Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 12:49 pm
involving third country contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan and who those contractors 'hire' - if the article is generally correct, and it seems well researched.

It's one of those New Yorker articles available only in the abstract, that I can read for free since I subscribe. The magazine may still be on news stands, date June 6, 2011. The magazine is then $5.95. To read a full article if you are not a subscriber is something like $2.50 (I haven't checked that lately).. perhaps available at some libraries.

The abstract for The Invisible Army, by Sarah Stillman, is here -
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/06/06/110606fa_fact_stillman


My own take is that this is shameful for the US to participate in, in our apparent oversight capacities, and, past that, stupid re any promotion of the US as behaving well. I know this is arguable, as Stillman quotes various overseers on their oversight. I'll be interested in what others who have read the article, or know of the circumstances the article discusses, have to say, one way or the other.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 1,066 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 02:15 pm
@ossobuco,
That is how anti-Americanism develops.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 02:22 pm
@ossobuco,
I am not sure which is worse....how we treat people while we are in Iraq and Afghanistan, our our lack of competence in the mission. Showing power and winning covers a lot of flaws, but when we flail about and treat people like **** we come off as bozo's.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 02:38 pm
@talk72000,
I know, I know already, that is part of what I was alluding to. Talk about failing to win hearts and minds. But, the article points out that at least a fair amount of the time, the US is still looked on favorably by those suffering this stuff - kind of a (my words) 'if they knew, they wouldn't like it' thing.

But never mind our PR, my take so far is that this is scummy before it is stupid. I admit I am not for our (US) being in either country in the first place, much less now - but given that we are, this purported behavior is shameful for us to have let, apparently continue to let, go on.

Re whatever JTT will say (resting now in the cloakroom on a2k for a time), I figured I had some of his or her opinions before JTT did. I don't hate the US; I would like us to be better.
PUNKEY
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 02:48 pm
My nephew - stationed in Baghdad, Iraq as a part of the active National Guard - has mentioned these people. Yes, they are contracted out. The reason the locals are not hired is because they are not trusted.

Yes, they live behind barbed wire in complexes, - but our troops do, too. It's a safety issue.

Rapes? Confiscating wages? Food strikes? I find this hard to believe on a military base. but I WILL CHECK IT OUT.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:15 pm
@PUNKEY,
These are not the local people, they're 'hired' from places over southeast asia and africa.
Best to get the article. I'm not testifying for the article - I don't know.


I'm also irritated when articles that seem important to me re verification are part of a paywall system, a real skirting of the nature of the press at the same time I understand paywalls for newspaper or magazine survival.


(A cousin's child's wife works for Halliburton)
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:16 pm
@ossobuco,
Also it seems that some of them genuinely feel that they are better off than they would be in their home situations.

But yes, that was upsetting to read. It sounds like there have been half-hearted investigations, I hope this starts a whole-hearted one. (And that there are results.)
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:19 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

These are not the local people, they're 'hired' from places over southeast asia and africa.
Best to get the article. I'm not testifying for the article - I don't know.
It does remind me of tales I've heard about how poorly hired help from abroad has fared in places like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and the article links this whole mess-in-question with that system).


I'm also irritated when articles that seem important to me re verification are part of a paywall system, a real skirting of the nature of the press at the same time I understand paywalls for newspaper or magazine survival.


(A cousin's kid's wife works for Halliburton)
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:38 pm
@sozobe,
Soz, you told me back when the NYT set the paywall that you'd send me an article if I requested. I can't remember if I thanked you or what I said, but I've planned not to abuse that.

As it is, I've trained myself to most of the time not click on any of their articles that show up on google news (not clear if that would count as one of twenty). I've used my twenty as a way of copying formerly saved recipes from Bittman or Shulman onto iWorks pages. Next I'll hit architecture and art, books, and so on.

But, if the NYT has articles about this, I'd sure like to see them. Problem is that I don't look at the NYT site anymore, too much temptation to bear. The good news is that I've discovered other sites to read.
Let me know if there is something on it, and I can skip some of that recipe copying, and if I'm desperate, I'll ask you to send me the text.

Likewise, I've been known to send an a2ker a printed copy of something, but I don't want to do that anymore, re printing ink and stamps. I suppose I could send an article as an Works attachment to an email but I'm quite stupid about how to do that re others who have Word. Or just plain copying. I'm not clear on the wherefores and hows of all that.
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:41 pm
@ossobuco,
I'll keep an eye out. But so far all I've read is this very article (finished it last night, made a very similar impression on me. I haven't shaken my head while reading a NYT article so frequently in a while... not from disagreement but from "geez that's just messed up.")
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:46 pm
@sozobe,
Same timing - it took me quite a bit of today to post this (I'm not always in the mood for this stuff). Plus the NYer site was wonky on my computer for at least an hour today.

sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 03:52 pm
@ossobuco,
Just caught my brainfart -- NEW YORKER article, not NYT article.

The Bunga Bunga one was interesting too. I had to Google Ariel Levy after the plastic surgery comment (Burlosconi's advisor suggested that before she met him she get plastic surgery so she'd be "messed up" and reduce the probability of manhandling -- oy.)
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 04:08 pm
@sozobe,
I appreciated the original bunga bunga article, well, I would - such a shmegegge in action, alas, no link at hand. I know I posted the article refs on a2k. Me with my piazza fascination, I'd saved - in real life, aka, clipped - an early probable NYT article with a crowd of people with pinocchio noses protesting in front of the italian parliament (well, that was my guess for the location) about Berlusconi. I probably still have it somewhere; if I run across it, I'll scan it.

On this article by Ariel Levy, I was in a slough of discontent, at least a couple of pages or more of piffle, it seemed like four, yes, an italian cad, and so... it seemed forever to see her not write piffle, not mentioning a lot of long known stuff. Then she ramped up.

ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 04:10 pm
@sozobe,
I caught your brainfart, no big deal.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 04:12 pm
@ossobuco,
Well, there's a thread where I reminded nimh about so and so, but the key article is

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_stille
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2011 04:14 pm
@ossobuco,
I remember HoT telling me I didn't understand Berlusconi, or something like that. (Hi, Helen).
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Jun, 2011 01:25 pm
I went back and read the article last night osso...very sad.
Also the Bunga Bunga article. Like I said on the IMF thread, European women seem to be living in the Middle Ages. I hope they are galvanized by recent events.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Jun, 2011 01:32 pm
@panzade,
Quote:
European women seem to be living in the Middle Ages.
They think that they are more advanced than American women, so dont hold your breath on that....
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Jun, 2011 02:22 pm
@hawkeye10,
They don't actually, that's what I've found interesting about this stuff. They're just resigned to not being able to make any real impact (well, the ones who don't stage highly successful women's rights rallies anyway... that was one heartening thing in the Bunga Bunga article).
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Jun, 2011 02:30 pm
@sozobe,
Quote:
They're just resigned to not being able to make any real impact (well, the ones who don't stage highly successful women's rights rallies anyway... that was one heartening thing in the Bunga Bunga article).
THat is what the Americans say, listen to the European women and they will tell you mostly that they dont want what what the Americans feminists are pushing for in America . I read the European papers, and I know a few women who spend a fair amount of time in Europe immersed in the culture, I dont have any doubt about my perception on this.

I have not read the bunga bunga thing, but based upon what I have heard I can predict that it was written by an American. Now to check...
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » A disheartening article about a disheartening process
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 07:27:52