USA Corrupt?

[Irish Caesar]

Corrupt as in the whole conflict in the middle east is just happening to create foothold to invade Iran and take the oil. Then yes.

Iraq has a lot more oil than Iran...

If it was only for oil, Iran wouldn't be the goal.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

No more corrupt than any other nation. Any nation that has politicians leading it is bound to have some corruption, but relatively speaking the US isn't that corrupt.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Iraq has a lot more oil than Iran...

If it was only for oil, Iran wouldn't be the goal.

Iraq appaently dose have the second LARGEST reserves behind Saudi Arabia. Though this was revised estimates of Iraq reserves comming in for recent oil developments. I remain skeptical but it is rather ironic.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Iraq appaently dose have the second LARGEST reserves behind Saudi Arabia. Though this was revised estimates of Iraq reserves comming in for recent oil developments. I remain skeptical but it is rather ironic.

Why is it ironic? It has been known for quite some time that Iraq's reserves were second only to Saudi Arabia, making Iraq a perfect country to invade. Sanctions mean that screwing up won't totally mess up the oil market, as Iraq couldn't keep the taps wide open anyway, and we already knew we could annihilate the Iraqi military in a matter of days. In 2003, Iran had neither sanctions, a crazy dictator, nor a military that the US and allies had kicked before.

I think the recent news is that Iraq has more oil than previously known, but it had been known to be #2 in reserves before.

 

[Mountain-God]

re: Tonkin Gulf.
- Commander of the USS Maddox is on record stating that the 'first attack' did not happen.
- NSA is essentially on record stating the 'second attack' did not happen - although in less concrete terms ie more like, 'appear it may not have happened'.
- Presidential records LBJ conclusive re: High pressure desire to intervene and looking for an excuse.
- One nation sending in a warship or aircraft in order to provoke a reaction is a time-honoured tactic and strategy

re: 9/11
- I tend to think the suggestion that the attack was essentially masterminded by an American group is extremely unlikely.
- however, evidence seems fairly conclusive that the attack was allowed to happen to whatever degree - with repeated warnings, etc. Over and over, key persons refused to act on plausible threat.
- and finally there's the point that, conspiracy or not, the attack played into the hands of and has proven immensely profitable to a certain clique of the American ruling elite.

 

[White Elk]

The following three quotes are excerpts of an article from the online edition of The American Conservative magazine. It was written by Philip Giraldi, former CIA Officer, who is now an international security consultant.

"Money for Nothing" October 24th, 2005 Issue of The American Conservative

"The American-dominated Coalition Provisional Authority could well prove to be the most corrupt administration in history, almost certainly surpassing the widespread fraud of the much-maligned UN Oil for Food Program. At least $20 billion that belonged to the Iraqi people has been wasted, together with hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Exactly how many billions of additional dollars were squandered, stolen, given away, or simply lost will never be known because the deliberate decision by the CPA not to meter oil exports means that no one will ever know how much revenue was generated during 2003 and 2004."

In one notorious incident in April 2004, $1.5 billion in cash that had just been delivered by three Blackhawk helicopters was handed over to a courier in Erbil, in the Kurdish region, never to be seen again. Afterwards, no one was able to recall the courier’s name or provide a good description of him.

Large-scale and pervasive corruption meant that available resources could not be used to stabilize and secure Iraq in the early days of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), when it was still possible to do so. Continuing corruption meant that the reconstruction of infrastructure never got underway, giving the Iraqi people little incentive to co-operate with the occupation. Ongoing corruption in arms procurement and defense spending means that Baghdad will never control a viable army while the Shi’ite and Kurdish militias will grow stronger and produce a divided Iraq in which constitutional guarantees will be irrelevant.

There is much much much more in that article. I highly recomend it. "Money for Nothing"


_________________________________________________

From the BBC... Iraq 'facing corruption threat' Wednesday, 16 March, 2005

The reconstruction of post-war Iraq is in danger of becoming "the biggest corruption scandal in history", Transparency International has warned.

However, the body is critical of the United States' handling of the reconstruction process, arguing that its process for awarding public contracts was secretive and favoured a small number of large firms.

Its comments echo those of the International Advistory and Monitoring Board, a United Nations body, which in December criticised the CPA [Coalition Provisional Authority] for awarding contracts to oil services firm Halliburton and other firms without a competitive process.

"In its procurement strategies, the US has been a poor role model in how to keep corrupt practices at bay," the report says.

_________________________________________________


There is a great deal more to US corruption in Iraq. And the corruption overseas doesnt stop in Iraq. But these two sources provide a good starter for those who wish to learn more. They provide 'leaping off points' from which you can launch your own research if you are so inclined. You may be surprised at what you learn with just a couple hours of .net research.
.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Holy ****! I thought I was the only one who read the American Conservative

 

[White Elk]

Holy ****! I thought I was the only one who read the American Conservative

I endeavor to read stuff from all camps in all nations (but I fall far short of that aim). I found that particular article by researching US corruption in Iraq from a differant angle. It was so choke full of specific information and provided so many names etc, that it then became a major source to launch into deeper research. It was a treasure and a treasure map all in one.

 

[plarq]

Wait, most corrupted administration? How do you compare administration, when corruption we know is only part of sham above the surface?

 

[nonconformist]

There is no corruption from the Democratic party . The Republicans are the only ones who are filled with totalitarian corruption

You hear that? That's the sound of 400 million americans and 500 million Europeans gasping for air in between guffaws.

 

[Ecofarm]

Few companies, if any, have the economies of scale required for defense contracts in Iraq.

That article sure had alot of specifics and names, like the "notorious" incident sometime during April involving an unnamed man (who it is rumored appeared to have crab-like appendages).

 

[ParkCungHee]

The fact that hes unnamed is the very thing the article is complaining about.

 

[Ecofarm]

That's just like the notorious occasion (sometime last decade) that an alien landed in my yard and stole a rose bush. The name of the alien is unknown. Therefore, the government is obviously covering up a huge scam in which aliens are being use to steal innocent people's rose bushes. Until the government comes clean on this, I am calling for the indictment of the Bush Administration.

Oh, you say I made all this up? Ok, then why don't you tell me - what was the name of the alien? You don't know, do you? Well, that proves it.

Of course, the same tactic is used in the paragraph before that one: Alot of money was stolen! We don't know how much (because they are hiding it!), but we are certain that it is alot (more than the 'Oil for Food' scandal, probably, so we can now forget about that). And, more importantly, we can confirm with absolute certainty that this money would have been used to build community schools, hospitals, and movie theatres if only the US hadn't brought all this corruption to the previously Eden-like Iraq.

What is the point of the article? Secret missions in the night? Ohhhh, how exciting! I feel like a special agent just reading about it! Or is it the vague accusations of grand war spoils exchanging hands in a dark alley somewhere that makes it so compelling?

Oh! We are so wasteful! We are ruining the once beautiful Iraq! I hate us!

Pa-lease. Anything someone gets paid for stepping foot in that cesspool is deserved, as long as I don't have to. Right now there are soldiers and diplomats trying to help "them" and risking their lives with minimal luxuries. I, however, am going back to NFL Draft coverage on ESPN (where I will not be wasting any taxpayer dollars or dodging any IEDs).

 

[White Elk]

I'm not sure Ecofarm that you actually read the article in full. Or if you did, that you understand what corruption is. This article speaks of many instances of fraud and bribery. Fraud and bribery are results of corruption.

And from the tone of your post and from talk such as this "Oh! We are so wasteful! We are ruining the once beautiful Iraq! I hate us!" it seems clear to me that your post falls squarely into the realm of trolling. At the very least your response appears to be disingenuous, add it adds nothing to this debate.

Defense Contract Audit Agency auditors have questioned Halliburton’s charges on a $1.6 billion fuel contract, claiming that the overcharges on the contract exceed $200 million.

Halliburton has also been accused of billing the Army for 42,000 daily meals for soldiers, though it was only actually serving 14,000.

Two former company managers turned whistleblowers have charged that the company [Custer Battles] defrauded the U.S. government of at least $50 million.

The GAO report [April 2004] also confirms that many private security contractors in Iraq have been charging the U.S. government exorbitant fees for their services, .... In one case, contract security guards were effectively being billed at $33,000 per guard per month while the average rate for a security specialist worked out to between $13,000 and $20,000 per month.

British sources report that the CPA contracts that were not handed out to cronies were sold to the highest bidder, with bribes as high as $300,000 being demanded for particularly lucrative reconstruction contracts.

Money for Nothing

There are many more specific instances of corruption in that article. Furthermore respected agencies such as the US govs, Government Accountability Office have discovered this corruption and point out how it has a profound negative impact on the war effort. There is much much more which isn't contained in that article. And there are multiple oversight groups (some are US gov agencies) which document the US corruption in Iraq. It is undeniable.

 

[White Elk]

That article sure had alot of specifics and names, like the "notorious" incident sometime during April involving an unnamed man (who it is rumored appeared to have crab-like appendages).

Despite the lack of proper record keeping by contractors, that article did indeed have many specifics. And some cases of fraud and bribery have already made it into the courts. When a company contracts itself to do a job and that contract invloves billing for material, manpower and other resources... then it MUST be backed up with paperwork. That is how it works. But this is not how it is working in Iraq. Contractors are being allowed to bill for huge sums of money for which there is no accounting for. They are free to inflate their fees, and it has been shown that that is exactly what they are doing. And we are not talking half a half a million here and there. We are talking about Billions of dollars here. That is just what is known beyond the shadow of a doubt!

Few companies, if any, have the economies of scale required for defense contracts in Iraq.

That is simply not true. There are a great number of construction outfits that can handle the scale of the reconstruction job in Iraq. Just look around the world and see what has been built. Haliburton does not have a monopoly on contructing massive projects internationally. But Haliburton, and others did have a monopoly on contracts that were not subject to a bid process. And in some instances where bidding was allowed, there are allegations of bribery pending judicial review.

That being said there are some contract needs that must naturally be done by US companies. Such as feeding the troops, water purification, security, etc. Personally I think those needs should be filled by the US Army. But VP Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld worked very hard to inact legislation which outsourced those aspects of our military. For the jobs relating to support of the military.. I do indeed think that the selection should be done in a non-bid process. The same with security. But they represent just a small portion of the overall contracting needs in Iraq. All of the reconstruction contracts should have been open to the international community. And if any favoritism is justified, then I think it should have been towards construction companies from within Iraq or their neigbors. As it has happened now, these no-bid jobs and favoritism for US companies has only worked against us in our "hearts and minds" campaign.

 

[White Elk]

Wait, most corrupted administration? How do you compare administration, when corruption we know is only part of sham above the surface?

I'm not sure I understand your post. By administration the author is speaking of the Coalition Provisional Authority which ruled Iraq after Sadam was removed. And it is true that it will be very difficult to know just how bad the corruption is. Beyond poor recording keeping, and CPA negligence... the bush administration doesn't think it should investigate into contracts made by the CPA. It wont be easy to prove just how big a figure the corruption represents. But many governmental and private agencies are investigating and have already found billions of dollars worth of fraud and bribery. Evidence points to that figure growing into the tens of billions.

There are many agencies working on identifying and stopping the corruption in Iraq, as well as to holding the criminals accountable. Here are just a few of them... Government Accountability Office (US gov), International Advisory and Monitoring Board (United Nations), Transparency International, Iraq Revenue Watch, ...

 

[White Elk]

The fact that hes unnamed is the very thing the article is complaining about.

I could be wrong but I think the rolleyes was directed to this Post
about the unamed man and the rumor of his "crab-like appendages".

Whatever the case... Yes that article did have alot to say about improper record keeping and the lack of paper trails. And it mentioned the dispersal of large sums of US money which cannot be tracked, nor can the purpose of some of those expenditures be known. This opens the door to allegations ranging from the bribery of Iraqi government officials to the funding of militias. The CIA has a history of doing both. Congress cannot properly oversee spending and the actions of US agencies when that spending is not documented. Doesn't it concern people that an "unnamed man" disappered into Northern Iraq with 1.5 Billion dollars of US tax payers money? He is just one example where significantly large sums of money cannot be accounted for. Accounting in Iraq must be transparent. Spending which cannot be made public, must be documented for Congressional review.

Oh back to the reason I originally made this post... So yes the article "complains" about the lack of a paper trail which trancends that one incident. But it went well beyond that. It covered specific cases of fraud, bribery and theft.

 

[Kozmos]

Elk man. There's the edit button you know.

 

[EdwardTking]

@ALL

There're two kind of corruption: one is the absolute power to do things without supervision; the other is failure to function as it intends to do. We should split our discussion into the two categories.

As part of @All, I do not agree with your definition.

The first is merely autocracy and the second ineffectiveness.


These may or may not be related to corruption.

For most people corruption in government is when candidates,
elected leaders, judges, civil servants, parties, policemen or
other officials take money or favours of monetary value for;
passing or not passing laws, voting or not voting, counting or
not counting votes, or for awarding contracts or permits, or
changing regulatory actions, or for not investigating or turning
a blind eye to criminality, and or for obstructing the honest
investigation of such corruption.

 

[White Elk]

Elk man. There's the edit button you know.

Yes I know but there are times like this when much time elapsed between my posts. And so I don't go back and edit new posts into old ones. I have done so in the past and then had to retread old ground because a poster didn't see the new posting because it wasn't made in a new post.

And there are other times where the content is so much that I break it down into multiple posts for ease of reading. And there are still other times that I post multiple posts rather than one so that multiple topics can be organzed into their own post. I dont see the problem here. And clearly I am not motivated by post count