Military Interactions with Contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan
I’m hoping the readers and discussion board participants of the Small Wars Journal can assist with some research we’re doing at Human Rights Watch on private contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. We’re especially looking for an on-the-ground perspective of those who have been in Iraq or Afghanistan, or are currently there, and who have interacted with private contractors. Below is a very short survey (all answers are treated confidentially) and feel free to distribute it to others who may have more information. Thanks so much!
-Thomas
http://hrw.org/images/thumbnails/HRW-Stripes-Ad.jpg
URL: http://www.polldaddy.com/s/88AD59AB7F5869C2/
- mere opinion of a non-participant
A moral predisposition, IMO, is clearly identified with the initial wording. IMO any identified 'bad contractor' would get special consideration and further inquiries made by some other agency. This is clearly more punitive than scientific and the intent of said survey is valid and I'm sure needed, it's just the approach that bothers me - seems intellectually dishonest. There are no real mechanisms or venues given to the participant for input on the dynamics and interplay that causes a disconnect between military and civilian which in turn opens the door for rogue behavior. The approach of getting the bad guys and all the rest will fall into place got us into a bad mess in the first place in Iraq and Afghan and this is more of the same mentality.
Would that be because of lack of professionalism at core structure?
A better question is: Why are government employees unionized?
Did somebody get that idiot to pay the Government the added cost
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sandbag
I know of a contractor performing work ordered within scope by the KO to pour sidewalks at a FOB. The sidewalk-making was going well and within cost, schedule and performance parameters. Then a senior soldier (we'll keep the rank out of this on principle) decided he needed a sidewalk to his quarters, along with one for his boss. He directed the contractor to perform this. The contractor's on-site supervisor, not having a full command of the language, and doing what DCUs tell him to, begins pouring the extra sidewalks.
Needless to say, confusion, frustration and anger reigned with both the KO and the contractor when the project busted the parameters. Evil, greedy contractor? Not hardly. Government conspiracy? Nope. Apparent authority mis-utilized? Yep.
Being a senior soldier of whatever rank doesn't entitle anyone to get away with stupid actions and doesn't prevent them from doing wrong -- but the system can cope with that; even if no disciplinary action was taken (should have been) he or she could still have been zapped for some funds for misappriopriation.
As long as stupidity like that is tolerated it encourages the idiots in Congress to pass even more dumb laws or others to write even more Regs that penalize the innocent and let guilty doofuses like that slide. :mad:
Not to mention Commanders that tolerate idiocy in their name, even if they weren't aware of it-- they should have been -- and don't stop it as soon as it appears as it usually does. That failure just encourage other Doofuses to say "The Boss wants ..." often without a clue to what the Boss might actually want.