Feral Jundi

Friday, November 7, 2008

News: Contractors and Obama, By David Isenberg

Filed under: News — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 10:07 PM

   Well here is that analysis I was talking about.  Check out what David had to say about Obama and contractors.  And as a disclaimer, I did not coordinate this with the guy, so I think it is pretty funny that he came out with this after I mentioned it a couple posts back. I am glad though that someone else besides me, is looking into the industry’s future under Obama. 

   So what is new?  Well, it sounds like Obama doesn’t have an issue with us.  He just wants more accountability, and I actually like that.  I think our industry does need more oversight. And I am not saying that we should be micromanaged to death by the government.  I am just saying give us some direction and some guidance is all.  Spell out exactly the terms, and get some of the ‘gray areas’ out of the industry that tend to give pause to those that have been critical.  The more the government can legitimize and give guidance to our industry, the happier the client(which is the government) will be.  

    I also like the fact that Obama wants to increase funding to DoS.  Today’s wars are not just a military battle.  It also requires a massive diplomatic effort.  And if the military is busy with other stuff, then security for DoS will have to come from contractors. I am sure the WPPS companies out there are pleased with that.

   On the down side, I was not aware of the provisions in the 2009 Defense Authorization Act.  The one I clued in on, was section 832.  It is a call for the military to do the security jobs that contractors have been fulfilling. Or if contractors are needed, that the decision to use us will be based on the discretion of the ‘relevant combatant command’. 

(more…)

Friday, October 31, 2008

Industry Talk: More SOFA Stuff–David Isenberg Reports

Filed under: Industry Talk,Iraq — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 5:57 PM

     Ok, this is cool.  I am glad that David Isenberg is trying to add some clarity to this thing.  He kind of echoes a few of the points that have been covered here on FJ.  I am just glad that this story is getting the attention it needs, so that guys know what to expect and how to deal with it.  –Head Jundi 

—————————————————————–

Dogs of War: Losing sleep over SOFA

Private military contractors fret over Iraqi-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement

By DAVID ISENBERG

Published: Oct. 31, 2008 at 7:43 PM

 

WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 (UPI) — If, as now seems possible, Iraq and the United States cannot finalize a Status of Forces Agreement governing U.S. troops there, private military contractors will be sighing in relief.

The agreement, known as SOFA, is basically a document signed by a country and a foreign nation stationing military forces there. The SOFA is intended to clarify the terms under which the foreign military is allowed to operate. Typically, purely military issues such as the locations of bases and access

to facilities are covered by separate agreements. The SOFA is more concerned with the legal issues associated with military individuals and property. 

At the end of the Cold War, the United States had permanent status of forces agreements with approximately 40 countries. Today the number has grown to more than 90, meaning the United States has agreements with 46 percent of the more than 190 nation-states comprising the world community. 

The Iraq SOFA covers everything from prosecuting violations of law to establishing operational command and a deadline for withdrawal. The United States wanted it to be completed before Dec. 31, when the United Nations mandate, Security Council Resolution 1790, covering the presence of foreign troops in Iraq expires.

Without a signed SOFA, U.S. troops will lack legal authority to remain in Iraq. U.S. officials say they would have to cease operations and confine troops to bases unless some other arrangement, such as an extension of the U.N. mandate, could be worked out.

(more…)

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Industry Talk: Logistics And Building the AK-47 of Facilities

Filed under: Industry Talk — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 1:15 PM

     This was a great little article about a topic we hear little of.  When Iraq finishes up, what are we going to do with all that stuff over there?  Personally, I would like to see us re-use most of that equipment, and take it into our other theaters of operation.  Unfortunately, cost will dictate what we do with these items.  The question to ask, is it more beneficial to scrap or sell that stuff locally, or pay the costs in fuel and shipping to get it to another location and reuse it?  My thoughts are that we should be reusing this stuff, but the fact of the matter is is that a lot of stuff was built by the lowest bidder and is just crap.  The parts on these facilities are substandard and are not universally used on all equipment, and the facilities themselves are not really quality products that could be used long term.  Which brings me to my next point.

      Equipment we use in the war zones should be built to last, and built to be reusable and interchangeable with other equipment.  I like the Southwest Airlines concept of one plane, one set of parts, and universal maintenance and knowledge about that plane.  We should be applying the same concept to logistics in today’s wars.  If we are using ten different types of tents, then that requires ten different types of parts, and a repair facility that knows how to repair all ten.  Same thing with trailer facilities over in Iraq.

     The shower trailers, for example, should all be constructed to the same standard and design specifications.  The intent is that a repair specialist(military or civilian)in Al Asad Air Base should be able to check out a Balad Air Base shower trailer and say this is familiar and I can repair this.  That they have the parts available, because the parts are universally used throughout the world.  The designs should be simple, durable, dependable, transportable, and have parts that are interchangeable with other units.  We should be making shower trailers and other facilities more like the AK-47 Assault Rifle.  It would cost less in the long run, it would free up the time of the military or civilians tasked with repairing these things, and this equipment could follow us where ever we go out there.  And I don’t see this war ending anytime soon. The concept of the Forward Operating Base(FOB) or mini-camp will continue to be a common theme, and especially if our generals continue pounding on the theme of not commuting to your office.  Small camps are essential to fighting in today’s 4th and 5th generation type wars.

(more…)

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Video: The Riz Khan Show- David Isenberg and Jeremy Scahill on Private Security Contractors

Filed under: Video — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 11:23 AM

   In this two part video series, I wanted to put this up for anyone that is interested in hearing the latest arguments ‘for’ or ‘against’ the use of private security contractors throughout the world.  Jeremy Schahill is obviously the ‘against’ side of the argument, and David Isenberg is arguing ‘for’.  

 

    I have read a ton of stuff from David, and he has been very involved with writing about the industry.  With Jeremy, I have skimmed through his book about Blackwater and I have read a couple of his articles.  Both of these men are extremely knowledgeable about the industry, although I have caught several mistakes in Jeremy’s book and had it very subjective feel to it. Either way, it was interesting to hear both men give their side of the issue with Mr. Khan moderating. 

(more…)

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Industry Talk: Is Africa The Future of the Industry?

Filed under: Africa,Industry Talk — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 11:18 AM

    I particularly liked the last sentence in this story.  I would certainly like to see that materialize and Africa needs all the help it can get.  If you were to just look at the Sudan, you could see that if a external security force, there to keep the peace, would have saved lives.  Versus Hollywood’s approach of throw money and celebrities at the problem, yet do nothing to actually stop the crime.  Like in Iraq, it takes boots on the ground, to keep the peace, and the Private Military Industry can provide that service. –Head Jundi   

———————————————————- 

Dogs of War: Back to Africa

Published: May 30, 2008 at 5:40 PM

By DAVID ISENBERG

WASHINGTON, May 30 (UPI) — Where does the future lie for the private military industry? Those who watch the industry closely have noted it tends to migrate periodically. In the beginning, mirroring human evolution, the industry emerged in Africa. The progenitor for many of today’s private security firms was the South Africa-based Executive Outcomes, which fought in Angola and Sierra Leone. (Incidentally, those truly interested in what this legendary firm did and how it worked should read the book published last year, “Executive Outcomes: Against All Odds,” by its founder, Eben Barlow.) After that, companies like U.S.-based Military Professional Resources Inc. worked in the Balkans, first for Croatia and then for Bosnia. And after that came Iraq, the mother of all private military contracting opportunities. But someday, regardless of who wins the presidential election in November, even Iraq is going to draw to a close. (more…)

« Newer Posts

Powered by WordPress