Reply With Quote
Surely AFBlue, just because your job is actually about military contracts, doesn't mean you know more about them than WC.
WC: There's also this pretty damning evidence on the use of support contractors as a percentage of the overall budget in the first five years of Bush's presidency...
http://democrats.oversight.house.gov...44:legislation
Surely AFBlue, just because your job is actually about military contracts, doesn't mean you know more about them than WC.
Yes, yes, yes. This was already in place. You can't just rebuild a military equivalent overnight.
I know you meant to use blue.
If he in fact does what he said, he most certainly knows more than I in this regard, at least for present day. I saw the reduction at the end of the cold war. Then I saw the crippling farther reduction by Clinton, going past what was reasonable.
it all makes sense now. WC is a butthurt republican shill because a democrat outsourced his government job.
This is purely anecdotal, so take it for what it's worth...
I supported a weapon system development program in which 95% of the engineering expertise was contracted out. The overall Program Manager was the only military or government civilian in the chain of command. Even the Chief Engineer and primary advisor to the PM was a contracted position. And my entire tenure was during the Bush administration. It could very well be that the levels were the same under Clinton, but they certainly didn't improve under Bush. It just goes to my original point...it's unacceptable and there is plenty of blame to go around.
I've talked it over with my peers and we've concluded that anything Wild Cobra has said is bull .
...and Bush.
No, My job was outsourced by Bush (41). I was part of his 5 year reduction in forces. My job tax fixed station communications repair. not tactical. My job was replaced by contractors, but under Bush.
If you wish to make that claim, I will agree that it was helpful politically. Still, this was a natural draw-down after the wall fell.
Remember "The Wall?"
Bush (41) did not replace tactical positions with civilian contractor. That is the difference. Clinton replaced support positions that were required to go into battle zones with contractors. That is what my gripe is about.
WC I can tell you that Bush did the same thing, or at the least, didn't replace them. Lots of contractors at bases overseas perform things like food delivery, comm etc etc which are vital support functions. (And yes, comm is more important now than probably ever.)
(Oh and I figured you'd catch the meaning of my post without the obvious blue.)
But not behind the lines.WC I can tell you that Bush did the same thing, or at the least, didn't replace them. Lots of contractors at bases overseas perform things like food delivery, comm etc etc which are vital support functions. (And yes, comm is more important now than probably ever.)
(Oh and I figured you'd catch the meaning of my post without the obvious blue.
is there some reason the suppliers shouldn't come all the way to the camp? seems to me you recently complained they wouldn't, leaving the front lines in the lurch.
That's the problems.
When the Iraqi war first broke out, they had convoys of food and supplies sitting. Contract truckers walked off their jobs. Then these places had to up the money to get people who would drive this stuff in to the soldiers.
The same thing would happen though right now if the contractors went on strike overseas. Essentially, soldiers would either take over the kitchen/comm/other support duties, or we'd go hungry. And if there weren't enough soldiers, then what?
And if you're only talking about "outside the wire" type activities, there's quite alot of Blackwater (or whatever they're called now) companies that are doing jobs of that sort.
Am I missing something? Have you not heard of Blackwater (now Academi)?
I understand your point. You are missing some info. The supply truck drivers were not allowed to arm themselves, but were expected to travel in a war zone. Many walked off the jobs, and left several units in the field without a restocked food supply! It took some time to get all this worked out.
It's ed up. Soldiers need to do such functions.
Is that called for?
WC, with the way health costs are going, they'd much rather hire a contractor than get stuck paying relatively cheap health care to a retiree.
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ets-illnesses/t’s not every day that a scientist creates such intense drama on Capitol Hill.
But Dr. Steven S. Coughlin’s charges that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) officials hid, manipulated, and even lied about research pertaining to Gulf War Illness (GWI) and health problems plaguing Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are still causing fallout a month after his stunning testimony before a key House subcommittee.
“The implications of his testimony are profound,” declared Anthony Hardie, 45, a Gulf War veteran who serves on the congressionally appointed Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses (RAC).
Veterans and their advocates, as well as many in the scientific community, have long believed that the VA avoids responsibility for veterans’ care by downplaying or outright ignoring evidence linking wartime experiences—such as exposure to Agent Orange, chemical weapons, or toxic pollution—to veterans’ chronic medical issues back home.
Coughlin, a senior epidemiologist with the VA’s Office of Public Health (OPH), gave the VA’s critics what they say is a smoking gun: after conducting major surveys of 1991 Gulf War veterans and “New Generation” veterans from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom-Afghanistan, Coughlin told the committee he quit his post in December. He claims the VA is hiding important survey results about the health of veterans and that his colleagues watered-down analysis that might have shed light on whether recent vets got sick from open-air trash-burning pits on overseas bases.
He told the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on March 13 that millions of dollars are invested in veterans’ heath studies each year, yet “if the studies produce results that do not support [OPH’s] unwritten policy, they do not release them.” And “on the rare occasions when embarrassing study results are released, data are manipulated to make them unintelligible.”
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
