The United States Army has undergone dramatic changes in operations as well as support activities since that fateful day in September, 2001. These changes have been marked by supplemental budgets, new equipment and increased contractor utilization. As a result of these changes, there has been a dramatic shift in the reliance on contracted support by the U.S. Army. This reliance will have strategic implications which will affect the military profession as we face conflicts in the future. In essence, the increased utilization of contracted sustainment support will lead to inefficiencies and unexpected risk as the U.S. Army engages in conflicts of the future. The intent of this paper is to provide an over-arching analysis and critique of contracted sustainment support. Although beneficial in many areas, contracted support will have strategic implications if the U.S. Army's core sustainment capabilities are unavailable or potentially nonexistent in the future. Greater exposure to the contracting issue will effectively bring balance to the workforce and mitigate potential risks in the future.