English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

18 answers

nothing

2006-08-11 16:25:00 · answer #1 · answered by idontkno 7 · 0 0

The fact that it's Halliburton is irrelevant. All outside companies have been overcharging the government and have been doing so for years. Of course the government does nothing because it's part of the plan. But surely you can find something more dramatic than 172 dollars. How about all of the billions that our government is wasting in iraq?

2006-08-11 16:32:09 · answer #2 · answered by Miss D 7 · 0 0

I spoke of that documentary too, I watched it out of interest. that's totally biased and under no circumstances fullyyt precise, it takes some situations of an adventure happening and back and back performs them for more effective or less an hour in an attempt to persuade you that that's all that is going on in Iraq, and that's no longer. Halliburton is between the in straightforward words organizations contained in the international sufficiently huge to fulfill the region it does in Iraq. If it would not were Halliburton, another employer could get the job, and could face an similar grievance that Halliburton does. Our authorities does take advantage of Halliburton's facilities, besides the undeniable fact that it can have prevented a no-bid settlement. No-bid contracts are indicators of corruption, it truly is amazingly undemanding to connect those dots once you look on the dimensions of the settlement and the shown actuality that Dick Cheney is the former CEO. obviously, this replaced right into a payout to them, we overpaid for his or her facilities.

2016-11-24 21:06:42 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Our government cut a check to Dick Cheney. Cheney and Halliburton have also ripped off our military with raising gas prices to more then what we pay.

Dick Cheney according to government records has made more then 10 million dollars a year since the Iraq invasion with Halliburton.

That's really why were in Iraq isn't it people. Just follow the money and you'll have your motive.

And ignore Father Chuck up above me. He will defend these rip off losers just as long as they don't let gay people get married. Bush could start WW3 and this idiot would defend it, just as long as gay people don't get married.

2006-08-11 16:30:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

First I won't say that was wrong,

You have the actual cost of the coke, you have most likely the airfare to fly it to Iraq. Next you have the security of the coke in a warehouse waiting to be driven to where it was going.
Private security in Iraq makes about 120,000 a year right now for one guard. And truck drivers there are also making about the same amount of money.

So by the time you add up all of those costs, I bet most companies in the US would have to charge them alot more than that.

don't complain about things you don't have all the facts about.

I would say they are going to pay it ( but pay it late like all thier bills)

2006-08-11 16:28:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Wow as the gov general overspends for everything (they have an unending source of money). I bet they thought they were getting a good deal!

2006-08-11 16:33:53 · answer #6 · answered by Camping Chick 3 · 0 0

Sorry, but I thought that Halliburton controls the U.S. government, so why would you expect the government to do anything about it?

2006-08-11 16:26:53 · answer #7 · answered by Perplexed Music Lover 5 · 0 1

Ordered less equipment for our soldiers, then took a 4 week
vacation to kill small animals, like the real men, they're not.

2006-08-11 16:29:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

our govt wanted to pay halliburton that much. it was cheney's company - they continued to pay him 'deferred pay' while he was in the white house.

but the worst is halliburton's contracts for detention camps for 'future programs.' they are going to charge us for the rope they seek to hang us with.

2006-08-11 16:27:28 · answer #9 · answered by cassandra 6 · 0 0

hard to do anything about this when one of the board and a major stock holder is vice president of the United States.

2006-08-11 16:43:46 · answer #10 · answered by billc4u 7 · 0 0

It's pretty much what Cheney had in mind - a sweetheart deal for his buddies.

2006-08-11 16:27:15 · answer #11 · answered by Skeff 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers