Your opinion: Private security firms

C

CGSteve8718

New member
I posted this in the "Have you served" thread but it probably would be more appropriate here as a new topic.

I'm curious, do you guys think people who work for private security companies or as the media hounds like to dub them "mercernaries" are serving their country?

I've seen a whole bunch of them while I was in Iraq. A lot of them are prior servicemembers who utilize their experience or skills to do either the same job as the military or jobs that the military won't or can't do, but for more money and no bureaucratic bs.

I'm still hung up on them myself. I don't have a problem with them though, I think I might be leaning towards yes because in some form, they are contributing to the same cause...

Interested to hear from the older guys who served in different wars, different times, even though this thing isn't "new" at all eg. the Hessians. I think even in Vietnam, there were a lot of "military civilians" out and abouts.
 
They're serving their paycheck. The re-up age is quite high now. They could have re-uped if they wanted to. And I do resent that taxpayer dollars are going to six-figure merc salaries while actual volunteer military gets paid very, very little.

And as for their use in the US:

I have no problem with them guarding private property. But once they start moving around on PUBLIC property here, to me, any threat of deadly force against a citizen is criminal, as they have no authority, and can be dealt with as one would deal with any criminal threat of deadly force.
 
If there wasn't a need for them then they wouldn't be there.Most of what I have seen and read about them describes them as professionals doing a job.
Mercs have been used as long as their have been wars and will be in the future.That said,something about a guy fighting for purely money just feels strange even if I understand why they are needed and why they do it.
 
Back in the 60's a guy from my old unit looked me up . He was recruiting for a guy named Col. (Mad) Mike Hoare as a merc somewhere in Africa . The details were scetchy at best . I passed . Fast forward to the future . I met a guy that served as part of the South African Army/Police that recognized my buddies name . (It was the same as a historical figure) . He said he was part of a small group picked up on the road stark naked and beaten nearly to death . And to think the one thing he was sure of when he tried to "put a sell on me" was that it paid $1500 a week . Pay ain't crap if you don't come home . I would rather die for my country than kill for money . This is coming to you from a guy that made $72 a month when I joined as an E-1 . When I made E-2 (I think a week or maybe a month later) I was bumped up to $78 a month . E-3 was like $98 a month . I remember with jump pay and overseas pay I was bringing in about $160 a month . I guess what I'm saying is that I would have served (and even killed) for free BUT there was not enough money to make me take a life .
 
Thanks for your opinions everyone and thanks for your story paratrooper. That sounds like it was some crazy stuff.

Military pay got a lot better but it still isn't anywhere near great.
 
I have no qualms about guys putting their skills to use to protect private property and whatnot but I don't think they should be in a combat zone representing our country. Even though they're now subject to rules of conduct their boss is still the corporation they work for, not the people of this country. To the people of other nations they are part of the American military and there is less assurance and accountability that they'll act in a manner acceptable to the American people.

I'm sure many of them are decent guys but they also take gung-ho warrior-wannabes that didn't qualify for the military for one reason or another but still wanted to play tough guy. I don't want someone like that representing my country overseas and I certainly don't want him "assisting" law enforcement here at home.

Not to mention the fact that if Congress pulls our troops out of Iraq Bush can still keep tens of thousands of mercenaries in-country doing what the American people don't want him doing at all.
 
Correction Redworm,

Congress could not pull our troops, only the money for them. The same with the "private contractors" Congress controls the purse strings, great checks and balances.

Just a minor point, want everyone to remember thier civics classes.
 
I would be curious to ask the guys that are "serving" (probably should just say "working", maybe) in this capacity weather they would do this for a company that was not working in line, or in accordance with the goals of the USA. Would they serve with the same company if they were providing the same services for France or Germany even the UN.

I suspect most of the guys would say no, they would not put themselves in harms way for someone elses Country.

(I think the defintion of Mercany is one who fights only for money)

Just a thought
 
I see private security personell (i refuse to call them "officers" ) as little more than just "rental cops" Most I've met seem to either be mall ninja's, or guys that couldnt make it into the police academy.

Mercenaries? Intresting. Mixed feelings on them. I dont have a problem with them being used in a special forces manner. Used as foot soldiers, they are expensive and a waste of taxpayer money. The whole "holier than thou" attitude ya get from many such groups is a real turn off too. My herritage comes from a historically long line of mercenaries and guns/swords for hire. That come to an end during the American Revolution. We lost the battle, and the British didnt want us back. I guess that made us Americans, like it or not. (on a side note, I'm proud to be American, but every july 4th, I take a moment to remember my Ancestors died to stop the revolution, not continue it.)
 
Paratrooper

What do you say, if you were a soldier now, served two or three tours in the desert, than came home, had a month or two left before your re-up date and were asked by a company to ETS, come work for them, do almost the same thing in Iraq (for the US Goverment) but get paid SUBSTAINTIALLY more would you do it. Knowing that if you re-enlisted you would probably go back and do the same thing.

Might be kinda tough for me, I can see the appeal of the money for doing almost the same thing a lot of them have done already. (If it was somewhere else for someone elses country I would definitely walk away though)
 
And I do resent that taxpayer dollars are going to six-figure merc salaries while actual volunteer military gets paid very, very little.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, private companies are responsible for equipping and arming their people themselves. They have to provide their own transport, air support, and weapons. If they get their butts uin a crack, the military is under no obligation to react, so they have to provide a reaction force. Plus, the contractors themselves have to pay for their own life insurance and some health bennies. The payoff is big, but the risks are also pretty big. If you do make it to payday, you either sign up for another assignment that will certainly put you in harm's way. or you go find other work. If you're killed, no bands, no flags, just dead.

As for those that cook, drive trucks, do laundy or whatever, they free up the military to go find bad guys.
 
TwoXForr

My point is simple . I WILL NOT kill for money . I WILL kill in the service of my country . Of course I will take a life in defense of myself or my family . Money is one of the strongest motivators we have . Now I will qualify a bit . I have always had enough money so there was never a great need . Therefore there was never the temptation . It's easy to stand for something that you will never have to prove . On the other hand the guy from my unit seemed to be happy looking like "Billy Bad Azz" to everyone .
Now here's another thought to dwell on . A guy I knew that served with the 173rd Airborne Brigade was working in Seirra Leone for a "security" firm and offered to get me hired on . 7K a month CASH! Just to escort gold and diamond shipments . Weapons of choice . My wife (bless her heart) thought about it and asked me how long I would be gone . (7K CASH a month had an effect on her) . My logic was that it seemed that I was still in a situation where I was killing for money . BTW after all the political fuss over there I have NOT heard from him again . I think I will just keep drivin' my big ol' truck and being a CB hero .
 
First of all, let's separate out what the OP is about.

It looks to me as if the subject is the "mercenaries" that are paid by "security" firms to protect people and assets in the sandbox.

I do NOT think the OP was asking about domestic security guards (armed or not) used to protect mostly property in the U.S. The subject of domestic security guards is another furball topic, I think.
 
They are all prior service, atleast the ones I talked with that were on my base in Iraq. Most were in their late 30s and mid 40s, and just had enough of the political crap associated with the military. My team leader I in Iraq with has worked for the top two security firms in Iraq and says they are all very professional. That they also have a basic training like course and classes and what not and if you don't make the cut, see ya, thank you for trying out, he said it's a very paced training course, so they pick from the best of who volunteers.
 
To get a private security contractor to guard convoys on a highway in Absurdistan, Congress (effectively) writes a check to XYZ Co. and says "Guard these convoys." If XYZ Co. wants to turn and spend the money to make sure they've got the highest paid highway guards on the planet, more power to 'em.

Now, suppose we decide to use a U.S. Army infantry company instead. Either we have to task a unit away from its parent formation, which is probably short of troops to cover its AO in the first place, or we spin up and ship over a Nat'l Guard formation. True, the individual soldiers aren't making as much per month, but there are a lot of hidden costs there: from medical care and the GI Bill to the infrastructure required to transport and feed that infantry company: There is a lot of "tail" required to support 120-something guys worth of "teeth".

The reason the check gets cut to XYZ Co., or whoever, is because it's a smaller check, and it allows us to keep the infantry company in Indian Country doing the things that XYZ can't do.
 
I'm sure many of them are decent guys but they also take gung-ho warrior-wannabes that didn't qualify for the military for one reason or another but still wanted to play tough guy. I don't want someone like that representing my country overseas and I certainly don't want him "assisting" law enforcement here at home.
Click to expand...


Any reputable company requires prior military service or LEO/Swat background. They won't take a guy off the street and train him for PSD, they want him to already have the background and training base so they can train him to their standard and TTP.
They are a little more lax for static security, but still have a standard that they enforce. It depends on the company and the contract. There's more to it than just getting some guns, a couple of Joes, an SUV and calling yourself a PSD team.

As for the OP, I don't have a problem with them as long they maintain a professional standard. BW catches a lot of heat because they are the largest and it puts them in the spot light more.

As a side note, virtually all of the contractors BW has overseas are independent contractors sub-contracted by BW for a contract period of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top