Originally Posted by The Other Guy

A law that is completely unenforceable.

I suggest we just leave. Not Cut and run-- The US soldiers have freed the Iraqis, latest reports say Al Qaeda is gone, they've completed their missions. Bring them home to parades.

Where's the link about it?

TOG has no sources he just parrots whatever the talking head on the TV spewed at him.

Well, I guess that's what I get for watching Fox News...

Depends.

Blackwater itself should be gone. There have been too many incidents/allegations of their recklessness to warrant them staying. They are too much of a liability.

As for other PMC, it depends on the role. I don't have any issues with non-combat support roles like Transportation, or Supply (anything out of harms way). For other more hazardous duty like escort, its a tough call. Those 17 dead civvies were killed whilist escorting a VIP. Escort has always been the domain of the military it should remain so.

One thing is for sure, If they were allowed I would place them directly under the orders of US Central Command, with the same ROE as any US soldier.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Depends.

Now what do adult diapers have to do with military contractors MMarsh?

Originally Posted by Tsunami

News flash -
EVERY G*D D**N independent contractor is paid more than your boot on the ground!
=
If you want Blackwater out - who do you replace them with?
Take the military off the table, they were brought in because the military is unable at this time to provide protection. When Ready Reserve, Guard and IRR troops are being asked to go above and beyond when it comes to mobilization - where else do you find the resources to backfill the hole created by kicking Blackwater out?
=
I strongly disagree with Blackwater's curent contract concerning immunity. They need to be held accountable for any killings that cannot be justified. I would (as they currently are doing) pass a law making them accountable and move on from there...

I agree....

Though why bother holding them accountable for "killings that cannot be justified?" Now granted, if they are going after women and children, yeah, but really...hey, these people are blowing our guys up, would it really hurt to have a few extra men that we are pretty sure are bad taken out of the picture?

Waiting for solid evidence (what is the evidence they are waiting for anyways? The bomb to go off?) just makes another bomber have some time to run into a crowd.

...then again, perhaps I am being to harsh. I have zero military experience, I just think we should quit pussy footing around.

Pussy footing around is one thing. The use of excessive force is quite another.

No doubt there have been many persons shot during this war who were merely in the wrong place at the wrong time. This has been accepted as an unfortunate necessity, however, this time it was judged by those involved to be as a result of the careless and excessive use of firepower.

There is obviously enough evidence to support this as it has gone much further than any other similar happenings of this type.

Though why bother holding them accountable for "killings that cannot be justified?"

Answer: Because that amounts to murder.

Why do I get the impression that because this is happening in someone else's country murder ceases to be a crime. Many men have been hung in the past for committing murder in other countries in time of war.

^^^ True but those were cases of killing in a conflict where the enemy was easily identified.

Either we stop the "helping" and start "occupying," or we ship out. Otherwise we can not pre-emptively strike in accordance to the rules of engagement.

Ok, what are the rules of engagement? Quick, no googlefu, out with it since you claim to know wtf they are?