News And in comes the money

  • Thread starter Adam
  • Start date
15
0
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_page/0,4057,6184800%255E25778,00.html [Broken]
Hmph. I guess I'm just cynical, right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kyleb

and here i though we were helping the Iraqi people out of the goodness of our hearts.
 

GENIERE

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
 

Alias

Originally posted by kyleb
and here i though we were helping the Iraqi people out of the goodness of our hearts.
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.
 

GENIERE

French, German, and Russian contracts that barter oil for weapons expertise and materials, will obviously not be honored.

Rgeards
 
73
0
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?
 

Zero

Originally posted by Alias
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?
 

les

Originally posted by Alias
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...
 

Alias

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.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,848
5,038
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.
 

Alias

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.
 

Zero

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?
 

Alias

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!
 

Alias

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.
 
15
0
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/0,4057,6186124%255E25777,00.html [Broken]
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6184425%255E25777,00.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zero

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.
 

Alias

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?

Talk about a victim of propaganda. Get with it Adam!
 
15
0
Alias

1) I have actually seen film from within Baghdad, it is played constantly on the news. Lot sof destroyed civilian buildings, many dead and wounded in the hospitals.

2) Given that the USA is hitting Baghdad with missiles and bombs every night, and Baghdad happens to be a city (ie. a place full of civilians), and given that you seem to think anyone who suggests civilians might die when a civilian city is bombed is a victim of propaganda, I am beginning to get the impression that you're a moron.
 

Alias

So the moderator says I'm brainwashed.

And now posters call me a moron.

Why don't you go hide under your beds, while my fellow countrymen, and many of yours, bravely sacrifice their lives defending your freedoms, and your peace.

And another thing, you call me names, which I believe is against the rules of this forum. So, I can only assume that the rules have changed. But I won't stoop to your level. What I will do though, is invite you to kiss my red, white, and blue ass.
 

Zero

Originally posted by Alias
So the moderator says I'm brainwashed.

And now posters call me a moron.

Why don't you go hide under your beds, while my fellow countrymen, and many of yours, bravely sacrifice their lives defending your freedoms, and your peace.

And another thing, you call me names, which I believe is against the rules of this forum. So, I can only assume that the rules have changed. But I won't stoop to your level. What I will do though, is invite you to kiss my red, white, and blue ass.
LOL...we prefer the word 'butt' if you don't mind.

You are really lacking in any sort of perspective, it is readily apparent. Whether you did it to yourself, or you had it forced upon you, is besides the point.

Oh, and hey, hero, when do you ship out for the gulf?
 

Zero

Re: Alias

Originally posted by Adam
1) I have actually seen film from within Baghdad, it is played constantly on the news. Lot sof destroyed civilian buildings, many dead and wounded in the hospitals.

2) Given that the USA is hitting Baghdad with missiles and bombs every night, and Baghdad happens to be a city (ie. a place full of civilians), and given that you seem to think anyone who suggests civilians might die when a civilian city is bombed is a victim of propaganda, I am beginning to get the impression that you're a moron.
"Moron" isn't the proper way to describe someone, boss.
 

Zero

Oh, and I'm sure that if you want the truth about the war, you will have to go outside the USA to get it. American media is in the hip-pockect of the DOD.
 

kat

12
0
Originally posted by les

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...
Yeah, OOOOOOKAY..that must be why Haliburton has oil extraction contracts with North Korea...Haliburton always signs Oil extraction contracts with countries that have no oil! What a world this is eh?
puleeeeesseeee do a little research people
 

les

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.
Man, you really must think this war is some sort of videogame. If the US can't even avoid the mistake of shooting down one of thier allies' figther plane, what do you think the chances are that some of those bombings will damage structures close to the intended target, or even worse, miss the target completely.

AS for Iraqi gov suggesting collateral damage, refer to Adam's links or try the watching the news. Unless, of course, like Alias, you feel those are all mere propaganda.
 

les

Originally posted by Alias
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.
Ahh...I see. So this war is being fought because the powers that be figured the casualty count would be more acceptable. Damn! And I almost believed Bush when he said it's about evil Saddam and his dangerous weapons of mass destruction.
 

Related Threads for: And in comes the money

Replies
39
Views
5K
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • Posted
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • Posted
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Posted
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
25
Views
973
Replies
19
Views
3K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top