Maybe the reason the armor for our soldiers was not provided

[Tony_FLADEM]

There was not a big enough profit margin.

However, Matt Salmon (R) Arizona said his company can make money providing the armor, so problem solved.

[Old and In the Way]

1. I figured $25MM max for the armor to outfit 10,000 hummers

But this administration's Pentagon with a $530BB ($530,000,000,000.00) just doesn't have enough money to spring for troop protection. It's that trickle down economics that the Republicans love so much.

On a related note, I dearly like to know how many new Republican millionaires this war has created.....

[eridani]

2. One reason--they pay mercenaries many times what they pay soldiers

That money could have been used for armor.


http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18193

The practice of using mercenaries to fight wars is hardly new, but it is becoming increasingly popular in recent years. During the first Gulf War, one out of every 50 soldiers on the battlefield was a mercenary. The number had climbed up to one in ten during the Bosnian conflict. Currently there are thousands of Bosnian, Filipino and American soldiers under contract with private companies serving in Iraq. Their duties range from airport security to protecting Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority.

It is also only a matter of time before U.S. soldiers grow unhappy with the presence of mercenaries in their midst. The high salaries and shorter terms of employment offered to mercenaries will inevitably make a serious dent on the military's budget. As Blackwater's Jackson acknowledged in the Guardian, "If they are going to outsource tasks that were once held by active-duty military and are now using private contractors, those guys are looking and asking, 'Where is the money?'"