Draw Muhammad contest Taxas!!! WHY?? - Page 15

Created

Last reply

Replies

147

Views

12.5k

Users

21

Likes

109

Frequent Posters

441597 thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
Btw, "petro-dollar" and "petro-currency" is different.
Qirat. thumbnail
16th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: krystal_watz


Btw, what I said is being repeated here once more: The war was about opening up Iraq's oilfields to the free market investments. And yes, it was about oil currency. When people refer to "war for Big Oil", they mean war for lining the pockets of the likes of Haliburton.


What are Halliburton profits? Halliburton was losing money in Iraq, so much that they actually had to sell KBR right in the middle of the Iraq war? If this is about the no-bid contract then there was only 1 no bid contract & they have been receiving no-bid contracts since long time. Why did Halliburton received a no bid contract in the Balkans from Clinton? Cheney have no financial interest in Halliburton, he own no Halliburton stock.. When you are elected, your money & investment will be taken over by the gov.. They cannot have stake in company as it will be conflict of interest..Cheney signed all his Halliburton Stock option to a irrevocable trust before he took office...

"The "Gift Trust Agreement" the Cheney's signed two days before he took office turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education, a charity that provides financial aid for low-income students in Washington, DC to attend private and religious schools. "

I read how he actually made $39.5 B but there was no proper source. From what I see, his net worth is only $90M http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-politicians/republicans/dick-cheney-net-worth/

Edited by Qirat. - 10 years ago
441597 thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
KBR landed the no-bid logistics contract worth $39.5 bn AFTER negotiations by Cheney. What do you make of that? And Halliburton incurred no losses in the war, that's wrong information.
Edited by krystal_watz - 10 years ago
Qirat. thumbnail
16th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

KBR landed the no-bid logistics contract worth $39.5 bn AFTER negotiations by Cheney. What do you make of that? And Halliburton incurred no losses in the war, that's wrong information.


Nothing.. Halliburton & KBR has been receiving government contracts since WWII. I doubt Cheney has anything to do with that war?.. No one bids in times of war, you go with the best equipped company.. no other companies provide with what they provide.. And yes they lose money in Iraq, Halliburton sold KBR because it was draining Halliburton resources? The contracts signed by corporations in Iraq were all cost + 1% contracts which means it doesn't matter how large the contract was for, they made just 1% profit off the contract. Halliburton and KBR are only service contractors, they don't directly get affected by oil prices but by the volume of work..Iraq was only offering service contracts to operators where they only get $1 per barrel, & combined that with the danger & expense of operating in Iraq, it actually made a very bad investment for them..
441597 thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
I don't know of any report where Haliburton said that KBR was draining them so they sold it. And yes, Cheney was behind the Pentagon's awarding of the highest contract to KBR.
As for oil, Brown and Roots was a construction company, granted. But what about the others like Exxon, Shell, BP et al? What about the tremendous profits they all made? And even if the theory stands true (KBR losses), what about the Hydrocarbons Act that USA wanted the Iraqi Parliament to pass to make things low-cost for Western investors?

I repeat what I said about the Cheney-led taskforce on National Energy Policy Development where he made plans to expand the number of petroleum pipelines and obtained a map of Iraq's oil and gas pipelines through FOI.
Druids thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/who-are-millionaires-behind-islamophobic-industry-america-1487378765
Who are the millionaires behind the Islamophobic industry in America?
Qirat. thumbnail
16th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
Oil speculators... Exxon etc did do rather well, but it was the speculators that made out the best. Shell and Exxon profits while being very good, were certainly not record breakers... Other companies did as well and many even better... Media will always says they are making massive money like all the massive money the health insurance companies are supposedly making now, this is simply not true... Exxon that made massive profits still has not been able to pay their fine for Valdez Oil Spill & god knows how long ago that happened.. It wasn't really the war, it was speculation that was driving the oil price up..

According to the Iraq Oil Law, all of Iraq's oil belongs to Iraqi people and the respected governate in which the resources lie... They are, by law, in charge of deciding who handles it, although there are some interesting terms for lucrative oil contracts, still the Iraqis decide, they choose to go with any oil companies, they are not required to work with US... If you invaded Iraq for oil, then why don't your army seized the oil fields and pump 24/7 just for US consumption?.. They did not own the oil fields, did not get a discount on oil, & neither are they getting any profits from Iraqi oil fields..

Anyway, this would be my last comment on this oil topic; I dont buy the oil argument, for the trillion you spent, you could have bought every drop of oil in Iraq. If your intent was greed then you would have lifted the sanctions instead of starting a war. If you invaded Iraq for oil, then why do you import less every year since the start of the war till today than you did pre war? http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MTTIMIZ1&f=A ... If it was for oil, then where is the oil? And when is all of this oil going to hit the market in the USA. Soon I hope, because it is not there yet? http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948787,00.html . The theory "war for oil" predicts certain specific outcomes which I don't really see happening..
441597 thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
Looks like there's a miscommunication. I repeated thrice that the war was for the oil cos. to make low-cost investments and assemble humongous profits, not for US consumption. The reason they couldn't do so, I've mentioned already.

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".