Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

CDMA vs. GSM in Post-war Iraq

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the nothing-like-a-free-market dept.

Wireless Networking 1439

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."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well, too bad for them (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612385)

Those cheese eating surrender monkeys in France are going to lose out. They won't even say which side they want to win the war, why should they have any say in our post-war rebuilding plans?

Re:Well, too bad for them (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612450)

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.

Re:Well, too bad for them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612531)

I'd just like to remind you that, all arguments to the contrary aside, the U.S. is very much the boss of the world. Fortunately for all, the world has never had a more benevolent boss.

Yode says (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612522)

Corporate Terrorists you are

Who the hell is Yode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612545)

Is that some foreign knock-off the American made Yoda?

At least the French are being mature about it (1)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612554)

"We are at a very serious moment dealing with very serious issues and we are not focusing on the name you give to potatoes."
--Nathalie Loisau, French embassy spokeswoman.

Re:Well, too bad for them (0, Redundant)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612558)

Mmmm, cheese.

Um, I think that it's obvious the French chose a side in the war, as Bush has said oftentimes in the past, "If you ain't with us, yore against us" (note cheesy imitation of texan accent here) So the french and the germans and the chinese and the russians and the canadians and the .... almost every other major nation the world are all TERRORISTS!!! KILL THEM ALLLLL!!!!!

*ahem* Sorry that was the caeser streak coming through.

My thoughts (3, Insightful)

mpost4 (115369) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612387)

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.

Re:My thoughts (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612451)

Umm

This is about the US of A.

They'll use tin cans and string in Iraq for all anyone in congress cares. But at least they neednt worry about being executed for what they say.

Re:My thoughts (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612574)

Not sure what your comment means.

This is about a Republican congress-person doing what Republican congress-people do best: fucking over the people (in this case of another country) in the favor of his corporate backers.

Well, the U.S.-ians are already bombing the shit out of them and ruining what little infrastructure their country has. Why not fuck them over some more?

CDMA rocks! (5, Interesting)

nebbian (564148) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612455)

I've had a CDMA phone for over two years now, and love it to death! There are a number of benefits, including longer range, lower amounts of microwaves hitting your skull, and so on.

GSM phones can exist in the same area as CDMA, I know this for a fact because all my friends have GSM...

What will probably happen is that the standard competitive environment will emerge anyway -- company A puts up GSM towers, company B puts up CDMA towers, and both try to convince the public that their system is better. Some people buy one system, some buy the other, based on what's important to that individual. This is, in my opinion, a much better system than relying on one technology -- and it's a system that will emerge without any form of legislation. Why can't political leaders just keep their noses out of it? :-)

Re:CDMA rocks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612525)

Obviously there have been a few too many microwaves hitting your skull, moron.

The modulation and encoding scheme have nothing to do with the band used, which is allocated to comply with locale specific requirements.

Re:My thoughts (1)

plalonde2 (527372) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612482)

What? Give the conquered people a choice? Oh no, I'm certain Uncle Sam knows what is best for the people of Iraq.

Seriously, GSM phones are the local standard, and any attempt by the Americans to impose CSMA is nothing short than continued imperialism.

To hell with karma.

Re:My thoughts (4, Interesting)

Twirlip of the Mists (615030) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612562)

Seriously, GSM phones are the local standard, and any attempt by the Americans to impose CSMA is nothing short than continued imperialism.

Oh, come off the high horse for just a minute and think rationally.

Here's a country with no effective mobile phone system. It needs a new one, and one's going to be put in place over the next few years. If you're a mobile phone company executive who is not slavering over this opportunity, you're not doing your job.

The Congressman's proposal is a perfectly valid one: here's an opportunity that has arisen (more accurately, that will arise) as a result of the war. Let's give American companies first swing at it.

Whether this proposal will ultimately be a good idea or not is up to the various House committees to decide.

Re:My thoughts (1)

XMode (252740) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612496)

Can CDMA and GSM phones exist in the same area?

Yes! Throughout most of Australia you are capable of using both CDMA and GSM phones. GSM is mostly limited to the cities and CDMA to the country areas (because of its much higher range), but it is possible to have them both in the same area at the same time.

It would really come down to cost. You can't use the same cell for both networks (although you can have both cells on the same mast) so installing both networks country-wide would be an expensive exercise.

frist psot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612392)

support the troops!

\/\/\/\/[][][]77!

woot!

-ac

Makes sense (0, Troll)

ewhenn (647989) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612397)

We blow everything up, when it comes time to rebuilt the infastructure, which the US should primarily be responsible for, of course they are going to pick a product which would benefit a US company vs. another one. Anything else would defy common sense.

Common sense?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612456)


This entire invasion is devoid of common sense. Pick on a nearly defenseless populace, destroy their country and infrastructure, then employ American companies to "rebuild" it in America's divine image. The only logic here is called Imperialism, and it is outrageous.

Re:Common sense?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612483)

We've rebuilt other countries without making them a part of some empire. See Japan and Germany for examples.

Re:Common sense?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612515)

> We've rebuilt other countries without making them a part of some empire.
> See Japan and Germany for examples.

Oh my god! moderators! quick mod this up! +5 funny!
this is one of the funniest things I've read all day!

umm.. it is a joke right?
my god I hope it's a joke..

Re:Common sense?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612528)

what the fuck are you talking about asshole

Re:Common sense?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612532)

Is Japan it's own country? Is Germany? While Germany was rebuilt by many, Japan was quite clearly rebuit by the United States under General MacArthur.

Re:Common sense?! (0)

apraetor (248989) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612541)

Why do you think Japan had top-notch factories after WWII? We built them to produce war materials for the Korean War.

Re:Makes sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612469)

Sure... The US should favor the standards used by the countries that helped keep the current regime in power. Let 'em benefit either way. Woo hoo!

Re:Makes sense (5, Interesting)

Pseudonym (62607) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612550)

Two points.

First, surely the primary goal is to pick products which benefit the people of Iraq? Otherwise what's the point of rebuilding the country?

Secondly, as the article from The Register [theregister.co.uk] points out, a lot of US companies (e.g. Lucent, Motorola) make GSM equipment. Why choose one US company over another? Is it the faux anti-French lunacy which is going around at the moment? Or, perhaps, the campaign contributions [thinkinglinks.info] from Qualcomm?

Hard to say.

Isn't this a bit premature (and U.S.-Centric)? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612398)

We haven't even come close to achieving our goal yet, and we're already arguing the politics of the after-war?

See my rants on war at GodFuckingDamnit.com:
"Shock and Awe" == Goal of Terrorism (or am I missing something?) [godfuckingdamnit.com]
Smoking Gun? What about N. Korea!? What about the War on Drugs? [godfuckingdamnit.com]

It's called planning ahead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612408)

While we're busy fighting, it's important to plan for the future, so that when the fighting is done, we're ready to move on to the next phase of setting up their new country. If we waited until we were done fighting, and then started working on the next step, it'd really screw things up.

Re:Isn't this a bit premature (and U.S.-Centric)? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612472)

During WWII the allies were making plans for a post-war world as early as 1943 with the end still very much up in the air. You must plan in advance or risk being caught with your pants around your ankles.
Also, I dont think anyone has any illusions about whether or not the US will defeat Iraq. It is only a question of the cost involved to acheive victory.

And Bush plays both sides... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612575)

Yes, and some of them, like George Bush's grandfather, decided to play both sides [takebackthemedia.com] .

The son of a facist is ruling our fucking country, and he's breaking 60-year-old treaties, taking away your rights, and is plummeting us into WWIII

Doesn't that concern you a little bit?

Re:Isn't this a bit premature (and U.S.-Centric)? (1)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612484)

We haven't even come close to achieving our goal yet, and we're already arguing the politics of the after-war?

Hrm, I'd venture to say that some of these post-war contracts were decided months before the war even began.

The war started last week, and Halliburton [forbes.com] has already secured a contract to help "Rebuild Iraq". A contract settled in less then 7 days... and it favors friends of our Vice President Dick Cheney. Gee, what a suprise.

Re:Isn't this a bit premature (and U.S.-Centric)? (1, Informative)

PukkaStoryTeller (661614) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612544)

Well, how can it not be U.S. centered when the U.S. is doing the job? The reconstruction is going to require a gargantuan amount of resources and military stuff. There are still soldiers in Japan and so forth. Anyway, this same sort of thing is happening with oil pipelines in Iraq. The company that was chosen is the one who's former CEO is VP Cheney. However, PLEASE don't jump to conclusions about that coincidence (And we all know people will). The company is probably one of the best at laying oil pipelines and what not, in addition to the fact that it is US based. So when it comes down to something like wireless mobile phones, whatever benefits the US economically will be very beneficial. I guess. I hope I was clear on that one. It's hard to say.

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612400)

congress press Congressman Darrel Issa (R-CA)!!!

Why not both (1)

gnu-sucks (561404) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612403)

You know, the best thing for an economy is competition. Why *limit* to one technology?

wouldn't it be best to have competing cellular services, instead of a monopoly?

yes, I know CDMA isn't a company but it is nevertheless a method

It's not about limiting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612433)

It's about directing where we spend our tax funds for the rebuilding effort. It's obvious we should direct that funding at coalition (US/UK/etc) country industries.

If GSM is selected... (1, Funny)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612406)

If GSM is selected, then the terrorsts have already won.

After all these years, you would think we would have grown beyond the same old game of 'empire'.

Re:If GSM is selected... (1)

dsarrazin (304841) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612493)

That "Empire building" comment is exactly why GSM is the way to go. It doesn't centre its powerbase, and is the common solution. CDMA is too isolated and restricted (as far as coverage goes) to be of use to anyone.

But why is anyone wasting time trying to setup a Cellular phone network in Iraq right now? Somebody obviously doesn't have his priorities straight.

9LA (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612409)

GSM VS CDMA Go Suck My Very Small Cock, Dirty MotherFucking Arab (I didn't set out to be rude honest!)

Stick it to the EU (0, Flamebait)

teutonic_leech (596265) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612411)

eXactly! That's what you get for spitting at us at the UN! Your own standards war!!

Talk about counting chickens (5, Insightful)

Tax Boy (75507) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612412)

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.

All about dough. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612559)

Sad to say it, but you are right. Kinda goes to show where the minds of these politicians are. They spit so much self-righteous nonsense, but their minds are always focused on one thing - The Almighty Buck.

That's why we don't mind going to war. It's for our benefit, so why not. We pay the costs of the war in the beginning, but since we did it to "liberate" the Iraqi people, when the oil wells are taken over, we give them the bill.

Don't believe me? Ask yourself who footed the bill in the first Gulf War. Ask yourself also which nation's companies got the majority of the contracts for reconstruction.

The victor *always* gets the spoils. Take the patriotic drivel you see on TeeVee with a grain of salt. Look at the testament of history. The masses will suffer, but the rich get richer whenever there is war.

Well... (4, Interesting)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612415)

If this is going to be US funded I thinks it's okay to favor US companies even though I personally like/use GSM. If the money will be loaned to Iraq and later recouped via oil sales, etc. then GSM should be used. It's not like Sony-Ericsson is a French company!

Re:Well... (1)

GMontag (42283) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612490)

Plus my GSM phone works fine in the DC area, NYC and in Knoxville, TN. If it gets shot down there are still plenty of US (and I assume, British) firms that can cover this.

If Qualcomm really wanted to be patriotic... (1)

argoff (142580) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612417)


They could forfiet their patent royalities on that technology which was originally developed for the military at taxpayers expense.

hah! (5, Insightful)

lingqi (577227) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612420)

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...

Re:hah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612441)

Its being trucked in and distributed you knob, and if the US is footing the bill to get rid of a murdering dictator you support why the hell shouldn't American companies make some money to help the people that paid to take out Iraq's trash?

go suck on a urinal tab

Re:hah! (3, Funny)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612442)

FOOD, WATER, MEDICINE! Don't you know that free anytime minutes are the key to modern life?

Uhhh (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612453)

There's already that sort of aid on the way, and Bush wants another 8 billion or so to be spent on that in the first 6 months. That's not counting other private group charities. They have to look at all these different issues as part of rebuilding. It's like saying we shouldn't bother fighting the common cold until we've got cancer taken care of.

Re:Uhhh (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612552)

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???

Re:hah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612479)

Pizza Hut is concerned the Iraqis won't have a way to phone them for dinner. Cell phones are essential to feeding the Iraqi people.

Re:hah! (2, Funny)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612523)

What? They don't need food, or water, or medicine! They're poor people! They can survive on cardboard and sand! Sheesh, didn't you know that??? We all know how important cellphones are to life!!!! OMG I would die without my cellphone!!! And I don't eat any food either, I just take in my nutrients through osmosis!!

Oh, and I'm also a plasmoid being from a distant solar system.

Well, of course. (1)

SexyTr0llGal (650651) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612422)

If we're paying to build it, then wouldn't we want to make our money back?

Re:Well, of course. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612468)

That's what I'm talking about!

Re:Well, of course. (1)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612540)

We are paying how much? How much are we asking the UN for? Think about it. Investigate it. Then talk about it.

Re:Well, of course. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612569)

If you think the cost of this war is anywhere near as low as the government is telling the American public, you're a fucking retard.

Re:Well, of course. (1)

plalonde2 (527372) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612564)

Yes, I'm certain the US will fund the Iraqi re-building about as well as they have (not) funded the rebuilding of Afghanistan.

CDMA is better (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612427)

Motherfuck! Fly bitches when I walk! Niggers! Kill the niggers! Fuck you! Fuck the niggers! Kill the niggers!

CDMA is worthless (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612428)

CDMA is hack that was implemented in the US as a stop-gap measure between analogue and true digital cell phones. If Iraq is meant to be rebuilt, then they might as well be rebuilt using modern technology such as GSM, which is clearly superior to CDMA, CMSA and all the other bullshit standards that have been adopted in the US.

Poop (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612430)

You will to be eating my poopy, yes?

Disgusting (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612434)


This has to be called what it is: war profiteering. The very fact that the U.S. is already engaged in involved debate over the "reconstruction" of conquered Iraq is disgusting. We have no right to Iraq's oil, no right to its money, no right to its land, and no right to its cellphone customers either. The Iraqi people are fighting us and dying to retain their sovereignity, and we are killing them for PROFIT.

This is a joke right? (4, Insightful)

mosch (204) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612436)

Seriously, this has to be a joke right? People aren't actually getting pissed about which cell phone technology may be used after we're done conquering Iraq are they?

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.

Re:This is a joke right? (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612476)

"the US Military has already killed more Iraqi civilians than 9/11 killed Americans" Where did you get the numbers? More Iraqi soliders a strong maybe. More civilians, please, and don't give me any sanctions crap.

Re:This is a joke right? (2, Interesting)

plalonde2 (527372) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612529)

Lookup the Iraq Body Count [iraqbodycount.net] page.

At about 220 civilian dead now for a country of under 25 million, compared to 3000 or so for a country of 300 million, I'd say the comparison is about right.

Now add millitary casualties that wouldn't have happenned without this warmongery. Hell, you might as well add in the US and British "Friendly Fire" casualties while you're at it.

Re:This is a joke right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612495)

People aren't actually getting pissed about which cell phone technology may be used after we're done conquering Iraq are they?

actually, i hope they do. if CDMA is chosen, owners of cell phones in iraq would be confined to using them in iraq, and owners of cell phones in surrounding countries would not be able to use their phones when visiting iraq.

this is a very important issue, could you imagine a europe where your phone only worked in one country? or where your phone only worked in one state? you'd be crying foul!

Re:This is a joke right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612511)

Nice FUD. Unfortunately, people can read for themselves. Nice try, though.

Re:This is a joke right? (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612547)

And the Iraqi regime killed more in Kuwait, Iran and Iraq than the US killed in the First Gulf War, Desert Storm, Afghanistan, Somalia, Serbia, Bosnia, Granada, Panama, Central America and the list goes on.

Peace. As Shalom.

Neutral arbitrators? How about Lebanon. (1)

Apuleius (6901) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612439)

They're cell phone crazy. They're almost next door. What do they use, anyhow? Any Lebanese care to comment? Anyhow, this has got to be the most bizzare case of putting the cart before the horse that I've seen so far.

public good (4, Insightful)

naoursla (99850) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612440)

Which is better for the common good?
1. Financial benefits for US companies
or
2. The ability for US citizens to use their cell phones internationally and foriegn visitors to use their cell phones here.

Would the financial impact to US companies be short term? Would they benefit more from visitors paying for international roaming charges if they took the hit now?

Is Congressman Issa trying to improve the local economy of his constituents or does he believe this is the best course of action for the country?

Honestly, I have no idea.

Re:public good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612573)

My god. What about the iraqi people? Do they have a saying? Your ignorance is astounding.

If the surrounding countries use GSM then it is clearly a better idea to implement GSM as people there can move around with their phones and use roaming. Both into iraq and to surrounding countries.

Implementing your own US "standard" because the alternative is european is just silly. There are always people who want to exploit war for their own good. I say - stop it!

First strike! (-1, Offtopic)

Spruce Moose (1857) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612445)

# Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal

FIGHT TEH POWER!! DOWN WITH BUSH! UP WITH LIFE!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612446)

This is a DIE-IN!

EVERYBODY who doesn't support bush's imperialistaic policies and bloodlust for oil POST HERE and we'll clog teh article!!!!

DOWN with Bush and Blair, let the IRAQUI PEOPLE choose there government and if saddam is it then let it be!!! GIVE EVIL nothing to OPPOSE and it will CEASE TO EXIST!

WE WILL BE HEARED! CONSERVATIVE MEDIA (slashdot) let our VOICE THROGUH!!!

Re:FIGHT TEH POWER!! DOWN WITH BUSH! UP WITH LIFE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612463)

Who are the IRAQUI PEPOLE?

great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612447)

let's get them to us US customary units too. That'll help em out!

this was my much better submission... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612452)

Dammit, I spent a half hour on this. Oh well, here goes:

According to an article [theregister.co.uk] in The Register, Congressman Darrell Issa (R, CA) [house.gov] is pushing hard for CDMA to be the cell network of choice for Iraq. Why? Because GSM(Groupe Speciale Mobile) is French, and he claims that the only source of GSM equipment would be French/German companies(except for, say, Lucent [lucent.com] , Motorola [motorola.com] , and Nortel [nortelnetworks.com] )...and we all know how popular the French are [cleveland.com] . Putting aside concerns about winning the war first and having your priorities in order(such as getting food there, before worrying about aide workers having Enhanced 911), Issa claims(incorrectly [google.com] ) that only CDMA offers GPS integration for E911. I'm sure the large campaign contribution by Qualcomm to Issa [opensecrets.org] has absolutely nothing to do with the bill [loc.gov] . Talk about people who need to be introduced to a cluebat [userfriendly.org] .

Re:this was my much better submission... (0)

apraetor (248989) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612571)

and I always thought GSM was Global System for Mobile communication..

Whee here come the parasites... (1, Insightful)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612458)

Who didn't see this coming?

Honestly, the opportunists will take anything they can get. Especially when they have the ear of our unpresident. I can't believe that corporate hounddog got into office...But I guess we have to live with it. Even if you don't care about the other countries, you have to admit that they have every reason to hate us. We would hate us if we were in their position. Truly, if you were being shoved out of every economic situation and opportunity by the world heavyweight, wouldn't you start to get a little frustrated too?

Right, right, they're all our slaves...They must bow down to the master if they want treats! =P

Anyone want to bet if this economic opportunism will increase the odds of terrorism?

GSM Phones (2, Insightful)

mike300zx (523956) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612461)

I hafta say I love my Sony-Ericsson T68i GSM phone. You can just get alot more features with them than with other networks with the ability to do high-speed transfers. And when you combine it with the fact that the countries around there all use it and countries all over Europe do as well then for the people would have a more versatile phone. I'm all for Qualcomm with them being based here in my city and that I know many people who work for them. However, I think that perhaps this would be a good opportunity for them to break into the GSM phone market as they could get deals with the cell service providers there in Iraq. If we are behind on the times as far as GSM goes then that is too bad, but we shouldn't try to force the same on them. GSM is taking over, it's only a matter of time. All the providers are starting to support it and all the cool new phones require GSM. So if the US has switched over for a large part in 6 months to a year, the Iraqis with anything else will be truly behind and won't have the American $$$ flowing in to upgrade their networks to GSM if they just put in another technology.

Use FSM instead (1, Funny)

KNicolson (147698) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612464)

Freedom System for Mobile communications, of course.

Counting Chickens (1)

MazTaim (1376) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612474)

There is an old and VERY familar saying. "Don't count your chickens before they hatch." We don't even have Baghdad yet and we are already arguing for what CELL phone STANDARD to use?!?!?! Come ON... I would be more worried about how to take Baghdad and what is needed to keep Baghdad before we start worrying about CDMA vs. GSM.

oh my god (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612475)

This is one of the worst things I have ever heard. Any doubts I had about the motivation of this war being financial have just dissapeared.

Competition or GSM (3, Insightful)

shylock0 (561559) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612477)

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.

more info on rebuilding effort (1)

illusion_2K (187951) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612480)

Cryptome [cryptome.org] is hosting more information on the whole rebuilding effort in Iraq. One such article is this one [cryptome.org] which is the text of a new york times article and two pdf's from USAID. Should be of interest to anyone who's following the whole Iraq war and is interested in the aftermath.

CDMA Bias by Issa (4, Insightful)

davidu (18) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612485)


Is it a coincidence that
Darrell Issa [house.gov] is the rep from the 49th district in California which is home to CDMA developer Qualcomm [qualcomm.com] ?
I THINK NOT.

This is just another example of politics being influenced by corporate desires and lobbying.

-davidu

Re:CDMA Bias by Issa (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612524)

Duh. Of course this is lobbying. Do you know a Senator is even married active lobbist? Yep. Tom and Linda Daschle (see a conflict here?)

All's right with the world (1)

madro (221107) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612492)

It's nice to see that in a country where citizens debate principles on both sides of an issue with global ramifications ... that congress reps first thoughts are still, "Mmmm ... pork ... " *drool*

Maybe we should get our rebuilding plans for oil production, water treatment, and transportation infrastructure taken care of first? Hey, maybe we can get DRM established there -- we can shape the future of the Middle East, and then the world!

If you dont like capitalism.... (0, Flamebait)

Travise (657076) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612499)

Go live in North Korea or something....

vote (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612501)

if the US wants to make Iraq democratic why not let them vote on it once they need to implement it? ... or am I missing the whole, supposed, point of the war?

More than just US-centrism... (1)

Sentry21 (8183) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612509)

GSM is a digital voice protocol with data services built on top of it. CDMA is a digital data protocol over which voice is one of the things you can send.

CDMA has a lot of things going over GSM, technically-wise, which I'm not going to bother to get into, because I haven't had several years of education in data encoding and communications so I can't speak with any great deal of force, but I do know that CDMA offers high-bandwidth, very reliable service (assuming the network is built properly), it's a newer protocol that builds upon the faults in GSM, TDMA, etc., and the method they use for encoding the data is just plain cool.

In the end, I vote CDMA, because other countries should consider upgrading (when GSM was the latest greatest thing, Europe locked themselves into it), and if I ever (read: when) go to Baghdad, I'd like to be able to use the phone I have now and just get subscription or roaming. It sucks that I can't do that anywhere else because the US and Canada are, amazingly, ahead of the cellular game for once.

--Dan

Re:More than just US-centrism... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612551)

Hey don't forget Japan lots of CDMA there too.

Kind of makes sense (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612516)

American companies and American forces will be there.

I'm sure the forces currently based in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will rebase to Iraq, so why not use the same standards as used in the US?

Since when is this americas decision. (-1, Flamebait)

doublehelix_nz (626685) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612518)

Who gave america the right to decide anything about iraq!
<br><br>
Im pretty sure that the UN will take over rebuilding the country, not the states.
<br>
<br>
Think of it from there point of you.
<br>
You go over there, rape pillage and plunder, kill a few thousand people. and expect the mothers/fathers/brothers/sisters/husbands/wifes/da ughters/sons to actualy want you to decide how there country is going to be.
<br>
The way the americas are speaking, they want to take over, MR BUSH wants to be the DICTATOR
<br><br>
Saddam with his SUPPOSED WepsMassDestruction, will be outsted in favor of Bush, who actualy has WMD and as we know, are fuct up enuff to use them.

Say no to war.

It would be unpatriotic to choose GSM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612519)

Of course, it would make more sense though.

Greedy Fingers (5, Insightful)

cdjfelton (569462) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612533)

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?

Might as well be Qualcomm (1)

zulux (112259) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612534)


Whatever is deployed - it will be done by Americans using American equipment.

Think of all the wire-taping opertunities if we use our equipment.

In other news (4, Interesting)

RelliK (4466) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612537)

Before the US military even finished bombing Iraq, the contracts for rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure have already been awarded to US corporations. Among those corporations is Haliburton, where vice president Dick Cheney served as CEO. He is still on Haliburton's payroll and still owns 8 million of Haliburton's stock options.

The more damage US military does to Iraq's infrastructure, the more money will US corporations make on rebuilding. US government is planning to use Iraqi oil to pay for this enterprise.

Let's first see who will really end up paying (1)

uradu (10768) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612543)

When it comes to rebuilding, the US tend to be big on words and small on deeds. See Afghanistan, see Gulf War I. Methinks for the moment there is a lot of posturing going on about what all we'll be doing in Iraq since "we'll be paying anyway", but eventually, after suitable redirection of the public attention to other things ("look, a shiny object!"), the US is going to work out things with the Europeans by "allowing" them to contribute to rebuilding to get "friendly" with them again, and the Europeans are going to oblige to get on the good side of the US again. Then the US will be enjoying the great PR of rebuilding Iraq, while someone else is footing the bill. Given the state of the budget, I really don't see us pouring billions into Iraq.

watch out corportate USA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612557)

i'm british. 2 british troops were executed today. I have fiends in the army out there now and i support them fully. But many people here believe they deaths sadly only served the cause of texan oil companies --- in week four of the war i shall go out to iraq, join up and take shots at some american troops i shit ye not ALL YOUR DESKTOPS ARE BELONG TO ME NOW

Not for long, boys, not for long. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5612566)

"Currently, GSM is the most widely used mobile standard in surrounding countries."

Wait til next year. Then another dictatorship will be re-building from powdered rubble. And then the year after that, another one, etc.

George Bush has decreed that countries ruled by decree will be erased, and I have no problem with that.

To the victors goe the spoils! (0)

Zathras11 (628385) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612568)

Let the other countries change if they want
to be in line with the new democratic Iraq!

sounds familiar... (1)

playagame (652532) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612572)

not only do they want to keep the dollar as the oil monitary standard but now they also want american standard technology as well. pretty hard to explain how this war is not profiting American now isn't it...

GSM is the best choice for Iraq (1)

syst3m1c (591351) | more than 11 years ago | (#5612576)

VoiceStream Wireless had a nation-wide GSM network in the US. When T-Mobile, a German based GSM provider, purchased VoiceStream Wireless and Powertel, they became a Global GSM provider. AT&T is also building out a GSM network. Japan, Europe, Israel, and even Kuwait has a GSM network - in total, something like 40 or 50 countries uses GSM. My point is, GSM is the defacto world-wide standard, and it is in the interest of Iraq to use GSM so that interoperability with the international community is more easily achieved.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?