[vundy33]

I trust most of our contractors that are in sensitive positions though. After all, our biggest problem from recent leaks came from inside the U.S. Army in the shape of a little chubby private. That did more damage than any surveillance program has in my opinion.

I just think relying on contractors for the easiest things, like building an outpost, is ridiculous when we have a capable force to do it and more importantly, much cheaper. Now some in some spots, we have to use contractors obviously. But I feel they're still being relied on way to much.

As an example, the U.S. Government (relying mostly on contractors) just finished up a project for a new RC-South command outside of Kandahar. By far the most up to date, high speed building in Afghanistan. The only problem is that multiple commanders advised years ago when the program was just getting started that we didn't need it. Now, we're done with it, and what Americans do we have to occupy it? None, lol. It's still empty. Over $150 million for nothing. Actually I think the price tag is a bit higher, I'll try to find the link again. Saw it on Wired before they stopped writing about National Security.

Of course we have many more problems, but this one is something that can be fixed, but is being ignored. Of course, we don't hear anyone accusing government officials of relying on contractors for their own personal gain like we saw in Iraq, lol. It hasn't changed, it was just exported.

Two of the Americans killed in Benghazi, two of the guys who were on the guns helping hold back the attack, weren't CIA. They're often called that, but they weren't. They were contractors, of course.