Bush Declares National Emergency for Iraqi Oil

[Iceberg]

I still fail to understand why "tax-and-spend" is supposed to be an insult, given that it's typically used by people who advocate the government's current "borrow and spend" fiscal policy.

The current government policy is based on the demonstrated fact that lowering taxes improved the economy, resulting in long-term higher government revenues, despite the lower levels of taxation.

Which would have a point if Bush didn't insist on increasing the size of the government such that it overwhelms any potential gains in increased revenue by sucking up another tenth of the GDP into the federal debt over the next three years.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I think what he is saying is pretty damn clear.

The Shrub is giving his oil buddies afew little benifits at the expense of due process.

Maybe it could just be... Oh wow!... We don't want to pay for rebuilding two countries at once? But you wouldn't care; a tax-and-spend like yourself would just raise taxes to do it, and then watch as you send the country into debt because no tax revenue gets raised when doing so destroys the economy.

Then oh wow, maybe we shouldnt be rebuilding two countries at once! *GASP* Maybe we should have rebuit Afganistan, and then, actually think before we invaded Iraq. There is a shocker. Maybe we should have cut costs by letting the fucking military, rather than private companies rebuild Iraq. I see no reason why the companies in Iraq should be immune from investigation and oversight. Hmm what a novel concept.

Do you honestly expect a company to remain honest when they are not even subject to investigation?

[Stormbringer]

. Maybe we should have cut costs by letting the fucking military, rather than private companies rebuild Iraq.

Try to think about what you say; that would increase costs as well as tie up troops that are needed else where.

The military is setup to fight wars and trained to do that. They break stuff. This isn't the Roman Legions, our troops aren't employed as construction workers or laborers. Id wager that with the exception of the few engineering units none of the soldiers would have a clue what to do or where to start. Rebuilding calls for people with specialized training and experience. A US army private can't repair a power plant nor restart a desalinization plant nor reopen an oil well. The military do there job and that's it.

Private companies have people that know what they're doing and will be able to do it for less. They're the right people for the job and it's pure naivete to think otherwise.

[Joe]

Then oh wow, maybe we shouldnt be rebuilding two countries at once! *GASP* Maybe we should have rebuit Afganistan, and then, actually think before we invaded Iraq.

Red herring. Don't bitch about the war after the fact; we have to rebuild two countries, like it or not. Focus on the issue at hand. How is your opinion of the war relevant to how we will rebuild Iraq?

There is a shocker. Maybe we should have cut costs by letting the fucking military, rather than private companies rebuild Iraq.

Are you completely dense? The U.S. military is in the business of fighting wars, not rebuilding countries. Perhaps the corporations in question are more qualified in the area of rebuilding infrastructure and buildings than the U.S. military is? Perhaps Halliburton knows how to put out an oil fire better than a general does? No, of course not, that doesn't fit in with your rabid anti-Bush stance on everything.

I see no reason why the companies in Iraq should be immune from investigation and oversight. Hmm what a novel concept.

Do you honestly expect a company to remain honest when they are not even subject to investigation?

Hey, brain surgeon, why don't you actually read the fucking executive order? The order simply prohibits judicial action against the companies in question; in no way does it state that the companies are to be made completely exempt from any kind of investigation.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Hey, brain surgeon, why don't you actually read the fucking executive order? The order simply prohibits judicial action against the companies in question; in no way does it state that the companies are to be made completely exempt from any kind of investigation.

Points conceeded on the military reconstruction by the way. I keep forgetting, our soldiers do not double as engineers

And why should they be immune from judicial action? If they are doing something illegal they should be held responsible, not given blanket immunity.

Now lets think about this for moment, if they are going to be appreciably tied up by lawsuits, maybe they shouldnt be the ones handeling the reconstruction If i had fears that a company woud be sued, I would choose a different corporation, not give the company in question immunity.

[Sea Skimmer]

Maybe we should have cut costs by letting the fucking military, rather than private companies rebuild Iraq.

So you idea is to take the slowest and most expensive option? The United States military does not posses the strength or resources to do the work.

[Darth Wong]

Could someone please explain why a company involved in Iraq oil reconstruction efforts is any more vulnerable to a lawsuit than any other type of company, hence requiring such special and unprecedented protection?

[MKSheppard]

Could someone please explain why a company involved in Iraq oil reconstruction efforts is any more vulnerable to a lawsuit than any other type of company, hence requiring such special and unprecedented protection?

lets say they fuck up and spill several million gallons of oil into the persion
gulf...you want them to get the damn country's oil infrastructure working and
not waste time on eco-hippie lawsuits

[Iceberg]

Could someone please explain why a company involved in Iraq oil reconstruction efforts is any more vulnerable to a lawsuit than any other type of company, hence requiring such special and unprecedented protection?

lets say they fuck up and spill several million gallons of oil into the persion
gulf...you want them to get the damn country's oil infrastructure working and
not waste time on eco-hippie lawsuits

Congratulations, you've just given the best reason NOT to indemnify them. What the FUCK, Shep? Should not corporations be responsible for their goddamn mistakes?

[Darth Wong]

Could someone please explain why a company involved in Iraq oil reconstruction efforts is any more vulnerable to a lawsuit than any other type of company, hence requiring such special and unprecedented protection?

lets say they fuck up and spill several million gallons of oil into the persion
gulf...you want them to get the damn country's oil infrastructure working and
not waste time on eco-hippie lawsuits

The west coast eco-hippies you speak of would not be able to show that they had personally suffered damages as a result of this spill, hence they would not be able to launch a lawsuit in the first place. The only people who would be able to launch lawsuits would be in the Persian Gulf.

[HemlockGrey]

If they spill several million gallons of oil into the Persian Gulf I want their asses fired, not protected.

[MKSheppard]

If they spill several million gallons of oil into the Persian Gulf I want their asses fired, not protected.

Problem is, there are only a few companies with the necessary experience...

Guess who got contracted for example to cut the bow of the K-141 KURSK
off in 2001?

Yep, Halliburton, Dick Cheney's company. I bet Clinton Paid him off to
get him that contract

[MKSheppard]

Congratulations, you've just given the best reason NOT to indemnify them. What the FUCK, Shep? Should not corporations be responsible for their goddamn mistakes?

We want Iraqi oil infrastructure running and the oil flowing, so we
can use it to pay to rebuild the country, and also so we can show
something TANGIBLE...

And is this the same logic that caused GE to have to pay billions of
dollars to clean up for doing something that was legal back when they
did it?

[Iceberg]

I bet they either had to submit a bid, or else had a pre-existing contract with the government for that kind of salvage of, Shep.

Bushdick gave Halliburton a sweetheart no-bid deal for Iraq without Halliburton ever having to touch a bit of competition.

[Iceberg]

And is this the same logic that caused GE to have to pay billions of dollars to clean up for doing something that was legal back when they did it?

If you fuck it up, you CLEAN IT UP. It's that simple.

[MKSheppard]

If you fuck it up, you CLEAN IT UP. It's that simple.

Wait, so by your logic, you can force ex post facto punishments
onto individuals and companies? If it was legal when it was being
dumped, so fucking what? If they kept dumping it after it was illegal,
then nail them for that...

[Joe]

I bet they either had to submit a bid, or else had a pre-existing contract with the government for that kind of salvage of, Shep.

Bushdick gave Halliburton a sweetheart no-bid deal for Iraq without Halliburton ever having to touch a bit of competition.

Why don't you tell me a company as qualified as Halliburton is to put out oil fires? Bush may have been engaging in favoritism, but he sure as hell wasn't irresponsible in hiring Halliburton.

[MKSheppard]

Iceberg's logic reminds me of the latest anti-gun tack, getting firing ranges
closed down due to "lead contamination", same as getting us to have to
use much more expensive tungsten shotshells because the poor geese are
too stupid to not gobble it down..

[Iceberg]

If you fuck it up, you CLEAN IT UP. It's that simple.

Wait, so by your logic, you can force ex post facto punishments
onto individuals and companies? If it was legal when it was being
dumped, so fucking what? If they kept dumping it after it was illegal,
then nail them for that...

It's not legal ANYWHERE to dump crude oil.

And anyway, if you're dumping a toxic substance, you can still be held liable after the fact for ill effects suffered by people later.

[Iceberg]

I bet they either had to submit a bid, or else had a pre-existing contract with the government for that kind of salvage of, Shep.

Bushdick gave Halliburton a sweetheart no-bid deal for Iraq without Halliburton ever having to touch a bit of competition.

Why don't you tell me a company as qualified as Halliburton is to put out oil fires? Bush may have been engaging in favoritism, but he sure as hell wasn't irresponsible in hiring Halliburton.

He was irresponsible in offering a no-bid, open-ended contract to his Veep's old company. If Halliburton was really the best company for the job, the bidding would have revealed that, and they would have been hired anyway.

[MKSheppard]

And anyway, if you're dumping a toxic substance, you can still be held liable after the fact for ill effects suffered by people later.

PCBs at the time were not recognized as a toxic substance, same as
Abestos, for much much later after the dumping itself...so why are you
taking someone to court for something that was legal at the time?

[Worlds Spanner]

If Halliburton was really the best company for the job, the bidding would have revealed that, and they would have been hired anyway.

Quite right. At the risk of sounding right wing, the market will solve.

[Darth Wong]

I find it fascinating how people who respond to all matters of liability lawsuits with the "whatever happened to personal responsibility" mantra see no reason for corporations to accept responsibility for their mistakes as soon as you mention the magic word "Iraq".

Yes, it's important to get Iraqi oil running. It's also important to keep the lights on in Boston; does that mean the Massachusetts power grid operators should be made immune from prosecution or lawsuits?

[Sea Skimmer]

I

Yes, it's important to get Iraqi oil running. It's also important to keep the lights on in Boston; does that mean the Massachusetts power grid operators should be made immune from prosecution or lawsuits?

If said lawsuits where going to result in the power being shut off for a prolonged period, yes.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Could someone please explain why a company involved in Iraq oil reconstruction efforts is any more vulnerable to a lawsuit than any other type of company, hence requiring such special and unprecedented protection?

lets say they fuck up and spill several million gallons of oil into the persion
gulf...you want them to get the damn country's oil infrastructure working and
not waste time on eco-hippie lawsuits

And so, they should not be forced to pay for the cleanup then? An oil spill only destroys the ecosystem in an area.. no damage there

If said lawsuits where going to result in the power being shut off for a prolonged period, yes.

So if a company performs something important... they should be immune from prosecution, and have free reign to do anything they fucking want? Um, NO! If they fuck up, they must pay for their mistakes.

He was irresponsible in offering a no-bid, open-ended contract to his Veep's old company. If Halliburton was really the best company for the job, the bidding would have revealed that, and they would have been hired anyway.

Oh, I had forgotten that the company i question didnt even compete for the contract...

W

ait, so by your logic, you can force ex post facto punishments
onto individuals and companies? If it was legal when it was being
dumped, so fucking what? If they kept dumping it after it was illegal,
then nail them for that...

Red Herring. This issue is in the here and now. So far the company involved is immune from being forced to clean up any mistakes they may make. Tht is fucking Bullshit.

So you idea is to take the slowest and most expensive option? The United States military does not posses the strength or resources to do the work.

Conceeded that one.