Started by Shiranu, September 26, 2021, 11:34:00 PM
QuoteUp to half of the $14 trillion spent by the Pentagon since 9/11 went to for-profit defense contractors, a study released Monday found. While much of this money went to weapons suppliers, the research is the latest to point to the dependence on contractors for war-zone duties as contributing to mission failures in Afghanistan in particular.In the post-9/11 wars, U.S. corporations contracted by the Defense Department not only handled war-zone logistics like running fuel convoys and staffing chow lines but performed mission-crucial work like training and equipping Afghan security forces â€" security forces that collapsed last month as the Taliban swept the country.Within weeks, and before the U.S. military had even completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Taliban easily routed an Afghan government and military that Americans had spent 20 years and billions of dollars to stand up. President Joe Biden placed blame squarely on the Afghans themselves. â€œWe gave them every chance,â€ he said last month. â€œWhat we could not provide them was the will to fight.â€But William Hartung, the author of Mondayâ€™s study by Brown Universityâ€™s Costs of War project and the Center for International Policy, and others say itâ€™s essential that Americans examine what role the reliance on private contractors played in the post-9/11 wars. In Afghanistan, that included contractors allegedly paying protection money to warlords and the Taliban themselves, and the Defense Department insisting on equipping the Afghan air force with complex Blackhawk helicopters and other aircraft that few but U.S. contractors knew how to maintain.â€œIf it were only the money, that would be outrageous enough,â€ Hartung, the director of the arms and security program at the Center for International Policy, said of instances where the Pentagonâ€™s reliance on contractors backfired. â€œBut the fact it undermined the mission and put troops at risk is even more outrageous.â€
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on November 14, 2021, 07:53:32 PMMeanwhile the US government could cut the defense budget in half and still have the biggest defense budget in the world.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 26, 2021, 11:34:00 PMhttps://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/study-says-nearly-half-of-defense-spending-for-9-11-wars-went-to-private-contractorsCui bono, cui bono?"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." - Major General Smedley D. Butler
QuoteWhat's the problem with private contractors?
QuoteA lot US military hardware is designed and funded by private companies even if it's considered part of the "public" military.
QuoteSo if this is just based on the false "public/private" or "non-profit/for-profit" dichtomy and some ignorant assumptions made thereof, it isn't saying much at all, since those are just flimsy and arbitary legal definitions which don't mean anything or work that way in the real world.
QuoteShir, you don't have clue how government contracting works. While there are always exceptions to every rule, nobody and I mean nobody gets paid ten times what something is worth by the government.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on December 20, 2021, 08:44:23 AMCould you post the long version of that?
Quote from: Shiranu on December 20, 2021, 09:35:10 AM-Future Combat Systems (FCS), started in 2009 and abandoned in 2016; Total cost to taxpayers - $18 billion.-RAH-66 Comanche helicopter, started in 91' and cancelled in 2004 after only two prototypes were built; Total cost to taxpayers - $6.9 billion.-The XM2001 Crusader Artillery, cancelled in 2002 by Rumsfield for being too heavy and not what the military needed; total cost - $11 billion.-The three attempts (at time of article) to replace the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, rejecting all 3 for not being what we need but continuing the same request; total cost to the taxpayer - $22.3 billion. -The Ground-based Midcourse System, a project in the works since 1999 and a branch of Regan's notorious "Star Wars" waste, used to stop incoming missiles but having a less than 60% success rate on mock missiles significantly less complex than we would actually expect to see in a nuclear launch; cost to taxpayer - $67 billion. -The F-35 Fighter program, constantly plagued by technical issues (over 900 software defects so far) and flaws and spending more time being repaired than seeing service; estimated cost to taxpayers - $1.5 trillion dollars. -The Zumwalt Destroyer, that has had to have it's role changed as most of the systems didn't work and those that did were massively over-priced, leading to them downgrading after 2 ships; program cost to taxpayers - $22 billion dollars. - The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) that my family has both assembled and served on, commissioned 17 years ago and costing 250% more a ship than originally agreed upon despite the fact that the Navy does not deem them ready for service due to constant technical malfunctions... but don't worry, Congress has decided to cut funding for anti-submarine and mine modules so they are even less suited for their job. Cost to taxpayers: $30 billion dollars. Get the fuck out of here with that, "nobody gets paid ten times what something is worth"... if anything 10 times was far too kind, we are paying about 30 billion times, 67 billion times, 1.5 trillion times what this garbage is worth, and the list could keep on going but I don't have the patience to spend another 5-10 hours listing overpriced garbage the Pentagon has wasted our money on.  - https://www.defensenews.com/30th-annivesary/2016/10/25/30-years-future-combat-systems-acquisition-gone-wrong/ - https://nation.time.com/2012/05/25/real-lessons-from-an-unreal-helicopter/ - https://web.archive.org/web/20040225164714/https://www.senate.gov/~armed_services/statemnt/2002/May/Rumsfeld.pdf - https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/army-decided-replace-bradley-fighting-vehicles-17-years-22b-ago-ncna1136141 - https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/missile-defense-risks/ - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/21/magazine/f35-joint-strike-fighter-program.html - https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/after-sinking-billions-its-stealth-destroyers-navy-needs-more-money-keep-them-afloat - https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/navy-spent-30b-16-years-fight-iran-littoral-combat-ship-ncna1031806