• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Oh look! Obama admin gives no bid contract to Haliburton

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
2
0
This sucks. Haliburton, KBR, Blackwater, and all the rest need to be off the government payroll.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Maybe Greenman has a point in saying, "Perhaps you work for crooks, because I can assure you that this isn't normal and common business practice."

But what has this to do with Haliburon, that was in the big business corruption business long before Obama was elected?

Point being, unlike most of US business, Halliburton is somewhat corruption personified as a business model. And because Halliburton bought Kellog Brown and Rout, they bought a long and rich established corruption experience dating back even before the time of LBJ's first congressional term.

Yet we expect only Obama, all by him self, to wave that magic wand that the last 90 years of US President failed to wield, and make a large and now internationa corporation like Haliburton is to simply evaporate in the new daylight. And failing that, Obama is the greatest rascal in history which seems to be the thread thesis.

OK OK join me, help Obama and write your congressmen and senators and ask them to ban Haliburon from ever receiving any US governments contracts.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,992
96
91
I don't disagree conceptually, but there's one slight problem with that approach. It used to be simple because (through the draft) there was a large pool of available people for the military at a relatively low cost. However, now it's very expensive to train and recruit each member of the military, and we simply don't have the manpower to have the military handle all those "support" roles that it used to handle in previous wars. That's why they turned to private contractors.
Agreed on all points. We use private contractors because we have manpower issues. Honestly though, since I disagree in principle on using private contractors in military matters, we should either bring back the draft to get ahold of the manpower issue, or reduce our operations to compensate for the amount of military manpower available.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,978
848
126
Oh look! Obama admin gives no bid contract to Haliburton

You Republicans should be thrilled your buds are still be taken care of.

Is that not the case?
I dont mind that Haliburton got the contract. Theyre the best at what they do (I know that statement leaves me open to things like kill, steal, etc, whatever. Fire away :rolleyes: ). what pisses me off is the no bid part. Always has.

That said, Im open to hearing why its done that way...or at least the theory why.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,578
618
126
Oh look! Obama admin gives no bid contract to Haliburton

You Republicans should be thrilled your buds are still be taken care of.

Is that not the case?
Yeah, so much for "Hope and Change," right? Your messiah appears to look exactly like your hero Bush -- you know, the guy you voted for?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,325
126
Maybe Greenman has a point in saying, "Perhaps you work for crooks, because I can assure you that this isn't normal and common business practice."

But what has this to do with Haliburon, that was in the big business corruption business long before Obama was elected?

Point being, unlike most of US business, Halliburton is somewhat corruption personified as a business model. And because Halliburton bought Kellog Brown and Rout, they bought a long and rich established corruption experience dating back even before the time of LBJ's first congressional term.

Yet we expect only Obama, all by him self, to wave that magic wand that the last 90 years of US President failed to wield, and make a large and now internationa corporation like Haliburton is to simply evaporate in the new daylight. And failing that, Obama is the greatest rascal in history which seems to be the thread thesis.

OK OK join me, help Obama and write your congressmen and senators and ask them to ban Haliburon from ever receiving any US governments contracts.
Executive order requiring bids be taken for the contract.

Is there any reason that the above which couldn't require more than a paragraph or two from Obama's pen wouldn't at least make Haliburton bid on the work?

I mean if Cheney/Bush are the reason that Halliburton got all these contracts in the first place it should be rather easy for Obama to at least make them take bids before doing the exact same thing.

Or are you trying to say that Bush was such a mastermind that Obama is simply unable to undo his master plan of making Haliburton even more money. That would be quite impressive if he could not only give them no bid contracts during his own term but also ensure they receive no bids during the next administration who is supposedly (but isn't, as we are seeing) much different in darn near all aspects.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
I'd think it easier to recruit some people if they knew they could sign up as cooks, bakers, clerks, etc. from the outset.

Sea Bees and Army Engineers did quality work in record time on too many occasions to count. And I'm sure that they cost a fraction of what a civilian contractor cost. I have personally known people who enlisted just for the guaranteed construction training.
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
Agreed on all points. We use private contractors because we have manpower issues. Honestly though, since I disagree in principle on using private contractors in military matters, we should either bring back the draft to get ahold of the manpower issue, or reduce our operations to compensate for the amount of military manpower available.
Or perhaps the military should be reorganized so that logistics and supply, as well as services such as base construction, laundry, etc. are separate from the fighting forces. Basically tweak the merchant marine model (as it operates in war time) into a full time service that runs the back side of all the forces. I don't know if that's a good idea or not, but it's a thought. At least it would reduce the training overhead needed to staff such duties, without privatizing them.

But I still agree we could use a major reduction in operations across the board...
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
I try to give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to racism but I have noticed that Mr Obama's political opponents mention his race more than anyone else.
You must be smoking something. Very very very rarely have I heard anything regarding race mentioned by Obama opponents. Race is almost always brought into the discussion by his supporters, who it seems are certain that everyone who disagrees with him must simply be racist. Don't get me wrong, I know as well as anyone else that a certain portion of opposition to Obama is based on racism, just like a portion of his unconditional support is based on racism.
 

LumbergTech

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2005
3,622
1
0
You must be smoking something. Very very very rarely have I heard anything regarding race mentioned by Obama opponents. Race is almost always brought into the discussion by his supporters, who it seems are certain that everyone who disagrees with him must simply be racist. Don't get me wrong, I know as well as anyone else that a certain portion of opposition to Obama is based on racism, just like a portion of his unconditional support is based on racism.
you know why? because people on this forum are being censored somewhat..

the people who I have talked to in real life or in voice chat often call him a fucking great person etc

and to address the OP..i agree..this is bullshit

there should be bidding, but will anyone have the guts to call him out on it? no

I am capable of disagreeing with some of his action and agreeing with others. I guess some people aren't.
 
Last edited:

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
17,645
2,784
126
From what expertise do you counter my assertion?

No one called them crooks. It's just the way the system works. If you think bids are neutral to all parties, then you're not speaking from a perspective of experience.

Everything I said is fact, not conjecture. If you have directly bid on government contracts as well and feel have contrary experience, then please educate us.
I have in fact bid on many government contracts. The entire process was spelled out at the very beginning of each bid, and every aspect of it was open to scrutiny by everyone involved. They went so far as to require that any questions had to be asked in writing, so that the question and answer could be sent to every contractor bidding on the project. At the bid opening the envelopes were unsealed, the bids read, and the apparent winning bid announced. Every contractor could, and often did, request a copy of the winning bid. It was, as far as I could tell, absolutely clean.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
I have in fact bid on many government contracts. The entire process was spelled out at the very beginning of each bid, and every aspect of it was open to scrutiny by everyone involved. They went so far as to require that any questions had to be asked in writing, so that the question and answer could be sent to every contractor bidding on the project. At the bid opening the envelopes were unsealed, the bids read, and the apparent winning bid announced. Every contractor could, and often did, request a copy of the winning bid. It was, as far as I could tell, absolutely clean.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Th Greenman contention may have some totally external to this thread validity, but it so so does not apply to a sweetheart no other bidders permitted contract like Halibuton just got.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
17,645
2,784
126
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Th Greenman contention may have some totally external to this thread validity, but it so so does not apply to a sweetheart no other bidders permitted contract like Halibuton just got.
I was responding to Descartes direct question to myself about involvement in Government contracting. His claim was that kickbacks and sweetheart deals are the norm, my experience has been otherwise.

Please try to keep up.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,434
84
91
Hey the Dems are allowed to get kickbacks... just like the republicans. Nothing to see here.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
17,645
2,784
126
One aspect that all of you have missed is that some projects can't be bid, because they can't be defined. In my world that's a T&M contract.
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,501
1
81
Wasn't the issue that Mr Cheney had worked for Haliburton? People were saying it looked like he arranged it that his friends were getting an inside track to big contracts.

Personally I did not run around with my hair on fire about this when Mr Bush was in the White House
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,992
96
91
Or perhaps the military should be reorganized so that logistics and supply, as well as services such as base construction, laundry, etc. are separate from the fighting forces. Basically tweak the merchant marine model (as it operates in war time) into a full time service that runs the back side of all the forces. I don't know if that's a good idea or not, but it's a thought. At least it would reduce the training overhead needed to staff such duties, without privatizing them.

But I still agree we could use a major reduction in operations across the board...
I am not sure how well that would work when put into practice, but it does sound like a promising idea. Hopefully somebody in this administration has a similar thought...
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Posting in a troll thread!

Other than the Army actually approving the contract, I can't really find another connection to Obama.

Fifty percent-plus of The War in Afghanistan has always been 'contracted out'. Privatizing War is now the New Way forward in the new millenium.

From paying the Northern Alliance in October of 2001, forward to this day of Afghan Policing and Nation-Building, we PAY.

Of the 100k+ 'contractors' in Afghanistan only around 11k are US citizens. Why the Army cannot hire their own locals, who knows?

Other than the fact of privatizing war-for-profit in the military industrial complex, of course.




--
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,260
4
81
Posting in a troll thread!

Other than the Army actually approving the contract, I can't really find another connection to Obama.

Fifty percent-plus of The War in Afghanistan has always been 'contracted out'. Privatizing War is now the New Way forward in the new millenium.

From paying the Northern Alliance in October of 2001, forward to this day of Afghan Policing and Nation-Building, we PAY.

Of the 100k+ 'contractors' in Afghanistan only around 11k are US citizens. Why the Army cannot hire their own locals, who knows?

Other than the fact of privatizing war-for-profit in the military industrial complex, of course.




--
Traitor in Chief? Ring a bell?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY