Iraq bans Blackwater operations, all Blackwater personnel told to leave immediately

...it used to be the Marines who provided all this high level protection in the past...why the need now for ex-used to be's?
Click to expand...

Nope you are incorrect. And I am pretty sure that the U.S. Marine Corps and the military et al has better things to do then escort DOS officials everytime they leave the green zone. This comes down to proper use of forces. Why would you try to use line infantry to do PPD?

What do you think is more cost effective for the US goverment? Training a bunch of 0311's how to do PPD or hire it out to a PC? Or maybe you want to use the SPECOP community? Sure they are trained for it. Force Reconaissance has done PPD for senators overseas before but thats a waste because now you have to invest strategic assests every time a low level DOS'er has to meet with a local mayor or tribal leader.

I am not sure where you get the ill founded notion that these PC guys are running around killing wontonly. The majority of these folks are engaged in day to day escort and personal protection of agents of the US government. As for accountability when PC's are running escort for DOS they fall under the DSS chain of command and now due to the bill that past this year they are subject to the UCMJ.

You are allowed you opinion as are we all. But I have to say I think you watched Mel Gibson and Robert Downey Jr's antics one too many times on late night cable. These people are good at what they do and they are compensated for it. Calling these people mercenaries is an incorrect term.

ETA

have a military...I stand by my assessments...have a problem with it, Xin Loi.
Click to expand...

I just for giggles googled your little Vietnamese saying there and I must say very classy of you to tell someone to F**K OFF in a different language. Way to bring the thread to a lower level.
 
Last edited:
It's all fun and games until "innocent bystanders got killed" includes a member of your family or someone you know. Think about that before spewing some "oh well the let this happen so who cares".
 
Well, I won't stoop down to your level of

provocative language/tone, but if you spoke Vietnamese, as I do, Xin Loi means too bad...now Concealed, who's bringing down the tone of the thread? It's the internet guy...it's not real:rolleyes:

Lastly, the thread is going fine, with a lot of opinions, no one getting in anyone's face, and then you step in with your subtle personal attack... the thread took a slight dip downward, but it will survive.
 
Last edited:
Alnamvet,

Why did you last post switch from bold font to normal font half way through? You stated that for some reason you had to use bold font and it was not meant to be construed as yelling. If you can turn it off then please do so.
 
Gee Musk...

is that all you can positively contribute to this thread? Why the sick obsession with my font, bold or otherwise? Are you now the official TFL Font Detective? Hate for this thread to get OT and closed down because of personal attacks, and marginalizing posts for only one reason...choice of font:rolleyes:
 
Alnamvet,

So you don't agree that United States private, civilian contractors can be held in Federal Court for violation of International Law and the Geneva Conventions?
 
The one sentence section (number 552 of a total 3510 sections) states that "Paragraph (10) of section 802(a) of title 10, United States Code (article 2(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by striking `war' and inserting `declared war or a contingency operation'."

"Contingency Operation" would include military mercinaries and guns for hire.
 
Alnamvet said:

Gee Musk...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

is that all you can positively contribute to this thread? Why the sick obsession with my font, bold or otherwise? Are you now the official TFL Font Detective?
Click to expand...

Your the one who said it wasn't inflammatory when I called it the first time. When you stated it wasn't meant as such I even apologized stating I understood that in a few rare cases some people have reported issues forcing the use of bold font. I even granted the face saving method of blaming it on hardware/software and being non intentional. You have been told that the use of it is meant to consitute yelling and if you continue to do so, after knowing that, it is rude nonetheless. Sorry if good manners bug you.

Part of the way to prevent threads from turning into flame wars with personal attacks is to maintain proper decorum. When you respond to people negatively and repeatedly in bold font it will be precieved as shouting. You now have been told that twice. If you want to have an effective dicussion then remain civil. Your intentions are meaningless if the accepted intetion of your behaviour is negative.

By the way, as I said before, thanks for your service although I disagree with much of what you are saying and consider it flat out wrong.
 
It's all fun and games until "innocent bystanders got killed" includes a member of your family or someone you know.
Click to expand...


How many people would that have to happen to on US soil before we were up in arms? How many mothers jogging with strollers would we need to see hit, or churches blown up before we figured out we need to take national security into our own hands?

I'm not citing this incident in perticular, but it does beg the question. How long will Iraqi's just sit and complain about this type of thing before they actually get up, get out, and push the crazy terrorist-fundamentalists out of their country? It should've happened by now, and if they don't care about earning their freedom, why should we?
 
Can we just stick to the facts and our understanding of them, rather than personal attacks and demeaning. If someone wants to use bold...so what? I can read it more easily, hehe. But, I don't think labling every private contractor in Iraq as a "scumbag" is right either.

I'm not citing this incident in perticular, but it does beg the question. How long will Iraqi's just sit and complain about this type of thing before they actually get up, get out, and push the crazy terrorist-fundamentalists out of their country? It should've happened by now, and if they don't care about earning their freedom, why should we?
Click to expand...

The difference between the middle-eastern culture and our own here in the United States is that they have a situational desensitization to death, war and tragedy. This has been happening in their environment, in their culture and their lives throughout the history of their existence up to and most likely beyond today.

Americans are not accustomed to such issues. We are used to being safe. We are used to seeing people die of old age, and it is tragic to us when someone important to us dies unnaturally. If this kind of thing happened here in the US, we WOULD take up arms against the evil amongst us. But, those in the Middle east see their families die. They see their lives torn apart on a regular basis. Their countries are third world countries on top of it all. Unnatural deaths are almost standard.

This is not to say it makes it any easier for them. Death is hard no matter who it is. There is always a family member who will be there to see the aftermath. But, these people are not accustomed to doing anything about it. We are.
 
you know I always thought that If we could make Iraq hate us or someone else enough, they could unite in that idea and rise as a nation.
 
Of Mercs and Soldiers...

Here is where I attract all types of hatred. Tell me what the difference is between a US Soldier who joined up for a $20,000 signing bonus, or payment for school and a mercenary when it comes to their moral motivation to fight?

They both do it for money, the only difference is one has an American flag on his uniform and has the option of quitting if he disagrees with the asignment. Oh, and the merc who is hired probably has more military experience and skills than the kid who simply joined for a bonus or school money.

There are plenty of people who join for patriotic reasons. Pat Tillman was a perfect example and many folks joined after 9/11, like after Pearl Harbor. Then there have been in the past many who were drafted. While not joining up because of a "noble cause" or desire to serve their nation they cannot be considerred to have joined up for monetary gain. If people join up though for money they do so for purely mercenary reasons.

Then there is the fact that many who joined up in the past, before 9/11, for the money never ever thought they would be deployed to a war zone, especially those in the Gaurd. This has led to the cases of people trying to get out now after they have been deployed and the cases of outrage at having been deployed. Again, I am not saying all but we know that it does apply to more than one or two. Looking at it that way at least the mercenary expects to be used for a job where he may get killed.

To say we do not have "mercenaries" within our own military would be ludicrous. Why then has the pentagon offerred higher signing bonuses except to entice young people to join with cash?

I still support our troops over anyone foreign power, period. Let us not be blind to their motivation though and if we are going to call those of Blackstone mercenaries then there are some within our own ranks to which the name also applies. The mercenary is simply skilled enough and valuable enough to better dictate the terms of his employment than the kid accepting a $20k bonus to act as Team America World Police and khaki clad IED detector.
 
Good article CrazyIvan.

This part seems to be of particular value:

In many ways, the new law is the 21st century business version of the rights contract: If a private individual wants to travel to a warzone and do military jobs for profit, on behalf of the US government, then that individual agrees to fall under the same codes of law and consequence that American soldiers, in the same zones, doing the same sorts of jobs, have to live and work by. If a contractor doesn't agree to these regulations, that's fine, don't contract. Unlike soldiers, they are still civilians with no obligation to serve. The new regulation also seems to pass the fairness test. That is, a lance corporal or a specialist earns less than $20,000 a year for service in Iraq, while a contractor can earn upwards of $100,000-200,000 a year (tax free) for doing the same job and can quit whenever they want. It doesn't seem that unreasonable then to expect the contractor to abide by the same laws as their military counterpart while in the combat theatre. Given that the vast majority of private military employees are upstanding men and women -- and mostly former soldiers, to boot -- living under the new system will not mean much change at all. All it does is now give military investigators a way finally to stop the bad apples from filling the headlines and getting away free.
Click to expand...

I think that is really all we need. If there is a crime let the US investigate it as it would with any uniformed US soldier. If the contractor does not like the terms then they can quit.
 
I believe Blackwater should be held accountable for there actions they are paid to do a job and paid well. I think our Government should be the ones puting them on the spot though. If they are found to be in the right then so be it. If they are found to be in the wrong then so be it.

Tell me what the difference is between a US Soldier who joined up for a $20,000 signing bonus, or payment for school and a mercenary when it comes to their moral motivation to fight?

They both do it for money, the only difference is one has an American flag on his uniform and has the option of quitting if he disagrees with the asignment. Oh, and the merc who is hired probably has more military experience and skills than the kid who simply joined for a bonus or school money.
Click to expand...

The 20k bonus you mentioned for the kid signing up do you know how much of that he see's in the lump sum payment he gets up front? If not it's about 7600 dollars after tax's. The other 7600 is spread out over the enlistment every Oct. So for 4 years it would be a extra 1900 dollars a month. A E-1 makes 1301 dollars a month before taxs. So with his 20k signing bonus the first year he will make 23212 dollars before tax's. Lets just say he is a e-3 next year he now makes 1534 a month. So with his bonus he make 20308 before tax's.
I didn't add in the extra 225 bucks for hostile fire pay, maybe I should have. Also being in a Iraq would be tax free.

But I will assure you Blackwater guys are getting much more than that.

EDIT: I didn't get a signing bonus but I did get a FAT re-enlistment bonus and I'm not in Iraq I'm on Submarines. I also just realized that my re-enlistment bonus worked that way and I could be wrong about sign up bonus but I would assume they worked the same.
 
FYI, I am not saying guys who do the job as US servicemen should not be paid. There are some though who take the job because the money makes sense to them and it has very little to do with patriotism or a call to duty. They though are not called soulless mercenaries unlike those who choose to work for Blackstone where their abilites are far better appreciated with regards to pay. Money decides alot and unless all our troops decide to work for nothing but room, board and a retirement plan at 60 something then compensation certainly has something to do with many of their enlistments... To an Iraqi insurgent, who I doubt is paid much, the US soldier must appear a mercenary as they are in their country being paid a wage much higher then them to enforce their employer's will through force of arms. Likewise to the VC who had a sack of rice given to him in comparison to US troops (most there through the draft but still paid).

People argue that mercenaries do not care what they are paid to do, simply that they are paid. Again there are US troops now on deployment against their will who do not agree with the war. They collect a paycheck for their service. The average soldier has no say in policy and goes where he is paid to go. At least the mercenary has the discretion to say no to a job.

Before we paint the people of Blackstone and other agencies as nothing but soulless mercenary killers we should understand what really motivates troops to fight and why they do. I just finished reading the book 1776 it it was interesting to see how many of the troops fighting for the nation's independence simply up and left when their time was done or suitable pay not offerred... I guess they were not patriots either. We all need to put food on the table, especially if one has a family. If one chooses to do it by selling the talents they developed in the US military I am not going to begrudge them the opportunity although I do believe accountability should be established with their employer through their contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top