Why the Department of Defense Will Seize No Easy Day Profits & Not Prosecute

 @SEAL76  @Contagio Still doubt anything comes of it, at least not in the too near future.

 @Icegator  @Contagio He is still in trouble because of the NDA. Oh well I hope he thought of that before.

 @SEAL76 @Contagio 

Yeah, that was my contention from day one, he stole Obama's thunder and even reversed a few beliefs about the raid.

Also wouldn't doubt if a few in D.C. had books in the works and where beat to the punch. Any books released now will sell fewer copies than N.E.D.

Sour grapes and they can't do shit about it, small piece of justice IMHO! :)

 @SEAL76  BTW all of the terrorists recieved training in Afghanistan.  It isn't mentioned much because it conflicts with the narrative but it's true.  They were also directed in Afghanistan just like our operational planning might happen in theatre, the direction comes from DC.

"He is dead.  Game over?"  You do realize the attacks in Libya were AQ right?  You do realize that the Times Square bomber got his training in Pakistan.  He would have gotten it in Afghanistan otherwise and not been rushed if it was available. 

No doubt  the areas we've been fighting have tribal tendencies.  That does not abdicate the Gov't and military's responsibility to protect us.  I would agree that the war has not been waged the most efficiently because of a desire to do it on the cheap and not adrdress issues like Pakistan that should have been addressed long ago.  That doesn't provide an excuse to quit the fight early.  There's no time limit on "support & sdefend the constitution".  Leaving to go back in the future only means we'll have less friends when we go back and it will be harder.   

 @majrod  @SEAL76 You are correct that no attack has come out of Afghanistan since we invaded. Mission Accomplished. The attacks of 9/1101 came from the USA planned and financed by UBL who was in Astan, He is dead. Game over. Afghanistan and Iraq are nations where family and tribal loyalties are the most important relationships. Centralized governments don't work well in that environment. Sub-Saharan Africa is the best example of the same situation. Take a look at the former Yugoslavia after Tito. That whole thing went south. I promise you that the current Iraqi government will do their best to cleanse Iraq of the Kurds ASAP. Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis etc will remain at each other's throats for years to come. We took out the bad guys in both countries and it's time to come home. We have no business telling others how to run their countries. Hell look at our own country and Europe. Not a pretty sight.

 @SEAL76  @majrod Eric Prince started out rich so not so much from the ground up, and didn't he leave the teams before his five years were up?  Is that a thing?  I always thought Blackwater had some sort of unmentioned backing.  It did sort of seem to come from no where, from the ground up.

 @SEAL76  Nazis are stilll around.  Did we lose WWII?

No attack on the US has come out of Afghanistan since we invaded. The Taliban (which is really Pakistan) no longer rules Afghanistan.  Saddam is gone.  Iraq has a fledgling Democracy (only the second in the region).

 I don't think its over (Radical Islam is still out there) but what's your point?  Why are you so motivated to embrace defeat?

 @majrod If we were victorious in Afghanistan and Iraq what did we win? The Taliban, and Al Queada are still around. Iraq is now buddy buddy with Iran. I don't see a clear victory. We aren't getting Oil from Iraq and the Kurds are in jeopardy

 @majrod If we were victorious in Iraq what did we win? The same question  applies to Afghanistan.

 @majrod  @HugeFan  @RVN SF VET  We are not capable of making the decision as to what countries can function as a democracy. Education is a key ingredient in a democratic society. Also the desire for a centralized government is a requirement. Tribal societies don't seem to handle that well.

 @HugeFan  @majrod  @RVN SF VET  @SEAL76 I agree a direct democracy would be difficult if not impossible. That is why we elect "leaders" and I use that term for identification purposes only. Our senate and house have not show real leadership for a long time. I do not like the electoral college though. For some reason it just seems archaic and makes me feel like the popular vote doesn't count. As for who is ready for democracy that is not the USA's call.  Nation building simply doesn't work in societies that are tribalistic and uneducated. It worked in Germany and Japan because they were educated, had an existing infrastructure such as it was and had homogeneous populations.

 @majrod  @RVN SF VET  @SEAL76 LOL, My point was that while a republic(yes, like ours) has democratic principles, no it is not a strict democracy. A "true" democracy is much less efficient because their is no order if 370 million Americans had a direct say as opposed to the Greco-Roman concept of congress and Senate, where representatives distilled the desires of their constituency into a political platform. I wasn't really trying to say anything other than get it out there that there are misconceptions as to our actual governance. Wasn't looking for a fight because nothing I said was incorrect. Just wanted to add a bit of academia to what I felt was very intellectual exchange between yourself and SEAL76.

"My bigger point was we shouldn't decide who's ready for democracy or not nor are we responsible for spreading it all over the world."

AGREED!

 @HugeFan  Don't understand your point.  Are you saying the Romans weren't a democracy?  (We also have a Republic, does that mean we aren't a democracy?)

Interestingly the Afghans in certain areas actually practice a primitive form of democracy e.g jirgas.  I don't think that would meet SEAL76's standard of "democracy".

My bigger point was we shouldn't decide who's ready for democracy or not nor are we responsible for spreading it all over the world.

@RVN SF VET  @SEAL76

 @majrod  @RVN SF VET  @SEAL76 Correction: Rome for the most part was a republic established upon Greco democratic principles. Ancient Greece was made up of hundreds of city states, of which Athens was the only "true" practitioner of democracy. I say true in that literally a town hall would consist of thousands of citizens(adult male, ethnically pure, landowners) with an audible vote. Check this book out: "First Democracy: The Challenge of an Ancient Idea" by University of Texas professor Paul Woodruff. Outstanding bit of philosophical history.

 @RVN SF VET  The greeks and the Romans were pre medieval and both had Democracy. 

I don't think we should be in the position of determining who deserves a democracy but I also don't think its our job to spread it.

 @SEAL76

 @SEAL76  @majrod "The Afghans and Iraqis don't want to change and we are not ever going to fix that."

I couldn't agree more. once we found Saddam and he was tried and hung; we should have unassed the country. It was a fairly advanced society and they were capable  of picking their own government and allocating their own resources. We should have left right after Saddam was hung.

In more primitive Afghanistan, we should have left right after Tota Bora; leaving the Northern Alliance in charge of Kabul and the Pashtun areas to themselves. We could always operate out of the Northern Alliance area to kill terrorists. Medieval people aren't ready for democracy.

 @SEAL76  Well what can I tell you.  Many historians disagree with how the Pacific was fought and felt the Island hopping campaign was a waste of resources and lives yet we had two different commanders and approaches. 

BTW, we did fight and win arguably in both countries.  (Saddam and the Taliban did fall.)

If you doubted invading Iraq at the time you were one of the very few.  Maybe 10% or 20% felt that way at the time.  I felt very much the same about Libya.  Go figure. 

 @majrod  @SEAL76 He was our buddy when he went up against Iran. We can't have it both ways. I don't see Saddam as anywhere near as dangerous as Hitler and his henchmen. When he was shooting at our airmen in the no fly zone perhaps we should have sent a clear message and took out his entire air defense system then and there. That was my take at the time. Invading Iraq at the time puzzled me. We had a war in Afghanistan that was not anywhere near close to being won and Bush decided it would be a great idea to start another war. Our military hasn't  had the capability to fight two wars simultaneously for a long time yet he tried anyway. Personally I don't think we should fight wars to bring democracy to a country.We should fight them to destroy the enemy. We need to use overwhelming force to do that. Screw nation building. The Afghans and Iraqis don't want to change and we are not ever going to fix that.

 @SEAL76  Saddam may have not been a threat to the physical US but he was a threat to peace in the region and our interests.  During WWII Nazi Germany had limited to no capability to impact the states  yet he was a threat.  Saddam was shooting at our airmen and the attempted assasination of a former president is no laughing matter (that alone is enough for an act of war).

The truth is after 911 Saddam actually allowed AQ operatives refuge in Iraq.  That's not a big leap to a partnership with a common enemy.

Anyway you slice it Saddam was bad news.

 @majrod  @SEAL76 Never thought of Sadam Hussein as much of a threat. Even though I believe he had some WMD. He and his generals were pretty inept and so there was no way they were going to do much damage. Clinton had ample opportunity to get UBL but treated him and the rest of those jerks like a law enforcement problem rather than a military one.

 @SEAL76  I get accused of making things political so I'm not going to expand on your observations about CICs.  I will say that many that condemn Bush for going into Iraq do some from a position of hindsight.  At the time Iraq was considered a pretty big threat to the world and we were very focused on ensuring our security.  The fact is leaders make decisions with the best info they have.

The same amount of hindsight would clearly say we should have gone into Pakistan after Bin laden and Mullah Omar.

We've had good and crappy CIC's.  I say the serenity prayer an awful lot through gritted teeth. 

I do know that after the hollow army of the 70's, key generals identified the problem and made organizational changes that turned the Army around.  The AAR process for instance didn't always exist.  That same kind of change is needed today.  I always emphasize leadership because good leaders can fix a myriad of problems.  Crappy ones seem to focus on the ones that will make them look better. 

 @majrod The current Commander in Chief lacks a moral compass as did Bill Clinton. Jimmy Carter lacked leadership capability. George H.W. Bush couldn't see the big picture when dealing with Iraq. George W. Bush was also out of his depth when he decided to start a war with Iraq before finishing with Afghanistan. We have had a series of bad C in Cs and Flag rank officers who kissed ass instead of telling the presidents what they needed to hear. The senior leadership of the military seemed to lose focus during the Johnson administration. Probably because of Macnamara and his cronies.

 @SEAL76  I don't disagree that the MICC exists (though I don't think it's this hegemonic monster some seem to believe it is).

My primary focus is on the lack of moral leadership in the services.  It's not good for the nation, services or troops. 

 @majrod  @SEAL76 The truth is the military/industrial complex that President/General Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about is alive and thriving. All branches of our armed forces are being told what to purchase even if they don't want or need it. The system is broken and there is plenty of blame to go around. It won't be fixed until the American people ask for accountability. .

 @majrod  @SEAL76 I agree :-)

 @SEAL76 Most companies start small.

My point is not the rank so much (though I think one always starts at the top if one wants change) as the person/values the organization rewards (vs. what is said to be valued) .  Of course the higher you go the more visible and farther reaching the impact.

You may not believe the problem isn't the same with tactical gear or PMCs but millions of dollars have been spent in those areas.  Have PMCs been used when gov't assets should have been?  Has equipment been bought and issued that isn't needed?  (I know conventional and operators that have been issued numerous boots, gloves etc.)

Again let me stress i don't give a crap about the rank and I would agree when former officers do it the problem is  larger in impact.  My point is the values some of these former leaders live vs. what they extoll.

It's all quite aggravating and the problem needs to be adddressed at the highest grades before one can change organizations.  It's all incredibly hard to do unless there is a major catastrophe.  OPSEC is a great example.  I find it incredibly difficult to make an ecample out of an enlisted man in ST6 if we are willing to let the admiral slide.

 @RVN SF VET  @majrod  @SEAL76 Don't get me wrong here. I do work with lots of competent people. I listed the board of directors for Eid Passport as possibly having connections that have been exploited by Eid Passport for the purpose of garnering a security contract that wasn't very necessary to begin with. The issuance of contractor badges was handled very effectively before with no additional costs passed down to the contractor. It was merely an example what can be construed as cronyism. I feel that a lot of vets honor the spirit of our market and find their niche. SOFREP is an outstanding example of that. Of course, I am biased and it is just my opinion.

 @majrod  @SEAL76 I believe the most severe problem is when a general/flag officer is the program manager on a large services contract and maintains their back channel contacts with Active Duty officers, some of whom are about to retire. On a services contract, the contractor's performance is tangible and subject to review. There are also restrictions on the scope of work. I have heard stories of such contracts in Iraq where the performance is substandard or outside their scope of work and the Program Manager (a general) calls his buddies on Active Duty to cover up the deficiencies to get the contract renewed. In one case, this guy got the O-6 overseeing his contract relieved because he was making waves, His OER w2as changed and that retired general ensured that his career was at an end and his future employ-ability was severely damaged. Pretty vindictive.

So, what's my point? The point is how the retired officer (or NCO) conducts himself in his civilian role. For one year they are prohibited from going back to their old office/unit to drum up business, but then it's Katy bar the door! As majrod points out, what is the service member's motivation while serving? There now appears to be be risk averse behavior in an attempt to ensure promotion. There have been incidents which have come to the public's attention where officers (NOT NCOs) have denied fire support to troops in contact where the troops were at risk of being overrun. They did not believe the commander on the ground who said that innocent civilians were not at risk. Similarly, an aviation fire support request by brigade was denied because the request was on the wrong form. Again, troops in contact. People were putting their careers before the welfare of the troops in a fight. In each instance that I am aware of, an NCO in a TOC had approved the requests and gotten a few rounds out of the tubes before he was countermanded. Different career paths and different ethics..

I do not know how these people live with themselves. What I do know is that this type of officer can make it to general with those same selfish ethics and poor morals intact. It used to be - just don't make waves. Keep your head down, do the work, and don't complain if you want to be promoted. Now it's make zero mistakes at all costs and you will get promoted. Remember, those who get promoted then sit on the promotion boards of those who aspire to follow them. They are looking for those who perform just as they did. IIn such an environment, there is no hope for change. The generals who rotate to industry do not suddenly change when they get there. Lastly, there is a formal network for general and flag officers keeping one another aware of job and consultancy opportunities. One that I saw made it clear that the employer was looking for a GO who could influence a contract and not someone with certain skills. If it didn't involve influence peddling, there would be nothing wrong with it. Retired FBI Agents have such a jobs network and so should other groups of retirees. I do go on!

 @majrod I stand corrected. Flag rank officers have a distinct advantage when it comes to working for big companies. Captains, Colonels, Lt Colonels, Majors, LCDRs and apparently CPOs can also cross over to the civilian corporations and profit from their connection to projects. It is an incestuous relationship when they go to work for the same companies that they were working with while on active duty. Using ones prior military expertise to manufacture or design weapons, body armor, commo gear, medical gear, clothing etc. like  Blackhawk or to start a PMC like Blackwater is similar but not quite the same. The men who started the two companies I mentioned built those companies from the ground up. They had to sell their equipment and operational capability to the government and individual operators themselves. I don't see that as objectionable.

 @SEAL76 I think you meant to say flag rank (generals & admirals) or do you really think lcdrs, cdrs & cpts are unemployable by small businesses?

There's another aspect to this though.  If it's wrong for flag or field grade officers to go to work in their fields is it wrong for special operators to go to work in the tactical equipment and PMC industries?  Don't they provide advantages to the company's they are working for?  This is especially true at the highest level of operators.  Remember Blackwater. 

Personally, I don't think officers (or anyone for that matter) should use "connections" to move a project, program, company forward for personal gain.  Often times though companies will hire you because they expect you to use your connections.  Is that the employer or employee's fault?  Does money corrupt politicians or do corrupt politicians attract money?  I'm not a fan of the gov't determining what a vet does after they serve.  Smacks me as more gov't regulation.  The solution isn't regulating retired vets it's picking those with impeacheable integrity to positions of power.

I think you really nailed the core issue earlier.  Promotion and rank is over emphasized making those who prioritize promotion over service more successful.  The same "type" that prioritizes promotion over service is going to use his contacts to be successful in whatever company.  While someone with a superior service ethic is going to promote a product that isn't the best.  I look at the tactical equipment industry and I see companies compete with each other.  Some are pretty honorable.  Others look for the "inside" advantage instead of improving their product.   

I saw this behavior numerous times when I worked in the battle lab both in the civilian and the military sector.  I talked with both sides.  Some can't see beyond their own self interest.  Then again, that's how they lived their lives.  Others lost sight but when asked the right questions they found their path again.  It was not limited by rank.  The only difference I saw was typically officers were at higher levels of responsibility so their decisions impacted more but I saw the same kind of self interest in everybody.  It all goes back to who/what the "system" rewards and it's exceedingly difficult to set up a system that reinforces the right values all the time.  Look at bureacracies.  Eventually they always tend to the easiest solutions for the system vs. the best thing for the individual or organization. 

 @SEAL76 That said, I of course will not list those CPO's names or the companies that they work for. Call it hearsay but I have been on the inside of the Navy contract work for over 10 years now and have seen some commendable and shameful behavior on both sides of the contracting "coin".

 @SEAL76 I can list three CPO's that went to project manager positions(without fully understanding the scope of work, might I add) after only being separated from the Navy for six months. It is a good ol' boy network that needs to be revised.

 @HugeFan  @SEAL76 Term limits for the POTUS and VPOTUS but not senators or representatives. We must push for an amendment to the Constitution. It has not passed before but we can't give up. Short of that the only choice we have is to vote against the incumbent every time they come up for reelection. I have no doubt that the former project managers on the military side who retire end up working for the manufacturer on the civilian side after a "decent interval". Still the kickbacks etc. no doubt continue. Small companies have no chance at big contracts because they don't have the juice that retired field grade officers and former politicians bring to the table as employees or lobbiests for Boeing etc.

@SEAL76

"We have Generals and Admirals who are not leaders or even managers. They are politicians who have their own agenda. My feeling is that agenda is to attain the highest rank possible, retire and go to work as a lobbiest for some corporation that sells whatever to the DOD. "

You are absolutely correct. RapidGate(a firm that makes modern federal ID badges) is a barrier to the market of defense contracting. To your point; the additional expense forces many small businesses like mine, who have been working in the support side of defense contracting for years, to pay non-available funds towards expenses that weren't there before(access/background checks were/are handled by the FBI and DoD at no additional cost as recently as 2010). Board of Directors of Eid Passport(the issuer of the credential) include Admiral Thomas H. Collins(USCG, Ret.), General Ralph E. Eberhart(USAF, Ret.) and Gov. Tom Ridge(former head of DHS). Point is these additional expenses to the contractor cannot be transferred to the customer like in usual business because a small firm like mine cannot compete with the capital that larger firms can use to absorb the additional expense. It seems that these men were looking for revenue streams beyond the commissions. It shifts the balance of business right towards the larger defense contractors. No one cares if Quality Marine Resources, Inc. can't employ it's people anymore but Boeing can be too big to fail.

Term limits? AGREED!

 @SEAL76 You hit on more than one problem and I agree on many points. 

Term limits is a great idea.  Too many politicians are corrupted by power or are addicted to the public trough.  Unfortunately voting someone out simply because he's the incumbent is silly not knowing who the incumbent is running against.

Both parties DO spend money we don't have.  Don't understand why you point out Boehner and give Reid a pass.  Egypt is a complicated subject.  We need to punish Egypt for pulling its security and allowing the grounds of the embassy to be comprimised and our flag to be destroyed and replaced with Al Qeada's on 911.  Suspending all aid might be a bit too harsh.  Not sure though I think the overall response to Egypt was exceptionally timid.  When the administration refuses to act for the people maybe Congress has to step in?

Don't know about generals going to work for industry.  Quite a few start their own businesses.  Those that do don't exceed the numbers of politicians that become lobbiests.   I do think one thing that tremendously hurts the officer corps is a fixation on advancing in rank above all other goals.  I saw it way too much and believe it's the cancer destroying selfless service, fidelity to integrity and the constitution and promotes a general sense of self promotion.

   @TomRyan

 @HugeFan  @majrod  @TomRyan Actually there is plenty of blame to go around for the situation our country is now facing. The people of the USA either don't go to the polls to vote or keep voting the same people back into office who have been screwing us for years. We have to apply term limits by voting the incumbents out of office every election cycle. The Republican and Democrats in Washington DC both spend money we don't have. Case in point Boehner and his crew just approved more money for Egypt. We have Generals and Admirals who are not leaders or even managers. They are politicians who have their own agenda. My feeling is that agenda is to attain the highest rank possible, retire and go to work as a lobbiest for some corporation that sells whatever to the DOD.

 @majrod  @SEAL76  @HugeFan  @TomRyan   FORWARD :)    Now, if Only we could get the POTUS and his crew to do the same, there might be Hope for America....6

@HugeFan @TomRyan @SEAL76 

FORWARD!  :)

 @majrod  @TomRyan  @SEAL76 I could rebuttal but I will say that this is a good point:

"Reagan looked forward and for solutions, not back and for excuses.  There's a lesson there."

Ready to move on when you are...

 @HugeFan Pot calling the kettle black?  I don't remember ever trying to change the subject...

Don't remember Reagan blaming Carter at the end of his first term.  In fact I remember no mention of him much after Reagan's inauguration.  I do remember the sitting Pres saying if he didn't fix the economy he'd be a one term Pres.  (There's no agenda there, just reciting the facts being the well read guy I am :) 

Reagan looked forward and for solutions, not back and for excuses.  There's a lesson there.  

@TomRyan  @SEAL76

 @majrod  @TomRyan  @SEAL76 "Agree, it's swerving (especially when facts start coming out to counter previous positrions)..."

That's the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.

"The numbers have gone down significantyly in the last four years.  I know, I know, "It's Bush's fault".  Just like the economy four years after he left office."

So was Reagan to blame for the economic mess he inherited? No those problems stemmed from the 1970's. Don't confuse agenda with being level-headed and well-read. Please, have the last word and make the most of it. We need to get this back on track by focusing on the DoD and it's treatment of MB. Thank you.

 @HugeFan   Agree, it's swerving (especially when facts start coming out to counter previous positrions)...

BTW, you might want to check the opinion polls in Libya, Egypt and Pakistan ref the US.  The numbers have gone down significantyly in the last four years.  I know, I know, "It's Bush's fault".  Just like the economy four years after he left office.

Quick question, when does Obama become responsible for anything or is he only responsible when stuff works out?  

 @TomRyan  @SEAL76

 @jeffreycarr  @SEAL76 It is I who owes you the apology. I felt defensive and lashed out. It was inappropriate and I have no excuse for it. ZERO. Thank you for not tearing me apart like I deserve. :-)

 @HugeFan  @SEAL76 Sorry for not being clearer. I'll try again. I posed a rhetorical question about EOP, DOD and recruiting because I've heard people blame Obama for the publicity around Navy SEALs. My point was that it's not Obama's fault the DOD wanted to increase their recruitment numbers. I was agreeing with you (HugeFan), not attacking you. :-)

My other points had to do with those who conflate Hollywood Democrats with: (1) the Navy's desire to get movies made; (2) leaks around the OBL raid; (3) Mark Owen's book and trying to lump everything together into an attack on Obama.

Sorry that my original post was so confusing. Hope this helps clarify what I was ranting about.

 @SEAL76  @jeffreycarr Two things: 

"the economy is worse since he has been president..." That started with Dubya, there is no evidence that it did not.The Economist had that pegged in late 2006/early 2007 with a series of articles questioning mortgage-backed securities and their efficacy as a financial instrument. Also the president actually less to do with economic direction then most think.

"...and our we are looking like idiots overseas. " Again this started with Dubya and only got worse as Blair and our original allied leaders began getting voted out overseas. Merkel is still around but you saw the ass-whooping that Sarkozy got against Hollande didn't you?

For the most part I think Obama has done what he has needed to to plug the holes in the dam but without a supportive congress and senate(meaning a bipartisan one that does not pander to populist notions) his job gets harder everyday. Dubya didn't have that problem initially because 9/11 had a galvanizing effect on the nation that permitted us to be civil and open-minded... for the grand sum of 4 years. Then it was back to politics as usual from all sides.

 @HugeFan  @SEAL76   Lol, "ROUGHLY", no shit!!  That movie portrayed EOD poorly, but then I rarely find Hollywood creating an accurate account of the military...imo...6

 @Recon6  @SEAL76 Well I'm glad someone decided to attempt to show the civilian population of this nation ROUGHLY what type of people and what type circumstances EOD personnel are and go through. Education has to start somewhere guys and if it's not entirely accurate then it's on us to change that. Remember when we all believed that Columbus was the first person to discover America? Evolution of thought boys.

 @SEAL76  @HugeFan  Thanks 76, I didn't think I was the only one that disliked the movie.  I admire the EOD warriors, just not the way they were portrayed in that film.  6

 @Recon6  @HugeFan Did not see the movie. A friend of mine(Lt. Col.Army CA ) who was in Iraq said the movie sucked as well.

 @HugeFan  @SEAL76   Actually, I just did not care for the movie 'Hurt Locker', and for it to be "Movie of the Year" was a farce.  Didn't know if the reason was because of respect for the military and the job EOD accomplishes, or because it was a female Director?    Movie just sucked....6