Obama Has 250,000 'Contractors' Deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan and is Increasing the Use of Mercenaries


By Jeremy Scahill, Rebel Reports

Posted on June 1, 2009, Printed on June 2, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://rebelreports.com//140378/

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executive Joseph Schmitz seemed to see a silver lining for mercenary companies with the prospect of US forces being withdrawn or reduced in Iraq.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.

Mo war for mo money!

and are busily congratulating someone who posted this article for his manly retraction and denunciation of his thought crime:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5771845&mesg_id=5771845

Let me guess, he got a PM from Bolo?

Not only have I read everything by Jeremy Scahill, I met him at a talk at a UU church. He's as honest as the day is long (and very passionate about his work). He probably had the most influence in terms of getting the Nasoor Square incident investigated (I believe that ex-contractors were indicted recently). Anybody that would decide he is lying is a complete idiot. This only convinces me more that there are plenty of idiots over there.

I think that the point is that the U.S. government has a whole lot more contractors (or contractors' employees) over there than had been previously thought. It doesn't really matter whether this increase is due to full realization/awareness of the problem (how many there really are over there, and have been for awhile) or an actual, recent increase. The percentage of the total "soldiers" that are over there that consists of private people is astounding. That's the bottom line.

Certain people will go to any lengths to continue being cheerleaders. It renders one speechless.

Whenever DU conducts a mega-purge, as it's apparently just done, we get to see the Platonic DU some shadowy string puller originally envisioned: a pacified playground for debunkers, explainers, and defenders of all things military to have their way with the sheeple, who dutifully fire off angry e-mails to Scahill for besmirching the good name of the US armed forces. For example, "24601," with 86 posts, assures us there's nothing sinister about McChrystal's handling of Pat Tillman's death, just another military SNAFU, so let's "move on":

"President Obama wants and needs McChrystal in Afghanistan - that's good enough for me. Confirm him and MOVE ON."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3905219&mesg_id=3905252

And nobody challenges him, at least not yet, and what's bizarre about the Scahill thread is that nobody dares to point out that a) Scahill is right, whatever weasley spin the Pentagon put on the figures, and b) why should anybody take their excuses for ANYTHING seriously?

Spooky is another word that comes to mind, pun intended.