Re: [atlarge-discuss] Your Cut $ - Bless the free marketplace..

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

James and all,

  That may be your desire.  However it is not the current administrations.

  So, no you and I are not on the same page.  Or even the same
book for that matter!  :(

  There are no "Spoils".  What is now under the thumb of Sadaam now
will be the Iraqi peoples once Sadaam's regime is removed.

In any event I don't see how this topic is appropriate for this forum.

Jkhan wrote:

> Good, we are on the same page. To the Victor go's the spOILs, we should take
> as much as we can, Why stop with Iraq?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> To: "Jkhan" <Jkhan@MetroMgr.com>
> Cc: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 10:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Your Cut $ - Bless the free marketplace..
>
> > James and all,
> >
> >   Nuking them, also is not an option either.
> >
> >   I don't think I misunderstood at all.
> >   You previously stated: "A growing number of people around the
> > world recognize that the  impending US assault on Iraq will be
> > a war of plunder."
> >
> >   I replied in the contrary.  The impending US assault will be one
> > of liberation, not of plunder, James.  I also shared your concern
> > for commercial follow on activities that will occur in Iraq, after
> > Salaam's regime is removed.  But the free market system will
> > have a chance to flourish, ergo no plunder is intended or
> > purposefully considered.  Sure, there will be opportunists
> > from various large and small commercial interests.  To be
> > sure that France, Belgium and Germany will be well represented
> > amongst those opportunists...
> >
> > Jkhan wrote:
> >
> > > Right on Jeff,
> > > You may have miss understood, Right-On for US, lets Nuke-em all
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> > > To: "Jkhan" <Jkhan@MetroMgr.com>
> > > Cc: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:03 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Your Cut $ - Bless the free marketplace..
> > >
> > > > James and all,
> > > >
> > > >   And and even larger number of countries, and people as individuals
> > > > are recognizing that the deposing of malignant regime holding Iraq
> > > > in a virtual strangle hold for nearly 30+ years using threat, death
> > > > squads,
> > > > selective executions, CENSORSHIP, forced starvation and chemical
> > > > and biological weapons upon it's own populace, is both desired by
> Iraq's
> > > >
> > > > own people, and the vast majority of the free world so that such
> > > > tyrannical and terrorist fostering regimes can no longer hold hostage
> > > > their neibors, or any liberty and freedom loving person anywhere in
> the
> > > > world.
> > > >
> > > >   Therefore I reject  your premise here James.  Yet I also understand
> > > > your concern in regards to commercial interests on and of Iraq.  I
> share
> > > >
> > > > some of them with you.  I do not, nor can I ever support however
> > > > any malignant persona such as Sadam, or Melosavich in any position
> > > > of power or influence of any kind.  Sadam must be brought down,
> > > > and he will be.
> > > >
> > > > Jkhan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >    US telecom giants and the war in Iraq: It's not just about oil
> > > > >
> > > > > A growing number of people around the world recognize that the
> > > > > impending US assault on Iraq will be a war of plunder. Focus has
> > > > > rightly centered on Iraq's enormous oil reserves and the desire by
> > > > > American corporations to seize control of this lucrative resource.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, the economic interests of the US extend beyond Iraq's
> > > > > petroleum supply. Recent reports point to the large stake of another
> > > > > segment of American industry in an overthrow of the Iraqi regime:
> the
> > > > > telecommunications sector.
> > > > >
> > > > > American corporations such as Motorola and Lucent are eager to win
> > > > > contracts for building mobile and fixed phone systems and other
> > > > > telecommunications infrastructure in a postwar Iraq. A US invasion
> and
> > > > > military occupation of the country will put these companies at an
> > > > > enormous advantage over their rivals, particularly those in France
> and
> > > > > China.
> > > > >
> > > > > Joseph Braude, author of the forthcoming book The New Iraq and
> senior
> > > > > analyst for Pyramid Research, gave an interview on February 17 to
> "The
> > > > > World," an American radio program produced by National Public Radio.
> > > > > In the course of the interview he noted, "Regime change could lead
> to
> > > > > certain changes in the geopolitical considerations that do weigh in
> on
> > > > > contracts. So American [telecommunications] companies, for example,
> > > > > who have up to now been on the outs in Iraq may suddenly be in a
> > > > > strong position to compete."
> > > > >
> > > > > He continued: "If there isn't a war, but the sanctions are lifted,
> > > > > then the likelihood would be that the traditional European and Asian
> > > > > countries that have been working with Iraq would continue to work
> with
> > > > > Iraq."
> > > > >
> > > > > The stakes, according to Braude, are high. At issue is "one of the
> > > > > biggest contracts in recent memory.... A billion dollars to revamp
> the
> > > > > fixed network [landline] over the next few years ... and hundreds of
> > > > > millions of dollars over the same period for the mobile network."
> > > > >
> > > > > The conflict over who will rebuild the Iraqi communications
> > > > > infrastructure-and how and when it will be rebuilt-has been
> simmering
> > > > > for over a decade. During the first Gulf War of 1991, the US
> > > > > specifically targeted communications systems for bombing campaigns
> as
> > > > > part of its policy of destroying the infrastructure required for the
> > > > > functioning of a modern economy. The damage sustained was enormous.
> > > > > Over the ensuing decade, the sanctions regime supported by the US
> and
> > > > > implemented by the UN served to block Iraqi efforts at
> modernization.
> > > > >
> > > > > As a consequence, Iraq, with a population of 24 million and the
> second
> > > > > largest reserves of petroleum in the world, has one of the most
> > > > > underdeveloped telecommunications networks in the world. The average
> > > > > number of telephone lines per 100 Iraqis is 3, down from 5.6 in
> 1990.
> > > > > Those who have phones-only the wealthy and the political elite-are
> > > > > faced with restrictions on their use because of the decrepit state
> of
> > > > > the telephone system.
> > > > >
> > > > > Baghdad was once a relatively modern city, but today it is one of
> the
> > > > > few capital cities in the world that lacks a commercial wireless
> > > > > network. Iraq was one of the last countries to establish an Internet
> > > > > domain suffix for web and email services, and the number of people
> > > > > with Internet access in the entire country is estimated to be merely
> a
> > > > > few hundred.
> > > > >
> > > > > The infrastructure that was destroyed during the Gulf War had
> > > > > originally been built by the French company Alcatel. Over the past
> > > > > decade the company has continued to play a major role in the limited
> > > > > reconstruction efforts that have begun.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alcatel has a standing contract with the government of Saddam
> Hussein
> > > > > to begin construction of an international telephone exchange and a
> > > > > microwave telephone system that would link up different areas of the
> > > > > country. The deal was valued at $75 million, but it, as well as
> > > > > Alcatel's other projects in the country, is unlikely to be realized
> in
> > > > > the event of war.
> > > > >
> > > > > For much of the 1990s, France was the largest beneficiary of trade
> > > > > with Iraq, with the UN approving some $3 billion in contracts for a
> > > > > wide range of goods and services, including telecommunications. In
> > > > > accordance with the food-for-oil program that was initiated in 1996,
> > > > > Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues-stored in an escrow account
> > > > > managed by the UN-to buy specific goods and services, as authorized
> by
> > > > > the United Nations Security Council. Generally, Iraq sought to
> direct
> > > > > trade to countries-such as France, Russia or China-that were willing
> > > > > to push for a loosening of the sanctions regime.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, every contract had to be approved by the Security Council
> > > > > before funds could be released. Members of the council, and
> > > > > particularly the US, had wide latitude to block contracts by
> claiming
> > > > > that the goods to be provided were "dual use," that is, they had
> > > > > potential military as well as civilian applications.
> > > > >
> > > > > The ability to block telecommunications contracts was one of the
> > > > > principal tools employed by the US to pressure China and France to
> go
> > > > > along with American and British attempts to restructure the
> > > > > inspections system in 2001. For example, in June of 2001 the US
> > > > > released more than $80 million in contracts between Iraq and Chinese
> > > > > companies that it had been blocking. This included a $28 million
> > > > > contract with Huawei Technologies to build a mobile phone network
> with
> > > > > a capacity of 25,000. The next day, China announced that it had
> > > > > reached an agreement with Britain, France and the US on a list of
> > > > > "dual use" items that would be part of an overhaul of the sanctions
> > > > > regime.
> > > > >
> > > > > The American government reached similar quid pro quos with France
> and
> > > > > Russia, involving oil contracts as well as telecommunications deals.
> > > > > In general, however, the US tended to block contracts that would
> > > > > benefit European or Asian companies.
> > > > >
> > > > > Scuttling contracts through the Security Council was not the only
> > > > > method used by the US to prevent the rebuilding of Iraqi
> > > > > telecommunications systems. Earlier in 2001, the US had alleged that
> > > > > Huawei was helping Iraq upgrade communications systems that would be
> > > > > used for military purposes. Those systems were promptly bombed by
> > > > > American and British warplanes in February and again in August of
> > > > > 2001, with the US citing the alleged but unsubstantiated improvement
> > > > > of air defense systems as the principal motivation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Huawei eventually backed out of another deal it had reached for a
> > > > > different project, apparently calculating that the uncertainty of
> > > > > Iraq's future position was too great. A new contract was reached
> with
> > > > > China National Technology Import, but all projects have now been put
> > > > > on hold given the imminence of war.
> > > > >
> > > > > The motivation for the American government's efforts to prevent work
> > > > > on Iraqi communications systems has been twofold. First, they are
> part
> > > > > of Washington's general policy of starving and brutalizing the
> > > > > country-a policy that has led to the death of hundreds of thousands
> of
> > > > > Iraqi civilians.
> > > > >
> > > > > Second, they are driven by economic self-interest. The Middle East
> is
> > > > > one of the principal regions of profitable investment for the
> > > > > telecommunications industry. Many of the countries in the area have
> > > > > begun to privatize communications systems, opening them up to
> foreign
> > > > > capital as part of the requirements for entry into the World Trade
> > > > > Organization. States in the Gulf region will spend an estimated 25
> > > > > percent of funds devoted to infrastructure development on
> > > > > telecommunications systems over the next decade.
> > > > >
> > > > > At present, Iraq's communications sector is almost entirely
> > > > > nationalized, but this will certainly change after an American
> > > > > invasion. American corporations will be in a position to take over
> > > > > even those limited projects that had been approved by the UN for
> > > > > France and China.
> > > > >
> > > > > The repercussions could extend beyond Iraq's borders. After the Gulf
> > > > > War of 1991, Lucent was awarded a $4.5 billion contract with Saudi
> > > > > Arabia as part of the growing influence of American companies in the
> > > > > region.
> > > > >
> > > > > The New York Times, in a piece published February 17, quotes
> Jennifer
> > > > > Weyrauch, a spokeswoman for Motorola, a world leader in mobile
> > > > > communications with operations throughout the Middle East: "If an
> > > > > opportunity exists under the right circumstances we would take a
> close
> > > > > look at it. To this end, we urge the US Congress and administration
> to
> > > > > prepare to promptly remove exiting sanctions that would impede US
> > > > > businesses from participating in the reconstruction and recovery
> > > > > effort."
> > > > >
> > > > > This "reconstruction and recovery effort" will be implemented on the
> > > > > backs of the Iraqi people. White House spokesman Ari Fleisher
> recently
> > > > > stated, "Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi
> > > > > people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able
> > > > > to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction." In
> other
> > > > > words, revenues from oil extraction will be used to fund generous
> > > > > contracts for American corporations to rebuild what the US military
> > > > > has destroyed.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > > > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > > > ================================================================
> > > > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > > > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > > > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > > > Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > ================================================================
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de