[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Well I don't know what he's saying, but do you honestly not see at least the potential or even appearance of "coercion" on this?

1. Country A invades Country B, destroys the infrastructure, takes over.
2. Country A starts selling Country B replacement infrastructure.

It's not all that crazy an idea, is it? The optics are not exactly perfect.

That being said, Iraq obviously needs a modern transportation system and they have to get the planes from somewhere and Boeing is (I assume) the biggest maker of the planes, so it seems like a pretty natural fit.

But, if I was an Iraqi citizen without either electricity or clean water I might not think so. Still though, they'll never get anywhere if people can't travel into or out of the country.

I can see why conspiracy minded people would jump to that conclusion.
Even when there are a few things that lend this to being a lot less sketcy than some deals. Things such as a Canadian company being involved, the fact that this is a legitimate necessity for the rebuilding of a healthy economy, and the fact that the majority of the damage to this infrastrucure was done before the current invasion.

That all aside, I'm more interesed in HHH's use of quotes in the thread title.
Does he really beleive there was coersion, was he just trying to be cool, or was there some other reason.