It's on 102 acres, but most of it is still within rocket range of the current red zone.
2006-12-28 07:01:12 · 10 answers · asked by Snowshoe 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
As the building was started, the assumption was that a "tame" or "puppet" government would be established in Iraq, and a permanent American administrative presence could be put in place. Had that money been spent on additional security, and facilities for the production of clean water and electricity, things might have been somewhat different.
Boondoggles of this sort are so wide-spread in Iraq that one is left to wonder if they weren't the intention, rather than an unfortunate side-effect, of the invasion. Were this complex to proceed to completion, it would simply be testimony to a staggering culture of corruption, and an equally impressive disconnect from reality.
2006-12-28 07:18:32 · answer #1 · answered by gooselane 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
the dimensions of an embassy has no longer something to do what so ever with occupying. Iraq is a familiar hotbed and probability is, anyplace there's a conflict, that embassy could have lots greater responsibilities, consequently increasing the decide on for individuals, increasing the decide on for area. See the way all of it works out?
2016-10-28 13:42:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ok, you say lavish, not quite understanding, in comparisson of other embassy's across the world, is this "embassy" to be, pocket money spent, bigger, better, in more control of the region, Embassy?, sry, my answer would be answer my question first, then I'll be able to give you an educated guess of whether the U.S. should continue with building of embassy
2006-12-28 07:14:11 · answer #3 · answered by whispergently0204 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sure why not? Its not like the money could be better spent on anything else after all.
2006-12-28 07:09:08 · answer #4 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
yes its a sign to the Iraqi people. it shows them and the world that we can do anything and go anywhere. once the country settles down all will be happy. the changes are for the better.
2006-12-28 07:05:15 · answer #5 · answered by strike_eagle29 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Heck yeah! Our tax dollars at work, middle class (or what's left of the middle class) America!
2006-12-28 07:03:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
SURE! Then the Iraqii's can blow it up and we can all bit*ch about how it was a waste of taxpayers money. Isn't that what America does best?
2006-12-28 07:04:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
It'll be a new palace for their future dictator.
2006-12-28 07:03:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
THEY WILL NEED SOMETHING FOR HALIBURTON TO REBUILD OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN
2006-12-28 07:08:32 · answer #9 · answered by Unfrozen Caveman 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Y E S!!
2006-12-28 07:20:56 · answer #10 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋