You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #1: An important piece. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
necso Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-05 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. An important piece.
For example, the implications of the following are significant:

"Another difference is that to a far greater degree than was the case in 1991, the US military has outsourced its logistics functions to the private sector. Companies like Halliburton and its Kellog, Brown and Root subsidiary will have to coordinate with the military to an unprecedented degree, through the Logistics Civilian Augmentation Program (LOGCAP), which Halliburton was re-awarded in 2001."

Integrating civilian contractors into critical military functions is a terrible idea, and, in practice, one driven by a reckless ideology, staggering greed and corruption unmatched since (at least) the Civil War.

The piece does leave certain things out. However, for legitimate issues of national security, certain things cannot be said ('cause these assertions just might prove correct), even if these assertions are the results of analysis as opposed to substantial in-field information.

But two things (although both are kinda implied): first, contractors will also need evacuated, and as some of these may be providing important support functions, pulling them out first may be impractical; and second, having been over there for some time, there may be significant forward accumulations of war material (and war waste) that need dealt with.

My guess is that the Preble rough estimate is somewhat low and the Pike rough estimate somewhat high (the 10% can also be seen as ambiguous, but starting-forces is most likely the intended base, as opposed to remaining-forces).

And I am delighted to see someone speaking to logistics.

It all comes down to beans and bullets, as they say. (Of course, this is an oversimplification, but it still makes an important point.)

However, the last paragraph is discouraging. With corruption on the scale that it is in Iraq, turning saleable materials over to the "Iraqi Security Forces" is a questionable practice on these grounds alone... and there are others.

And there are some other good nuggets in this piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC