I'll Give My Life To My Country, But Not To Protect Corporations.

On June 19, 26 year old SPC Eli Israel put himself at great personal risk.

He decided to refuse further participation in the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

Eli told his commanding officer and sergeants that he will no longer be a combatant in what he calls an "illegal, unjustified war."

“I have told them that I will no longer play a ‘combat role’ in this conflict or ‘protect corporate representatives,’ and they have taken this as ‘violating a direct order.’

"Corporate representatives?" Who are these people?

Apparently, there are lots of them.

By one estimate, as many as half the Americans in Iraq are working for private contractors.

Investigative journalist Dina Rasor, co-author with Robert Bauman of "Betraying Our Troops: The Destructive Results of Privatizing War" (Palgrave) was on The Diane Rehm Show on Monday, June 18th, explaining why she thinks privatization of the Iraq war undermines U-S troops and threatens national security. Eli Israel made his stand the next day.

Bauman and Rasor are sponsors of the Follow the Money Project. According to their website, the project investigates "where the money appropriated for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is going -- especially money that should be going to the Troops."

Bauman and Rasor are old hands at investigating government fraud. In their new book they claim private contractors have put the lives of countless American soldiers on the line while damaging our strategic interests and our image abroad. They "give the inside story on troops forced to subsist on little food and contaminated water, on officers afraid to lodge complaints because of Halliburton's political clout, on millions of dollars in contractors' bogus claims that are funded by American taxpayers. Drawing on exclusive sources within government and the military, the authors show how money and power have conspired to undermine our fighting forces and threaten the security of our country."

Eli Israel is stationed at Camp Victory in Baghdad with JVB Bravo Company, 1-149 Infantry of the Kentucky Army National Guard. You can read more on Eli at Iraq Veterans Against the War.

Shoo-be-doo-be Dubai, bai....

Oil services giant Halliburton is moving its CEO to Dubai, where there are friendlier tax laws. Officials at the company formerly run by Dick Cheney strongly deny that has anything to do with its decision.

Of course, Democrats sharply criticized the move, even if the tax dodging issue is not clear. North Dakota Senator Byron L. Dorgan even wondered if Halliburton is trying to run away from bad publicity on their contracts.

As you may recall, Halliburton was awarded more than $19 billion in Pentagon contracts through it Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) units, which made it sole provider of food and shelter services to the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.

(Picture above from bigpicture.typepad.com; picture below from villagevoice.com)


Are critics singling out Halliburton unfairly? After all, as the Associated press reports, "Western businesses have been pouring into Dubai to capture regional energy revenues and take advantage of some of the world's most liberal tax, investment and residency laws. Dubai charges no corporate or income tax and in many cases allows companies no restrictions on repatriating profits or importing employees."

So the question is:

If Halliburton saves U.S. tax money through the move, how much?

In the short term, "not much," writes Michelle Tsai in Slate. "The company is still incorporated in Delaware and remains subject to U.S. law and taxes."

Still, Tsai goes on to say: "the move to Dubai could save Halliburton (and CEO Dave Lesar) some money on foreign taxes."

"With operations in 100 countries, Halliburton had to pay out $289 million to foreign governments last year. The United Arab Emirates government may have sweetened the deal with favorable real-estate terms or other incentives. Dubai's Jebel Ali Free Zone, which already houses more than 5,000 foreign-owned businesses, doesn't impose corporate or personal income taxes and has a robust workforce with no minimum wage. The labor advantage could even convince Halliburton to eventually close the Houston office as the North American business shrinks. After 2008, about 55 percent of Halliburton's services business will come from the Eastern Hemisphere—up from just 40 percent in 2006."

Halliburton has its defenders, though, such as Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Alabama. He said the argument that it's wrong to do business with Dubai or for a company to move its headquarters there risks alienating one of the strongest U.S. allies in the Middle East. 'We need to consider that Dubai is a strong ally in a region of the world (where) we need strong allies desperately,' he said in an interview.

Where was that argument in the Dubai Ports deal last year? When it was revealed that a Dubai-owned firm bought operations in six U.S. ports last March, the Republican Congress voted to force Dubai to sell the U.S. ports.

Security matters aside, there are possible economic implications. Marketwatch reports some market strategists say the move would bring substantial benefits to Halliburton shareholders, but it may prove hurtful for the U.S. economy and the dollar in the long term.

Today's opinion piece in the New York Times on the subject: The Death of Geography?

Just in case you want to visit Dubai but don't have deep pockets, the NYT has some tips on how to visit the emirate on a budget.