Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is it true that Halliburton built the Camrahn Bay Armny facilities in Vietnam

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:36 AM
Original message
Is it true that Halliburton built the Camrahn Bay Armny facilities in Vietnam
Edited on Sat Oct-28-06 08:38 AM by Toots
I was told that yesterday. It was in the context of all those politicians are the same, whether Democrat or Republican. JFK was in office when Camrahn Bay was built. Was it built by Halliburton or Army engineers and if it was built by Halliburton was it done by "No-Bid Contract"? Anyone know off hand or how to find out? I was not able to argue the facts as I don't know what they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. be interesting to know. I spent 15 months at the Navy base there
69-70. In the years since mostly trying to forget
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Here is something I just found out about it
"For the first time, the Pentagon began to privatize construction and logistics operations during wartime in the war zone. In 1965, Halliburton formed a consortium with the Idaho-based firm Morrison-Knudsen to manage big construction projects for the Pentagon in Vietnam. Over the next five years, the contracts would fatten to more than $2 billion. They also followed a familiar contour: the contracts were awarded without competitive bidding and on a cost-plus basis with a guaranteed profit built-in.

It is alwfully hard to sound holier than thou when we are as deep in the shit as they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. so thats the precedent
sorry bas'turds' been doing it a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. You want a precedent? How about ...
Crdit Mobilier

... In 1864, the company was given a no-bid contract to build a 667-mile stretch of the Transcontinental Railroad, with much of the cost being paid for by federal subsidies.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/law/corrup...

Damn Republicans!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Believe it or not, there is a certain justification for no bids.
When you are trying to get things done fast in situations requiring people who have the specialized expertise and equipment to get the job done expeditiously. They are, unfortunately, prone top exploitation. I worked for a contractor who was routinely awarded no bids, because no one else was in a position to provide the support, we made all the parts, had all the engineering services, etc. No one else could do the job, period.

Eventually the Pentagon went to a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) format, after the scandals in the eighties, I don't know when they reverted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. I spent 11 years working for my brother and it was all no bid
bringing someone else up to speed on the projects wouldn't have been feasible for the plant. They would just break the project up into several phases so as to not require the letting of bids. Was it wrong, I don't know but we were the ones who had all the experience and knowledge of the initial installation, plus the confidence of all involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. Look at it another way, it is EASIER
If you simply say that it is wrong - and that it doesn't matter who did it. Consider how Senator Kerry handled BCCI - when he found that Democratic money men were implicated, he continued to investigate. BCCI which covertly moved vast amounts of drug laundering and terrorist money around the world was a criminal enterprise which had bought off governments includidng our own.

Senator Kerry had to fight Democrats and it was Senator Pell who closed his committee down, eliminating his supoena power. Senator Kerry was right in continuing to fight because you have to go at corruption - no matter who backs it.

The investigation of war profiteering needs to be done and the people involved - even if Democrats - need to be exposed. In Iraq, it went beyond profiteering to actually SHORTCHANGING the soldiers leaving them with bad water, food and housing. Profiteering is unethical and disgusting, but what they did here was immoral. Senator Dorgan has been incredible in pushing to find the truth here.

What we need are honest, principled leaders in all parts of government. If that means that some Democrats will be shown to be less than good - that's a necessary price.

The cost plus basis was used for many things and it wasn't always abused. The FCC used that methodology when AT&T was a monopoly. Having a guaranteed rate of return allowed AT&T to afford Bell Labs, which produced many innovations that benefited the telephone industry and the world as a whole. The cost to make a call declined spectacularly over that entire time period - due to technology improvements. The key was that the FCC had oversight as well and could disqualify expenditures from the base if there was reason.

The question was whether Congress or the Pentagon had real over sight over the Vietnam bases. I have NO knowlege on that - which is why I used AT&T where I have very limited knowledge. The issue of non competitive bidding IS a major problem unless they were the only company willing to do it (which seems unlikely.) Did LBJ have any connections to Halliburton?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INdemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. Im going back to 1966
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. I believe that was Bechtel - the guy across the street.
Not sure about that particular project, but both Bechtel and Halliburton are huge politically-connected Texas defense construction firms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INdemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. You are going back over forty years but I think it
was the Navy Seabees and ACE that built that facility.There were four bases there(general proximity) if I remember correctly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
7. When I was there...
the rumor was that it was built by Lady Bird Johnson's "company"... KBR??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlayson Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
9. They were there

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
13. No - Halliburton Was A Very Small Company Then - It Was PA&E
Back in the Viet Nam days the company to go to for graft was Pacific Architects and Engineers (PA&E). They build dam near everything in Viet Nam that the Military didn't build. Remember, this was back before the military contracted out every fart-smelling.

Halliburton, prior to the late 90's was primarily an oil field service company. Surprisingly enough they were very good to work with. I had a lot of dealings with them back when I was a Contracting Officer with the Department of Energy. They did what they said they would do when they said they would do it and they always ... I repeat, Always ... came in at the target price.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 18th 2014, 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC