'Bush Was Right'(Saddam's WMD)

To: LibertarianInExile

The American company mentioned is not a public corporation and is not large enough to take the business on this deal.

141 posted on 02/22/2006 4:06:34 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)

"The American company mentioned is not a public corporation and is not large enough to take the business on this deal."

Wha--the company is soooo small they can't even hire, train, a monkey to send to each port to collect profits? I thought that was all DPWorld was doing, according the folks supporting this action here, that there was no significant involvement by management or new hiring that was going to take place? What business would they be taking?

142 posted on 02/22/2006 4:10:32 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)

To: LibertarianInExile

Usually bids are accepted only from companies of sufficient size. That's how business is done. SSA Marine is in the business, but they are not large enough for this deal.

143 posted on 02/22/2006 4:12:45 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)

"Usually bids are accepted only from companies of sufficient size. That's how business is done. SSA Marine is in the business, but they are not large enough for this deal."

But again, why would no company be the sufficient size to handle this? I thought this was just profit collection? A competent accountant could pull that off!

144 posted on 02/22/2006 4:16:24 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)

To: LibertarianInExile

My own company has a net worth of about $10 (that's not billions, just 10). I should have bid. Surely I could borrow the other $2 billion by next Monday so I could ante up.

145 posted on 02/22/2006 4:20:11 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)

Hey, since it's all just profit-collecting anyway, why not hire six accountants on a commission basis and do it? You can always go to the bank and get a loan, since the profits are going to be rolling in, right?

146 posted on 02/22/2006 4:28:55 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)

147 posted on 02/22/2006 4:29:22 PM PST by onyx (IF ONLY 10% of Muslims are radical, that's still 120 MILLION who want to kill us.)

Boy...media is all over this one....zzzzzzzzz

148 posted on 02/22/2006 4:30:08 PM PST by wardaddy (I want to be king ........tribute, neat robes ...and best of all Prima Noctra.......I'm down wid it!)

To: LibertarianInExile

It's very easy to do just that under the umbrella of a large business deal. The main contractor has to deal out subcontracts in short order, everything from finding pickup trucks to donut wagons. Anybody that seems somewhat competent can get a piece of the action. Of course there must be follow-through because when things calm down and the bookkeepers get to work the paperwork has to match up with the work.

149 posted on 02/22/2006 4:34:21 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)

...especially the USA who has been smeared incredibly over this ordeal.

We have the luxury of waiting for history to prove us correct on WMD. We don't have that luxury to when it comes to Iran. We have to act now and we need all the help we can get, help which will be slower to come if all we seem to care about is winning the WMD debate.

150 posted on 02/22/2006 7:06:14 PM PST by EarlyBird

To: LibertarianInExile

151 posted on 02/22/2006 7:56:32 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)

Quote: "We have the luxury of waiting for history to prove us correct on WMD."

I don't agree with that at all. If we are correct on the WMD issue, than this means that these weapons are in someone else's hands; one of the very reaons why we went into Iraq was to prevent these WMDs from getting into these hands. It does no good for history to prove us right if we still have to face this threat sometime in the future.

Quote: "We don't have that luxury to when it comes to Iran. We have to act now and we need all the help we can get, help which will be slower to come if all we seem to care about is winning the WMD debate."

Excuse me...but it isn't the "debate" that I am worried about winning; this is still a war, with other enemies who now have access to these WMDs. And whether you like it or not, this WMD debate has diminished US credibility. Regaining this credibility is very important if we are going to expect other nations to follow us in the future WOT...including any actions we may take in Iran.

Hell, one of the reasons we are even having to deal with Iran is because the so-called allies you want us to rely on have been double-dealing with these very nations. Just like with Saddam, the Soviets and French have been providing them with the material to get this far.

To continue to ignore this duplicity is nothing but appeasement that allows them to think they can continue at will. Are we going to have the Russians and French in Iran prior to any war there...just like Iraq, so they can destroy or move the materials and make us look like liars...again?

It is past time that we start acknowledging how we got here to begin with...or we're going to continue ending up here, over and over again. In fact, this has all the same makings of another Iraq-Redux, were everyone "talks" about doing something about Iran, but leaving the dirty work to the US so when the dust settles, the US is again, left looking like the aggressor for prohibiting the poor Iranians from developing legitimate nuclear energy.

Call me paranoid, but there is a sincere desire by other nations to cripple the US, even at the expense of other rising threats. And since when can't we chew bubble-gum and walk at the same time...especially since Iran is very much a part of this "WMD debate." Sadly, I don't think we have the luxury of waiting for history to prove us right...especially when history is overwhelmingly written by liberals.

152 posted on 02/23/2006 10:25:36 AM PST by cwb (Liberalism is the opiate of the *asses)

I'm not say don't do anything about the WMDs. We know exactly where they are and have known since they were moved there -- Syria. And we are doing something about it (booting them out of Lebanon, destabilizing their ruling class, shrinking their influence in the region).

This thread was about why the administration is not talking about the WMDs, not about why the administration isn't doing anything about them. We do a lot of things without proclaiming them to the world, and my argument is that this is one of the things it does no good to talk about right now.

153 posted on 02/23/2006 3:10:03 PM PST by EarlyBird

To: TruthNtegrity

154 posted on 02/25/2006 3:30:50 PM PST by TruthNtegrity (What happened to "Able Danger" and any testimony by Col Schaffer?)

This fell into a black hole as far as the MSM is concerned.

155 posted on 02/25/2006 3:31:45 PM PST by hershey

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794