Author Topic: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.  (Read 1314 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Mucho

  • Guest
No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« on: July 04, 2007, 02:32:22 PM »
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-private4jul04,1,6564316.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
From the Los Angeles Times
Private contractors outnumber U.S. troops in Iraq
New U.S. data show how heavily the Bush administration has relied on corporations to carry out the occupation of the war-torn nation.
By T. Christian Miller
Times Staff Writer

July 4, 2007

The number of U.S.-paid private contractors in Iraq now exceeds that of American combat troops, newly released figures show, raising fresh questions about the privatization of the war effort and the government's capacity to carry out military and rebuilding campaigns.

More than 180,000 civilians ? including Americans, foreigners and Iraqis ? are working in Iraq under U.S. contracts, according to State and Defense department figures obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

Including the recent troop buildup, 160,000 soldiers and a few thousand civilian government employees are stationed in Iraq.

The total number of private contractors, far higher than previously reported, shows how heavily the Bush administration has relied on corporations to carry out the occupation of Iraq ? a mission criticized as being undermanned.

"These numbers are big," said Peter Singer, a Brookings Institution scholar who has written on military contracting. "They illustrate better than anything that we went in without enough troops. This is not the coalition of the willing. It's the coalition of the billing."

The numbers include at least 21,000 Americans, 43,000 foreign contractors and about 118,000 Iraqis ? all employed in Iraq by U.S. tax dollars, according to the most recent government data.

The array of private workers promises to be a factor in debates on a range of policy issues, including the privatization of military jobs and the number of Iraqi refugees allowed to resettle in the U.S.

But there are also signs that even those mounting numbers may not capture the full picture. Private security contractors, who are hired to protect government officials and buildings, were not fully counted in the survey, according to industry and government officials.

Continuing uncertainty over the numbers of armed contractors drew special criticism from military experts.

"We don't have control of all the coalition guns in Iraq. That's dangerous for our country," said William Nash, a retired Army general and reconstruction expert. The Pentagon "is hiring guns. You can rationalize it all you want, but that's obscene."

Although private companies have played a role in conflicts since the American Revolution, the U.S. has relied more on contractors in Iraq than in any other war, according to military experts.

Contractors perform functions including construction, security and weapons system maintenance.

Military officials say contractors cut costs while allowing troops to focus on fighting rather than on other tasks.

"The only reason we have contractors is to support the war fighter," said Gary Motsek, the assistant deputy undersecretary of Defense who oversees contractors. "Fundamentally, they're supporting the mission as required."

But critics worry that troops and their missions could be jeopardized if contractors, functioning outside the military's command and control, refuse to make deliveries of vital supplies under fire.

At one point in 2004, for example, U.S. forces were put on food rations when drivers balked at taking supplies into a combat zone.

Adding an element of potential confusion, no single agency keeps track of the number or location of contractors.

In response to demands from Congress, the U.S. Central Command began a census last year of the number of contractors working on U.S. and Iraqi bases to determine how much food, water and shelter was needed.

That census, provided to The Times under the Freedom of Information Act, shows about 130,000 contractors and subcontractors of different nationalities working at U.S. and Iraqi military bases.

However, U.S. military officials acknowledged that the census did not include other government agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development and the State Department.

Last month, USAID reported about 53,000 Iraqis employed under U.S. reconstruction contracts, doing jobs such as garbage pickup and helping to teach democracy. In interviews, agency officials said an additional 300 Americans and foreigners worked as contractors for the agency.

State Department officials said they could not provide the department's number of contractors. Of about 5,000 people affiliated with the U.S. Embassy in Iraq, about 300 are State Department employees. The rest are a mix of other government agency workers and contractors, many of whom are building the new embassy.

"There are very few of us, and we're way undermanned," said one State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We have significant shortages of people. It's been that way since before [the war], and it's still that way."

The companies with the largest number of employees are foreign firms in the Middle East that subcontract to KBR, the Houston-based oil services company, according to the Central Command database. KBR, once a subsidiary of Halliburton Co., provides logistics support to troops, the single largest contract in Iraq.

Middle Eastern companies, including Kulak Construction Co. of Turkey and Projects International of Dubai, supply labor from Third World countries to KBR and other U.S. companies for menial work on U.S. bases and rebuilding projects. Foreigners are used instead of Iraqis because of fears that insurgents could infiltrate projects.

KBR is by far the largest employer of Americans, with nearly 14,000 U.S. workers. Other large employers of Americans in Iraq include New York-based L-3 Communications, which holds a contract to provide translators to troops, and ITT Corp., a New York engineering and technology firm.

The most controversial contractors are those working for private security companies, including Blackwater, Triple Canopy and Erinys. They guard sensitive sites and provide protection to U.S. and Iraqi government officials and businessmen.

Security contractors draw some of the sharpest criticism, much of it from military policy experts who say their jobs should be done by the military. On several occasions, heavily armed private contractors have engaged in firefights when attacked by Iraqi insurgents.

Others worry that the private security contractors lack accountability. Although scores of troops have been prosecuted for serious crimes, only a handful of private security contractors have faced legal charges.

The number of private security contractors in Iraq remains unclear, despite Central Command's latest census. The Times identified 21 security companies in the Central Command database, deploying 10,800 men.

However, the Defense Department's Motsek, who monitors contractors, said the Pentagon estimated the total was 6,000.

Both figures are far below the private security industry's own estimate of about 30,000 private security contractors working for government agencies, nonprofit organizations, media outlets and businesses.

Industry officials said that private security companies helped reduce the number of troops needed in Iraq and provided jobs to Iraqis ? a benefit in a country with high unemployment.

"A guy who is working for a [private security company] is not out on the street doing something inimical to our interests," said Lawrence Peter, director of the Private Security Company Assn. of Iraq.

Not surprisingly, Iraqis make up the largest number of civilian employees under U.S. contracts. Typically, the government contracts with an American firm, which then subcontracts with an Iraqi firm to do the job.

Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, a contractors' trade group, said the number of Iraqis reflected the importance of the reconstruction and economic development efforts to the overall U.S. mission in Iraq.

"That's not work that the government does or has ever done?. That's work that is going to be done by companies and to some extent by" nongovernmental organizations, Soloway said. "People tend to think that these are contractors on the battlefield, and they're not."

The Iraqis have been the most difficult to track. As recently as May, the Pentagon told Congress that 22,000 Iraqis were employed by its contractors. But the Pentagon number recently jumped to 65,000 ? a result of closer inspection of contracts, an official said.

The total number of Iraqis employed under U.S. contracts is important, in part because it may influence debate in Congress regarding how many Iraqis will be allowed to come to the U.S. to escape violence in their homeland.

This year, the U.S. planned to cap that number at 7,000 a year. To date, however, only a few dozen Iraqis have been admitted, according to State Department figures.

Kirk Johnson, head of the List Project, which seeks to increase the admission of Iraqis, said that the U.S. needed to provide a haven to those who worked most closely with American officials.

"We all say we are grateful to these Iraqis," Johnson said. "How can we be the only superpower in the world that can't implement what we recognize as a moral imperative?"

t.christian.miller@latimes.com

--

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #1 on: July 04, 2007, 04:06:56 PM »
Misleading article at best.


Mucho

  • Guest
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2007, 04:32:59 PM »
Misleading article at best.



Please expound oh leader of all crackers.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2007, 05:17:39 PM »
Interesting article with lots of ramifications.  For example, from my dimly-remembered Roman History course in University, I believe that the use of mercenaries to do the Empire's fighting for it was one of the symptoms of the final decline of the Roman Empire.  A citizenry that was too decadent and too cowardly to do its own fighting was easy pickings for domestic tyrants and ultimately for the barbarians at the gate. 

The cost of the war doesn't seem to be any higher, at least not if the mercenaries' payroll was properly included in the dollar cost estimate of the war.  The death toll is higher than officially recorded, but the extras are only mercenaries and traditionally nobody gives a shit about the fate of a hired gun.  The world's probably better off without 'em anyway.

The humanitarian cost of the war is automatically raised when mercs are employed, although given the uncontrolled savagery of combatants in this particular case, it's hard to see how hired guns could lower the bar any further.

If anyone is interested, it certainly indicates the general carnage and the toll in human suffering is even greater than the Bush admin lets on, but that's just gilding the lily.  Nobody would describe the operation, even in the absence of any information about the mercs, as a humanitarian venture.  A few extra cadavers thrown onto the pile at this point hardly makes any difference at all. 

If anyone wanted to count the number of green-card wannabes inside the "official" number of U.S. forces in Iraq, the level of mercenary participation would be even higher than currently admitted.  This might be the real secret of this and future wars of American aggression - - expose the minimum number of American soldiers and the maximum number of foreigners and mercs.  Ultimately get it down to an all-merc, all-foreign force.  That'll mean, finally, that we're at five minutes to midnight in the life-span of the American World Empire.

Mucho

  • Guest
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2007, 08:21:48 PM »
Maybe we should thank the Bushidiot for speeding our imperial demise by creating Bellum Americana

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2007, 08:34:37 PM »
<<Maybe we should thank the Bushidiot for speeding our imperial demise by creating Bellum Americana>>

You'd make his whole day.  He wouldn't get the irony.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2007, 12:24:15 AM »
The story catalogs contractors working on reconstruction as mercenaries. See,  even Mikey was misled.

That wasn't what the article was about. And that was why it was misleading.




Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #7 on: July 06, 2007, 02:46:02 AM »
Quote
More than 180,000 civilians ? including Americans, foreigners and Iraqis ? are working in Iraq under U.S. contracts, according to State and Defense department figures obtained by the Los Angeles Times.


   If this includes Kindergarden teachers , bridge builders , and water carryers what does the number mean?

Mucho

  • Guest
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #8 on: July 06, 2007, 08:27:44 AM »
The story catalogs contractors working on reconstruction as mercenaries. See,  even Mikey was misled.

That wasn't what the article was about. And that was why it was misleading.





Anyone that profits from the misery of the Iraqi people is a mercenary. Who said you have to shoot a gun to be one?

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
mer?ce?nar?y      [mur-suh-ner-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, plural -nar?ies.
?adjective
1.   working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal.
2.   hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc.
?noun
3.   a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army.
4.   any hireling.
[Origin: 1350?1400; ME mercenarie < L merc?nnārius working for pay, hired worker, mercenary, perh., repr. earlier *merc?d(i)nārius, equiv. to *merc?din-, s. of *merc?dō, a by-form of merc?s, s. merc?d- payment, wage (akin to merx goods; cf. merchant) + -ārius -ary]

?Related forms
mer?ce?nar?i?ly      [mur-suh-nair-uh-lee, mur-suh-ner-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation, adverb
mer?ce?nar?i?ness, noun

?Synonyms 1. grasping, acquisitive, avaricious, covetous.
?Antonyms 1. altruistic, idealistic, unselfish.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, ? Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source
mer?ce?nar?y       (m?r'sə-něr'ē)  Pronunciation Key 
adj. 
Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
Hired for service in a foreign army.

n.   pl. mer?ce?nar?ies
One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.


[Middle English mercenarie, a mercenary, from Old French mercenaire, from Latin mercēnnārius, from mercēs, wages, price.]

mer'ce?nar'i?ly adv., mer'ce?nar'i?ness n.
(Download Now or Buy the Book)
The American Heritage? Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright ? 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Online Etymology Dictionary - Cite This Source
mercenary  (n.)
c.1386, "one who works only for hire," from L. mercenarius "one who does anything for pay," lit. "hired, paid," from merces (gen. mercedis) "pay, reward, wages," from merx (see market). The adj. is recorded from 1532.

Online Etymology Dictionary, ? 2001 Douglas Harper

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mercenary

Methinks you are the misled(or misleading one)
« Last Edit: July 06, 2007, 08:58:18 AM by Mucho »

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2007, 10:14:39 PM »
Well, Knuttia has proven in her very own way that everyone who earns a paycheck is a mercenary.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2007, 08:37:46 AM »
Well, Knuttia has proven in her very own way that everyone who earns a paycheck is a mercenary.
==================================================================
Do you acknowledge that his definition is from the dictionary?
Do you acknowledge that the dictionary is the authority?


Perhaps you have another dictionary you would like to share with the class...

The modern distinction is that a mercenary serves in the military for money rather than out of a spirit of patriotism.

Except I doubt that most of our regular military would be in the service risking their butts if they were not paid to do so.

'Mercenary' seems to be a word like "deserve", a word best left out of intellectual conversations becauswe of emotion and vagueness.

The main purpose of contractors seems to be to reward the companies that provide them like B&R, Blackstone, Fluor, etc. There was and is a definite mercantile motive for their use.

It will be fun to see how much they contribute to the various political coffers. Or if we ever actually know this figure.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: No wonder Iraq is lost to US.
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2007, 02:00:25 PM »
Do you acknowledge that his definition is from the dictionary?
Do you acknowledge that the dictionary is the authority?

As I said, all she has proven is that her definition claims that everyone who is employed is a mercenary.

And wasn't Mikey just arguing that the intent of the speaker is as important, maybe more important, than the definition?
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)