Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 60 of 78

Thread: PMC / Mercenaries in Iraq (catch all)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rancho La Espada, Blanchard, OK
    Posts
    1,065

    Default I have a visceral reaction

    to contracting for things that should be inherently governmental!

    In general, contracting training of other people's militaries (and police) is something that should be done by the USG (and its allied governments). That said, if Rob is correct, then some of the current contracting is, indeed, legitimate. On one issue, however, I would argue that there is little reason to use contractors and that is in the Ministry Support Teams. Here, the expertise lies in the USAR Civil Affairs Commands and is an outgrowth of their function beginning in WWII. The MSTs were pioneered in Panama, Kuwait, and Haiti and draw on the functional teams inherent in a CA Command and the civilian expertise that members bring.

    Is there a place for contractor's in the MSTs? Some of us older guys who have retired could be brought in under contract to fill holes in the MSTs but, I think it would be better, cheaper, and easier to simply recall some of us to active duty out of the retired reserve.

    Cheers

    JohnT

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default Personal Protective Services in Iraq

    U.S. Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors Office of Inspector General, Dec 08:

    Status of the Secretary of State’s Panel on Personal Protective Services in Iraq Report Recommendations
    In October 2007, the Secretary of State’s Panel on Personal Protective Services in Iraq (The Panel), composed of outside experts, was assembled to review the Department’s security practices in Iraq following the Nisoor Square incident and to provide recommendations to strengthen the coordination, oversight, and accountability of Embassy Baghdad’s security practices. This report examines the status of The Panel’s recommendations and whether changes in operations enhanced the protection of U.S. mission personnel and furthered U.S. foreign policy objectives.

    In making this assessment, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) visited Embassy Baghdad and sites throughout Iraq where private security contractors provide movement and personal protection for U.S. mission personnel, including Erbil, Kirkuk, Hillah, Tallil, and Basra. In addition, OIG examined Department reporting on the status of the recommendations and consulted with senior and operational-level officials in Management and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS), Embassy Baghdad, Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I), and the three security companies under contract with the Department to provide protective services in Iraq—Blackwater USA, DynCorp International, and Triple Canopy. The evaluation was conducted according to Quality Standards for Inspections issued by the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency.

  3. #3
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default

    I guess the one thing that I do not understand is how it is cheaper to contract to companies then to contract individuals.
    Reed
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  4. #4
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Administrative costs. If you contract

    individuals, you have to cover the Admin costs of payroll, insurance, etc. etc. -- plus, if equipment is involved, you have to provide it or specify with some precision what the individual is to provide. Cheaper to just get a Company to do all that minutia.

    Plus, Congress like it that way because the contracting companies can contribute to Congressional campaigns whereas the Armed Forces or OGA cannot...

  5. #5
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    individuals, you have to cover the Admin costs of payroll, insurance, etc. etc. -- plus, if equipment is involved, you have to provide it or specify with some precision what the individual is to provide. Cheaper to just get a Company to do all that minutia.

    Plus, Congress like it that way because the contracting companies can contribute to Congressional campaigns whereas the Armed Forces or OGA cannot...
    Your still paying for all that "minutia" with companies too. It's not like they don't add those charges , along with the need for hefty profit into the contract proposals. Besides support positions already exist w/i the DOS and trainers can be dual purpose (train FT and "Contract" agents along w/ other nation security teams if need arises). Sorry, but I have heard that line a lot, I have never seen it pan out in practice. What I have seen is the disparity in income increase as we pay the "doers" less and shift the money to some CEO type. I'm sure that's not 100% the case, but it is in my limited experiance (private corrections, and State level service contracting).
    Reed
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  6. #6
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Yes, you are -- but you don't have to provide the staff/people

    Quote Originally Posted by reed11b View Post
    Your still paying for all that "minutia" with companies too. It's not like they don't add those charges , along with the need for hefty profit into the contract proposals. Besides support positions already exist w/i the DOS and trainers can be dual purpose (train FT and "Contract" agents along w/ other nation security teams if need arises).
    to do it so your number of spaces can be decreased even as your overall costs increase. That lets you do other things with people and still stay within your Congressionally imposed personnel ceiling.
    Sorry, but I have heard that line a lot, I have never seen it pan out in practice. What I have seen is the disparity in income increase as we pay the "doers" less and shift the money to some CEO type. I'm sure that's not 100% the case, but it is in my limited experiance (private corrections, and State level service contracting).
    Why be sorry? Yeah, me too, you're right on that.

    Did you know the Army and the USAF, USN, USMC, NG and Reserves used to provide free Helicopter Ambulance service nation wide? Did you know that USN and US Army Stevedore companies cannot unload ships in the US? Did you know that military postal units cannot peform most postal services (for training) in the US?

    Know why?

    Might I suggest you go back and read the second paragraph of my response above; that really is the answer to everyones complaints of all types about government's contracting out, mismanagement and such as well as all the dumb things I asked about above. Oh, and add the civilian operators of Air Ambulance Services and Unions to those who can contribute to Congressional campaigns...

  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,074

    Default Our Silent Partners: Private Security Contractors in Iraq

    Our Silent Partners: Private Security Contractors in Iraq

    Entry Excerpt:



    --------
    Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
    This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,074

    Default Our Silent Partners: Private Security Contractors in Iraq

    Our Silent Partners: Private Security Contractors in Iraq

    Entry Excerpt:



    --------
    Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
    This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

Similar Threads

  1. Iraq and the Arab States on Its Borders
    By Jedburgh in forum Catch-All, OIF
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-18-2009, 07:51 PM
  2. Toward Sustainable Security in Iraq and the Endgame
    By Rob Thornton in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-30-2008, 12:24 PM
  3. US Senator's Iraq Trip Comments: WSJ 15 June 07
    By TROUFION in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2007, 04:26 PM
  4. The New Plan for Iraq
    By SWJED in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-19-2007, 03:00 AM
  5. Victory in Iraq
    By SWJED in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-03-2007, 01:50 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •