Setting a Withdrawal Date

The US Army has announced that it will end its exclusive contract with Halliburton for logisitics services overseas. That's the contract under which Halliburton

"...had exclusive rights to provide the military with a wide range of work that included keeping soldiers around the world fed, sheltered and in communication with friends and family back home. Government audits turned up more than $1 billion in questionable costs. Whistle-blowers told how the company charged $45 per case of soda, double-billed on meals and allowed troops to bathe in contaminated water."

The War Tapes has several scenes depicting Halliburton's service: the extra charge for a styrofoam plate to cover food taken from the mess hall and third country nationals driving supply trucks without windshields.

More interesting, though, the same article notes that the US will not fund additional reconstruction contracts in Iraq after September 30, 2006. The administration made this announcement earler this year but today's article, coming not long after the Senate's refusal to set a date to withdraw American troops, reminds me that for all BushCheney's heated rhetoric against any kind of "cut and run", he is doing just that with regard to America's obligations to rebuild Iraq.

Reconstructing Iraq would go a long way to alleviating the political crises in that country. Demonstrating American competence and improved living conditions would have lessened the appeal of the insurgency. Conversely, the presence of a foreign occupier has fueled the insurgency. Pulling the plug on reconstruction while continuing military operations seems to me to be completely backward.

But that's been pretty much the policy since before Day One.