War, What Is It Good For?

erik_prince_blood_money_725

For Erik Prince…apparently it’s good for cost-plus, no-bid government contracts and (blood) money by the wheelbarrow. While Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast residents continue to fight floodwaters, Prince made his case in a New York Times op-ed.

My proposal is for a sustainable footprint of 2,000 American Special Operations and support personnel, as well as a contractor force of less than 6,000 (far less than the 26,000 in country now). This team would provide a support structure for the Afghans, allowing the United States’ conventional forces to return home.

Sort of like Rambo III, but for the 21st century. No word on pesky liability issues.

And then there’s the source, i.e., for whatever reason, the NY Times decided that Erik fucking Prince was fit to print, a classic “opinions differ on the shape of the earth” rationale if there ever was one. What’s next? A Charles Manson column explaining Helter Skelter? Hey…both sides.

It’s one thing to be a merchant of death. Prince made a career out of it. It’s quite another to openly lobby for taxpayer funded, perpetual mercenary war…particularly at a time when we could and should probably look for better ways to spend trillions of dollars…like, I don’t know, maybe on flood and storm protection.

Just saying.

%d bloggers like this: