What’s your point? That we should force the Iraqis to fix the port?
Adam-
I understand your frustration with the current situation. I do care to know what other people’s thoughts on the matter are. However, I don’t come to this website to just read the news! 
Please try and post an opinion or observation that we can comment upon in the future regarding your quotes.
Okay, my opion. There was no offer of tender. The contract was simply awarded. No bids required. This was planend a long time ago. And all the while, the UN is making prepartions to handle these tasks. Yet the USA awards this conrtact to an American company. It is not conclusive evidence, but there is the possibility that this is how the war costs will not only be covered, but will turn a profit.
The point I took from it was, instead of using a local Iraqi company they have used an American one. Using the money to inject life into there own economy rather then using an Iraqi based company that could then grow into a bigger company by completing the rebuilding. In doing so creating a subsidiary of an American based company that will create jobs for the Iraqis after the war is completed. So now an American subsidiary will run the port in the future. Multinational companies undermine local autonomy and creates a need for external investment, as there are no local companies able to supply the need. This is a sly way of making sure America is very much involved in the future of Iraq, and that the Iraqi people need them, so will listen to what the America’s have to say, or else America will pull out.
In a capitalistic society the owner of the capital gets the most rewards, while the worker is seen as a paid slave! And no my name is not Marx, it’s Pax!
I would like to start my response with a disclaimer-
This is not necessarily my view, but just alternatives to your opinions (I really don’t know what I think 
)
The U.S most likely wants to create an Iraqi dependency. Mostly so that they have a foothold in which to help shape it’s future into a more proseperous one, or should I say less dangerous one. I don’t know if that is necessarily wrong on their part ( although I wonder how altruistic their motives are). As far as America making money off the war, I think the opposite is true. The expected war budget for the U.S is around $50-75 billion. The millions that these corporations make are peanuts in comparison. With the U.S investing so much money into this ordeal, I think they have a right to make sure it ends positively, not just for the Iraqi’s, but fot themselves as well.
I agree with you that the worker gets the proverbial shaft in a Capitalistic society. That’s another debate however.
Another point about money and economy. If you drop 2 billion dollars worth of bomb on Iraq it means you need to buy another 2 billion worth of bomb. If you read the Shock and Awe topic, and the link to the book of the same name, you’ll see America has been spending less and less on defence, because there are no real threats to national security, unit recently. With the Shock and Awe tactic large amounts of weaponry is used but less manpower is required. Also Bush, I think got about 70 billion extra to fight this war, a lot of that money will go to the American Arms industry. It’s like injecting steroids into the economy.
Although a philosophy website is a dangerous place to mention ‘morality’, morally that is one of the most abhorrent views I have ever read here.
Yet the stock market has plummetted as a result of the war and fears about the future, whilst oil prices have surged. Even if these are considered to be short term problems, will this war really be of such great benefit in the long term?
There are many easier and less controversial ways of rehabilitating and stimulating the economy e.g. cutting interest rates, building of public works, that are of wider scope and effect.
Also, how many billions of American tax dollars will go overseas for the long haul, possibly never to be repaid?
I suspect that this war will have done the American economy a disservice when the costs are finally counted.
While the real outcome will not be seen until later this year or even next year. I think the total requested was 74.9 billion, but even if only 35 billion goes into the American Arms industry on top of what they are currently getting it will help boost that part of the economy. I know this is not a massive part, but it will help the over all picture. Either way I think with Bush’s plans to cut taxes and increase spending, it’s not going to be that healthy long term for the economy. But again only time will tell.
FlaminRed worte:
What is immoral about watching out for yourself? I know in an ideal setting one should never need to think about their own needs, as the others that surround him should be just as giving. But this is reality, and nobody is going to make sure the U.S’s economy is healthy except for the U.S themselves. I agree with you that this war will have negative ramifications on the future economy of the U.S. For this reason alone, the U.S is not wrong in pursuing measure that will help to ensure its financial survival. This borders on imperialism (in fact it probably is) and I have no argument against that. But if this war really has alot to do with “liberating” Iraq, then the Americans should not get the shaft for doing the dirty work.