It costs far more to pay a Soldier than a third world national. If it was redeeming work that did not further aggravate frequently deploying Soldiers, you might have a point. But why make Joe on his third year-long tour endure any more hassle and drudgery than you have to.

Read this article written by a Marine Colonel. Pay particular attention to Figure 1 data:

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/08autumn/cancian.pdf

I don’t have the time to respond to all you said, but I will take on your last paragraph. At least in the military that I was in I don’t recall being asked if I wanted to do a job or not, filling sand bags, unloading vehicles, cleaning up where buddies had been killed or wounded were all part of being a soldier. The military need cooks, truck drivers, sand bag fillers etc. Although these are not glamor jobs they do present opportunity for these who can’t quite serve in more demanding jobs to serve and perhaps find a better life they other wise they may have had.

The flip side of this is that private contractors can do these jobs cheaper is simply not true. OMB, CBO, GAO and internal Pentagon studies have shown that using non military contractors doing this work is MORE expensive then the using soldiers.

Another factor that all who advocate the use of private contractors is security. By the very nature that the bad guys know where to plant IED’s/EFP’s, or where to ambush a patrol, or where to put a mortar round in the Green Zone etc. should be evidence that there are leaks, and most likely those leaks come from the civilians that we hire to cook, clean and do those jobs that you say U.S. troops. “…may not enjoy performing”.

On the negative side private contractors have lured away from the military, mostly early retirement options, highly trained NCO’s with combat experience for higher wages. Of course when these guys get hurt and come back stateside they become wards of the VA. To me this is profits and patriotism at work.

As far as writing doctrine that’s what staff officers do. I find it strange that these same officers, who”…have no desire to write doctrine.” are more then happy to do it for the thinks tanks in retirement and then go on TV and and do a Billy Mays” in pitching it to the public.

As far as owning a business, I to had one, one day I woke up and found I was only working for the money, I had enough for the rest of my life and walked on it, I gave it all to a former competitor for a buck.

Well I got a bag to pack and a plane to catch, all communications go dead, back next week.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Once at war, you might believe the military should have the sole say. That isn’t true either, as we have seen from flaws in the conduct of both current conflicts. Ambassador mistakes, lack of money authorized for nation-building, and an overzealously kinetic military can come back to haunt us. Counterinsurgencies have political policy, economic, cultural, and interagency considerations that go beyond the SecDef’s office or the purview of the military CINC.

Some civilian analysts spend extensive time studying the culture, history, and technical factors associated with warfare. Servicemembers usually are too busy deploying to study such issues in detail. Troops may not express their opinions because they don’t like to or can’t write very well. Even with disclaimers, offering your frank opinion in person or in writing while on active duty can damage careers. Retired officers and think tank civilians are more likely to offer their unrestrained beliefs. Getting paid to offer your true informed or researched beliefs is not evil.

“Information operations” illustrate the value of being an advocate to disseminate facts and counter false perceptions. Advocating policy or procurement does not mean that isn’t your true belief. Think tanks, retired officers, the media, and “journals” like this one either purposely or inadavertantly advocate or dispute positions on matters. They enable reinforcement of valid arguments or the ability to shoot down ideas that miss key points. Debate is always healthy, regardless of its source.
========================================
Byron said: “General McCaffrey is a very brave man by his combat record, but that doesn’t mean he has the intellectual firepower to be a commentator to analysis military events in an honest and forth right way to the American people.”
========================================
Reply: That is ludicrous. His opinions, whether televised, or couched in terms of letters from a West Point Associate Professor are valuable to the debate.
========================================
Byron said: “You may have been not following or a bit to young when General Powell made his speech including postings on the web and articles in the major dailies questioning, oh so litely but still questioning what he said. At this point General Powell still had creditability.”
========================================
Reply: Too young? ;) Assume you are talking about the fact that he initially expressed reluctance as Secretary of State to go to war in Iraq. But after the decision was made, he saluted and drove on. You don’t know what was said behind the scenes but he certainly would not express misgivings in public.
========================================
Byron said: “Cole if you don’t think that drugs are involved in the current wars and that officers are not daily threatened you are quite naive.”
========================================
Reply: Of course drugs are out there, even with drug testing and dogs. But suspect there is more peer pressure not to be high while on duty in combat where others could be endangered. You certainly don’t hear about fragging incidents to the same extent you did in Vietnam.
=======================================
Byron said: “Cole it is OK for a Retired general to offer his opinion, even if he is paid for that opinion and it is handed to him, all that I’m saying is declare it as such. Retired General So and so, who is a consultant for the XYZ Think Tank than will give an opinion of whatever. You and I Cole seem to be co-citizens of Plato’s Republic.”
=========================================
Reply: These Generals and other officers often are network spokesman to keep the public informed. Would you rather have their slant/bias or that of more liberal reporters? Doubt you get many from the public organizing demonstrations, or calling their Congressman to demand action based on what they hear on TV from a military officer. Wouldn’t you rather have someone advocating for the military than hearing “the military is evil.”
=========================================
Byron said: “You last question is simple Cole, Patriotism and for profit are at the opposite ends of the spectrum to me. The interest of profit and patriotism are by definition at odds with each other. Naive to be sure, but thats the way I see is.”
=========================================
Reply: See it differently, perhaps because I owned a small retail business for 13 years, and went back to work on military-related matters only after 9/11. Most military folks don’t grasp the gross revenues required to make a profit, or the stresses of cash flow and making payroll. For a profession dedicated to protecting the American way, many don’t understand that profit is not a dirty word and is a necessity to continue providing the product or service the military or civil sector requires.

Agree with you that SOME overseas contracts and contractor personnel may go overboard on pay, profit, and mercenary perception. Yesterday, saw on C-Span that the majority of theater contractors are not U.S. personnel, and are often Iraqis or Afghanis or other nationalities. So some of that contracting money is helping provide jobs for locals, and other contracts permit Soldiers to avoid drudgery duties and local security around bases.

In the U.S., many jobs performed by contractors allow Services to benefit from military experience without continuing to pay higher military pay. If many contractors were still on active duty their retirement benefits would be growing, or personnel constraints of each service would be surpassed. If contractors were not cheaper, or were not providing essential skills, they would not be employed.

Finally, many jobs performed by contractors are not career enhancing in the military or are jobs troops may not enjoy performing. They may be too dull or technical to some. Plenty of military personnel have no desire to write doctrine, requirement documents, collective tasks, lesson plans, and other training and combat development documents, yet they must be created. Civil servants cost money. too.

Byron’s post is a funny parody of them and their official names: The American Enterprise Institution for example. People who don’t have the cojones to sign up for a war they call for, don’t have the courage to admit the war they got was a botched and bloody affair, and they certainly don’t have the integrity to admit that their so called opinions are not independent thinking.

That said, a retired Colonel who is paid for his opinion is not the same thing as Free Speech at its highest. Paid for opinions are worthless. If the retired Colonel really believed in what he or she says, then why take money for it? Why not go out there and offer it without a stipend? Now THAT’S free speech.

(Well, I promised I wouldn’t go all caps, but it looks like I did).

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup.com

It seems you fail to grasp the core arguments when we post. I quite frankly don’t care all that much about numbers or other trivial remarks I make because I will often do it on purpose to high lite that the person responding to why I’m trying to say hasn’t the faintest idea.

The central question in this debate is who should make the basic decisions for the military. Should that function be charged to the men and women in uniform and the appointed representatives of our elected leaders or to “Think Tanks” that are answerable to nobody, are paid by the vested interests that would profit from various decisions or promote political agendas that are corrosive and not a reflection of the best interest or values American people and by contract to the United States Government itself.

As shown in the invasion of Iraq when the whole venture went into the toilet, these special interest think yanks threw up their hands cashed their government checks and walked away.

General Mc Caffrey is a very brave man by his combat record, but that doesn’t mean he has the intellectual fire power to be a commentator to analysis military events in an honest and forth right way to the American people. One embed, during the “Surge” to Iraq and be came back babbling about how had the GI’s are fighting, which now American doubted but totally failed to see that all that the Surge was doing was balkanizing of Baghdad and moved the U.S. military into a war of attrition, killing any Iraqi who looked cross eyed at them. Of course Gen. Mc Caffrey was not alone in ignoring this, being a General with the insight of what he should have seen in Vietnam this should have been very clear to him.

You may have been not following or a bit to young when General Powell made his speech including postings on the web and articles in the major dailies questioning, oh so litely but still questioning what he said. At this point General Powell still had creditability.

Cole if you don’t think think that drugs are involved in the current wars and that officers are not daily threatened you are quite naive. You don’t have to be around a major military instillation that regularly deploy troops to the war zone the see a lot of $100.00 bill in the hands of young people, guys just back in ranks of E-3/E-4 driving around $40,000.00+ new automobiles. The price of heroin I’m told especially the Afghanistan variety is flood in the streets and is on a downward price spiral. Now before all you patriots out there start screaming that I’m a terrorists or commie, those who are doing this are a very small minority and the military is trying to deal with it as quietly as possible.

Cole it is OK for a Retired general to offer his opinion, even if he is paid for that opinion and it is handed to him, all that I’m saying is declare it as such. Retired General So and so, who is a consultant for the XYZ Think Tank than will give an opinion of whatever. You and I Cole seem to be co-citizens of Plato’s Republic.

You last question is simple Cole, Patriotism and for profit are at the opposite ends of the spectrum to me. The interest of profit and patriotism are by definition at odds with each other. Naive to be sure, but thats the way I see is.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Some valid comments. However let me suggest:

- Several dozen current and retired officers at a reunion or AUSA conference are not really continuing to “serve” if not working for a defense contractor, think tank, or for the federal government.

- General McCaffrey is a professor at West Point, and shows up on TV. I respect what he says. Retired General Eikenberry as Afghan ambassador probably does not mind receiving advice from retired officers and civilians in think tanks. Is advice only valuable when provided by a truly retired officer schmoozing at AUSA meetings or reunions?

- Reference General Powell and the bio-van and yellow cake, wish they had consulted you about Iraqi WMD prior to the OIF invasion. You are probably the only person I know who did not believe they had them! Even Saddam Hussein told the FBI interrogator he led us to believe he had them so we would not invade. But will agree that the entire premise for the Iraq invasion was somewhat flaky. Son had to finish Dad’s job.

- I seem to recall you arguing vehemently (with little factual “due dilligence”) against FCS. Your points, aside from lacking knowlege about FCS, seemed to involve lack of any need for future manned armored vehicles, and insufficient MGV armor. Yet here you cite the poorly armored M-113s as a Basra lifesaver?

- This body armor you don’t appear to like sure has saved many lives.

- My father-in-law got fragged by his own troops as a Vietnam 1SG. Between that, experience with residual Vietnam NCOs, and things I’ve read about drugs there, forgive me if I’m not a major fan of the draftee Army of that era. But oonsidering the casualty rate, I can kind of understand turning to drugs.

- Why do you believe it is acceptable for you and I to offer opinions publicly, but it isn’t OK for a talking-head retired General? Are they not entitled to free speech? Or is the fact that their opinions are not free the problem?

- I don’t know a single General officer on a first name basis, Byron. Maybe if I did, my opinion of them would be more similar to yours. ;) But considering how many you claim to know, sounds like there is a bit of jealousy/resentment that it’s not them on TV.

- I do know a bunch of fellow contractors/retired officers supporting the Army that work for our company. Suspect that only a handful make within $40 grand of what they made then or would make now on active duty. And I mean $40 grand less…certainly not the six figures, let alone high six figures you suggest.

- Why do you believe a contractor or talking head is incapable of patriotism?

What appears to be missing from the Afghan war from the start is a clearly defined strategy. Just what do we want to achieve in Afghanistan? A Jeffersonian democracy with a strong, capable, honest, and respected central government is a non-starter. We don’t have 200 years and infinite blood, treasure, and patience to do this. Furthermore, we are not willing to round up the corrupt warlords, government officials, judges, and Karzai and put them all to the sword.

If our goal is to eliminate al Qaeda and the Taliban, then we need the complete cooperation of the Pakistan government and military. There can be no sanctuaries for insurgents to run to, regroup, and recruit. We need to go after them and kill them and anyone who supports them

If we add “nation building” to the goals, that is fundamentally NOT a military task except for Civil Affairs troops in a limited role. We need a lot of folks from the State and Agriculture Departments to accomplish this task in a 4:1 ratio to the military. We likely don’t have them.

Whatever the strategy is, it must be realistic and achievable. After the National Command Authority [NCA](Obama et al) decide the strategy, then it is up to Gates, the JCS, Petraeus, and McChrystal to devise a plan to carry it out. Throw in Karl Eikenberry, our ambassador to A-stan and Secretary Clinton. This stage is Operational Art. The whole process down to and including the tactical level is iterative and repetitive. Use what works and discard what does not.

Assuming we devise a reasonable strategy and a campaign plan, then turn the job over to McChrystal and let him get it done. We don’t need any inside the Beltway quarterbacks or NCA folks telling our commanders which outhouse to bomb or not bomb. The chain of command goes both ways.

If this does not show some really positive results within a year or two, perhaps it is time to declare victory (whatever that might be) and come home.

My message was not really about Generals, but you are right I have a thing about career orientated officers who game the system for rank and then work their way into six figure jobs with defense contractors peddling their accumulated influences or becoming hired media guns who spit out what ever message as fact that their corporate/think tanks sponsors want out regardless of fact.

I would quote names and facts but Colin has admonished me from mentioning former officers of less the celebrity status, the want-a-be. Honor among our retired officer corps is an economically negotiable line item.

Be it General Colin Powell who, gave out misinformation about chemical warfare vans, when he failed to used due dilligence before presenting the material. This is completely inexcusable or the second and third string who sell themselves to the cable and net work news to comment on any current event. I can not use names, but during the body armor debate a few years a well know General lies about the countries of origin and manufacture and the host knew that the general was lying but didn’t attempt to correct him. A little later this same lame team commented that their were no M-113’s available that could be sent to the 2ACR who was getting the sh** kicked out of them in street fighting Basra using un-armored HUMMVES. In that case Congressman Duncan Hunter looked into it and found that there were plenty of M-113’s A3 ready to go, and had them air lifted to the 2ACR. The 2ACR was having an average of one KIA a day, after the M-113’s arrived the had zero mounted KIA and only a single dismounted KIA for the rest of the operation.

There are other examples Cole. You father was a Sgt. Major retired Army, a lifer is you like, you own personal experience is some what limited to his filtered version of things which is fine. But be very careful in transferring that as factual information.

Our career military are not the golden/white/blue or what ever color knights that the media is currently trying to make them, while there are and I know quite a few honorable men and women who have served their country with honor, they know that there is a rather small but highly visible corrupted underbelly of both serving and retired officers that will sell their uniform and rank in what is the new second oldest profession. Those who served and are still serving their country honorably are often the first to speak out. The only problem the media is not listening.

It is widely acknowledged that the political and military pressure to invade Iraq came from Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld, VP Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. With only a single exception the active uniforms sat on their careers and remained silent, this is a disservice to their country that borders on treason.

The same folks who bought the war in Iraq are now attempting to invade and corrupt the DoD of Sec. Gates and Adm. Mullen. and call the shots in Afghanistan. The airways and cable have been invaded by retired officers giving their bought and paid for opinions. Perhaps it might be time for the FCC to make the news media who use these experts label the product on the bottom of the screen.

You get a break next week Cole, I’m off to a meeting where there will be several dozens or hundred current and retired officers, a Lt. General is the highest rank attending, but we will have a video link for a current four star. I’m on a first name basis with nearly all of them and many follow my ramblings and post back channel comments. Strange but the media darlings manage to be MIA’s. work conflict I guess.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

I find it interesting that there are more 4-stars, 3-stars, and one-stars in the Air Force which has far fewer overall servicemembers. Also interesting is the number of Lieutenant Colonels in the Air Force which outnumbers the Army. That means the percentage of enlisted and officers led by each LTC is far less in the USAF.

Also note the absence of USAF warrant officers…the only service without them. So if you want to look at retirement expenses, Byron, don’t concentrate so much on the Generals, examine the numbers of Colonels/Navy Captains and LTCs/Navy Commanders.

http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/MILITARY/rg0907.pdf

Understand you are a disabled Vietnam war vet which might tend to breed bitterness against some Generals considering the casualties you witnessed. Believe, however, it is unfair to generalize about current leadership matters you have little knowledge about. As the previous poster noted, there is more to it than “grabbing the checkbook.” As a Vietnam vet, you also know that more forces are not always the answer.

As for the article, I read the linked transcript and I’m not sure conclusions Greg reached correspond with what was said. The previous poster’s quote and other statements, to include Admiral Mullen’s early response that Afghanistan has always been underresourced, certainly do not indicate an unwillingness to add forces. I also read from other sources that General Casey preferred a surge that only increased troops by 2 BCTs instead of 5 BCTs. That is different than being completely against the surge.

It is natural for Army leaders aware of tremendous Army deployment burdens to try to restrain unnecessary deployment. It is questionable whether the surge’s level created success or if the determining factor was the “Anbar awakening.”

CNN just showed an engineer unit from Fort Rucker returning from its surge 15 month deployment and those guys deploy ALL THE TIME with one Soldier saying on the air that 15 months is a long time. Certainly true compared to the USAF’s 4–6 months which probably includes payment of TDY. Don’t hold it against leaders or Secretary Gates for being reluctant to further stress the land component, or as he stated, make the Afghanis perceive we are an occupation force rather than there for assistance.

What part of the Secretary’s comment ““[McChrystal’s] recommendations or alternative courses of action would follow the chain of command. They will go to General Petraeus, as the commander of Central Command, who will offer his view. That will then be forwarded to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the chairman. And they will evaluate it and add their point of view. And I will then add mine and provide that to the president.”

Do you only see what YOU want to see?

Briliant. Hilarious. Unfortunately true.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup.com

I’m not sure that I can follow this. A field General (Mc Chrystal) sends a request to the CJCS for more troops and sends his plan to fight the war in Afghanistan, and the Sec. of Defense doesn’t grab the check book and run over to K Street and contracts with think tanks like The Cohen Group, Heritage, Cato, American Enterprise etc. to send over, their under retainer retired Generals (the ones who while in uniform screwed up the wars in the first place like Lt. General Yakovac) to tell the administration how to fight the war in Afghanistan. This is scandalous.

Just think of the economic impact this is going to have. You have hundreds of these military officers who have medaled up their resume’s, redone and updated their Power Points with new bullets for the 09–10 season, signed on with the think tanks who have paid them token retainers, who have signed on with FOX, CNN, PBS, the Network news and anybody else who broadcasts news to provide on call expert analysis on what is happening in Afghanistan on any given day, to do service club speaking engagements, to OK newspaper articles ghost written under their bylines. This is just outrageous, this is socialistic, why this is un American

I don’t know what Sec. of Defense Gates and Adm Mullen are thinking, how can they expect the over 1500 men and women in flag ranks to fight a war, why they have more important things to do work their careers and shop post military employment. We need a congressional inquiry into this NOW!

How can we expect these women and men who served their country for decades live on the pauper retirement checks in the $110K range. Come the first snows if December in Washington DC if Congress doesn’t step in at one and at least give these improvised and destitute warriors an economic bailout or we shell see them in their great coats on the DC street corners, in the snow with tin cups and carrying signs saying “Will make war for food.”

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

The basic problem in AfPak is that it is not a war, yet American Generals are in charge and want to fight one. What about troops for Sudan, Yemen, Lebanon, Pakistan, Syria?