MMarsh, given the financial state some warriors are in, yeah the Chavez offer would be VERY tempting.

Originally Posted by Gator

I believe the Merc's need to be removed from United States soil, and the United States Military along with the Department of State needs to sever all ties. Furthermore, I personally believe they are all outlaws and should be treated as such.

As for the Press Corps on the Ground, there is no need to offer them protection, as the United States Military has its own Reporters, so, any other Private Press Company sending people should be on their own as for Protective Services.

For your first paragraph, with what shall you fill the void? Very easy to point fingers at a problem, the rub lies in the solution to it.

And thank god our laws are not determined by your "feeling" and rather by the legal system which as it stands right now says that these companies and their employees are legal. Shall I quote you chapter and verse from the US legal code, I got it here if ya need it in black n white. We've been down this road before incase your memory fails you and between then and now the laws have not been altered.

Second paragraph, you really can't have just said what you said. You make the case for press companies to hire the PMCs... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Gator you are your own worst enemy in an argument. Would you like to rephrase that one?

Let's go one further just for shits 'n giggles, are personal body guards hired by VIPs around the world mercenaries? Think about this one before you answer because I've got a full ammo belt on this one.

With all the pressure on the Governments about troop losses the Governments are only to happy to get some of the dirty work done by these contractor's, now there is not the hue and cry when they get killed. Also it appears that they operate under different rules to the military. Many of the Soldiers would like to able to be so free in opening fire with out so many questions being asked

I'm going to have to ease myself into this debate very carefully as much has transpired in the last 24 hours and I haven't as yet absorbed it all. I spent yesterday largely elsewhere and only looked in for a few seconds every time I had a chance. All manner of points have been raised but I figure that rather than attempt to answer them all I will go back to the question originally posed "What is your opinion of Black Water"

The way I see it is that Blackwater have come into public prominence of late because of a number of questionable incidents that have transpired, which in turn has led to people questioning the way that these companies operate.

Now the question was what do "I" think of them. Well,..... based on reports in the press and subsequent developments.

(1) It appears that the company is operating in a very grey area regarding their very legality. I don't care if the they call themselves Mother Teresa's little Helpers, by definition, they fulfil all of the requirements to be classified as mercenaries pure and simple.

(2) There have been reports of them behaving as a law unto themselves where they have no authority. e.g. Pulling their weapons on US troops and disarming them, the reckless use of weapons against unarmed civilians including spraying a crowded square with machine gun fire.

Now I could go on, I think we have all read of the calls for enquiries into the way that they work and all the rest of it.

Just based on the couple of points above, I feel that until many questions are answered like their position vis a vis the military forces, and there is a clarification of the legal status of companies such as this internationally, there is absolutely no legal place for them. Yep they are Illegal, that's what I think.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I just saw this:

Let's go one further just for shits 'n giggles, are personal body guards hired by VIPs around the world mercenaries? Think about this one before you answer because I've got a full ammo belt on this one.

I can only speak for Australia, but I'm sure that it would also be the case in most other countries. Body guards when operating in a foreign country hold absolutely no legal status, they are merely non resident civilians, they are not permitted to carry weapons unless a special dispensation is given, and this is only done for some heads of state. Should they assault anybody they are held accountable and treated the same as any other criminal.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Just based on the couple of points above, I feel that until many questions are answered like their position vis a vis the military forces, and there is a clarification of the legal status of companies such as this internationally, there is absolutely no legal place for them. Yep they are Illegal, that's what I think.

I'd like to know how the Merc Supporters on this Board feel about the Iranians being within their legal rights sending Merc's to Iraq to fight the United States Military and plant IEDs just because the Government of Iran wants a certain outcome in Iraq, and the Government of Iran is willing to pay Merc's to achieve such an intended outcome.

If we say Merc's are legal for us to use in a Combat Zone in place of Military Troops, then one would think they are legal for any nation on Earth to use in a Combat Zone, perhaps even the same Combat Zone, and even if said Merc's are used against United States Troops.

You guys see this? UNBELIEVABLE.
I was just telling Bulldogg a few days ago I didn't think Blackwater would ever take arms against US soldiers. I was wrong.

Blackwater Ops points weapons at US soldiers in Iraq.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21163806/site/newsweek/

Oct. 15, 2007 issue - The colonel was furious. "Can you believe it? They actually drew their weapons on U.S. soldiers." He was describing a 2006 car accident, in which an SUV full of Blackwater operatives had crashed into a U.S. Army Humvee on a street in Baghdad's Green Zone. The colonel, who was involved in a follow-up investigation and spoke on the condition he not be named, said the Blackwater guards disarmed the U.S. Army soldiers and made them lie on the ground at gunpoint until they could disentangle the SUV. His account was confirmed by the head of another private security company. Asked to address this and other allegations in this story, Blackwater spokesperson Anne Tyrrell said, "This type of gossip has led to many soap operas in the press."

Americans civilians pointing weapons at US soldiers??? WTF!!!
Had I been the Colonel I would have sent MPs with arrest warrants for the Blackwater people involved and send them to the stockade as 'enemy combatants'.So lets see...

1. Killing of 17 unarmed civilians -and then lying about it.
2. Killing of 3 US soldiers in Afghanistan while hotdogging in a cargo plane.
3. Weapons smuggling.
4. The killing of a Iraqi diplomats bodyguard
5. The armed detention of US Military personnel.

Whats next??? Furthermore I am sick and tired of listening to Blackwater 101 lame excuses of "why its not our fault".

About conscription into the military. No. I prefer a professional military. In fact, since those in arms are volunteers, I don't really see what all the fuss is about. I know a lot of folks didn't really want to go to Iraq but that's the deal they signed up for.
As for "Support Our Troops, Bring them Back Home" people... they'll come home if they don't re-up.
Blackwater et al, are a wakeup call to the government to make our military more effective and less restricted to cumbersome rules and restrictions. However, Blackwater also serves as an example of what happens if these regulations are too light.
As for manpower issues... people are just going to have to wear a lot of hats. I had to wear 7 when I was in. You don't need to wear that many but you get the idea.
All I can say is that these companies should never be used in the capacity they have been in this conflict at any point after Iraq. More restrictions must be placed on what sort of force they can use, when and also their subjection to laws. Once a bunch of these characters get jailed for what they do, they might not strut around so much looking down on regular military folks.

It was a mistake to bring in Blackwater to begin with. The USA should have never placed it's trust nor it's dependency upon an organization of mercs that the US command structure has extremely limited control over. Ex-military? Irrelevant. Former US military does not mean you are loyal. It just means that you have the same training and skills that the regular military has.

Mercenary organizations are an age-old problem. There have always been a large variety of niches they've filled. For instance, entering combat where nobody else will and providing an "instant" increase to a nations military strength. Some mercs are better soldiers than regular soldiers too. But the problem just encountered is the same problem that has always been encountered with mercs. You can't trust them and they do as they damn well please.

The truth of the matter is that the United States has probably lacked the capacity to successfully occupy Iraq from the start. Yes we can play policeman there. Yes there can see success stories. But the underlying fact is, we're just too ... soft? nice? diplomatic?

What I'm getting at is this: The type of insurgency you're seeing in Iraq cannot be solved by reason and it cannot be negotiated with. The brutal tactics we are starting to see on the part of Blackwater might give some chance of success, but the USA simply cannot and should not saddle itself with that liability.

The last successful policy for stable control of Iraq was the rule of Saddam Hussein. How did he do it? Blood, torture, genocide and terrifying his populace into submission. The US Military cannot conscience such an approach, yet it's likely that is the only method of creating stability in Iraq -- a large collection of mutually hostile peoples.

It does seem to me that Blackwater is beginning to take a more Saddam Hussein-like approach. In so doing, they've proven that the US government should terminate their contract and work in Iraq post-haste.

I wonder if those who invested money into getting Blackwater started are happy if there not I wonder how many want to cash out before it sinks. Thats who should be worried now if there kicked out Iraq.

Originally Posted by Gator

I'd like to know how the Merc Supporters on this Board feel about the Iranians being within their legal rights sending Merc's to Iraq to fight the United States Military and plant IEDs just because the Government of Iran wants a certain outcome in Iraq, and the Government of Iran is willing to pay Merc's to achieve such an intended outcome.

If we say Merc's are legal for us to use in a Combat Zone in place of Military Troops, then one would think they are legal for any nation on Earth to use in a Combat Zone, perhaps even the same Combat Zone, and even if said Merc's are used against United States Troops.

Then quit pretending to ignore my posts and ask me, instead of using a thinly veiled euphemism shades vis-a-vis Phoenix80, since in fact I have never said I support any of these private fighters. Danger, thin ice.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Americans civilians pointing weapons at US soldiers??? WTF!!!
Had I been the Colonel I would have sent MPs with arrest warrants for the Blackwater people involved and send them to the stockade as 'enemy combatants'.So lets see...

I can't believe that a United States Military Force surrendered to a group of Merc's in Iraq without firing a shot.