Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They got the contract because they already had their foot in the door, the cost of mobilizing a new contractor into Iraq with clearances and cost for placement, start-up for an effort that will last a few years is cost prohinitive
The government does not pay for that, the contractor does. There are a number of ways a contractor can manipulate the government, especially when the government is in a hurry, but don't think for a moment it's a good deal for the government.
I could tell you a couple of real-life "$500 hammer" and "4-Gee coffee pot" stories that happened to me.
Don't forget the 100 or so "advisors" ..... it's important for Obama to deny that these are "boots on the ground" to satisfy the Leftists. He spins until he is dizzy.
He had to have "Congressional Approval" to do anything in Syria and now he says he doesn't need "Congressional Approval" to do anything in Iraq. Spin, Spin, Spin .... All politics all the time.
I guess all these folks he is sending over there wear Flip-Flops.
"Boots on the ground" means a combat fighting force, and everyone knows that's what it really means. If you think 100 men--half a company--in a whole country by themselves equals ay kind of a fighting force, you need to confer with a National Guard troop or a Reservist near you to get yourself schooled.
That's just enough people, placed in the right locations, to provide the US Army leadership with "ground truth" about the worthiness of the Iraqi army--whether it would be worthwhile to provide them with any measure of support at all, or whether it would be a total waste of time.
It's been reported that he's sending these guys in to protect our embassy.
If that's the case then he's doing the right thing ( remember Benghazi ?).
That being said , Iraq is a cluster**** and a lost cause, Muslims can't live peacefully with other peoples unless FORCED to, apparently they can't live with each other also.
Obama is in a lose/lose situation in Iraq.
Time for Iraqis to deal with their own problems instead of being babysat by Uncle Sam.
I would say United States of America can't live peacefully with other people.
Originally Posted by Kibby
Halliburton got the contract because they are not only "big enough", but they are one of the few outfits in the World that have the expertise to do the job. That's exactly why they have continued to work for the O-Team - but the Low Info Leftists still have no clue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Speaking of no clue, please explain Halliburton's expertise that no one in the world has the capability.
You actually don't know anything at all about the Oil/Gas Industry at all .... do you?
These "straw man" things the Leftists use get ridiculous - since when is "one of the few" the same as "no one in the world"? Perhaps you could explain why Obama used "No one in the world" Oil Service people instead of the plethora of folks you seem to think are out there. Why do you think that Obama stuck with Halliburton and it's subsidiaries instead of giving the contracts to somebody else?
The government does not pay for that, the contractor does. There are a number of ways a contractor can manipulate the government, especially when the government is in a hurry, but don't think for a moment it's a good deal for the government.
I could tell you a couple of real-life "$500 hammer" and "4-Gee coffee pot" stories that happened to me.
A new contractor would need to include the transportation costs to move their employees and equipment in their bid not to mention security clearances, that is a huge advantage for an existing contractor. It would have to be a rather gross underbid for a new contractor.
You actually don't know anything at all about the Oil/Gas Industry at all .... do you?
These "straw man" things the Leftists use get ridiculous - since when is "one of the few" the same as "no one in the world"? Perhaps you could explain why Obama used "No one in the world" Oil Service people instead of the plethora of folks you seem to think are out there. Why do you think that Obama stuck with Halliburton and it's subsidiaries instead of giving the contracts to somebody else?
Who said plethora, the contention was that Halliburton was the only company that had the expertise.
A new contractor would need to include the transportation costs to move their employees and equipment in their bid not to mention security clearances, that is a huge advantage for an existing contractor. It would have to be a rather gross underbid for a new contractor.
There are already many capable contractors for nearly everything the government needs doing, especially when we're just talking about providing functional services like electrical work, carpentry, waste disposal, cooking, et cetera, as Halliburton was involved in.
It's a problem when the government has allowed a single contractor to become too embedded in operations that it essentially has a monopoly within the government.
For the uniformed staffers involved, it can be a challenge to fight even when they know the government has been put into a weak position. The contractor reps have usually been embedded for a decade or more (and play golf with senior military leadership) while any particular uniformed staffer is not going to be in that job for more than three years. He'll either come in at the beginning of contract negotiations or at the end, but rarely will be around long enough to see the whole thing play out...the company rep has been there the whole time, watching the military staffers come and go like mayflies.
So, having been there and done that while in uniform, I know how contractors play that game. Just because they got the contract, don't believe it's because they were up and up the company--and the only company--that deserved it.
You actually don't know anything at all about the Oil/Gas Industry at all .... do you?
These "straw man" things the Leftists use get ridiculous - since when is "one of the few" the same as "no one in the world"? Perhaps you could explain why Obama used "No one in the world" Oil Service people instead of the plethora of folks you seem to think are out there. Why do you think that Obama stuck with Halliburton and it's subsidiaries instead of giving the contracts to somebody else?
Does the president sign and give out contracts now?
Does the president sign and give out contracts now?
And there is the perfect "poke in the eye" question.
I'll answer, no president is involved in letting out contracts to any individual corporation. There are agencies well below his pay grade that handle that.
Bush didn't win anything, the fed defense contractors did and a whole bunch of people died because of it.
Obama promised to bring the troops home while campaigning in 2007-2008, effectively ending the war. Nixon has a better record than Obama.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
