If they're following Ford's example, it's more like a case of investing in technology American labor unions won't let them use here.
I think this is probably the best description and because of it I don't have much problem with the investment.
Remember, the bail out was to sustain the company, not a jobs thing. If GM invests in US plants, fine and good. But moving investments - work - from the unionized north into the right to work south only buys more union hassles. There will be enough difficulty dealing with union feather bedders as it is.
I didn't like TARP then and I don't like it or anything else I've had described as a stimulus. But short of taking the money back, it is theirs to use in sustaining and/or strengthening the company itself. Not the United Auto 'Workers'.
(From what we've seen so far, Obama isn't thinking too much about those jobs either...but we'll eventually have more bridges to walk across and nicer government offices to visit when we get there.)
So, if GM is still building cars in ten years ask if they have a better product - and whether or not you can afford to buy one.