It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A. Halliburton Contracts
The largest private contractor operating in Iraq is Halliburton. Through its KBR
subsidiary, Halliburton has held three large contracts in Iraq: the Logistics Civil Augmentation
Program (LOGCAP) contract to provide support services to the troops; the Restore Iraqi Oil
(RIO) contract to rebuild oil fields throughout Iraq; and the Restore Iraqi Oil 2 (RIO 2) contract
to rebuild oil fields in southern Iraq. The total value of these three contracts is approximately
$25.7 b i l l i ~ nA. ~c cording to the information received by the Committee, it appears that DCAA
has audited $19.8 billion of the costs incurred under the Halliburton contracts and identified over
$2.7 billion in questioned and unsupported billings.
DynCorp Takes Afghanistan: As KBR and Blackwater Get Shut Out, DynCorp Profits From Afghan War
Originally posted by BigfootNZ
Thing is, just at what point did America actually get 'attacked' by any of the people it supposedly is currently at war with?... 9/11?, wasnt that done by Saudis? Dont see no damn american troops any where near their damn place.
Originally posted by jam321
Don't you find it odd that people think we invaded Iraq for oil, when Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Mexico are closer.
Originally posted by manxman2
as if it wasnt already cut and dryed years ago.
greenspan et al are philanphropists. .. so are the bush family and their billionaire oil producing buddies.
[edit on 15-10-2009 by manxman2]
Originally posted by fraterormus
But then again, our Military isn't renown for their Mathematical Prowess, considering they routinely purchase $700 Toilet Seats, $700 Screwdrivers, contract for $240 Billion for Chem/Rad/Bio Environmental Suits that upon receipt they sell Surplus for $24 Million, and pay $3 Billion for planes that were contracted for $240 Million (and only cost $240 Million), this doesn't come as a surprise.
Originally posted by Jenna
I'm going to put on my tin foil hat (I think that's the first time it's been worn!) and say that I don't believe they actually spent $700 on toilet seats and screw drivers. I believe they bought toilet seats and screw drivers, but I think they bought it for a fraction of that $700 and spent the rest on things the public at large doesn't need to know about.
*takes off the tin foil hat*
Wow, I've been reading too many conspiracies lately.
Originally posted by fraterormus
However, since the DoD is already getting a Black Ops Budget on top of their regular Budget, if they are wheeling and dealing under the table then they aren't just double-dipping but triple-dipping into the cookie jar.
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Art 17. Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information.
...
No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.
Originally posted by nenothtu
*** INVALID ARGUMENT ALERT! ***
Sure, it was "the Saudis" that attacked the US. Sure.
Unless, on any given day, it promotes some loon's argument further to say it was "the CIA", or "The Mossad", or "the US Government". Y'all decide once and for all who did this, and get back to me, K?
It was Al-Qaeda, last time I checked on who was crowing about having done it.
The same Al-Qaeda that the Taliban tried to give aid, comfort, and safe harbor to. You know, all those actions that brought war to the Taliban.
The same Al-Qaeda that decided to stir the Shia/Sunni rift in Iraq.
Yeah, THAT Al-Qaeda. You know, the "other" foreign fighters. The ones it's so easy for you folks to conveniently fail to mention, when it suits your purpose.
Originally posted by KSPigpen
www.icrc.org...
Art 17. Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information.
...
No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.
We get by THAT one by claiming they aren't really 'prisoners of war', right?
I think when a nation has learned to love killing and torture, there is little hope for them. When the citizens of that nation have learned to justify those actions, we can certainly, just as easily, be on the receiving end and probably deserve to be.
Originally posted by KSPigpen
This is ONLY ONE SIDE, I realize that. A 'bleeding heart', perhaps. To be fair, I KNOW there are atrocities on ALL sides of conflicts, but the ENEMY is supposed to be the bad guy.