> A common misconception.
Doesn't seem to be a misconception on any of the sites that you ref'd. There just seems to be agreement that everyone sees a great (if unspecific) opportunity to feed at the trough.
from the CBOs intro ...
> According to various estimates, the cost of reconstructing Iraq after
> the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime could range from $50 billion
> to $100 billion. As that range indicates, there is considerable
> uncertainty about the amount of funding that might be necessary to
> rebuild the country. Debate also continues about how much
> international assistance Iraq will need, whether that aid should come
> as grants or loans, what share the United States should contribute,
> and how much reconstruction Iraq can pay for from its own future
> revenue sources, principally oil.
from the NK article on The Nation site ...
> By now there have been dozens of similar trade shows on the business
> opportunities created by Iraq's decimation, held in hotel ballrooms
> from London to Amman. By all accounts, the early conferences throbbed
> with the sort of cash-drunk euphoria not seen since the heady days
> before the dot-coms crashed. But it soon becomes apparent that
> something is not right at ReBuilding Iraq 2. Sure, the organizers do
> the requisite gushing about how "nonmilitary rebuilding costs could
> near $500 billion" and that this is "the largest government
> reconstruction effort since Americans helped to rebuild Germany and
> Japan after the Second World War."
Martin