Halliburton moving to Dubai

Post by **Tossica** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:36 am

Haha. This shit just gets more and more ridiculous.

Evermore · Post by **Evermore** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:42 am

they need to be closer to where they are stealing money.

Markarado · Post by **Markarado** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:23 pm

I just saw this on CNN. The U.S. Government is concerned that they are doing this to avoid taxes. The company claims that they won't be avoiding any taxes. I doubt that...

Eziekial · Post by **Eziekial** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:04 am

I think it's a great idea. If another country can offer the same benifits for less taxes then let them move.

Bodin · Post by **Bodin** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:49 am

http://www.nysun.com/article/5137

http://www.americandaily.com/article/12313

http://www.urbanelephants.com/nyc/node/5280

Alot of people take money from em' I would not just bitch about Halliburton moving their headquarters there if you want to "take up the cause."

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:03 am

so lets get this straight...you bitch at haliburton because they are mean for making money on the rebuilding, however I cant see anyone doing it for fun and profit free. Its called free economy. amazing...I dont seem to recall any of you bitching about haliburton during the clinton admin. was kinda a quiet about haliburton. He used them quite extensibly.

Bodin · Post by **Bodin** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:57 am

I dont seem to recall any of you bitching about haliburton during the clinton admin.

/nod

Post by **Arlos** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:19 am

Back in the Clinton administration, the VP of the country wasn't a former Halliburton CEO, thus creating conflict of interest issues when issuing them no-bid contracts, etc. Also, they weren't being investigated b y multiple house committees for misuse of funds, gross overcharging, failure to deliver services/products that they were already paid for, substandard troop messes, etc.

-Arlos

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:59 am

ahh so, it does not matter that Clinton had about half a mill in shares wrapped up in haliburton that he was managing?

substandard troop messes? strange I have a nephew that just got back from over there and all he said was that the food was better than in boot camp and the only complaint he had was left wing whiney bitches smearing the good they are doing over there.

Funny...he was a liberal before he went in. He is now a libertarian. Maybe you should join arlos since you seem to arm chair qback all the problems in the military and yet, I dont see you have any clue what is going on over there.

Go find a few marines. and talk to them. get a general pull. Best place to do that is a nearby military installation, not the DNC. Talk to them, see what they say. Or do you believe like most of the liberals do that military personal are too stupid to know what they are doing?

Zanchief · Post by **Zanchief** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:02 am

kaharthemad wrote:Or do you believe like most of the liberals do that military personal are too stupid to know what they are doing?

Always with the assumptions man.

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:10 am

pot meet kettle.

and I said most.

I am referring to the non outcry of the liberal community when one of your great leaders said "The military personnel are not educated enough to understand what is going on around them." I can get the exact quote but that is the nuts and bolts of it. There was no public outcry no condemning of the statement by other leaders.

Post by **Arlos** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:33 am

OK, so I misremembered the issue with Halliburton and the troop messes. It wasn't that they were substandard, it was that they were grossly overcharging the US government to the tune of 10s of millions of dollars for meals that were never provided. Here's a link to that noted radical liberal rag the Wall Street Journal about that one: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB107568715481617685.html?

And gee, I am supposed to be shocked about someone's mental makeup changing after military indoctrination? Golly gosh gee, isnt' that the entire POINT of military indoctrination, is to change someone's personality around until they are a nice square peg that fits neatly into the square holes the military has all lined up? (Or, as the military would put it, turn them into a team instead of individuals.) Hey, I'm sure that's necessary for the military, random individuals are unlikely to want to go charging face-first into machine gun nests to save a group of people they may not even like, say. But to expect surprise that attitudes of someone will change after entering the military? I think not.

Most of the people I know in the military, or have had contact with over the last few years (mostly AF, with a few army people thrown in, including at least one chopper pilot) have been anti-Bush andn against the war in Iraq. And no, I wouldn't say, ever, that the average military person is necessarily any stupider than the average non-military individual. Do note, however, that education levels is a different issue than intelligence. A 19 year old enlisted person is going to by definition be less educated than someone with a college degree. Not necessarily any smarter or dumber, just less educated. But yes, that was a stupid statement by whoever said it.

-Arlos

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:06 am

Try talking to prior service in places other than Code Pink meetings. :wink:

My personal experience is that most prior and current military support the Iraq war 80/20. That doesn't mean they support or like Bush, or agree with a lot of the policies, they just understand the initial reasonings and the current stakes.

Ginzburgh · Post by **Ginzburgh** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:30 am

I don't know about "initial reasonings" but "current stakes", sure.

Post by **Arlos** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:33 am

Code Pink? Huh? No clue WTF that is.

These're people I either know/knew from working with them, or mroe recently, met through campus. In the interest of full disclosure, I did include a couple opinions from guys in ROTC too, but both're far enough along to have actually been through boot.

The main friend I know who is EX-military (was just referring to people, mostly acquaintances currently in my first time), my main friend there is a AF vet from the first gulf war, and he's even more against this current war than I am. Not that I agree with all of HIS politics, he's a full-on libertarian to the point where the Libertarian Party was going to have him run for Congress from the SJ district, and we disagree on a fair number of matters. Still, as I said, he's even more rabidly against this current war than I am.

Perhaps it is a matter of location; California is certainly known for being rather more liberal than Ohio, and this is the Bay area, which is certainly more liberal than other areas of California.

-Arlos

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:45 am

You'd be surprised. My hometown in California, San Diego, is much, much more right leaning than either place in Ohio I've lived.

San Francisco gets a lot more attention due to the fringe far left people, but overall California is fairly moderate in most regards.

Code Pink is an anti war group that is visible near you and espouses a lot of views similar to yours. They are on CNN, MSNBC, & Fox once in a while, so I'm surprised you haven't heard of them

http://www.bayareacodepink.org/about.htm

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:48 am

thought it was for breast cancer awareness...Ill be damned.

Ginzburgh · Post by **Ginzburgh** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:49 am

Whoever wrote the copy for the website should be shot in the pink.

And if everyone in the US followed code pink's values, we'd all be dead.

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:54 am

whoever decided that color was cool should be shot. Christ my eye are melting out of my skull