Halliburton An Irritant In Plan For Iraq

Atlanta Journal & Constitution ^ | 04/05/03 | Cynthia Tucker

[berserker]

If that's how you feel, then let's let the Pentagon issue some more no-bid contracts. U.S. companies not asked to bid can just keep their mouths shut.

For those so interested, link to Congressional request for the GAO to investigate the award of the Halliburton contract (pdf format).

[Nucluside]

And which company do you work for? I have no ax to grind and don't work for Haliburton, but I damned sure know how they perform in the oil field. From what I've seen they are incomparable.

[joesnuffy]

Affirmative action calls for the incompetent to do the work for twice the money with half the results in ten times the time..
The idea of the expert being hired is an anathema to these people...and if they can make the great leap of linkage in any infinitesimal amount then by gum they will...screaming govt. corruption...
After all if she and hers know anything they know corruption...what they dont understand is expertise and awards for merit that great leap escapes them

[berserker]

It doesn't matter what company I work for, or what company gets the bid - the problem with no-bid secret contracts is that they are not the lowest bid, and hense have wasted the money that we provide in our taxes to our government. Part of the deal with taxes is that the government is only to spend them efficiently, which was not done here for reasons that no one can state. Why the rush? Why did it have to be secret?

A secret no-bid contract just stinks (and smells of payoffs or influence).

[Nucluside]

There are only two companies I know of that could handle the scope of work that will be required in the Iraqi oilfields: Haliburton and Brown and Root
1. It is going to cost a lot to repair the damage. Bids couldn't be submitted until damage assessements can be made, and we have an emergency situation. Time will be the main factor in cost, and Haliburton can handle the situation much quicker.
2. I'll bet you the following:
a. there will be an investigation of the contract award.
b. allegations of impropriety will be found groundless. Reason: The Bush Presidency is a clean one, for a change.

[berserker]

Duh, one of the problems with your comment is that Halliburton ownes Brown & Root (now part of its Kellog Brown & Root division). The second is that there are many more oil services companies in the U.S. that could handle the work. The third problem, if Halliburton is one of the only companies that could do the work, then they would have won a competitively bid contract, wouldn't they? But by having a no-bid secret contract, the military wastes money once again - even if Haliburton would have won, they would have entered a lower bid to ensure that they got the bid.

Only loosers in no-bid contract: U.S. taxpayers.

[Nucluside]

I had no idea that Haliburton owned Brown and Root; that shows how long I've been away from the oil field. My main point still stands: Time is of the essence. Why did you not try to refute that? I know a little about government bids. Yes, there are time limitations on them, but how long do we, theoretically, keep the bids open? Or, how much oil do we allow to be pissed away while we satisfy YOU? Duhhhhhhhh!

[timestax]

What's the problem here? 4 posted on 04/05/2003 3:59 AM PST by Mr. Mojo [

DITTO ! President Bush is the President of these UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Not president of Britain,or any other country.