GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Wartime commission scrutinizes contractors' role in Iraq drawdown

• 91441
  

  Response to V Wayne: I must first thank you for your service to this great nation: With all due respect sir. What you describe as the truth is unfortunatly your fantasy $$. I do not get my views on this situation from the media. You are correct about the draft to make up for short comings if contractors where not used. However I am seeing the money spent and can not see how anyone can justify paying one individual three soldiers salaries. Also I do not believe that these functions are inbedded in the ARMY from here on. A matter of fact the more the taxpayers learn of the repeated waste and beatings we are taking finacially in many areas of this war effort by contractors the wave of discontent will devour this situation. You are correct again the youth does not want anything to do with this conflict for many reasons this war is not popular with the kids. A draft will be met with protest for sure, this entire situation could have and should have been avoided we know this today our leadership both parties have thrown us into the economic quagmire at home and abroad. Soldiers do their jobs for us the citizens who they protect the flag they honor and the country they love and I for one am indedted to them and respect each of them. We are only seeing contractors do what they do for greed no flag no country no cause but their own pockets which appauls me. I will say though, we get in a conflict this country believes in and the youth will pour into service look at WWII. This is a money machine for some and that view does not come from my TV its just a reality and I for one have seen enough.

  LC Posted November 6, 2009 1:45 PM
• 91136
  

  Most of the argumentative points I'd make have already been made by previous commentors, I'd simply stress the macro-issue, as follows: What do the commenters that are suspicious of contractors expect to receive if you agree that the USA will have overseas battles fighting with overseas ground units. More to the point -- what are your expectations for: 1) predicting operational costs 2) predicting operational inefficiency as well as graft, 3) predicting where in the private sector or where in the uniformed and US government sector - operational support structures and units will be raised, maintained, and administered. 4) Minimizing graft, inefficiency, and unfairness - supply your personal yardstick. Sorry, commenters, but, most of the contractor-suspicious seem vastly uninformed if not naive on the realities especially the historical record, deep and rich, of war operations. By war operations, I mean actual shooting battles - chaos, dying, killing, heroes and cowards on any given battlefield. Such activities are famously difficult to predict in terms of cost, dollars and lives - the wise or politically clever don't try. Pre-battle predictions and post-battle costs generally differ dramatically -- pick your favorite multiplied number -- say 10X what Congress has approved, what the public hopes. So who can best supply military supplies and services: is it self-serving contractors or the virtuous civil servants? Do you want to re-establish US government factories - we could do that -- the Springfield Armory made Union Army rifles, in WWII battleships were made in US Navy Shipyards - e.g. Boston, Mare Island, and the famous Brooklyn yard. Here's a fun test: assume the TOE US Army regiment has about 40,000 individual inventory items - food, uniforms, mortars, ammo, plasma, etc. Now, check out your local town public works unit - do they stock 40,000 items? Any funny business therein and if so, are you equally shocked at local perfidy? Do you expect, local graft should be 0%, 1.5%, 15% of inventory? Under 2% ? Oh my, bless you my children, for you war is just too childish for your apparently ethereal values. Perhaps, we can nosh on a different topic some time. Yo, check you at the next roundtable on IRS audit targets, oh the unfairness to the Little Guy! Plus ca change.

  Concerned Retiree Posted November 3, 2009 5:27 PM
• 91129
  

  where is our vaulted state dept and us aid?? Why aren't they involved and taking over the missions that are there's and not the military's. I'm tired of their bloated budgets and bloated payroll and their 0 contribution to this nations well being

  dan m ketter Posted November 3, 2009 4:41 PM
• 91105
  

  Dear LC, Your comments are thoughtful and make total sense from the viewpoint of what most American's know based on the facts presented to them by the newsmedia. What is not readily apparent is that contractors are an integral component of US military capability and will forever be a part of warfighting. Contractors provide everything from food, vehicles, drinking water, fuel, toothpics and toiletpaper, to the warfighter.. and yes, they drive the trucks that deliver it. For the most part, outside of LogCap, they even provide the security for the trucks that deliever it. We used all private security in Iraq for the Reconstruction materials that were delivered to Iraqi Ministries. Why? IT was our mandate because the Miliatary did not have the assets to spare. Our troops are stretched to do warfighting and as you accurately said, they are exhausted. If we detailed US military with all that contractors now do, it would requre a draft. Faced with that reality, I think we would opt to have guys and gals do that work voluntariy, albeit for more money. Keep in mind that the military sign up with full knowledge of what it means and what it pays. As a nation, we are better off with our fighting men on the front lines than driving logistics trucks and securing convoys. Remember KP duty? No uniformed military have been peeling potatoes in the kitchen for a long time. It may not be what we would like, but it is today's and tomorrow's reality. Regards, Former Deputy Director Logistics, Iraq Reconstruction

  V Wayne Posted November 3, 2009 1:24 PM
• 91077
  

  Contractors do what they do to make a profit. The military is non-profit. Are Do Contractors have value in the TOA, yes. How could that be, have you ever tried to get toilets through the military supply system? Through using a Contractor all of that red tape is passed over. What could take up to years to accomplish can be accomplished in days, weeks or months through contracting. Tweak the military suply system to allow what is needed to be there when needed and we could do away with the contract and use military personnel.

  Fed Posted November 3, 2009 10:51 AM
• 91063
  

  I have been told that KBR is paid by the number of meals they serve to the boots. The was they do this is by counter the number of paper plates that are used. Some of the GIs have told me that the paper plates are so thin you have to use 2 or 3 to keep the food on. Thanks to our ex-VP for all this.

  JM Posted November 3, 2009 9:38 AM
• 91055
  

  Terry Thomas you miss the point. The contractors expect ot get paid for the hazardous job their in. They are in many cases retired or separated military who are no more or less motivated to see that rat hole Afghanistan become ivilized or not. They are interested in pay as is anyone else. They dont care about the companies profits because their pay is not tied to it. Thats the executives and they are not in theater. I'm guessing you have never been to any of these places but watch it on tv when you are not watching COPS or soe other "informative source" for your delusions.

  alex badme Posted November 3, 2009 9:19 AM
• 91053
  

  The government contracting officer must modify the contract to require a reduction in staffing. Don't blame the contractor if he is following a contract - blame the government for not performing adequate contract surveillance and administration. And if the contract was in fact modified and the contractor ignored this - the invoices should not be paid. If the invoices are not paid the contractor will reduce his staffing because he will be paying salaries and not receive reimbursement.

  Simple

  Anonymous Posted November 3, 2009 9:12 AM
• 91036
  

  Think of what the government is saying! They are surprised at what these contracts cost the taxpayer. Well I said this before but to prove my point. I am not a highly educated man but when I saw some footage of a convoy about 5 years ago in Iraq and the guy in the interview was a civilian from Kentucky and was paid over $100,000 a year to drive a truck and the soldiers in front of him in a Hummer with a ring mount, each of the 3 soldiers where making about 30 grand a year maybe, this wasnt rocket science to figure contracting the work was going to cost us much more then if our military did the work. On top of all of this the truck way out front hit an IED and turned it over in a narrow street area the soldiers in the hummer instead of protecting their brothers up front their main mission was to get the civilians out of the hot zone ASAP. Now I know the guy from Kentucky was just doing a job but he cant fight he was way over weight and old and the kids had to protect him instead of their own Unit. this is a problem in a war zone my opinion a war zone has no cilvilians no media and no politicians. If you operated this conflict in that fashion this would be done and over and our boys would be home years ago. Political correctness (contractors) has no place in war the enemy want to kill us simply for being alive they have no regard for your life or their own. Yet when confronted our fighting force must get permission to send these idiots to their promised land I figure if dieing is their ultimate goal lets help em out. We do have a long term commitment with our soldiers however I do believe after you work the real figures it is still much cheaper to have our military do all this work especially in a war zone. I'm sure someone somewhere showed other figures that is why contractors are in harms way and our fighting force no only has to protect themselves, kill the bad guys and have their main mission be protect the civilians. no wonder our war fighters are getting worn out.

  LC Posted November 3, 2009 8:41 AM
• 91012
  

  Why is it that only the peons can see the forest. Contractors are responsible to stockholders, not the American people. Whatever fantasy the the leadership has (I assume due to fantastic powerpoint briefings) about a contractor being concerned about the country, being patriotic, the American people and the money they dish out for the government to waste, is not only naive but delusional.

  Terry Thomas Posted November 3, 2009 7:09 AM