That is accurate and therefore fair enough.....
Blackwater License Revoked
- Thread starter RenegadeRick
- Start date
That is accurate and therefore fair enough.....
I don't think it's a question of whether or not they are doing what they need to survive. It's a question of if they should be there in the first place.
no prob with you mike, you are very well spoken.
I've been to Kuwait, probably before you were born. I walked around, visited mosques, bought stuff from local shops, and generally enjoyed myself. I wonder what's happened since then? I suppose it's all the arab's fault?
They should embrace Jesus....
kuwait now is like bartertown on mad max. just nothing but corruption, extortion and hate groups running amuck. kuwait is supposed to be a nuetral or friendly country but it was far from it. it seems to be a "stepping stone" for vagrant terrorists and radical muslims in and out of iraq.
we had 3 soldiers killed in kuwait just moving vehicles from the port.
Amen brotha! AMEN!
So what do you think happened to it? Seriously, I remember one day I was joking around with some locals and they were showing me how to put on a turban. They looked just like bin Laden. Everyone I met over there was friendly and generally happy. Where did all those people go? Or maybe WE PISSED THEM OFF?! You can only push someone so far before they snap, no matter how nice of a person they were to start with.
alot of them went to saudi or left the major cities. since desert storm it has declined in organic population quite a bit. and after the start of OIF it has been the center of operation for us forces going into iraq. this has led "others to the watering hole to speak. I had the oppourtuntity to take a couple days off when i was in saudi and was able to speak to a few shieks about this and thier response was, "thier country is being taken over by thugs and americans, the americans will leave one day, whats left."
It really is sad. I wonder if the decline started when Saddam invaded, or when we stuck our noses in there.
That's not precisely what we're discussing...it's more of a question of whether/how much the tools of the policy share responsibility for the bad policy being implemented. MMike and Chang believe they share as much or more.
None of us think the policy was a good idea from the outset.
this quagmire make me appreciate unprotected sex. because without unprotected sex with my wife i would not have 3 kids. without 3 kids i would have taken the job with BW and would be stuck in the middle of this junk. 
yeah for procreation!
yeah for procreation!
And here is where I think you need to make a distinction between the Blackwater "contractors" and the regular armed forces.
But the contractors are not prosecuting a war or implementing policy at all. They are providing protection to US diplomats and other civilians doing work in the war zone, and there's no legitimate argument that these people shouldn't be afforded the right to stay alive while they do their jobs. (Again, you can argue whether they or any US/UN/Western power should be present at all, but that's a policy argument, and I am strictly arguing on the de facto situation, not whether US policy is intelligent, productive, or fair in the overall sense.) Contractors are the only people who can provide this necessary protection.
Blackwater is not, as is said in the parlance, a "private army" or "mercenaries." PSD contractors do not provide offensive combat power or support for US policy, except by allowing diplomats to get to meetings alive and infrastructure providers to work on building it.
We're operating under different definitions. An unarmed truck driver, I fully understand how he isn't a mercenary. I think it's crazy that an army that has a budget of half a trillion a year can't take care of it's own logistics, but that's another story. I'm not going to argue that they shouldn't be allowed to keep themselves alive. What I would contend is that they shouldn't be allowed to keep themselves alive at the expense of the civilian population in Iraq, especially considering the lack of oversight and accountability that they seem to operate under.
Speaking of the State Department contractors from Blackwater, I can say that there's a HUGE amount of oversight as to what they do. The idea of PSD contractors going off to do their own thing, apparently without a protectee, as R00 describes, is unthinkable in that context. Perhaps it was different in the early days or in the hinterlands, but I have no experience with that.
Now, as to the "expense of the civilian population of Iraq," well, I go back to an individual's right to stay alive. If there's a guy shooting from a crowd, I tend to name that individual for collateral loss of life/property, not the victims of his attack who are defending themselves.
That said, I understand that from many Iraqis' point of view, attacking any US target is legitimate. However, just because I understand how they feel and why, I don't think American diplomats, third-country workers, or aid workers should get killed while driving around Iraq. The political consequences of being baited/forced to fight in crowded civilian areas, obviously, are great. But that matters little when bullets are punching holes in your car or IEDs are blowing you up.
And when someone runs a checkpoint or closes on a motorcade, and their car is attacked, then the driver is shot, I don't blame the motorcade for defending itself in an environment where any car can be a lethal explosive device. Motorcades and checkpoints are high-profile, and anyone, including non-Iraqis, will pay the price for obliviousness in the war-zone environment.
An American truck driver was cut in half by an Aussie with a machine gun at the hospital over there...driver reached down to pick up a banana off the floor, let off the brake a bit, and rolled towards the checkpoint. The American guard shot at the engine compartment in accordance with his ROE. The Aussie guard, having less restrictive ROE, put a belt of rounds directly into the cockpit. I don't blame the Aussie...he did what he was trained and authorized to do to protect himself. Tragic, but that's why you have to be vigilant driving in a war zone.
(and, it should be noted, situations like this are obviously going to arise from any long-term occupation of a country, and since the political consequences of civilians dying on your watch, by your hand, however tragic, are pretty hard to overcome, you DON'T PUT YOURSELF IN THESE SITUATIONS as a country...but again, that's a strategy question, not a tactical decision. I'm starting to feel like Bruce Willis in The Siege here...)
normally, I'm in agreement with you, but aren't those two things often mutually exclusive given the situations described above?
Isn't that how Falluja exploded?
We're mostly in agreement, but this is where I make a distinction between guys with guns from Blackwater and the regular armed forces. The Blackwater guys can leave any time they want to. They don't...they are choosing to stay for the money, which is why I consider them mercenaries.MikeD said:
By the way, have you read Fiasco? If so, what did you think of it?
See my reply to Mr. D...
Well, the word "mercenary" is something I only disagree with when it's used as a prejorative...which it generally is. But I also disagree with it because mercenaries, to me, are paid to fight...and these guys are paid to do what protection agents/bodyguards do, world-over, from the Secret Service to private executive protection specialists. (That is, manage risk, keep their protectees far from fights, and get them out of any fights they're in...or fight to survive if forced to stay in place). They just do it in an environment that forces them to jock up like Marines instead of the Men in Black.
I liked Fiasco a lot, but it just generally mirrored my feelings (Tom Ricks is a big USMC rah-rah guy) instead of giving me hope or insight into a way out of things.
I liked Fiasco a lot, but it just generally mirrored my feelings (Tom Ricks is a big USMC rah-rah guy) instead of giving me hope or insight into a way out of things.
I'm amazed that you can be so blase about killing innocent people. George must be glad he has people like you to do his dirty work for him. Wow. I hope it at least gives you some sleepless nights.
Are you really so naive as to think that calling them "contractors" wasn't dreamt up by a PR executive somewhere? I know you're not...
I can't imagine the type of person that applies to work at Blackwater. I understand the money aspect....but if that what you're REALLY there for, you can go crab fishing or work on an oil rig or something. As near as I can tell, the only reason someone would want to work for Blackwater is to be allowed to hurt people.
My problem with Blackwater is that they don’t have the same kind of oversight as the military.
I understand that the military can not provide the protection services that Blackwater and other contractors do. Let them have it.
There are bad people who do bad things in the military as well as Blackwater (Look at the Marines and 101st AA Soldier on trial). However, as of right now, no Blackwater personnel have been prosecuted either under American or Iraqi law for “crimes” everyone knows they commit. As was mentioned, when an innocent Iraqi is killed by a US Service member, there is usually an investigation. Not so with a contractor. They are given the equivalent of “Diplomatic Immunity.”
Contractors can use weapons and tactics, which I as a member of a standing Army can not, because I fall under the Geneva Convention. These include the use of hollow-point ammo and integration tactics. I have seen both first hand, but we can’t do anything to stop it even though we knew it was wrong.
Let Blackwater stay for all I care, but put them under the same rules that all Western Armies play by, such as the Geneva Convention and/or the Laws of War. They give what we are doing over here a bad after-taste. That doesn’t sound like to much of a stretch, does it?
Food for thought: Blackwater fields its own fleet of Armored Personnel Carriers and Attack Helicopters (Modified Little Birds). While, there is an argument that they need IED protection and air support, what about when this thing ends? You are going to have a company with the equivalent firepower of a small company. Responsible too………………? Now that's scary.
I understand that the military can not provide the protection services that Blackwater and other contractors do. Let them have it.
There are bad people who do bad things in the military as well as Blackwater (Look at the Marines and 101st AA Soldier on trial). However, as of right now, no Blackwater personnel have been prosecuted either under American or Iraqi law for “crimes” everyone knows they commit. As was mentioned, when an innocent Iraqi is killed by a US Service member, there is usually an investigation. Not so with a contractor. They are given the equivalent of “Diplomatic Immunity.”
Contractors can use weapons and tactics, which I as a member of a standing Army can not, because I fall under the Geneva Convention. These include the use of hollow-point ammo and integration tactics. I have seen both first hand, but we can’t do anything to stop it even though we knew it was wrong.
Let Blackwater stay for all I care, but put them under the same rules that all Western Armies play by, such as the Geneva Convention and/or the Laws of War. They give what we are doing over here a bad after-taste. That doesn’t sound like to much of a stretch, does it?
Food for thought: Blackwater fields its own fleet of Armored Personnel Carriers and Attack Helicopters (Modified Little Birds). While, there is an argument that they need IED protection and air support, what about when this thing ends? You are going to have a company with the equivalent firepower of a small company. Responsible too………………? Now that's scary.
Ha-ha, funny you should say that. One little rumour the tin-foil hat brigade has doing the rounds is that Bush is going to use Blackwater as his private army to hold onto power after his term finishes. Private army, cool. Actually it'd be cooler if it was a private army of zombies or robot ninjas.
Responsible directly to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security officers, and therefore the ambassador, who live and work in short proximity to the Blackwater living compound. The DS command center in the embassy has precise knowledge of the tasks each Blackwater team has, and has 100% tactical control over everywhere they go and every asset they use. Federal authorities oversee everything, and dictate the tactics and equipment used by Blackwater under the WPPS contract.
What's scary to me are the military Joes who are handed cool suburbans and weapons and sent to perform the PSD job without any real knowledge of PSD tactics and techniques. Oftentimes they're really trying their best, and there are some fantastic guys there, but they don't generally know how to drive an armored SUV safely, and many are intoxicated by being designated "PSDs" and speed all over the IZ as if they're under fire, even though they're just taking a friend through checkpoints using their PSD credentials unlawfully so they can get to the PX.
Again, how other companies run things, particularly those not under the WPPS, aren't anything I have any first-hand experience with, but Blackwater is tightly controlled, to the point that State security personnel often ride in the motorcades to oversee their tactics/techniques/procedures (not to mention their being beholden to the diplomats' personal-and sensitive-opinions).
Blackwater also doesn't have diplomatic immunity...in fact, they're now technically subject to the UCMJ, as far as I know.
You're mad they're using hollowpoint ammo? Please...you'd use it, too, if the military would pay for it. There are military members who use it, too, by the way...just not your average grunt or rear-echelon guys.
Are you retarded? [Thats a serious question....]I'm amazed that you can be so blase about killing innocent people. George must be glad he has people like you to do his dirty work for him. Wow. I hope it at least gives you some sleepless nights.
Are you a psychopath? Serious question.
Nope.
Nope.
I've got to hear this...Seriously, you imply that George bush is stupid, I mean, come on, do you actually read your own posts?
Completely missing my point Mike. He obviously had to do what he had to do. The callously cold way it was described was what I was shocked by.
I didn't miss the point; I just wanted to make sure that you understood his actions, but didn't think they were appropriate unless he flagellated himself for it later on the Internet to a bunch of strangers...
Well if shooting holes in kids doesn't cause at least momentary introspection I don't know what would. I'm sorry to be shocked that some people here can so casually mention killing innocent people regardless of circumstances. I'll be sure to toughen up in future.
What do you mean, "regardless of circumstances?" We're actually speaking of pretty specific circumstances...and he's not reveling in his actions, but acknowledging their necessity at the time.Well if shooting holes in kids doesn't cause at least momentary introspection I don't know what would. I'm sorry to be shocked that some people here can so casually mention killing innocent people regardless of circumstances. I'll be sure to toughen up in future.
Don't put words in my mouth, I never said he revelled in it. His description of it was more emotionless than I would have expected from someone in as awful a situation as that. And, regardless of circumstances, it's always awful when an innocent life is taken. Sincerely hope none of us have become so jaded as to not realise that.
I never said that you said that he was reveling...I was just pointing out that he wasn't, like, happy, like you know...?
I don't think the Internet's a spectacular forum for conveying depth of emotion, and there's no "it sucked to have to shoot kids" smilie, so I think we can end the pissing contest over this...I just didn't get the same vibe from his post that you seem to have.
I don't think the Internet's a spectacular forum for conveying depth of emotion, and there's no "it sucked to have to shoot kids" smilie, so I think we can end the pissing contest over this...I just didn't get the same vibe from his post that you seem to have.
Fair enough.
No use arguing with you anyway, you have this depressing ability to bring logic and common sense to the table so it's no fun at all.
