T Nation

Bush's Iraq Reconstruction

Corrupt or Incompetent?

I’m leaning toward the latter. Either way, the level of mismanagement is stunning:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600193_pf.html

The guy is not running a country, he’s running a family business.

You see stuff like this on “the sopranos”.

I read this somewhere else… no bid contracts, and loyalty to Bush was paramount in getting the jobs.

Intensely corrupt it seems.

A good book to read is called, “To Babylon By Bus”. The corruption is evident, and it’s a great read.

I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?[/quote]

Lemme give it a shot.

You’re anti-American ? ? ?

And you hate Bush ? ? ?

And you’re an evil person ? ? ?

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?[/quote]

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

The facts of this reporting are in dispute.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFlNGY3NDU0ZWI5YTQzMzJiMTEyMzY3MDIyMzZmNWY=

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015304.php

Which isn’t to say that things are going particularly well in Iraq, but no need for reporters to make stuff up either…

Again, refer back to that “To Babylon by Bus” book- these two guys who never got halfway through college were immediatly picked up for the Provisional Government and were living in Saddam’s Palace.

They only left the country after an assassination threat was put out on them, and the guy who took over their town hall style meetings was killed shortly after they left.

They said that the amount of corruption was un-fucking-believable, and just the fact that these two got jobs says something about it.

The facts of any report are disputed BB, but might I remind you that there are still people who think the moon landing is a hoax and Bush blew up the Trade Centers?

The facts seem to be that corruption, as always, was rampant. You guys are conveniantly ignoring that eh?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.[/quote]

Funny how that shit works huh?

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

Funny how that shit works huh?[/quote]

Like BB said - the “facts” of this piece are questionable. I mean it’s not that uncommon for the wa-po to make shit up.

But you guys are so rabid for bad news, you will believe whatever is put in front of you if you agree with it.

But - the no bid contracts that Irish was whining about happened under CLinton as well. Why is it okay for him to award no-bids, but it is a crime for Bush?

Partisan ABBer’s…it must be election time.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

Funny how that shit works huh?[/quote]

Yeah, funny in an ironic “I told you so” way.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
The facts of this reporting are in dispute.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFlNGY3NDU0ZWI5YTQzMzJiMTEyMzY3MDIyMzZmNWY=

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015304.php

Which isn’t to say that things are going particularly well in Iraq, but no need for reporters to make stuff up either…[/quote]

No offense, but I’d take a guy at the Washington Post over Ramesh Ponnuru, who writes at the National Review with Kate O’Bierne and launches partisan polemics like “The Party of Death.”

Also, read the Assassin’s Gate, you’ll see that the Defense-State rivalry repeatedly led to the best men being left off the job.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

Funny how that shit works huh?

Like BB said - the “facts” of this piece are questionable. I mean it’s not that uncommon for the wa-po to make shit up.
[/quote]

Yeah, you’re right, the Washington Post just “makes shit up” all the time, it’s how they got to be one of the most respected papers in the country.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
The facts of this reporting are in dispute.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFlNGY3NDU0ZWI5YTQzMzJiMTEyMzY3MDIyMzZmNWY=

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015304.php

Which isn’t to say that things are going particularly well in Iraq, but no need for reporters to make stuff up either…

No offense, but I’d take a guy at the Washington Post over Ramesh Ponnuru, who writes at the National Review with Kate O’Bierne and launches partisan polemics like “The Party of Death.”

Also, read the Assassin’s Gate, you’ll see that the Defense-State rivalry repeatedly led to the best men being left off the job.[/quote]

The guy at the Post is hawking his own book – the piece is an excerpt.

BTW, “Party of Death” is a self-proclaimed polemic, and he announces his friendship to the O’Beirnes in the title of the post in question. This as opposed to a poorly masked opinion piece masquerading as factual journalism (not unlike David Corn).

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

Funny how that shit works huh?

Like BB said - the “facts” of this piece are questionable. I mean it’s not that uncommon for the wa-po to make shit up.

Yeah, you’re right, the Washington Post just “makes shit up” all the time, it’s how they got to be one of the most respected papers in the country.[/quote]

It also has been caught making shit up on more than one occasion. I think there was a Pulitzer Prize winner that got caught making up her prize winning story about crack babies.

It may be respected - but it is not above lying.

Did you read the links posted by BB?

How dare we question the WaPo.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
The facts of this reporting are in dispute.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFlNGY3NDU0ZWI5YTQzMzJiMTEyMzY3MDIyMzZmNWY=

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015304.php

Which isn’t to say that things are going particularly well in Iraq, but no need for reporters to make stuff up either…

No offense, but I’d take a guy at the Washington Post over Ramesh Ponnuru, who writes at the National Review with Kate O’Bierne and launches partisan polemics like “The Party of Death.”

Also, read the Assassin’s Gate, you’ll see that the Defense-State rivalry repeatedly led to the best men being left off the job.

The guy at the Post is hawking his own book – the piece is an excerpt.

BTW, “Party of Death” is a self-proclaimed polemic, and he announces his friendship to the O’Beirnes in the title of the post in question. This as opposed to a poorly masked opinion piece masquerading as factual journalism (not unlike David Corn).
[/quote]

Not sure I see the point. The Post article is clearly labelled as a book excerpt as well.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

Funny how that shit works huh?

Like BB said - the “facts” of this piece are questionable. I mean it’s not that uncommon for the wa-po to make shit up.

Yeah, you’re right, the Washington Post just “makes shit up” all the time, it’s how they got to be one of the most respected papers in the country.

It also has been caught making shit up on more than one occasion. I think there was a Pulitzer Prize winner that got caught making up her prize winning story about crack babies.

It may be respected - but it is not above lying.

Did you read the links posted by BB?

How dare we question the WaPo. [/quote]

Having a rogue columnist, which happens to many papers (NYT and Boston Herald come to mind immediately) is a far cry from saying that “it’s not that uncommon” for a paper “to make shit up.”

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Having a rogue columnist, which happens to many papers (NYT and Boston Herald come to mind immediately) is a far cry from saying that “it’s not that uncommon” for a paper “to make shit up.”[/quote]

Not a rogue columnist. An investigative reporter. And it has happened at the WaPo more than once.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:

No offense, but I’d take a guy at the Washington Post over Ramesh Ponnuru, who writes at the National Review with Kate O’Bierne and launches partisan polemics like “The Party of Death.”

Also, read the Assassin’s Gate, you’ll see that the Defense-State rivalry repeatedly led to the best men being left off the job.

BostonBarrister wrote:

The guy at the Post is hawking his own book – the piece is an excerpt.

BTW, “Party of Death” is a self-proclaimed polemic, and he announces his friendship to the O’Beirnes in the title of the post in question. This as opposed to a poorly masked opinion piece masquerading as factual journalism (not unlike David Corn).

GDollars37 wrote:

Not sure I see the point. The Post article is clearly labelled as a book excerpt as well.[/quote]

Yes, but it was published as a page 1 news story, and my point was that it was a thinly veiled opinion piece. It wasn’t that it was a book, though a matter to be considered (surely not dispositive, but just as one small factor) is that the author is trying to sell books based on this “reporting” – and that his book not only has a thesis, or, an argument, that it advances, but also keeping in mind that sensational books tend to sell better.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I distinctly remember a while back that many loyalists on this board were adamant that these types of things weren’t going on and that anyone who believed it were part of the “tin-foil hat brigade” or this was more leftist propaganda and talking points. Are any of them going to explain this away as well?

If you all would quit responding to this thread they could forget it existed and ignore it better.

Funny how that shit works huh?

Like BB said - the “facts” of this piece are questionable. I mean it’s not that uncommon for the wa-po to make shit up.

But you guys are so rabid for bad news, you will believe whatever is put in front of you if you agree with it.

But - the no bid contracts that Irish was whining about happened under CLinton as well. Why is it okay for him to award no-bids, but it is a crime for Bush?

Partisan ABBer’s…it must be election time. [/quote]

So obviously you’d like some real oversight on this issue to get down to the bottom of it all right? And you’re naturally ashamed of your own party’s total unwillingness to do this oversight?