It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How will this not be seen as imperialism?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 07:01 AM
link   
YAHOO NEWS STORY

Bush Has Audacious Plan to Rebuild Iraq Within Year
Mon Mar 17,12:30 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration's audacious plan to rebuild Iraq ( news -web sites ) envisions a sweeping overhaul of Iraqi society within a year of a war's end, but leaves much of the work to private U.S. companies, Monday's Wall Street Journal reported.



arc

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 07:05 AM
link   
eww thats not good at all.

by all means help rebuild a country but it doesn't sound as if the iraqi people are going to have much choice in how their's is reformed after this war



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by William


" but leaves much of the work to private U.S. companies, Monday's Wall Street Journal reported "


That's logic.

USA are fighting, USA are rebuilding. I don't think that you want " to leave much of the work to France ".



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:00 AM
link   
With the whole world watching what is going on in Iraq,I don't think the U.S. is going to go in and make a permanet takeover.The one thing that Bush has said over and over,is to bring democracy to Iraq.
So when the ball gets rolling I think it will be left to the Iraqi's to determine their fate.



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Democracy is just a fancy word for 'choice'. In a democracy a communist government can be elected if the people so choose. Democracy is just a basic form of government, a starting point. If they want a different form, they can vote for a different form.



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 01:20 PM
link   
It certainly seems a little imperialistic, however, I think the people of Iraq are going to be better off with private US companies, as opposed to the anything UN (with all that bureaucracy). Otherwise, it would be audacious to say you can rebuild in a year.

I certainly wouldnt want to see any French or German companies getting a piece of the pie either: to the victor goes the spoils and lucrative oil contracts. Surely, well see British companies in there also and hopefully Australian companies as well. And with all this 'anglo-capitalism' there will probably be quite a boost to the Iraqi economy. (do they really want a 'french' government or a 'german' economy - haven't the Iraqis suffered enough
)



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 02:35 PM
link   
There is no reconstruction plan for Iraq ... There isnt even a humanitarian plan, in the first place!
Some have hopes for a Florida-style democracy, but even the basic question of regional autonomy is unresolved. And how will the arabs greet their new "friend" ?



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Now, how do you know there is no plan for reconstruction? Because they haven't invited you to the back rooms? And, yes, the government is preparing for humanitarian aide to begin, that is already known and put out.
Hopefully they aren't dropping the aide on top of civilians' heads, this time. Talk about killing someone with kindness!

What companies should rebuild the infrastructure, hmm? French companies, maybe? How about German? I don't think so.



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Now, how do you know there is no plan for reconstruction?
...
What companies should rebuild the infrastructure, hmm? French companies, maybe? How about German? I don't think so.


If there was evidence against Iraq it would have been presented in public, as for a reconstruction plan.

Now it could be that the american and british leaders don't "need" public support , and that they didnt disclose their plans and "ample", "100%" evidence because of that, preferring to acquant us instead with forged evidence and photocopied pictures from magazines.

This hypothesis is, however, improbable since by primarily blaming France's veto for the diplomatic mess they are ignoring the fact that an enormous majority in the world security council, the united nations, and in all people on earth,along with all major religions condemn this war, because it would be too difficult to explain to the american people.



posted on Mar, 25 2003 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Uday, is that you?

Karl bin Sobbin, if anyone is ignoring facts, it would be you. There is by enlarge, a tremendous amount of support for the liberation of Iraq. Over 40 countries are helping the coalition, including many of the Arab nations surrounding Iraq. The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously a few months ago that Sadaam would face serious consequences if he did not finally disarm. It sounds as if your hatred for everything American has clouded your judgement or else you believe all the anti-American propoganda you see on your television.

'Any serious criticism of the war must rely on one or both of two claims: First, that it is not in the security interests of the United States forcibly to remove Saddam from power; or, second, that a war to rid the Iraqi people of a psychopathic dictator is worse for that people, in humanitarian terms, than letting them continue to suffer under him.'



posted on Mar, 26 2003 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tanya Crowne
Uday, is that you?

Karl bin Sobbin,


racist post please delete

[Edited on 26-3-2003 by banned]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join