Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiU.S. Increasing Use of Private Contractors in War Zone
In Iraq, armed contractors are increasing as US troops “drawdown.” In Afghanistan, the increases are across the board.
The Department of Defense has released an updated census of Pentagon contractors deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan and CENTCOM's area of operations. The overall number of contractors in the third quarter of 2009 increased slightly from 243,000 to 244,000, which means that private forces continue to constitute about half of the total US force deployed in these two wars.
Two other statistics jump out. First, in Iraq, the DoD reports that there was "a 19 % increase (from 10,743 to 13,232) of armed DoD PSCs in Iraq compared to the 2nd quarter FY 2009 census." The DoD says the "increase can be attributed to an increased need for PSCs to provide security as the military begins to drawdown forces and to our continued improved ability to account for subcontractors who are providing security services." In other words, less soldiers means more mercenaries in Iraq.
Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, there continue to be more private contractors than US soldiers. There was "a 20% increase (from 4,111 to 5,165) of armed DoD PSCs in Afghanistan compared to the 1st quarter FY 2009 census," according to the DoD. That increase is, predictably, linked to the overall "build up of forces" in Afghanistan.
In neither Iraq, nor Afghanistan, do these numbers include the armed contractors working for the US Department of State or for private entities or individuals. That means that the Blackwater, DynCorp and Triple Canopy forces working for the State Department are not included in this count. Nor are those who work for the CIA or other covert US agencies. In other words, these statistics are a conservative estimate of the total number of private armed personnel on the US payroll in these countries.
In Iraq, there has been an overall 10% decrease in the total number of private contractors- there are now 119,706. According to DoD this is "due to ongoing efforts to reduce the contractor footprint in Iraq." Interestingly, there has been an increase in the overall number of contractors in Afghanistan- "a 9% increase (from 68K to 74K) in contractor personnel in Afghanistan." Kuwait has also seen a "significant" increase in US contractor personnel. The report was prepared by the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Program Support.
22 Comments so far
Show AllIt seems to me there a disconnect amongst the Public here when it comes to the issue of "Contracters".
It gives the impression that as employees of a private Corporation this somehow makes Governmnet smaller, more efficient and less costly.
For all intents and purposes these ARE Government employees as all the dollars paid to them are taxpayer dollars.
The use of contracters does NOT make the Governmnet smaller in real terms, nor is it less expensive. Indeed the contracters are more expensive then had the US Militray relied on its own resources as they did when they used the Sea bees and US Core of Engineers in WW11.
Consequently it should be OBVIOUS that this entire policy shift to contracters, supported by both the Republicans and by the Democrats is simply another means of shifting the taxpayer dollar into the hands of the Corporations.
The Government becomes little more then a "Collection agency" working at the behest of the Corporation.
GwNorth sez: "... it should be OBVIOUS that this entire policy shift to contracters, supported by both the Republicans and by the Democrats is simply another means of shifting the taxpayer dollar into the hands of the Corporations."
***
We have a winner!
The Canuck gets it. Your turn, USAns.
Absolutely correct.
700,000 contractors in WWII. It wasn't all seabees.
If this country keeps hemorrhaging $10,000 per year per family on the wars (extrapolation of one economist's estimate of total lifetime costs), it doesn't matter whether enlisted American boys or paid American vets are doing the shooting and bombing. This country's employment rate and its currency will both collapse. Soon! Maybe last year! So will most of the state and local governments.
A few years ago a euro was worth 80 cents. Today it's $1.43. In a few years a euro will be $10.00?
much much worse than
$10,000 per day..
try $10,000 per second, on the "national debt clock"
right here:
http://usdebtclock.org/
Scahill sez: "In neither Iraq, nor Afghanistan, do these numbers include the armed contractors working for the US Department of State or for private entities or individuals."
***
And the unpronounceable symbol formerly known as "Blackwater" is a wholly owned subsidiary of the State (sic) Department. Or is it the other way around?
"U.S. Increasing Use of Private Contractors in War Zone"
DUH! I mean, it's not as if we're fighting these wars for democracy or justice or self-defense or anything else just and fair. The people of the countries we're invading are getting screwed, the people of the US are getting screwed and the only ones making out like bandits are those in the military complex, from Halliburton to Blackwater and everybody else in between. If there were no money to be made in war, we wouldn't be fighting them!
Another corporation lobbying to keep the wars going. Actually, what will we do with all these armed mercenaries if they are brought home? Eventually, though, the monster always returns to the creator! God's startin' to worry!
There was a reporter during Katrina who came across some of these armed mercenaries in waterlogged New Orleans. When she asked about why they were there, she was told something to the effect... "get used to it lady, we'll be in every city pretty soon"....
Makes one wonder why the TV series "Jericho" was really cancelled and what "our" government really has planned for all us little people.
They come home, and too many kill in the USt. Given the purposes of these wars, they are all mercs. Even worse, most get veteran's preference in becoming cops, when they have been trained to treat civilians with contempt and death.
Hi gde,
I've agreed with many of your postings, but have to take exception here. The US soldier (the ones that get veteran's preference), should not be included in the mercenary catagory along with the other paid killers (IMHO).... Dispite our joint distain for the war actions themselves, I'd hope that we could seperate our feelings for the war from our feelings for the warrior. Many of the soldiers are there for economic reasons.... there's no other work, so they joined the military and are doing what their country asks of them. Many, like myself during Viet Nam, enlist because they have a deep seated believe that every person should serve their country for a period of time. After my service was up, I marched with the Viet Nam vetrans against the war, as many of today's returning veterans are also doing. After taking that oath, the soldier has little choice about assignments. (just one perspective).
It's not contracters, it's mercenaries.
It's not USA, it's empire.
State-corporatism at almost its fullest form...when the state-corporatism that China inflicts on its own people joins with the state-corporatism that the US inflicts internationally, the bottom will have been reached.
Then, not even the rich will be free.
The corporation floats the wrong people to the top of the power structure for the wrong reasons. Revoke corporate "personhood". Sunset charters at 10 years.
corp is borg.
Yeah, you'd think Scahill would call them what they are, mercenaries.
And hmm...
"We are the Borg (corporation). Lower your shields and surrender your ship (deregulation). We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own (patents). Your culture will adapt to service us (self-explanatory). Resistance is futile."
Spot on man.
Are these our 'Settlers' of the New American Century or just Rent-A-Thugs?
Nearly all of the contractors, or as some of you call them mercenaries, in Afghanistan and Iraq are non-combatants (meaning, they are unarmed and most do not leave military bases). The majority of the contractors are to support the military in a wide array of areas to include logistics, food service, maintenance, water purification, fire protection, and force protection (these are individuals who guard the bases and man the entry control points, guard towers, dining facilities and they are not permitted to leave the base), to name a few of their duties. The armed contractors like the former Black Water now called XE, Triple Canopy, and Aegis work directly for the government like the Department of State and do not work for the military and they do not participate in military operations. Government agencies have to rely on private security to be escorted when they leave the bases because the military is not permitted to do so.
Scahill sez: "... in Iraq, the DoD reports that there was 'a 19 % increase (from 10,743 to 13,232) of armed DoD PSCs in Iraq compared to the 2nd quarter FY 2009 census.'"
***
Note: "increase", "armed", "DoD".
Yes, the Middle East is awash in U.S. civilian hash-slingers, chauffeurs and paper-pushers. But that's not what Scahill is writing about.
Scahill just likes to *imply* they're all Americans and all armed. Most are in fact locals and the vast majority are simply doing support and construction functions.
Though newtont94 is correct that the majority of these contractors are unarmed the result is the same.
Armed military (mercenaries) contractors are the shame of our government. They replace our armed services which exist for exactly the things most of these foks do.
Our military has always been fairly self sufficient and rightfully so. Civilians in a combat zone introduce another factor that should not be there.
Our Soldiers and Marines detest these loose cannons that are armed and the idea that Marines can't set up a field kitchen and feed themselves is laughable.
The whole system exists for one reason....to access the public treasury for private business.
Yep.
snydly
Yep.
Changing public money to private money.
End of story.
How are these "contractors" paid? Are their payments accounted for in the DoD budget? Or is it another case of shifting military expense to so-called "civilians" agencies, like the nuclear weapons being charged to the Dept. of Energy? Or kept completely off the books in some "black budget?"
I guess it doesn't really matter. There are no "civilian" depts in the U.S. gov't any more.