Halliburton bought an oil cleanup company 8 days before rig explosion.

[Iason Ouabache]

Latest news is that half of the spill by weight is methane, which is stripping all the oxygen out of the water.  Needless to say, everything in that area of the ocean is being killed off at nearly 100% efficiency (if not 100%).  Bear in mind also that methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide by an order of magnitude or two.

WE'RE FUCKED FOREVER!!! 

[LMNO]

And so the world ends; not with a bang, but with a gasping wheeze...

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Requia, you are discounting the fact that FOUR men were left there to basically cover Halliburton's ASS, not work a solution to potential disaster they were/were not gearing up for (this last part of my sentence is what this OP is about, btw).

I'm intrigued as to why you are engaged in so much BP and Halliburton apologetics since this went down, btw.  I'm sure you know already that this is a fucked up stance and esp on PD you'll get shot down pretty much right off the mark unless you have impeccable logic and infallible sources.  

So DO tell:  how is leaving a skeleton crew of 4 men to avert and help stave off this type of disaster, meanwhile buying cleanup equipment, show that Halliburton acted with the correct amount of moral and ethical business acumen?

Requia isn't trying to defend either company, as far as I can tell.  She's trying to defend the fact that she's an expert on every topic, and will argue from now til the end of time to avoid being seen as admitting an error.

I stopped wasting time on her the other day...I can get behavior like that anywhere.

All I ever said was that BP Halliburton didn't leave the job.

Did you read the articles about how BP went directly against Halliburton's advice, and Halliburton's response to it? No wonder they bought an oil cleanup company... they had to know that what BP was doing was bound to end disastrously, because they flat-out told BP as much. I mean, come on. Doc said "walked off", which I interpreted as "chose not to continue in their advisory capacity due to risk" and which you apparently interpreted as "broke contract".

Halliburton should have blown the whistle on BP's activities... but didn't. It's hard to say why, but it certainly doesn't look good for them.

[Requia ☣]

You mean like this?

I'll ad to this, while Halliburton completed the jobs up to the point several BP internal emails reveal that Halliburton was also pressuring BP to use better designs and parts, which BP rejected. source

Again, what source do you have that Halliburton left the job, or wanted to leave the job?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

You mean like this?

I'll ad to this, while Halliburton completed the jobs up to the point several BP internal emails reveal that Halliburton was also pressuring BP to use better designs and parts, which BP rejected. source

Again, what source do you have that Halliburton left the job, or wanted to leave the job?

You seem to be stating that Halliburton was continuing work on that well past the cementing job they were contracted to do. There is no  evidence whatsoever for that.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/06/bp-emails-show-disregard-for-nightmare-well.html
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/gulf-oil-spill-testimony-executives-bp-transocean-halliburton-2615749.html
http://djd.newsvine.com/_news/2010/06/15/4513779-what-was-halliburtons-role-in-us-oil-spill-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19762
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/company-news-story.aspx?storyid=201006150955dowjonesdjonline000263&title=exxon-to-distance-itself-from-bp-shell-to-cite-renewable-efforts-at-hearing
http://www.divorcesaloon.com/bp-stock-plummets-the-obama-administration-gets-a-unilateral-divorce-and-haliburton-pivots-when-the-marriage-of-equals-ends-with-a-divorce-of-unequals
http://www.luimbe.com/2010/06/15/how-many-corners-did-bp-cut/

It's pretty clear that, beyond finishing the contracted capping, Halliburton was seeking no further engagement with that job.

[Requia ☣]

Why would Halliburton seek more contracts on a well that was scheduled to be shut down?

Reading your articles before I say more.

Ok, I have read all of them.  A couple of them are a fair bit better than the one I linked above, but seem to say the same general thing as the one I linked.  Halliburton wanted to do a quality job, but BP refused.

None of them say anything about Halliburton leaving the project, or that they wanted to leave the project but couldn't for contractual reasons.  Nothing mentions anything about Halliburton's plans prior to the disaster.  The only thing close is the one with the divorce headline, but that's about post disaster actions and the stock price.

It's entirely possible I missed something, if so please point it out.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Whatever; you're right, Requia. Always, especially when you correct people for no apparent reason.

[Requia ☣]

I'm quite frequently wrong.  I may be wrong now, but unless Roger decides to grace me with the source of his information, I cannot know.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I consider a Roger a primary source on this particular matter because of his employer, and also because of his employer I do not expect him to cite sources, for incredibly obvious reasons.

[Requia ☣]

If his source is someone who was involved with the project I would accept that, I don't need to know who.