[bohorec]

Ok, I'll quote you 2x.

Kindergartener on crack?

First of all, I never said that Blackwate(or other companies) is not a diplomatic security company, I said that they might also do military tasks(logistic). But you said that guarding civilians-diplomats is their only task. For example, according to link they were carrying U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan. Are such missions also DOS's task?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec07/blackwater_10-02.html

And nobody in this thread did not say that Blackwater started the war in Irak. It was said that it's a part of the war machine and for some reason you are trying to deny that very simple fact and you keep talking about proper grammar terms.

Am I conspiracy theorist now?

so I'd love to find where he states that Blackwater is taking over the military's job. Because if he said it, he's wrong...even if he's in the military in Iraq and even if I was a home-maker mother in Wisconsin.

I'm sure you'll check the first link, they were keep talking about privatization of the US military, contractors taking over millitary tasks and such stuff. But obviously they were on crack or something. (To be clear I'm writing about all contractors not only BW)

Just for you-a proof how private security companies have nothing to do with military:

Oh wait, now I know, because most of the people who work on our bases, prepare and serve our food, fix our vehicles, clean the latrines, drive the buses and transport our vehicles and supplies don't speak English! Isn't it great that the American Military can't support itself anymore? I digress....

Now show me a military unit trained, tasked, or equipped to protect civilians outside the military structure.

You said that it's not even a traditionally military role to protect their OWN leaders and I ask you simple queston. Again, are you joking?


Here is military opinion about their psd:

No love lost by U.S. military
Some U.S. military commanders similarly have no love for the company, which they say "complicates their battle space."

One U.S. commander working in the area where the Sept. 16 shooting took place told me, "It is one of the quietest areas in northwest Baghdad, as far as kinetic activity is concerned. Usually a lot of traffic. I would question the training of this PSD [Personal Security Detail]. We have trained our guys to hold fire and get used to driving in traffic. I have never heard of this number of civilians being killed in an EOF [Escalation Of Force]. We have had one EOF fatality in ten months in sector."

About diplomatic security mission, I like this term. And you are correct again. Private security companies are not military, because military fall under the Geneva convention (no hollow-point ammo, etc). And military don't do this:

Agents’ cars zigzag across the roads, guns pointed out the back. If a car gets too close, Blackwater agents often throw water bottles at its windshield. It's supposed to be a "non-lethal" warning. Better to have a water bottle hit you than be shot. But some Blackwater guards have been freezing the bottles so they crack the windshields.

Blackwater often keeps the same defensive posture even within the Green Zone, alienating just about everyone, their colleagues included.

One of the interior ministry officials involved in the investigation was himself hit by one of Blackwater's water bottle projectiles. He's still annoyed and insulted. The case is personal. He wants to see Blackwater go down. Many security contractors here do as well.

"This is worse than Abu Ghraib for us. It is going to be the Abu Ghraib of our industry," bemoaned one contractor, worried Blackwater's incident is going to ruin his business.

Another contractor said, "The big question is, why did the State Department allow Blackwater to behave this way? They were the clients. If they didn't like the way Blackwater operated, why didn't they say anything? Silence is consent."

You see the issue is not if they are part of military or not, it's have they act. They rescue polish ambassador, fine it's their job, but in 80% of the shootings, Blackwater fired first and there has been no proper sanction against them...

But obviously we have to praise the BW for saving polish ambassador and forget everything else...

 

[bohorec]

Ok 3x

Which, by the way, amounts to a few civilian-model helicopters without armament and some lightly armored cars (in military terms) with medium machineguns on them.
.

I almost forgot, is this vehicle lightly armored car?

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/grizzly/

 

[MikeD]

Ok 3x




I almost forgot, is this vehicle lightly armored car?

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/grizzly/

Yes, with a medium machinegun, just like I said.

 

[MikeD]

Ok, I'll quote you 2x.

Kindergartener on crack?

First of all, I never said that Blackwate(or other companies) is not a diplomatic security company, I said that they might also do military tasks(logistic). But you said that guarding civilians-diplomats is their only task.

No, I didn't; however, I can see how you could think that. But the scope of the discussion is Private Military Contractors (PMCs) doing Personal Security Details (PSDs) in Iraq, not other missions. And Blackwater's not a logistics company; it's a security company. They provide other services (training, convoy escort for civilian convoys) which actually could be military missions, but the PSD mission, which we're discussing, is not. The economics of using private vs. military assets is ongoing and has been since the founding of the US. Lots of private companies have provided stuff for the military to varying and changing degrees over the course of history. But that's basically an economic argument, and completely irrelevant here.

And nobody in this thread did not say that Blackwater started the war in Irak. It was said that it's a part of the war machine and for some reason you are trying to deny that very simple fact and you keep talking about proper grammar terms.

Actually, someone pretty much did say that. And it's extremely significant that people think that Blackwater is actually doing the military's mission. Because it isn't, and people have a very distorted view. They think Blackwater is an offensive combat unit. This is far more than a grammatical distinction.

I'm sure you'll check the first link, they were keep talking about privatization of the US military, contractors taking over millitary tasks and such stuff. But obviously they were on crack or something. (To be clear I'm writing about all contractors not only BW)

So you're blindly mixing arguments. The privatization issue is really an economic one. I'm not an economist and don't claim to be. But in the short term, since PSDS FOR CIVILIANS ARE NOT A MILITARY MISSION, contractors were the answer. I still think they are the only answer for diplomatic security in Iraq, because we can't/shouldn't hire more diplomatic security agents (part of the US Dept of State) to do this very short-term mission in a combat zone. They wouldn't be trained and working for another 2 years minimum if they were hired, and the training is extensive and expensive...and then you have hundreds more government employees, who you can’t fire, with no viable job positions when the war's over. Which it might be (hopefully) by the time they finish training.

You said that it's not even a traditionally military role to protect their OWN leaders and I ask you simple question. Again, are you joking?

No, you just don't understand what I've said...I put it to what I assume to be a non-native level of English and no military experience. I said military units don't provide PSDs...protecting their leaders as individuals rather than members of a unit. I've been a member of an armored military unit whose task was to protect a commander as part of my unit. I've also worked PSD missions as a civilian; I’m a specialist in international security and law enforcement. I know the difference. You don't. (I also know what a lightly-armored vehicle is…you obviously don’t.)

I also think it’s great that you obviously don’t like the “war machine,” but love to use military sources to denigrate PSD professionals. There are lots of reasons the military doesn’t like PSDs. Lots of these are historical reasons, with bad blood over the contractors not being fully integrated into the local situation and plan. Some are because of jealousy over the money. Some are because of the beards and the sunglasses. Some because, like the military, there are idiots and psychos in every group that needed weeding-out.

The PMCs have had their issues. Some continue to do so. The military does as well. Many issues, especially deconfliction with the military in-zone, have been largely worked out as the industry grew. I, and any other real professional, thinks accountability is a great thing. That’s why Blackwater is so tightly controlled now…and why the remaining contractors like it that way, as well. The rejects have been weeded out…from the WPPS State Department contract. I can’t speak much to others, and I know there are lots of third-country wierdos running around with guns in the hinterlands around here.

And this pedantic arguing-by-quote has never been my style. Too much computer geekery involved. I feel like I'm arguing with Old Man G-Funk all over again, but in his second language.

 

[bohorec]

No, I didn't; however, I can see how you could think that. But the scope of the discussion is Private Military Contractors (PMCs) doing Personal Security Details (PSDs) in Iraq, not other missions.

Ok ok they are doing PSD, but they are still merceneries and they are involved in all kind of sh1t going on there.

However here is a story of BW's employee, he actualy thinks he's defending his land :biggrin::

"We have to be willing to go abroad to fight, to go after these guys here so my family at home can stay safe,"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10547-2005Apr22.html

And it's extremely significant that people think that Blackwater is actually doing the military's mission. Because it isn't, and people have a very distorted view. They think Blackwater is an offensive combat unit. This is far more than a grammatical distinction.

Ok point taken. However in reality it's reported that their defensive units often act offensive.
One thing is for sure, Blackwater is actually doing a lot of money.
Here is the link to the article which describes relationship between BW and GWB. They did not start the war, but they might had few drinks together and discuss it, but this is speculation. However claiming they didn't is also speculation.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/10/02/blackwater_bush/index.html?source=rss&aim=yahoo-salon

So you're blindly mixing arguments. The privatization issue is really an economic one. I'm not an economist and don't claim to be. But in the short term, since PSDS FOR CIVILIANS ARE NOT A MILITARY MISSION, contractors were the answer. I still think they are the only answer for diplomatic security in Iraq, because we can't/shouldn't hire more diplomatic security agents (part of the US Dept of State) to do this very short-term mission in a combat zone. They wouldn't be trained and working for another 2 years minimum if they were hired, and the training is extensive and expensive...and then you have hundreds more government employees, who you can’t fire, with no viable job positions when the war's over. Which it might be (hopefully) by the time they finish training.

As I said point taken, well if BW would act professional this thread would not even exist. However you can call guarding L. Paul Bremer peace keeping operation if you like.

No, you just don't understand what I've said...I put it to what I assume to be a non-native level of English and no military experience. I said military units don't provide PSDs...protecting their leaders as individuals rather than members of a unit.

Historicaly, leaders were usually part of military while other "important" people were protected by mercenaries (now called psd or something).

I've been a member of an armored military unit whose task was to protect a commander as part of my unit. I've also worked PSD missions as a civilian; I’m a specialist in international security and law enforcement. I know the difference. You don't. (I also know what a lightly-armored vehicle is…you obviously don’t.)

That's why I asked you about it, thanks for ekplanation.

If anyone is interested here is video about saving ambassador:

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/242674.php