can we not call them contractors, but what they really are: mercenaries.
No, not at all. You haven't a clue whence you speak.
Is a contractor a mercenary because he or she gets paid to haul garbage from A to B? That's what contractors do. Is a contractor a mercenary because he or she gets paid to dismantle explosives? Because that's what contractors do. Is a contractor a mercenary because he or she gets paid to provide airlift support? Because that's what contractors do. Is a contractor a mercenary because he or she gets paid to carry a firearm in the pursuit of his or her duties? Because that's what some contractors do.
Is a soldier a mercenary when he or she draws a paycheck for hauling garbage from A to B? Soldiers do that, you know. Is a soldier a mercenary because he or she gets paid to dismantle explosives? Soldiers do that, you know. Is a soldier a mercenary because he or she gets paid to provide airlift support? Soldiers do that, you know. Is a soldier a mercenary becausehe r she ets pid to carry a firarm in the performance of his or her duties? Soldiers do that. You know that.
The same organization pays both; the government of the United States of America. Both are funded by taxpayer dollars. Both wear protective gear, uniforms of different sorts. Both face the same risks, the same dangers, both take pay for doing the same job. You'd have to be a bloody idiot to suggest that one is a mercenary and one isn't; standing side by side, being wounded side by side, serving the same country, the same mission, in the same sand and mud.
You in your absolute arrogance don't have a clue wht you're talking about. You read a washington post article and consider yourself informed. We've been running missions for decades, centuries even, in and out of uniform in all forms. You might even try to suggest that it's only noble to die draped in the flag or in a uniform, but you must not know that when one dies in the service of one's country, when one draw's one's last breath...dead is dead. Serving the same master, the same mission, with the same citizenship, awnsering a call put out by the government, is not acting as a mercenary. A soldier lives under a contract as an employee of the government. A contacor lives under a conract to the government too.
We as a nation employed contractors to fight native Americans, we fought as a rag-tag civil guerilla force in the defense of what became our country. We employed privateers and the merchant marine, and contractors in nearly every aspect of building our country from the earliest days until now. We are limited in what we can field for military force. Money isn't being diverted to contractors so we can downsize the military; contractors are employed as force multipliers in order to maximize the effort that can be made by the military. Does the military need to squander it's resources hauling shipments cross country when a contractor can do that just as easily and not tie up military vehicles and personnel? Does the military need to use it's resources to do everything the contractor does today? No, and it doesn't. Take away the contractors, and you don't have an army to fight with because the army would be completely absorbed into the menial tasks and labor taken over by the contractor (and historically, far less efficiently). You see, the army can waste and doesn't need to turn a profit. The contractor must, and is bound by very strict contracting requirements. I can vouch for that.
Could the USAF continue to fly without the heavy support of contractors that maintain aircraft and do so much of what gets done today to keep the USAF airborne? Not on your life, and the USAF doesn't have the size or capability to do it...nor should the USAF tie up it's resources doing it. The military has a mission to do.
You may not see what often amounts to an opaque support structure that's not on center stage, but every aspect of what makes the military mission possible is civillian, from the making of the uniform to the design and production of the weapons, vehicles, and aircraft, to the production, distribution, and even serving of the food. Where do you suppose the ammunition comes from? Then again, where do you think soldiers come from? Civillians.
Is a woman sewing a uniform, getting paid for her job, a mercenary? Of course not. Not even you are that dense. Neither is the contractor, serving at risk of loss of life in the same sand as the uniformed soldier, any more a mercenary. That same contractor, present at behest of the same government (civillian government, mind you) that put the soldier there...both employees of the same employer, both getting paid to do the job.
You push your luck when you speak of things you don't understand. Perhaps you should go bury yourself in Washington Post and leave reality to those who understand it a little better. When you're ready to crawl out from under that paper, you might try it with a little more respect.
