PDA

View Full Version : Undercounting deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan



Iraq Ninja
09-19-09, 09:27
Interesting stuff...


Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:31am

(Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed
are his own)

By Bernd Debusmann

WASHINGTON, Sept 10 (Reuters) - By most counts, the death toll of
U.S. soldiers in America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan stood at
5,157 in the second week of September. Add at least 1,360 private
contractors working for the U.S. and the number tops 6,500.

Contractor deaths and injuries (around 30,000 so far) are rarely
reported but they highlight the United States' steadily growing
dependence on private enterprise.

It's a dependence some say has slid into incurable addiction.
Contractor ranks in Iraq and Afghanistan have swollen to just
under a quarter million. They outnumber U.S. troops in
Afghanistan and they almost match uniformed soldiers in Iraq.

The present ratio of about one contractor for every uniformed
member of the U.S. armed forces is more than double that of every
other major conflict in American history, according to the
Congressional Budget Office.

That means the world's only superpower cannot fight its war nor
protect its civilian officials, diplomats and embassies without
support from contractors.

"As the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have
progressed, the military services, defense agencies and other
stakeholder agencies...continue to increase their reliance on
contractors. Contractors are now literally in the center of the
battlefield in unprecedented numbers," according to a report to
Congress by the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in
Iraq and Afghanistan.

"In previous wars, the military police protected bases and the
battle space as other military service members engaged and
pursued the enemy," said the report.

In listing the 1,360-plus contractor casualties, it said that
criticism of the present system and suggestions for reforming it
"in no way diminish their sacrifices."

So why are they not routinely added to military casualty counts?
And why should they? A full accounting for total casualties is
important because both Congress and the public tend to gauge a
war's success or failure by the size of the force deployed and
the number of killed and wounded, according to George Washington
university scholar Steven Schooner.

In other words: the higher the casualty number, the more
difficult it is for political and military leaders to convince a
sceptical public that a war is worth fighting, particularly a war
that promises to be long, such as the conflict in Afghanistan.
Polls show that a majority of Americans already think the Afghan
war is not worth fighting.

Figures on deaths and injuries among the vast ranks of civilians
in war zones are tracked by the U.S. Department of Labor on the
basis of claims under an insurance policy, the Defense Base Act,
which all U.S. contracting companies and subcontractors must take
out for the civilians they employ outside the United States.

EXPENDABLE PROFITEERS, ROGUES?

The Labor Department compiles the statistics on a quarterly basis
but only releases them in response to requests under the Freedom
of Information Act. This can take weeks. The Department gives no
details of the nationalities of the contractors, saying that
doing so would "constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy" under the U.S. Privacy Act.

Writing in last autumn's Parameters, the quarterly journal of the
U.S. Army War College, Schooner said that an accurate tally was
critical to any discussion of the costs and benefits of the
military's efforts in the wars. What's more, the American public
needs to know that their government is delegating to the private
sector "the responsibility to stand in harm's way and, if
required, die for America."

Schooner wrote it was troubling that few Americans considered the
deaths of contractors relevant or significant even though many of
them performed roles carried out by uniformed military only a
generation ago. "Many...concede that they perceive contractor
personnel as expendable profiteers, adventure seekers, cowboys,
or rogue elements not entitled to the same respect or value due
to the military."

That's not surprising after a series of ugly incidents involving
armed security contractors. They make up for a small proportion
of the total (about 8 percent) but account for almost all the
headlines that have deepened negative perceptions and prompted
labels from mercenary and merchant of death to "the coalition of
the billing."

In the most notorious incident, two years ago, employees of the
company then known as Blackwater opened fire in a crowded Baghdad
square, killing 17 Iraqis. Five of the Blackwater shooters, who
were working for the Department of State, have been indicted on
manslaughter and weapons charges.

The Pentagon describes private contractors as a "force
multiplier" because they let soldiers concentrate on military
missions. Some of the actions of private security contractors
could be termed a "perception multiplier." Such as the
after-hours antics of contractors from the company ArmorGroup
North America guarding the U.S. embassy in Kabul.

Shaking off the image of rogues became even more difficult for
private security contractors after a Washington-based watchdog
group, the Project on Government Oversight, accompanied a
detailed report on misconduct and morale problems among the guard
force with photographs showing nearly nude, drunken employees in
a variety of obscene poses and fondling each other.

Whether contractors, even rogue elements and cowboys, should not
be counted in the toll of American wars is another matter. Doing
so would be part of the transparency Barack Obama promised when
he ran for president. (You can contact the author at

VooDoo6Actual
09-19-09, 10:12
Good post thanks.

JHC
09-19-09, 11:51
Very interesting article. We should honor and mourn all our losses. I think it is a fundamental error of enormous proportions of our whole culture to obsess over the daily, weekly, monthly, total casualty numbers for the purpose of judging "Is this worth it?" This is a metric for military decisions, judgements etc.

IMO it should not be a metric for politicians to play their games and public support. I believe this is an unfortunate carry over from the Vietnam complex which does no one any good whatsoever.

Once the Nation is committed to a fight then the focus should be on victory. Not constant measurements with redundant questions about whether it's worth it.
As I heard a father of a young man lost in Iraq say in an interview, "Whenever America commits it's forces, it's always worth it until it is won." (how else can you live with that sort of sacrifice?)

If America was polled in 1860, or 1914, or 1941 to decide if the fight they were entering was worth 100K, 200K 300K or 600K American lives, we would have been frozen and History would have run all over us.

I hope my meaning is clear. I grieve for casualties I've never met. But the pain cannot be the measure of the mission.

Spooky130
09-19-09, 12:25
Here are my two cents on this. The growth of contractor use is directly related to the size of the armed forces. In WWII and on the military had enough people through various means (i.e. the draft) that there was no need or a much smaller need at least for contractors. As the Cold War concluded the government decided such a large standing military was too expensive to maintain and cut the numbers of everything from troops to super carriers. I believe they called this the peace dividend. At any rate, we're now in a time where we need those extra forces and don't have them so we contract out for needed services. With the cost of a contractor versus a 19 year old grunt being so drastic the whole "cost savings" of the peace dividend is gone.

Spooky

Safetyhit
09-19-09, 13:45
Hard to believe the loss of 1,360+ men fighting on our side in a war isn't newsworthy no matter how one looks at it.

JHC
09-19-09, 13:52
True. A few years ago, a PSC (former Army SF as I recall) who lived in Cobb County outside of Atlanta was killed and his funeral was covered heavily here and he was treated as a heroic defender of America as though he were still in uniform.
I would never have guessed the number was that high so something is amiss for sure.

Iraq Ninja
09-19-09, 14:42
JHC,

That might have been Steve Osborne. He was killed in October of 2004 when suicide bombers hit the Green Zone Cafe and the Haji Market. I think he was in the market. He worked for Dyncorp.

I was walking back from lunch when it went up. I remember hearing what we thought was small arms fire, but it turned out to be 9mm ammo from the Dyncorp contractors cooking of in the fire.

That was a crazy and sad day...

JHC
09-19-09, 15:04
Yes that was Steve Osborne. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31692-2004Oct14.html

I recall the testamonials carried locally as to his patriotism and call to serve.
Details about him at this link:
http://www.securityinfonet.com/IMO/IMO_SSG_Osborne.htm