Politics: J'accuse!

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Not Me

You are underestimating the job opportunities that are available in the private sector for these highly trained military personnel. Former special forces types can find plenty of well-paying jobs in the private sector.

So you're saying they're not getting more money to go to iraq?

Please identify where I said they were otherwise being paid minimum wage, or not even "well" by the standards most of america would apply. I said better, much better. Find me one of these folks who's there for something other than principally money, and then go ahead and ask him why he hasn't enlisted.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Certainly that is a factor on some level, but I think the real reason actually more distressing than that - I think they're near the point where there literally isn't anybody else to send short of conscription, calling up a lot more of the reserves or recalling the IRR. Of the 10 active divisions of the US Army, only one hasn't already been sent to Iraq or Afghanistan - the one in South Korea.

Concur.

I've heard blurbs of someone (can't remember who) actually saying that it's time to reinstate the draft, which is a proposal so radioactive (especially in an election year) that I cannot fathom it being seriously considered, much less enacted. Does anyone recall who's talking about this?

(Tried "Cheney" and "Draft" on Google, but apparently it wasn't him.)

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Gattigap
How many ex-SEALS and special forces guys do you think are available for people to hire?

How many of these private security personnel are in Iraq? There aren't 50,000 of them. There are about 4,000. I have heard reports that say higher, too, but where are they getting their information from?

Everything I have read about these private security firms indicates that they are not hiring some enlisted guy after he does a 2 year stint in the army. They are hiring either ex-special forces or ex-seasoned officers. These aren't guys with factory jobs in the US.

BTW - they aren't fighting on the front lines. They are protecting convoys of private contractors who are engaging in rebuilding Iraq. If the private security firms don't do this, then regular military personnel have to be taken off of guarding check points and other vital duties to protect a group of engineers working on an oil rig/pipeline.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Concur.

I've heard blurbs of someone (can't remember who) actually saying that it's time to reinstate the draft, which is a proposal so radioactive (especially in an election year) that I cannot fathom it being seriously considered, much less enacted. Does anyone recall who's talking about this?

(Tried "Cheney" and "Draft" on Google, but apparently it wasn't him.)

Rangel.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Not Me
Where are you getting your information? From what I can tell, many if not most of these security firms are employing former navy seals and other former special forces. Not exactly guys who are working in factories stateside. Anyhow, unless they live in China, I doubt they work in a factory. Last I checked, there wern't too many factory jobs left in the US.

Unfortunately, demand is outpacing supply right now. While many of these companies were founded by SEALs/Special Ops guys, the recent spike in demand has required them to spread their nets a bit wider. According to a story on Marketplace (I think), these firms have had to hire lots of former South African, Eastern European, and Chilean soldiers. I think that they've exhausted their inventory of Demis and Viggos.

So what's the problem with that? A few of the South Africans turned out to have been confessed war criminals who had been involved in massacres and assasinations of anti-apartheid activists (and, yes, some of the victims were probably ANC). The SA Truth and Reconciliation Commission apparently has a website which lists the names of those who confessed to such stuff in testimony, and some reporters have matched the name of a wounded contractor to their list.

I think that it's fair to assume that the companies (and the US gov't, which hired the companies) would prefer not to have such people in service. The lack of any accountability for bad acts by these contractors makes this a special concern.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by bilmore
Rangel.

Yeah, I remember that, but that was about a year ago. I thought someone had brought it up more recently.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Yeah, I remember that, but that was about a year ago. I thought someone had brought it up more recently.

Chuck Hegel, I think.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by bilmore
We've already deployed most of the reserves. The cupboard is bare.

http://www4.army.mil/USAR/organization/force.php

[a little over 1 million total reservists - including the IRR and the Retired Reserve, all of whom can be recalled, though the RR, numbering over 700,000 of that million, would take serious time to mobilize].

The House Armed Services Committee says 46% of the army reserves (meaning Ready Reserves, not the retirees) have been mobilized since 2001. http://armedservices.house.gov/openi...03-10cody.html

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Find me one of these folks who's there for something other than principally money, and then go ahead and ask him why he hasn't enlisted.

You underestimate how gonzo/macho some of these ex-special forces types are.

I never said if you give them two options, re-enlist at a lower pay or go to Iraq as an employee of a private security firm for higher pay, that they would chose the lower pay. What I am saying is that you are making it out as if they are some factory worker ('cuz that is what you said) just looking for a better economic opportunity. That isn't who these people are. It is not just all about money for many of these guys and they aren't some ex-infantry enlisted guy.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
http://www4.army.mil/USAR/organization/force.php

[a little over 1 million total reservists - including the IRR and the Retired Reserve, all of whom can be recalled, though the RR, numbering over 700,000 of that million, would take serious time to mobilize].

The House Armed Services Committee says 46% of the army reserves (meaning Ready Reserves, not the retirees) have been mobilized since 2001. http://armedservices.house.gov/openi...03-10cody.html

We are fucked if Canada decides to attack.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Unfortunately, demand is outpacing supply right now. While many of these companies were founded by SEALs/Special Ops guys, the recent spike in demand has required them to spread their nets a bit wider. According to a story on Marketplace (I think), these firms have had to hire lots of former South African, Eastern European, and Chilean soldiers. I think that they've exhausted their inventory of Demis and Viggos.

So what's the problem with that? A few of the South Africans turned out to have been confessed war criminals who had been involved in massacres and assasinations of anti-apartheid activists (and, yes, some of the victims were probably ANC). The SA Truth and Reconciliation Commission apparently has a website which lists the names of those who confessed to such stuff in testimony, and some reporters have matched the name of a wounded contractor to their list.

If that is true, that is a problem. Is there any reason to believe it a widespread problem? Is it possible that he just shares the same name as this confessed war criminal?

But as I recall, the initial discussion was more about the proposition that the existence of these security firms enticed US military personnel to leave the military to make more money for the same job.

Originally posted by Not Bob
The lack of any accountability for bad acts by these contractors makes this a special concern.

Is there any evidence that they are committing bad acts? I have heard people speculate about it being a possibility. But is there any evidence it is occurring?

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Chuck Hegel, I think.

Yup, before the Sen. Foreign Relations Committee. He's a vocal critic of the Iraq excursion, so no one is taking it seriously as a suggestion, he's pretty much shit-stirring.

The quote I got (from stratfor, so not bothering to link): "Hagel said if the American public understands the gravity of the situation in Iraq, then, "Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?""

The only thing I see that speaks in favor of the draft is that 95% of the US population will suddenly either embrace the gay lifestyle or deplore discrimination against it.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Chuck Hegel, I think.

Damn. That's the name. They're too close.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Not Me
We are fucked if Canada decides to attack.

That's what my Canadian relatives have been telling me for years.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by bilmore
Damn. That's the name. They're too close.

Rangel, too. Hell, Rangel didn't just talk about it, he introduced a bill to reinstate the draft before we even invaded Iraq:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/rangel.draft/

• WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Rep. Charles Rangel introduced a bill in Congress Tuesday to reinstate the military draft, saying fighting forces should more closely reflect the economic makeup of the nation.
  
  The New York Democrat told reporters his goal is two-fold: to jolt Americans into realizing the import of a possible unilateral strike against Iraq, which he opposes, and "to make it clear that if there were a war, there would be more equitable representation of people making sacrifices."