Mercenaries in Iraq

[Stan]

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.

I totally disagree with that. It goes against all the republican principles of our country. There is no joy in sending a regular guy or what you call in an (I hope) endearing way, "poor slob" to die for his country. But that is how republics should defend themselves (don't go quoting Machiavelli on me. I no not all republics follow this.) If a war is not important enough for American citizens to leave their lives and homes and defend the country, maybe it isn't a war we should be fighting.

 

[Ninjamom]

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.

This is an accurate depiction of what is happening. Words like 'mercenary', 'soldier of fortune', and 'illegal combatant' add fevered emotion to the diatribe, but they do not represent the facts of the situation.

 

[MBuzzy]

This is an accurate depiction of what is happening. Words like 'mercenary', 'soldier of fortune', and 'illegal combatant' add fevered emotion to the diatribe, but they do not represent the facts of the situation.

Ninjamom,

You are completely right...They do tend to add emotion into the discussion - although this is a VERY emotionally charged subject to begin with. Although, the term "Illegal Combatant" isn't intended to be an emotion provoking term. It is actually a technical term used to describe a combatant who fits into certain criteria as defined by the Law of Armed Conflict. When we try someone for war crimes....this is the law that we use.

An Illegal Combatant is someone who is fighting in a war, but is not sanctioned by a recognized government. An Illegal Combatant can also be anyone who fights in civilian clothes or the wrong uniform, i.e. if I went to war wearing another country's uniform in order to spy on the other side. You can also be an illegal combatant if you wear either Chaplain insignia or Medical insignia, but are not from either of those corps. Basically....LOAC requires you to be wearing a uniform from a government's military, thereby officially identifying yourself as a combatant.

As for Mercenary and Soldier of Fortune - it depends on your individual definition and connotation.

 

[michaeledward]

and yet,

one of the major arguments put forth by ... well, it is even hard to describe the sub-group of our populatio, without adding "fevered emotion to the diatribe" ... or being so generic as to be meaningless.

I have heard arguments that "al Qaeda terrorists do not wear uniforms." That's why the "War on Terror" is a different kind of war. They are willing to "cut peoples heads and put the tape on the interenet".

Have you heard similar arguments?

The United States military invaded a sovereign nation. Our military wears uniforms. Our military is (theoritically) subject to the laws of the United States, the laws of the United States Military, and the laws of International Treaties that have been ratified by the government of the United States.

Military Contracts are exempt from each of those controls. The contracting companies have fought to keep their employees exempt from the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And because they are private persons, outside of the territorial United States, they are not subject to the laws of our country.

And, if I understand the reports I have heard correctly, the United States military has argued and received compliance from the Iraqi (puppet) government, that our Contractors are not subject to the local laws.

Whoever it is that is holding those guns, they appear to be completely outside of an law.

So, if in the process of -- QUOTE -- defending security interests -- UNQUOTE -- as one person put it, they kill an American soldier, or an Iraqi citizen, under whose rules are they prosecuted.

What if they steal from that "security intrests"? Again, outside the law.



You may claim that 'mercernary' is emotionally charged, but we have no other language. Because of the good sense of those who have lead our Republic in the past, have never allowed such a thing.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Mercenaries are almost always used in some fashion in every conflict. This is really nothing new and will continue.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

There are 3 types of Military Contractors:

Military provider firms focus on the tactical environment. These firms engage in actual fighting as line units, specialists, or direct command and control for field units. Examples of MPFs include Executive Outcomes, Sandline, SCI, and NFD, which have run combat operations in Angola, Sierra Leone, Papua New Guinea, and Indonesia. Clients will typically use MPFs if they have comparatively low military capabilities and are facing immediate high-threat situations. MPFs are the most controversial type of privatized military industry and often receive unfavorable publicity.

Military consulting firms give advice and training necessary for operating and restructuring a client’s military. Levdan, Vinnell, and MPRI are all considered to be MCFs. Their clients usually are restructuring their militaries or want to increase their capabilities dramatically. For example, MPRI lists its core competencies as security sector reform, institution building, leader development, military training and education, and emergency management.

MCFs can be further divided between firms that offer pure analysis and those that also provide training and consultation in combination with recommendations. “The line between advising and implementing, however, sometimes can be quite fuzzy; often, if a trained soldier has been hired to teach, it is difficult to duck out of the way when the opportunity comes to put training into practice.”

Military support firms provide supplementary military services such as logistics, intelligence, technical support, supply, and transportation. They allow their clients to focus on fighting and their core mission areas while they handle the support work. Clients tend to rely on MSFs where they are involved in operations that are immediate but of long duration (e.g., standing forces that need surge capacity). While these contractors do not participate directly in executing or planning military operations, they fulfill needs that are essential to combat operations. MSFs comprise the largest component of the privatized military industry and have the most subcomponents.