The United States relies on contractors to provide a wide variety of services in Iraq and Afghanistan, including security. Private firms known as private security contractors (PSCs) are hired to protect individuals, transport convoys, forward operating bases, buildings, and other economic infrastructure. While DOD has previously contracted for security in Bosnia and elsewhere, it appears that in Iraq and Afghanistan DOD is for the first time relying so heavily on armed contractors to provide security during combat or stability operations. As of March 31, 2010, there were more than 27,000 armed private security contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Recent contracting trends indicate that the number of such contractors in Iraq may decline while the number in Afghanistan may continue to increase. Many analysts and government official believe that DOD would be unable to execute its mission without PSCs.
The above paragraph is from a 6/22/10 "Congressional Research Service" report on the use of contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since Iraq, the use of contractors has been both war’s dirty secret - growing exponentially in cost of lives and treasury. These contractors allow our cowardly & craven leaders cover up the extent of our involvement in both wars as conversation always pivots on the US troop numbers never on the amount of private contractors.
This use of what amounts to mercenaries (in many cases) was embraced by President Bush, but it has increased under President Obama with none of the “accountability” that he promised during his campaign.
I have a novel idea - if this war is worth fighting lets (1) increase taxes to pay for it and then (2) re-institute the draft so it is fought by regular US citizens being paid military rates of compensation and not highly paid private contractors!
Monday, July 19, 2010
FILE UNDER - "That's what you think!"
John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told C-SPAN's "Newsmakers" program that "Bush's stock has gone up a lot since he left office," adding: "I think a lot people are looking back with more fondness on President Bush's administration, and I think history will treat him well."
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Economic Stimulus, Capitalist Style!
No it is not quite “Marriage, Italian Style” but it could be just as stimulating! U.S. corporate cash reserves have grown (apparently) to an all time historic high of almost 2 trillion dollars. Maybe the idiots in Washington could figure out how to foster companies to loosen the purse strings and invest some of this money (rather than borrowing cash from the Chinese and having the Government spend it!).
There is little doubt that there is a rather deep seated anti-business bias that runs thru the Democratic Party. I suspect that this is a remnant of some ill fitting counter culture baggage. I would hasten to inform the great party that this is America, if you are trying to stimulate the economy you might wish to consider engaging business owners and their checkbooks!
How about starting by figuring out what tax policy is going to be for the coming year/years? Whether taxes are going to go up or down, the unknown is a lot more damaging then a clear, stated policy one way or the other.
As I sat with clients this week to do tax planning I kept having to preface every remark with the caveat “as of right now …….” I thought, how absurd, that in July I cannot give a client a reasonable idea of the tax consequences of a particular action in 2011! Businesses and business owners do not do well with ambiguity; it makes tax and strategic planning impossible. We have known for 10 years that the infamous Bush tax cuts were going to sunset in 2010 and yet we still sit in July of 2010 with a no Federal estate tax policy and no real idea what the tax code is going to look like when the clock ticks past midnight on January 1, 2011.
Keep in mind the scheduled tax change (if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to simply sunset) are fairly extreme, we would in an instant move back (essentially) to the tax code in place @ the end of the Clinton administration. While this would NOT be the end of the civilization as we know it, and the fires of hell would probably not open up and consume our country (I say this with all due respect for W.S.J. opinion makers who would disagree and could no doubt PROVE me wrong!) it would nonetheless represent a fairly extensive, one time change to the federal tax code. I would also add that the liquidity of Federal tax policy makes it impossible for many states to establish their taxation schemes for 2011 and that increases the unease for business owners.
Clarity in tax & fiscal policy would make executives and business owners all over America feel more comfortable about moving forward with business expansions, hiring and purchasing, and that, my friend would be, much like Sophia Loren in "Marriage, Italian Style," a source of stimulation!
There is little doubt that there is a rather deep seated anti-business bias that runs thru the Democratic Party. I suspect that this is a remnant of some ill fitting counter culture baggage. I would hasten to inform the great party that this is America, if you are trying to stimulate the economy you might wish to consider engaging business owners and their checkbooks!
How about starting by figuring out what tax policy is going to be for the coming year/years? Whether taxes are going to go up or down, the unknown is a lot more damaging then a clear, stated policy one way or the other.
As I sat with clients this week to do tax planning I kept having to preface every remark with the caveat “as of right now …….” I thought, how absurd, that in July I cannot give a client a reasonable idea of the tax consequences of a particular action in 2011! Businesses and business owners do not do well with ambiguity; it makes tax and strategic planning impossible. We have known for 10 years that the infamous Bush tax cuts were going to sunset in 2010 and yet we still sit in July of 2010 with a no Federal estate tax policy and no real idea what the tax code is going to look like when the clock ticks past midnight on January 1, 2011.
Keep in mind the scheduled tax change (if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to simply sunset) are fairly extreme, we would in an instant move back (essentially) to the tax code in place @ the end of the Clinton administration. While this would NOT be the end of the civilization as we know it, and the fires of hell would probably not open up and consume our country (I say this with all due respect for W.S.J. opinion makers who would disagree and could no doubt PROVE me wrong!) it would nonetheless represent a fairly extensive, one time change to the federal tax code. I would also add that the liquidity of Federal tax policy makes it impossible for many states to establish their taxation schemes for 2011 and that increases the unease for business owners.
Clarity in tax & fiscal policy would make executives and business owners all over America feel more comfortable about moving forward with business expansions, hiring and purchasing, and that, my friend would be, much like Sophia Loren in "Marriage, Italian Style," a source of stimulation!
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Pixar and “the best movie ever!”
Recently took our 5 year old to see “Toy Story 3” in IMAX 3-D and was knocked out. Having seen all the Pixar movies more times that I care to remember I am always astounded by the consistent quality of their films. The reason for this consistency is their abiding love of character and story and a striking fidelity to both, in Pixar films there is never gratuitous technology, everything serves the forward movement of the story. This is amazing for a company that was (initially) built on its technological achievements and it sets them apart from most major Hollywood filmmaking which, at times, seems to be all about gratuitous use of technology.
Toy Story 3 has the earmarks of all great Pixar movies including its incredible ability to embrace directly very serious subject matter, yet still do so in the context of a children’s movie. Toy Story 3 addresses, with great nuance and emotional resonance: death, love, fear, sex, abandonment and evil. It is full of feeling, humor and excitement, including a very daring escape sequence. It is awash with film references, both to their own movies as well as other classic films, and much like Wall-E it picks up structural and visual elements from film history to move the story along. While all along maintaining its own unique individuality and transporting for all time Woody and Buzz into the pantheon of great movie characters.
Is Toy Story 3 up to the genius and grace of Wall-E (one of films great masterpieces) or the brilliance of Ratatouille? Not quite, but when you are up in this stratosphere of creation and sheer genius any one-upmanship is merely child’s play (so to speak!). Toy Story 3 is immensely entertaining, you will laugh and cry and your time in the theatre will fly by, or as my 5 year old said as the movie ended; “Daddy, that was the best movie ever!” and who was I to argue.
Toy Story 3 has the earmarks of all great Pixar movies including its incredible ability to embrace directly very serious subject matter, yet still do so in the context of a children’s movie. Toy Story 3 addresses, with great nuance and emotional resonance: death, love, fear, sex, abandonment and evil. It is full of feeling, humor and excitement, including a very daring escape sequence. It is awash with film references, both to their own movies as well as other classic films, and much like Wall-E it picks up structural and visual elements from film history to move the story along. While all along maintaining its own unique individuality and transporting for all time Woody and Buzz into the pantheon of great movie characters.
Is Toy Story 3 up to the genius and grace of Wall-E (one of films great masterpieces) or the brilliance of Ratatouille? Not quite, but when you are up in this stratosphere of creation and sheer genius any one-upmanship is merely child’s play (so to speak!). Toy Story 3 is immensely entertaining, you will laugh and cry and your time in the theatre will fly by, or as my 5 year old said as the movie ended; “Daddy, that was the best movie ever!” and who was I to argue.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Fareed Zakaria on Afghan War
Huffington Post - 7/4/2010
Fareed Zakaria criticized the Afghanistan war in unusually harsh terms on his CNN program Sunday, saying that "the whole enterprise in Afghanistan feels disproportionate, a very expensive solution to what is turning out to be a small but real problem."
His comments followed CIA director Leon Panetta's admission last week that the number of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan may be down to just 50 to 100 members, or even fewer.
"If Al Qaeda is down to 100 men there at the most," Zakaria asked, "why are we fighting a major war?"
Zakaria noted that the war is costing the U.S. a fortune in both blood and treasure. "Last month alone there were more than 100 NATO troops killed in Afghanistan.," the CNN host said. "That's more than one allied death for each living Al Qaeda member in the country in just one month.
"The latest estimates are that the war in Afghanistan will cost more than $100 billion in 2010 alone. That's a billion dollars for every member of Al Qaeda thought to be living in Afghanistan in one year."
To critics who suggest that we need to continue fighting the war against the Taliban because they are allied with Al Qaeda, Zakaria countered that "this would be like fighting Italy in World War II after Hitler's regime had collapsed and Berlin was in flames just because Italy had been allied with Germany."
"Why are we investing so much time, energy, and effort when Al Qaeda is so weak?" Zakaria concluded. "Is there a more cost-effective way to keep Al Qaeda on the ropes than fight a major land and air war in Afghanistan? I hope someone in Washington is thinking about this and not simply saying we're going to stay the course because, well, we must stay the course."
Fareed Zakaria criticized the Afghanistan war in unusually harsh terms on his CNN program Sunday, saying that "the whole enterprise in Afghanistan feels disproportionate, a very expensive solution to what is turning out to be a small but real problem."
His comments followed CIA director Leon Panetta's admission last week that the number of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan may be down to just 50 to 100 members, or even fewer.
"If Al Qaeda is down to 100 men there at the most," Zakaria asked, "why are we fighting a major war?"
Zakaria noted that the war is costing the U.S. a fortune in both blood and treasure. "Last month alone there were more than 100 NATO troops killed in Afghanistan.," the CNN host said. "That's more than one allied death for each living Al Qaeda member in the country in just one month.
"The latest estimates are that the war in Afghanistan will cost more than $100 billion in 2010 alone. That's a billion dollars for every member of Al Qaeda thought to be living in Afghanistan in one year."
To critics who suggest that we need to continue fighting the war against the Taliban because they are allied with Al Qaeda, Zakaria countered that "this would be like fighting Italy in World War II after Hitler's regime had collapsed and Berlin was in flames just because Italy had been allied with Germany."
"Why are we investing so much time, energy, and effort when Al Qaeda is so weak?" Zakaria concluded. "Is there a more cost-effective way to keep Al Qaeda on the ropes than fight a major land and air war in Afghanistan? I hope someone in Washington is thinking about this and not simply saying we're going to stay the course because, well, we must stay the course."
4th of July
How sad and cynical it is for our nation’s leaders to play on patriotism to support our current war efforts. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have nothing to do with preserving freedom or protecting our nation. These “leaders” extol our servicemen and women for “fighting to preserve our freedom” when all most of them have ever fought for is to preserve their bank accounts (and of course guarantee funding for their next campaign).
Of course, all Americans “support” our troops, I feel like crying whenever I hear about some poor soldier losing his or her life in Afghanistan, but this does not make this war worthwhile, reasonable or “win-able.” It is a war driven by our military industry (talk about corporate welfare!) to fill defense contractor’s pockets and pour cash into congressional districts and feed campaigns.
Republicans can make a stand on extending unemployment benefits to American citizens in the name of “deficit reduction” but they are happy to spend millions of dollars a day in Afghanistan and Iraq (funded by our foreign debt holders) and that is A-OK (please do not construe this comment as being supportive of Democrats – they are just as guilty). Hey, Tea Party morons, here is something to really get MAD about!
For more info on the cost of our war efforts visit www.costofwar.com run by the National Priorities Project.
Of course, all Americans “support” our troops, I feel like crying whenever I hear about some poor soldier losing his or her life in Afghanistan, but this does not make this war worthwhile, reasonable or “win-able.” It is a war driven by our military industry (talk about corporate welfare!) to fill defense contractor’s pockets and pour cash into congressional districts and feed campaigns.
Republicans can make a stand on extending unemployment benefits to American citizens in the name of “deficit reduction” but they are happy to spend millions of dollars a day in Afghanistan and Iraq (funded by our foreign debt holders) and that is A-OK (please do not construe this comment as being supportive of Democrats – they are just as guilty). Hey, Tea Party morons, here is something to really get MAD about!
For more info on the cost of our war efforts visit www.costofwar.com run by the National Priorities Project.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)