Halliburton and Bechtel conquer Iraq

[shemp]

Now that the dirty work has been done at the behest of their puppet Bush, it's time to reap the profits. I'm sure that little of the oil money will find its way into the hands of the common Iraqi people. So much for "Trickle Down" economics.

Halliburton unit could make $7b (http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/101/nation/Halliburton_unit_could_make_7b+.shtml)

HALLIBURTON, BECHTEL ET. AL. TO PROFIT IN POST WAR IRAQ (http://www.rushlimbaughonline.com/articles/pigs.htm)

War or Cash Cow? You Decide (http://www.africana.com/columns/alexander/bw20030324conspiracy.asp)

[crackmonkey]

So... the US and UK won the war, therefore any US or UK companies that get contracts for the rebuilding are profiteering. Is that about it? Or did we go to war so Bechtel could get the contracts? "No War for Oil Infrastructure Repair"?

[aerocontrols]

The contracts could have been worth $7 billion, but since there were less than 2 dozen oil fires, they've billed $50.3 million so far?

Flowers wrote that the $7 billion ceiling reflected the difficulty in predicting the extent of the damage to Iraqi wells and stressed that the actual value of the deal will depend on the cost of the orders placed under it.

[Clancie]

originally posted by crackmonkey
Therefore any US or UK companies that get contracts for the rebuilding are profiteering. Is that about it?
Well, only a handful of politically well-connected American companies have been given contracts so far.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/114656_rebuild28.shtml
One of the first major contracts was awarded to a subsidiary of Halliburton Co., a company that was run by Vice President Dick Cheney, on a no-bid basis.

Experts say the job in Iraq could be the biggest undertaking since the Marshall Plan after World War II.

The early contracts -- including the one to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root -- have been awarded without competition or detailed explanations of total cost.

Business as usual.

Income redistribution, Republican style.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Clancy
Business as usual.
Not that I want to defend Haliburton et al, but it's my understanding that the DOD has longstanding relationships with several large corporations. Not every job is put up for bid. Some are sort of like extensions to pre-existing contracts and work orders.

It's difficult to bid a job without detailed specs for the work. Initially, people will have to assess what's to be built, and where, and how. I'd think it would be easier to put up specific jobs for bid to sub-contractors, once a stable infrastructure and management division is in place.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by Clancy

Business as usual.

Income redistribution, Republican style.

Income redistribution, Republican style - Hiring large corporations to do work that creates jobs and shareholder value.

Income redistribution, Democrat style - give a handout to a lazy piece of crap so he can go out and buy more cheap wine.

I'll choose the former, thank you.

[aerocontrols]

U.S. Finds Iraq Contractor with No Political Ties (http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/000834.html)

MattJ

[shemp]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
U.S. Finds Iraq Contractor with No Political Ties (http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/000834.html)

MattJ

Looks like Diogenes finally found his honest man.

[crackmonkey]

Did Halliburton and Bechtel get government work during the Clinton years? If so, would that make Clinton part of the Vast Right Wing Military-Industrial Conspiracy?

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Not that I want to defend Haliburton et al, but it's my understanding that the DOD has longstanding relationships with several large corporations. Not every job is put up for bid. Some are sort of like extensions to pre-existing contracts and work orders.

True. Companies have to bid for the extensions and/or additions, though. Rarely are they a "done deal".

There are not all that many companies that can do the work on the scale required in Iraq. Quite naturally, the contracts fall to the largest corporations with global resources, such as Bechtel, Raytheon, Fluor, Halliburton, etc. These aren't jobs for companies seeking a "foot in the door".

[corplinx]

NEWS FLASH:

Longtime Defense Contractor gets Defense Contract!!!!


Conspiracy!!!!!!!!

[Clancie]

Did Halliburton and Bechtel get government work during the Clinton years? If so, would that make Clinton part of the Vast Right Wing Military-Industrial Conspiracy?

I'm glad you mentioned the Military Industrial complex. Here's President Eisenhower's warning about it:

from Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation, 1961

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government.

We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.

The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted.

Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

[crackmonkey]

Well, I didn't... I mentioned the 'Military-Industrial Conspiracy'. Thanks anyway, I guess...

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer


Income redistribution, Republican style - Hiring large corporations to do work that creates jobs and shareholder value.

Income redistribution, Democrat style - give a handout to a lazy piece of crap so he can go out and buy more cheap wine.

I'll choose the former, thank you.


Carefully phrased by Scrut so that personal bias will not be overlooked.

[Clancie]

Former Iraqi Foreign Minister Adnan Pachachi makes an excellent point (below). Unless we're saying we've defeated and occupied Iraq, there's no reason the U.S. should unilaterally be approving all these reconstruction contracts for another country.

KUWAIT (Reuters) - A prominent Iraqi exile said on Saturday only a democratically elected government should be allowed to sign the massive contracts needed to reconstruct the country.

Former Foreign Minister Adnan Pachachi criticized Washington over its plans for a U.S.-led civilian authority to hand out reconstruction contracts without the approval of an elected Iraqi government.

"No one has the right to commit Iraq to obligations and costs," he told a news conference in Kuwait. "Only an Iraqi government can do that. A parliament should also endorse the agreements."

The U.S. government on Thursday awarded Bechtel Corp. a $680-million-contract to help rebuild Iraq's power, water and sewage systems as well as repair air and sea ports.

Pachachi, seen as a potential future policymaker, also said he wanted a U.N.-sponsored conference to select an interim Iraqi government over the civil authority headed by retired U.S. general Jay Garner.

"We believe that the involvement of the United Nations will give (the government) legitimacy and greater acceptance worldwide and among Iraqis," Pachachi said.

[Pyrrho]

Clancy, that's an extremely good and important point. Whose country is it, anyway?

[hammegk]

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
Clancy, that's an extremely good and important point. Whose country is it, anyway?

Truly, LOL.

Say for the sake of argument 1,000,000 bbl/day is shut-in; i.e. gross value US$30,000,000 / day being foregone by Iraq. Nearly US$1 Billion/month! (If you don't have an oil-well, get one .. ;) )

Writing a RFP for the work would take many days, bid preparation weeks, bid award more weeks. Few companies are capable and competent, and any that are are first-world -- a few US, a couple British, a couple French, and the odd Italian, FSU state, etc.

Potential production is perhaps 4,000,000 bopd.

Now, would you prefer the work to begin? Pachachi will have to get his personal cut (& his buddies & relatives) later.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by hammegk

Now, would you prefer the work to begin? Pachachi will have to get his personal cut (& his buddies & relatives) later.
Now yer talkin'. :D

I can imagine the manifold difficulties in getting just one contract moving through a new government there. Why, in a small village I used to work in many years ago, it took two years and $50,000 to get a single traffic light installed.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Clancy


I'm glad you mentioned the Military Industrial complex. Here's President Eisenhower's warning about it:


Thank you for reminding us of history. Pretty wise honest guy that Ike for a Texas Republican.

[fishbob]

Writing a RFP for the work would take many days, bid preparation weeks, bid award more weeks. Few companies are capable and competent, and any that are are first-world -- a few US, a couple British, a couple French, and the odd Italian, FSU state, etc. Hammegk is being very optimistic here about the time required for the US govt to contract anything anymore. Contracting is one of the most broke down, inefficient things the Govt does (this is why we get $900 hammers). Emergency type contracts with the few companies that engage in this kind of work is the only way to get the work started.

[RandFan]

Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. Ike was right.

Of course Johnson and Mcnamara had other plans. Johnson was another very bright Texan. Together with Kennedy they figured away around the whole military thing and funneled a boat load of money into the auspices of "space" exploration so that Johnson would not have to "go to bed by the light of a communist moon." And they still had money left over for their little police action AKA the Vietnam War.

Care to guess who Johnson favored with military and space contracts?

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Clancy
Former Iraqi Foreign Minister Adnan Pachachi makes an excellent point (below). Unless we're saying we've defeated and occupied Iraq, there's no reason the U.S. should unilaterally be approving all these reconstruction contracts for another country. We should not alter the plan that is in place now because we know that if we do the job it will get done and get done right. If the whole deal gets blown then we will be to blame.

We are not there to occupy or control but having come this far, having lost American lives, we must take great pains to see that things are done correctly. Let the UN do what they do best and make certain that elections are held and a gradual and stable transition takes place. There are lots of reasons for the US to do exactly what it is doing right now. This is definitely not the time to cut and run.

The Iraqis have every right to control their country and their assets especially the oil. Iraq belongs to Iraqis. But to eliminate a regime and then just leave would be very irresponsible. Who speaks for the Iraqis, Pachachi? There are other Iraqis who disagree with him. No, time and help is needed to get the Iraqis to a place where they can take care of themselves. They will need to be patient. It will happen. George Bush knows the consequences of not making that transition.

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
Clancy, that's an extremely good and important point. Whose country is it, anyway?

Actually, it's not a good point. America is paying the $$$, and we therefore get to pick who we send our money to.

It is the responsibility of the occupying party to maintain law, order, stability, and infrastructure for the people occupied. And America has taken up this thankless but necessary task to be in compliance with that set of international laws and treaties.

-Ben

[Clancie]

Actually, it's not a good point. America is paying the $$$, and we therefore get to pick who we send our money to.

So...what about all the Bush talk about paying for the vast majority of the reconstruction costs with Iraqi (as in Iraqi) oil money?

This administration should also want to involve the U.N. in helping form the new government. But, typically, they reject U.N. involvement, although it makes good political sense, even in terms of the "blame" issue you mentioned.

This administration is arrogance personified. To me that also explains why they are ignoring the offer of Blix and his experienced team of inspectors, to come help in the search for weapons of mass destruction.

After all, I would think the U.S. military would be glad for some help from people already familiar with Iraq's WMD--especially after the Marines broke the UN seals on some of the radioactive stored material they found--thus making it impossible to now tell what is missing from the original inventory the UN had done of the barrels.

And, while we're looking for biological weapons, it would also be prudent to not let looters take live polio viruses from the labs in Baghdad.

All in all, I think the preparation and foresight of this endeavor leaves a lot to be desired, especially as it was hardly a "spur of the moment" attack.

[subgenius]

"And, while we're looking for biological weapons, it would also be prudent to not let looters take live polio viruses from the labs in Baghdad. "

That part of the looting is the scariest. There were many other deadly agents carted away.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by subgenius

Thank you for reminding us of history. Pretty wise honest guy that Ike for a Texas Republican.

Kansas Republican.

Like me.

MattJ

[crackmonkey]

How do broken seals of the radioactive barrels (was this actually confirmed, by the way?) prevent a tally of what's missing?

[subgenius]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


Kansas Republican.

Like me.

MattJ

"Born in Texas in 1890, brought up in Abilene, Kansas, Eisenhower was the third of seven sons."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/de34.html

Certainly a man that anyone would like to claim as a native son.

Wichita is one of the nation's leading aircraft-manufacturing centers, ranking first in production of private aircraft. (Have something to do with your nick?)
Points of interest include the Kansas History Center at Topeka, the Eisenhower boyhood home and the Eisenhower Memorial Museum and Presidential Library at Abilene.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108215.html

Also the birthplace of Buster Keaton.

Kansas is a Sioux word meaning "people of the south wind."

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by subgenius


"Born in Texas in 1890, brought up in Abilene, Kansas, Eisenhower was the third of seven sons."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/de34.html

Certainly a man that anyone would like to claim as a native son.

Because he is.

Originally posted by subgenius
Wichita is one of the nation's leading aircraft-manufacturing centers, ranking first in production of private aircraft. (Have something to do with your nick?)

I'm an aerospace engineering grad student, and I was raised in Wichita, but I've never worked at Boeing, Cessna, Raytheon, or Learjet.

Originally posted by subgenius
Points of interest include the Kansas History Center at Topeka, the Eisenhower boyhood home and the Eisenhower Memorial Museum and Presidential Library at Abilene.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108215.html


Been there. Grade school field trip. Good times.

MattJ

[Clancie]

crackmonkey,

Good question, but I can't find the original article I made that conclusion from.:(

However, here are some "highlights" and a link from an LA Times article on the same subject:

U.S. Finally Secures Uranium Warehouses in Iraq

By Bob Drogin, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON -- Three Iraqi warehouses filled with 2,500 barrels of uranium that could be enriched for nuclear weapons -- plus 150 radioactive isotopes that could be used for deadly "dirty bombs" -- lay unguarded for several days this week as Iraqi mobs swirled around.

The facility, known as Location C, was Iraq's only internationally sanctioned storage site for nuclear material. It thus was a potential prize for U.S. forces -- or for anyone seeking to steal radioactive material for sale to other countries or to terrorists....

Initial reports indicate that U.S. Marines who entered the chaotic complex last weekend didn't realize Tuwaitha's significance. Nor did they immediately look for the nuclear warehouses about a mile away.

Marine combat engineers finally secured Location C on Wednesday after a State Department counter-terrorism task force warned Central Command of the danger, U.S. officials said.

It wasn't clear Thursday if special U.S. weapons teams had reached the site. Officials at the Pentagon and in Qatar said they did not know if anyone had breached the steel doors and removed any of the 500 tons of unrefined uranium and uranium dioxide, 1.8 tons of low-enriched uranium and 150 transportable radioactive devices from Iraqi hospitals and research facilities that were stored at the site.

"The most immediate concern is the radioactive isotopes," said David Albright, a former nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq who now heads the nonprofit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington. "You worry that some idiot will take them and spread them around. We don't need a radiation accident. Or that someone will try to sell them for a dirty bomb. Or that they'll try to sell the uranium on the black market for someone else's nuclear weapons program."

..."There's a tremendous danger now that materials could slip out of the country," warned Rolfe Ekeus, who headed U.N. weapons teams in Iraq during most of the 1990s. "It's very important that these sites be taken under control immediately.`

...So far, U.S. forces have found none of the illegal arms that Bush administration officials insist are hidden in Iraq - and that still could be used as battlefield or terrorist weapons. President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair repeatedly cited the existence of forbidden weapons as the chief justification for invading Iraq.

...Jessica Matthews, president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Washington should allow U.N. inspectors weapons back into Iraq to assist in the search and to provide an independent assessment of any weapons found. The U.N. teams have amassed vast databases that are unavailable to the U.S. teams.

"There's no question it would be helpful both for international legitimacy and for simple expertise," Matthews said.

...So far, the Pentagon teams have visited only a dozen sites of more than 1,000 on their priority list, the official said. "That could grow as you interview people and you get documents and intelligence," he added.

...U.N. inspectors recently searched 400 sites in four months - and found no evidence of illegal biological or chemical weapons.

President Bush outlined Iraq's suspected weapons in his State of the Union speech last January. Saddam, he said, had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax and more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin. He said Iraq also could produce as much as 500 tons of sarin and VX nerve agents, as well as Mustard gas.

Bush (had) said such weapons could be used to "kill several million people."

..."It's possible the Republican Guard refused orders, or that they couldn't get to the weapons," said Judith Yaphe, who was the chief CIA analyst on Iraq in the 1991 Persian Gulf War..."The situation may have deteriorated much faster than they thought. Or it's possible, of course, that they didn't really have the weapons to start with."

Others, still in government, expressed similar skepticism. Several said the administration presented worst-case intelligence estimates, not realistic appraisals of the danger.

"I think we'll probably find some stuff, but I don't know how much we'll find," said a U.S. official familiar with the intelligence on Iraq. "It may be a lot less than people were anticipating."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/inside/la-war-nukes11apr11.story