$15 Billion Unaccounted for in Iraq

[AllieBaba]

The onus is on you to state your own case, not on those who disagree with you to prove the negative.

State your case.

 

[BrianH]

Yes it certainly does. If you do not think it does, state your case. Simple as that.

The push towards privatizations remains the idea of a band of bumbling civilian and military individuals who sold the idea of the "all volunteer" army to the government as way to shed a few layers of skin.

What it really was, was a giant rip-off.

Private armies are very much a part of the armed effort of the United States. No matter what you think, when most Iraqis see a convoy carrying the insignia of Blackwater corp, they do not differentiate. They are still American to the Iraqi eyes and they are here because Washington sent them to Iraq and they are part of the war effort wroguht on Iraqi by the Americans.

These private armies are run and owned by high ranking civilian and military guys who saw the potential to make billions by fleecing US taxpayers. They had all the right friends, and all the right connections.

Like I said, private armies are very much a part of the "all volunteer" model whether you like it or not.

I'll first say that since you have made this claim, it is your job to post your proof and prove your position.

Second, I'll prove my case: THE U.S. Military does not dictate where it's funds come from, they do not make decisions on where they are to wage war, they have nothing to do with policy regarding private armies, in fact, the military hates private armies like blackwater. Since when to we let Iraqi view of blackwater effect an interpretation of the military??

you can dance around this all day long if you want. The problem with your claim is that it, in no way, reflects the effectiveness or decision making abilities of the U.S. Military. Your evidence reflects the inability of politicians and Congress to effectively fund and make policy for the U.S. military. Do you think that the U.S. military invented the "Don't shoot first" mentality of the "rules of engagement"? I highly doubt it and in fact would put money on the Geneva convention for that. The distribution of funds and burden of tax-payers have nothing to do with personell in the military and whether or not they are doing a good job. As far as the draft goes, it makes no sense to replace the all volunteer army with the same number of consrcripts. All you are doing is swapping out personnel...they'll still need the same equipment and supplies....

You have no idea what your even talking about. Your conlcusion does not represent the information or "evidence" that you claim you have.

 

[cbi0090]

Wow.

I wish you had bothered to read the article. Your post has nothing to do with the claims made in the article especially the part about "Remember our troops are taught to be soldiers not accountants."

Read the article.

Actually, I did and the point was that if there is anyone screwed up in this mess it's the Government Accounting Office. It's like the kettle calling the pot black. If you want to find something wrong that anyone is doing just start looking at their finances. They'll be so messed up you can interpret or twist them any way you want. That's why anytime I hear something about how some governmental agencies books aren't balancing I have to laugh.

 

[Gunny]

Actually, I did and the point was that if there is anyone screwed up in this mess it's the Government Accounting Office. It's like the kettle calling the pot black. If you want to find something wrong that anyone is doing just start looking at their finances. They'll be so messed up you can interpret or twist them any way you want. That's why anytime I hear something about how some governmental agencies books aren't balancing I have to laugh.

This idjit just has a hard-on for the military. I suspect he tried to join and was found wanting. This is the third thread in which he has talked straight out his ass, been shot down by everyone that cared to barring guest appearances from other boards to lay some smack on him.

You can put what he knows about the military in a shot glass and still have room for an ounce of alcohol.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Actually, I did and the point was that if there is anyone screwed up in this mess it's the Government Accounting Office.

And how do you think the GAO screwed up?

 

[BrianH]

Yeah TGS, just do what you best....ignore the people that prove you wrong. Since you're still in college, I'll give you some advice. You gripe and complain about others not discussing things rationally, yet, you double the irrationality of this board. Not only have you been proven wrong on numerous occasions, but you refuse to admit it. When you are proven wrong,your first inclination is to start calling people liears, then you just start ignoring posts after they put you in your place. If you really want to be as smart as you believe you are, start learning how to frickin interpret information correctly, and don't sit there and act like you're more intelligent than everyone else. No one likes a "know-it-all", especially one that acts like a "know-it-all" but really doesn't know jack. The problem you have is letting your biased emotion dictate what you find. IMO, you're someone who already has his mind made up, but is looking for information that will lead to a desired result, while casting all other information aside. You may think I'm some kind of internet personality (which is typically your only defense most of the time--and not to mention your right to have an opinion) but before you go around throwing blind accusations, ask yourself if there's any credentials you bring to the table? Degrees? Certifications? ???
By the way, your rep is really low, which doesn't mean that people don't like you. It means that they obviously know that you're full of crap 99% of the time.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Yeah TGS, just do what you best....ignore the people that prove you wrong. Since you're still in college, I'll give you some advice. You gripe and complain about others not discussing things rationally, yet, you double the irrationality of this board. Not only have you been proven wrong on numerous occasions, but you refuse to admit it. When you are proven wrong,your first inclination is to start calling people liears, then you just start ignoring posts after they put you in your place. If you really want to be as smart as you believe you are, start learning how to frickin interpret information correctly, and don't sit there and act like you're more intelligent than everyone else. No one likes a "know-it-all", especially one that acts like a "know-it-all" but really doesn't know jack. The problem you have is letting your biased emotion dictate what you find. IMO, you're someone who already has his mind made up, but is looking for information that will lead to a desired result, while casting all other information aside. You may think I'm some kind of internet personality (which is typically your only defense most of the time--and not to mention your right to have an opinion) but before you go around throwing blind accusations, ask yourself if there's any credentials you bring to the table? Degrees? Certifications? ???
By the way, your rep is really low, which doesn't mean that people don't like you. It means that they obviously know that you're full of crap 99% of the time.

Try sticking to the issue instead of obsessing over me.

 

[BrianH]

Try sticking to the issue instead of obsessing over me.

I've stuck to the issue several times, and you've chosen to ignore it. You chastise everyone else in here about their intellectual abilities and you still fail to acknowledge your own intellectual faults. Instead of posting a nice long message debating my position, you've chosen to type a 10-word statement that really shows your own ignorance.

For the record, I'm not obsessed with you, I'm obsessed with making you look like an ass. Of course it's not that hard.....

Oh and BTW, nice dodge again.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

I've stuck to the issue several times, and you've chosen to ignore it. You chastise everyone else in here about their intellectual abilities and you still fail to acknowledge your own intellectual faults. Instead of posting a nice long message debating my position, you've chosen to type a 10-word statement that really shows your own ignorance.

For the record, I'm not obsessed with you, I'm obsessed with making you look like an ass. Of course it's not that hard.....

Oh and BTW, nice dodge again.

My points remain astonishingly clear and so does the source.

Find fault with the GAO conclusions or do not. Highlight their legitimate points or do not. Provide a report with equal or greater prestige then the general accounting office, or do not. Substantiate your claim that an all volunteer army "functions" more efficiently than its opposite or does not.

Typing how you "owned" me or about "loving to kick my ass, or make me look like an ass" reveals a side the keen observer can only characterize as bizarre.

No rational being would ever level akward proclamations of victory towards the person whom one engages in conversation.

It is coarse and it is queer.

 

[BrianH]

My points remain astonishingly clear and so does the source.

Find fault with the GAO conclusions or do not. Highlight their legitimate points or do not. Provide a report with equal or greater prestige then the general accounting office, or do not. Substantiate your claim that an all volunteer army "functions" more efficiently than its opposite or does not.

Typing how you "owned" me or about "loving to kick my ass, or make me look like an ass" reveals a side the keen observer can only characterize as bizarre.

No rational being would ever level akward proclamations of victory towards the person whom one engages in conversation.

It is coarse and it is queer.

You are the only one on this board who thinks your points are clear. Everyone else would agree that your points are "astonishingly" coming from your ass.

See, your problem is always assuming that someone else has the job of substantiating a specific claim that they've never made. This is typical TGS bullshit. You always make a very specific claim and act as if the evidence suggests your conclusion. 9 times out of 10, your conclusion does not represent the information and or any reports that you post. When you make a claim, it is your job to prove it, end of story. It is not others' job to prove your claim, but your own. You can't even prove your case to numerous normal human-beings on this thread. You pass yourself off as the all knowing and a college intellectual prodigy when you are only in fact a biased researching goon who thinks he's better than everyone else cause he's in Canada going to school.

No rational human being would ever engage in a debate without having all of his facts straight either. Do you think your rep points are low because everyone simply just doesn't like you??? Or do you think maybe it has something to do with all of the bull shit that spews from your tiny brain....?



As far as the actual topic goes....I've stated the fualts of your conclusion numerous times....
1.) The military does not make financial decisions in regards to limitations of their budget.

2.) The military does not make decisions on where they are to wage wars.

3.) The military does not enact legislation or policy with regards to where their funding comes from.

4. The military does not enact legislation or policy with regards to privately operated armies such as Blackwater and other mercanries.

5. The military has nothing to do with foreign policy or anything enacted there of.


Basic fact: The military is given a mission, (whatever that may be) and they complete the mission. Any qualms you have with the reasons for war, the conduction of the war, the foreign policy regarding the war, does not rest at the feet of the military. They are trained to do their job, when they are given orders from their commanders <---who get orders from Congress and the President---they carry out those orders....99% of the time with success.

It's also funny how you will stoop to call our all volunteer army a disaster when it is the most effective fighting force on the frickin planet. Now am I saying that there aren't things that could use improvement?...no. There are things that could use a fine "tweaking" but then again, so does your intellectual abilities.

"You are the scum between my toes, I hate your stinkin guts, You make me vomit."

 

[cbi0090]

And how do you think the GAO screwed up?

You would have to have some first hand experience I suppose but let's try by looking at our tax laws, as an example. Now they don't have anything to do with it but they have grown in the same manner. The sets of rules (please note: plural) surrounding how they conduct themselves and others makes our tax laws look like a comic book. The politicians have had their hands in the GAO's inner workings for so long there is very little left that follows a course of normal rational thought.
I've done projects for state and federal governments. When you price work for the federal government you have to include lots and lots of time for accounting and finance. It's not a simple "I do the work and bill you for the hours" deal. There are overhead issues, which is huge!! Unbelievable!! Expenses? I wouldn't know where to begin. Rates? You'd think that was pretty cut and dry? Hah! Then you have subcontractors??? These are not just your usual subs, NO, they have be minority owned, women owned, disabled, disadvantaged, native american, etc. The list is endless and they have to get a very specific percentage and, of course, they have to also follow all the rules and you have to make sure they do.
I would charge the feds easily three times what I'd charge a state agency to do the same thing just to cover all the unknowns related to keeping the books straight. And it is a BIG unknown. Remember the $300 wrenches?
The states can get crazy too, but nothing close to the feds, although California and New York are trying very hard.

 

[Gunny]

Try sticking to the issue instead of obsessing over me.

Try addressing the issue with actual facts instead of some stupid, kneejerk reaction, or doing exactly as he says ... ignoring the people who shoot you down.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

You would have to have some first hand experience I suppose but let's try by looking at our tax laws, as an example. Now they don't have anything to do with it but they have grown in the same manner. The sets of rules (please note: plural) surrounding how they conduct themselves and others makes our tax laws look like a comic book. The politicians have had their hands in the GAO's inner workings for so long there is very little left that follows a course of normal rational thought.
I've done projects for state and federal governments. When you price work for the federal government you have to include lots and lots of time for accounting and finance. It's not a simple "I do the work and bill you for the hours" deal. There are overhead issues, which is huge!! Unbelievable!! Expenses? I wouldn't know where to begin. Rates? You'd think that was pretty cut and dry? Hah! Then you have subcontractors??? These are not just your usual subs, NO, they have be minority owned, women owned, disabled, disadvantaged, native american, etc. The list is endless and they have to get a very specific percentage and, of course, they have to also follow all the rules and you have to make sure they do.
I would charge the feds easily three times what I'd charge a state agency to do the same thing just to cover all the unknowns related to keeping the books straight. And it is a BIG unknown. Remember the $300 wrenches?
The states can get crazy too, but nothing close to the feds, although California and New York are trying very hard.

Your post is a winded rant. Very boring, contrived and unappealing.

You are talking absolute nonsense having nothing to do with the pointed claims made the by GAO.

If you do not think the claims are legitimate, then say so and adequately explain why.

 

[Gunny]

Your post is a winded rant. Very boring, contrived and unappealing.

You are talking absolute nonsense having nothing to do with the pointed claims made the by GAO.

If you do not think the claims are legitimate, then say so and adequately explain why.

Where have YOU adequately explained why you believe, iin your OPINION, the claims are legitimate?

Stop disrespecting other members' posts since that is your whining little rant for ignoring anyone who disagrees with you.

Now, you can either stop insulting others and practice what you preach, and address the arguments, or you will be restricted from the threads you cannot behave as an adult in.

If you wish to continue to display your dishonest, insulting and childish behavior, the Flame Zone subforum has been provided for such antics.

If I have not made myself clear feel free to PM with your specific questions.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Still waiting for anyone to address the claims made by the GAO.

 

[BrianH]

Still waiting for anyone to address the claims made by the GAO.

Duh...ok.

From the head of the GAO:

Comptroller General David Walker, who heads the GAO, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday that "the least progress has been made on the political front." Fifteen of 37 cabinet ministers have "withdrawn support" for the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and serious problems remain in other ministries, Walker said.

The most failure is at the POLITICAL level...(Nothing to do with the Military.)

It says the miltary has failed to reach 2 of the 9 goals....wow...that's an overwhelming failure.

And I forgot to ask....since your against the war in Iraq so much (which is obviously driving your opinions of the military) how is it that the "failure" in Iraq applies to the military in Germany, Japan, U.S., Phillipines, Korea, and other nations??? You seem to be taking downfalls of one military conflict, and applying it to the entire armed forces.........you seem to possess Larkinn's aspirations of generalizations.


What a giant dog-turd you are.....(Shemptard)

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Duh...ok.

From the head of the GAO:

Comptroller General David Walker, who heads the GAO, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday that "the least progress has been made on the political front." Fifteen of 37 cabinet ministers have "withdrawn support" for the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and serious problems remain in other ministries, Walker said.

The most failure is at the POLITICAL level...(Nothing to do with the Military.)

It says the miltary has failed to reach 2 of the 9 goals....wow...that's an overwhelming failure.

And I forgot to ask....since your against the war in Iraq so much (which is obviously driving your opinions of the military) how is it that the "failure" in Iraq applies to the military in Germany, Japan, U.S., Phillipines, Korea, and other nations??? You seem to be taking downfalls of one military conflict, and applying it to the entire armed forces.........you seem to possess Larkinn's aspirations of generalizations.


What a giant dog-turd you are.....(Shemptard)

As usual, I haven't a clue what this bizarre rant is supposed to be about.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

As far as the actual topic goes....I've stated the fualts of your conclusion numerous times....
1.) The military does not make financial decisions in regards to limitations of their budget.

2.) The military does not make decisions on where they are to wage wars.

3.) The military does not enact legislation or policy with regards to where their funding comes from.

4. The military does not enact legislation or policy with regards to privately operated armies such as Blackwater and other mercanries.

5. The military has nothing to do with foreign policy or anything enacted there of.

The GAO's claims are brutally clear and none have anything to do with whatever the hell you posted above. As usual, you're arguing a position I have never challenged.

Well sir, since you cannot read worth a damn, let me spell it out for you.

The GAO claims the safeguards put in place to prevent such wanton theft and corruption were deliberately circumvented. You have not commented on this issue - the core issue of the article - because you are too busy inventing straw man arguments and obsessing over me.

Contrary to whatever runs through that lizard brain of yours, military men absolutely have a lot to with financial decisions.

Military men absolutely make decisions on where and when to wage wars.

Military men absolutely disproportionately influence legislation and policy directly concerning budgetary issues and private armies.

Military men have a hell of a lot to do with foreign policy as well.

Everything you stated in the above post is actually the opposite of what remains emblematic of the comings and goings of the real world.

The All volunteer model has been a disaster for the military and more importantly for the United States.

There existed, and still exist a group of military and civilian men with direct and indirect stakes in firms like Blackwater pimping the modern AVA model and the outsourcing of jobs. They said "Don't worry Rummy, 125,000 troops will be enough!"

But it wasn't enough, not even close.

Instead, the taxpayers got hosed, the "right" people got all the fat contracts and the military and the country remain mired in a crappy desert.

The United States sacrificed too much of its prestige for a military model that remains more of a liability than a strength.

This essentially speaks to what the "all volunteer army" is really about: a giant ripoff masquerading as a patriotic and legitimate organizational push to transform the military. And the most culpable are certain high ranking military men and their civilian counterparts who've elected to hijack the military with the "all-volunteer army" bullshit.

Consequently, you may think I carry an extreme view but I do not. Discussion concerning the negatives of the all volunteer army remains frequently mentioned among military academic circles. It is not a new or fresh topic.

In fact, published papers from military academics addressing this very topic can be found.

I don't even think you knew such academic papers discussing this topic existed. Thats how uninformed you remain and thats how willingly you suffer to play the court jester.

Why bother to do the research? Why tinker with the fascinating or wrestle with the significant when its so much easier to type "I powned you" and relish the role of a clown.

 

[Gunny]

The GAO's claims are brutally clear and none have anything to do with whatever the hell you posted above. A usual, you're arguing a position I have never challenged.

Well sir, since you cannot read worth a damn, let me spell it out for you.

The GAO claims the safeguards put in place to prevent such wanton theft and corruption were deliberately circumvented. You have not commented on this issue - the core issue of the article - because you are too busy inventing straw man arguments and obsessing over me.

Contrary to whatever runs through that lizard brain of yours, military men absolutely have a lot to with financial decisions.

Military men absolutely make decisions on where and when to wage wars.

Military men absolutely disproportionately influence legislation and policy directly concerning budgetary issues and private armies.

Military men have a hell of a lot to do with foreign policy as well.

Everything you stated in the above post is actually the opposite of what remains emblematic of the comings and goings of the real world.

The All volunteer model has been a disaster for the military and more importantly for the United States.

There existed and still exist a group of military and civilian men with direct and indirect stakes in firms like Blackwater pimping the modern AVA model and the outsourcing of jobs. They said "Don't worry Rummy, 125,000 troops will be enough!"

But it wasn't enough, not even close. Instead, the taxpayers got hosed, the "right" people got all the fat contracts and the military and the country remain mired in a crappy desert.

The United States sacrificed too much of its prestige for a military model that remains more of a liability than a strength.

This is essentially speaks to what the "all volunteer army" is really about: a giant ripoff masquerading as a patriotic and legitimate organizational push to transform the military. And the most culpable are certain high ranking military men and their civilian counterparts who've elected to hijack the military with the "all-volunteer army" bullshit.

Consequently, you may think I carry an extreme view but I do not. Discussion concerning the negatives of the all volunteer army remains frequently mentioned among military academic circles. It is not a new or fresh topic.

In fact, published papers from military academics addressing this very topic can be found.

I don't even think you knew such academic papers discussing this topic existed. Thats how uninformed you remain and thats how willingly you suffer to play the court jester.

Why bother to do the research? Why tinker with the fascinating or wrestle with the significant when its so much easier to type "I powned you" and relish the role of a clown.

Dude, you don't even own yourself. You've been owned by everyone in this thread. This piece of drivel here is a perfect example. Nothing but opinion and rhetoric based on what can only be assumed is your imagination.

You have no argument. You refuse to respond to anyone that does. Your behavior is on the level of a junior-high-school student.

 

[BrianH]

The GAO's claims are brutally clear and none have anything to do with whatever the hell you posted above. As usual, you're arguing a position I have never challenged.

Well sir, since you cannot read worth a damn, let me spell it out for you.

The GAO claims the safeguards put in place to prevent such wanton theft and corruption were deliberately circumvented. You have not commented on this issue - the core issue of the article - because you are too busy inventing straw man arguments and obsessing over me.

Contrary to whatever runs through that lizard brain of yours, military men absolutely have a lot to with financial decisions.

Military men absolutely make decisions on where and when to wage wars.

Military men absolutely disproportionately influence legislation and policy directly concerning budgetary issues and private armies.

Military men have a hell of a lot to do with foreign policy as well.

Everything you stated in the above post is actually the opposite of what remains emblematic of the comings and goings of the real world.

The All volunteer model has been a disaster for the military and more importantly for the United States.

There existed, and still exist a group of military and civilian men with direct and indirect stakes in firms like Blackwater pimping the modern AVA model and the outsourcing of jobs. They said "Don't worry Rummy, 125,000 troops will be enough!"

But it wasn't enough, not even close.

Instead, the taxpayers got hosed, the "right" people got all the fat contracts and the military and the country remain mired in a crappy desert.

The United States sacrificed too much of its prestige for a military model that remains more of a liability than a strength.

This essentially speaks to what the "all volunteer army" is really about: a giant ripoff masquerading as a patriotic and legitimate organizational push to transform the military. And the most culpable are certain high ranking military men and their civilian counterparts who've elected to hijack the military with the "all-volunteer army" bullshit.

Consequently, you may think I carry an extreme view but I do not. Discussion concerning the negatives of the all volunteer army remains frequently mentioned among military academic circles. It is not a new or fresh topic.

In fact, published papers from military academics addressing this very topic can be found.

I don't even think you knew such academic papers discussing this topic existed. Thats how uninformed you remain and thats how willingly you suffer to play the court jester.

Why bother to do the research? Why tinker with the fascinating or wrestle with the significant when its so much easier to type "I powned you" and relish the role of a clown.

Let me post it again for you Shemptard....

Comptroller General David Walker, who heads the GAO, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday that "the least progress has been made on the political front." Fifteen of 37 cabinet ministers have "withdrawn support" for the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and serious problems remain in other ministries, Walker said.

The stupid bull shit you are finding in your drawers and posting on this thread have nothing to do with whether or not the volunteer army has been a disaster. Whether you have a volunteer force or a conscripted force, the same people will be making the decisions. All you are doing is replacing a force of people who volunteer with a force of people who don't volunteer. You still need the same supplies, equipment, training, etc....You're also adding money to the personnel charged with tracking down AWOLs and Draft Dodgers.

Shemptard, how'd that Ice Melt again?

You're one of those people who believes it because "it's in a book" aren't you.


And for the record, you haven't owned shit. What you do own, is a dumbass conclusion and shit for brains. Those, definately belong to you.