Thanks for the M.R.E.'s - Privatization has led to Troops' Privation

[Guest guest]

COMMENT: Our men and women risk their lives and in return, they get pay

cuts, no increase even in death benefits, poor to no health benefits, etc.,

just so some civilian company makes money, they don't matter. THIS SUCKS

*************************************************

 

" There's also another element in the Iraq logistical snafu: The U.S.

military has shifted many tasks traditionally performed by soldiers

into the hands of such private contractors as Kellogg Brown & Root, the

Halliburton subsidiary. The Iraq war and its aftermath gave this privatized

system its first major test in combat and the system failed. "

 

 

Thanks for the M.R.E.'s

 

By PAUL KRUGMAN

 

few days ago I talked to a soldier just back from Iraq. He'd

been in a relatively calm area; his main complaint was about food. Four

months after the fall of Baghdad, his unit was still eating the dreaded

M.R.E.'s: meals ready to eat. When Italian troops moved into the area, their

food was " way more realistic " and American troops were soon trading whatever

they could for some of that Italian food.

 

Other stories are far worse. Letters published in Stars and Stripes and

e-mail published on the Web site of Col. David Hackworth (a decorated

veteran and Pentagon critic) describe shortages of water. One writer

reported that in his unit, " each soldier is limited to two 1.5-liter

bottles a day, " and that inadequate water rations were leading to " heat

casualties. " An American soldier died of heat stroke on Saturday; are poor

supply and living conditions one reason why U.S. troops in Iraq are

suffering such a high rate of noncombat deaths?

 

The U.S. military has always had superb logistics. What happened? The

answer is a mix of penny-pinching and privatization which makes our

soldiers' discomfort a symptom of something more general.

 

Colonel Hackworth blames " dilettantes in the Pentagon " who " thought they

could run a war and an occupation on the cheap. " But the cheapness isn't

restricted to Iraq. In general, the " support our troops " crowd draws the

line when that support might actually cost something.

 

The usually conservative Army Times has run blistering editorials on this

subject. Its June 30 blast, titled " Nothing but Lip Service, " begins: " In

recent months, President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have

missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on the military. But

talk is cheap and getting cheaper by the day, judging from the

nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately. " The article goes

on to detail a seris ofbenefits cut.

 

Military corner-cutting is part of a broader picture of

penny-wise-pound-foolish government. When it comes to tax cuts or subsidies

to powerful interest groups, money is no object. But elsewhere, including

homeland security, small-government ideology reigns. The Bush

administration has been unwilling to spend enough on any aspect of homeland

security, whether it's providing firefighters and police officers with

radios or protecting the nation's ports. The decision to pull air marshals

off some flights to save on hotel bills reversed when the public heard

about it was simply a sound-bite-worthy example. (Air marshals have told

> MSNBC.com that a " witch hunt " is now under way at the Transportation

Security Administration, and that those who reveal cost-cutting measures to

the media are being threatened with the Patriot Act.)

 

There's also another element in the Iraq logistical snafu: privatization.

The U.S. military has shifted many tasks traditionally performed by

soldiers into the hands of such private contractors as Kellogg Brown &

Root, the Halliburton subsidiary. The Iraq war and its aftermath gave this

privatized system its first major test in combat and the system failed.

 

According to the Newhouse News Service, " U.S. troops in Iraq suffered

through months of unnecessarily poor living conditions because some

civilian contractors hired by the Army for logistics support failed to show

up. " Not surprisingly, civilian contractors and their insurance companies

get spooked by war zones. The Financial Times reports that the dismal

performance of contractors in Iraq has raised strong concerns about what

would happen in a war against a serious opponent, like North Korea. Military

privatization, like military penny-pinching, is part of a pattern. Both for

ideological reasons and, one suspects, because of the patronage involved,

the people now running the country seem determined to have public services

provided by private corporations, no matter what the circumstances. For

example, you may recall that in the weeks after 9/11 the Bush

administration and its Congressional allies fought tooth and nail to leave

airport screening in private security companies, giving in only in the face

of overwhelming public pressure. In Iraq, reports The Baltimore Sun, " the

Bush administration continues to use American corporations to perform work

that United Nations agencies and nonprofit aid groups can do more cheaply. "

 

In short, the logistical mess in Iraq isn't an isolated case of poor

planning and mismanagement: it's telling us what's wrong with our current

philosophy of government.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/12/opinion/12KRUG.html?th