Al Qaeda and Taliban Found with US Government Contracts in Afghanistan - US Refuses to End Contracts
9 replies, posted
[url="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-30/al-qaeda-backers-found-with-u-s-contracts-in-afghanistan.html"]Bloomberg[/url]
[url="http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/56666516-68/afghanistan-sopko-report-afghan.html.csp"]Salt Lake Tribune[/url]
[url="http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/07/30/usa-afghanistan-aid-idINDEE96T02R20130730"]Reuters[/url]
[img]http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20130730&t=2&i=755436054&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=CDEE96T0C6T00[/img]
[quote]The U.S. Army has refused to bar 43 individuals or companies from getting U.S. contracts in Afghanistan despite information that they support the Taliban or other enemies of U.S. forces, a government watchdog said on Tuesday.
John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR), said he was concerned by the Army's refusal to follow his office's recommendations to prevent alleged supporters of the Taliban, the Haqqani network and al Qaeda from getting or keeping U.S. government contracts.
"I am deeply troubled that the U.S. military can pursue, attack and even kill terrorists and their supporters, but that some in the U.S. government believe we cannot prevent these same people from receiving a government contract," Sopko wrote in an introduction to his office's quarterly report on the U.S. reconstruction effort in Afghanistan.
The Haqqani Network is an Islamist insurgent group that operates on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
The report said SIGAR referred 43 contractors' cases - most of them Afghans - to the U.S. Army for suspension or debarment, but all were rejected, "despite detailed supporting information demonstrating that these individuals and entities are providing material support to the insurgency in Afghanistan."
"In other words, they may be enemies of the United States, but that is not enough to keep them from getting government contracts," the quarterly report said.
-Contd. in Reuters Article-
[/quote]
No, you can't have your privacy, but those men can have their contracts.
[quote]The United States and its NATO allies are committed to wrapping up the international combat mission in Afghanistan by the end of 2014.[/quote]
We just want out.
[QUOTE=areolop;41675116]We just want out.[/QUOTE]
Yeah well you can't just abandon the country without rebuilding it.
The US indirectly funding Al Qaeda/taliban? whodathunkit
[QUOTE=bravehat;41675133]Yeah well you can't just abandon the country without rebuilding it.[/QUOTE]
But you can though.
Ask France circa 1918 about how they abandoned a country without rebuilding it.
Not sure if they got away with it though.
[QUOTE=certified;41675163]But you can though.
Ask France circa 1918 about how they abandoned a country without rebuilding it.
Not sure if they got away with it though.[/QUOTE]
The french are masters of running away, though.
[QUOTE=certified;41675163]But you can though.
Ask France circa 1918 about how they abandoned a country without rebuilding it.
Not sure if they got away with it though.[/QUOTE]
There was nothing to rebuild in Germany though, they were never invaded. The Treaty of Versailles was to lenient to break Germany and to harsh to allow it to prosper, it doesn't have relevance to this situation.
This reminds me of when we found out that Iran was supplying the US military with oil.
It's brilliant, really. Constantly fund your own enemies so you always have someone to fight and the companies that profit off war and pay your way into government for you always make a profit.
It's like a big circle of money that keeps everyone happy except the tens of thousands that die because of it
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;41675201]The french are masters of running away, though.[/QUOTE]
France has a bad reputation because of the whole defeated by Germany thing, but the true running awayers are Denmark.
They lasted literally an hour.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.