Is there a light at the end of the tunnel?

[ravells]

Ah! The light at the end of the tunnel was a glinting pot of gold?

Ravs

[capt. apathy]

Originally posted by ravells
Ah! The light at the end of the tunnel was a glinting pot of gold?

Ravs

or was the tunnel really just a mine-shaft all along?

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
so they competed and won a bid for $1.2 B

they where also given a $7 B no-bid contract before the war was even started.

I find it a major conflict of interest to have the VP of our country as a major shareholder in a company that is receiving huge profits from the actions of this administration.  especially when much of those profits are received through no-bid contracts.

these conflicts, combined with Halliburtons generosity to the Bush campaign during the 2000 election, and the fluidness of the reason(s) why this war was necessary, should alarm anyone who is paying attention.

  that kind of blind trust isn't healthy for our nation.

would you rather have somone who is less capable of doing the job?

I still dont see why you librals get your pink panties in a bunch overthis.  If they were the only bidder on the contract and didnt win NEITHER WOULD ANYONE ELSE CAUSE THEY DIDNT BID ON IT. You librals would not care if a US soldier had in adequate facilities or died because they did not have the support they needed if it meant hurting the president or the country.  here is a great example of your precious single bidder contract winner aleged conflict of interest.

When I was in Kuwait (a year ago) we had Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) taking care of most of the service support we needed (food, laundry facilities, generators, AC for the sleep tents, etc). KBR is a subsidiary of Halliburton.

While not perfect, they did a pretty good job of trying to help us whatever and whenever they could. If a generator went down (which was often, they didn't like 135 degree heat) they would be there right away to attempt repairs. Our clothes were cleaned pretty well (we only had two uniforms, the turn around was less than two days-really good for us).

One of the things that really impressed me about KBR was the food service. After the 'major combat' portion of the war was over and the SCUDS stopped falling on our camp they went all out to improve the food at the place. I remember nights when we got steaks, shrimp, lobster tail, they tried to make the food as palatable as they could, they brought in non-alcoholic beer for the troops, and the ice cream bar they set up would have given Baskin Robbins a run for its money.

Any soldier will tell you that one of biggest morale pick me ups is decent food and KBR did an outstanding job trying to keep us well fed.

Funny thing happened. All this whinning about Haliburton and KBR caused the Government to change contractors for sevices on Camp Wolf (and other places I have been told). The food quality dropped right into the toilet, as did the laundry point, the support for our AC and generators and everything else. As far as I know the money spent was identical.

Strange though, the soldiers ended up suffering over all this infighting. Now whom should I blame? I don't blame Dick Cheney. As far as I was concerned he did the soldiers a favor by working for Halliburton We got decent service and we appreciated it.

I've heard the same story from fellow Marines in the sandbox right now who are experiencing the same damn thing.

[Scootter]

Originally posted by Boroda

Again: if someone expects to get 50% profit yearly - he should be prepared to lose his money. It's a "risky investment". And it was ME and MY PEOPLE who paid for this games.

Rather be part of the Third Reich?


They tought you well in USSR schools comrade!

Oil drilling equip. not weapons very good comrade we can even call them Mig-25 oil pumps.

I really like the line about the cold war "you did not win, we lost it our self" your about ready to run for office please fill out your Democratic party application.

Your stuff is old and tired and you have no power here, now be off!

[Nash]

Originally posted by Scootter
Your stuff is old and tired and you have no power here, now be off!

pffft...

After you.

[capt. apathy]

If they were the only bidder on the contract and didn't win NEITHER WOULD ANYONE ELSE CAUSE THEY DIDNT BID ON IT.

did you read the link?  it doesn't say they where the only company to bid.  it says it was a no-bid contract.

No-bid means that no bids where taken.  nobody else could compete because nobody else new there was anything to compete for.

no matter how fast you spin it, that means the Bush administration gave the contract to Halliburton without soliciting bids from any other contractors.  anybody who can't/won't see a conflict in using this type of system for awarding contracts to a company for whom the VP was CEO until the election is just hiding their head in the sand.

in fact the deal was made before the war started and wasn't announced publicly until later.

how could anybody else bid on a job that was hidden from them until Halliburton had the deal inked?

as a matter of fact Halliburton is a major player in the war for profit industry.  and while I don't think they would have it as sweet as they do now, they would still make a lot of profit off this war, even if they competed fairly (there are many jobs that they just have a lot more experience at).  I find it a conflict of interest for any top gov't official to own interests in companies who make a significant portion of their profits from war.  

how much crying would their be if Kerry gets elected and awards  a no-bid contract to his wifes company to provide ketchup for our school lunches at $2 a serving?  (and at least in this scenario no Americans would have to die for them to steal from our treasury)

[AKIron]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
did you read the link?  it doesn't say they where the only company to bid.  it says it was a no-bid contract.

No-bid means that no bids where taken.  nobody else could compete because nobody else new there was anything to compete for.

no matter how fast you spin it, that means the Bush administration gave the contract to Halliburton without soliciting bids from any other contractors.  anybody who can't/won't see a conflict in using this type of system for awarding contracts to a company for whom the VP was CEO until the election is just hiding their head in the sand.

in fact the deal was made before the war started and wasn't announced publicly until later.

how could anybody else bid on a job that was hidden from them until Halliburton had the deal inked?

as a matter of fact Halliburton is a major player in the war for profit industry.  and while I don't think they would have it as sweet as they do now, they would still make a lot of profit off this war, even if they competed fairly (there are many jobs that they just have a lot more experience at).  I find it a conflict of interest for any top gov't official to own interests in companies who make a significant portion of their profits from war.  

how much crying would their be if Kerry gets elected and awards  a no-bid contract to his wifes company to provide ketchup for our school lunches at $2 a serving?  (and at least in this scenario no Americans would have to die for them to steal from our treasury)

If you're referring to the link I posted it stated that the Army Corps of Engineers said there was no need to rebid that particular requirement as it was covered by a previous competitively bid contract.

[Sixpence]

I'll take any good news. We can't sit and question the past, what is done is done, you can never unring a bell. And don't worry, if it is a train, we'll drop a cookie on it. But I still think every cent to rebuild should come from sales of their oil, and not one tax dollar. They sit on the biggest reserves in the world, they don't need our money.

[Stang]

Boroda, question for ya lad... Are you a communist, or is the avatar some kind of symbol for your being Russian and harkening back to "better" days for Russia?  Just curious;)

[capt. apathy]

Originally posted by AKIron
If you're referring to the link I posted it stated that the Army Corps of Engineers said there was no need to rebid that particular requirement as it was covered by a previous competitively bid contract.

no, I quoted gunslinger because I was replying to his post, so to stay on topic I refered to the link that he was talking about (and had quoted).

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Scootter
Rather be part of the Third Reich?


They tought you well in USSR schools comrade!

Oil drilling equip. not weapons very good comrade we can even call them Mig-25 oil pumps.

I really like the line about the cold war "you did not win, we lost it our self" your about ready to run for office please fill out your Democratic party application.

Your stuff is old and tired and you have no power here, now be off!

Well, while my country lost 27 million lives fighting nazism - American bomber crews that bombed Germany had industrial objects where American capital invested marked on the flight maps so they couldn't destroy them accidentaly... This is about "third reich".

Again: I said "most of Iraqi debt to Russia is for oil equipment". And most of this debt was made while Saddam was America's best friend, in the 70s, when he was killing Iraqi communists with steam rollers...

There is no difference between your two major parties, they even share the same name, only in different languages.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Stang
Boroda, question for ya lad... Are you a communist, or is the avatar some kind of symbol for your being Russian and harkening back to "better" days for Russia?  Just curious;)

It is mostly to piss off people like... you know like whom

I am not a communist and never voted for them. Hammer and a Sickle is an international symbol of Labour.

Did you see the movie "Mortal Combat"? They have a character there, a bearded guy in a fur hat with a red star, who fights with hammer and a sickle Some peoplethink it's Russian traditional weapons

[Curval]

Umm..Boroda,

The Russians did the same thing when they overran Eastern Germany.  Stalin ordered that certain industrial areas should not be destroyed because they were "gold" to the Soviets.

It makes sense not to destroy something you will need after the war is won...no?

[mosgood]

Originally posted by Sixpence
We can't sit and question the past, what is done is done, you can never unring a bell.

So.... when voting you'll consider all the things both candidates are gonna do in the future instead??  

[mosgood]

Originally posted by Boroda
Well, while my country lost 27 million lives fighting nazism - American bomber crews that bombed Germany had industrial objects where American capital invested marked on the flight maps so they couldn't destroy them accidentaly... This is about "third reich".

Again: I said "most of Iraqi debt to Russia is for oil equipment". And most of this debt was made while Saddam was America's best friend, in the 70s, when he was killing Iraqi communists with steam rollers...

There is no difference between your two major parties, they even share the same name, only in different languages.

Dude, you are such a drama queen.  Bringing up WW2 ......  Again another oppurtunity for the Russians to screw up and lose 27 million lives.  

And about bombing strategic industrial targets......

If you want to compare apples to apples, maybe you should instead talk about 27 million communist lives fighting nazism to Afghani's fighting the (screwed up)communist invasion.... yet AGAIN another oppurtunity for Russia to screw up....

Boroda, for a guy that lives in a country that can't take a piss without screwing it up, you sure like to complain about America a lot.  Is it really as simple as jealousy?