Krugman: A Deliberate Debacle

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/12/opinion/12KRUG.html

James Baker sets off to negotiate Iraqi debt forgiveness with our estranged allies. And at that very moment the deputy secretary of defense releases a "Determination and Findings" on reconstruction contracts that not only excludes those allies from bidding, but does so with highly offensive language. What's going on?

Maybe I'm giving Paul Wolfowitz too much credit, but I don't think this was mere incompetence. I think the administration's hard-liners are deliberately sabotaging reconciliation.

<snip>

In short, this week's diplomatic debacle probably reflects an internal power struggle, with hawks using the contracts issue as a way to prevent Republican grown-ups from regaining control of U.S. foreign policy. And initial indications are that the ploy is working — that the hawks have, once again, managed to tap into Mr. Bush's fondness for moralistic, good-versus-evil formulations. "It's very simple," Mr. Bush said yesterday. "Our people risk their lives. . . . Friendly coalition folks risk their lives. . . . The contracting is going to reflect that."

In the end the Bush doctrine — based on delusions of grandeur about America's ability to dominate the world through force — will collapse. What we've just learned is how hard and dirty the doctrine's proponents will fight against the inevitable.

[Brucey]

1. Yes, right, and also

the policy shows that it's all about money and the spoils of war for these assholes. They're so psychopathic that they openly admit that they are after the spoils of war, and expect people to be supportive and accept their kindergarten logic. This administration is simply evil and unbelievably arrogant. Their greed knows no bounds, nor any shame.

[wtmusic]

2. eloquent

'delusions of grandeur about America's ability to dominate the world through force'

[caledesi]

3. Krugman - always the best! eom

[realFedUp]

4. Bush has no control over the neocons

running the show...that's fairly obvious now.

[DinkyDem]

5. No, it was all scripted, I will explain

the scheme.

Bush wants debt relief for Iraq, but he knows he has no carrot and no stick.
SO right before entering negotiations that that are doomed from the outset, Wolfowitz announces that uncooperative countries get no contracts.

The hope is that these countries will suddenly become more cooperative on the issue. They provide some debt relief (debt they know they will probably never see paid back anyways) and they get lucrative new contracts that WILL pay.

Will the plan work?
I don't know.

What I do know is people misunderestimated Bush on a lot of things and get it wrong, and the NYT got this one wrong.

Bush is far too wily to be misunderestimated.

[Old and In the Way]

6. Well, it appears to be working....

NOT. Canada is already on record as saying that they will not forgive the Iraq debt. I doubt any country will bite on jumping into Iraq to share in a few billion dollars of spoils, anyway. Too much downside risk.

Much better to let Bush get roasted as his benefactors gorge on pork.

And as far as Bush being 'wily'. The only reason he's not impeached and fighting for his imperial life is that he has a corrupt Republican majority in Congress and pliant media allowing him to trash the Constitution and International reputation.

[DinkyDem]

7. Canada

is not a major player in this.
It is focused like a laserbeam on France and Russia.

As for the rest of you post, do you feel better now?
Are you now ready to return to reality and face up to what we are up against?

You dismiss Bush at your peril, not his.

[DinkyDem]

8. Oh, and BTW

These contracts aren't merely "a few billion dollars of spoils".
They are long-term commitments. Any company that gets in now will have years and years to come in maintanence work, upgrades, and most importantly, expansion.

These contracts are only the tip of the iceberg of what will come for the companies who land them.

[Old and In the Way]

11. Hey Dink

Small change in the overall scheme of things.

What is important is how Bush plans to dole out the oil contracts. Because, this was always about stealing the oil. And mature "grown-up" countries don't do that...they play by the rules. We are going to pay the price in a myriad of ways, sit back and watch. As strong as the neo-cons think we are, you will see America go to hell under their stewardship.

Clinton, through finesse and diplomacy, kept us strong economicly and militarily. George and the neo-con criminals have set us up for the big fall. That's what arrogance, hubris, and collective stupidity gets you.

[Merlin]

9. You're joking, right? You don't really believe Bush is "wily" do you?

He couldn't think his way out of a paper bag. He's never had to focus in his life. What's going on now is exactly what went on in Reagan's admin. He's got two competing groups advising him, and he doesn't know his own mind, so he just sets them loose to see which one comes out on top. He just goes with the winner. The demagogues will defeat the enlightened every time when they're playing on a stage in front of an audience (the US public) of the easily duped.

[DinkyDem]

10. And that dismissive attitude

will lose us the next election just like it did the last one and the midterm.

Just stick your head back in the sand, it's nice and safe in there...

[Merlin]

13. Bullshit. It wasn't being dismissive that lost 2000. It was being weak.

Bush came across as a tough guy. Gore came across as an intellectual, afraid to stand up to those who attacked him.

But finally somebody in our party has come along with a backbone. And, lo and behold, backbone is contagious.

Bush isn't wily. He's a first class jerk. Rove isn't clever. He's a hack. Oh, they'll try the typical crap. And they'll spend lots and lots of money. And they'll demagogue us to death.

But we can outraise them in money. We can call them on their stupidity and arrogance. We can refuse--this time--to let them define us. And we can fight back against the demagoguery. We wil do all of these things. And we will win.

[Skittles]

19. oh please, Dinky

George W. Bush was my governor and he is as dumb as a box of hair. He doesn't think, he just does what his puppet handlers tell him to do.

[ze_dscherman]

12. It's not about debt relief

Not at all. Check out which countries Iraq is most indebted to: http://www.jubileeiraq.org/debt_today.htm

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are NOT on the list of countries excluded from contracts. And I have not heard of them forgiving Iraqi debts.

As well there's the matter of war reparations Iraq has to payCheck these here: http://www.jubileeiraq.org/reperations.htm

[begeegs]

14. Yep....Time for Rummy and Co to go..

It makes sense. I thought this as well.

Wolfowiz isn't an idiot, He wants his and his fellow PNAC cronies to have their wider war and they will get it more than likely. Unless Bush doesn't get re-election.

If the current Gallop polls are anything to go by, Bush is a shoo-in for re-election as long as he has his 10 minute photo-op.

[BlueEyedSon]

15. *kick*

gotta kick the Krug-man!

[dennis4868]

16. Hey Paul....

the motive for this so-called war was for profiteering and for nothing else. Take a look at the Defense Policy Board that recommended war in Iraq.....all those members have close ties to major companies that have been given contracts in Iraq. 60 Minutes did a piece on this very issue.......disgusting!

[Wetzelbill]

17. I wish it was only about that

it's much bigger. Pax Americana. Yes, about war profiteering, but not just in Iraq. We are talking about reforming and modernizing Islam through force. Fighting smaller wars in the vast theater of the Middle East -and I say Central Asia too- until we own it all by both military and economical means. These archaic theological elements in these countries have the gall to not want the U.S. and British based corporations to come in and liberalize and privatize the whole economies from water to electicity to whatever else they can get their grubby paws on. First Afghanistan. Then Iraq. Next up, well, I would argue for Iran if they could manage it. Just look at the "War On Terror" as a replacement for the Cold War. Through the "War On Terror" lens we plan to cherry pick every country's resources in an endgame for energy reserves and to force an armed peace upon the world. It's a play on Pax Romana the 300 year time in history in which the Roman empire enforced peace on the world by being a huge unchallengable empire. Simply put, these guys have delusions of grandeur, and are completely nuts. Living in an empire is not exactly the same as living in a liberal democracy. We know we're in trouble when they start limiting our constitutional rights and branding dissenters as unpatriotic.....oops, nevermind.

[teryang]

18. This sort of discordance from within the junta

...isn't orchestrated by any mastermind. Rather it is the Pentagon, defense contractor, energy industry alliance dictating foreign policy from the Pentagon regardless of what other agencies within the executive branch propose as possible policy initiatives. It is the total lack of leadership in the oval office that allows this to happen.

The network of policy gonks who represent these interests is lead by Chechny and Rumsfeldt and is in effective control of the American armed forces and American foreign policy. Lesser lights are dismantling the Republic at home. The rest of the crew are along for the ride trying to chip off a piece here and there for their corporate satraps. Dip stick doesn't have a clue. He never has, he's like the redneck who mouths off a few stupid right wing cliches and feels at one with the powerful. Say the right thing and everything will be hunky dory.

[jab105]

20. Wow...

I'm sending this one to my Dad...he's been nuts enough to argue with me that the Bush doctrine is great...ugh!