Blackwater

[Buckaroo]

""Keep in mind that Iraq is a violent place.""

 

Yeah it is, especially after we bombed the crap out of it back into the 3rd world, after we perpetrated Abu Graibe and collected and distributed pictures, to poke the hornets nest, yeah it's violent now.

 

""For every incident you hear or read about, whatever the nature of the incident, there are perhaps hundreds more that go unnoticed. It is the nature of reporting""

 

embeded in the green zone is hardly reporting. Or are you talking about the defense department report on the incident that was ghost written by a blackwater employee?

 

"""The ROE dictates the level of force permissible. This ranges from alert behavior to the right to repel deadly force. The force continuum is similar to your rights as a civilian.""

 

Do the Iraqis have ANY rights, when blackwater is accountable to ZERO laws? Do Eric Prince's huge contributions, mostly to repugs, dictate the (ZERO) level of accountability to any laws with respect to their actions?

 

""There are hard and fast rules, but in war, ""

 

It's not a war, it's an occupation, we are not going to "win" it, just maintain at a low level. More crony defense industry profit that way.

 

Rules?, there are zero rules that apply to these people.

 

""Some people tend to see this whole issue with such a jaded perspective that they are almost totally unable to see past their preconceived notions. Dru, you are one of those people, and therefore you tend to not get listened to much. Your spew is tired, tired, tired. ""

 

ad hominem homina homina homina

 

Let me get this straight, a bunch of mercenaries with ZERO accountability. In other words, yeeeehhh haaaaaaa, no rules, we can do WHATEVER we please. The human (if you can call them human) nature of these individuals means they aren't exactly boy scouts.

 

Let me also get this straight, we are turning our voluntary force over to crony profiteers and paying them 10 to 20 times (tax $'s) as much as regular army and NOW we have to send the FBI (more tax $'s) to monitor their crooked asses?

 

And stop calling them contractors, call them what they are, MERCENARIES. KILLERS FOR HIRE.

[Buckaroo]

""WASHINGTON -- The House passed a bill Thursday that would make all private contractors working in Iraq and other combat zones subject to prosecution by U.S. courts.""

 

"I suspect Bush will veto it."

 

NO KIDDING?

[Dechristo]

Just like that, eh?

 

Even if the brilliance of the change can readily be determined to be of low luster, I wonder if this light bulb can be so easily unscrewed.

[noliquidity]

New here, lurker for a few years(mainly for the bushwack routes).

 

Excellent discussion when the emotion is filtered out(if thats possible and I doubt that it even should be).

 

War is political/geostrategic/economic tool for either keeping the staus quo, or outflanking "threats"(possible and/or perceived and/or real). The soldiers dont make the policy, they follow orders and protect each other while they are there (that includes all the former special forces guys that work for the private security firms) . These ex SF guys are trained machines that need to be utilized while we are there. At the very least the private contractors need to be brought under military law standards(for the morale of US troops, the "hearts and minds" propoganda campaign directed at moderate muslims around the world, and to attempt to salvage what little respect we have among our allies). Ideally the contracts should be rescinded and contractors be absorbed into the DOD and pay raised across the board for ALL the troops. Privatization of the military (one of the most basic aspects of a soverign country ) is traveling down a dangerous road. The people that have joined AFTER this quagmire started will sadly have to deal with with their own personal demons for the rest of their lives. I truely feel sorry for the troops that were already in the services before this giant chess match started. They had no choice.

 

We are vying with BOTH China and Russia for mid-east oil AND pipeline routes emanating fom central asia AND African oil AND Venezualan oil AND Canadian oil AND....... ie a Global Resource "War" At the same time our generation has inherited the slowly evolving/building hatred of radicalized fundamentalists. The hatred didn't occur spontaneously,first it was the Bitish /Dutch /French /Spanish /Portugese for hundreds of years manipulated the mid east for the spice trade,coaling stations,military basing and general trade routes. Since WW1/WW2 (when the world and its various militaries converted to the oil based economy) the Mid-East became THE prize. Enter the cold war when the US and the Soviets took over the chess match and supported leaders in the Mid-East that assured oil supply(We did NOT base our descions based on what was best for the civilians in these oil producing countries, we based it on national "self-interest" (ie vital oil supplies in a Cold War context).

So you combine this anger built on HUNDREDS of years of manipulating the Mid-east region and add it to the CHILDISH reasoning of the islamic fundamentalist extremists(the refusal to adapt to basic global civil norms-do you treat your wives/girlfreinds with such contempt-do you riot and make death threats if somebody publishes a cartoon of Jesus taking a shit, etc,etc,etc... The truly fucked up thing is that using mid-east oil puts money in the pockets of these corrupt regimes we(the US, Russia and now China) helped to create. Then the regimes pay off these radical fundamentalists to keep them off their back. The money stengthens these fundamentalist groups who then add fuel to the fire, help drive up oil prices and make these regimes even more money.

 

We are in deep shit guys. This is a quagmire that will effect us and our families for the rest of our lives. I will be shocked if we dont go after Iran (70% of the know global oil reserves are in the mid-east and Iraq is our new staging base smack dab in the middle of it). If we do go after Iran, the current controlled crumb of the US dollar may turn into a dollar collapse (ie think 1929).

 

If we stay, we keep the oil, we help to recruit once moderate islamic fundamentalists over to the childish piece-o-shit radical fundementalist camp, our soldiers continue dying in the midst of a civil war that we cant stop, and Iraqi civilians that we went into "liberate" are getting picked off in the middle.

 

If we leave quickly, we will see the civil war that is already occurring go from a slow burn to something I dont even want to think about--from a purely strategic view point this would probably act as a magnet for the Sunni extremeists(ie slime ball suicide bombers) that would flood in to fight the Shiites. The Shiites would end up doing the dirty work for us. The slaughter of innocent civilians however will probably reach Rawanda proportions(if it hasnt already).-- And even if the Shiites thinned out a large number of Sunni fundentalist extremists, there are over 1 BILLION muslims in the world. The terrorist threat is never going away(this is the neocons wet dream).

We would also be seen as backing away from a fight that we started and that may encourage future attacks. (Showing weakness in the mid-east DOES have consequences).

Then you end up with Russia and China by way of Iran controlling 70% of the worlds oil reserves. (Like it or not this is an oil based global economy).

 

So, do we stay and keep the oil, further fan the flames of islamic extremism, keep getting our soldiers killed trying to hold together a country that is going to split up anyway and watch as innocent Iraqis slowly kill each other off.

Or, do we leave, give control of the oil to Russia and China via Iran, bring our soldiers home and rebuild our military, probably tone down SOME of hatred directed at us(ie fewer future terrorists), and probably witness a horrible civil war that we helped to create?

 

I wish the fuck I knew.

 

If it was only as simple as that those pieces of shit like Limbaugh and the Fox propaganda machine make it out to be, or as easy as saying "NO WAR!" A TRUE FUCKING QUAGMIRE!!!

 

For anybody on the board who has served in the military, thanks, it takes balls. I hope they just start the draft. Maybe that can be the catalyst to bring this country back together again. What was that phrase????.... Divide and conquer.... the big money power structure is eating this situation up.

 

Oh and KASKADSKYKOZAK, you are a truely pathetic little creature, at first I just thought you were brain washed, but now I wonder if your sucking Putin's cock.

Edited October 7, 2007 by noliquidity

[joblo7]

who needs another voice without solution?

 

get out, elect obama,cut military budget in half.diversify military complex.use compassion or diplomacy and/or business.war is the way of the bully. become a great nation .

 

we have enough nukes to defend about 10 planets.!

[noliquidity]

There are solutions, the problem is ALL of them lead down paths to further problems as big or bigger than the one we are in are in now.

 

I am not making arguements to defend the fiasco that the neocon's have left in there wake. -Under the cover over war,while we have been focused on terrorism, and the war in Iraq and Afganistan, the Constitution has been SEVERELY eroded and regulatory laws built up since the Great Depression (that had been designed to protect the GOOD of the PEOPLE) have been wiped off the books. We all know where the balance of power has shifted .

 

Solutions?

 

Partition Iraq ASAP, get the fuck out, shift a large force to Afganistan and try and help them REBUILD while keeping close to the region so as to deal with the next move in the giant chess match. That move in the chess match will come too(probably China and/or Russia via Iran).

 

Dramatically ramp up ENERGY CONSERVATION efforts and build up our strategic oil reserves as large as we feasibly can. Hopefully there are new energy technologies in the wings that will ease the transition from oil to conservation.

 

Who we elect now probably really doesnt matter. The current situation is being dictated by longer term strategic choices that were set in motion when the world switched to a oil based economy during WW1. For domestic isssues though how about Edwards/Obama 08, Edwards/Obama 12, Obama/(maybe some RATIONAL moderate republican) 16. Hopefully by 2016 this country will be ready for a split ticket.

 

Diplomacy ,in the long term, is truely the only answer between nations. We need to demonstrate to the people of developing countries that we can make descions based on the overall good ,not just what is good for us. This includes refusing to support ANY regime that treats the peolpe within its borders like peices of trash.

Diplomacy will NOT work when dealing with extremeists. We know what it is like dealing with ANY religious fundementalists. They believe their view is the only correct view. (Ironically the republican party is being torn apart from the inside by that James Dobson religious zealot. The lord works in mysterious ways:) Only the moderates within the islamic world can fix the terrorist problem. They need to flush the scum out into the open and deal with it in a manner that makes it clear that if they want to live in the modern world THEY need to adapt to to some basic civil norms the rest of the world has adopted. Unfortunatley its probably not going to happen and the world will evolve into a bipolar one(ie the muslim world on one side and everyone else on the other) The sad thing is the moderate and non practicing muslims of the world are going end up paying the price for their inaction.

 

The Bush admin and his corporate media lackys(or is it the other way around?) need to stop the propganda campaign of FEAR. Terrorism is about using FEAR to effect a change. Try to prevent the threats IN THE BACKGROUND, and otherwise ignore the peices of shit. Just like an immature troll, KKK for example, the more you feed it(ie terrorism) the more power it has.

[STP]

MQV2BdazOns

[cj001f]

I recommend soylent greening the lot of them. Starting with all registered Republicans.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I recommend soylent greening the lot of them. Starting with all registered Republicans.

 

Left wingers are always looking to "liquidate" the opposition.

[STP]

BTW, talking about right and left, which way is the dancer turning?

 

The Right Brain vs Left Brain test

[murraysovereign]

What does it mean when it switches from counterclockwise to clockwise to counterclockwise and back again? Am I going to die?

[Fairweather]

BTW, talking about right and left, which way is the dancer turning?

 

 

Who cares. She has nearly perfect breasts.

[AlpineK]

Right brain. Of course every time I pick up a pen it's with my left hand so the right brain thing is obvious.

 

Sorry that has nothing to do with Blackwater.

 

Edit: The boobs were nice too

Edited October 8, 2007 by Feck

[cj001f]

What does it mean when it switches from counterclockwise to clockwise to counterclockwise and back again?

 

You keep staring into the shitter as you switch hemispheres?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

What does it mean when it switches from counterclockwise to clockwise to counterclockwise and back again? Am I going to die?

 

Don't know but it happened to me too. I have to look away and then look back to make the direction change though.

[Serenity]

Some insights into the Waxman hearings on Oct 3, 2007

 

Although marred by a good deal of political infighting the hearings highlighted a couple of key points:

 

1. Much of the information that the Members of Congress based their questions on was hopelessly biased, and collapsed in the face of the testimony. A memo the Committee released the day before the testimony included some eye-popping allegations about costs and numbers that just didn't hold water and undermined the quality of questions. Industry critics and sensationalist media too often ignore industry information and then get quoted in Congressional press releases - a recipe for bad policy.

 

For example, left out was the fact that the overwhelming number of contractors in Iraq are Iraqis - the people who one would hope would be doing the security and reconstruction of their country. In fact, as many as 100,000 Iraqis have jobs with private sector companies supporting U.S. policies, it may be the single greatest factor countering the insurgency.

 

Also left out was a more accurate understanding of the numbers doing security work and their nationalities. Only about 2,000 Americans are doing high-level bodyguard work, in addition to 3-5,000 other Westerners and 5-8,000 Third Country Nationals (who are doing mostly doing static and convoy security) - but the bulk of private security is done by Iraqis. Much of this information is widely available for researchers and staffers interested in keeping Congress appraised with accurate information - something that would be helpful when creating laws to enhance the use, oversight and accountability of the industry.

 

2. Contractors play a critical role - not just in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in Darfur, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, Somalia and many other places where international peace and stability operations are underway. Indeed, peacekeeping could not happen without them. Good laws and effective oversight would do much to improve the use of contractors in the future - beyond Iraq. It is rather appalling to see the use of the private sector treated as a political ping pong ball when lots can be done to improve the use, oversight and accountability. Nothing is helped by turning contractor utilization into a partisan issue. The United States has used contractors to vastly enhance U.S. foreign policies in the past, we will do the same in the future.

 

3. We often point out that U.S. efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are the best supported and supplied military operations in history. Yes, lots can be done to improve them further, and this came out clearly in the testimony, but we should focus on doing those improvements rather than trying to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater.'

 

3. Accountability of contractors was a key question raised during the hearings and Mr. Prince pointed out that companies are limited by law in the ways they can sanction employees for misbehavior. When an incident happens is incumbent on government agencies to do much of the follow up and to carry out legal proceedings. Congressman David Price of North Carolina has been the key supporter of the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA), the primary tool the Department of Justice has to prosecute contractors working for the U.S. government abroad who have been accused of a felony-level crime. This law is being enhanced with the "MEJA Expansion and Enforcement Act of 2007" and the International Peace Operations Association fully endorses the bill - see below for the full text of our press release. Our 40+ member companies firmly believe that good oversight and accountability are good for good companies.

[mattp]

Her interview on Al Jazzera was better stated:

From Kline Website

[noliquidity]

"Industry critics and sensationalist media too often ignore industry information and then get quoted in Congressional press releases - a recipe for bad policy."

 

The problem with indusrty information is that it is often press releases. Would you ever release company information voluntarily that is going to damage its reputation?(Latest example is the current subprime credit crisis going on in the financial markets... one day a company says "We are in a strong position for the next quarter" and a week later they are filling for bankruptcy... yea you can really trust "indudstry information" Damaged reputation equals damaged profits. So you end up with jaded policy makers basing descions on overly optimistic information given to them. Of course they are going to question what part of the info is true and what is false. One of their jobs is oversight.

 

 

"overwhelming number of contractors in Iraq are Iraqis"

 

And I'm sure they are needed for the task. What you fail to mention is that we will give a open ended contract out to "Company A" (who skims a "pofit") then subcontracts "Company B" thats an addtional 20% on to the cost (and then skims a "profit") and the subcontracts to "Company C" who then adds 20% on to the cost ...etc. Why not have the DOD directly hand out the contracts to the Iraqis. You avoid the multiplier effect caused by this layering of subcontracts, one of the primary things the DOD does is logistics and the boots on the ground are going to know where those contracts most need to be utilized.

 

 

"Nothing is helped by turning contractor utilization into a partisan issue"

 

Yea, we need more division in this country, huh? Its a simple fix. Absorb the security companies into the DOD, or if thats too extreme, rescind the contracts and and use the "backdoor draft" to bring all the the ex-SF troops back into the services. If there were efficiencies found in the management style of these companies they could be utilized by the DOD. Hell, start a cross-services specialty group within the DOD that focuses on high risk security tasks. The partisan issues are derived from the fact that you have major campaiagn donors/former partisan officials miraculously receiving these no bid contracts. Or how about disqualifing any company with former partisan officials or campaign contributors from the contracts?

 

 

"we should focus on doing those improvements rather than trying to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater.'"

 

You got it. After you bring these security services back into the DOD, utilize what management/logistical/tactical techniques were found to be most efficient in theater. As you know, the guys on the gound know what works and what doesn't.

 

 

"Our 40+ member companies firmly believe that good oversight and accountability are good for good companies"

 

Yea thats what Enron said, thats what the mortgage brokerage and hedge fund industry is saying now, thats what the food industry says after each E.Coli cotamination recall. Companies make money, that is their job. If not, why not just pay managment and the employees on the same pay scale as the military. We are just adding unnessary layers of cost and management when we have a DOD that can do the job. Werent most of the ground level employees of these security firms not initiallly trained by the DOD with taxpayer dollars? Are you saying that the training and utiliztion of our forces is inefficeint? After these contractors are brought back into the DOD, utilize their knowledge to help stream line the military then.

 

 

I believe the former special forces guys need to be utilized. I understand we are in a precarious point in our history. I understand the terroist threat isnt going to miraculously disappaer when we leave Iraq. And I also understand there are many near/medium/and long term issues that are staring us right in the face. We need the best of the best in OUR military. We dont need a for profit entity making security decsions based on next quarter earnings.

 

 

[Serenity]

A majority of contractors are already retired veterans. There is little that would entice them back into a system they have already given a lifetime, several wives, and blood to. The fact that these guys are in their late thirties, early forties with a lifetime of institutional knowledge makes them incredibly valuable, but the hierarchy of the military is based on a model that is no longer attractive to intelligent, and capable individuals who have already provided a lifetime of service to the nation. Paying them good salaries was the only way to entice them back in the fold.

[noliquidity]

I in no way question the sacrifice these guys have made. These guys are doing things we will never know about that I'm am sure have tilted senarios in directions that prevented some serious shit from happening. I didn't think age made a difference anymore when it came to being called back into the service . I thought that had called back specialists in certain fields(ie medical, translation, M.P.'s etc.) that had been out of the service for longer than even decade? If there are bureacratic issues that are driving away the most trained,intelligent and capable individuals from one of the most valuable military assets we have, we are in trouble. The pay thing is easy. Pay the troops more money. Its a slap in the face to the ground troops over there when tehy are taking the same risks from getting blown up from an IED or getting picked off by a sniper but get paided 1/5 the salary. Can you imagine what that does to their morale? And do you think the military is going to be able to recruit anybody in the future? The problems this country faces aren't going away(which I'm sure you would agree with). We need to think long term and not just let the best of the best be controlled by corporations thats main motivator is $$$$ and not our strategic interest. What happens if/when these companies either go off shore or are bought out by a multinational from lets say Dubai? Does it become more of a problem then. I dont question the motives of the ground level forces working for these firms. But I know in a free market economy a company and its management makes decions based on profit(corporations are mandated to maximize profit) and not necessarily whats best for the country

Edited October 9, 2007 by noliquidity

[Buckaroo]

bloodwater

 

the crony repug CEO pays off the crony repug politician, essentially purchasing the right to a no bid contract. Costs are GROSSLY inflated. Goons are hired and restraining laws are removed so there won't be any costly repercussions.

 

enron's MO to the bone, don't break the laws, just remove them then commit the crimes scot free. but they can't stop there because greed knows no limits, they even break what little laws are left.

 

of course all this money spent is just borrowed at taxpayers expense. Like the 9 bil that disappeared shortly after we went in there. or the 9 bil that enron stuck Califa for, and then Arnold was cheated in there and the first thing he did was shut down the AG's case to get the 9 bil back.

 

or like the 3 trillion missing from the pentagon books, that death skull rummy reported about on 9-10. timed so the story would disappear.

[Serenity]

I in no way question the sacrifice these guys have made. These guys are doing things we will never know about that I'm am sure have tilted senarios in directions that prevented some serious shit from happening. I didn't think age made a difference anymore when it came to being called back into the service . I thought that had called back specialists in certain fields(ie medical, translation, M.P.'s etc.) that had been out of the service for longer than even decade? If there are bureacratic issues that are driving away the most trained,intelligent and capable individuals from one of the most valuable military assets we have, we are in trouble. The pay thing is easy. Pay the troops more money. Its a slap in the face to the ground troops over there when tehy are taking the same risks from getting blown up from an IED or getting picked off by a sniper but get paided 1/5 the salary. Can you imagine what that does to their morale? And do you think the military is going to be able to recruit anybody in the future? The problems this country faces aren't going away(which I'm sure you would agree with). We need to think long term and not just let the best of the best be controlled by corporations thats main motivator is $$$$ and not our strategic interest. What happens if/when these companies either go off shore or are bought out by a multinational from lets say Dubai? Does it become more of a problem then. I dont question the motives of the ground level forces working for these firms. But I know in a free market economy a company and its management makes decions based on profit(corporations are mandated to maximize profit) and not necessarily whats best for the country

 

I've argued privately for a long time about paying CERTAIN troops (Combat arms-Intel) more money, (much more $), making the services extremely selective (not just the special operations forces), and reducing the number of officers. We could probably discuss that for a long time.

 

You can call back individuals with certain skills from IRR (Inactive Reserve), but once a guy retires out, then they don't owe any further obligation. I state once again that the majority of the high end contractors are retirees and in my mind are being paid fairly for the type of consulting work they are being asked to do, in the conditions they do it in, with the level of risk they face. These guys aren't your everyday Joe off the block looking for some GI Bill money, or some cheap thrill. Some of these guys are like the Olympians of warfare. Look at how much we pay pro sports players and what exactly do they contribute overall versus how much they get paid?

 

There are tremendous advantages to being a soldier that contractors do not enjoy, in particular the mission sets. You're not going to see contractors actioning intelligence and conducting raid packages.

 

Contractors are going to be standing around with an aimpoint glued to their foreheads waiting to take a bullet for some guy. Now if you paid them the same pay, which would you rather do? I'd rather be kicking a$$ and taking names.

 

I read somewhere, maybe http://icasualties.org that you are statistically MORE likely to be killed or injured in contracting work.

[canyondweller]

Its a slap in the face to the ground troops over there when tehy are taking the same risks from getting blown up from an IED or getting picked off by a sniper but get paided 1/5 the salary. Can you imagine what that does to their morale?

 

You are drawing the wrong comparison. As Serenity said, Blackwater's contractors have a different mission profile than the average soldier on the ground. Blackwater contractors provide diplomatic security and, in order to be factual, need to be compared to similar in grade:

 

"It appears that Blackwater's highly paid private security contractors are still more of a bargain to the taxpayer than government diplomatic security agents.

 

A House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs report says that Blackwater bills the government $1,222 per security contractor per day in Iraq. That comes out to $446,030 per Blackwater guard per year.

 

By contrast, a single State Department Bureau of Diplomatic Security agent in Iraq costs the taxpayer "nearly $500,000 a year," according to the Los Angeles Times. The Times cites Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Richard Griffin as the source.

 

Blackwater CEO Erik Prince repeatedly urged Congress to do cost comparisons to find out whether government or private guards make the best sense for the taxpayer. Prince adds that the $1,222 per man per day figure includes built-in costs like his company's helicopters - costs that he absorbs when those helicopters are shot down. Blackwater lost three helicopters so far this year."

Source

 

 

[No. 13 Baby]

Blackwater contractors provide diplomatic security

 

Diplomatic security:

 

[canyondweller]

Nice try, junior. Keep the training wheels bolted on for a few more weeks.