• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Army to Pay Halliburton Disputed Costs


Feb 15, 2006
Reaction score
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The US Army has decided to reimburse Halliburton most costs incurred in a 2.4 billion dollar no-bid contract in Iraq despite challenges by auditors of more than 200 million dollars of the costs, officials confirmed Monday.

The controversial contract to deliver fuel and repair oil facilities after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq has been at the center of a long-running controversy over allegations of inflated fuel costs and other problems.

Auditors from the Defense Contract Audit Agency questioned more than 206 million in costs submitted by Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), the Halliburton subsidiary awarded the no-bid contract, according to a summary provided by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Nothing unusal, quite the norm which such large contracts and business deals, the provider submits it's bill, the payee questions certain charges, the provider provides more documentation, the payee agrees or negotiates and a finally billing is submitted. I do it all the time in my business.
Top Bottom