Regardless of what political/press/diplomatic maneuvering took place (or didn't take place), what's done is done. The consequences of a complete American pullout of Iraq at this time would probably not be very good, in the short term, and especially in the long term. I'm not going to chew over old fat about whether it should have been done or not. It has been done, and we have created a power vacuum in Iraq, conveniently located in the middle of the Middle East. If that vacuum is left unfilled, i.e. by an American pullout, what or who is going to fill it? Will we like the consequences of such an action. I highly doubt it.
Live today, not yesterday.
As far as the thing about what nations get to have contracts to rebuild Iraq: If a nation goes to war, and another nation's government chooses to yell to the world that they're wrong, that's fine. They have their own sovereignty and right to say that. But they probably shouldn't expect to profit as a result of the war, after the war is over. And they may find that they can't buy their way in when it's over, either.
Either you stand with us, or you stay on the sidelines. Either is your right as a nation, but don't expect the combatants to let you profit after they've done the risky work for you. Japan and Australia, among others, understood this. Others didn't, including France and Germany. They all made their choices.
While we're talking about administration personalities: John Ashcroft makes me wish he wasn't from Missouri. He was a horrible governor, a worse senator, and I'm not even going to speculate on how the heck a POS like him became Attorney General. He makes Shrub look like the greatest man that ever lived. Trust me. We know John Ashcroft in Missouri, and he's WAY worse than W ever thought about.
Now, my (edit: next to) last opinionated point. It's going to be really sad if next November I have to vote for W, because the Democrats can't come up with anyone better than Harold Dean as a frontrunner. If you don't understand why I don't like Harold Dean, see my point above about the effects of pulling out of Iraq at this time. $80B would just be a drop in the bucket to the long-term costs of that.
Oh, and one more. The Supreme Court got one right. To paraphrase: 'Soft money is a corrupting influence on politics'. Well, DUH! Took'em long enough.
Live today, not yesterday.
As far as the thing about what nations get to have contracts to rebuild Iraq: If a nation goes to war, and another nation's government chooses to yell to the world that they're wrong, that's fine. They have their own sovereignty and right to say that. But they probably shouldn't expect to profit as a result of the war, after the war is over. And they may find that they can't buy their way in when it's over, either.
Either you stand with us, or you stay on the sidelines. Either is your right as a nation, but don't expect the combatants to let you profit after they've done the risky work for you. Japan and Australia, among others, understood this. Others didn't, including France and Germany. They all made their choices.
While we're talking about administration personalities: John Ashcroft makes me wish he wasn't from Missouri. He was a horrible governor, a worse senator, and I'm not even going to speculate on how the heck a POS like him became Attorney General. He makes Shrub look like the greatest man that ever lived. Trust me. We know John Ashcroft in Missouri, and he's WAY worse than W ever thought about.
Now, my (edit: next to) last opinionated point. It's going to be really sad if next November I have to vote for W, because the Democrats can't come up with anyone better than Harold Dean as a frontrunner. If you don't understand why I don't like Harold Dean, see my point above about the effects of pulling out of Iraq at this time. $80B would just be a drop in the bucket to the long-term costs of that.
Oh, and one more. The Supreme Court got one right. To paraphrase: 'Soft money is a corrupting influence on politics'. Well, DUH! Took'em long enough.
--Mav