Black water and our other mercenaries

45degreeN

It seems we have more mercenaries in Iraq than sworn military personnel. The recent flap over Blackwater's killing "innocent civilians" just is the tip of the iceberg.

The simple problem is that since we only have a volunteer force anymore, we cant recruit people to peel potatoes and cook dinners so we hire them as civilians and pay them far more than they ordinarily would ever get to do the same thing here.

In the case of Blackwater their primary job is to protect our politicians and diplomatic people who are there "in harms way" (looky loos in this war). It used to be the army that would do this, but no, they have more important things to do.

We seem to have contradictory evidence concerning the UCMJ. Are they in fact covered by it or not? Blackwater's own PR releases claim they are not under it yet the Pentagon claims they are covered. Mostly the Iraqis are very confused and frightened by these private military people who seem to do whatever they want whenever they want. Are they unaccountable? Given their no bid contract with the government of the US they are unaccountable to the taxpayers. We have more contractors in Iraq than military personnel does this make sense?
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.

Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com

saintmichaeldefendthem · Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:13 pm Post subject:

Hmm, just a couple of things I'm noticing.

One, you seem to have this case pre judged. You probably posted this before the news report that Blackwater operatives rescued the Polish ambassador who was beseiged by terrorists. Doesn't it seem that we should let the facts assert themselves before jumping to conclusions?

Two, you twice said that there are more contractors than military personnel in this combat zone. Do you have any numbers to support this? Does that really make any sense that contractors outnumber soldiers over there? Even if there were a shred of truth to that, one thing can be sure; most contractors are building schools and power plants, and the Iraqi people love them.

Now of course, I bring up a point that people often ignore. In this dumbing down mentalilty, we focus on a shootout between terrorists and contractors, and give the benefit of the doubt to the terrorists!

As far as being paid more, they deserve it. Since you know so little about these security contractors let me enlighten you. They consist mostly of former soldiers who have excelled in their field and are highly skilled in combat. Like accomplished Navy pilots who become airline pilots, these soldiers have earned the right to move into a more lucrative career. But even so, they still risk their lives so that armchair generals like yourself have the freedom to postulate and slander their service in blissful ignorance. No amount of money is worth a man's life.

With all the allies our enemies have in this country, I often wonder if we are worthy of the sacrifice that these brave men and women are making.

45degreeN · Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:51 am Post subject:

The point was never that this ambassador was protected but by whom was he protected.

Many of the contractors in Iraq have nothing to do with security and I would relegate them to the dustbin of discussion. It is the armed contractors that I worry about who seem to be a "law unto themselves" unaccountable to anyone. Up until yesterday when congress passed a new law putting them under the military chain of command and responsible for their actions.

It all starts with the fact that we have an all volunteer military by the way. It used to be that the military was self contained, they did everything needed to sustain themselves but not any more. No more cooks and other "non-essential" work codes. Now our military hires contractors (some locally)to do all those non-essential chores (very much like the Roman legions by the way).

Likewise when officials of some diplomatic status come into the war zone, they used to be protected by our military, but not now. This is where Blackwater comes into the scene. Black water has hired mostly ex-"special forces" types and arms them fully for situations like these escort missions. They got a 'no bid' contract for this duty some say because of their huge contributions to the Bush campaign in 2000 and 2004. At over $1000 per day they are very expensive.

But up until now they worked under the State department not the DOD, so the rules of engagement have blurry rules of just how they are supposed to respond when it appears danger comes to one of those precious people they escort. Being armed and in Iraq means for them that they dont have to be responsible to Iraq, and they are not even under the military rules so they exist in a no man's land of no rules, no limits and do whatever they want lifestyle. In 192 episodes of gun fire they have been accused of firing first in at least 80 of them.

We'll just have to wait and see what happens to them wont we?
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.

Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com

45degreeN · Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:02 am Post subject:

It seems the Iraqi government is demanding $8 million per "innocent civilian" killed (17 of them they say) and total disconnection between Blackwater and our government. who do they think runs their government anyway? We do! , so this little demand will go down with no money on the table (but maybe some "hush money" under the table).
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.

Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com

saintmichaeldefendthem · Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:43 pm Post subject:

I think Blackwater shames the Iraqis by hightlighting by brutal and deft efficiency, the incompetence and corruption that has retarded the civil control of their government.

Moreover, as much as the decepticrats who are drooling for our defeat, would like to frame the Iraq war as a Bush failure, if indeed it does fail, it will be because Iraq didn't step up to the plate. We have poured billions into their country and given ample blood and treasure to give them an opportunity at self governance. The problem is, we view pulling out of Iraq as a U.S. failure, when it should be viewed as an Iraqi failure. Not that there aren't brave Iraqi's like those who dodged bullets to cast their vote, but their government still follows the corrupt template of the former regime.

45degreeN · Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:28 pm Post subject:

saintmichaeldefendthem the western powers first stepped into Iraq Circa1919 after WWI. We inserted our own choice of government then and later on the Saddam government .

The issue of failure is long past and we are just deciding who will survive long enough to pick up the pieces. Dont you think we western powers need to just lay off of them and let them decide how they want to set up their own government.

At the moment the Al Maliki government is seen by the Iraqis as a stooge for the US, he will always be a weak leader for this very reason. In fact the government that we set up there in Iraq cannot ever be strong simply because we set it up. At best the Iraqis co-operated with us in setting it up, but they have not bought into it as the ultimate authority for their country. This must happen for it to gain strength and perform the things we expect from it. Frankly I dont see that happening anytime soon.

As far as Blackwater is concerned, the employees they hire are just doing the same thing they did earlier only for higher pay. As long as they are under the state department instead of the DoD they will continue to act the rogues. I'm guessing that the bill passed by congress to put them under military authority will do wonders for them even if they might not like it.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.

Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com

saintmichaeldefendthem · Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:13 pm Post subject:

45,

I know you don't rejoice in being correct on this issue, but I must reluctantly concede that you are. Now it's official that Blackwater operatives shot innocent Iraqi citizens according to the FBI, and some expert opinion paints them as a rogue force.....as you said all along. This is a sad finding as it imbrues our nation in the eyes of the world.

But it was also noted that most civilian security firms have impeccable records of service in Iraq. Hopefully this will cause a shakedown that results in more accountability for our civilian contractors. Even so, I still hold in highest regard those civilians that risk their lives ever as much as U.S. soldiers. Like the soldiers, most of them are doing the right thing.

Saint Michael, defend them in battle!

45degreeN · Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:37 am Post subject:

The underlying issue is about how our all volunteer forces are so few in numbers that they must hire contractors for all the extra duties.

It also seems that these particular contractors may still slip through th cracks and not be prosecuted because we didn't have the proper legal context set up. We'll see as time goes by. It seems the only legal obligation they might have is to Iraq and not US law.

By the way: I spent a year on contract in the middle East and I have no grudge against these men making the money, it is the context of the whole thing that bristles my bones.

In general I dont like mercenaries anywhere, I much prefer missionaries anytime.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.

Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com