamaterial flat lens>> Google eyes emerging markets networks
 and here i though we were helping the Iraqi people out of the goodness of our hearts. [:((]
 Recognitions: Science Advisor Nothing new, as this was announced publicly after action began. Initially a military government, followed by private US companies who will operate all goverment agencies until a democratic Iraqi goverment can take over. Did the Fucrench expect to be part of this? They'll be lucky to get some oil stained sand. Regards

## And in comes the money...

 Originally posted by kyleb and here i though we were helping the Iraqi people out of the goodness of our hearts. [:((]
[s(] No. We are in the process of disarming a dangerous regime. It just so happens that in order to do this, we have to remove the regime. The beneficial side effect of removing the regime is that the Iraqi people will no longer be brutalized by it, and will be able to develop their own brand of self-governance.

Not that we expect it, but once our mission is complete, the Iraqi people ought to shower us with gifts of kisses and thanks for giving them a better life. After all, our blood is spilled just as their's.
 Recognitions: Science Advisor French, German, and Russian contracts that barter oil for weapons expertise and materials, will obviously not be honored. Rgeards

 We are in the process of disarming a dangerous regime. It just so happens that in order to do this, we have to remove the regime.
Then why didn't the US ever try to obtain a UN resolution authorising the removal of the regime? There was no mention of this. I'll tell you why. Because it is against international law.

 Not that we expect it, but once our mission is complete, the Iraqi people ought to shower us with gifts of kisses and thanks for giving them a better life. After all, our blood is spilled just as their's.
Did they ask for our help?

 Originally posted by Alias [s(] No. We are in the process of disarming a dangerous regime. It just so happens that in order to do this, we have to remove the regime. The beneficial side effect of removing the regime is that the Iraqi people will no longer be brutalized by it, and will be able to develop their own brand of self-governance. Not that we expect it, but once our mission is complete, the Iraqi people ought to shower us with gifts of kisses and thanks for giving them a better life. After all, our blood is spilled just as their's.
LMAO

Sure, after we allow US companies to rape them blind, like they do worldwide, they should thank us?

 Originally posted by Alias [B]Not that we expect it, but once our mission is complete, the Iraqi people ought to shower us with gifts of kisses and thanks for giving them a better life. After all, our blood is spilled just as their's.
If the Iraqis had been lining up along the streets waving little American flags when the US army moved in, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But as it is, I don't think the Iraq civilians are grateful that their homes and families are being bombed - especially when they didn't ask for it in the first place.

As for dangerous regime, North Korea had admitted to nuclear capability to the point of taunting the US. If any regime needs disarming and removing, it should be NK first. Now, if they only had oil as well...

 Originally posted by Laser Eyes Then why didn't the US ever try to obtain a UN resolution authorising the removal of the regime? There was no mention of this. I'll tell you why. Because it is against international law.
The UN authorized disarmament. Unfortunately, the UN was incapable of enforcing it. The coalition will now enforce the original UN mandate. The fact that the regime has to be torn down in order to do it is merely a side effect.

 Did they ask for our help?
Yes many of them have. Many more, it is presumed, would like to but can't for fear they'll have their tongues cut out.

Mentor
 But as it is, I don't think the Iraq civilians are grateful that their homes and families are being bombed.
Wow, could you come any closer to an outright lie? The only "homes and families" to be bombed are Hussein's. The US does not target civilians and no one even in Iraqi government has even suggested we have had any collateral damage like that.

 Originally posted by Zero LMAO Sure, after we allow US companies to rape them blind, like they do worldwide, they should thank us?
At least we'll kiss them first, which is something Saddam would never do. Besides, we won't be staying long.

 Originally posted by Alias At least we'll kiss them first, which is something Saddam would never do. Besides, we won't be staying long.
Don't bet on it...do you think any company will give up cheap labor, convenient oil, and the lack of environmental protection?

 Originally posted by les If the Iraqis had been lining up along the streets waving little American flags when the US army moved in, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
When they think they can get away with celebrating, that is when the real threat to them is gone, they'll be partying like it's the Fourth of July.

 As for dangerous regime, North Korea had admitted to nuclear capability to the point of taunting the US. If any regime needs disarming and removing, it should be NK first. Now, if they only had oil as well...
What are you talking about? If you people can't stomach 50 casualties, how would you stomach the 250,000 that would die in a war with NK? That's simply not how that one will play out. I think your dread-locks are too tight!

 Originally posted by Zero Don't bet on it...do you think any company will give up cheap labor, convenient oil, and the lack of environmental protection?
You act like the country is being autioned off. That is simply not true. It is once again the graciousness of this country being misunderstood.

 Originally posted by russ_watters Wow, could you come any closer to an outright lie? The only "homes and families" to be bombed are Hussein's. The US does not target civilians and no one even in Iraqi government has even suggested we have had any collateral damage like that.
Are you serious? Do you simply not watch the news at all? Or is the news where you live very censored?

http://news.com.au/common/story_page...E25777,00.html
http://news.com.au/common/story_page...E25777,00.html
 Alias...you define anything that the U.S. does as perfect and wonderful...which is the exact opposite of reality. I'm not the one who is gonna try to break through the years of your brainwashing.

 Originally posted by Adam Are you serious? Do you simply not watch the news at all? Or is the news where you live very censored?
I found this at the site you linked to (news.com.au).

Iraqi civilian casualties: More than 200, according to Iraqi officials.

Now the question is...

Are YOU serious? Do you simply beleive everything you read without considering it's source. Or does the news where you live concern some other universe?

"...according to Iraqi officials." What a joke! When was the last time those guys told the truth?