Unemployed? Halliburton Has Plenty of Work In Iraq.

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ Unemployed? Halliburton Has Plenty of Work In Iraq.
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
Apr 20, 2010 2:35 AM
The CEO cites expanding US military bases and oil processing operations.

No wonder the Iraqi people don't like us.

http://freedomsyndicate.com/fair0000/wsj006.html
Apr 20, 2010 2:35am
fish82's avatar

fish82

Senior Member

4,111 posts
Apr 20, 2010 8:04 AM
I wish you would find a way to articulate your feelings a little better. ;)
Apr 20, 2010 8:04am
S

Shane Falco

Senior Member

440 posts
Apr 20, 2010 8:25 AM
Would rather have experts in this field pumping the oil from the ground using state of the art technology in an environmentally friendly manner, than a bunch of goof balls just tryin to shove a pipe in the ground. No?
Apr 20, 2010 8:25am
Q

queencitybuckeye

Senior Member

7,117 posts
Apr 20, 2010 9:11 AM
Footwedge wrote:
No wonder the Iraqi people don't like us.
Please cite a reputable source (not some anecdotal bullshit) indicating that the majority of their population doesn't like us.
Apr 20, 2010 9:11am
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Apr 20, 2010 9:20 AM
Mr. Falco, logic and reason has no bearing on this discussion, this is a bash Bush and Chaney thread, if you bring facts in you will be tarred and feathered.

Good day now :).
Apr 20, 2010 9:20am
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 11:11 AM
Any oilfield work will be contracted out by non-american companies who won the bids on drilling in Iraq. I believe BP has won that bid, so at least the money will be considered an "export of services". Also, it says nothing about military bases, they are basecamps for oil workers.
Apr 20, 2010 11:11am
S

Swamp Fox

Senior Member

2,218 posts
Apr 20, 2010 11:29 AM
How did that last Iraqi election come out? Didn't the guy we were opposing do quite well? And with regard to a "bunch of goofballs trying to shove a pipe in the ground", I can see how that general attitude would certainly make Iraqi's run to us in thankfulness that we saved them from Saddam. I now know why that famous book was entitled "The Ugly American".
Apr 20, 2010 11:29am
S

Shane Falco

Senior Member

440 posts
Apr 20, 2010 12:41 PM
Swamp: If I had feelings, that would hurt.

Jmog: Oops I Forgot! Sorry.

Ummmm... Bush made me do it?
Apr 20, 2010 12:41pm
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
Apr 20, 2010 4:43 PM
queencitybuckeye wrote:
Footwedge wrote:
No wonder the Iraqi people don't like us.
Please cite a reputable source (not some anecdotal bullshit) indicating that the majority of their population doesn't like us.
"A new WPO poll of the Iraqi public finds that seven in ten Iraqis want U.S.-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year."

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/250.php

That's just one source on polling. I could easily find 10 more. Polls from 2003 all the way forward through today have remained relatively consistant. The idea that Iraqi citizens view us as liberators is farcical.

2 million people have migrated their borders.
Apr 20, 2010 4:43pm
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
Apr 20, 2010 4:47 PM
LJ wrote: Any oilfield work will be contracted out by non-american companies who won the bids on drilling in Iraq. I believe BP has won that bid, so at least the money will be considered an "export of services". Also, it says nothing about military bases, they are basecamps for oil workers.
Even though Halliburton has done some shady dealings in trying to "headquarter" themseles in the Cayman Islands, they are still an American conpany making huge cash in Iraq...

Last time I looked Halliburton had no affiliation as a subsidiary of British Petroleum.
Apr 20, 2010 4:47pm
ptown_trojans_1's avatar

ptown_trojans_1

Moderator

7,632 posts
Apr 20, 2010 4:47 PM
Footwedge wrote:
queencitybuckeye wrote:
Footwedge wrote:
No wonder the Iraqi people don't like us.
Please cite a reputable source (not some anecdotal bullshit) indicating that the majority of their population doesn't like us.
"A new WPO poll of the Iraqi public finds that seven in ten Iraqis want U.S.-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year."

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/250.php

That's just one source on polling. I could easily find 10 more. Polls from 2003 all the way forward through today have remained relatively consistant. The idea that Iraqi citizens view us as liberators is farcical.

2 million people have migrated their borders.
Hey chief, that is from 2007. Even then, all combat forces are out by next year anyways. The remaining 36,000 or so are in the Green Zone and middle of nowhere bases.

I'm sure they do want us out, but image if we did pull out in 2006, the place would be much worse off than it is now.

Plus Halliburton workers are not in full combat gear fighting insurgents. I have a good friend who studied the role of contractors in Iraq. They are grossly mischaracterized. Most are doing infrastructure, working with local officials to improve schools, roads, water, etc.
Apr 20, 2010 4:47pm
Q

queencitybuckeye

Senior Member

7,117 posts
Apr 20, 2010 4:54 PM
Footwedge wrote: "A new WPO poll of the Iraqi public finds that seven in ten Iraqis want U.S.-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year."
Not remotely the same thing as your earlier assertion.
Apr 20, 2010 4:54pm
fish82's avatar

fish82

Senior Member

4,111 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:03 PM
Footwedge wrote:
queencitybuckeye wrote:
Footwedge wrote:
No wonder the Iraqi people don't like us.
Please cite a reputable source (not some anecdotal bullshit) indicating that the majority of their population doesn't like us.
"A new WPO poll of the Iraqi public finds that seven in ten Iraqis want U.S.-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year."

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/250.php

That's just one source on polling. I could easily find 10 more. Polls from 2003 all the way forward through today have remained relatively consistant. The idea that Iraqi citizens view us as liberators is farcical.

2 million people have migrated their borders.
How exactly does that translate into "they don't like us?" I love Canadians, but that doesn't mean I want them occupying my country for 10 years.

And you constantly confuse "liberation" with "occupation."
Apr 20, 2010 5:03pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:12 PM
Footwedge wrote:
LJ wrote: Any oilfield work will be contracted out by non-american companies who won the bids on drilling in Iraq. I believe BP has won that bid, so at least the money will be considered an "export of services". Also, it says nothing about military bases, they are basecamps for oil workers.
Even though Halliburton has done some shady dealings in trying to "headquarter" themseles in the Cayman Islands, they are still an American conpany making huge cash in Iraq...

Last time I looked Halliburton had no affiliation as a subsidiary of British Petroleum.
Do you know what being a "contractor" means? Why would they be a subsidiary? They are hoping to get HIRED as a CONTRACTOR.

Who gives a shit where they try to make money. BP is the one that has the exclusive drilling contracts, Halliburton won't control anything except what is outlined in the contracts that they get from BP, that's it.

Like I said, they are trying to set up basecamps for workers, this has nothing to do with military bases. Last time I checked, the gov't didn't have companies buy private land to turn them into military bases.
Apr 20, 2010 5:12pm
C

cbus4life

Ignorant

2,849 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:18 PM
The whole "BP having exclusive drilling contracts" there reeks of colonialism.
Apr 20, 2010 5:18pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:19 PM
cbus4life wrote: The whole "BP having exclusive drilling contracts" there reeks of colonialism.
It was a bidding process with the Iraqi government and they were the only ones who bid LULZ
Apr 20, 2010 5:19pm
C

cbus4life

Ignorant

2,849 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:22 PM
Yea, i get that. Still don't like it.

I understand the bidding process, and it is better than the alternative, still just doesn't smell right.
Apr 20, 2010 5:22pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:25 PM
cbus4life wrote: Yea, i get that. Still don't like it.
There is a ton of other companies that have rights to smaller fields and such throughout Iraq, but it's like giving a company here West Virginia, this one gets New York, this company gets Penn. while BP gets Texas, Alaska and the Dakotas.
Apr 20, 2010 5:25pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:26 PM
cbus4life wrote: I understand the bidding process, and it is better than the alternative, still just doesn't smell right.
Exxon was the other bidder and they didn't like some of the stipulations.

The BP contract is BP owned, but with the help of other companies in a consortium.
Apr 20, 2010 5:26pm
C

cbus4life

Ignorant

2,849 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:28 PM
Ah, didn't know that Exxon was involved at one point.

And, thanks for the explanation. Very interesting.

What type of pay to the BP employees get who will be working there? Would imagine it would be pretty darn good...
Apr 20, 2010 5:28pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:32 PM
cbus4life wrote: Ah, didn't know that Exxon was involved at one point.

And, thanks for the explanation. Very interesting.

What type of pay to the BP employees get who will be working there? Would imagine it would be pretty darn good...

Probably pretty good. Halliburton is setting up camp because they provide a ton of products and services like transport, drill bits, actual drilling, frac'ing and all kinds of other services. They do a lot of specialties that oil companies themselves don't and won't do.
Apr 20, 2010 5:32pm
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:45 PM
Footwedge wrote:
LJ wrote: Any oilfield work will be contracted out by non-american companies who won the bids on drilling in Iraq. I believe BP has won that bid, so at least the money will be considered an "export of services". Also, it says nothing about military bases, they are basecamps for oil workers.
Even though Halliburton has done some shady dealings in trying to "headquarter" themseles in the Cayman Islands, they are still an American conpany making huge cash in Iraq...

Last time I looked Halliburton had no affiliation as a subsidiary of British Petroleum.
Do you know what being a "contractor" means? Why would they be a subsidiary? They are hoping to get HIRED as a CONTRACTOR.
You brought BP into the equation not me. According to the WSJ article, Halliburton is claiming that there is a lot work there in Iraq.

It's a pretty sad commentary after all the rhetoric that the Iraq war was "not about the oil"..that "when they stand up, we'll step down"...and then American companies are in there making big money.

Might want to check your history books on why there was a 444 day hostage crisis in Iran. It was all about Americans (and the Brits) ripping off the locals of the revenues from THEIR oil.
Apr 20, 2010 5:45pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 5:52 PM
Footwedge wrote:
LJ wrote:
Footwedge wrote:
Any oilfield work will be contracted out by non-american companies who won the bids on drilling in Iraq. I believe BP has won that bid, so at least the money will be considered an "export of services". Also, it says nothing about military bases, they are basecamps for oil workers.
Even though Halliburton has done some shady dealings in trying to "headquarter" themseles in the Cayman Islands, they are still an American conpany making huge cash in Iraq...

Last time I looked Halliburton had no affiliation as a subsidiary of British Petroleum.
Do you know what being a "contractor" means? Why would they be a subsidiary? They are hoping to get HIRED as a CONTRACTOR.
You brought BP into the equation not me. According to the WSJ article, Halliburton is claiming that there is a lot work there in Iraq.
no shit I brought BP into the commentary. What the fuck does that have to do with anything? They own the largest contract in Iraq. So why would you say something like "they are not a subsidiary"?
It's a pretty sad commentary after all the rhetoric that the Iraq war was "not about the oil"..that "when they stand up, we'll step down"...and then American companies are in there making big money.
Seeing as how no American companies gained controlling rights to any major oil fields, I would say not. At this point, who gives a shit where a company makes it's money? The Iraqi government are the ones who sold the rights, nothing was taken unfairly.
Might want to check your history books on why there was a 444 day hostage crisis in Iran. It was all about Americans (and the Brits) ripping off the locals of the revenues from THEIR oil.
the Iraqi government sold their rights to these companies in exchange for cash up front and mega royalties. If they are getting fucked, it's their own damn fault for accepting the bid, don'tcha think?
Apr 20, 2010 5:52pm
C

cbus4life

Ignorant

2,849 posts
Apr 20, 2010 6:15 PM
Are you involved in the petroleum industry, LJ?
Apr 20, 2010 6:15pm
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
Apr 20, 2010 6:17 PM
cbus4life wrote: Are you involved in the petroleum industry, LJ?
I'm the assistant manager at a Citgo ;)
Apr 20, 2010 6:17pm