chrisishardcore.com

I guess he could have waited until the Dems put up Metrosexual Dean or GOP Until Five Minutes Ago Clark before endorsing Bush. It's just a manner of bad manners, really.

I suppose I can understand wanting a conservative in office. But this one?. Surely there has to be someone better to choose from. Why not just run yourself if you're Zell?

Oops I meant to post this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iraq-Contracts.html?hp

I'd vote for President Zell!

Is there any point to the Halliburton article? It's really a tired, irrelevant argument.

I personally believe that the Iraq war was unjustified from a national security standpoint, especially if it accelerates an arms race for Iran and North Korea. When you think something was done under a false pretext, I'd argue that the cronyism that went along with it is important and not just tired. Obviously you don't believe this, but wouldn't you at least feel better if there weren't so many coincidences like this? Or if the White House would release classified 9/11 information to the oversight committee investigating it? At least release the identities of the individuals and countries that funded the 9/11 terrorists?

I don't know, I may end up being wrong, but I don't want to go down similar roads as the Iraq war in the future, and things like the Halliburton deal that highlight the sleaziness of the current administration are aesthetic arguments against them.

Yeah, if I started from the standpoint of "the whole thing is done under a false pretense," I would certainly point to KBR as an example.

However, taken at face value, there's certainly nothing wrong with hiring one of the biggest/best/most-experienced companies to do the task at hand! (Anecdotally, I've heard that oil project planners are spread very thin, and there are very few with proven track records.) KBR was involved in Kosovo and Afghanistan, I believe. They have been around for quite some time: "It has been a supplier to the US Defense Department since the 1940s. The company is the main US Government contractor for managing Russia’s nuclear-weapons conversion programme, under an agreement between the two countries. It is also one of the US military’s main logistics operators, a role it looks increasingly likely to replicate in the UK: a sign of the convergence in the armed forces of the two countries that the UK Government is pushing through not only at strategy and operational levels, but also in logistics and procurement."

(Googled from http://www.bjhc.co.uk/journal/1/2003/5003.htm)

That article also addresses some of the controversies regarding Halliburton and KBR. I think the no-bid process by which they were awarded is fishy, but might be justified due to time constraints. Coincidentally, they seem to be involved in some tax evasion issue in Nigeria, for which the US is investigating them.

Don't you think Halliburton isanother post?

The cronyism is a problem, but an afterthought.They (Bush) didn't go to war to get Halliburton money. But after they decided to do the thing, they sure gave out the no bidders.I agree that KBR is probably the best for the job, but why not open it up and give other bidders a shot? Why antagonize allies. And finally why not throw totalfinaelf or the Russians a bone on the oil deals? That would improve the situation immensely.

Yes, probably!

Are you going to the Atlanta bloggerthon?

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: