No I didn't think you were Krugman. So who do you think should have been awarded the contract to rebuild Iraq?
Halliburton seems fine. The only - possibly legitimate - claim I've seen is that it was a no-bid contract so awarded because of time-pressures. If true, that's fine also. I don't see how political favoritism can be avoided in such situations so I've no problem with it.
The remaining questions concern oversight and performance. Both ongoing concerns and legitimately so.