quade 4 #1 March 3, 2011 Considering how much the US depends on contractors, I'm curious why nobody has suggested bringing back the draft? Oh sure, people would go apeshit over it, but if we're paying contractors three times as much to do the same job as an enlisted person would be paid, wouldn't it just make sense? To me it's ridiculous that the US government is the only "company" that outsources for MORE than what it costs to pay their regular employees.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #2 March 3, 2011 QuoteConsidering how much the US depends on contractors, I'm curious why nobody has suggested bringing back the draft? Oh sure, people would go apeshit over it, but if we're paying contractors three times as much to do the same job as an enlisted person would be paid, wouldn't it just make sense? To me it's ridiculous that the US government is the only "company" that outsources for MORE than what it costs to pay their regular employees. Because you're looking solely at the paycheck. The logistical 'tail' for a troop makes them MORE expensive than a contractor. The home base, support structure, support units, training costs, military retirement/medical, etc...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #3 March 3, 2011 QuoteBecause you're looking solely at the paycheck. The logistical 'tail' for a troop makes them MORE expensive than a contractor. The home base, support structure, support units, training costs, military retirement/medical, etc... Are you certain that's actually true? I'm not.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #4 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteBecause you're looking solely at the paycheck. The logistical 'tail' for a troop makes them MORE expensive than a contractor. The home base, support structure, support units, training costs, military retirement/medical, etc... Are you certain that's actually true? I'm not. Given that CBO did a study in 2005 that showed exactly that, yes, I'm sure. The soldier still has to be paid and supported in peacetime, the contractor does not. QuoteTherefore, including both the wartime and peacetime costs, the Army’s total cost would be about 90 percent higher than the contractor’s cost under Task Order 59, CBO estimatesMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest #5 March 4, 2011 Quote Considering how much the US depends on contractors, I'm curious why nobody has suggested bringing back the draft? Oh sure, people would go apeshit over it, but if we're paying contractors three times as much to do the same job as an enlisted person would be paid, wouldn't it just make sense? To me it's ridiculous that the US government is the only "company" that outsources for MORE than what it costs to pay their regular employees. Oh boy, here we go again.... Paul, haven't we beaten this horse to death before? mh ."The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #6 March 4, 2011 Quote Oh boy, here we go again.... Paul, haven't we beaten this horse to death before? Muslims! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,326 #7 March 4, 2011 Nor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #8 March 4, 2011 QuoteNor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained. Nor are contractors subject to the command of the President of the United States or the supervision of the United States Congress. Personally, I'm not OK with that. BTW, the French Foreign Legion is a unit of the French military, and is subject to the command of the French government. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #9 March 4, 2011 my simplistic response would be, that IF our country played More Defense... and Less Offense.. the spending would be reduced. By offense i mean running alllll over the world spending money we don't have, to impose a philosophy, and OUr attitudes on people who may not want it, or can't understand it, and simply see Us as intruders....We seem to "choose our battles" according to geographic importance, the available resources of an area, and some ill conceived Need to feel like the " monitor of the world." our current approach to "defense" is "offensive" to me. Work for peace, peacefully....jt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,030 #10 March 4, 2011 Quote Quote Oh boy, here we go again.... Paul, haven't we beaten this horse to death before? Muslims! motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/obamas-secret-muslim-plot... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #11 March 4, 2011 If there had been a draft (more participants, fewer spectators), perhaps more people would have been more vested in the latest conflicts and we'd have had more pressure to end them earlier and bring everyone home. Perhaps the war opposition would have been more intelligent and less flaky in the opposition and made more convincing arguments. perhaps...... - it's amazing what happens when the citizenry is more involved in the ownership and protection of their country still - I'm preferential to all volunteer myself. But it's not a cut and dry proposition at all - there are serious benefits to a draft in terms of defense of course, but also in terms of creating better citizens. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #12 March 4, 2011 Just looking at the $ amount... administering the draft itself must also cost millions more than the costs involved with hiring contractors, even if everyone you wrote to turned up on day 1 and that never happens. You also have to provide health care, pensions and bereavement benefits etc for wounded/killed conscripts – contractors will presumably usually have to provide themselves with all of that privately/through their employers if they want it, though how much of that is taken into account in the above referenced study I don't know. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,326 #13 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteNor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained. Nor are contractors subject to the command of the President of the United States or the supervision of the United States Congress. Personally, I'm not OK with that. BTW, the French Foreign Legion is a unit of the French military, and is subject to the command of the French government. And, when the French government turns them loose, they don't laden them down with silly "Rules of Engagement."Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #14 March 4, 2011 QuoteIf there had been a draft (more participants, fewer spectators), perhaps more people would have been more vested in the latest conflicts and we'd have had more pressure to end them earlier and bring everyone home. Perhaps the war opposition would have been more intelligent and less flaky in the opposition and made more convincing arguments. perhaps...... - it's amazing what happens when the citizenry is more involved in the ownership and protection of their country still - I'm preferential to all volunteer myself. But it's not a cut and dry proposition at all - there are serious benefits to a draft in terms of defense of course, but also in terms of creating better citizens. I prefer a volunteer during peace or offense (we're attacking) and draft during defense (we're being attacked) ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #15 March 4, 2011 Quote Quote Oh boy, here we go again.... Paul, haven't we beaten this horse to death before? Muslims! And thus rapier (wit) of Zoro Andy has left it's stinging mark on Marks cheek. Touche (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #16 March 4, 2011 QuoteNor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained. Yeah they get to drive drunk around neighborhoods in Bagdad shooting innocent civilians for fun... YEAH thats the ticket. I think you might have a problem with that if they are tooling around Tulsa or Okielahoma City though instead of over in Hadjiland. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #17 March 4, 2011 QuoteIf there had been a draft (more participants, fewer spectators), perhaps more people would have been more vested in the latest conflicts and we'd have had more pressure to end them earlier and bring everyone home. Perhaps the war opposition would have been more intelligent and less flaky in the opposition and made more convincing arguments. perhaps...... - it's amazing what happens when the citizenry is more involved in the ownership and protection of their country still - I'm preferential to all volunteer myself. But it's not a cut and dry proposition at all - there are serious benefits to a draft in terms of defense of course, but also in terms of creating better citizens. Amen to that... I would also make sure that this time around the "favoured sons and daughters" do not get a pass like those in my generation did with so many ways to escape serving. If those families get to profit so much from our society.. then their children need to be there in the mix for getting killed with the rest of the pawns that they look down upon. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,326 #18 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteNor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained. Yeah they get to drive drunk around neighborhoods in Bagdad shooting innocent civilians for fun... YEAH thats the ticket. I think you might have a problem with that if they are tooling around Tulsa or Okielahoma City though instead of over in Hadjiland. That's your best shot? You're slipping, lady. I expect more outta you than inaccuracy with a dash of hypothetical.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteNor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained. Nor are contractors subject to the command of the President of the United States or the supervision of the United States Congress. Personally, I'm not OK with that. Contractors have never been subject to the command of the President or the supervision of Congress. They *are*, however, subject to the UCMJ the same as the military (as well as civilian laws).Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #20 March 4, 2011 QuoteThat's your best shot? You're slipping, lady. I expect more outta you than inaccuracy with a dash of hypothetical. Unfortunately, that's all you're gonna get.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #21 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteThat's your best shot? You're slipping, lady. I expect more outta you than inaccuracy with a dash of hypothetical. Unfortunately, that's all you're gonna get. Oh yeah.. just more of the same from Mikee the DEFENDER OF THE rePUBIClown FAITH. DID Blackwater contractors in Iraq intentionally kill innocent civilians or not??? You just cant help yourself can you... DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDE.. you need some new material... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #22 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteNor do contractors have to put up with the Politically Correct bullshit of the new and improved corporate military. Think of them as our own French Foreign Legion albeit already highly trained. Yeah they get to drive drunk around neighborhoods in Bagdad shooting innocent civilians for fun... YEAH thats the ticket. I think you might have a problem with that if they are tooling around Tulsa or Okielahoma City though instead of over in Hadjiland. That's your best shot? You're slipping, lady. I expect more outta you than inaccuracy with a dash of hypothetical. I guess it never happened eh... no innocent civilians were killed by Blackwater Contractors.. Past performance is indicitive of future events. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #23 March 4, 2011 QuoteContractors have never been subject to the command of the President or the supervision of Congress. Yes; my point was that because of that, I really don't want too many mercenaries out there operating ostensibly on behalf of the US without enough of a command-and-control leash held by the civilian government of the US. QuoteThey *are*, however, subject to the UCMJ the same as the military (as well as civilian laws). Which is a good thing. Half a loaf is better than none... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #24 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteContractors have never been subject to the command of the President or the supervision of Congress. Yes; my point was that because of that, I really don't want too many mercenaries out there operating ostensibly on behalf of the US without enough of a command-and-control leash held by the civilian government of the US. Yes, I already figured it was the "ZOMG THEY'RE MERCENARIES" crap that's been debunked before. You *do* realize that falling under the UCMJ means they have to follow orders just like soldiers do, and can be court-martialled and imprisoned just like soldiers can, right? Sort of takes the wind out of your prior argument. Oh...and you can thank the Republicans for that change, btw - the legislation was the brainchild of Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC).Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #25 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteContractors have never been subject to the command of the President or the supervision of Congress. Yes; my point was that because of that, I really don't want too many mercenaries out there operating ostensibly on behalf of the US without enough of a command-and-control leash held by the civilian government of the US. Yes, I already figured it was the "ZOMG THEY'RE MERCENARIES" crap that's been debunked before. YO HOWARD.... your contractor buddies are QUACKING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
