3 ms·
The submitter didn't even need to read the entire article. That information was available in the first sentence: "More than 80 percent of the Defense Departmen
by nhebb 14y ago
The submitter didn't even need to read the entire article. That information was available in the first sentence:
"More than 80 percent of the Defense Department’s Afghanistan reconstruction contracts are vulnerable to putting U.S. taxpayer money into enemy coffers, a government watchdog says in a new report."
- rdl 14y agoI added "may" to try to make the headline more accurate, but this isn't just a paperwork deficiency. There are many other contractual clauses which aren't always correctly documented (no sex trafficking, DBA coverage, etc.), none of which people really make much of an issue about, because they generally don't happen even when the documentation is absent. Deficiencies clauses to prevent money going to Taliban is an issue due to the numerous cases of this before the 2012 NDAA; deficient paperwork in these contracts is much more likely an indicator of pre-NDAA operations continuing, and those were shown to be contributing materially to the Taliban.