Darth, I appreciate your service, and part of me wishes I was still in some way connected to the Army.

I'm not that familair with the new battallion/squadron organization. I know it has changed quite a bit since I was in not too long ago, but I assume that a battalion or Task Force still consists of 3 line companies/troops/batteries and one or two Headquaters and/or supply companies. I'd hope, from the bravado of your posts you are an 11, 12, 13, 14, or 19 series MOS, or one of the support MOS that is commonly within those battalions.

My main problem with the heavy reliance on contractors besides the things that all other posters have mentioned is best illustrated by the following scenario.

I know this is a poor analogy but I'd like to call it the "Mogadishu Scenario". Your battalion is stationed at a remote FOB, in one of the worst areas to be in. Alpha is detached to a mission many km away from the FOB. Bravo is out on escort of contractors enroute with supplies to the FOB. Charlie has been running a hard OPTEMPO for the past few months and is currently doing a bit of lighter duty like guard duty for the FOB and near patrols for a bit to give the guys a break. Bravo is ambushed and hit pretty damn hard with multiple wounded KIA. Charlie is immediately tasked to relieve and support Bravo. Enroute to assist Charlie has contact resulting in thier own wounded and KIA. Charlie is hit hard enough to be near combat ineffective, but is hard charging and manages to link up with Bravo. They are able to secure a casevac location for a dustoff but there are still a ton of supplies and they are a couple of km from the FOB. Most of the supplies and drivers are still there but they have thier share of wounded themselves. Meanwhile meteorogical conditions are deteriorating rapidly making the availabillity of CAS and helicopter borne reinforcement iffy at best.

In this scenario, a Battilion Commander has two very different set of options if his support is soldiers or contractors. If they are soldiers he can get his clerks, cooks, mechanics, etc, say welcome to the infantry and roll out to support/reinforce the two endangered companies. If the support is contractors he is simply SOL and gets the privelege of watching his men die.

This is my greatest fear in concerns to the reliance on contractors. My secondary concern is that the taxpayer is getting fleeced.

I think if we look more into where the money is going we might find something more interesting.
Lets get away from the companies and find out where they get the supplies that they buy with American taxpayer money. (and to note - halliburton and KBR are separate companies now - KBR is an overseas company and hires non Americans as much as they can to make more money off the U.S. government).
Most contracts are required to purchase their supplies (not classified contracts) from countries other than the U.S. If you think about it - war is usually good for America's economy - now it is not! Over 90% of supplies used by our contractors and military comes from outside the U.S. Yes - it might cost a little more to get everything from the U.S. but the economy would boost and the tax revenue would maybe help pay for the war?
I find it disturbing that our soldiers can not even get a real hamburger in Iraq at their dining facilities unless they buy them from AAFES (a company that charges outrageous prices for everything to our soldiers) and then they have to cook it themselves.
One more thing about AAFES - they import Indian workers at very low pay (their coffee shops actually don't pay them the first year - they tell them the cost to bring them there is their first years pay) and then still charge the government the cost of doing business in Iraq. The prices that AAFES charges for items mostly not produced in America is extremely high even though the taxpayer pays AAFES the shipping charges to bring things to Iraq so the soldiers wont have to pay huge prices - which does not work or at least nobody cares.

I think if we look more into where the money is going we might find something more interesting.
Lets get away from the companies and find out where they get the supplies that they buy with american taxpayer money. (and to note - halliburton and KBR are seperate companies now - KBR is an overseas company and hires non americans as much as they can to make more money off the U.S. government).
Most contracts are required to purchase their supplies (not classified contracts) from countries other than the U.S. If you think about it - war is usually good for America's economy - now it is not! Over 90% of supplies used by our contractors and military comes from outside the U.S. Yes - it might cost a little more to get everything from the U.S. but the economy would boost and te tax revenue would maybe help pay for the war?
I find it disturbing that our soldiers can not even get a real hamburger in Iraq at their dining facilities unless they buy them from AAFES (a company that charges outrageous prices for everything to our soldiers) and then they have to cook it themselves.
One more thing about AAFES - they import Indian workers at very low pay (their coffee shops actually don't pay them the first year - they tell them the cost to bring them there is their first years pay) and then still charge the government the cost of doing business in Iraq. The prices that AAFES charges for items mostly not produced in America is extremely high even though the taxpayer pays AAFES the shipping charges to bring things to Iraq so the soldiers wont have to pay huge prices - which does not work or at least nobody cares.