Census Counts 100,000 Contractors in Iraq

This puts the U.S. force committment in Iraq into a different perspective. At the height of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, there were about 500,000 troops there. With only 150,000 official U.S. military personnel serving in Iraq, it pales in comparison to Nam. However, the U.S. military did a lot more of its own cooking, truck driving and the like in the 1960s and 70s. When you throw in the contractors, Iraq is at least half a Nam. In manpower terms, that is. In terms of long-lasting disaster, it,s a Nam-and-a-half!

By Bukkonen | Dec 5, 2006 1:02:24 AM | Request Removal

Mr Nash Are you saying the US contractors have been driving through the streets of Iraq at 90kms an hour and running over kids? If this is true where is the outrage? Or is it festering about to be released like cobra venom on those who have done this slaughter of children? Surely you werent serious.

By seankenan | Dec 5, 2006 6:24:24 AM | Request Removal

I hope the Post will stay on top of this story and provide information about what the contract employees are being paid vs. soldiers. Also, it would be informative to know what the contractors are charging the government for each job skill. My guess is that many rather mundane jobs are costing us huge sums. Haliburton is really ripping us off to provide these services.

By cdierd | Dec 5, 2006 7:23:52 AM | Request Removal

When there is no will or interest from the American public to wage war, high priced contractors also known as mercenaries fill the bill. In this case the republican hawks, who often have ties to the ownership of many of these mercenary companies get to make a few bucks while keeping the weapons contractors happy by blowing off lots of expensive ordinance. This is so wrong.

By RhumbLine | Dec 5, 2006 8:16:43 AM | Request Removal

Also, we all know people who are subjected to war and combat experience psychological ramifications. I know the VA is not the model to follow, but what resources are available to returning mercenaries? Having a bunch of vets and mercenaries running around our society with mental health issues is going to have an effect on all of us. I bet violent crime spikes in the near future as these people try to return to normal life.

By RhumbLine | Dec 5, 2006 8:27:18 AM | Request Removal

The cost of training, equipping and providing benefits for a soldier vs. hiring a contractor to work in a war zone results in significant savings to the government. It also hides the real numbers of manpower committed to the effort. For instance, I know many KBR employees work 12 hrs per-day 7 days per week. That they might receive $80-100,000 annually is really a pittance because it is like having two jobs in the US and they are in a combat zone! Those that complain, fail to recognize that the US government is getting great value from the efforts of these contractors and it saves soldier deployments - still no excuse for running over children which would appear to be exaggerated and if true demands investigation.

By cdrichards1 | Dec 5, 2006 8:50:56 AM | Request Removal

The degree of misunderstanding and ignorance illustrated by the comments on this site about the role of contractors in Iraq is amazing. Mercenaries? Youve got to be kidding or you believe the US military is a mercenary army because they are volunteers. Overpaid? Ridiculous! If DOD performed these functions it would cost considerably more - of course one would never know because the true cost would be hidden from view. How much does it cost to train and recruit a soldier? And then you have a rookie. The contractors are hired because they posess the proper skills. That Halliburton and other companies engaged in providing support make a lot of money? Of course they do - the only organization that could assemble the skills necessary to complete these tasks is DOD and their forces are already over stretched. That there will be pschological ramifications? There will be, but no more than the normal number that are present in our society. Of course the Army recruiting of less than capable individuals will probably result in more PTSD cases - which leads back to employing more contractors which are generally ex-military and have faced the hardships before.

By cdrichards1 | Dec 5, 2006 9:08:37 AM | Request Removal

Yeah, gotta get those mercenaries ready for deployment here in the States! When revolution comes, our citizen soldiers wont protect the criminals in power. Mercenaries will shoot anyone for a dollar. DEMAND IMPEACHMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION NOW! Accept no less.

By foolsuperior | Dec 5, 2006 9:19:41 AM | Request Removal

Wow, 100,000 thousand contractors = how many dollars and profits. Guess we will be in Iraq for a longer time than I thought. Maybe, we will go broke first. Yaall have a good day

By rustybert | Dec 5, 2006 9:22:25 AM | Request Removal

cdrichards1 - If your primary BUSINESS is warfare, you are MERCENARIES and PART OF THE PROBLEM. The military is supposed to be a function of government. Period. Stop whining about your career choice because you know the average man thinks you are paid killers with loyalty only to a paycheck. You ARE paid killers. Maybe you have the same mental illness as Bush-olini that allows him to rewrite his memory on the fly to make him the hero no matter what evil he perpetrates. You are taking a paycheck to fight an illegal war for oil profits while bin Laden is allowed to run free. How are you the good guys again?

By foolsuperior | Dec 5, 2006 9:24:47 AM | Request Removal

There is no concrete oversight of these contractors who are working in Iraq, Kuwait and other places who inturn charges the government exorbitant price for their survice. The practice is nothing new and questionable as always. I am not sure if there are any law against this. Its about time we creat one, if needed to reign in thier growth.

By Ruptan | Dec 5, 2006 9:38:15 AM | Request Removal

This argument that contractors do more for less is not substantiated by the facts as reported by those with first hand experience. There are numerous websites with direct comments from military personnel who detail the use of non-trained contractors doing work they the military personnel had been trained to do. The contractor business is just another sign of what the war in Iraq is really about. It is a fundraiser for Republican business owners. The war is a disaster by any measure but the administration wants it to continue. Why, as the old adage goes, if you can’t understand a phenomenon, look for the money interest. There are a lot of contractors making a fortune and we don’t want that money tap turned off, even though it is borrowed money, which our children and grandchildren will have to repay. And, of course, our illustrious vice president just reported 8 million for his involvement last year from Halliburton so there is a direct connection there. It’s free money and very few of the people making it have family taking any risk. The perfect scam. I know, I was one of the contractors.

By mountaintb | Dec 5, 2006 9:56:21 AM | Request Removal

It is unbelievable that this Washington Post report totally fails to cite the costs to U.S. taxpayers through no-bid contracts and those bid, if there are any for the war profiteers! Why is there not a breakdown of contracts, who is paid what, and who ultimately pockets the money?? I pray the investigative reporters for The Post will be digging for the facts, do their homework, and for Gods sake, tell us just what the hell is going on...and how this privatization which clearly has reached outrageous levels can even be justified!! I thought this is what we have a military for??? Disgusting!!!

By writersbloc33 | Dec 5, 2006 10:32:24 AM | Request Removal

Blackwater USA has more than 1,000 employees in the country, most of them providing private security.. If you are doing this in a war zone you are a mercenary, not a contractor, even if you have lots of experience in the military and a contract from Blackwater. Do the Blackwater contracts include life insurance?? if not they should.

By kuseldavid | Dec 5, 2006 10:40:18 AM | Request Removal

But the 100,000 is really more like 87, right? How can we have an accurate count of government contractors but not an accurate count of Iraqi dead? If the folks who did this count compare their methods to those used by the professionals who arrived at the numbers of Iraqi dead, who used more statistically accurate methods? My guess is the Johns Hopkins team was far more thorough. w and his crew should have to acknowledge the truth.

By hansensnellt | Dec 5, 2006 11:05:46 AM | Request Removal

Another euphemism: Contractor = Mercenary A soldier by any other name would work as well. No surprise here! Bushs disembling includes hiding the true number of U.SA. soldiers in Iraq. The difference between those in uniform and those in civies is that our soldiers get far less salary and are subjected to far more risk.

By marceld | Dec 5, 2006 11:29:21 AM | Request Removal

writersbloc - I thought this is what we have a military for??? Disgusting!!! Our military is not of sufficient strength to carry out all the duties that are required to prosecute the war.

By cdrichards1 | Dec 5, 2006 11:42:45 AM | Request Removal

Wild guess here that the Bush twins arent among the children being run over, the contractors there or the military. Wonder where they could be partying? I mean, I wonder where they could be?

By craigclarksville | Dec 5, 2006 11:42:57 AM | Request Removal

Instead of internalizing the skills needed to provide essential services, and obtaining them at cost, the administration has leapt headlong into outsourcing them. This is a mania at private companies, only a few of whom do it using best practices. Many companies end up with the worst of both worlds. Fewer skills and higher costs. Mr. Bush - despite his vaunted Harvard MBA - seems to have opted for the latter. Outsourced experts in a war zone either cost taxpayers an order of magnitude more than a Pentagon employee, or they work under contracts that absolve them of liability. When they do the second, the burden of any wrong they do is born not by the US Government, on whose behalf they act, but on the person wronged. That person often has little practical recourse, either for a day in court or reasonable compensation. The Buck has nowhere to stop. Mr. Bush has also adopted that pseudo-strategy domestically. At the IRS, GSA, Homeland Security, ad nauseam. An aspect of de facto profiteering that needs inspection. That is, if all the inspectors have not yet been outsourced.

By dpklln | Dec 5, 2006 12:10:30 PM | Request Removal

Mercenaries is the usual term for these types ... any person who will do anything for money

By jack.gatrost | Dec 5, 2006 12:27:50 PM | Request Removal