Olympic security contractor regrets shortfall

Olympic athletes are scheduled to begin arriving in London on Monday.

With two weeks to go before the games begin, organizers have been stunned to learn that one security contractor has come up thousands of employees short.

The 2012 Olympic Games will be staged in dozens of venues over a vast area in and around London, and they'll need an equally vast security operation to keep them safe. Key are 13,000 British soldiers and marines, the largest domestic mobilization since World War II. There will also be fighter jets to enforce a no-fly zone for small planes, and missiles set up on apartment buildings.

US-UK security experts unite for London Olympics
U.K. adds 3,500 military personnel to London Olympics security
Judge clears way for Olympic rooftop missiles

There was supposed to be another army of more than 10,000 civilian security guards too, supplied by a private contractor G4S, but suddenly last week, the company announced it could not deliver.

CEO Nick Buckles said: "It's a very complex process to recruit and deliver that many people in quite a short period of time."

The original contract was for 2,000 G4S guards. Then, last December, after advice from U.S. law enforcement, that figure ballooned to more than 13,000, and G4S simply couldn't keep up.

"It's down to G4S, we should have...we are contracted to deliver staff. We should have done that," Buckles said.

It's a big blunder on a sensitive issue. This month, seven years ago, London won the 2012 games. The very next day, suicide bombers killed 52 people on a bus and the London subway.

So G4S' announcement put the government on the defensive. Their "plan B" is more troops. That means another 3,500 soldiers to keep the games secure.

Government officials say there is no specific terrorist threat against the Olympics. In fact, organizers are concerned about something else: The weather.

This has been the wettest summer in the U.K. since records began, and the forecast is for more of the same.

24 Photos

Peek inside the 2012 London Olympic Village

View the Full Gallery »

[rwsmith29456]

13,000 is quite a few warm bodies more than 2,000.

[TLUnrine1]

Send Romney over there to play Mighty Mouse "Here I Come To Save The Dayyyyyy!"

He could still run for President, the same way he wasn't running Bain Capital when he left for SLC Olympics.

[venusvegasvada]

The contractors are literally just throw-away troops anyway.

They should have planned to use real troops from the beginning.

I know if I were there, I'd feel a million times safer seeing British troops everywhere rather than a bunch of rental cops.

No comparison.

[askagain]

Here we go again. Let the governmernt do everything. If governments around the world could provide enough security, there wouldn'r be a need for private security firms. Those who sponsor the olympics have an obligation to provide security as well, not just the taxpayers.

[venusvegasvada]

I say that for multiple reasons-

Real troops have the true authority of the law and the Govt. behind them. They are well taken care of- medical, education, retirement, family support, etc. They are treated with respect because they are our sons and daughters who have volunteered to protect us. They are our most precious resource. It costs money to support them and pay for their benefits, but a grateful society bears that cost with pride.

It's one thing to have contractors as technical support personnel, that's required with the high tech equipment our military's need to function. There has to be technical support from industry to the military in order for the military to do their jobs. That's not what I have a problem with.

What I have a problem with, is when some Govt. bean counters, that don't care about the actual people who put themselves in harms way, marginalize contractors to replace the shooters- I.E. combat troops, in order to save the Govt. some money. I'm talking about replacing real troops that shoot people with contractors. That is an entirely different can of worms and actually they shouldn't even be called contractors if they have weapons and are hired to shoot people. That's an insult to real contractors. Those people are simply mercenaries, plain and simple, but they don't call them that because it opens a huge legal can of worms, so they sneak them in under the guise of a "contractor".

Legally, it's a mess for a Govt hired mercenary to actually shoot somebody as they don't fall under the protections of the Govt/military laws.

Furthermore, those mercenaries are marginalized. They receive none of the real benefits of service or recognition. They get paid a bit more during their employment, but the companies they work for are the real reapers of the fruits of their labors. The little bit more they make is about all they get. Afterwards they are caste aside and forgotten. They don't even get recognition for serving in a combat environment if they apply for a Govt. job later, even though they actually saved the Govt. money! It's incredible!

Another good thing about having a nations troops out there in the street is the interaction between them and the public. It shows the public the real face of the military. Not some disconnected image from the evening news. But to see them face to face and appreciate the sacrifices they make.

That's a good thing that will pay benefits to society that you can't put a dollar value on.