Yeah, I love paying for dickheads to go on sexcations under the guise of security

[Shell B]

Why do we hand out contracts to private firms again? There is so much information on this stuff, if you want to know more than what AI has to say about it.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issue...-companies

[Cinjin]

War is big business. Piles of money to be had.


Makes me fucking sick!

[Minimalist]

Bush and Cheney loved contractors. I'm sure there were plenty of kickbacks, too.

[Shell B]

Why do we have these multinational contracting firms representing the United States? It's not only fucking horrendous what (obviously a few of many, but still) they are participating in, but it is just bad policy to have entities outside of our control representing us.

[Cinjin]

It's appalling and embarrassing. Like most things going on in Washington, it should be criminal. Democracy my ass! We are powerless against our corrupt government. I have NO say on the issues that I most want a say in.


This topic just gets my blood boiling. I'll probably have to sign off soon.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Makes me fucking sick!

Oh, me too; I've never seen a penny of all that money.

It's not that I mind corruption so much, it's that being excluded really pisses me off.

[Shell B]

Haha, well, I wouldn't be nearly as pissed if they were taking pay-offs to ignore legitimate brothels. Yes, there is such a thing. However, when said brothels contain underage girls and/or women taken against their will, it pisses me off. We have literally paid men (sorry, the problem is so far an exclusively male one) to go to countries that are rebuilding and partake in rape for a fee. These are guys with no fucking affiliation with the DoD, apart from a contract. Are we going to have to send yet another army to everyone of these places just to police the "police?"

---

It kind of reminds me of the IRS. You know, paying entities outside of our control to rape people.

[Angrboda]

Why do we have these multinational contracting firms representing the United States? It's not only fucking horrendous what (obviously a few of many, but still) they are participating in, but it is just bad policy to have entities outside of our control representing us.

It depends on what you consider those goals to be. I haven't read your article, but hiring outside contractors insulates the government from liability, and if an organization is unacceptable, just cut them loose; no need for internal reform. For the contractors, the money is good, and they're insulated from intrusive government oversight, and like the government, if a problem arises, you blame it on individual workers and cut them loose.

Given the right policy goals, this could be a win-win. Not to mention privatization is seen as a positive by many, and the private firm's activities are less likely to show up on the six o'clock news. I guess I'm not understanding which policy you think this is undermining?

[Shell B]

Where did I state it was outside of the scope of existing policy? I'm saying that it is bad policy.

Less likely to turn up on the 6 o'clock news? How do you explain that it is common knowledge? Blame it on individual workers and cut them loose? They barely cut any of these people loose and they rarely own up to it until it is clear that it goes all the way to the top of the firm. This is almost always the case. If an organization is unacceptable, you cut them loose and don't bother with reform? How about they don't bother to cut them loose and don't bother with reform?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DynCorp

How is this a win-win or even just a two-sided issue? Do you think that the child prostitutes are winning when we provide demand for their services, thus causing the very scenario that led to them being enslaved?

I think it all boiled down to the "policy" thing with you. Had you read the article and taken my comment in context, you would have seen that I am talking about changing shitty policies, not facilitating international crime.

[Cato]

Bush and Cheney loved contractors. I'm sure there were plenty of kickbacks, too.

Give me a fucking break. Are you suggesting that since the end of WWII that Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton and Obama haven't employed the same goons?

Your problem, politically, is that you actually think there's a real difference between the parties and the 'vision' each proposes. They each play to the fears and emotions of their consitutents to gain votes without ever intending to solve our problems. All for the sake of power.