Well, That Sounds Like It's Worth $85 Million

Some of us have been around long enough to recall the doomed Desert One mission to rescue the U.S. hostages held by Iran in 1980. That’s where eight U.S. troops died in the middle of the Iranian desert, their bodies abandoned in the survivors’ rush to leave. They perished in a night-time ground collision between two U.S. aircraft at a refueling stop. It was a bleak day in Washington, and it led to the creation of the U.S. Special Operations Command by Congress over the Pentagon’s objections. Lawmakers acted because it seemed clear that the military services involved in the rescue attempt — that would be the Air Force, the Army, the Marines and the Navy — were too bureaucratic and couldn’t work together on such daring missions.

But an $84.9 million contract awarded today by that very same Special Ops command should give us cause for pause:

The contractor will assist the government in performing the daily operations necessary to facilitate USSOCOM’s ongoing ability to effectively and efficiently optimize delivery and performance of distributed computing management services to sustain and maintain USSOCOM’s global enterprise information technology distributed computing environment.

Thank God the snake eaters haven’t become too bureaucratic.

Related Topics: special operations command, National Security
  • Latest on Battleland

    Army photo / Sgt. Michael J. MacLeod

    Humpin’ It…And Jammin’ It…

    Reuters

    China’s ‘Security Dilemma’ Risks Arms Race in Asia

    TOKYO – A shooting war with China may not be inevitable, but a dangerous arms escalation seems a dead certainty. That’s the take from a rare public discussion here this week among naval experts from Japan, the U.S. and China.

    Chris Hondros / Getty Images

    Mental Ills Top Reason U.S. Troops Now Hospitalized

    Four of the top five non-combat medical conditions sending troops to the hospital in 2011 were mental ailments, the Pentagon reports:

  • gysgt213

    But an $84.9 million contract awarded today by that very same Special Ops command should give us cause for pause:
    .
    Mark: Your little snippet of the press release does not tell us any details about the contract. With only the 85 million dollar price tag as a guide it hard to know what the problem is.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    The problem is the $85 Million. In this age of budget cuts and union-busting should the military really be privitazing such work as “information technology”? It seems to me that if the Pentagon got it’s act together there would be plenty of military personnel capable of doing such work–at a far lower cost to the tax payer.

  • certifiablylazy

    Think he’s just referencing the procurement jargon.
    .
    Probably a cloud computing award, either as an integrator / operations task and/or a program management office support task.

  • newfreedomblog

    Did Jimmy Carter give them a recommendation to the Obama Administration? Figures.

  • certifiablylazy

    See 1.1.
    .
    If this is a cloud computing contract it’s not really something the govt has the capability to perform in house. The infrastructure alone exceeds the 85m cost. Nor do we know the period of performance.
    .
    By outsourcing the work and/or support, the government takes advantage of sunk costs by the private sector at a fraction of real cost.
    .
    This all assumes there is a real need which I’m in no position to comment on.

  • gysgt213

    Cert. The link says its a 4 year fixed contract and the work will be performed states side and overseas, beyond that we really can’t tell what is involved. The 85 million dollar price tag sure is not a reason to say this is the government overpaying, getting ripped off or a waste.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Is this about the price tag or the way it was written?

  • square1

    the doomed Desert One mission to rescue the U.S. hostages held by Iran in 1980.

    That was when, just before the helicopters left for the rescue mission, they took off from the WH and Jimmy Carter forgot to put the anti-sand air-intake filters because he was fiddling with his cardigan while adjusting the solar panels on the WH roof.

    At least, I think that’s what Rush Limbaugh told me.

  • formerlyjames

    I am all for critique of the Rush take on history, but please, even in jest, don’t offer him any suggestions for revision. The truth of the Carter administration is painful enough without embellishment or fantasy.

  • kbanginmotown

    Yeah. Carter should have sacrificed 2000 lives to get reelected. It worked in 2004….

  • Art Pepper

    I’m in the camp that thinks we need to cut the defense budget … but are you saying that USSOCOM doesn’t need a distributed computing environment? What should they run on, mainframes?

  • 11charlie

    Maybe Carter should have sold Khomeni millions in military hardware, and then ask nicely for the hostages.
    .
    Then again, that didn’t work when Reagan tried it.

  • afguy

    I think it’s about the language, Paul.
    .
    To be honest, I’ve written performance reports that sounded a lot like that for individuals who were borderline “doorstops” but liked by the supervisors.
    .
    Writing when the subject is really worthwhile is EASY… however, it takes REAL TALENT to write such narrative prose that others “roll their eyes” (and their pants legs) while reading it.
    .
    In this case, the bid description was probably “embellished” to make it sound like it deserved to be worth $85 million.

  • afguy

    Making a “plain English” description of what they were going to be doing would have been easy and to the point… and would have made it sound like they were letting a bid on a new computer.
    .
    Hardly what the higher-ups want to see.

  • liberalmeltdown

    Thompson is simply pointing out bureaucrat gobbly gook.

    “The contractor will assist the government in performing the daily operations necessary to facilitate USSOCOM’s ongoing ability to effectively and efficiently optimize delivery and performance of distributed computing management services to sustain and maintain USSOCOM’s global enterprise information technology distributed computing environment.”
    .
    George Orwell would be proud.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Of course we never encounter prose like that in the private sector – right?

  • http://grapemusing.blogspot.com/ grape_crush

    It’s wordy to us, but it sounds like a basic IT support contract: keep the servers lit, troubleshoot various technical issues.
    .
    Thank God the snake eaters haven’t become too bureaucratic.
    .
    Because every person in military service is a ‘snake eater.’ Dumb statement from a reporter who specializes in military issues and who should understand the phrase ‘Tooth to tail.’
    .
    Oh, and [this]:

    …KBR, on numerous occasions, threatened the generals in charge of bases with stopping work in the middle of a war zone. One KBR manager threatened not to feed the troops on the base the next day unless the general got the Army to approve payments right away to KBR on dubious billings. Because many generals caved in to these threats, one can see why the Army would not want to threaten these large contractors during a war situation to get back ill-gotten gains through qui tam lawsuits.

    Almost all of these attorneys have filed some war contracting cases, but they say that it is becoming more and more difficult to take any DOD qui tam case and especially the war contractors’ cases. They believe it is because of the lack of oversight by the Army and the political influence the large war contractors have with the Congress and the Army bureaucracy.

  • certifiablylazy

    gysgt213 – excellent point…I didn’t dig into the link, rather made a generic comment base on the procurement lingo.

  • http://nakedempire.wordpress.com nakedempire

    As war with Libya is days away, check out “Maps of War”….5000 yrs of history in 90 seconds…

    http://nakedempire.wordpress.com/

blog comments powered by Disqus