Wasn't there a time when our military was more self-sufficient?

[derby378]

Now, I realize that there's always been some need for our armed forces to interface with the private sector throughout our history, from the now-defunct Springfield Armory to Dillon Aero, from American Bantam to Pratt & Whitney, from Dayton-Wright to Lockheed. That will probably never change, although the modern concept of the military-industrial complex needs to be thoroughly dismantled.

What I'm talking about is the ability of our troops to go into any part of the world and sustain themselves under their own power without having some low-bid contractor piggybacking on them. What's wrong with the military setting up its own communication systems instead of relying on AT&T and phone cards from Wal-Mart? Or building their own barracks instead of letting some half-assed outfit like KBR do it for them? And as for food, I know soldiers can get tired of MREs pretty quick, but is the only alternative to let Burger King and Pizza Hut tend to the nutritional needs of our troops?

I'm not preaching the North Korean concept of juche. I'm just suggesting that while we should give our soldiers whatever support we can at the homefront, we should also pressure our legislators in Washington to free our troops from being jerked around by a bunch of opportunistic suits who are legally obligated to put the bottom line over the best interests of the military.

Your thoughts?

[MADem]

1. It's a cost cutting issue. It is VERY EXPENSIVE to pay the pensions of all those

military personnel to provide support. You pay them crap for twenty years, but then you pay them for the rest of their lives. It gets costly.

We pay these low bid contractors crap, too. We pay the company "X" amount per body, and the company pays the body (sometimes a Filipino or Korean or Indian or Indonesian making way less than a US person would accept) a salary and keeps the change.

Then, when the action is done, we fold the tent and leave. No need to muster out/draw down soldiers, toss their families out of housing, go through all the agita and expense of separating someone from the service (household goods, air fare, severance in some cases, retirement in others). You just let the contract run out.

It may seem expensive to pay some "security specialist" a hundred grand a year. But it's way cheaper than paying a guy to go through basic training and work in the military for ten years or more before he finally achieves the level of experience that the "security specialist" has. And when you're done with him, he's gone. Bye bye! No pension, no nothing. He might get a plane ticket home and his final paycheck--that's it.

Personnel costs are the biggest piece of the DOD pie. They're huge.

It's cheaper to contract, in the big picture. That's why we do it.

[northzax]

2. plus, with an all-volunteer media

there are issues with getting people to do a lot of these jobs. you can sell 'join the army, see the world' but not really 'join the army, work a chow line for two years'

[MADem]

6. And, the military does tend to view that which does not have a role

that facilitates the placing of ordnance on target (or repairing the people and gear that does the same) to be prime candidates for outsourcing. It's the way to be as lean as possible, yet as "ready" as possible, too.

After all, it's not an impossible lesson to learn how to cook for a large group, or type information into blocks on a computerized form, but it is a trick to learn how to fly a drone, drive a trank, or launch an RPG. And the more you do those things, the better you get at these "war" skills.

It would be optimal if people only had to use their "war" skills in training, but unfortunately, we're not at that point yet. Hopefully, one day we will be in that place again.

[Fumesucker]

13. You make a great point, but I don't think you realize the point you are making..

War SHOULD BE EXPENSIVE... That will keep us from going to war so goddamn often.

War should be the last resort, not the first as it has far too often been.

[MADem]

14. I'm making the point because I worked in the biz.

I'm not ascribing any moral aspect to my commentary.

Believe me, even with this massive cost-cutting through personnel reductions, it's still expensive.

Just the development of assets that replace/reduce humans or pull them out of harm's way (drones, e.g., or SmartShips) has a pretty hefty price tag.

[librechik]

3. we got hosed by the partnership between contractors and govt.

All just business to them--to us it is our defense.

They lobbied to privatize the army using the argument that it would be cheaper and more efficient.

CAN YOU BELIEVE ANYBODY BOUGHT THAT CRAP???!!!

It took a couple of decades, but they did it--now we have an army addicted to Burger King.

WTF? Indeed.

[bushmeister0]

4. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the army SOP for supplying water involved tankers

that dispensed water directly to the troop's canteens. Beginning with the Iraq invasion, however, KBR began supplying bottled water, at much greater cost, of course, and resulting environmental damage.

The rub with this brilliant plan was that there was so much materiel to ship to forward units, that space on trucks became such an acute problem that a choice had to be made about what got priority. Water took a back seat to ammunition and this is why we had so many troops keeling over from heat exhaustion during May and June of 03'.

No way to run a popcorn stand. Thank God we didn't have Rummy & Co. around for WWII, or we'd all be speaking German.

[derby378]

8. Not to mention that KBR water was sickening our soldiers

I seem to recall that some of it was contaminated with sewage. In some cases, you were more likely to be killed by that bottle of KBR water in your hand than by an IED or a 7.62 bullet.

That's no way to treat a soldier who's prepared to give his or her life for our nation.

[bemildred]

5. Not really.

It just used to be a lot cheaper.

[TahitiNut]

7. Yes. Not only our military but that of other nations as well.

For example, Club Med was started by French WW2 veterans who had learned how to set up a camp in the middle of nowhere including fresh water supplies, water purification, plumbing, sewers, sewage treatment, power, food preparation, etc ... and thought that'd make an excellent business. They found remote places on the earth - often paradises - and set up the 'camps.' They succeeded because it worked. Unspoiled places all over the world became vacation spots.

My father was a SeaBee during WW2. Our military personnel did all the work in all the forward areas. The one exception was hiring indigenous personnel to do unskilled labor. In Viet Nam, we had maids, kitchen help, people who maintained the ditches and culverts, barbers, office help, and the "papa-san" who, every morning, dragged out the half-barrel from under the latrine seat, poured diesel fuel on it, and burned it. (This was all done by G.I.s at fire bases, but indigenous people at ather bases.)

The corporate privatization of such functions and far more is a result of the "all-volunteer" military ... and the M.I.C. that Ike warned us about.

[cliffordu]

12. That is an excellent summation.

:hi:

[dysfunctional press]

16. i worked with some former seabees back in my construction days...

iirc- "seabee" was derived from "c.b." which was he abbreviation for construction battalion?

i always loved their logo-


one of the seabee guys i worked with had it as a tattoo.

[TahitiNut]

17. Yup. "Construction Battalion" ... they had a lot of 'esprit d'corps'

The way my father described it, they went ashore to make it possible for the Marines to land. :evilgrin:

[ThomWV]

9. When I was in the army we had no contractors what so ever supporting us

Army cooks, army mechanics, army construction workers, army grunts doing the fighting and every other thing we did.

[derby378]

11. My point exactly

Outsource all those essential functions to for-profit corporations who don't have the Army's best interests at heard, and the troops run the risk of getting caught in a trap.

[dkofos]

10. Just another reagan legacy.

Everyone knows that it's cheaper to outsource to private contractors.

:sarcasm:

[Mari333]

15. a lot of it was about avoiding a DRAFT

we hire all these yahoo mercenaries to make up for the lack of troops available , and then send our kids over to these places 3-4 times til they collapse. its about avoiding a draft..so we have mercenaries to make up for it..and they demand 1500 a week, whereas the soldiers get paid squat.
none of the politicians can get re elected if there is a draft..and they want to make those big War Bucks...but they cannot with a small army..so they create their mercenary army using yours and my tax dollars..and call them 'contractors'.
its another line of bullshit.