Newspost: US shuts down Iraqi GSM network

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:29 am

Supposedly the reconstruction plan DOES call for GSM, although a California politician drafted a bill to use CDMA, ostensibly because he believes that, since most European countries were against the Iraq war, and most GSM equipment is made in Europe (including Finland

), they shouldn't be able to profit from the Iraq invasion in this manner.

There is a US-based manufacturer of GSM equipment, Motorola, but it wouldn't have been proper to make a bill using only them.

Nemoxs · Post by **Nemoxs** » Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:31 am

Unamerican ways? I'm sure someone was ordering a large pizza with bread sticks on the side.

madmallard · Post by **madmallard** » Thu Jul 31, 2003 2:22 am

Business deal = building a network. Occupying forces = americans= deal goes to american company. Major rebuilding contracts have gone to US companies so why should I assume anything else in this, even though bidding will be open for everyone.

most american tele-coms can't afford any ventures like this right now, not without iraqi business coordination. There is a price/service war going on over here like crazy. All cellphone services are fighting it out.

and why should you assume anything else other than the conclusion you've drawn? Oh i dunno. . .because ITS NOT THE TRUTH, maybe?

btw, GSM does represent over 70% of mobile phone users and new users choose it nearly 80& of the time instead of other standards.

. . .in everywhere but America, Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia. . .

and you STILL didnt answer my question. Kthulu answered yours because -I- was too lazy to research the story and freely admit it because i knew there was hardly any merit to it, which is why all you got from me was a 'me too' post. But as long as i'm at it. . .

politician drafted a bill to use CDMA, ostensibly because he believes that, since most European countries were against the Iraq war,

an actually sensible arguement from california? Oh well, my gut would want more reactions like this, but at the heart, i know america has a short term memory, and most of the transgressions will be forgotten like who ran for president and lost two elections ago. . .just as it should be.

But in the short term, it makes sense that who can provide the resources widespread now and can be modular in the future, wether american business or iraqi or european or whatever should get the work done.

The iraqi/british company they(us) stopped will be able to make a bid for the groundwork along with other companies that will front for it. Regardless, it will creat jobs and infrastructure needed over there.

jonmartensen · Post by **jonmartensen** » Thu Jul 31, 2003 10:39 am

Meh, the guys that set up the cell phone network are being good ol' entreprenurial capitalists.

Al-Snan said Batelco hoped to apply for a license and use its current network in Baghdad as proof of what the company can do.

They sneak some of their stuff in and get it built up, so that when bidding for the contract does start, they will have some extra leverage over other companies. They probably knew they weren't supposed to, and also knew that there was going to be bidding for cell phone network production in the near future. It's the classic risk vs benifeit drastic action you see every now and then with capitalism. Sometimes it fails, and sometimes you can get great results.

Simpi · Post by **Simpi** » Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:28 am

sixstop wrote:

btw, GSM does represent over 70% of mobile phone users and new users choose it nearly 80& of the time instead of other standards

. . .in everywhere but America, Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia. . . .
I did a bit of cheking and there are GSM networks in Australia, Russia (expect in Siberia and other very remote areas such as Petropavlosk), Canada & America. Only place where you cannot use it, is Japan, which is no surprise to me (being forced to use my phone as a phone memo when I visit there). Here is a nice map provided by a finnish company if you want to take a look, it's in finnish though: http://mobileplaza.sonera.fi/in/kuuluvu ... index.html

But in the short term, it makes sense that who can provide the resources widespread now and can be modular in the future, wether american business or iraqi or european or whatever should get the work done.

The iraqi/british company they(us) stopped will be able to make a bid for the groundwork along with other companies that will front for it. Regardless, it will creat jobs and infrastructure needed over there.

Hey, we agree on something. As I said earlier, it really serves no purpose to shut down a working network so nobody can use their phones during the time bidding & negotiations are done. (if Batelco loses, i'm sure they could receive some compensation). I can admit it's less important who actually rebuilds it as working phone network is a definite improvement for the people of Iraq.