I'm not happy about this, but to be fair (0.00 / 0)

to Obama, if you read the whole article it sounds like his senior advisor is pretty unhappy about it too.

Basically, my read on it is that, while Obama would clearly prefer not to use private contractors, it isn't clear how they could be replaced at this point. This quote from the article is particularly shocking:

The State Department has only an estimated 1,450 diplomatic security agents worldwide who are actual government employees, and only thirty-six are deployed in Iraq. In contrast, Blackwater has nearly 1,000 operatives in Iraq alone, not to mention the hundreds more working for DynCorp and Triple Canopy.

The privatization of US security personnel will takes years to reverse. I sincerely hope that Obama is serious about reversing this terrible situation. But it seems like the immediate problem of what to do in 2009 is not so clear as simply banning private contractors, and we may have to live with stopgap solutions (like making private contractors accountable to US law) for at least a few years.

I don't know. I'm torn about this since Blackwater in Iraq has been terrible on a number of fronts, and it isn't clear how easily bad actors could be prosecuted even if they were technically liable under US law. But the Obama advisor quoted in the Nation piece makes a reasonable argument that there is simply no way to replace Blackwater immediately.

---

by: Tim Sackton @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 12:01:17 PM CST

What this translate to is forget it. (0.00 / 0)

Years?  He'll be gone.  Then we'll have another crook who will put it back.  It needs to be outlawed, immediately, now and not in the future.  Boy, what a cop out.  "big, bold, change" my foot.  I keep asking myself how progressive can two sitting DC Senators, who have done little to nothing to lead the change they now both claim, be?  

They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich  

---

by: dkmich @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 12:12:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, or at least outlaw it in such a way (4.00 / 2)

that mandates a workable stepdown in the number of mercenairies.  Equivocation of this sort is not helpful.

---

by: Valatan @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 12:50:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If he is serious about it, (0.00 / 0)

he needs to damn well say so loud and clear. Any equivocation about Blackwater is the one thing that could keep me from voting for him in the general election.  

---

by: DaveW @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 12:44:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Respond to the content of the post (0.00 / 0)

The argument is that many logistical necessities - like bodyguarding State Dept. personnel - don't have an obvious solution if Blackwater is unilaterally ejected.  Just like you can't physically remove every U.S. soldier from Iraq in two weeks even if you wanted to.

The best policy option here is a long-term restructuring of foreign affairs that makes these contractors permanently unnecessary.  The best short-term policy, according to this argument, is to hold the contractors in place accountable to the law while that long-term restructuring takes shape.

---

by: TValley @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 19:15:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

vetted (0.00 / 0)

I'm glad to see you asking these questions.  Right now I'm seeing positions that are actually Hillary's assigned to Obama and vice versa.

It's not too late to find out what the truth is on some of these policy positions and I've found a series of positions, statements that imply privatization is something he is fine with.  It sure was my wait a minute hair stand on end event.

Obviously the privatization of military is both an economics issue as well as a national security issue.  Outsourcing the military from all reports I'm seeing, costs more when it is supposed to cost less.

And then there is the obvious issue of national loyalty.

What is a nation-state anyway if everything is just plain cut, privatized and offshore outsourced?

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

---

by: Robert Oak @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 12:03:23 PM CST

This is a great question (0.00 / 0)

this issue was raised Democracy Now yesterday. Its a great question.

Meanwhile Hillary is a fucking FUD monger, which is what Edwards was trying to warn about when he rejected the "War on Terrorism" meme:

I'm starting to let my contempt of Hillary show, which is against what I've liked about this site. But her militarism, and the NAFTA lying and the fight-on-to-Penn is starting to piss me off.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 12:54:12 PM CST

oh (0.00 / 0)

i c now that this video is on the hot links. sorry, not trying to hijack.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 13:02:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The worst part is.... (0.00 / 0)

....these mercenaries are above the law, and have literally raped and murdered with compunction.  

Imagine what it must feel like to be a serviceman stationed in Iraq, and seeing these guys earning much bigger salaries to do the same work as you, and not be accountable to anyone?  Talk about corrupting the military.

The fact that they are now deemed irreplaceable speaks volumes about plans for any early withdrawal from Iraq.

This is the kind of stuff that a raising of the SS cap will pay for, boys and girls.

---

by: Taylor @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 13:01:51 PM CST

not trying to defend Obama here, exactly... (0.00 / 0)

...but who would you replace them with?

I know very little about US diplomatic security, but if it is true that neither State Dept. personnel or military personnel can adequately replace private contractors at the moment, then what are the options? Either leave the private contractors there while the US diplomatic security apparatus is rebuilt, or pull out the contractors and forgo whatever services they provide. Maybe the latter option is the right one, I don't know. But it surely isn't as simple as just saying that outlawing contractors will solve the problem.

I am afraid that it is possible that Bush has screwed things up much, much more than we realize, and it is going to take awhile to recreate even a basic, functioning government. I'm not advocating that Obama supporters give him a pass on military contractors; rather, I am advocating that it is important to be aware of the fact that fixing the problems Bush has left for us may be a great deal more complicated then even pessimists are expected, and it is important to keep in mind the fact that realities on the ground can't be reshaped instantaneously.

---

by: Tim Sackton @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 13:39:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Troops (0.00 / 0)

who would you replace them with?

The simple fact is the US does not have enough personnel to carry on the mission, and the mercenaries have if anything undermined the mission in Iraq.  

Can you understand the magnitude of the political disaster arising from the Nisour Square massacre?  It is the Iraqi political equivalent of Bloody Sunday in Northern Ireland, the fiasco that guaranteed the IRA 25 years of support in their war against the British.  Blackwater should have been thrown to the wolves for this.

You cannot continue to have American servicemen and Iraqi civilians killed on a daily basis, and their sacrifice wasted by disasters like this.

---

by: Taylor @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 14:24:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Troops? (0.00 / 0)

Do you really know enough about these contractors and their duties to make that argument credibly?

Look, I agree that this catastrophe of private contractors has to come to an end, but the better half of idealism is implementation.

---

by: TValley @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 19:18:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The Right Judgement from Day ONE???? (0.00 / 0)

HAHAHAHAH

Well, I hate to say it but this position doesnt sound very PROGRESSIVE. LOL!

I am sorry but that post just cracks me up. HAHAHA

I think as this process continues there will be many more Obama surprises in store for progressives. LOL!  Buyers remorse might set in with those who came late to the Obama religion. The Obamabots will continue to support him as he slides further to the right...after all Hillary is the devil.

LOL.

Obama...what a joke!

---

by: FTLBoy @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 21:32:42 PM CST