I believe it is because the major media serve their corporate masters. If this was allowed to become widespread knowledge, it might lead to the end of government of big business, by big business, and for big business.
But, has it ever been THIS lucrative? Because some corruption has always existed doesn’t mean we should yawn and look away when this den of thieves takes it to new levels.
I think the pertinent question is how many more billions is it costing us as more things that were done by our military are now done by private companies at a much higher cost to the public. When it comes to rebuilding the infrastructure it makes sense to let Iraqi’s get back to work in their own country as much as possible.
I’m beginning to think your response must be sarcasm. Who said they should be paid western wages? IMO the idiocy here is that the obvious thing to do in rebuilding a country is put the people of that country to work so they can feed their families and take pride in their own country.
Unless profiteering is the goal. When people are making millions off the American taxpayer and the present admin is protecting them and condoning the action because these are the same companies that will help keep them in power then there’s no reason to go back. Privatizing is not innovative. It costs us much more for no improvement. One of the reasons someone might serve in the armed forces is to receive training. It seems like a fair exchange. Serve your country for x number of years and we will educate you in an area. Instead the technical areas are being handed over to private companies at a higher cost. Some thank you to our troops.
Did you read the article. Would you expect them to actually do the work they were hired to do? Would you expect them to be criminally for fraud, such as charging for work never done etc. etc.
Money, …and power. Using money to seize power and retain it.
I think you’re right. We do have films like “Iraq for Sale” and “Why We fight” also “The Ground Truth”
If we can no longer trust the main stream media to present the important issues then we have to take it upon ourselves to do it, and then the hard part…Do something about it.
IMHO it’s a huge “Fuck You” and "You’re all a bunch of “American Idol Morons and you deserve it”
As long as we do so very little to stop it or correct it. They’re right.
“…why you seem to think they should have to pay western wages in the east?” Well its my understanding that they’re billing as if they’re paying Western wages.
My best friend just came home from 2 years in Afghanistan working as a plumber at a forward operating base on the Paki border. His experience with KBR went from one of exuberance to disapointment pretty quickly.
Care to share any stories about why he felt that way?
My daughters boyfriend spent 11 years in the army and planned on a career. He got out after one tour in Iraq.
I printed it out and read it in the office this morning. While an important story (not that it is new, mind you), I have rarely encountered a more poorly–written article in RS. Rather than simply stating the gruesome facts, the author starts hyperventilating.
I took a few note, but am not sure I trust this article as a source.
IMO, Greg Palast’s analysis was spot-on: The war was mainly about the oil, but on that point the war’s planners had (at least) two incompatible agendas, which accounts for the strange reversals in policy under the occupation. However, the neocons’ radical pro-business agenda also played a role, and I have no doubt the prospect of (some selected) American corporations making massive profits in-country was also given great weight in the decisionmaking.
As for removing a despot . . . I notice we haven’t invaded Pakistan yet. Or Saudi Arabia.
I haven’t had enough time to hear everything but a very high level of incompetance and bad management mainly.
That’s a very basic flaw in the privatization concept in my opinion. Who really wants to go to some shithole, surrounded by people who want to kill you just for somewhat better wages? Not generally your best and brightest. There are a few, my friend for one but generally its the desparate and stupid. Then because they get people from all over the world there’s a huge communication barrier between the people trying to work together. Allegedly everyone spoke English…
Obviously. I agree that should be the goal. My job here in Yemen is to ensure that goal is met and eliminate my job in the process. I take it seriously.
It sounded like the person was saying that they should be paid at a higher level than they are. Do you know one of the reasons that places like the UAE bring people in from other countries? It is because few UAE nationals are willing to do the job that an expat from somewhere like the Philippines or India are doing.
Emiratisation push failing in healthcare
Then they should be jailed if this is the case. I’m not arguing against that, though.
It certainly can be in open and fair competition. Someone finds a better, cheaper way of doing things and bids for the job. Are you saying that governments are innovative?
Of course companies should do the work they are paid to do. I assume that if you hire a company to do something you have some oversight that will assure this. My comment is that if you hire a company and don’t expect them to do any work while paying them for it, then is it the company’s fault? Well, at least partially I’d say it is, but more so it is the person who did the hiring. The utter incompetence indicated in the article is appalling.
TWEEEEEET!
If anyone has a problem with the manner or style of another poster’s presentation, they are free to bring it up in The BBQ Pit. There is no reason to hijack threads with posts commenting on the ways that other posters should post differently.
Regarding the first interruption:
I have two observations:
1. Unlike a former poster who was eventually banned for submitting a horrendous number of post-and-run threads that amounted to little more than a link and a question mark, following which the poster would not even return to the thread, BrainGlutton submits a very large number of threads that amount to little more than a link and a question in the form of a complete sentence. However, he does return to those threads and participates in them.
That level of participation definitely sets his actions apart from those of the previous poster.
2. OTOH, it is generally more polite to initiate a thread with an actual assessment of the linked site and the staking of an actual position in the OP. This is not a hard and fast rule and we have no desire to make it one, but there is certainly something to be said for seeking a bit of quality over quantity. If one in six threads on the Great Debates page are random variations on “Bush Sucks” or “Ooo, Lookit this!” from a single poster, it does get a bit monotonous wandering through them, particularly considering the significant overlap in the comments that appear in them.
I am not going to set any rules, here.
It would be nice if BrainGlutton would spend a few more minutes formulating an actual discussion in his OPs (and cutting down on the torrent of threads that he submits).
On the other hand, the OP’s name is listed beneath each thread title and none of our software compels anyone to open or read a thread if one believes s/he will already know its content or direction before they even open the thread. I have to read all the threads; the rest of you do not.
The bottom line is that we could use a bit more tolerance, and even courtesy, both in how we choose to post (or read) and in how we choose to react.
[ /Moderating ]
Erm…what exactly did Rolling Stone “expose” again?
This is hardly groundbreaking or revealing. In fact, the tone of the article is more on the side of “hysteria” than “investigative reporting”.
Don’t know how I missed this post. It said basically everything I was thinking. Thanks!
That Bush is a poopy-pants and we are seeing the “triumphant culmination of two centuries of flawed white-people thinking”. They took a highly reported story (about war profiteering) and turned it into a nutty theory about what they think Bush (and I guess “white people” in general) want to turn the world into.
There is, as well, the synergy. These companies that profit so handsomely, are they not civic minded? Do they refrain from making, say, contributions to political parties? And do not businessmen tend to favor the party that favors them?
I see this in a lot of other aspects of American daily life, as well.
There are a lot of buisnesses making money supplying school books and food to our public schools, janitors to vacuum the offices at city hall, construction crews to repair the highways, and so forth. (Not to mention the defense industries that build the planes and ammo…)
As these costs go up, so do the taxes. We justify these expenses because we believe that the “cause is just” (or the expense is just plain necessary).
In the end, we will leave Iraq not because some unscrupulous Scrooge McDuck is rolling around in Iraq-war profits, but because the “cause” is no longer seen as “just”.
IMO.
Why don’t they volunteer to provide services and materiale on a non-profit basis? This doesn’t seem to have occurred to any of these patriotic men, I’ve certainly not heard of any. Why not? It isn’t even a sacrifice, it is merely forgoing profit to serve one’s country.
I didn’t get the feeling that any of the people listed in the article who ran these companies was in the least patriotic. They were just criminals taking advantage of government incompetence.
Not hiring Iraqis to rebuild Iraq seems really irresponsible, stupid and wasteful to me. If Iraqis are unwilling to rebuild their own country , or unwilling to do so under our direction and occupation, then we shouldn’t be there.
Your link doesn’t support your point.
I confess I know little about the culture but there is a difference between hiring people because they are willing to work for less money and no benefits, and hiring your countrymen who might ask for higher wages and some benefits.
Would Anglo Americans pick crops if the pay was decent? I know I have. I know others that have. That’s not the same as people just refusing to do the work.
OKay, but we are discussing this article aren’t we?
Once again, we’re discussing this particular article and things going on in Iraq, not some abstract concept.
Yes, sometimes a private firm can come up with a way to do things cheaper and more efficiently than a government agency. That sure doesn’t seem to be the case according to the article does it?
I don’t agree. If someone commits fraud and theft and nobody catches them is it any less fraud and theft? In the article we have two sets of criminals. The people who committed the fraud and theft and the people who protected them from prosecution. That’s aiding and abetting. A separate crime.
I know there is corruption here at home as well but I don’t see much of a comparison between the war in Iraq and the school janitor crisis.
One huge issue seems to be oversight. Here at home we have systems that can be corrupted but we also have a justice system to deal with them. It isn’t just an issue of the rising cost of the war or the unethical practices of a handful of business men. The issue is that those in Washington right now are condoning, cooperating, and encouraging a war for the sake of profit. That is certainly connected to the issue of whether this is a just cause or not.
The link was the best I could find on short notice. The cultural differences are far greater than we can normally visualize coming from the West. It is not about wages it is about working in a profession not held in high regard. It is about status and honor. It is unlikely that any UAE national would want to work in an industry that is dominated by Indians and other Asians. It would be beneath them unless they were the managers and directors. I understand from one of the people I work with that this is more prevalent in places like Saudi, the UAE, and Bahrain and not so much in other areas. In those cases due to their low populations a lot of the national people don’t have to work so they don’t. Iraq may be somewhat different due to a higher population and living under Saddam’s rule. I think the basics of the culture are similar, though. But, in any case, I don’t think I can pursue this part of the discussion with any certainty. Just understand I agree that you should hire local people for a whole host of reasons if possible. I was offering a reason as to why, in some areas of the ME it isn’t done.
Please read my paragraph again and see that I’m essentially agreeing with you. The only point of difference is that it is also the responsibility of the government to ensure that its contractors are doing the job they are hired for.
I moved your passage because it follows along with my point better. You can’t say the government is more qualified to provide a service if they can’t even monitor contractors effectively. If the government is competent then they can provide the service, or they can hire others to provide the service and monitor them properly. Either way would work. If they aren’t competent then the money will be blown uselessly anyway. Businesses hire contractors all the time. They make strategic decisions as to whether it makes more sense for them to provide a service, or for someone else to provide the service if it isn’t a core competency. It makes sense to do so. A successful business monitors their contractors.
In this case it is obvious that these companies didn’t do the work they were being paid for. It is also obvious that the government didn’t do its job monitoring the spending of taxpayers money.