In my last post, I was appalled that we were still so "at war." But even more, why does it cost so much more with so many fewer soldiers than, for example, Viet Nam? Carl suggested it was paying all of those contractors:
I think we might have to ask Halliburton. If we got hold of the part of the graph that was accounted for in payments to civilian contract organizations, it might shed some light. We also have, I think, to question the costs of the "all volunteer" model. The Army likes this because they have more managerial leverage on day-to-day operations and personnel ‘administration’. They have shed lots of the work that they used to have to do themselves because, after all, they are a professional Army and they are trained to do particular things. They have civilians to clean the barracks for example; basic and not-too-costly in itself but perhaps reflective of managerial and executive behavior all the way up the line. I don’t know this for sure and haven’t figured out how to get hold of the data. I also know that officers in the line, in both Iraq and Afghanistan, have been furnished with large discretionary budgets to throw at local development initiatives, like paying money to tribal chiefs for participating in a jirga or buying infrastructure projects in Baghdad neighborhoods.
It’s a good thought, but it’s not easy to figure out how to look at it. Here’s a weak start:
This is the overall military budget somewhat broken down. The increase in the War years sure isn’t for personnel, it’s for "Operation and Maintenance" and "Procurement." I expects that hints at Carl’s point, but since it’s snowing briskly outside, I expect that I’ll be looking for some more refined accounting of the military budget to pass a wintery evening [after the opening ceremony]. Hoorah for the cut in 2009 [whoever did it]…
By the way, that crazy bump in the 80’s was Reagan feeding the Military-Industrial Complex…
UPDATE: How about this? Contractors’ Support of U.S. Operations in Iraq, 2008, Congressional Budget Office. The cost analysis is pretty sketchy, but this table adapted from the report is a telling:
From 2003 through 2007, U.S. agencies awarded $85 billion in contracts for work to be principally performed in the Iraq theater, accounting for almost 20 percent of funding for operations in Iraq… More than 70 percent of those awards were for contracts performed in Iraq itself.
You’re all over this Mickey! A 43% increase in the number of contractors over ‘Nam. Moreover, they are doing things, e.g. Blackwater, that combatants,once we’ve decided to fight, should be doing. They are driving supply convoys for goodness sakes and the poor sots doing the driving are doing that because they lost their jobs in Paducah and have to support their families.