war shift from soldiers to contractors

[Steadfast]

Risks of Afghan war shift from soldiers to contractors

By ROD NORDLAND


updated 2/12/2012 1:19:22 AM ET

KABUL, Afghanistan — Even dying is being outsourced here.

This is a war where traditional military jobs, from mess hall cooks to base guards and convoy drivers, have increasingly been shifted to the private sector. Many American generals and diplomats have private contractors for their personal bodyguards. And along with the risks have come the consequences: More civilian contractors working for American companies than American soldiers died in Afghanistan last year for the first time during the war.

story

[Jim]

While there are no US troop units in Iraq, there are plenty of armed contractors being paid by the US State Department. However, as the federal budget is reduced, expect the contractor effort will be reduced.

[rgrokelley]

If you study history, this is pretty scary. I know that the ultimate killer to any argument is when you invoke the name of Hitler, but he is such an easy person to learn from. He perfected the way to take a normal sane country and turn it into a genocidal sociopath, in a relatively short period of time.

The scary thing about this is that this new "army" of contractors is not answerable to the Department of Defense, which is basically run by the Legislative Branch. This new "army" is answerable to the Department of State, which is run by the Executive Branch.

So, when the army does not do what you want, or has too many rules on what it can and cannot do, you create a new army that answers to you directly. Hitler did this with the Waffen SS, when the plain old Wermacht didn't fit his needs.

[Jim]

So, when the army does not do what you want, or has too many rules on what it can and cannot do, you create a new army that answers to you directly. Hitler did this with the Waffen SS, when the plain old Wermacht didn't fit his needs.

At the end of WWI, Germany was limited to a cadre sized army. To put down the Communist threat and to defend East Prussia, they created a shadow army, the Frei Korps. They were fanatically loyal to their commanders, and not accountable to the German Army. Later a lot of these men joined the "Storm Troopers."

[GoldCoast]

I knew there was a brutal five year-ish insurgency at the end of WWII; however, that is the limit of my expertise. This conversation sounds fascinating.

[hobbit]

I knew there was a brutal five year-ish insurgency at the end of WWII; however, that is the limit of my expertise. This conversation sounds fascinating.

When communists and right-wingers took to the streets of Germany following WWI, they minced neither words nor actions. All were armed, some small factions like the National Socialists (Nazis) armed very well with machine-guns by sympathizers in the army. Thousands died in these street battles, the three-million member SA prevailed, and the rest is the most monumental history in human existence.

Anyway, as to civilian belligerents running wars on our behalf, I think it's a very bad idea. We need an armed body answerable to congress, not to the whims of every would-be dictator in the White House

[colt1rgr]

The scary thing about this is that this new "army" of contractors is not answerable to the Department of Defense, which is basically run by the Legislative Branch. This new "army" is answerable to the Department of State, which is run by the Executive Branch.

I cannot help but wonder if this is what Barry was talking about? :?

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Barry Soetoro, July 2, 2008

[rgrokelley]

The scary thing about this is that this new "army" of contractors is not answerable to the Department of Defense, which is basically run by the Legislative Branch. This new "army" is answerable to the Department of State, which is run by the Executive Branch.

I cannot help but wonder if this is what Barry was talking about? :?

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Barry Soetoro, July 2, 2008

BINGO! You win a cookie!

[Jake-the-Snake]

Who exactly is Barry Soetoro? And isnt that somehow unconstitutional? And if were sworn to protect the constitution from all enemy's foreign and domestic, What effect will this have on us?

[rgrokelley]

Who exactly is Barry Soetoro? And isnt that somehow unconstitutional? And if were sworn to protect the constitution from all enemy's foreign and domestic, What effect will this have on us?

I don't know if you are being tongue in cheek or not. So I'm going to assume you actually have no clue. Barry Soetoro is Barack Obama's name when he was five years old. At that time his mother had divorced her first husband, Kenyan Barack Obama, and had remarried Indonesian Lolo Soetoro. He then assumed that name. Indonesia did not allow foreign children to attend their public schools in the 1960s and 70s, so Barack was listed as an Indonesian citizen and had legally assumed that name. Since he has never legally changed it back, that is still his name. He went to college in the US listed as a foreign student.

Tin hats aside, there is a lot of mystery about this whole thing.

Second question, is this constitutional. If the Congress decided it wanted to have a civilian force, funded by Congress, then no, it would not be unconstitutional. Congress merely has to provide for defense. The exact specifics are left up to them. However if the President wants his own civilian defense force, and not go through Congress, then yes, it would be unconstitutional.

Unfortunately Barack Obama does not care whether or not he uses the Congress and has made them irrelevant with some of his recent decisions, such as doing a recess appointment, when the Senate was no in recess.... ordering the death of a US citizen without any due process at all... creating dozens and dozens of "czars" to regulate, without have any oversee by Congress... using military force against another country without any Congressional approval... and funding items on his agenda without going through Congress.

[Lefty]

As I have posted before, and will continue to state, I do not think it unreasonable to suspect we will see some form of an Enabling Act, either close to the elections or some time after Barack Obama aka Barry Soetero is re-elected.

As for the SA as mentioned above, the SA was used by the Nazis to beat, murder, and intimidate rival political factions until the installation of Hitler as Chancellor in 1933. Ernst Roehm, the leader of the SA, had become a power in his own right and rivalled some of the other top party leaders. He believed in the Socialist portion of the National Socialist German Worker's Party, or NSDAP, the formal name of the Nazi Party, which was counter to the actual aim of the party. Because Roehm presented a real threat to the aims of Hitler and his closest associates (Rudolph Hess, Heinrich Himmler, Hermann Goering, among others) it was decided to eliminate him and his top deputies in order to disband the SA, which also was beginning to rival the Wehrmacht for dominance. When Roehm announced a general leave for the SA in 1934, Hitler and his deputies launched the Blood Purge of assassination, wiping out the SA leadership. Many of them, awoken in the night to be shot out of hand, had no clue what was happening. One of them was quoted after being rousted out of bed "Gentlemen, I have no idea what this is about, but please shoot straight!"
In one night, the SA was eliminated as a force after being used to promote and install the Nazis to political supremacy. The Army, or Wehrmacht, reigned supreme and Himmler's SS became Hitler's Praetorian Guard.

[colt1rgr]

I could be wrong........... and I pray that I am.............. But at this point I'd bet the farm that there is 0.0% chance that Barry will not be re-elected. Despite overwhelming evidence that this guy is a poser, not a US citizen (not legally, not constitutionally) and has comitted the biggest fraud against the US in our history while all the while doing everything he can think of to lead us to bankruptcy and to further strengthen his powers, the media keeps telling us how popular the guy is! In fact his support base is the 47% of Americans who pay no taxes, won't work and are looking for more and more handouts. Then you add those "lost sheep" who will follow anyone, anything as long as they see the crowd going along as well and what we have is a majority. A majority that will lead us right down the path to destruction and/or a dictatorship.

Even if someone beats him either by the popular vote or the electoral college, he will not relinquish power. He will use his new powers or whatever he feels is appropriate since thats his MO to put troops on the streets if necessary. You think the Black Panthers were out intimidating people last time around? They will be off the chain this time. I'm gonna vote come hell or high water but I seriously doubt that my vote will even be counted.

Fast and Furious? This makes Watergate look like someone took an extra cookie without asking and other than FOX news and the NRA............... no one even thinks its newsworthy.

Beans, bullets and start diggin' in, its comin'.

[colt1rgr]

As I have posted before, and will continue to state, I do not think it unreasonable to suspect we will see some form of an Enabling Act, either close to the elections or some time after Barack Obama aka Barry Soetero is re-elected.

Just as sure as the sun is gonna shine!

[GoldCoast]

I knew there was a brutal five year-ish insurgency at the end of WWII; however, that is the limit of my expertise. This conversation sounds fascinating.

When communists and right-wingers took to the streets of Germany following WWI, they minced neither words nor actions. All were armed, some small factions like the National Socialists (Nazis) armed very well with machine-guns by sympathizers in the army. Thousands died in these street battles, the three-million member SA prevailed, and the rest is the most monumental history in human existence....

Did my homework Sarn't. Sorry it took me so long to get back on this - I did a fair amount of internet-ing on this topic to ensure I was on the right track.

Bottom Line Up Front: Not a single Allied Soldier was proven to have been killed by a post WWII insurgency in Germany.

I was wrong in my understanding of post WWII events in Germany. I pictured an inaccurate Nazi-led true believer type of second front war, which never existed. There was, however, a NASTY political insurgency fomented all throughout Europe by the Soviet Union. That appears to be what most people confuse for a true 'German' guerrilla war. Below I posted links to the Wiki and another interesting read. My observation is that the Soviets were absolutely terrifying in their manner of continuing to purge dissidents in any form long after the war was over.

A decent Wiki on Werwolf

Scroll down the thread for another interesting article

[GoldCoast]

Some of Robert Service's excellent verse while I am at it; I think he was inciting his audience to rebellion in this one. It's a bit irreverent.

"The Ballad of Lenin's Tomb" by Robert Service