Bush Wins a Victory on Grant for Iraq (LA Times)

[stevedeshazer]

By Janet Hook, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — In a crucial victory for President Bush, House and Senate negotiators agreed Wednesday to provide more than $18 billion in aid to Iraq as a direct grant, beating back bipartisan demands that some of the money to rebuild the country eventually be repaid.

Bush has been adamant that the reconstruction aid be provided with no strings attached, and he labored for weeks to bring wayward Republicans in line.

His victory came as a House-Senate conference committee approved the final version of a bill providing most of the $87 billion Bush requested for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, including the more than $18 billion in reconstruction money. Negotiators voted to drop a Senate proposal that could have required Iraq to repay up to half the reconstruction aid.

But Bush's win came at a price: He had to give ground in other areas that reflected lawmakers' sensitivity to growing anxiety on the home front about the war's toll.

Over the administration's opposition, the compromise requires the Pentagon to expand access to health-care coverage for National Guard and Reserve troops when they return home.

source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/la-fg-congiraq30oct30,1,6549291.story?coll=la-home-leftrail

[Brucey]

1. So, you mean Helliburton and the other repug corporations

won't have to pay it back? Good for them. Shit for us.

[stevedeshazer]

2. There ya go

And portrayed as a great Democratic victory, no less.

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. It has to be a case of shared insanity

It's like the charity auction at the elementary school when the parents are overtaken by a fit of generosity and then can't pay the bid.

This give away is a truly unnecessary waste of our money, or should I say, our remaining credit.

There is no reason to be doing this other than for the republicans to back up the liar-in-chief's big boasts about being able to take care of Iraq.

[skyzics]

4. Something fishy here..

<Administration officials argued against making Iraq repay any of the reconstruction aid because they said it was unwise to pile more debt onto a country already heavily indebted to other nations.>

Something is wrong with this story. Since when has this cabal ever been altruistic to anybody or anything other than their corporate and political supporters? Something significant is being ommitted - the above explanation from the White House - repeated in this article uncritically - makes no sense. Something significant is being ommitted in this explanation and hidden from the public.

But exactly what?

[Guaranteed]

5. Well everyone else seems to think

that the money is just being simply stolen, and if it was a loan, it would have to be accounted for. My explanation is that the more debt Iraq has, the more it has to sell its oil for in order to pay off those debts. Now one of the main reasons the Bush administration wanted this war was so that they could go in there and get really sweet oil deals- the kind with military leverage- and if Iraq sells the oil to them at a higher price to pay off those debts, it cuts into Bush's buddies profit margins.
It's just another way for Bush to subsidize his fatcat buddies with taxpayer money. Billions and billions going from our pockets to theirs.
It's disgusting. Downright criminal, I'd say.

[skyzics]

6. More Bushonomics..

Take from the working people and give to the fatcats and criminals. Of course, the media - even the LA Times which is not as bad as most - accepts the bush justifications for the tax-payer funded handout completely uncritically. I'd say that's criminal, too. The cororate media, when all is done and stolen, needs to be held to account as well.