Iraq Rebuilding Contracts Awarded (to Haliburton - Cheney's former employer)

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Iraq Rebuilding Contracts Awarded (to Haliburton - Cheney's former employer)
Pages (6): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 »

Posted by PeacefulWarrior on Mar-25-2003 21:51:

Iraq Rebuilding Contracts Awarded (to Haliburton - Cheney's former employer)

Iraq rebuilding contracts awarded
March 25, 2003: 4:33 PM EST
By Mark Gongloff, CNN/Money Staff Writer
http://money.cnn.com/2003/03/25/new...racts/index.htm

Excerpts:

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The first contracts for rebuilding post-war Iraq have been awarded, and Vice President Dick Cheney's old employer, Halliburton Co., is one of the early winners.

The Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) unit of Halliburton (HAL: up $0.54 to $20.66, Research, Estimates), of which Dick Cheney was CEO from 1995 to 2000, said late Monday that it was awarded a contract by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to put out oil fires and make emergency repairs to Iraq's oil infrastructure.

President Bush Tuesday asked Congress for $489.3 million to cover the cost of repairing damage to Iraq's oil facilities, much or all of which could go to Halliburton or its subcontractors under the terms of its contract with the Army.

Since it's still unknown how much damage has been or will be done to Iraqi oil fields in the war, it's difficult to estimate the contract's eventual dollar value.

But its biggest value could be that it puts Halliburton in a prime position to handle the complete refurbishment of Iraq's long-neglected oil infrastructure, which will be a plum job.

Related Stories:

Boots & Coots called to war zone to deal with fires
Baghdad building bonanza?

Posted by PeacefulWarrior on Mar-26-2003 00:00:

Where's the shock and outrage? Does anyone see a "conflict of interest" with this situation? What gives the United States the right to award contracts in a foreign country?

Posted by Nalin on Mar-26-2003 01:41:

Posted by AnotherWay83 on Mar-26-2003 06:26:

there was a huge writeup at nytimes.com on this...very good article

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/23/business/23REBU.html

titled 'Which Companies Will Put Iraq Back Together?'

Posted by Yoepus on Mar-26-2003 07:13:

quote:
Originally posted by PeacefulWarrior
Where's the shock and outrage? Does anyone see a "conflict of interest" with this situation? What gives the United States the right to award contracts in a foreign country?

Umm perhaps the gain the right from the fact that they are paying 100% for the contracts to be completed? NOOOO that couldn't be it nevermind. They shouldn't have any right to decide where their money is directed... we should let the unexisting new Iraqi government funnel it into corruption instead, your absolutely right.

Posted by Renegade on Mar-26-2003 07:53:

No it's called imperialism.

An American company, rebuilding Iraq according to the wishes of an occupying American force? I wonder how much say the Iraqis are going to get in how the new society is structured?

Posted by Izzy on Mar-26-2003 15:46:

Does Romania have a say in how McDonald's runs its business in its country? So McDonald's is another example of how america is imperializing the whole world. its the same thing as oil. of course contracts are made about future markets.

Posted by biznology on Mar-26-2003 16:08:

this sucks, but it is no surprise.

the US chose to go to war almost alone, so therefore it is their responsibility to rebuild. that means US firms will take the brunt. Cheney is still an ass tho - im not saying he deserves the paycheck|

Posted by Az on Mar-26-2003 23:49:

used to be dick cheney's employer? he's still on the board, and still recieves a salary. I find it hard to believe he hasn't had a part to play in this contract

Posted by occrider on Mar-27-2003 00:04:

quote:
Originally posted by Az
used to be dick cheney's employer? he's still on the board, and still recieves a salary. I find it hard to believe he hasn't had a part to play in this contract

Incorrect. He had to leave halliburton in 2000 to become bush's running mate. The laws on conflicts of interest are very specific. He is still receiving payments from Halliburton but not a salary as you suggest. He opted not to receive his leaving payment in a lump sum but instead have it paid to him over five years, possibly for tax reasons. The money was owed to Cheney as part of his salary for the time he was employed.

The payment is even insured so that it would not be affected even if Halliburton went bankrupt, to ensure there was no conflict of interest.

Posted by DaveSZ on Mar-28-2003 11:47:

I fucking knew it.........

No one wanted to make a bet with me that this would be true.....

Posted by Nrg2Nfinit on Mar-28-2003 16:49:

quote:
Originally posted by Izzy
Does Romania have a say in how McDonald's runs its business in its country? So McDonald's is another example of how america is imperializing the whole world. its the same thing as oil. of course contracts are made about future markets.

lol this is a totally irrelevant comparison since romania wasnt taken over by the US and then the mcdonalds installed then..

the fact is the US took over iraq and are now calling the shots on the oil

how much of a coincidence is it that the vice presidents company got the contract.. hrmmmmm

Posted by Izzy on Mar-28-2003 17:11:

quote:
Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
lol this is a totally irrelevant comparison since romania wasnt taken over by the US and then the mcdonalds installed then..

true that is a difference, however it doesnt prove america is imperialist. new contracts have been signed lately for areas in rwanda and uganda where new reserves of oil have been found. so what? what i see is an industry that is expanding naturally....

Posted by Az on Mar-28-2003 17:14:

quote:
Originally posted by Izzy
true that is a difference, however it doesnt prove america is imperialist. new contracts have been signed lately for areas in rwanda and uganda where new reserves of oil have been found. so what? what i see is an industry that is expanding naturally....

thats all fine and dandy
but we weren't talking about rwansda or uganda.
Theres been so much hype about the war for oil, we go to war, first thing that happens, halliburton, the vice presidents company, gets a contract for digging oil
if you think thats an industry expanding naturally, you're blind

Posted by Nrg2Nfinit on Mar-28-2003 17:15:

Posted by LiquidX on Mar-28-2003 17:23:

Mmm Cheney's ex company.... oil.... money.... money from congress to ESPECIFICALLY recontruct the oil wells.. cheney...cheney's ex company... mmmmmmmmmmm I so knew it!!!!

Posted by occrider on Mar-28-2003 17:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Az
thats all fine and dandy
but we weren't talking about rwansda or uganda.
Theres been so much hype about the war for oil, we go to war, first thing that happens, halliburton, the vice presidents company, gets a contract for digging oil
if you think thats an industry expanding naturally, you're blind

The contract isn't about "digging" Iraqi oil or taking Iraqi oil. The contract is for EXTINGUISHING the oil fires. And why this company? Hmmmm maybe cuz they extinguished the oil well fires in Kuwait in 1991????

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle....storyID=2446317

Posted by AnotherWay83 on Mar-28-2003 17:40:

quote:
Originally posted by occrider
The contract isn't about "digging" Iraqi oil or taking Iraqi oil. The contract is for EXTINGUISHING the oil fires. And why this company? Hmmmm maybe cuz they extinguished the oil well fires in Kuwait in 1991????

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle....storyID=2446317

the problem most ppl. are having with this is that US companies seem to be getting special preference over the awarding of contracts...raising questions about just how much the US really cares abt Iraqi liberation...already there has been a rift between the British, who want to return the port of Umm Qasr to the Iraqis, and the US, which has given a US company a contract for it

Posted by Az on Mar-28-2003 17:45:

quote:
Originally posted by occrider
The contract isn't about "digging" Iraqi oil or taking Iraqi oil. The contract is for EXTINGUISHING the oil fires. And why this company? Hmmmm maybe cuz they extinguished the oil well fires in Kuwait in 1991????

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle....storyID=2446317

it's not just extinguishing the oil fires, Halliburton will be reconstructing parts of iraq, and digging for oil to help rebuilds Iraq's economy, all at hefty profit for Halliburton...

Posted by occrider on Mar-28-2003 17:47:

quote:
Originally posted by AnotherWay83
the problem most ppl. are having with this is that US companies seem to be getting special preference over the awarding of contracts...raising questions about just how much the US really cares abt Iraqi liberation...already there has been a rift between the British, who want to return the port of Umm Qasr to the Iraqis, and the US, which has given a US company a contract for it

A contract for what?? You mean like the deed to the city? I don't know why a company would want such a thing ...

Posted by occrider on Mar-28-2003 17:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Az
it's not just extinguishing the oil fires, Halliburton will be reconstructing parts of iraq, and digging for oil to help rebuilds Iraq's economy, all at hefty profit for Halliburton...

Sources?

Posted by Az on Mar-28-2003 18:03:

quote:
Originally posted by occrider
Sources?

from an interview on BBC news 24 with a spokeswoman from Halliburton
the hefty profits bit wasn't included

Posted by LiquidX on Mar-28-2003 18:15:

-There HAS to be a reason for the companies to drool over and help reconstruct Iraq.. I mean, wouldn't it be NICE if the companies would be THAT kinda and HUMANITARIAN?!?! .. well, the truth is, that's not what companies are looking for, these companies are drooling for big time profit... it's all pure BS that Bush doesnt want the OIL fields destryoed because of environment!! loooool!!!!1 Bush saying that?!?!? hahahahahaha

Posted by occrider on Mar-28-2003 18:26:

quote:
Originally posted by LiquidX
-There HAS to be a reason for the companies to drool over and help reconstruct Iraq.. I mean, wouldn't it be NICE if the companies would be THAT kinda and HUMANITARIAN?!?! .. well, the truth is, that's not what companies are looking for, these companies are drooling for big time profit... it's all pure BS that Bush doesnt want the OIL fields destryoed because of environment!! loooool!!!!1 Bush saying that?!?!? hahahahahaha

Well of course the companies are doing it for the money!! They wouldn't be in business for very long otherwise! It's not like the Iraqi people are paying for all of this, it's all coming out of the 2.4 billion dollar reconstruction package going to Iraq to rebuild its infrastructure. And Az yes at a hefty profit for the company but at a great deal of cost to the government!

What the hell ... the US needs to invade my house and then set up a $500,000 reconstruction package to rebuild infrastructure.

Posted by AnotherWay83 on Mar-28-2003 21:45:

quote:
Originally posted by occrider
A contract for what?? You mean like the deed to the city? I don't know why a company would want such a thing ...

damn the article was even in cnn and the nytimes...cant locate it now...basically the company had been given the contract to i think rebuild and then control the port at Umm Qasr...but the british wanna give it back to the Iraqis

Pages (6): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 »