Friday, November 24, 2006

Bargain Basement Weapons

There was a time when war profiteering was considered treason. Unfortunately, that time is not now, or we'd have some serious trials being held for those contractors who have provided unsafe water and spoiled food to our troops, who have given used trucks and other vehicles a fresh coat of paint and sold them to the government as new, who have 'built' schools and prisons that have fallen down as soon as they opened, and who can't account for billions of dollars of government money.

We can now add to the list contractors who are outfitting the new Iraqi army and police forces with third rate weapons obtained at the bargain basements of Eastern Europe nations who are upgrading their own military with more seviceable weaponry. From the Iraqi Basaer News:

In closed-door meetings, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, the General Commander of the Iraqi Armed Forces, complained about American foot-dragging over adequately arming and improving the capabilities of the Iraqi Army. This is the case because the Americans are providing antiquated weapons produced in Eastern Europe, the quality of which is far inferior to the American weapons, and even recent Russian ones. The Americans purchase these Russian weapons from East European countries trying to get rid of them as part of a program to modernize their armaments and harmonize their armies with the other nations in the European Union.

The American companies who won contracts to supply the Iraqi Amy found these old weapons at rock-bottom prices. They are considered little more than scrap metal by experts. This allows them to pocket what's left over from the massive appropriations designated for the creation of the "modern" Iraqi Army. Consequently, neither the new ranks of the Iraqi Army nor those of the police have received anything but old weapons, which are the object of ridicule by average Iraqis. This is in contrast to the Iraqi resistance, militias, and other armed groups confronting the Army, which carry more advanced weapons that in many cases surpass those of even America's coalition partners in Iraq. Observers of Iraqi affairs believe that the American companies and Iraqi politicians, in addition to corrupting the bidding process itself, have found additional opportunities for obtaining ill-gotten wealth in equipping the Iraqi Army.


How shameful is that? And how dangerous? After all, the President has made it clear that our military forces won't be leaving Iraq until its army and police forces can provide adequate security for the country. How can Iraqi forces provide that security when the insurgents and sectarian militias they face are far better equipped? Or is that the point?

The article suggests that the US doesn't really want a strong, viable army in Iraq because it would be dominated by the Shi'a, thus making Iraq nothing more than a satellite of Iran. Isn't it a little late for that kind of worry?

I think it just as likely that the current administration meant it when it said it wouldn't be leaving on Bush's watch, hence the permanent base and the huge bunker called an embassy. There's still the matter of the oil in Iraq, and the oil in Iran.

I hope that somebody in the next Congress decides to take a long, hard look at this latest bit of malfeasance and then moves to do something about it.

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home