"We’re spending billions of dollars on Iraqi reconstruction projects, apparently without Iraqi involvement and acceptance of which ones are being built first, and now we wonder why the Iraqis are not taking ownership of the completed projects and running them."
Thank you! I am so sick and tired of people blaming the Iraqis for the failure of reconstruction. It was obvious from the beginning that the very Iraqis who had build the infrastructure, then rebuilt it within a few months after the U.S. systematically destroyed it in 1991, and then managed to maintain it under near-impossible circumstances for nearly 13 years of unbelievable embargo - the people who really understood the systems - were being kept out of any of the decision-making, or even allowed access to begin to repair the systems after they were destroyed again in 2003.
I good friend of mine who was in charge of international telephony did his best to keep the system going throughout "shock and awe", going out between attacks to make repairs. After the "fall of Baghdad", he got his crews together and got some of the areas back up and running. When he went to the Americans to tell them what he had done so far, and to ask for security assistance in some of the more volatile areas, he was told to stop the services he had restored, to go home, send his crews home, and not do any more work. He was told that he no longer had a job, that an American corporation was coming to take over, and that he could apply for a job with them if he wanted to (and fat chance of getting one!). What little confidence in the Americans' promises and good intentions that he had left evaporated at that point. His experience was typical.
The Americans did not want the Iraqis to be involved in deciding or bringing to pass their own future or that of their country. And now the Iraqis are being blamed for the Americans' failures.
Posted by Shirin at July 28, 2007 12:23 PMIt is a violation of one of the articles of the Genevea Conventions for an occupying force to destroy, then remake economic sectors of the occupied country. Yet, this is exactly what the United States has done and continues to do in Iraq to the benefit of US Corporations.
It seems to me that this is the essence of colonialism and a prima fascia case of a war crime.
Posted by brisa at July 28, 2007 12:45 PMJust look at Iraq before the US invaded. Yes, it had a dictator (but so do many of US/Bush allies), but it also had water, electricity, buildings, sewage operations, and peace (granted, it was an inforced peace, but peace nevertheless). It was also fully contained militarily by the UN and the basically illegal US Air Combat Patrols. Look at Iraq now. The Iraq we see now is 100% the result of the Bush Invasion, signed off on by Congress (including, among others, Hillary and Edwards).
Moving Beyond Failure in Iraq will NOT happen until Bush is out of office. And it will only happen then if the right person is in charge. Hillary, Steve Soto's choice for president, has already said he..er...she will not leave totally. We will not move beyond failure until we leave. Until we STOP failing. The sooner the better. The Iraqi Leadership, their country in tatters and religious civil war, are just soaking the US for money...billions are unaccounted for, and, like any con, they will continue until the mark slaps at the hand in his pocket. Why is that so hard for people to understand? If we are there, we are failing. We are the problem. We can't start to move beyond failure until we leave.
"It is a violation of one of the articles of the Genevea Conventions for an occupying force to destroy, then remake economic sectors of the occupied country. Yet, this is exactly what the United States has done and continues to do in Iraq to the benefit of US Corporations.
It seems to me that this is the essence of colonialism and a prima fascia case of a war crime."
Yup!
And I believe very strongly, and with good evidence, that the (patently illegal) dismantling and remaking of the Iraqi state, including the economy, was not just intended to benefit US corporations. I believe that it had an even more vital purpose of making Iraq economically, and technologically dependent on the U.S. in order for the U.S. to be able to obtain long-term political control. If the U.S. could make or break the country economically, and if the proper functioning of the infrastructure were dependent upon the U.S. to provide technology and know-how to maintain the technology, then even a truly democratic government would be beholden to the U.S. for everything, and would not be able to defy it in any major way (like telling it to close its military bases, and its so-called "embassy" (i.e. Regional Empirial Command and Control Center) and go back to a normal diplomatic relationship.
Posted by Shirin at July 28, 2007 12:58 PMIt would appear that it's possible to build permanent bases, McDonald's, and movie theatres in Iraq, but not a power plant. I have a Time magazine from 2004, with a large article on this power plant and other rebuilding fiascos.
The front cover is a photo of a sweating Bush, and his "84 billion dollar" mistake. That was several years, and billions of dollars ago.
This administration needs to watch "Frazier" or "Dr. Phil", or something. They are certifiable.
Posted by tempus at July 28, 2007 01:38 PMOh, and I'm sorry that Cheney's battery replacement was successful. Pity.
Posted by tempus at July 28, 2007 01:49 PMHe obviously was not at Building 18 at Walter Reed, with those nice little bugs...
Posted by tempus at July 28, 2007 01:56 PMWe’re spending billions of dollars on Iraqi reconstruction projects...
Why aren't we spending billions on American reconstruction projects? Our highways, bridges, airports and dams are being ignored while American tax dollars are being spent in a foreign country.
This is blatantly criminal.
Posted by Christopher at July 28, 2007 02:07 PMYeah, Christopher....like the great American city of New Orleans....oh yeah...its 75% Black. They vote Dem if at all.
All Politics, no Policy= George. W. Bush.
Why aren't we getting the Iranians and Saudis directly invested in a solution, and why aren't we getting the international community involved in reconstruction and regional security as well?
Because, dammit, its ours. ITS OURS!!! We've paid a hellish price for the Iraqi oi -- er, uh, people's freedom, and there's no way in hell Bu$hco is gonna let annyone else in on the action. ITS OURS!!
Posted by redstater at July 28, 2007 02:44 PMGood point Christopher. However, you overlooked the fact that one city housed mainly Afro-Americans, and the other houses mainly towel heads. Jeez, how many times do we have to tell ya?
Posted by Judith at July 28, 2007 02:49 PMI agree with much of the post although ending the war would make discussion/debate about handing over responsibility for rebuilding more realistic. Congress does not appear to be moving with the urgency required for this war to end. We are encouraging those interested to join us in Congress to let them know we are watching them and that we expect them to end this war now. Check it out at AmericaStandsWatch.org
Posted by Jethro H at July 28, 2007 03:19 PMsee what is happening. One day BushCo lets it out that they are unhappy with the Saudi's for supporting the Sunni in Iraq. The next day they sneak it out that they intend to give the Saudi's a huge Military Arms package. On the surface, a preposterous mix-up, underneath, a clever bait and switch. And to placate the Israeli's, they'll give them a huge package too. Can't any of you see this game? The End Game is to bait the Iranians into saying "If you arm our adversary's, we'll develop a A-Bomb". It's a Grand Scheme to goad the Irainians into a position that allows the US and Israeli's to bomb the hell out of Iran.
Firstly, we don't need to arm the Saudi's. They have already proven the ability to blow up massive buildings in New York. Secondly, why would the Israeli's and the Saudi's...two fundamental adversaries, work a deal with BUSH to arm them both to the teeth?? OIL, maybe?. Yeah, and a desire, shared by the PNAC, to exterminate the Shia regimes across the Mid East. It's all part of a plan folks...open your eyes.
But T2, although you are correct on many points, the fact is the Cheney administration funds and directs a Shia (and Iranian-affiliated) government. They are playing both sides, as the US did in Afghanistan.
Posted by tempus at July 28, 2007 04:10 PMNot only do we not hire Iraqis, worse yet, contractors have been known to (kidnap) hire people thinking they are going to work in Dubai, and end up in Bagdad.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HJ27Ak01.html
Posted by Judith at July 28, 2007 04:11 PMYou have to go all the way back to the first chaotic half of our Civil War to find anything quite like the treasury looting undertaken by the Cheney crony posse in a faux reconstruction mainly concerned with how to steal the oil.
You know the great House of Morgan began with JP fleecing the old War department with rusty muskets and contaminated flour as a procurement vendor.
Of course this spectacular hog wallow never intended to fix any real thing.
As for the regional players, they have been holding their own talks for months, our media just doesn't report them. The Saudi's fired Bush in the early spring and everyone in the Gulf is just playing idiot Bush.
Teheran and Riyadh have been negotiating since Februarly, at least.
The american Israel lobby and Leibertool are too dumb to get Israel's diffidence to their input. All the regional players, including Israel are poised to fix the mess when we stop breaking it and leave.
Posted by Chris Rich at July 28, 2007 04:14 PMI don't think Israel is ready to give up any pre-1967 territory. Until they do, there will be no peace. That is not their land. The UN will have to decide who can claim this land, and not the US.
Posted by tempus at July 28, 2007 05:03 PMAnd to placate the Israeli's, they'll give them a huge package too.
Yeah T2, I saw that. The same N.Y. Times article on aid to the Saudis.
The $30.4 billion being promised to Israel is $9.1 billion more than Israel has received over the past decade, an increase of nearly 43 percent.
Posted by Seven of Six at July 28, 2007 05:23 PMThe only construction going on are the permanent military bases and inside the Green Zone, aka, Emerald City. While the rest of Iraq remains in darkness, the Emerald City is lite up like a neon sign. While the Iraqis cannot get water and elecricity, the walled-off compound of the Emerald City has swimming pools, luxurious amenities, restaurants, shops, fitness centers, gasoline stations, constant electricity and water.
For those few Iraqis who work within the Emerald City, each night they leave to go back into the Red Zone and face the horrors the Americans have brought.
Here is what one contractor says:
"To some, the Green Zone feels like a vast isolation chamber. One recent night at a saloon called The Bunker, a resident contractor asked, "So, what's going on out there in Iraq anyway?" He hadn't left the Green Zone in six months. "It's like Plato's republic in here, all of these well-meaning, smart people who want to do the right thing," says one security contractor and Green Zone regular. "But they never leave here and they have no idea what's happening in the country they're supposed to be building. It's totally absurd."