[nyg4168]

I'm fine with spending money on building infrastructure in unstable parts of the world. That's a huge part of what we're doing in Iraq. People who's basic needs (food, water, shelter, etc.) are being met are less likely to be angry radical violent revolutionaries.

Okay, please pile on now...

[Moonman62]

I'm fine with spending money on building infrastructure in unstable parts of the world. That's a huge part of what we're doing in Iraq. People who's basic needs (food, water, shelter, etc.) are being met are less likely to be angry radical violent revolutionaries.

I agree and I think the article implies that we'll be getting back some portion of that $250 million.

[7.62 x 51mm]

I don't have a problem with helping turd-world countries with infrastructure-building, but I have a h-u-g-e problem in throwing US Taxpayers' monies down a murderous muslim hole.

http://www.freerepublic.com/~762x51mm/

[Malsua]

Okay, please pile on now...

I'm not a pile on kinda guy. Too much groping in the pile. I agree with you that satiated masses tend not to Jihad so much. Fact is, built a plant today, tomorrow you'll get "Well what have you done for me lately". That said, CA could use some of these to quit sucking the Colorado river dry. Why can't we put the pilot plant in Southern California. If it works, give the plans to the PA and say, good luck. They built their own stuff, they're more likely to take care of it. We build it, they'll ask for 25 million in annual funds to take care of it.