So the casualty count reports to the public are kept down... but these guys cost us a lot of money. These soldiers don't work for the $20,000-$40,000 that regular soldiers get, try double or triple that. But, we all know that if you show the money you get your way in Washington, even the DODefense.

http://www.greenchange.org/article.php?id=4505


Obama boosts use of mercenaries in Afghanistan, Iraq

Obama Has 250,000 'Contractors' Deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan and is Increasing the Use of Mercenaries
Jeremy Scahill |  Alternet |  06.07.2009

A couple of years ago, Blackwater executive Joseph Schmitz seemed to see a silver lining for mercenary companies with the prospect of US forces being withdrawn or reduced in Iraq. “There is a scenario where we could as a government, the United States, could pull back the military footprint,” Schmitz said. “And there would then be more of a need for private contractors to go in.” When it comes to armed contractors, it seems that Schmitz was right.

According to new statistics released by the Pentagon, with Barack Obama as commander in chief, there has been a 23% increase in the number of “Private Security Contractors” working for the Department of Defense in Iraq in the second quarter of 2009 and a 29% increase in Afghanistan, which “correlates to the build up of forces” in the country. These numbers relate explicitly to DoD security contractors. Companies like Blackwater and its successor Triple Canopy work on State Department contracts and it is unclear if these contractors are included in the over-all statistics. This means, the number of individual “security” contractors could be quite higher, as could the scope of their expansion.

Overall, contractors (armed and unarmed) now make up approximately 50% of  the “total force in Centcom AOR [Area of Responsibility].” This means there are a whopping 242,657 contractors working on these two U.S. wars. These statistics come from two reports just released by Gary J. Motsek, the Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Program Support): “Contractor Support of U.S. Operations in USCENTCOM AOR, IRAQ, and Afghanistan and “Operational Contract Support, ‘State of the Union.’”

“We expect similar dependence on contractors in future contingency operations,” according to the contractor “State of the Union.” It notes that the deployment size of both military personnel and DoD civilians are “fixed by law,” but points out that the number of contractors is “size unfixed,” meaning there is virtually no limit (other than funds) to the number of contractors that can be deployed in the war zone.

At present there are 132,610 in Iraq and 68,197 in Afghanistan. The report notes that while the deployment of security contractors in Iraq is increasing, there was an 11% decrease in overall contractors in Iraq from the first quarter of 2009 due to the “ongoing efforts to reduce the contractor footprint in Iraq.” Both Pentagon reports can be downloaded here. http://www.acq.osd.mil/log/PS/hot_topics.html

Jeremy Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army.

http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy ... r_funding/

Just a few excerpts...
If you had an expense account that let you spend $1 million dollars per day... ...it would take 2,391 years to spend $872.6 billion, the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan so far.

The cost of Iraq and Afghanistan laid out end-to-end in $100 bills... ...would extend 846,157.6 miles – or just short of 34 times around the Earth's circumference.

The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost each American family of four $11,458.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... ater08.htm

Military Contractors See a World of Business Opportunities

The billions of dollars being doled out to these companies, Wilson argues, “makes of them a very powerful interest group within the American body politic and an interest group that is in fact armed. And the question will arise at some time: to whom do they owe their loyalty?”

Precise data on the extent of U.S. spending on mercenary services is nearly impossible to obtain - by both journalists and elected officials - but some in Congress estimate that up to 40 cents of every tax dollar spent on the war goes to corporate war contractors.

That was in 2007... its probably higher now.

http://www.alternet.org/module/feed/mob ... &type=blog

Obama Has Betrayed the Progressives Who Got Him Elected -- So Now What Do We Do?
Allison Kilkenny, True/Slant August 31, 2009

Though he's barely over six months into his first term, President Obama faces a critical time. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, support for Obama is dropping, and Greg Sargent theorizes this is due to waning support among Democrats and liberals. Sargent's theory makes sense. Ask any Democrat or Progressive why they voted for Obama, and you're likely to hear a range of grievances extending from he's better than Bush to Nader wasn't on the ballot, but others say things like he said he'd bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, or he promised healthcare reform.

Clearly, liberals expected big things from their new, exciting President. However, as so oftentimes happens in the world of politics, pragmatism and triangulation sucked the air out of Obama's audacious hope. While the new President made plans to draw down troops in Iraq (plans that include tens of thousands "residual forces,") he surged in Afghanistan and approved the use of 17,000 additional troops. Meanwhile, Obama remained silent on the issue of mercenaries including the scandal-ridden Blackwater even though "private contractors," the pretty euphemism for "private soldiers accountable to no one," now outnumber troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Another moment for Obama to prove he wasn't lying during campaign season approaches now that Senator Feingold has called for a flexible timetable to bring troops back from Afghanistan. Since Obama repeatedly stated during the primaries that the goal in Afghanistan was to hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden, surely he will be open to the issue of timetables since a targeted assassination doesn't require the same troop levels needed to occupy and "rebuild" an entire country. A majority of Americans now see the war in Afghanistan as not worth fighting, according to a Washington Post/ABC news poll. No one seems interested in polling Americans about Iraq anymore most likely because the responses can so easily be predicted. The wars are lost and unpopular. The occupations are pointless and destructive. It's now up to President Obama to join the consensus and end these futile wars.

The President's behavior on the other progressive hallmark, healthcare reform, is equally abysmal. Obama's shameful conduct has been well-documented, including the White House's agreement to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada, and the agreement not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements. In exchange, PhRMA agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years, mere pocket change to the booming industry over a decade-long projection, which makes it unlikely the cuts will significantly help citizens or ever actually happen. It's almost like the number was plucked from thin air to give the appearance of PhRMA's concession so liberals wouldn't completely lose their minds.

The popular single-payer model vanished almost immediately from the healthcare reform debate, and was replaced by the "public option," an entity no politician bothered explaining to the American people, who remain confused and miseducated about what it means. It's no wonder that myths spread quickly, culminating in the famous town hall blowouts. The mainstream media and politicians snickered at the screaming crowds, implying citizens are somehow too stupid to understand what's really going on.

Allison Kilkenny co-hosts Citizen Radio, the alternative political radio show. G. Gordon Liddy once told her her writing makes him want to vomit, which is the greatest compliment she's ever been paid, ever. (Of course she was after other liars at the time)

War? How about telling everyone money is not the answer.

In the movie "Lord of War" they focused on the flood of arms that happened after the fall of the Soviet block nations. What isn't mentioned is that the same thing occured with personel. A soldier employed by a government gets paid next to nothing for putting thier lives on the line. Is it any wonder that these men and women get out and go to a PMC? This is the corporitization of the military and is quite scary. I wonder how far this will end up going and what kind of complications will arrise from it in the future (as if the complications arrising from it now weren't enough).

Worse case scenario (I'd imagine), is that most big corps start recruiting their own private armies (to the point they outnumber and have better equipment than government forces) and can start dictating terms and conditions to governments (after all, why waste money by dismantling then rebuilding a puppet government).