US presence in Iraq only contracts

Soldiers gone, but contractors remain in Iraq. U.S. relies heavily on civilians, with even more in Afghanistan.

State Department officials have said they expect that 5,000 security contractors will be needed in Iraq next year to protect U.S. diplomats.

A “life support” team of an additional 4,500 contractors will cook, clean and provide transportation and other services.

In Afghanistan, 105,000 U.S. troops are supported by about 101,000 civilian contractors.

Only 23,000 of those contractors are U.S. citizens. About 50,000 are Afghans, and 27,900 come from other countries.

“The U.S. military can't move, fight or sustain itself without contractor support today,” said Steven Schooner, a law professor at George Washington University who has studied contractor fatalities.

According to a report released in August by the congressionally chartered Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, at least $31 billion — and possibly as much as $60 billion — has been lost to contract waste and fraud. It concluded that the government was relying too much on contractors and that major reforms were needed.

Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Soldiers-gone-but-contractors-remain-in-Iraq-2426228.php#ixzz1hiwaDxN2

Support Our Troops? Nah, screw 'em

There is a US Federal law that offers certain legal protections to military personnel and their families against the usual rude intrusions of civilian life. It's called the The Servicemembers' Civil Relief Act. See this and this.

The Big Banks, which the troops seemingly protect don't always return the favor, or care about the law -- until, that is, they get caught. This is true, or so it seems, about JP Morgan and BofA, from the looks of these stories:

New Program to Help Military Homeowners, Bank of America Announces

I received an email last month from Sgt. Keith Oliver – a soldier currently deployed in Iraq. He told me that after Bank of America had reduced his payments for two years the bank suddenly came back and said he owed about $19,000 or else he would face foreclosure.

He kept calling the bank to explain he was deployed but Oliver said he bounced from one department to another until finally he contacted us at “GMA” to ask for help.

When we called Bank of America it quickly realized the error and fixed the situation with Oliver.

Bank of America announced this morning on “GMA” that it will help members of the military who have trouble meeting their mortgage payments by creating a new program to assist those active duty soldiers.

“What we’re going to do is set up a program of our own that allows us to reduce their principal if they get in trouble, extend their payments, bring their rates down,” Larry DiRita, a spokesman for Bank of America, said.

“Our goal is, look, if you are a military person, you are deployed, you don’t need to be worrying about your house. If you do find yourself in a distressed situation let us know and we will start working with you right away,” he told me.

Chase spends $2M to fix errors on military mortgages

Marine Capt. Jonathon Rowles, now assigned to South Korea, alleges Chase committed a number of violations, including failing to give the proper effective date of the interest rate reduction, repeatedly requiring him to re-apply for protections, and trying to collect on inaccurate account balances.

Rowles alleged that Chase Home Finance, a subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase, failed to reduce his interest rate to 6% on the effective date of his active-duty status and required him to re-apply for protections no less than four times a year after that. He also alleges that starting in April 2009, Chase tried to collect "an inaccurate account balance" resulting from "its own systemic errors in servicing the loan," according to the lawsuit, filed July 6 in U.S. District Court in Beaufort, S.C.

Chase has advertised itself as a military-friendly bank since at least 2005, when it began touting its Home Finance Military Mortgage program, which offers a discount on closing costs in home purchases or refinancing for military members and retirees.

Bank ends student loan deferrals for troops, then reverses decision

the bank was contacted by the wife of a soldier serving in Afghanistan, and she was told the bank decided in December to stop allowing active-duty troops to delay paying their student loans.

"They informed me that they are no longer deferring private student loans for active duty military personnel," said Kerri Napoli, whose husband, Army Pfc. Andrew Napoli, is now serving near Kandahar.

After repeated conversations with Chase, Napoli says she told the bank last month that she had contacted NBC News. The next day, she says, the bank told her it would grant her husband an exception to the new policy and defer his loan.

The bank also has had second thoughts about ending a program aimed at helping U.S. troops with their family finances. After NBC News contacted the bank about why it had stopped allowing deferred payments, a Chase official said that decision was being reversed and the program would be reinstated.

J.P. Morgan Apologizes for Military Foreclosures

A J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. executive, at a U.S. House hearing Wednesday, apologized for wrongly foreclosing on military families and overcharging thousands for mortgages, as lawmakers weigh whether new legislation is needed to help prevent military personnel from losing their homes and getting hit with high interest rates.

She said the company is embarrassed over the matter, and apologized for the bank's errors.

But lawmakers didn't sound satisfied. In a heated exchange, California Rep. Bob Filner, the top Democrat on the panel, made it clear he doesn't think an apology is enough.

"You broke the law. How are we going to hold you accountable?" Rep. Filner said. "Everything is impersonal. Nobody is ever responsible and yet these people's lives are turned upside down. You can't just apologize...and then, this is over."

Chase initially found it overcharged at least 4,000 military personnel in active service and took the homes of 14. However, Chase's testimony Wednesday shows the firm has now found more problems--it said it overcharged 4,500 active-duty military members and wrongly foreclosed on 18.

Lawmakers at the hearing voiced concern that Chase, a company that received funds from the government's 2008 financial-industry government rescue program, would have made such errors. They were also concerned that the problem could be rampant, with other banks overcharging military personnel and threatening to take their homes just as the federal government is trying to combat the nation's foreclosure crisis.

Banks reminded on military personnel protections

Holly Petraeus, wife of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American military commander in Afghanistan, pointed the firms to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which limits the interest rates that banks can charge those in the military and prevents them from foreclosing on homes of active duty service members without a judge's expressed authorization and a formal hearing where the homeowner is represented.

The recently-tapped head of military issues for the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, sent a letter to the nation's 25 largest banks Tuesday urging them to comply "with important legal protections for military personnel."

Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard law professor helping to set up the new consumer watchdog, appointed Petraeus to the post early last month.

Chase's people are trying to spin the story down a few notches. Forget the harassment and foreclosures. There really isn't all that much money at issue here, is their subliminal message, reported the the WSJ article noted above:

Stephanie Mudick, executive vice president of J.P. Morgan's office of consumer practices, told the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs the bank has so far sent the 4,500 overcharged service members $2.4 million including interest, and the median payment has been $70 plus interest.

Chump change.

Chumps, indeed.

More on that burning issue

Thanks and hattip to Brogonzo for this update on the Afghan incident mentioned yesterday: http://guambatstew.blogspot.com/2005/10/burning-issue-with-some-folks.html

October 19, 2005Release Number: 05-10-71 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CENTCOM CONDEMNS ALLEGATIONS OF DESECRATION

MacDill AFB, FL -- Recent media reports out of Afghanistan have alleged that U.S. forces were involved in an incident involving the desecration of the bodies of deceased enemy combatants.

Under no circumstances does U.S. Central Command condone the desecration, abuse or inappropriate treatment of enemy combatants. Such actions are contrary to U.S. policy as well as the Geneva Convention.

The Army Criminal Investigation Division has initiated an investigation into the alleged misconduct. Should that investigation uncover actions by U.S. personnel that were contrary to the Geneva Convention and U.S. policy, legal and disciplinary action will be taken in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/News_Release.asp?NewsRelease=20051071.txt

October 20, 2005 Release Number: 05-10-74

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

UPDATE: ALLEGED MISCONDUCT BY U.S. FORCES

KABUL , Afghanistan – The Army Criminal Investigation Division continues its investigation into alleged misconduct by U.S. service members, including the burning of two dead enemy combatant bodies under inappropriate circumstances.

“The inflammatory nature of this allegation raises two pertinent concerns that the command is investigating,” said Army Colonel Jim Yonts, Combined Forces Command – Afghanistan , Public Affairs Officer.

“First, the command does not advocate, nor does the command tolerate, the wrongful desecration of anyone’s remains.

Second, the use of broadcast messages in conjunction with an act such as this does not represent the values and beliefs of this command therefore necessitating a procedural and policy review.”

“These are very serious allegations and if true, they are reprehensible. If the investigation reveals misconduct those responsible will be held accountable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice,” he said.

http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/News_Release.asp?NewsRelease=20051074.txt

I gotta admit: this gave me a few goosebumps of pride when I read it. It sure puts the fire out on those marshmellow toasting extremists of the Rambo persuasion.

Rumsfeld: Support the troops

"It has been 11 months since Congress ordered the Defense Department to reimburse soldiers and their families for out-of-pocket combat equipment expenses, but the law is being ignored. Pentagon officials say they are still "working on" details of a reimbursement policy, and should have something by the end of the year. How many U.S. soldiers will die, because they were improperly equipped, between now and the end of the year?" http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2005/10/03/sections/opinion/100205b.txt

"The US President, George Bush, last October signed into law legislation requiring the Pentagon to set rules by February 25 for reimbursing American troops, their families and charities as much as $US1100 ($1442) for the purchase of protective, health and safety gear to use in those war zones." http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/troops-demand-some-action-from-pentagon/2005/10/04/1128191719592.html

"During Operation Iraqi Freedom, inadequate body armor was issued to thousands of troops. I know -- I was one of them. I commanded thirty-seven infantrymen who rode into Baghdad in the spring of 2003 with outdated, inferior flak jackets. Later I learned that as many as 40,000 other Troops went to Iraq with the same substandard gear. One of them was Spc. Richard Murphy, who said, “When my company landed in theatre in May, I was one of the few soldiers equipped with body armor effective at stopping powerful AK-47 ammunition. My mother, an elementary school art teacher, shipped the bullet-proof ceramic plates to me from the States. Other soldiers weren't so lucky, having to raid buildings and patrol dangerous streets while wearing inferior Vietnam-era flak jackets.”

"Richard didn’t have the proper equipment to fight effectively in a war zone, so his mother bought it for him on Ebay." http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20050929/cm_huffpost/008077;_ylt=A86.I0LDUjxDfnUBmg39wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

About buying body armour on the internet: http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:rVg_jn_Rj5EJ:www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,SS_042505_Ebay,00.html+body+armor+ebay&hl=en

Go the Guam Guard !

("Purported"; I don't know this site but it looks real) excerpt of briefing by a General Ghormley about his role in the Horn of Africa:

"I want to make it really clear I'm not a direct action unit. I don't saddle up and go out and hunt down the enemy. That's not to say I don't have the inherent right of self-defense. My people go out, they have force protection. This time around, my force protection is provided by Bravo Company, 1st of the 294th, the National Guard out of Guam. Absolutely spectacular soldiers. They go out, they protect my Civil Affairs teams and Civil Military Operations operations. We don't seek to engage the enemy, but we do seek out those in need. The way we go about seeking out those in need, I send out CA assessment teams, Civil Affairs assessment teams, and they go out throughout the villages, they go out into the towns, they meet with the leadership of the villages, the Imam, the village elders, the mayor, ask them what they believe that that village could use to enhance that stability, to make life easier for the people. People want the same thing there as we want here. If you're a father or a mother, you want to be able to provide for your children. They're no different. If their child is hurting, they want to do something about it. We're trying to provide that. So they go out, they collect these projects, they take them to the embassy. I'm one of the tools that the embassy can employ. I try to solve the -- I try to address, I should say, the mission performance parameters, the MPPs, that each of the embassies have got. I do that through my civil affairs. Once the embassy has agreed to what my CA assessment teams have come up with, they bring it back to the CJTF headquarters. Each of those projects are vetted, racked and stacked, prioritized, and then they're addressed with resources. Our primary maneuver elements? Doctors, veterinarians, well drillers, civil engineers. And it's so important that you understand about my -- the folks that go out and what they can accomplish. Where can seven soldiers who work for five months to drill a well affect 1,500 people for the next 10 years? I had -- there's a small town out in -- Yoboki, in Djibouti. The well is 640 feet deep, drilled through volcanic rock. Took us five months to drill it. Those young soldiers pumped water on the Army's 230th birthday. They said it was coincidence; I don't believe it. I think they did that just to prove a point. But they pumped water. It comes out at 105 degrees. The nomads out there, the Bedouins, have never had a well out there. Now, for the next at least 10 years, they're going to have a water source. Quite a significant impact. "
http://www.rantburg.com/index.php?HC=1&D=9/23/2005#130332