In Iraq,McCain Vows to Fight for All Resources Needed for U.S. Troops to

In Iraq, McCain Vows to Fight for All Resources Needed for U.S. Troops to Finish the Job
By Jamie Tarabay Associated Press Writer
Published: Aug 20, 2003

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Sen. John McCain said Wednesday the United States should spend "whatever it takes" to complete its mission in Iraq after a bomb ripped through U.N. headquarters in Baghdad, killing at least 20 people including the top U.N. envoy.
McCain, R-Ariz., is leading a seven-member delegation of U.S. lawmakers to Iraq for meetings with soldiers, military officers and civilian administrators. The group - on the second day of a three-day visit - had just toured a mass grave site near Hilla, 34 miles south of Baghdad.

"After an event like this (the U.N. bombing) we have to evaluate whether we have enough people, whether we have the right kind of people and whether we are spending enough money, and I think it's appropriate to make that evaluation," McCain told reporters at Baghdad International Airport. (snip)

(snip) "It's going to be interesting when we sit down and see how much money is being spent," said McCain, who supported the U.S.-led war that ousted Saddam Hussein.

L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civil administrator in Iraq, has said he hoped that most of the money for Iraq's reconstruction would come from its oil exports. But the lucrative oil pipeline has been the routine target of saboteur, and oil exports are not flowing as they should. (snip/...)

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAZSNCMLJD.html

But his pathetic pandering is partly why we are in this mess.

I do not respect McCain any longer. I feel hoodwinked by him.

"After an event like this (the U.N. bombing) we have to evaluate whether we have enough people, whether we have the right kind of people and whether we are spending enough money, and I think it's appropriate to make that evaluation,"


Can we now finally evaluate why we are there?

Does anyone know exactly HOW much has been exported since the war ended, and how that compares to pre-war levels?

That I know for certain. My question for Bremer is why should reconstruction depend upon oil? What if they didn't have any?

And Bremer keeps changing the goalposts (care of http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2003_08_17_nomoremister_archive.html#106126453937864974

"Paul Bremer moves the goalposts just a wee bit:
The total the total amount of power available once we get to pre-war levels is about 4,000 megawatts ... we’ve been working our way up and we’re going to continue to work our way up and the next 60 days we’ll get to 4,000.
--Bremer's conference call with editorial writers, July 23, 2003
On restoring power, we expect to restore power to the pre-war level, and that's the maximum there is here, in the next six weeks, by the end of September ... we will be back at pre-war levels here in the next six to eight weeks.
--Bremer on CNN's Live from the Headlines today
I'll do the math for you: Sixty days from the time of the first statement is September 21. Six weeks from today is September 29. Eight weeks from today is October 13."

Before or after Aug 17 when this was written? Either way, these projections are the rosy best-case scenario. If there's more sabotage, and if the electricity and water don't come on (needed for oil extraction), this will take WAY longer. Also, they're going to be slowed down by private contractors pulling people out if they're afraid of being attacked. I don't want to be right about this, but I don't think Bremer is facing facts.

1. WHERE THE HELL DO WE GET THE MONEY FROM, SENATOR?

2. WHEN DOES THE DRAFT BEGIN?

3. ARE YOUR GRANDCHILDREN OLD ENOUGH TO SERVE?

4. IS CONGRESS AND THE ADMINISTRATION GOING TO TAKE
PAY CUTS?

5. IF THIS ADVENTURE FAILS, DO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET
TO PICK AN ALL NEW CONGRESS?

Please feel free to join in with any questions others might have.

Please feel free to join in with any questions others might have.

I like yours a lot. Let's get answers to them first.

WHAT exactly is the "job?"

...we were in Iraq to bring "peace and democracy."

So my question for the Senator is this: "Wasn't Iraq at peace prior to the US invasion?"

to pay for it?

This guy is senile. Whatever common sense he had has now left him.

when the bullets are flying over HIS head and the bombs expoding near HIS hotel.

Eventually, the U.S. is going to be GONE long before peace comes to Iraq.

was behind it. The Iraqis would be much better off under the UN. So I would think that would leave them out. After McCain's comment about "whatever it takes", I would guess it has to be the US, Israel, or Haliburon that did the bombing. And it appears to be a "professional" bomb, according to terrorist experts. Bombing the UN people would make the people around the world more sympathetic to us instead of the UN.

You may think so, and I may think so, but it appears to me, at least that the Iraqis don't think so. And its their country, after all which was illegally invaded, conquered and occupied.

They want all infidels (even well intentioned ones) to get the heck out of their country. They've had enough "help".

And the UN had never been attacked in Iraq before. So I'm not sure I agree with you. Sixty percent of the Iraqi population (25 million people) depended on UN food aid prior to the invasion. I don't think Iraqi sentiment is as anti-UN as you suggest.

for food from the U.N.

I'm not criticizing the UN. They were right. They were set to vote down the resolution authorizing the invasion when Smirk decided to ignore them and invade anyway.

I think they would try hard and probably, if given a chance by the Iraqi people do a very creditable job getting them back on their feet.

However at this point, the LAST thing the Iraqis seem to want is any more "help" (12 years sanctions, GWI, GWII, occupation, theft of their oil, installing saddam in the first place).

It appears that they are saying that the infidels should leave and they would like to run their own country (like Smirk promised he would do after Saddam was removed).

Because their country was under UN sanctions that kept them from exporting sufficient oil to buy their own food, medicine, etc. The only reason the UN was giving them food was because they weren't letting them earn money to buy food. In a culture where pride and honor are as important as they are in the Middle East, having to live on hand-outs can become a great dishonor to that family, something not easily forgotten.

Also, how many Iraqis died because of the UN sanctions? I can easily see some Iraqis wanting revenge for the loss of a child due to lack of medicine banned by the UN sanctions, for example.

...that the sanctions were a US/UK backed measure? For almost a decade there have been other voices at the UN (ie France) trying to get sanctions lifted. Personally, I credit the Iraqis with a little discernment on this particular issue.

horrified by the UN bombing. Sure, there are some who may have had enough of a grudge to do it, but more likely they would have been Iraqi groups that don't want a compromise government (or whatever could have been brokered by the UN), and prefer to grab for power when the grabbing is good. Probably most Iraqis would prefer the UN way, but in the present environment, it's a free-for-all.

The above is assuming that the bombing was done by some Iraqi group. And that doesn't exclude the Chalabi faction. But it could of course have been some unfathomable US operation. Or even stray "terrorists"--who knows? The only thing that's certain is that the US is churnng out disinformation. Creating a "fog of war" excuse. The PNACers are great fans of chaos--wonder what they're doing with it, now they've got it.

They have been very quiet lately.

Send more soldiers and bombs and tanks and weapons....forget the fact that we cannot win this guerilla war. Just throw more bodies and bombs at the problem. don't bother thinking about how to solve it.

VIETFUCKINGNAM ALL OVER AGAIN.

I swear to you, the people in congress have not one clue about what they are doing. Not one.

...the current Congress of gross dereliction of duty, of aiding and abetting the abuse of presidential powers, and of monumental incompetence.

McCain is not the only one who should be feeling deep shame right now.

McCain never met a foreign war he didn't like. The old soldier is keen to dish it out, and he is never so animated as when he reddens talking about teaching this or that "enemy" a lesson.

And here is today, preaching the same gospel that stole his youth. And a lot more from those who weren't so lucky.

of housing, food, water, etc while they are in that hellhole!

And let's investigate the lying pukes AWOL & company who got us in there in the first place.

how much money is being spent..."

And that doesn't count the social problems our troops will be redeploying to the states with, Mac. Seeing one's family two weeks out of a year ("11 days" is how one soldier's child counted it) is becoming standard in Bush's military. You've been there, done that, and then some, Mac. Is this the direction we want to take our country, again?

...that rubs me the wrong way. Very much the wrong way. (I would have said it was "fucking vital!")

"Finish the job"?????? How about finish the crime!!!

While all of these dumb ass politicians are wringing their hands trying to patch up Dubya's crimes the son-of-bitch is hatching new ones and keeping the focus off of HIS responsibility to boot.

There should be no discussion of fixing Iraq until the BFEE is OUT OF THE PICTURE, preferably behind bars.

is he even pimping for jr. after the way he was treated well running in 2000 , these same asses didnt have a kind thing to say about him when he was running agaist jr.

have air time to make his presence known. It is pathetic. These fools don't have a clue about what the BFEE is up to.

IMO McCain doesn't want to appear "Un-American", by condemning the war and, by implication, Bush.

"L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civil administrator in Iraq, has said he hoped that most of the money for Iraq's reconstruction would come from its oil exports. But the lucrative oil pipeline has been the routine target of saboteur, and oil exports are not flowing as they should."

We broke the place, we need to fix it. We are putting our responsibility on the people of Iraq. We are expecting the Iraq people to give up their natural resources to pay for our responsibility. Mr Bremmer did you think to ask yourself this question: Maybe they see it is as a symbol of imperalism and that is why they are attacking it. Maybe Mr Bremmer they can see thru your lies and they know that you are there to just take the oil for your own profit, and you don't care about them. Why are you so pissed about the oil Mr Bremmer, when all it would take is a simple change of attitude by the Bush administration and the U.N. would have troops and aid in there in just a few days while releving the U.S. of some of its obligations. Be pissed at the WH.