Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 12:57 PM        Welcome to Iraq, a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton
Halliburton's Deals Greater Than Thought

By Michael Dobbs, Washington Post Staff Writer

Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Vice President Cheney, has won contracts worth more than $1.7 billion under Operation Iraqi Freedom and stands to make hundreds of millions more dollars under a no-bid contract awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, according to newly available documents.

The size and scope of the government contracts awarded to Halliburton in connection with the war in Iraq (news - web sites) are significantly greater than was previously disclosed and demonstrate the U.S. military's increasing reliance on for-profit corporations to run its logistical operations. Independent experts estimate that as much as one-third of the monthly $3.9 billion cost of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq is going to independent contractors.

Services performed by Halliburton, through its Brown and Root subsidiary, include building and managing military bases, logistical support for the 1,200 intelligence officers hunting Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, delivering mail and producing millions of hot meals. Often dressed in Army fatigues with civilian patches on their shoulders, Halliburton employees and contract personnel have become an integral part of Army life in Iraq.

Spreadsheets drawn up by the Army Joint Munitions Command show that about $1 billion had been allocated to Brown and Root Services through mid-August for contracts associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Pentagon's name for the U.S.-led war and occupation. In addition, the company has earned about $705 million for an initial round of oil field rehabilitation work for the Army Corps of Engineers, a corps spokesman said.

Specific work orders assigned to the subsidiary under Operation Iraqi Freedom include $142 million for base camp operations in Kuwait, $170 million for logistical support for the Iraqi reconstruction effort and $28 million for the construction of prisoner of war camps, the Army spreadsheet shows. The company was also allocated $39 million for building and operating U.S. base camps in Jordan, the existence of which the Pentagon has not previously publicly acknowledged.

Over the past decade, Halliburton, a Houston-based company that made its name servicing pipelines and oil wells, has positioned itself to take advantage of an increasing trend by the federal government to contract out many support operations overseas. It has emerged as the biggest single government contractor in Iraq, followed by such companies as Bechtel, a California-based engineering firm that has won hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. Agency for International Development reconstruction contracts, and Virginia-based DynCorp, which is training the new Iraqi police force.

The government said the practice has been spurred by cutbacks in the military budget and a string of wars since the end of the Cold War that have placed enormous demand on the armed forces.

But, according to Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) and other critics, the Iraq war and occupation have provided a handful of companies with good political connections, particularly Halliburton, with unprecedented money-making opportunities. "The amount of money [earned by Halliburton] is quite staggering, far more than we were originally led to believe," Waxman said. "This is clearly a trend under this administration, and it concerns me because often the privatization of government services ends up costing the taxpayers more money rather than less."

Wendy Hall, a Halliburton spokeswoman, declined to discuss the details of the company's operations in Iraq, or confirm or deny estimates of the amounts the company has earned from its contracting work on behalf of the military. In an e-mail message, however, she said that suggestions of war profiteering were "an affront to all hard-working, honorable Halliburton employees."

Hall added that military contracts were awarded "not by politicians but by government civil servants, under strict guidelines."

Daniel Carlson, a spokesman for the Army's Joint Munitions Command, said Brown and Root had won a competitive bidding process in 2001 to provide a wide range of "contingency" services to the military in the event of the deployment of U.S. troops overseas. He said the contract, known as the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program, or LOGCAP, was designed to free uniformed personnel for combat duties and did not preclude deals with other contractors.

Carlson said the money earmarked for Brown and Root was an estimate, and could go "up or down" depending on the work performed.

The Joint Munitions Command provided The Washington Post with an updated version of a spreadsheet the Army released to Waxman earlier this month, giving detailed estimates of money obligated to Brown and Root under Operation Iraqi Freedom. Estimates of the company's revenue from Iraq have been increasing steadily since February, when the Corps of Engineers announced the company had won a $37.5 million contract for pre-positioning fire equipment in the region.

In addition to its Iraq contracts, Brown and Root has also earned $183 million from Operation Enduring Freedom, the military name for the war on terrorism and combat operations in Afghanistan (news - web sites), according to the Army's numbers.

Waxman's interest in Halliburton was ignited by a routine Corps of Engineers announcement in March reporting that the company had been awarded a no-bid contract, with a $7 billion limit, for putting out fires at Iraqi oil wells. Corps spokesmen justified the lack of competition on the grounds that the operation was part of a classified war plan and the Army did not have time to secure competitive bids for the work.

The corps said the oil rehabilitation deal was an offshoot of the LOGCAP contract, a one-year agreement renewable for 10 years. Individual work orders assigned under LOGCAP do not have to be competitively bid. But Waxman and other critics maintain that the oil work has nothing to do with the logistics operation.

The practice of delegating a vast array of logistics operations to a single contractor dates to the aftermath of the 1991 Persian Gulf War (news - web sites) and a study commissioned by Cheney, then defense secretary, on military outsourcing. The Pentagon chose Brown and Root to carry out the study and subsequently selected the company to implement its own plan. Cheney served as chief executive of Brown and Root's parent company, Halliburton, from 1995 to 2000, when he resigned to run for the vice presidency.



At the time, said P.W. Singer, a Brookings Institution scholar and author of "Corporate Warriors," it was impossible to predict how lucrative the military contracting business would become. He estimates the number of contract workers in Iraq at 20,000, or about one for every 10 soldiers. During the Gulf War, the proportion was about one in 100.

Brown and Root's revenue from Operation Iraqi Freedom is already rivaling its earnings from its contracts in the Balkans, and is a major factor in increasing the value of Halliburton shares by 50 percent over the past year, according to industry analysts. The company reported a net profit of $26 million in the second quarter of this year, in contrast to a $498 million loss in the same period last year.

Waxman aides said they have been told by the General Accounting Office that Brown and Root is likely to earn "several hundred million more dollars" from the no-bid Corps of Engineers contract to rehabilitate Iraqi oil fields. Waxman, the ranking minority member on the House Government Reform Committee , had asked the GAO to investigate the corps' decision not to bid out the contract.

After a round of unfavorable publicity, the corps explained that the sole award to Brown and Root would be replaced by a competitively bid contract. But the deadline for announcing the results of the competition has slipped from August to October, causing rival companies to complain that little work will be left for anybody else. Bechtel, one of Halliburton's main competitors, announced this month that it would not bid for the corps contract and would instead focus on securing work from the Iraqi oil ministry.

In addition to the Army contracts, Halliburton has profited from other government-related work in Iraq and the war on terrorism, and has a $300 million contract with the Navy structured along similar lines to LOGCAP.

Pentagon officials said the increasing reliance on contractors is inevitable, given the multiple demands on the military, particularly since Sept. 11, 2001. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is a champion of "outsourcing," writing in The Post in May that "more than 300,000 uniformed personnel" were doing jobs that civilians could do.

Independent experts said the trend toward outsourcing logistic operations has resulted in new problems, such as a lack of accountability and transparency on the part of private military firms and sometimes questionable billing practices.

A major problem in Iraq, Singer said, has been the phenomenon of "no-shows" caused by the inhospitable security environment, including the killing of contract workers, including a Halliburton mail delivery employee earlier this month.

"At the end of the day, neither these companies nor their employees are bound by military justice, and it is up to them whether to show up or not," Singer said. "The result is that there have been delays in setting up showers for soldiers, getting them cooked meals and so on."

A related concern is the rising cost of hiring contract workers because of skyrocketing insurance premiums. Singer estimates that premiums have increased by 300 percent to 400 percent this year, costs that are passed on to the taxpayer under the cost-plus-award fee system that is the basis for most contracts.

The LOGCAP contract awarded to Brown and Root in 2001 was the third, and potentially most lucrative, super-contract awarded by the Army. Brown and Root won the first five-year contract in 1992, but lost the second to rival DynCorp in 1997 after the GAO criticized the Army for not adequately controlling contracting costs in Bosnia.







And they say there's no such thing as the military/industrial complex.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
El Blanco El Blanco is offline
Mocker
El Blanco's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
El Blanco is probably a spambot
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 01:27 PM       
You're mad because private companies are profiting off the hard work they are doing to rebuild a country?
__________________
according to my mongoose, anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 01:52 PM       
No. I'm mad becuase a tiny handful of companies all with direct ties to the Bush administration and often without bidding are getting contracts who's profits are significantly larger every time they're reported.

This is called War Profiteering.

War profiteering makes me mad.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
BombsBurstingInAir BombsBurstingInAir is offline
Member
BombsBurstingInAir's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
BombsBurstingInAir is probably a spambot
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 02:39 PM       
Next I suppose we'll hear Cheney is sitting in a lawn chair with a mint julip, bamboo umbrella, cigar, and big ol grin on his face next to an oil rig, while Bush stands alone with a big fat wad of cash in his shirt pocket. I guess all those jailbirds from Enron will be doing the finances.
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 03:05 PM       
Bush's wad of cash will go into his reellection fund, Chenney spends much of his time in 'undisclosed locations' which on at least one occasion were a private resort and shooting club, so if he has mint julips there it wouldn't suprise me in the least, and since no one from Enron is doing any time, their free to do the books for the administration. But it doesn't need to be the actual accountants if that seems to outrageous to believe for you. It can just be the same accounting practices.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Phil the anorak Phil the anorak is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England,land of the 2003 RWC winners
Phil the anorak is probably a spambot
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 03:18 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
You're mad because private companies are profiting off the hard work they are doing to rebuild a country?
Hmmm yes and who was it that helped wreck it further than Saddam did then?

Its logical, Bush and co destroyed it to show how good Halliburton et al can put it back together!
__________________
The fart in your internet astronaut suit.

Discover a lost art, play marbles at www.marillion.com
Reply With Quote
  #7  
BombsBurstingInAir BombsBurstingInAir is offline
Member
BombsBurstingInAir's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
BombsBurstingInAir is probably a spambot
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 03:40 PM       
Howard Dean for president. Happy?
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 04:09 PM       
Sure. But Hell, I'm not choosy. "Howard Stern" for president would make me happier than I am now. "Moe Howard" would make me happier, and he's dead. "Lump of Sick for President" would mke me happier. I don't think that's the issue.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Big Papa Goat Big Papa Goat is offline
Mocker
Big Papa Goat's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Missouri
Big Papa Goat is probably a spambot
Old Aug 28th, 2003, 05:36 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
You're mad because private companies are profiting off the hard work they are doing to rebuild a country?
Rebuild a country? Since when was Iraq ever a country? The land which is now enclosed by present day Iraq's borders has been occupied by several empires over the past few thousand years, the most recent being the Ottoman Empire, until 1919, when the British established the borders of the country we now call Iraq as it carved up the defeated Ottoman Empire's colonial posessions. I believe it was around 1939 when some kind of monarchy was established, and in 1958, it was overthrown by a revolutionary general. In 1968, the Ba'athist military took over, and the rest is history.

So a casual glance at history doesn't show any reason for Iraq as we know it to be considered a country, but what does a casual glance at Iraq itself reveal?

The north of Iraq is populated largely by Kurds, who along with the Kurds of Turkey and a few other middle eastern nations are seeking a homeland. Kurds are not Iraqis, and do not want to be a part of any Iraqi state, be it Saddams Iraq, or a democratic US backed Iraq.

Then there are the Shiite and Sunni Muslims, with their little schism.

Well, thats 3 groups of people, all disliking eachother to different degrees, and not wanting to work together.

Bearing that in mind El Blanco, what is this country that these corporations are "working hard to rebuild?"
__________________
Ibid
Reply With Quote
  #10  
BombsBurstingInAir BombsBurstingInAir is offline
Member
BombsBurstingInAir's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
BombsBurstingInAir is probably a spambot
Old Sep 11th, 2003, 02:40 PM        RE:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...enron_glisan_9
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Sep 11th, 2003, 02:57 PM       
I was pleased that one of these bastards is going to do some time. So that brings us to, what now, a grand total of... one so far?

Besides, I thought we were talking about Halliburton.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
BombsBurstingInAir BombsBurstingInAir is offline
Member
BombsBurstingInAir's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
BombsBurstingInAir is probably a spambot
Old Sep 11th, 2003, 03:58 PM       
I was just correcting your previous post.
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Sep 11th, 2003, 04:05 PM       
Howard Dean for president. Right.

I'm not sure if you knew this folks, but Bush is actually spending more on traditionally leftist policies than any Democrat ever has. He also hasn't signicantly raised taxes to cover this extra cost, either.

For every Dove, there is a Hawk: maybe even a 2:3 ratio.

You see, Bush is smarter than the DNC would make you think. He knows, or at least his handlers know, that cutting government programs is going to get him taken out of office after one term (sad, but true). He also knows that more people care about tax raises than the budget deficit. It may seem that Bush is going to go down in a ball of fire, but the term "vocal minority" comes to mind.

In reality, Bush isn't tipping off anyone other than the die-hard left, anti-war protestors, and the few people who actually care about the deficit.

So, what does this all mean? Is the Republican party overrun by neocons? Is this all a clever ploy by the Reps to decimate the Dems enough to have a one-party system for a while, force the Dems to change their platform, and then slowly ween the people off of the government? Who knows.
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:05 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.