|
Caught a bit of financial news Monday. The next round of contracts for Iraq will be given by the administration in February and at the moment the details are being worked out so that foreign bidders can be included.
I assume you are keeping an eye on the international political sport being played? Major nations are not sending troops to Iraq, nor money, or simply loans rather than aid because the Bush boy wouldn't divide up the spoils of war. Same countries know that Bush boy desperately needs them to bail him out of the Iraq mess.
It looks as though that 20 billion (of the 87b) may just be headed in that direction. Now, consider what an impact that has on the Democrats.
Bush has said he will bring back a lot of troops in May (I believe 80,000). Even pundits agree he will hype this as our "progress and strategy for leaving" and ask the people to stay the course with him by re-electing him. If foreign troops and money enter the picture at the same time, people will think he worked diplomatic magic and got them to cooperate without having to stoop to the damands of those "dirty devils who didn't support us in this war"--the people will be clueless about the contracts that they are paying for with their tax money. Thus, the Dem arguments, going into summer '04, are cut off at the kneecaps--i.e., Bush is bringing the boys home and Bush has engaged the international community. I fear our $20 billion is a re-elect Bush campaign contribution.
I feel sad as I watch out candidates hissy-fit all over each other right now--it's so trivial. The Dems simply are not in the league to deal with this national/international power and money game that is going to smash them in the face very soon. The American voter is an easily swept aside nusance in this game. And I'm afraid once that international community gets those spoils (paid for by us), it will be eager to support Bush after his re-election in taking the war to more and more Arab states.
|