Privatized "soldiers"??...creeeeeepy

[SoCalDem]

http://www.newcity.com/exitlog/frameset.php?close=http://indyweek.com/durham/2003-07-23/cover.html




Soldiers of good fortune

They fly helicopters, guard military bases and provide reconnaissance. They're private military companies--and they're replacing U.S. soldiers in the war on terrorism

B Y   B A R R Y   Y E O M A N

At a remote tactical training camp in a North Carolina swamp, six U.S. sailors are gearing up for their part in President Bush's war on terrorism. Dressed in camouflage on a January afternoon, they wear protective masks and carry nine-millimeter Berettas that fire nonlethal bullets filled with colored soap. Their mission: recapture a ship--actually a three-story-high model constructed of gray steel cargo containers--from armed hijackers. July 23, 2003

C O V E R   F E A T U R E


The men approach the front of the vessel in formation, weapons drawn, then silently walk the length of the ship. Suddenly, as they turn the corner, two "terrorists" spring out from behind a plywood barricade and storm the sailors, guns blazing. The trainees, who have instinctively crowded together, prove easy pickings: Though they outnumber their enemy 3-to-1, every one of them gets hit. They return from the ambush with heads hung, covered in pink dye.


...snip



Boquist and his colleagues fled to the embassy from their downtown hotel--but when they got there, their superiors from DynCorp were nowhere to be found. "They had left the day before," Boquist says. "Just disappeared." Boquist tried to contact the company for several days and finally reached DynCorp's U.S. offices by telephone. "Do the best you can to get your personnel out," he recalls being told. By then, though, the airport in Monrovia was closed. Stranded in the burning city, Boquist and his colleagues armed themselves--buying weapons on the black market and picking up abandoned guns from the street--and defended the embassy and the refugees inside until U.S. military reinforcements arrived. "It's easy to be patriotic when you don't have anyplace to go," he says.

Boquist hasn't forgiven DynCorp ("it was hell on earth"), but notes that it's only natural for businesses to be concerned with their bottom line. "They're worried about liability and being sued, and that takes precedence," Boquist says. "That's the same problem you're going to face in any major conflict."

Despite such experiences in the field, the Bush administration is rapidly deploying private military companies in the Persian Gulf and other conflict zones. By March, DynCorp alone had 1,000 employees in the Middle East to assist in the invasion of Iraq. "The trend is growth," says Daniel Nelson, the former professor at the Pentagon's Marshall Center. "This current president and administration have--in part because of September 11, but also because of their fundamental ideology--taken off constraints that somewhat limited the prior administration." According to some estimates, private military companies will double their business by the end of the decade, to $200 billion a year.





President Bush only has to look to his father's war to see what the consequences of this trend could be. In the Gulf War's single deadliest incident, an Iraqi missile hit a barracks far from the front, killing 28 Army reservists who were responsible for purifying drinking water. Other troops quickly jumped in to take their place. "Today, the military relies heavily on contractors for this support," Colonel Steven Zamparelli, a career contracting officer, notes in the Air Force Journal of Logistics. "If death becomes a real threat, there is no doubt that some contractors will exercise their legal rights to get out of the theater. Not so many years ago, that may have simply meant no hot food or reduced morale and welfare activity. Today, it could mean the only people a field commander has to accomplish a critical 'core competency' task such as weapons-system maintenance...have left and gone home."

[Divernan]

1. And they're a lot better paid than an army private!

Ever heard of the hardship pay that corporations have to shell out to get employees to agree to work in high risk areas? OR the private military companies can go on the cheap and hire underskilled locals. Either way, it's less cost effective than using our own Army/military forces.
"Troops already rely on private contractors to maintain 28 percent of all weapons systems. Bush wants to increase this to 50%".
But private contractors are free to flee if the situation gets too dangerous, leaving the troops with complex weapons systems they are not trained to service/repair. There is no Congressional oversight and little accountability. War is strictly a bidness to the good old boys with Bush - all profit, and no patriotism. Would you want your son or daughter in the military relying on these people?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. The real threat of mercinaries

is that they are beholden to their employers. They don't take an oath to defend the Constitution, but their company's bottom line. I could see Bush getting up an "army" of these people so he can take over the country if 2004 doesn't go his way.

[Walter_Bowman]

23. If he tries it, even many in his own electorate would rebel

How many troops would he need to stop several million angry Americans?

[SoCalDem]

26. But they have to KNOW about it, first..

The ones on the ground , in harm's way, only hear what their immediate supervisors want them to hear and we know they have Foax News and Rush Limbaugh practically "mainlined" to them..

They think they are doing GOOD :(

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Training the Timothy McVeigh Corp.

If this isn't a disaster waiting to happen...

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. War is a big money maker for lots of folks..our economy depends

on it and more and more of it is going to PMI's.

This is a 10 part series ran last fall by the Center for Public Integrity. The shit is much thicker than you think. BTW, the arms story this week ties back to this study..Victor Bout a Soviet arms trader is mentioned in the arms trade story from this past week.

http://www.icij.org/dtaweb/icij_bow.asp

[Brian Sweat]

5. Rule of acquisition number 34

War is good for business.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

6. Making A Killing -The Business of War..Oct. 28, 2002

http://www.publici.org/dtaweb/report.asp?ReportID=469&L1=10&L2=10&L3=0&L4=0&L5=0

(WASHINGTON, Oct. 28, 2002) – At least 90 companies that provide services normally performed by national military forces – but without the same degree of public oversight – have operated in 110 countries worldwide, providing everything from military training, logistics, and even engaging in armed combat. Amid the global military downsizing and the increasing number of small conflicts that followed the end of the Cold War, governments have turned increasingly to these private military companies to intervene on their behalf around the globe, a new investigation by the Center for Public Integrity’s International Consortium of Investigative Journalists has found.

With the ongoing international military presence in Afghanistan and a possible war in Iraq on the horizon, the issue of military privatization has taken on new relevance. Since 1994, the U.S. Defense Department has entered into 3,061 contracts with 12 U.S.-based private military companies identified by ICIJ, a review of government documents showed. Not every contract was for military services; records obtained from the Pentagon were not specific enough to determine the purpose of each of the contracts.

Private military companies – a recently coined euphemism for mercenaries – are just one face of the increasing trend of the privatization of war, the investigation found. A small group of individuals and companies with connections to governments, multinational corporations and, sometimes, criminal syndicates in the United States, Europe, Africa and the Middle East have profited from this business of war.

Arms dealers have profited from a massive unregulated sell off of low price surplus armaments into the most fragile, conflict-ridden states and failed states. The weapons, mostly from state-owned Eastern European factories, have found their way to Angola, Sudan, Ethiopia, Colombia, Congo-Brazzaville, Sri Lanka, Burundi and Afghanistan – where conflicts have led to the deaths of up to 10 million people during the past decade.

The investigation profiles arms dealers like Victor Bout and Leonid Minin, both of whom were born in the Soviet Union and, after its breakup, became involved in the profitable trade in arms to Africa. Bout, a Russian pilot, allegedly supplied arms to the Taliban, and was dubbed “the Merchant of Death” for supplying weapons to a series of African conflicts. Minin, a Ukrainian, was charged with supplying weapons that fueled a bloody war in Sierra Leone. Both have been accused of having ties to international criminal syndicates by various international authorities.

more...
read the full report here
http://www.icij.org/dtaweb/icij_bow.asp
A

mid the military downsizing and increasing number of small conflicts that followed the end of the Cold War, governments turned increasingly to private military companies – a recently coined euphemism for mercenaries – to intervene on their behalf in war zones around the globe. Often, these companies work as proxies for national or corporate interests, whose involvement is buried under layers of secrecy. Entrepreneurs selling arms and companies drilling and mining in unstable regions have prolonged the conflicts.



A nearly two-year investigation by the Center for Public Integrity’s International Consortium of Investigative Journalists has also found that a handful of individuals and companies with connections to governments, multinational corporations and, sometimes, criminal syndicates in the United States, Europe, Africa and the Middle East have profited from this war commerce – a growth industry whose bottom line never takes into account the lives it destroys

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. SoCalDem it's more than "creepy" it's downright INSIDIOUS

I am so glad you brought this issue back up...it has freaked me for years and should be of grave concern to US citizens ...bush is pushing to privatize out military BIG TIME...read the many reports at this site
Privatizing War: Mercenaries in Africa and South America
http://www.peace.ca/privatizingwar.htm

[Bandit]

8. Why are you advertising for Arnold?

Or is your ad somehow a negative ad. :shrug: I don't get it.

[SoCalDem]

9. read the bottom line..It's a joke

:)

[Bandit]

10. Okay ~~but it seemed sooo Arnold.

It wouldn't surprise me to see exactly the same thing for real.

[Lisa]

11. anyone remember the Mark Russell song about this?

It was back in the 1980s -- he lampooned suggestions of privatizing the military -- pointing out the dangers of "Bob's Army" or "Ralph's Paratroopers" used to enforce "no-frills foreign policy".

[SoCalDem]

12. and now that I have changed my sig line, it's gone

:(.. I liked the old DU in that respect.. I could "revisit" my old sig lines :)

[Clete]

13. Weren't they once called soldiers of fortune or mercenaries?

[RainDog]

14. another phase of the fascist assassination of democracy

this is horrible, as someone else noted, because these "private" soldiers are beholden to a corporation, not the Constitution.

this is, again, the very definition of fascism, or the merger of state and corporate power.

and these corporations are already vested in making war because it is so profitable...whose interests will they serve when they have an army at their disposal?

how can democracy survive when a PRIVATE, WEALTHY minority controls the capacity to make war...either here or abroad...with no way to vote the bastards out of power???

the fascists who wanted to assassinate FDR also attempted to build a private army. they were not allowed to succeed.

Bush, no doubt, will do everything to accomodate the fascists in America now, since he's one of them.

[sexybomber]

15. why are they using euphamisms? (sp?)

they're mercenaries. keep it to the plain truth.

[jcc]

16. The Devil’s Advocate

My boyfriend is a reservist stationed in Iraq and currently works with at least one contracted civilian that I know of. He is in a job that is extremely specialized and there are fewer than 3000 guys with his specialty to cover all 52+ wars that we’re fighting. Without these contracted people he would get less than the six hours of sleep he gets now. As it is, he will spend a year and a half in the region, but without civilian contractors, it may have been much more. Before you spit on these corporations, look at the reason we use them: First, we went to fight a war that we didn’t have the staff to support. Second, our government cut the military. Either way it’s not the corporations’ fault, they are just capitalizing on the incompetence of our government leaders.

[SoCalDem]

17. BUT.. the "leaders" are doing this stuff on the sly..

They are using MY MONEY to pay exorbitant rates to "outside contractors" for stuff that we, the people, have no knowledge of, nor any control over..

If we NEED a larger military, then crank up the draft and ADMIT that we need more manpower.. Don't start up some clandestine cloak and dagger "rent-a-soldier organization..

MY TAX MONEY is being funnelled into the pockets of these sleazebag big shots who suck at the teat of our government,yet operate at the fringe of propriety..

The same people who howl with derision at the thought of an immigrant child getting an education, give tacit approval for this kind of shit when they deify the almighty rightwing BushBots who are in charge..


My FORTY NINE YEAR OLD friend (also a reservist) got called up too, and I know how hard it is for the guys who are there. but dammit, I don't want my friend, or your boyfriend risking HIS life so that SlickDick Cheny & the boys can pocket more tax money.. How freaking MUCH money is enough for these creeps..?

For your information, our government did NOT cut the military.. Rumsfield immediately set out as Secretary of "perpetual war" , to GUT the military down to size and close bases... WHY would he do this?? Because if the "soldiers" are government issue, they have accountability.. The secret military that gets paid "under the radar" has NO accountability.. The "wars" kind of derailed his plans for the moment..

The military represents US, the citizens, NOT Halliburton,Bechtel, Brown & Root, and all the others..

Let them do their share, but do it in an open and fair atmosphere.. Make them bid against others who might want a piece of the pie too..

The fact that our guys over there are limited to 2 bottles of water a day in 125 degree heat , is that they "privatized" it and Halliburton f@#ked up....BIG TIME..

[Isome]

18. *ahem*

My brother is currently involved in the training of Iraqis (security, police functions, etc.). He's a retired Army officer and went over there as a civilian with some company. He sent me a picture just yesterday of him (dressed in a plain green fatigue-like pants & shirt assemble) standing behind some Iraqis doing target practice. He took the job because he believes in American imperialism (his definition: we know best, we are the best, we have the most money, we have the military might, we should do what we want), makes no bones about it and found the six-figure salary too tempting to pass up.

For the record: we argue constantly about politics and I can't believe we were raised by the same set of parents.

[SoCalDem]

19. Your brother is not high enough up the food chain to be a

sleazebag.. He saw an opportunity and took it.. The ones I have a beef with, are the 7 figure guys..the ones who meet in privacy and decide who we are going to overthrow next :(

[Isome]

20. He ain't heavy... he's my brother.

I appreciate your consideration of our familial ties. I, on the other hand, haven't been as restrained in my condemnation of his decision... in private that is.

Publicly I can say that I find the decision exploitive, not to mention a very loud invitation to bad karma to make an extended visit. Those at the top of the food chain couldn't hope to turn a profit without the participation of those on the lower end who assist them in their effort.

[MrPrax]

21. Private soldiers with private contractors

from Monkey Media (an eclectic blog and a great read)
http://www.monkeytime.org/archive/Aug2003.html#dumbdumbdumb
from links in the 8.11.03 (scroll down)
Quotes David Wood of Newshouse News
http://newhousenews.com/archive/wood080103.html
<snip>
"U.S. troops in Iraq suffered through months of unnecessarily poor living conditions because some civilian contractors hired by the Army for logistics support failed to show up, Army officers said...

"We thought we could depend on industry to perform these kinds of functions," Lt. Gen. Charles S. Mahan, the Army's logistics chief, said in an interview."

Why the delay? Well, gosh, sir, insurance rates for civilian contractors went through the roof, you see:

Last fall the Army hired Kellogg Brown & Root, a Houston-based contractor, to draw up a plan for supporting U.S. troops in Iraq, covering everything from handling the dead to managing airports. KBR, as it's known, eventually received contracts to perform some of the jobs, and it and other contractors began assembling in Kuwait for the war.

But as the conflict approached, insurance rates for civilians skyrocketed -- to 300 percent to 400 percent above normal, according to Mike Klein, president of MMG Agency Inc., a New York insurance firm. Soldiers are insured through the military and rates don't rise in wartime.

It got "harder and harder to get (civilian contractors) to go in harm's way," said Mahan, the Army logistics chief.

The Army had $8 million in contracts for troop housing in Iraq sitting idle, Mahan said. "Our ability to move (away) from living in the mud is based on an expectation that we would have been able to go to more contractor logistical support early on," Mahan said...

Patrice Mingo, a spokesman for KBR, declined comment."

<snip>
Civillians need insurance coverage!!...reason number 287 never to privatize an army

[stickdog]

22. This is the death knell of democracy.

Eisenhower's worst nightmare has now been almost completely realized.

Orwell's is rapidly approaching.

[w4rma]

24. This article is very good. It lays out, precisely this *serious* problem.

Because they operate with little oversight, using contractors also enables the military to skirt troop limits imposed by Congress and to carry out clandestine operations without committing U.S. troops or attracting public attention. "Private military corporations become a way to distance themselves and create what we used to call 'plausible deniability,'" says Daniel Nelson, a former professor of civil-military relations at the Defense Department's Marshall European Center for Security Studies. "It's disastrous for democracy."
…
When the companies do screw up, however, their status as private entities often shields them--and the government--from public scrutiny. In 2001, an Alabama-based firm called Aviation Development Corp. that provided reconnaissance for the CIA in South America misidentified an errant plane as possibly belonging to cocaine traffickers. Based on the company's information, the Peruvian air force shot down the aircraft, killing a U.S. missionary and her seven-month-old daughter. Afterward, when members of Congress tried to investigate, the State Department and the CIA refused to provide any information, citing privacy concerns. "We can't talk about it," administration officials told Congress, according to a source familiar with the incident. "It's a private entity. Call the company."

The lack of oversight alarms some members of Congress. "Under a shroud of secrecy, the United States is carrying out military missions with people who don't have the same level of accountability," says Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), a leading congressional critic of privatized war. "We have individuals who are not obligated to follow orders or follow the Military Code of Conduct. Their main obligation is to their employer, not to their country."
…
The companies don't rely on informal networking alone, though. They also pour plenty of money into the political system--especially into the re-election war chests of lawmakers who oversee their business. An analysis shows that 17 of the nation's leading private military firms have invested more than $12.4 million in congressional and presidential campaigns since 1999.
…
The United States has a history of dispatching private military companies to handle the dirtiest foreign assignments. The Pentagon quietly hired for-profit firms to train Vietnamese troops before America officially entered the war, and the CIA secretly used private companies to transport weapons to the Nicaraguan contras during the 1980s after Congress had cut off aid. But as the Bush administration replaces record numbers of soldiers with contractors, it creates more opportunities for private firms to carry out clandestine operations banned by Congress or unpopular with the public. "We can see some merit in using an outside contractor," Charles Snyder, deputy assistant secretary of state for African affairs, recently told reporters, "because then we're not using U.S. uniforms and bodies."
…

[terryg11]

25. this should not be allowed

how scary is this? Fast forward ten years or so and look at where we could be at. huge corporations with large armies doing what they want in other countries, our leaders not able to directly control them.

This could really be a step towards real oppression of the poor and middle class