Mercenaries in Iraq

[Makalakumu]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/15/AR2007061502602.html

BAGHDAD -- Private security companies, funded by billions of dollars in U.S. military and State Department contracts, are fighting insurgents on a widening scale in Iraq, enduring daily attacks, returning fire and taking hundreds of casualties that have been underreported and sometimes concealed, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials and company representatives.

While the military has built up troops in an ongoing campaign to secure Baghdad, the security companies, out of public view, have been engaged in a parallel surge, boosting manpower, adding expensive armor and stepping up evasive action as attacks increase, the officials and company representatives said. One in seven supply convoys protected by private forces has come under attack this year, according to previously unreleased statistics; one security company reported nearly 300 "hostile actions" in the first four months.

Armed Ford F-350 pickups with steel-reinforced gun turrets and belt-fed machine guns protecting supply routes? This sounds like Mad Max for Christsakes! Anyway, what do you think about this?

 

[Blindside]

I don't have a problem with it. The world is a nasty place and the private military industry will have a role to play in it, it always has.

Lamont

 

[tshadowchaser]

sounds like what happens in most war zones
The troops are there for one reason these people for fill a different role
I just hope they do not have better equipment than the troops we sent as I feel the troops should have the best available not some private organization

 

[tellner]

As I've said before, they're not soldiers. They're not guerrillas. They're not mercenaries. They are the classic "unlawful combatants". I hate to say it, but I don't shed a single tear when one of them is killed, maimed or tortured. They are war criminals by definition. Screw them. And damn to hell the government which uses them. They're just part of the reason the US has squandered all moral authority and is becoming the most hated and loathed nation on Earth. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, the "War Czar" and the entire JCS should be up in front of the ICC at the Hague for crimes against humanity for using them.

 

[michaeledward]

I'm not certain there is anything we can do about it, except to recognize it for what it is.

A means of transferring more the citizenry's wealth to the military industrial complex (Contract soldiers are paid significantly more than Army soldiers).

A means of keeping military expenditures off the books, (billing the State Departmenht for contractors' services).

A means of keeping the number of military fatalities down, (contractor fatalities are rarely included in publicly discussed numbers of death and injury).

All of this falls under the control and direction of Vice President Dick Cheney. It was his idea, when he served as Secretary of Defense to 'outsource' military jobs. The idea was, it would keep some costs down, and allow for the smaller military size in the post cold war era. When he left government service, isn't it odd that he ended up running a company that provided outsourced military services.

When do we get the yellow ribbon magnets that say "support the contractors"?

 

[Makalakumu]

One thing that concerns me is the simple lack of oversight these contractors enjoy. Who really knows what they are doing and who they are doing it to? Who do they report to? In a very big way, the use of mercenaries subverts the constitutional controls that are supposed to be on our nation's military.

Once the check is written, the citizens of this country have very little say in regards to what they do.

 

[Steel Tiger]

As I've said before, they're not soldiers. They're not guerrillas. They're not mercenaries. They are the classic "unlawful combatants". I hate to say it, but I don't shed a single tear when one of them is killed, maimed or tortured. They are war criminals by definition. Screw them. And damn to hell the government which uses them. They're just part of the reason the US has squandered all moral authority and is becoming the most hated and loathed nation on Earth. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, the "War Czar" and the entire JCS should be up in front of the ICC at the Hague for crimes against humanity for using them.

Strong words, very strong words, but I can't disagree.

I can see a future where these corporate 'soldiers' carry the bulk of the load in situations like Iraq. Because they are non-government troops no declaration of war need be made, oversight is carried out by their own organisation and so is not transparent, and they are not bound by the various conventions that most governments have ratified concerning war and personnel involved therein.

It is a frightening future that I would rather avoid if possible.

 

[fireman00]

They've been around for thousands of years, in the middle East more then 2,500 years ago when Pharoh Ramses II used 11,000 of them against his enemies. The Spartans about 450 BC , the Saika used in the 1500s in Japan, the French infantry in 17th and 18th centuries, the Flying Tigers of WWII, in they were used in the Congo during the '60s, the French Foreing Legion in Vietnam, they were also involved in Biafra and Sierra Leone in the '70s, to Blackwater in Iraq ... its nothing new.

I personally would rather have someone who want to be there fighting rather then sending some poor slob in the Guard who has a family and was sitting in a 9 to 5 job a couple of weeks ago.

 

[mjd]

War is a dirty game, people will be killed, it's the price of freedom, these peole will kill us, they will not stop, it's their religion to destroy all people that do not follow their religion, the sad thing is the Russian's and chineese think they only want to kill westerner's, they are on the to do list also.

 

[Tames D]

Security companies? Arn't they really called Soldiers of Fortune?

 

[MBuzzy]

They've been around for thousands of years, in the middle East more then 2,500 years ago when Pharoh Ramses II used 11,000 of them against his enemies. The Spartans about 450 BC , the Saika used in the 1500s in Japan, the French infantry in 17th and 18th centuries, the Flying Tigers of WWII, in they were used in the Congo during the '60s, the French Foreing Legion in Vietnam, they were also involved in Biafra and Sierra Leone in the '70s, to Blackwater in Iraq ... its nothing new.

Paying contractors to do the job isn't necessarily new....but by these terms, the Geneva convention is relatively new. And under the Geneva Convention and the Law of Armen Conflict, these people are unlawful combatants and fight basically at their own risk - they do not benefit from a great deal of these agreements.

But at the same token, Iraqi insurgents don't honor the Geneva Convention OR LOAC....a prisoner of war in Iraq has no rights and the insurgents treat them with no respect....

Its a tough subject, on one hand, we're paying someone to do the military's job and we're operating on the edges of these rules. On the other hand, the military honors both the Geneva Convention and LOAC...the insurgents do not. We're playing by different sets of rules and it is killing us. The US also deals with the public opinion battle that the Insurgents do not. Insurgents have murdered thousands...military and civilian alike in the most inhumane ways that anyone can imagine. The world knows that they are bad. Yet if an American soldier kills one innocent bystander, that solider is brought up on trial and considered a war criminal to the entire world.

 

[tellner]

"Fight them over there or we'll have to fight them over here. The Price of Freedom!"

Come on, man. The Charlie Foxtrot that is Iraq is pretty much completely our creation. With the recently released documents such as the Downing Street memos (plural) and so many others it's clear that there was no plan, no rational thought and no good reason to go in. Bush had already decided before 2002 to invade and lied like a cheap carpet to sell the country on his little war. It never had anything to do with WMD. It never had anything to do with "liberating" Iraq. It had a lot to do with oil, the Election-Stealer's daddy issues and the wet dreams of the neo-con cabal that runs the Executive Branch. The reasons for the war have changed several times - WMD, Saddam Hussein, 9-11 (even though there was no connection whatsofreakingever between them except in the lies coming out of Dick Cheney's cake hole), protecting Israel, voices from G-d (yes Bush has said so), America's Destiny (another Bushism), Al-Qaeda, and the Sunk Cost Fallacy, i.e. if we stop then all the money and blood hasn't been for anything.

We created Al Qaeda in Iraq. They weren't there before. By invading we gave every Arab at least a touch of sympathy for them and made millions of sympathizers and who knows how many actual combatants where there hadn't been any until after the (illegal) invasion. In the process we irreparably destroyed the nation of Iraq. The photos from Abu Ghraib made the Islamists' recruiting targets for the next century. If Cheney and his Sock Puppet in Chief hadn't gone in against all advice and evidence and screwed the pooch like she was a two dollar hooker afterwards there wouldn't be thousands upon thousands of fighters in the newly revitalized Al Qaeda. Tony Blair just admitted he knew in advance we had no plan at all for what to do after the war.

The argument that since terrorists don't observe the laws of war or any other rule of law we shouldn't either is both specious and disgusting. If we are not a nation bound by the Rule of Law we are a nation ruled by men. That is not what we were. It is against every single principle upon which this country was founded and is contrary to the behavior of civilized countries. If the freedoms we brag about meant anything we wouldn't have been so eager to give them up without a fight the moment the Republican Lie Machine kicked into gear. But we did because, fundamentally, we have become a nation of cowards desperate to give up our liberties to any lantern-jawed Daddy figure who promises us the illusion of a little temporary security. And you know what Benjamin Franklin said about that.

Terrorists don't act like human beings so we shouldn't either? If we can not be better than the worst people in the world, then America has ceased to exist and should be replaced. At the very least it is time for the Tree of Liberty to be nourished with its natural aliment. We have become monsters or at least the willing lick-spittle slaves of monsters. One of my best friends says "When you look at America you see Athens. I see Rome." I always respond "If you work like hell for Athens you might end up with Rome. But if you settle for Rome you're guaranteed to get Mordor." He always concedes the point.

When we invaded Afghanistan the entire planet understood. We had been attacked. We were responding to an act of war. Le Monde wrote "Nous sommes touts Americains" - "We are all Americans". Everyone wanted to hold our coat. With unseemly haste the chicken hawk cabal got down to the real agenda - invading Iraq. Now I note that we're gearing up for the next phase of PNAC's plan by beating the drum to invade Iran. It begs the question "You and what Army?"

Fifteen years ago the elder Bush didn't invade Iraq because he understood what an epic mistake it would be. His idiot child listened to the voices in his head, put on his paper hat and picked up his tin sword and led us into a disaster from which our children may not recover. The rest of the world was aghast. We couldn't bribe enough other countries to make it anything but an American operation with a figleaf. Now that Italy has a new government, the old one having surpassed all previous depths of corruption, and Blair's career has foundered on the rocks of his Master's war we're left with nothing, no allies, no support, no esteem in the eyes of the world. Just crushing debt, maimed soldiers, a worn out military and flag-draped coffins that we're not allowed to see.

If it comes down to it we didn't even obey our own laws where they obviously applied. Consider the Iraqi Major General who was captured wearing the uniform with which he was issued. Two Marines under orders (Semper Fi! all you jarheads) beat him to death on orders to "soften him up for questioning". That should have been a hanging offense under the UCMJ. Nobody was punished. That argument has turned us into a nation of torturers who round up, abuse, destroy and murder the innocent and guilty alike, civilian, soldier, terrorist, poor SOB who was sold to us by drug dealers or warlords and anyone else the President wants without evidence or appeal.

The unlawful combatants and war criminals? They are costing us a hell of a lot more money per operative than a trained soldier does. Of course, that's pretty much always what happens when essential services are outsourced. It's not about saving money. It's about making sure the right people can suckle off the Federal teat. They aren't accountable to anyone. They are not covered by the UCMJ. They use our troops' equipment as a free commissary. They commit atrocities and will never be brought to justice. What good function do the serve? They lower our casualty figures since they're not soldiers. They let some of the richest supporters of the GOP swill down taxpayer dollars like swine with both trotters in the trough. They allow the Administration to have its plausibly deniable death squads that inconvenient naysayers like Congress, the Courts and the American People can do nothing about.

If you want to be blunt about it they are terrorists. By our own government's definition they use illegal force or the threat of illegal force to influence the politics of a country or segment thereof. They degrade and debase us by our continued tolerance of their actions.

Someone said that it's better for a professional to take the risk than some poor slob in the Guard. No. It isn't. War isn't some splendid little expedition. It's serious business. If the People don't want war and won't volunteer for it, then we shouldn't be there. If we have to bleed the Treasury to find someone greedy, venal or sociopathic enough to do the killing because the Citizenry won't do the job it's proof positive that America shouldn't be doing it at all. It's not a reason to circumvent the considered will of the people just so a few rich and evil elites can get what they want. It's the antithesis of democracy and the ideals of an enlightened Republic.

It's evil. It bears evil fruit. And it has made us an evil nation whom almost everyone in the world despises.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

One of my old kempo profs was an SOF in his youth. He's a limey; SAS trained and served, then went for hire after his stint. There are 2 professional soldier cultures out there. A lawless one for mentally screwed up deviants, and a proud one populated by proficients who happen to have a knack for military war arts and little else. There are a-holes in any war-based culture. But they are not, by default, all viking raiders, raping and pillaging all they survey. There are several among the chaos who pride themselves on being honorable men of war, upholding traditions of order and excellence through fraternity that stretch back centuries.

FFL is one of them. Stop to commit a warcrime against a non-combatant, and you might get shot in the back of the head by one of your own company. Your actions are seen to bring honor -- or dishonor -- upon the whole corps, and corps de esprit counts among many in these organizations.

Some Americans torment small children, keep domestic and sexual slaves, and commit identity theft without remorse of consequence for their victims. Shall we then kill all Americans? Celebrate their deaths?

Baby. Bathwater. Baby. Bathwater. A better solution to hating the professional soldiers joining in the conflict is to end the conflict; put all the guns on stand-by.

D.

 

[tellner]

Professional soldiers are professional soldiers. They are the backbone of any military private or national.

Mercenaries are mercenaries. They have a place in the military world. Sometimes it is an exceptionally proud one like La Legion Etrangère.

In both cases the participants have a recognized place in war. They are under military authority and subject to the rules that govern honorable soldiers. What I most object to about the "contractors" is that none of this applies. They are not under any legal authority. They are accountable to nobody. In fact, a good part of the point is that they are a means to avoid financial, legal and moral accountability.

 

[jdinca]

Tellner, do you feel the same way about the militias? The Mahdi Army, the Badr Brigade, Hezbollah, etc.? They are not professional soldiers, they don't answer to the government and many of them fight only because they get paid to do so, or to support religious beliefs. Are the only honorable soldiers the ones tied to a government?

 

[Dave Leverich]

Then there's that pesky army that formed against the red coats a few hundred years ago heh.

Honestly though, the forces in Iraq aren't used in offensives, simply defending interests (be that contractors building things, people getting from point A to point B, etc). I see them as security guards in a very hostile location.

 

[MA-Caver]

Then there's that pesky army that formed against the red coats a few hundred years ago heh.

Yeah those pesky insurgents are doing the same thing alll over again... only just where THEY live. What does that say?

 

[jdinca]

Yeah those pesky insurgents are doing the same thing alll over again... only just where THEY live. What does that say?

The difference is that the British WERE the government. They didn't come here to remove a repressive regime and let us build our own democracy and then leave. How do you think we would have faired if that had been the situation and instead of thanking them, working together to build our country, we decided to start settling age old vendettas and killing each other instead?

 

[MBuzzy]

The argument that since terrorists don't observe the laws of war or any other rule of law we shouldn't either is both specious and disgusting.
.....
Terrorists don't act like human beings so we shouldn't either? If we can not be better than the worst people in the world, then America has ceased to exist and should be replaced.
.....
The unlawful combatants and war criminals? They are costing us a hell of a lot more money per operative than a trained soldier does. Of course, that's pretty much always what happens when essential services are outsourced. It's not about saving money. It's about making sure the right people can suckle off the Federal teat. They aren't accountable to anyone. They are not covered by the UCMJ. They use our troops' equipment as a free commissary. They commit atrocities and will never be brought to justice. What good function do the serve? They lower our casualty figures since they're not soldiers. They let some of the richest supporters of the GOP swill down taxpayer dollars like swine with both trotters in the trough. They allow the Administration to have its plausibly deniable death squads that inconvenient naysayers like Congress, the Courts and the American People can do nothing about.

If you want to be blunt about it they are terrorists. By our own government's definition they use illegal force or the threat of illegal force to influence the politics of a country or segment thereof. They degrade and debase us by our continued tolerance of their actions.

First off, no one said that it was OK for people to break rules just because the enemy does. Though these contractors are "technically" not bound by any of these agreements and documents, they are still operating under the control of the Government AND the military.

Agreed that they are costing us a lot more money than soldier do, but that is mainly because our Solidiers are so horribly underpaid. On top of that, the majority of the security contractors that I met in Iraq are ex-military. In most cases, they are being used to supplement security details because the Army is so undermanned. A lot of the Trans battalions that I traveled with were doing multiple convoys per day. That is high stress work...If we can take some of the stress off of them, I say that is a good thing.

And another group of contactors that is very active in Iraq is the Truck Drivers. These guys do NOTHING but drive semis all over Iraq to transport goods from us. Basically up and down Tampa to all of the MOBs and FOBs....and some of those guys are more heavily armed than the soliders protecting them. But unfortunately, they fall under that same umbrella. If they're driving...they're fine, but as soon as they take a shot at someone...again, technically they are an illegal combatant.

Being an illegal combatant in Iraq, though, doesn't mean anything. As far as the enemy is concerned, we are all illegal combatants. Since they don't follow our rules, there are no special treatments for anyone. Everyone gets treated the same by then - uniformed or not. And by the way...when we capture them, we DO treat them with the rules put forth by those agreements.

And as for all of the security contractors in Korea being Terrorists, murderers, and embarrassments....I disagree. We are using them based on a need that we have. They are not violating any of the rules of LOAC. They ARE under the control of the military. If anyone thinks that we are just letting contractors loose with 50 cals and saying "Go shoot and rape anything that moves"...that is mistaken. They are doing the same jobs that the military is doing (in many situations, they are giving us VERY VERY valuable training. I received my final combat training from Contractors who had been in REAL combat - an advantage that most of my military instructors did not have)....and they are accountable to the military.

As for my opinion as to whether we should use them or not....That's not important - I can only speak from experience.

 

[Makalakumu]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...268&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Here is an interesting documentary on the use of mercenaries and private contractors in Iraq.