1
   

Re: Iraq...I Think Everyone Has Forgotten Something

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 02:23 am
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
And the beautiful think about this conspiracy theory is that it requires not a shred of proof, and, although false, is almost impossible to disprove.


With real congressional oversight we could see how real it possibly is.

US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.

Your theories are pretty safe as long as you speak only in generalities, and give no specific examples that can be examined.


Lets start with the Police academy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2006092702134

Then we can go here
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/iraq-n19.shtml

Or how about this from the CSMonitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0407/dailyUpdate.html

Nah, nothing specific in any of those cases. Can't possibly be any problems with no bid contracts in Iraq. Lets all pretend everything is OK. Isn't life grand. George Bush is a GOD.

I'lll give you three books on Amazon that prove I'm right, and unless you read and refute every word, I win. Give a concise argument in your own words.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 04:31 am
Brandon ( I am the internet debating team champion) 9000 Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 07:23 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Brandon ( I am the internet debating team champion) 9000 Laughing Laughing

Anything to avoid having to support your assertion, I guess.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 07:31 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
And the beautiful think about this conspiracy theory is that it requires not a shred of proof, and, although false, is almost impossible to disprove.


With real congressional oversight we could see how real it possibly is.

US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.

Your theories are pretty safe as long as you speak only in generalities, and give no specific examples that can be examined.


Lets start with the Police academy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2006092702134

Then we can go here
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/iraq-n19.shtml

Or how about this from the CSMonitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0407/dailyUpdate.html

Nah, nothing specific in any of those cases. Can't possibly be any problems with no bid contracts in Iraq. Lets all pretend everything is OK. Isn't life grand. George Bush is a GOD.

I'lll give you three books on Amazon that prove I'm right, and unless you read and refute every word, I win. Give a concise argument in your own words.


I see you jumped right on examing the specific examples I provided.

As long as you speak in generalities Brandon your theories are pretty safe.

I guess I was wrong to assume you were intelligent enough to read and follow the news.

I love the argument though.. If you speak in your own words then you have to provide examples but if you provide examples then you have to speak in your own words. Very circular in its reasoning.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 07:49 am
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
And the beautiful think about this conspiracy theory is that it requires not a shred of proof, and, although false, is almost impossible to disprove.


With real congressional oversight we could see how real it possibly is.

US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.

Your theories are pretty safe as long as you speak only in generalities, and give no specific examples that can be examined.


Lets start with the Police academy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2006092702134

Then we can go here
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/iraq-n19.shtml

Or how about this from the CSMonitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0407/dailyUpdate.html

Nah, nothing specific in any of those cases. Can't possibly be any problems with no bid contracts in Iraq. Lets all pretend everything is OK. Isn't life grand. George Bush is a GOD.

I'lll give you three books on Amazon that prove I'm right, and unless you read and refute every word, I win. Give a concise argument in your own words.


I see you jumped right on examing the specific examples I provided.

As long as you speak in generalities Brandon your theories are pretty safe.

I guess I was wrong to assume you were intelligent enough to read and follow the news.

I love the argument though.. If you speak in your own words then you have to provide examples but if you provide examples then you have to speak in your own words. Very circular in its reasoning.

No, it's not circular reasoning. Anyone can post links to multiple long articles and claim that in there somewhere is the proof of his viewpoint, without saying how or why, and then declare that anyone with enough sense not to waste his time on them has lost the argument. This is not what is meant by a citation referenced in an argument. Your argument is only citations. It's just a typical liberal attempt to win an argument without being right.

However, if that's the way you want to play it then I'll answer. This proves that I'm right and you're wrong:

An End to Evil


Ha, ha, ha.....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 07:58 am
parados wrote:


Done by Parson's Corp who sub-contracted the work to locals. Oversight seems to have been lacking as well as access by the sub-contractors to proper building materials. Never should have happened.

Quote:


A result of having companies bid for work. Bribe the guys picking the companies and this is what happens. Perhaps that is why the military creates contracts with very large corporations so when they need the work done, they don't need to worry about corruption. A good reason to have no-bid contracts, don't you think?

Quote:
Or how about this from the CSMonitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0407/dailyUpdate.html


Corruption is being tracked down and punished. That's the problem with trying to rebuild a country before the peace is brokered. I hope all those that have defrauded the US Government get the punishment they deserve. Hardly a referendum to stop no-bid contracting though.

Quote:
Nah, nothing specific in any of those cases. Can't possibly be any problems with no bid contracts in Iraq. Lets all pretend everything is OK. Isn't life grand. George Bush is a GOD.


Nice little screed. Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 08:05 am
Ah yes Brandon in his usual claims of "I know how to debate and you don't" ignores the fact that he asked me for specific examples. I provided those examples with the source links.


I saw no reason to explain what the sources were going to say since they were examples of no bid contracts that were not completed or included massive overbilling or the people that got them were convicted of fraud. That was precisely what I had said in the first place. There are too many examples of no bid contracts being awarded and the work not being done as required by the contract.

So lets recap. One company and its owner convicted of fraud, multiple investigations of overcharges and lack of work performed, the most egregious being the Iraqi police academy which has sewage running through the walls because they installed the plumbing without connections.

If you don't like the fact that I provided examples of "huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to", then why the hell did you ask for examples that you could examine?

Brandon as we well know and you have said so many times in a mulititude of different ways...
Quote:
A response to an actual argument, whether that argument is right or wrong, which consists solely of negative adjectives, but no counter-argument, is of zero consequence, and does nothing to disprove or diminish the argument. It is a favorite technique of people who suspect that they cannot actually defend their viewpoints..

I supplied the sources for my statement. Either refute my argument and the sources or admit you can't actually defend your veiwpoint.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 08:13 am
That's nice McG.
I stated...
Quote:
US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.

Then you state

Quote:
Corruption is being tracked down and punished. That's the problem with trying to rebuild a country before the peace is brokered. I hope all those that have defrauded the US Government get the punishment they deserve. Hardly a referendum to stop no-bid contracting though.


Funny, I never once said we should stop no-bid contracting in my statement. You agreed with me completely that but then created a strawman to disagree with me on. Are you opposed to fraud or not McG? Is the fraud evidence that there has not been enough oversight? The only way to find fraud is through audits and other mechanisms of oversight.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 08:28 am
parados wrote:
That's nice McG.
I stated...
Quote:
US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.

Then you state

Quote:
Corruption is being tracked down and punished. That's the problem with trying to rebuild a country before the peace is brokered. I hope all those that have defrauded the US Government get the punishment they deserve. Hardly a referendum to stop no-bid contracting though.


Funny, I never once said we should stop no-bid contracting in my statement. You agreed with me completely that but then created a strawman to disagree with me on. Are you opposed to fraud or not McG? Is the fraud evidence that there has not been enough oversight? The only way to find fraud is through audits and other mechanisms of oversight.

How does any of this support the thread opening thesis that:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
...what I think is and has been the reality of our Iraq engagement and here it is "We will leave Iraq when our own, and our friends and supporters in the private business sector, have milked every profit possible out of Iraq and implemented policies and strategies to continue to milk profits from it for many years to come"....


which is to say that the President is motivated to be in Iraq primarily by a desire for business profits?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 08:41 am
parados wrote:
That's nice McG.
I stated...
Quote:
US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.

Then you state

Quote:
Corruption is being tracked down and punished. That's the problem with trying to rebuild a country before the peace is brokered. I hope all those that have defrauded the US Government get the punishment they deserve. Hardly a referendum to stop no-bid contracting though.


Funny, I never once said we should stop no-bid contracting in my statement. You agreed with me completely that but then created a strawman to disagree with me on. Are you opposed to fraud or not McG? Is the fraud evidence that there has not been enough oversight? The only way to find fraud is through audits and other mechanisms of oversight.


Then you are content with the military use of no-bid contracts? I figured that you, like most liberals, find them offensive. Especially when companies like Haliburton is involved. I admit that I am under the impression you are against no-bid contracting.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 08:44 am
Perhaps if you bothered to read my statement you would have your answer Brandon

parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
And the beautiful think about this conspiracy theory is that it requires not a shred of proof, and, although false, is almost impossible to disprove.


With real congressional oversight we could see how real it possibly is.

US corporations getting huge no bid contracts, taking the money and not providing what they were supposed to. Whether it was a conspiracy or not, it seems to have been the reality in far too many cases.


There are shreds of proof. But we have to look at them before we can see if it is real or not.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 08:48 am
McGentrix wrote:

Then you are content with the military use of no-bid contracts? I figured that you, like most liberals, find them offensive. Especially when companies like Haliburton is involved. I admit that I am under the impression you are against no-bid contracting.


I find no bid contracts without oversight to be offensive. I find overbilling in a war zone to be offensive. I find failure to perform what you were paid to perform to be offensive. Frankly if the company isn't honest enough to not overbill then they should not be given a contract.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 09:33 am
parados wrote:
McGentrix wrote:

Then you are content with the military use of no-bid contracts? I figured that you, like most liberals, find them offensive. Especially when companies like Haliburton is involved. I admit that I am under the impression you are against no-bid contracting.


I find no bid contracts without oversight to be offensive. I find overbilling in a war zone to be offensive. I find failure to perform what you were paid to perform to be offensive. Frankly if the company isn't honest enough to not overbill then they should not be given a contract.


Fade in:

Parados sitting at adesk contemplating large corporations and accounting practices.

Zoom in focusing on Parados' eyes

Fade out: swirly effect to show transition inside Parados' head

Fade in:

2 fat, elderly gentlemen drinking brandy from human skulls and smoking cigars.

Old man 1: "Heh! We really screwed over the US this time, eh?"
Old man 2: "yeah, we'll be sure to get more business this way. I was thinking of getting a new Humvee for my son with all the money we are making skimming from the Government!"
Old man 1: "Yeah? I am hoping we have another war soon so we can continue screwing over the American people! I need a new Mercedes for my wife."
Old man 2: "Another one? What color this time? Hey, did you hear that Harold down in accounting figured out a way to get even more money from the government?"
Old man 1: "No, I hadn't heard that. What he doing this time? Just robbing the federal Treasury?"
Old man 2: "Hahaha, not yet, no. He is sending out 2 bills for the same services!"
Old man 1: "Brilliant!"
Old man 2: "Yep! Good thing we never had to bid on any projects, keep any accounting records, prove any work has been done or do any actual work! Imagine if we had to risk our lives working in a war-zone trying to help develop a country while the inhabitants are trying to tear it down!"
Old Man 1: "That's silly! Cheers!"

Fade out: Parados typing away on an internet chat forum.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 10:09 am
Rather naive to think that there are no corrupt people in running these no-bid contracts which lack oversight.
There are tens of billions of dollars to be made in Iraq, at various levels.

There are husbands and wives who kill their spouses for $50 000.
Doncha think that, with higher stakes come higher potential for corruption and despicable behavior to attain those stakes?

Although the questions surrounding the war are partisan, questioning no-bid contracts are not.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 11:26 am
It seems McG is just fine with overbilling as long as the company executive doesn't drink his brandy from a human skull...
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Oct, 2006 01:55 pm
McG...what is the advantage of a no-bid contract, and, more specifically, a no-bid contract with absolutely no oversight.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Re: Iraq...I Think Everyone Has Forgotten Something
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/12/2025 at 04:24:05
▲ ▼