????

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Damn, I gotta wait a week for answers. :yuk: Blown & Steve just went on vacation for "improper arguing".

[eliminatedsprinter]

What does it matter?
It matters, because all the goofy retoric that surrounds, so much of what Halliburton does, in contract with our government, is silly and counterproductive.
The other 2 companies that have the range of services that Halliburton provides are foreign based. By long standing government policy, U.S. companies have priority on recieving U.S. government contracts. Therefore, Halliburton has no real compitition on many types of government jobs. I know the anti capitolist conspiracy types love to make it seem somehow sneaky or corrupt that Halliburton gets so many really big gov contracts (from this and prior administrations). But it's really just a simple matter of policy. Of course, that simple explination is far too boring to make major news or moveon.org type wack job news letters.

[Knotbad]

Since you have a problem with it blown ...............
Tell us what other company should have been awarded the contract.
What other company/companies were qualified?
It was a "competitively awarded contract" per the article. I guess you didn't read beyond the first 2 lines to catch that part.
The article doesn't say what other companies put bids in on the contract. It DOES say, however, that KBR held the contract for the last five years. Now, considering that Cheney has been CEO of Halliburton/KBR forever(or so it seems), and further considering that Michael Chertoff owes his job to Bush/Cheney(whichever one hired him who knows???), it stands to reason that Halliburton/KBR would be awarded the contract again. As Cheney said about waterboarding, "it's a no-brainer".
Since blown 472 is in time-out, I will answer the question for him; yes I have a problem with Halliburton/KBR handling this contract. I have a problem with everything Halliburton/KBR has done under the Bush administration, expecially in Iraq. They have failed miserably in every phase of their mission over there, especially with regard to how they supply our troops. Our troops deserve better as long as they are under fire in a war, and in peacetime also. Halliburton/KBR has failed them.

[eliminatedsprinter]

The article doesn't say what other companies put bids in on the contract. It DOES say, however, that KBR held the contract for the last five years. Now, considering that Cheney has been CEO of Halliburton/KBR forever(or so it seems), and further considering that Michael Chertoff owes his job to Bush/Cheney(whichever one hired him who knows???), it stands to reason that Halliburton/KBR would be awarded the contract again. As Cheney said about waterboarding, "it's a no-brainer".
Since blown 472 is in time-out, I will answer the question for him; yes I have a problem with Halliburton/KBR handling this contract. I have a problem with everything Halliburton/KBR has done under the Bush administration, expecially in Iraq. They have failed miserably in every phase of their mission over there, especially with regard to how they supply our troops. Our troops deserve better as long as they are under fire in a war, and in peacetime also. Halliburton/KBR has failed them.
V.P. Cheney was CEO of Halliburton from 1995-2000. During that time they got tons of contracts from the Clinton Administration. They are the only U.S. firm that provides the range of services they do. That puts them in the front of the line for many types of contracts. No mystery and no influence from V.P. Cheney, or anyone else, is needed.
Now if you don't like the type of job they do that is different matter.

[Schiada76]

In all fairness the contract should have awarded to the Fwench. Oh wait their country is on fire, they're busy with their own homebound terror.
They're trying to give up and run away but they have no where to go. :220v:

[Knotbad]

...Now if you don't like the type of job they do that is different matter.
LOL you quoted my post did you not read it???
Try this link; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton

[eliminatedsprinter]

LOL you quoted my post did you not read it???
Try this link; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton
Read the wikipedia link before.
I read your post. Clarify?? In the first paragraph you tossed out Sec. Chertoffs' name in to further consider, please do. The post may be clear to you, since you wrote it, but I can only see the words as written. It's clear as mud to me. You seem to be implying some sort of nefarious connection in that first portion. Explain. The mear fact that Chertoff is a Bush appointee means nothing, since that is how cabnet members are selected, how does it relate to Halliburton??
In the second paragraph you state your opinion of the job they are doing as if it is undisputed fact. Please elaborate. What is it based on? What have they done right vs wrong? Some of their mistakes have made the press. How do they relate overall with the many complicated jobs all their subsidiaries are doing? Who do you think would do these jobs better?
I mearly pointed out that the job they are doing is a seperate matter from how they got the job. How does that imply I didn't read your post???

[Knotbad]

There are at LEAST ten pages of articles documenting Halliburton/KBR's job performances in Iraq. Enjoy.
http://www.google.com/search?q=halli...en-US:official

[eliminatedsprinter]

There are at LEAST ten pages of articles documenting Halliburton/KBR's job performances in Iraq. Enjoy.
http://www.google.com/search?q=halli...en-US:official
I wasn't requesting a data dump. Just clearer connections and a little better spelled out logic. The above data dump is the opposite of what I was requesting. I'm not trying to dispute what you are saying. Just asking for some brief, on point, clarifications. Nothing more.

[Old Texan]

There are at LEAST ten pages of articles documenting Halliburton/KBR's job performances in Iraq. Enjoy.
http://www.google.com/search?q=halli...en-US:official
So tell us what YOU know about Halliburton and KBR. Googling up ramblings isn't what I'd consider accurate research.
Most of these contractors are picked because of experience and ability. Low bidder BS doesn't cut it when the options hinder the "project". LBJ helped put B&R in place and subsequently their offshoot companies have pretty much controlled the contracts in time of need and war.
What do you say about Boeing,Lockheed, and numerous other defense contractor s that just "seem" to always win the bids? Too many view them as "big business" buying everyone off when in essence they are proud American skilled business that get the job done a helluva alot better than anyone else in the world and have the resources to "win" or be awarded contracts no one else can F'ing do..
It really pisses me off when most folks that bitch about our industrial giants winning all the big projects come from lame asse electorates that vote a Ted Kennedy (D-MA) or John Cronin (sp) (D-MI) into office for a lifetime. If you want to put limits on somebody doing a job, start with out House and Senate.
If Nancy Pelosi or Dirtbag Harry Reid had to win on merit they'd still be working for the local CofC in their hometowns booking tour buses.