Slashdot Mirror
CDMA vs. GSM in Post-war Iraq
An anonymous reader submits: "Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) is pressing congress to favor CDMA over GSM for mobile phone service in U.S.-funded reconstruction plans. One reason for pushing this is that a CDMA system would benefit American companies, such as California-based Qualcomm, while GSM would favor European companies. Currently, GSM is the most widely used mobile standard in surrounding countries."
I think for the benefit of the Iraq people it would be best to either, us the existing standard and what the surrounding countries use. But if they want some of the benefits of the CSMA as they say in the article, they should at lest do a dual implantation of it. Why? Well so the Iraq people can chose what standard they want, the one they don't go for will by default die away, I am sure they probably will not go for CDMA since it would not be useful outside for the boarders of Iraq. Can CDMA and GSM phones exist in the same area? That is the big question that could stand in the way of my idea. But this is all thinking and we should be consternating more on the war that is going on now then rebuilding, yes we also have to look at humanitarian aid now, but that is still different from rebuilding.
Before they're hatched. Can I be on the occupied Iraq new currency designing committee? More importantly, will occupied Iraq choose Direct TV or Dish Network as its standard?
I can tell this esteemed Rep. has his priorities straight.
I really hope this lays to rest any argument about the US going there to "save the civilians from Saddam's evil."
Come on people, war hasn't even finished, and all they can think about is US cellphone company's benefits? what about FOOD, WATER, MEDICINE?
sheesh...
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Seriously folks, in percentage of population, the US Military has already killed more Iraqi civilians than 9/11 killed Americans. Let's not worry about what cell phones the Iraqis will use after we win, and worry instead about whether or not it's possible for us to win.
Peace. As salaam alaikum.
I'd just like to remind you that the U.S is NOT the boss of the world, for lack of a better phrase.
Any country should be able to FREELY make their decision on participating in a conflict, and not be expected to march to Start Spangled Banner.
You may label the Frech as, 'Surrender monkeys', but maybe the U.S could be labelled as a, 'Government Sanctioned Terrorist Unit'
As an Australian, I support our troops, but that does not mean I support the actions of our Government.
Generally speaking, it would probably make the most sense to allow something resembling competition. Barring that, I would vote for GSM. It has nothing to do with which is a better standard. The point is, the middle east is a relatively small region. Cell-phone interoperability would be a huge boon -- so it would be great if the whole region used one standard. Iraq is about the size of a mid-sized state. Imagine if you couldn't use your New York cell phone in Connecticut because of standards problems.
Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
I THINK NOT.
This is just another example of politics being influenced by corporate desires and lobbying.
-davidu
# Hack the planet, it's important.
I would feel much better if the US made the commitment to not have any economic interest in Iraq. There should be no US based company getting contracts for oil. Same goes for cell phone standards. KEEP YOUR GREEDY LITTLE HANDS OFF OF IRAQ! We are going to war with Iraq for the freedom of the people, not the plunder. Right?
Here's a hint: Just because the President says something, DOESN'T MEAN IT'S TRUE!
The proof is in the pudding, and right now I see too many "liberated Iraqis" without food, water and who are getting sicker every day.
Why is it that we spend drop a $100-million dollars fucking cruise missles on a single point in Iraq in the space of 15 minutes, but we can't ship the fucking food fast enough.
WHO PLANNED THIS FUCKING CIRCUS???
So you go around the mines, land in a Kuwait harbor, and DRIVE the food up to Iraq.
Somehow we can get a hundred thousand soldiers and tanks and guns and bombs into Iraq, but we can't ship some food.
It's about the oil. Those poor Iraqi's can starve to death as far as our president is concerned...
No one ever died from a cold, but a cure for the common cold would be far more lucrative than a cure for cancer by the sheer fact that people get colds more often than they get cancer. But if you're actually interested in saving people's lives, we really should pursue the cure for cancer instead of the cure for the common cold. In the same vein, I think making sure people get food and water is a hell of a lot more important than determining what their cel phone standard is going to be.
In summary, I don't think dead people or people dying of starvation and thirst really need cel phones. And I don't think people with terminal cancer will feel all that much better even if you manage to stop their nose from running.
Yes, bombs are going off all over Iraq now. BUT that is where the similarity to 9/11 ends.
On 9/11, there were no bombs, just commercial jets used as missiles. The invasion of Iraq and the attacks on 9/11 are not similar at all, even from the civilian perspective.
9/11 was a secret attack inflicted by a rogue group mainly to cause maximum deaths of civilians. (I'm not including the Pentagon attack because that was a valid military target)
Our invasion of Iraq is a pre-planned, well-announced attack on the regime running Iraq (and its figurehead, Saddam) by national military forces against military targets. The coalition forces are not purposely targetting civilians, however, as war is ugly, collateral deaths are inevitable. I truly believe the coalition forces are doing everything possible to avoid killing civilians. The Iraqi regime has gone out of their way to put its own citizens in harms way by embedding SAMs (surface-to-air missiles) in residential neighborhoods, even hiding a tank inside a hospital (which is against the internationally accepted rules of warfare; the Geneva Convention, which Iraq is a signatory to).
The Iraqi are also launching a moderately successful political game based on complete lies. Seems thats the regular mode of business for them. How about those chemical weapons they said they don't have but have warned us they will use if we try to take over Baghdad? Or the Iraqi POWs telling debriefers that their superiors told them to fight hard because the Americans would inject poison in their veins if they were caught.
So simply comparing numbers based on population size has no merit unless you also look at the overall situational factors, including history.
- mobster1975!
Well, of course a US congressman would choose something other than GSM...to benefit US companies and their regime that contols them...or is it vice-versa? Why do you think the we invaded Iraq to begin with? It was not to liberate anything, but to serve a select few in the US hierarchy. Go murder a bunch of folks we have no business telling what and how to live their lives, do this based on fear and misinformation, lie to the US public, and then have the regime here in the US sell stuff to the new regime in Iraq that is not like anything used in surrounding countries, geesh...it makes total sense huh? Of course...all for the benfit of the Bushies and their crew, and those ignorant US citizens that buy into it all. What fools...and what crap. I just figure that by the time the US gets through there will not be any civilians left to use phones anyway.
So because Germany had a bad tyrant ruler, and did some bad things, which they've been trying to atone for since (and the people that actually did these things are mostly dead as well), the whole of Europe is doesn't deserve respect?
Does that include your hero Dubya's pal Blair?
That's it america... keep alienating your allies. You don't need anyone. The universe revolves around you.
--
"The Greatest Nation in the World" can't even feed it's poor.
If I can't smoke and swear I'm fucked.
GSM is an aging standard. Code division multiplexing is the way of the future, and the engineers know this. It offers better reception, better capacity, and makes for a much better 3G infrastructure with mixed high-speed data/voice traffic.
China is rolling out a WCDMA network, folks. Qualcomm isn't necessarily the flagbearer for the technology or the platform; it's no longer a US-only phenomenon.
GSM will be phased out over the next decade, cohabitating with WCDMA, as peoples' handsets are replaced by shiny new models with ridiculous multimedia features they won't use for years. Check the market for dual-band WCDMA/GSM mobile phones and notice how many of the major manufacturers are producing them.
Regretably, none of that matters to our friend, Mr. Issa. He and his backers are interested solely in making a quick buck. It's obvious to me that Iraq would be better served by allowing a privatized Iraq Telecom corporation to arise from the ashes of the old state-run telecom. Iraq Telecom should make its own decision about what kind of cellular technology to deploy, perhaps with the help of a US bank loan. That would be a minor boon for the US and a blissful telecommunications future for Iraq.
But, honestly...what'd you expect, from a politician?
What about interest in Halliburton owned by family members, golfing buddies and other fellow back-scratchers?
What neither quote makes clear is that Cheney didn't think that maintaining stock options was a conflict of interest - he said words to this effect in public. It was only after a relatively large hoohaw in the press that he finally acquiesced. It is doubtful that he has changed his mind, divestiture was purely a face-saving political move. Given that, you can be pretty sure he (or rather his accountants) will have worked every angle and loophole to indirectly keep him "on the payroll" with Haliburton and who knows how many other companies.
For another example of this kind of mindset, look at Richard Perle who, after a couple of weeks of denial-tactics finally became too much of a liability, just like the stock options, to keep around. This guy, former Bush Sr top-dog and until today a Bush Jr top-dog too, was given $700K to convince the DoD that it would be ok for Global Crossing to self off to the Chinese. Why? Because his official top-dog title was "Chairman of the Defense Policy Board," an advisory panel to the Pentagon - making close to, if not the civilian with the most influence over the DoD. Not to mention the even larger issue of his ties to arab-owned corporations. Conflict of interest? Not in any dictionary of his.
This crony capitalism mindset is endemic in the current administration and as far as I am concerned is 100x more of a moral defect than boffing an intern or two, or even ten. Because instead of just screwing a few people, it screws most of the country for the benefit of just a few people. These guys (and democrats too, but they at least know enough to be embarrassed about it) have taken the term, "spoils system" to a whole new level.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
God, what a perfect representation of what is important to the bush administration. I thought Slashdot may actually avoid this type of propaganda called "reporting."
Women and children are being killed. Our friends, neighbors, brothers and sisters are killing them/being killed, and what is the US media reporting? What do we hear about?
Who makes the bucks from war.
Never mind that has already taken a heavy toll on any US legitimacy (the founding principles of the nation itself are threatened to be as illegitimate as its current "president"). Never mind that it's at a cost of billions in tax dollars (that our children, and their children will be paying for). Never mind that it will cost thousands of lives before it is finished (and possibly hundreds of thousands of lives as the ranks of Al Qaeda grow). Never mind that it's barely even begun!
Have you no decency? If you want to report on Iraq, report on something legitimate. Report on what's happening rather than the propaganda puff-pieces.
Report on the 28 year old plumber who drowned after being ordered to cross a canal in full battle dress. Or the 20 year old lifeguard who drowned trying to save him.
Report on the seven year old girl lying in a pool of her own blood, her intestines laying beside her.
Report on the fact that the people of Iraq don't want to be "liberated." And that our friends and families will be the ones to pay the highest price of all because of the dreadful mismanagement and miscalculation of the bush administration.
Fuck rebuilding. Fuck Saddam. There's an unjust war being wrought upon the innocent civilians of Iraq, as well as the innocent soldiers of the United States. This is not their war, this is the war of a few greedy people who don't even legitimately hold the positions they currently abuse.
The bush administration has shown time and again that it has no care for legitimacy, or truth. From the moment the first Florida recount started, they have shown that they care only for protecting their own interests. They have never had the interests of the US in mind. They have never cared about those men and women who are suffering and dying right now.
With a smug smile they say, "We will liberate you from your God, your money, and your dignity."
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us
Ah, yes, there's the funny thing. "We're not in it for the oil, see, because this war is costing so much, the profit that will be made from Iraqi oil is very small compared to not going to war and just buying the oil". But you have to consider that the government is paying for the war. The government gets his money through taxes, big corps, small corps, inviduals, they all pay the taxes. Government money is taxpayers money. It's not like Bush is spending for the war from his pocket. It's not his money.
So, the whole American people is paying for this war. Who will benefit? To an extent, the whole american people, from a revitalised economy. Whether that'll balance the cost of the war we shall see. But a few corporations will get a FUCKLOAD of money from this. They'll have invested a part of their taxes - which they would have paid anyway - and some money in politics and will get loads and loads of money. Their balance is on the plus side. A lot. Mucho money they're getting,and the best part is that THEY reap in the benefits, but the whole population financed the whole thing.
And really, Bush is only there for a few years. Taxpayer's money isn't his money. But - is Bush by any chance into the Oil business? Yes? And tell me, is there a chance that with all that oil money that will be moving around after Iraq has been conquered, is there a chance some of that money *might* find its way into his pockets? There IS?!? Well, shit, there I was thinking he was doing it all cuz he's such a nice guy, y'know.
Of course, it's not just Bush. There are lots of people who will benefit from this war - and probably not just on the Republican side. What do you think, that the White House is full of people who have the American people's best interest at heart? Shit man, you're dreaming. It takes a lot of money to get into the White House. And the people who have enough money to play politician usually didn't come into all this money by giving it away - they invested, they invest all the time, and politics is just another investment.
Karma: Could be worse (could be raining)
There already is a GSM network in Iraq - KurdTel. CDMA would be utterly insane; GSM is the world standard; in use on every contient and nearly every country. CDMA is only in a handful of countries, and you cannot travel with a CDMA phone.
Let me ask you a question, though. This war, including the postwar reconstruction, is probably going to cost us around 200 billion dollars, and that doesn't count the cost of the munitions we're using. We've used over a billion and a half dollars' worth of cruise missiles alone so far, and the war's only a week old. Two hundred billion dollars plus would have bought us practically all the Iraqi oil we could have hauled off. Why didn't we just buy it, and save everybody a lot of time, money, and trouble?
It's not quite that simple.
Most of the money that's spent on the war is actually spent paying US companies for products and services (those cruise missiles were actually bought from someone) + salaries for servicemen.
That money is thus transfered from the US government to other sectors of the US economy.
From the point of view of the global US economy, most of the money spent on the war stays in the US.
Now, if we assume that after the reconstruction the entities that will benefict the most from the new status quo in Iraq will be US oil companies, then what this war ammounts to is:
- Having the US government spend taxpayer's money in the Defense industry to subsidize the US oil industry.
-------------
Please note that i'm only touching the economical side here. There's the whole human side (lives lost in both sides, the future of the surviving Iraqui people); political side (Bush's approval rates); and geopolitical side (will the rest of the world still trust the US?).
Who is getting screwed? Could you be less clued in to the world around you? I mean, come-the-fuck-on, "red"? "Red?" Are you serious? This isn't the 1950's. Shit man! It isn't even the 20th fucking century anymore. What a fucking anachronism you are.
The whole damn country is getting screwed because our piss-poor foreign policy is breeding more terrorists. Fucking idiots that think Al Capone is a role model (I'm sure you can use the net to find Rumsfield with his favorite quote) and that democracy and freedom have its place the world, as long as it doesn't get in the way of US business interests.
It is all about power being used to garner more power with no more thought given to long-term consequences than is required to tell the big lie enough times to dupe the stuck-in-the-20th century red-scare sheeple like yourself into passively going along. Hell, more terrorists might even be the desired result because with the USSR gone we need a new dark and sinister, baby-eating enemy to rally against and distract the population from the declining standard of living and how increasingly fascist the US government is behaving.
Forcing CDMA down the throats of a literally captive market when the next nearest CDMA country is at least 1,000 miles away, if not across the atlantic DOES NOT MAKE THE USA ANY FRIENDS IN THE WORLD. And if you think this utterly transparent attempt by qualcomm to get a little of that corporate welfare is typical, you're wrong - they were just so clumsy they got caught out by an otherwise lazy reporter.
The real sharks don't have to get congress to vote on their welfare directly, it gets submitted in committee, behind closed doors or gets dealt with at the far more easy to obscure procurement stage rather than the legislative level.
Oh yeah, almost forgot - you know why the internet ain't much good at digging up the hidden web of finacial connections? Same reason it is just as hard in meatspace - any individual or organization that owns less than 5% of a company has NO requirement to report that holding to the SEC or any other public agency. None, zip, nada, zilch. The only way that kind of web gets found is if a good-old-boys brokerage like Merril-Lynch slips-up big time and is unable to intimidate/bribe the right people to forget all about it. Doesn't happen too often.
... people are dying in Iraq. Soldiers and Civilians. The latter die of hunger, precision bombs lack of water, stray bullets and other such things.
So here comes a US senator whose only concern is what mobile phone system one should install when it's all over. Quite frankly, this is so cynical. Not only against the iraq people but also against US soldiers. As a soldier, I'd really like to get the message: 'Go soldier, risk your life, so we can open up some market for mobile phones.'
If some European politician made any such proposal or in fact any attempt to "secure a market" at this point in time he'd be thrown out of office.
That is what makes people turn away from the US. The lack of tactfullness. Double standards (Yes, we respect the Geneva Convention - whenever it is useful to us). Turning one or two blind eyes (Who gave Saddam weapons of mass destruction when he was the bulwark against Iran?). The will to break international law whenever it serves the purpose.
The rest of the world may be afraid of the US. But there is no respect.
"Terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich. I can't see any difference between them."
Sir Peter Ustinov, UNICEF
DI Robert Lichtenberger effad@gmx.at
All this talk about electronical gadgets... millions of people in Iraq suffer every damn day because there is no water or too less water or only dirty water and not enough food.
And the US of A can only talk about cellphones. I don't know but then you really are out of touch with reality. Give the iraqi people food and water and let them rebuild basic infrastructure first. This will cost a few years. After that the debates about the unnecessary gadgets can begin.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
With the US "rebuilding the iraqi infrastructure", and effectively stating monopoly rights or the entire country despite their claims, this is another example of unilateral american thinking. I am sorry to be biased about you guys, but time after time you as a people prove me right.
1. As for GSM vs. CDMA, no self respecting idiot would bring a CDMA phone to Europe, so only self serving people would choose CDMA over GSM.
2. GSM may or may not be a better channel today, but GSM is the upgrade path to GPRS and UMTS, not CDMA.
3. Having America as the monopoly, will other providers enter the country, and who soon after the reconstruction? In a fair playing field CDMA would die out very fast in Iraq. Having the US dictate a (wrong, selfserving) decision for CDMA would cause nobody but downturned American companies grief.
Bye!
GSM was pushed through as a standard by the UK (under the guise of ETSI). I think we've earned the right to poke our nose in :-P
GSM is standard in every country but the USA. I can SMS anyone anywhere in the world without any problem. GPRS can be tacked on at little cost to provide 2.5G services. The correct choice is clear. However, the US seems particularly vulnerable to lobby groups.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
GSM? WHICH GSM? Africa, US or European frequency? GSM not as universal as most think.
It's very universal. Changing frequency doesn't mean having to change chipset design, infrastructure, etc.
CDMA is head and shoulders above - look at where the highspeed wireless is going - CDMA, not GSM.
They have different roots. GSM was specifically designed for voice data.
Plus CDMA is more efficient in its bandwidth usage than GSM. Remember GSM is still TDMA at its roots. So CDMA has better spectral efficiency.
TDMA vs CDMA was examined in depth in deciding the GSM standard. The committee decided that the TDMA system was superior (easier to build more accurate and reliable base stations was one of the factors IIRC).
Plus you should take into account the terrain and desnity - Iraq probably is not all that population dense outside of Baghdad and Basra. CDMA really comes into its element when you are out in the countryside with few sites covering large expanses of land. Under these conditions CDMA provides extremely stable audio with few frame errors to mess things up. This is because Channel Pollution is almost non-existent in these situations. Under similar conditions TDMA suffers too readily from interference and it will often blank the audio. Many people who use CDMA systems in sparsely populated areas have given this technology extremely high marks.
GSM is a compromise, which allows it to work well under both conditions. It had to satisfy all the members of ETSI, including Switzerland (sparse, all mountains) and Holland (totally flat, with large cities).
So despite the obvious political motivations behind this decision, technologically speaking, it s actually a good decision to favor CDMA.
It's not, because you restrict the technology (handsets, base stations, etc) to a couple of US companies. With GSM you can invite tenders from every company in the world, with an already mature market providing a lot of CHOICE for both handsets and infrastructure.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
Don't you love half-truths when you see 'em? GSM is not only the most widely used standard "in surrounding countries", it's the most widely used standard, period.
GSM: 330 million world wide users
CDMA: 67 million world wide users
But, it seems more important to purchase national patriotic technology than good technology. (That must be why Americans still use Windows. After all, Linux originates in Europe and must so be inferior, by definition. ;)
Let's buy steel from US companies, even if it's more expensive because they neglected to modernize their factories (in Europe, just about everything was rebuilt after WW2 - and the debts for foreign help, also from the US, have long since been paid. It was a very painful process, but it paid off). And because foreign steel is now cheaper and better, phone George to introduce some nice import taxes.
Forget that the white "paint" which is used for most national buildings (eg. white house) is made in Germany. Forget that most of the cars that run the US are produced in Germany or by German companies. (BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, anyone?). Forget that under the hood of most cars made in the US you see European labels like Bosch, Siemens, Philips, etc.
While you're at it, ban not only french fries, french toast, and french kissing, but also french red wine (which might be considered a merciful fate for the wine, considering that Americans mix it with Coke!). And all that just for the fact that - understandably - most of Europe has a problem with war, for any reason whatsoever. It's even in the German constitution: Germany is not allowed to participate in non-defensive warfare. The constitution which was written by the US after WW2.
I'm waiting for the USA to ban Hamburgers, which originate from Hamburg (the 'ham' story is a myth!), Franfurters, Schnitzel, Mortadella, etc.
I remember a quote from a demonstrant in the US: "If we had invested the money now spent in war in proper education soon enough, the war wouldn't even have started."
Right.
Home Page
That is all true, but still we use VHS instead of
Betamax or Video2000, and we use Windows instead of Unix.
Morale: the better technology doesn't necessarily win. In fact, it often loses because the company rolling out the inferior technology somehow makes it good on better marketing or better cooperation with other companies and governments.
GSM may be an an abbreviation for French words, but GSM is a global standard originally designed by a group of European companies and organisations. Loads of countries were involved, not just France.
This argument that French products shouldn't be used is racist. I know Americans like their country, but this is racism and xenephobia on a huge scale. Shame on you all.
Finally, who gave the USA permission to build this stuff? Privatising the services in Iraq doesn't benefit them, and definately isn't democracy - it's THEFT. The services and infrastructure belongs to Iraq and after they have a democratic elected government the choice of how to run public services belongs to them.
Please note that I am not against Americans in any way, but your government really pisses me off.
A latent existence
and apparently you havent noticed the american government doesnt give a shit about iraqi people, their just in for the money.
because if they did give a shit, they would realize that GSM is better for them, because every other nation around them uses it!!!.
but no, they'll force them (because thats what the US government is used to do) to use CDMA in the interest of a couple of greedy corporations.
and btw, who the fuck is the US congress to decide which mobile phone service protocols is the iraqi people going to use ???
operation iraqi freedom indeed...
They made a wasteland and called it peace.
Tacitus, Roman historian. - 1st century AD
If the French hadn't helpt out your puny revolution, US would still be a British colony.
Dude, that was two hundred years ago. Get over it.
The liberation of Old Europe was two generations ago and we *are* currently getting over it thanks to the current US administration.
He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
The "upgrade path" of GSM is... CDMA. Specifically, TD-CDMA and W-CDMA.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
and now im getting sick of you.
didnt you read the post ? i already made my point by noting that if the US congressmen were really thinking about iraqi peoples future they would have chosen GSM over CDMA, but instead they take their decisions based on profit.
so yes, the american government (or 1/3 of it as you naively put it) is in for the money.
look, if you cant see that the actions of your government through history have nothing to do with "liberation" and everything to do with profiting then you must be really blind.
or really patriotic (orwellian style).
i come from south america and ive seen lots of this things happening. and i know from experience what im talking about. whenever the US government gets into "helping out" some south american country it means fucking the people there and getting away with as much as they can in their wallets
of course its not like they get into that countries national reserve and start filling their pockets... its more like setting up a friendly "representative democracy" - or if that fails, a "moderately repressive regime" - and tell them to start signing out contracts for US corporations to start exploiting its oil, gold, silver, etc. etc.
and that of course with very low to none at all taxes.
here is a list if you care to see of _some_ of the things US government has done "in the name of freedom".
yeah, in the name of their freedom to profit
They made a wasteland and called it peace.
Tacitus, Roman historian. - 1st century AD
Personally, I don't give a rats ass either way, it's fucking phones for Christ's sake. I say build whatever would be best for the Iraqi people, screw everything else, because it's the right thing to do. But assholes from both sides of the pond will lobby for what they personally want.
Furthermore, unilateral my ass! America + Great Britain + 40 other countries != unilateral. I could go on and criticize you Europeans as a whole, but I won't stoop down to your level.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
There's an implicit belief behind most of the anti-American, anti-war comments here that only pure motives are good - that if you have more than one motivation for an action, and some of those motivations are of economic benefit to you, then the entire action is tainted.
... and each year after that he had stayed in power. He has worked to acquire vicious weapons in the past, and has the wealth to buy nukes from elsewhere (impoverished North Korea, for example). If he were to plant a few of those nukes in US cities, then set off one as an example while, say, invading Saudi Arabia, would we be willing to sacrifice more cities to stop him? Or do you think he's too nice a guy to enter into such a scenario?
But consider what's at play here: 9/11 demonstrated that American cities are vulnerable to catastrophic attack by terrorists. At that point it was prudent to ask what nations are in the position of being (1) run by sociopaths with a record of mass killings which (2) have or can afford to acquire catastrophic weapons and (3) are in ideological or religious proximity to those with demonstrated terrorist abilities. The whole claim of the Bush administration is that it is legitimate self-defense to remove such threats to our cities.
Saddam is a sociopath who has killed many hundreds of thousands. It is extremely unlikely this war will kill more Iraqis than Saddam's own forces would have killed this year anyway
Given the overwhelming historical logic that requires that we act against him now - not in a couple of years after he's got things set up to his best advantage - is there something evil about our being concerned that in return for the vast cost of this action to us in lives and treasure that we receive some small economic opportunities afterwards? If the US finances a new phone system after the war, should we do it to French specs? This level of "purity" would be absurd, IMHO.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
A whole new approach to getting market share in foreign countries: destroy the infrastructure (on the taxpayers dime)and then rebuild it, without any worries about competitive building or conflicts of interest. No complaints about congressional pork barrel politics, because they abdicated their responsibility and handed it over to the CEO of America. No dang disclosure to shareholders, hell Cheney and Rumsfeld don't even have to disclose their dirty little secrets from Nixon-Reagan days, because 30 years isn't long enough to figure out whats protected under "national security".
... that this Congressman is from San Diego, the home of Qualcomm. He is doing his job, fighting for his constituency, just like I'm sure the senators and represenatives from the home states and jurisdictions for Lucent and Motorola will be saying much the same things.
BTW: MOT and LU both make GSM equipment, so the argument that GSM = EU manufacturers is completely invalid. This congressman is just saying that because his constituent (Qualcomm) only makes CDMA stuff.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
The only thing that will save the Americans here is the latest mobile phones are small enough to fit when the Iraqis give them back. Saddam Hussein is not a nice person, and cleaning out his political machine is a good idea. Replacing it with a worse one is not, because we will need to clean out the replacement, also. Governing any country in the Middle East ourselves is guaranteed disaster. Muslims do not take kindly or gently to infidels telling them how they will live and behave. We have opened a can of poisonous worms. These people do not and will not live by our rules, customs, or mores. Any attempt to force our system on them is doomed. The best we can hope for is modest reform and a government that is not openly hostile. So far, we have Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey as allies and examples. With friends like this, we do not need another enemy.
The sound of the vultures starting to circle a little lower...
If the US didn't care at all, I would imagine that they would bomb all of Iraq to utter destruction kill every citizen they saw and only secure the oil wells and create military compounds around them. That would be easiest, cheapest, and the greatest return on the investment.
Please rememeber this part of your post 1-2 years from now. In Afganistan, the U.S. installed government only controls the capital. The rest of the country has fallen in to civil war. Fortunately Iraq has a very lucrative black substance peppering its land, so we can expect a bit more stability there. But the same priorities.
This forcing of a cellular standard that the rest of the region doesn't use demonstrates our concern about the Iraqi people. What do you say about a government that forces an impovrished people to buy 2 cellphones if they want to travel outside of iraq so that U.S. companies can make more money?
Do me a favor and double it!