Obama Could Issue an Executive Order to End the Wars Tomorrow (Yes, It's That Simple)
Also in World
War Vet: I Served 40 Months in Iraq, After Which I Didn't Want to Go Back Home
Anonymous
I Volunteered For Obama in 2008, But His Support of Landmines Is the Last Straw
Clancy Sigal
The Great Afghan Gem Heist: How the War Led to the Pillaging of Afghanistan's Precious Stones
Lal Aqa Sherin
Obama's Af-Pak War is Not Just Deadly and Counterproductive: It's Illegal
Marjorie Cohn
Is It Possible to Cobble Together 10 Good Things That Happened in 2009? You Better Believe It!
Medea Benjamin
Afghan National Army: Afghan Police Are Doing More Harm Than Good
Ahmad Kawosh
PS: We, too, are upset at soldiers getting killed or injured due to faulty contractor work. Contractors and mercenaries have no place on the battlefield fighting for a democracy. In our view, the government must retain a monopoly on the use of deadly force during war.
Sadly, former President Bush and former Vice President Cheney "privatized" war with no-bid contracts to mercenaries who are political cronies from the extreme right wing. This new type of "War by KBR, Halliburton and Blackwater" has proven to be a disaster.
One reason mercenaries and contractors should be banned from the battlefield is because of Blackwater's notorious reputation for recklessly killing civilians, as thoroughly documented in Jeremy Scahill's excellent book, Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. Mercenaries have no rules of engagement, and they were immune from any prosecution in Iraq until very recently. In contrast, our soldiers do have rules of engagement that restrict when and how they can use deadly force. In addition, our troops can be, and sometimes are, held criminally responsible for their actions in the war zone.
Another reason mercenaries and contractors have no place in a war zone is because their No. 1 goal is profit -- all they want is money. That is markedly different from the No. 1 goal of our military service members -- protecting and defending our Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. A person cannot defend our freedom while simultaneously promoting profits for a distant corporation that answers to no one.
NE: The system that rotates the same people in and out of military, industry and government has been called the iron triangle. Do you think this is a valid description? If so, what do you see as the consequences of this system for veterans, troops, citizens, national-security policies and an open and democratic society? What can be done to challenge this entrenched system?
PS: The iron triangle is also called the revolving door, where a person moves between three distinct groups: A government agency, such as the Pentagon, a congressional oversight committee, such as Armed Services, and an interest group, such as a defense contractor.
While there are some benefits to having people with experience in all three, there are also significant adverse consequences when the same people populate all three for extended periods of time. When the relationships within the iron triangle become too close, and objectivity is lost, or when the relationship hinges on profits instead of progress for people, then the interests of the people are not served.
For the VA, the iron triangle includes VA, the congressional oversight committees (Veterans' Affairs), and the veteran service organizations (VSOs). Two of the larger VSOs include the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion, two conservative groups that participated in pro-war rallies at the White House. The Legion went so far as to promote unilateral and pre-emptive war before the invasion of Iraq, what we now call the failed "Bush Doctrine."
From the period starting January 2001 and ending December 2006, the iron triangle was securely conservative and Republican, with VA, Congress and major VSOs at all three corners. … In most cases, an insulated iron triangle dominated by one extreme ideology can lead to group think. … During nearly all of the Bush administration, VA suffered from a very serious case of failing to plan or to think outside the box.
Fortunately, the new Congress seated in 2007 conducted significant oversight into VA policies and practices, and this provided a positive and progressive shot in the arm for VA.
We hope that limited view under the Bush administration changes with the Obama administration. With the formation of new and younger veterans' groups, and the sharp drop in membership of the older conservative groups, we may see some changes in how the iron triangle performs in 2009.
NE: You were involved in writing a section of the American Veterans and Servicemembers Survival Guide. The title suggests it's dangerous to be a veteran in America. What makes you think that?
Yes, you are correct, a veteran would be negligent and naïve to seek VA health care or benefits all alone. … If a person was in a serious car crash caused by a negligent multibillion dollar corporation that resulted in long-term disabilities, then that person would exercise common sense and hire an attorney. …
It is fair and reasonable for a veteran to be able to hire an attorney to obtain VA health care and disability benefits worth an estimated lifetime value in the millions of dollars. … Currently, veterans may hire a lawyer only after a VA office has issued an initial denial. Obviously, an attorney can assist a veteran or surviving family member with locating evidence and presenting the best cast at the start.
Unfortunately, since most attorneys helping veterans with appeals come into the process at the end, the veteran often waits through years of complex appeals before eventually winning their claim. This backwards thinking has helped clog the VA claims system.
In 2009, VCS is promoting the idea that VA should go to where our service members and our veterans live. VA can do this easily by opening up permanent VA benefits facilities at all military bases and in suburban areas.
See more stories tagged with: iraq, vietnam, 9/11, torture, afghanistan, robert gates, barack obama, blackwater, mercenaries, george w. bush, military contractors, ptsd, walter reed, department of defense, depleted uranium, gulf war, jeremy scahill, veterans affairs, gulf war syndrome, paul sullivan, veterans for common sense, bonus army, post-traumatic stress dis, penatgon, phil sheldon
Nora Eisenberg is the author of the novels The War at Home, a Washington Post Rave of the Year 2002, and Just the Way You Want Me, awarded the 2004 Gold Prize for Fiction from ForeWord Magazine, the weekly of independent publishing. Her new novel, issued this month by Curbstone Press, is about troops returning home from the 1991 Gulf War, and the unexpected price of war for young victors and their families.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.