Why is it cheaper for the US to hire private military contractors than use their own soldiers for some things?

I heard that one reason the US used private military contractors like Blackwater in Iraq was because it was cheaper than using US soldiers. Why is that? I would think that soldiers would be much cheaper, since they get paid very little, whereas Blackwater contractors earn six figure salaries, if I recall correctly.

This is something I haven’t understood for awhile.

Back when Bush Jr took office, the US military went from using their own personnel for things such as mechanics, commo specialists, and other support rolls, to hiring civilian contractors to do the exact same thing for 3x the price.

I’ve lost track of the number of people I knew who were in support units in Active Duty, who then got out of the Army and did the exact same job as a civilian for more money, better hours, and less stress.

Not to be a conspiracy freak, but I’m sure the change was the result of the Bush Jr administration being buddies with many of the Dept of Def contractors.

The deal with companies like Blackwater is they don’t have the limitations that US military units have. That’s why the US has been using companies in places like Columbia for over a decade.

Riz Khan – US military contractors – 21 Dec 09 – Pt 1

Tired of LOUSY service? Try Angie’s List.

Comments are closed