Admin to Euros: Give them the Stick, then ask for a carrot...

I don't think these countries that contributed nothing should feel entitled to these contracts. If you don't want the fight the war, fine, but don't expect to benefit from the same war!

 

And don't ask them to forgive debt owed to them. Do you think we should ask them to forgive Iraqi debt after not allowing them to bid on reconstruction?

 

Two separate issues.

One is our money and how we will spend it.

The second is helping out a country that will soon be standing on its own 2 feet.

 

I could go either way on this one. But forgiving debt would not be for the benefit of the US, so I don't see how they are related.

 

Usually I admire your hard-nosed postings, but this strains credulity. We're there for years, we're the de facto government. It's our mess and it's not going to look pretty anytime "soon."

 

Who do you think is going to be responsible for handling those payments in the near future.

 

Originally posted by SamFisher
Nothing means any money for us. Pretty much everything having to do with Iraq means less money for us. I really have no idea what you're talking about at all.

Really?

Then re-read above. You indicated that we wanted these countries to give US there money, which is untrue. You continued discussing it, until your sudden lapse in comprehension.


If you can't see the problem with crapping on somebody and then asking them for help the next day, which it sounds like you can, I don't see what you're arguing about or why.



Explain, exactly, how we're crapping on anyone.

I can understand how they are pissed that it will be harder for them to get a piece of our $18 billion, but I cannot see why they would expect it. Can you? It certainly may have been more magnanimous of us to have allowed them to bid, but I like that we are rewarding leaders who went out on a limb for us.

And FWIW, again, if they elect to punish the Iraqis for it, they will probably pay the consequences down the road with them.

 

Do you know the answer?

 

Well, I'm sure its the country with a government over there, and that's not them.

 

This administration has screwed-up a number of times. They screwed up letting the Pentagon do State's work on more than one occasion. Kristol and Kagan's approach would have been far more preferrable. The net results would have been almost the same, but with subtlety and w/o the public snub.

That said, it irritates me that these countries think that they are entitled to OUR money. We're not locking them out of the other $13 billion, we're not even keeping them from benefitting as sub-contractors on our $18 billion. What do you find so incredulous? That we handled international politics poorly, again, or that these other countries have to work harder to get some of our money?

 

Is this a Quote from
CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER?

Rocket River

 

You're sure?

When are these payments scheduled to begin?

 

That you think Iraq will be standing on it's own two feet soon.

 

Originally posted by SamFisher
Actually Cohen, we have solicited them for donations several times, and in fact many of them are contributing money (example, Canada pledged 190m, and was infuriated when they showed up on Wolfowitz's blacklist.)

But even aside from that, Do you need me to explain that there is no real economic difference between forgiving a debt and asking for a handout? There isn't.

...

All on behalf of the Iraqis. It's not our debt. It's not our country being rebuilt.


Don't ask me, ask the President. He was the one who was pissed off about it.

Do you not read responses?

The White House approved this policy. They were pissed about the most idiotic way it was released for consumption.

...
Nope, they won't elect to punish Iraqis, they'll elect to punish us: Fewer NATO soldiers in Afghanistan (Germany has lost a lot of guys over there for you and me), less cooperation in breaking up European terror cells, etc. But hey, you can't fight the deputy undersecretary of defense I guess, he's the will of the people.

Those terror cells don't just target the US.

Germany has already stated that Iraqi debt relief and these contracts are two separate and distinct issues. Why would that differ WRT Afghanistan?

 

When talking about nations, 'soon' doesn't mean a year, and maybe not even two to me. What's it mean to you?

 

Looks like George isn't as sold on this move as Cohen and Basso:

 

In this instance I thought we were discussing contracts and debt forgiveness. Contracts will be awarded soon and Baker is on a mission to work on the debt issue. I don't think we were talking about or even considering time frames beyond a few years. Now, if you want to go all Holy Roman Empire on me, that's a different set of time frams and not what the thread was about.