Evil Mercenary Helicopters Kill Ambassador

[MikeD]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gkx-3oYeFwuWKCusr2jrojs98w8wD8S1N8CG0

Actually, they saved their ****ing lives; the article is too new to say, but it was Blackwater who pulled their brothers-in-arms and the ambassador out of harm's way after a diplomatic motorcade was destroyed in Baghdad. Those helos that everyone complains about routinely evacuate people that the military can't or won't. (EDIT: "routinely" is emotional hyperbole on my part. However, they do it whenever the opportunity presents itself...point is, do psycho mercenaries who only care about money and killing do things like this at their own lives' risk and financial cost? I mean, accuse them of being adrenalin junkies...who else does a job like this...but this is a mountain biking site, for god's sake...that's not a crime, and someone's gotta do this job.)

I'm sure Rockwool will be saddened that his heroic freedom fighters failed to kill the evil interloper usurper supporters who are preventing the establishment of a pure Islamic shari'a state in Iraq. Maybe some other day. At least you killed one.

And Changleen's suspicious that they in fact instigated the attack to curry favor in the world view.

-Mike

[X3pilot]

92709

You want me on that wall, you NEED me on that wall.

[MikeD]

Damn right.

[Silver]

I had forgotten about Poland...

[jimmydean]

I had forgotten about Poland...

:stupid:

I think all 36 of their soldiers are still there too.

[MikeD]

:stupid:

I think all 36 of their soldiers are still there too.

Well, now it's 35.

[N8]

http://i23.tinypic.com/34zgi21.gif

[MikeD]

92709

You want me on that wall, you NEED me on that wall.

It's too bad I have a custom title already.

"Nathan R. Jessup" would rule.

[BurlyShirley]

It's too bad I have a custom title already.

"Nathan R. Jessup" would rule.

Im sure you've heard this, still hilarious!

http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2003/s_jn-p1.php

[MikeD]

Im sure you've heard this, still hilarious!

http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2003/s_jn-p1.php

I can't listen to that right now (no speakers) but I imagine it's the radio clip where they reduce the woman to tears using only NRJ sound bytes? If so, God bless you. I've been trying to find it online again for some time.

[BurlyShirley]

Yep, that's the one.

[N8]

http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070928/070928_blackwater_hmed_12p.standard.jpg

[MikeD]

I'm putting that up in the office, right under this one:
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/spetznaz.jpg

[rockwool]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gkx-3oYeFwuWKCusr2jrojs98w8wD8S1N8CG0

Actually, they saved their ****ing lives; the article is too new to say, but it was Blackwater who pulled their brothers-in-arms and the ambassador out of harm's way after a diplomatic motorcade was destroyed in Baghdad. Those helos that everyone complains about routinely evacuate people that the military can't or won't. (EDIT: "routinely" is emotional hyperbole on my part. However, they do it whenever the opportunity presents itself...point is, do psycho mercenaries who only care about money and killing do things like this at their own lives' risk and financial cost? I mean, accuse them of being adrenalin junkies...who else does a job like this...but this is a mountain biking site, for god's sake...that's not a crime, and someone's gotta do this job.)

I'm sure Rockwool will be saddened that his heroic freedom fighters failed to kill the evil interloper usurper supporters who are preventing the establishment of a pure Islamic shari'a state in Iraq. Maybe some other day. At least you killed one.

And Changleen's suspicious that they in fact instigated the attack to curry favor in the world view.

-Mike

And next thing you're going to tell me is that the Nazis weren't all that bad because they actually did some things like create jobs to all Germans, build roads that helped the infrastructure to grow both before and after the war, spent ****loads on the defence industry which had positive effects on post war know-how, genetic reaserch using Jews which has given alot of knowledge to post war scientists, etc?

See, war isn't that bad, you occupy a country, kill 600.000 people, opress 30 million (or so), and every 5 years you get to save an ambasador. :disgust1:

[Slugman]

They did what they were supposed to do.... does that erase their trigger happy attitude?

Sorry - but a nice little PR move like this will not change the world's perception of them.

[MikeD]

See, war isn't that bad, you occupy a country, kill 600.000 people, opress 30 million (or so), and every 5 years you get to save an ambasador. :disgust1:

Blackwater did all that?

[DaveW]

Blackwater did all that?

Nope but people outside of the US associate Blackwater with the US government/military now, as they do work for you, and they are protected by the US. *shrugs*

[MikeD]

Nope but people outside of the US associate Blackwater with the US government/military now, as they do work for you, and they are protected by the US. *shrugs*

Well, if anyone believes Blackwater played a part in the invasion of Iraq or the plan to do so, they're simply ignorant. They were hired when civilians needed protection in the resulting war zone (a creation of horrendous US foreign policy, but we're stuck with the results now).

So Rockwool's statement simply doesn't mean anything...but it does invoke Nazis, which is always a smooth move. He's arguing that the invasion was wrong. That's got nothing to do with Blackwater's mission, or the mission of any other security company. It's not wrong to associate them with the US government...they're implementing US government directives...but they're not carrying on the war.

[Slugman]

Well, if anyone believes Blackwater played a part in the invasion of Iraq or the plan to do so, they're simply ignorant.
I doubt most people (foreign or US Citizens) really look at armed forces associated with US governement and take the time to distinguish which branch/division they are a part of or report to.

Armed and doing the work of the USA - your actions reflect on the soldiers in the streets.

[DaveW]

Quite true you'd have to be a total moron to think that Blackwater played a part in the invasion of Iraq or the plan to invade.
I was just pointing out that to many (def the Iraqi's) they are NOW seen as just another arm of the USA in Iraqi . And given the amount of gunfire they are portrayed as using in the media they could quite easily be thought to be carrying on the war..... Sure as sh*t the Iraqi's wouldn't see the difference.
As far as Rookwool's Nazi invoking? No I don't follow him on that either.

[kidwoo]

Well, if anyone believes Blackwater played a part in the invasion of Iraq or the plan to do so, they're simply ignorant.

Really? So the existence of blackwater, halliburton et al. Had NOTHING to do with the invasion of Iraq?

These guys were just twiddling their thumbs, shining the two guns they owned, completely unaware of the implications of the 2000 election? They just got a call one day and announced to the cubicles 'hey boys, we gots some work......some guy named george just called.....ever heard of 'em?'

[MikeD]

I doubt most people (foreign or US Citizens) really look at armed forces associated with US governement and take the time to distinguish which branch/division they are a part of or report to.

Armed and doing the work of the USA - your actions reflect on the soldiers in the streets.

That's obvious.

However, it still doesn't somehow make Blackwater actually responsible for the invasion of Iraq, nor does it obviate the need to protect civilians working in the war zone.

[DaveW]

I think there is however a need to shoot LESS unarmed civilians living in your war zone.......... :clue:

[MikeD]

Really? So the existence of blackwater, halliburton et al. Had NOTHING to do with the invasion of Iraq?

These guys were just twiddling their thumbs, shining the two guns they owned, completely unaware of the implications of the 2000 election? They just got a call one day and announced to the cubicles 'hey boys, we gots some work......some guy named george just called.....ever heard of 'em?'

Wait, where did Halliburton jump in from?

The invasion of Iraq was the result of a misguided political ideology, ignorance of cultural and political realities, and willful dismissal of expert opinion. If you think Blackwater was pitching a war to the White House to drum up business, I think you're a little out there.

And part of 'their' ideology (politicians who started this) may be that war is good for business and good for strengthening their own political position. But that doesn't somehow put Blackwater behind all this...that's something I've NEVER even heard put forth.

That's not to say a security company won't watch politics for a business opportunity...I mean, insecurity is their market...but that's like saying a shipbuilding company shouldn't look at the Navy as a potential customer and examine the potential future of conflicts towards that.

I know the "insecurity" reference above will spike some more conspiracy types to say, "See? See?", but the PMC business developed in relation to the current world situation, not the other way around.

[DaveW]

I do like this bit from the core values and ethics page on blackwaters website

Execution: The foundation of our success. We plan to execute, and execute our plan. Using innovation, flexibility, speed and agility, we will perform with moral courage and conviction and we will do so against all odds.

(bold italics my emphasis) :twitch:

[DaveW]

Whoops.... Forgot the link.

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/about/corevalues.asp

[bohorec]

This is interesting:


The SS was a private army of the nazi party and in reality the private army of Hitler. It was not supported by the German state, it was not included in the budget of the State.

Hitler's stormtroopers were often former members of the Freikorps (right-wing private armies who flourished during the period that followed the First World War) and had considerable experience in using violence against their rivals.


The "special work" that the SS was called upon to do, necessitated a special legal status, according to Paul Scharfe, the head of the SS Legal Service: "This special position of course means that the SS man must be dealt with in a special way."


All units report unanimously that the relationship of the SS Verfügungstruppen to the Army is very cool, if not hostile

[kidwoo]

The invasion of Iraq was the result of a misguided political ideology, ignorance of cultural and political realities, and willful dismissal of expert opinion. If you think Blackwater was pitching a war to the White House to drum up business, I think you're a little out there.

I'm an innovator.

Policy was part of it obviously. And just to be clear I'm not saying the concept was dreamt up in a blackwater board room. But no successful presidential candidate wins the office on his merit alone. If so I'd have the job (I have really good hair). There's a mechanism behind it, and there's throwing your friends a bone after the fact.

And part of 'their' ideology (politicians who started this) may be that war is good for business and good for strengthening their own political position. But that doesn't somehow put Blackwater behind all this...that's something I've NEVER even heard put forth.


Again, not blackwater and blackwater only, but they as a part of a larger mechanism (hence the random halliburton toss in).


the PMC business developed in relation to the current world situation, not the other way around.

Maybe :D

Obviously these guys are going to root for the team that will bring them the bidness. But from what I've read on little bush's eagerness to get on the iraq thing early on in his presidency, I'd be surprised to hear that no one in blackwater knew a thing about the plans before the office changed hands......and then acted accordingly.

Again, just to be clear, I'm talking minutia of getting a candidate in office with a known result, not the wholehearted birthing of the policy in its entirety. But let me drum up some names with cross-contamination through ye ole revolving door;)

[MikeD]

But from what I've read on little bush's eagerness to get on the iraq thing early on in his presidency, I'd be surprised to hear that no one in blackwater knew a thing about the plans before the office changed hands......and then acted accordingly.

Or it's possible that an avowed right-wing rich guy backed the
Republican candidate...

And I'd only vote for you if you retained the mullet and the moustache.

[kidwoo]

Or it's possible that an avowed right-wing rich guy backed the
Republican candidate...

Crazy talk!



And I'd only vote for you if you retained the mullet and the moustache.

I got a corvette too.

[MikeD]

I got a corvette too.

oooooh, ouch. Sorry. Gold Trans-Am t-tops only for my candidates.

[rockwool]

Well, if anyone believes Blackwater played a part in the invasion of Iraq or the plan to do so, they're simply ignorant. They were hired when civilians needed protection in the resulting war zone (a creation of horrendous US foreign policy, but we're stuck with the results now).

So Rockwool's statement simply doesn't mean anything...but it does invoke Nazis, which is always a smooth move. He's arguing that the invasion was wrong. That's got nothing to do with Blackwater's mission, or the mission of any other security company. It's not wrong to associate them with the US government...they're implementing US government directives...but they're not carrying on the war.

You were implying that not only bad things have come out from the occupational forces, didn't you, or rather Blackwater, who you consider to be a security force but infact these security forces have taken over a role that the military always has had in an occupation. Doing so they are releaving forces that otherwise would have been tied to secutity, thus helping continue the occupation and oppression.

That of course doesn't mean that they nessesarily had any part to do with the invasion, and if they did it would probably have been through campaign funding for GWB, lobbying, or that their situation was/is similar to Haliburton (conserning desission makers being stockholders in the company) etc.

So, Blackwater and the other security companies have indeed a major responsibility for the continuance of the occupation. The comparison to the nazis was easy to make as their example is very well known but also because it's the worst of all examples.

I also don't agree that you are stuck with the results as you can (should) always pack up and leave (but if you did that it would probably mean that you would invade the new socialist countries that have come up in LA, primarily Venezuela, as the leftist movement will probably continue to spread otherwise).

[rockwool]

oooooh, ouch. Sorry. Gold Trans-Am t-tops only for my candidates.

Man, that Trans-Am with the golden eagle on the hood, what is it 79-80's model with the double head lights, that's a car is for rock stars, not politicians...

[MikeD]

You were implying that not only bad things have come out from the occupational forces, didn't you,

No.

or rather Blackwater, who you consider to be a security force but infact these security forces have taken over a role that the military always has had in an occupation.


Absolutely not. In fact, my point is the opposite (in other threads, not this one, where it's not come up). Blackwater is in FACT, not in your opinion and much of the world's, doing a job that the military has never done, is entirely out of the scope of its mission, and is neither trained nor equipped to do.





So, Blackwater and the other security companies have indeed a major responsibility for the continuance of the occupation. The comparison to the nazis was easy to make as their example is very well known but also because it's the worst of all examples.

No. That's the politicians' responsibility, and the military's if you're going to extend that. Blackwater is guarding civilians--diplomats, who reside in other countries during peacetime and sometimes in war-- in a war zone, and they have a right to be safe.


I also don't agree that you are stuck with the results as you can (should) always pack up and leave

That's another issue. I'm not for, and never have been, the war or the occupation of Iraq. However, I do somewhat believe in a responsibility to not completely **** a place up and then bail out...that said, whether we're doing any good at all over there is a question that I'm willing to explore. But it's got nothing to do with the point at hand.

[MikeD]

Man, that Trans-Am with the golden eagle on the hood, what is it 79-80's model with the double head lights, that's a car is for rock stars, not politicians...

Indeed...I'm just down on my politicians these days. I'd take Woo in a Trans Am (with a plate reading TRANNY) any time.

[bohorec]

No.

Absolutely not. In fact, my point is the opposite (in other threads, not this one, where it's not come up). Blackwater is in FACT, not in your opinion and much of the world's, doing a job that the military has never done, is entirely out of the scope of its mission, and is neither trained nor equipped to do.


Ask MarineROO how Blackwater is not doing the military job.

Or blackwater:

We are a professional military, law enforcement, security, peacekeeping, and stability operations firm who provides turnkey solutions.

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/about/


No. That's the politicians' responsibility, and the military's if you're going to extend that. Blackwater is guarding civilians--diplomats, who reside in other countries during peacetime and sometimes in war-- in a war zone, and they have a right to be safe.


There must be a lot of diplomats in Irak:

…instead the administration is building a coalition of corporations. Right now in Iraq, private personnel on the US government payroll outnumber official US troops. There are about 186,000 so-called private contractors operating alongside 165,000 troops. The US military is the junior partner in this coalition.—-This is a shadow war. We’re in the midst right now of a discussion about a surge, and about troop withdrawals, and we hear conflicting messages. But there’s been a surge on for four years of the private sector, in Iraq, this mercenary army that the Bush administration has built up all over that country.

Quoting is fun :pirate2:

[MikeD]

Ask MarineROO how Blackwater is not doing the military job.
Or blackwater:
http://www.blackwaterusa.com/about/

There must be a lot of diplomats in Irak:

Quoting is fun :pirate2:


You don't know what you're talking about. MarinR00 hasn't ever said anything about how PSD for diplomats in a war zone is a traditionally military job. He's said he doesn't like their behavior. That's entirely different.

Blackwater uses the word "military" on its site. So? Find me a US military unit trained, equipped, or tasked with protecting diplomats in a war zone. There are people who've had a bit of PSD training for military leaders, and most of those are ad-hoc arrangements devised after the start of the war. Proof that it's not even a traditionally military role to protect their OWN leaders, as individuals rather than as part of a unit, during a low-intensity conflict. And if the mission was to protect one civilian guy only, the military could probably easily adjust to do that...like the Poles in question at the start of the thread, whose spec-ops guys run the diplomatic security mission for their country.

The misconeption among the misinformed such as yourself, who also love the waffen SS analogy, is that Blackwater is prosecuting the war or even the occupation. They're not. They don't locate, close with, and destroy the enemy--the ultimate mission of the military. They manage risk by planning and procedure, and try to keep civilians out of harm's way, which may involve fighting out of an attack if one occurs. They do the EXACT SAME protection mission as the Department of State's special agents, trained to the same standards and procedures as mandated and supervised by DoS. The agents just aren't numerous enough to staff this mission, and training more would be a bigger problem since it takes 2 years and requires much more than the PSD skills that Blackwater employs (law enforcement and diplomatic stuff), and the new agents wouldn't have a mission when the Iraq debacle is over. Oh, and DoS owns all the vehicles and helicopters and everything that people say they're scared of Blackwater owning. Which, by the way, amounts to a few civilian-model helicopters without armament and some lightly armored cars (in military terms) with medium machineguns on them.

Most of the security personnel in Iraq (those 186,000 you quote) are static guards for the entire IZ, checkpoints within, and specific facilities; Blackwater has approximately 1000 PSD personnel in-country. There are other private security companies providing PSD for other private and public personnel as well.

So since this has all been said before, I'm tired of re-typing it every time an ill-informed person decides to quote stats they don't understand, and I'm done.

[Silver]

Worrying about the corrosive effect of Blackwater on the Republic is like worrying about a pimple when you have terminal cancer. It's not the pimple that is the problem...

[bohorec]

You don't know what you're talking about. MarinR00 hasn't ever said anything about how PSD for diplomats in a war zone is a traditionally military job. He's said he doesn't like their behavior. That's entirely different.

Yes you are correct, I don't know. But you might consider rereading all his posts. Or not since you are military expert and you know much more about Irak than soldiers who are there.


The bottom line is that these guys are NOT just doing escort and personnel security. They are actively engaged and conduct their own “missions” using their own APCs and air support. Who orders these missions? Who knows. Who do they report too? No idea.


Blackwater uses the word "military" on its site. So? Find me a US military unit trained, equipped, or tasked with protecting diplomats in a war zone. There are people who've had a bit of PSD training for military leaders, and most of those are ad-hoc arrangements devised after the start of the war.


You keep saying that, but that's not the point. 150.000 mercenaries in Irak all protecting poor foreign diplomats?


Proof that it's not even a traditionally military role to protect their OWN leaders, as individuals rather than as part of a unit, during a low-intensity conflict. And if the mission was to protect one civilian guy only, the military could probably easily adjust to do that...like the Poles in question at the start of the thread, whose spec-ops guys run the diplomatic security mission for their country.


Are you joking? Military not protecting their own leaders?

The misconeption among the misinformed such as yourself, who also love the waffen SS analogy, is that Blackwater is prosecuting the war or even the occupation. They're not. They don't locate, close with, and destroy the enemy--the ultimate mission of the military. They manage risk by planning and procedure, and try to keep civilians out of harm's way, which may involve fighting out of an attack if one occurs. They do the EXACT SAME protection mission as the Department of State's special agents, trained to the same standards and procedures as mandated and supervised by DoS. The agents just aren't numerous enough to staff this mission, and training more would be a bigger problem since it takes 2 years and requires much more than the PSD skills that Blackwater employs (law enforcement and diplomatic stuff), and the new agents wouldn't have a mission when the Iraq debacle is over. Oh, and DoS owns all the vehicles and helicopters and everything that people say they're scared of Blackwater owning. Which, by the way, amounts to a few civilian-model helicopters without armament and some lightly armored cars (in military terms) with medium machineguns on them.

I don't love the SS analogy, it's interesting (scary parhaps?).

Since when is logistic of military equipment DOS's job?


Most of the security personnel in Iraq (those 186,000 you quote) are static guards for the entire IZ, checkpoints within, and specific facilities; Blackwater has approximately 1000 PSD personnel in-country. There are other private security companies providing PSD for other private and public personnel as well.

Static guards you say? Private checkpoints?


So since this has all been said before, I'm tired of re-typing it every time an ill-informed person decides to quote stats they don't understand, and I'm done.

Your military and history knowledge is supreme (ancient war tactics=conspiracy), so I wont quote any more.

[MikeD]

Yes you are correct, I don't know. But you might consider rereading all his posts. Or not since you are military expert and you know much more about Irak than soldiers who are there.

You don't know what I do or where I'm sitting as I type this. None of that changes the facts I've stated. And I've read MarinR00's posts, so I'd love to find where he states that Blackwater is taking over the military's job. Because if he said it, he's wrong...even if he's in the military in Iraq and even if I was a home-maker mother in Wisconsin.



You keep saying that, but that's not the point. 150.000 mercenaries in Irak all protecting poor foreign diplomats? .

Keep smoking crack; I covered this.


Are you joking? Military not protecting their own leaders?
.

As individuals with a PSD, not as members of a unit. Show me a military unit with an inherent PSD capability or mission. You might find something. Now show me a military unit trained, tasked, or equipped to protect civilians outside the military structure. Doesn't exist. If you're capable of making the distinction, which you're not.



Since when is logistic of military equipment DOS's job?
. It's not. But if you'd read half of what I said, you'd realize this isn't a military mission...it's a diplomatic security mission, and DoS owns its gear to do that. But you're incapable of understanding that.


Static guards you say? Private checkpoints?
. Yes. Some. IZ/government of Iraq/US/other nation/United Nations/NGO buildings/venues/checkpoints. Static guards who stand in booths, check IDs, patrol the grounds, etc.


Your military and history knowledge is supreme (ancient war tactics=conspiracy), so I wont quote any more.

This is arguing calculus with a kindergartener.

[bohorec]

Ok, I'll quote you 2x.

Kindergartener on crack?

First of all, I never said that Blackwate(or other companies) is not a diplomatic security company, I said that they might also do military tasks(logistic). But you said that guarding civilians-diplomats is their only task. For example, according to link they were carrying U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan. Are such missions also DOS's task?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec07/blackwater_10-02.html

And nobody in this thread did not say that Blackwater started the war in Irak. It was said that it's a part of the war machine and for some reason you are trying to deny that very simple fact and you keep talking about proper grammar terms.

Am I conspiracy theorist now?

so I'd love to find where he states that Blackwater is taking over the military's job. Because if he said it, he's wrong...even if he's in the military in Iraq and even if I was a home-maker mother in Wisconsin.


I'm sure you'll check the first link, they were keep talking about privatization of the US military, contractors taking over millitary tasks and such stuff. But obviously they were on crack or something. (To be clear I'm writing about all contractors not only BW)

Just for you-a proof how private security companies have nothing to do with military:


Oh wait, now I know, because most of the people who work on our bases, prepare and serve our food, fix our vehicles, clean the latrines, drive the buses and transport our vehicles and supplies don't speak English! Isn't it great that the American Military can't support itself anymore? I digress....





Now show me a military unit trained, tasked, or equipped to protect civilians outside the military structure.


You said that it's not even a traditionally military role to protect their OWN leaders and I ask you simple queston. Again, are you joking?


Here is military opinion about their psd:


No love lost by U.S. military
Some U.S. military commanders similarly have no love for the company, which they say "complicates their battle space."

One U.S. commander working in the area where the Sept. 16 shooting took place told me, "It is one of the quietest areas in northwest Baghdad, as far as kinetic activity is concerned. Usually a lot of traffic. I would question the training of this PSD [Personal Security Detail]. We have trained our guys to hold fire and get used to driving in traffic. I have never heard of this number of civilians being killed in an EOF [Escalation Of Force]. We have had one EOF fatality in ten months in sector."

About diplomatic security mission, I like this term. And you are correct again. Private security companies are not military, because military fall under the Geneva convention (no hollow-point ammo, etc). And military don't do this:


Agents’ cars zigzag across the roads, guns pointed out the back. If a car gets too close, Blackwater agents often throw water bottles at its windshield. It's supposed to be a "non-lethal" warning. Better to have a water bottle hit you than be shot. But some Blackwater guards have been freezing the bottles so they crack the windshields.

Blackwater often keeps the same defensive posture even within the Green Zone, alienating just about everyone, their colleagues included.

One of the interior ministry officials involved in the investigation was himself hit by one of Blackwater's water bottle projectiles. He's still annoyed and insulted. The case is personal. He wants to see Blackwater go down. Many security contractors here do as well.

"This is worse than Abu Ghraib for us. It is going to be the Abu Ghraib of our industry," bemoaned one contractor, worried Blackwater's incident is going to ruin his business.

Another contractor said, "The big question is, why did the State Department allow Blackwater to behave this way? They were the clients. If they didn't like the way Blackwater operated, why didn't they say anything? Silence is consent."

You see the issue is not if they are part of military or not, it's have they act. They rescue polish ambassador, fine it's their job, but in 80% of the shootings, Blackwater fired first and there has been no proper sanction against them...

But obviously we have to praise the BW for saving polish ambassador and forget everything else...

[bohorec]

Ok 3x

Which, by the way, amounts to a few civilian-model helicopters without armament and some lightly armored cars (in military terms) with medium machineguns on them.
.


I almost forgot, is this vehicle lightly armored car?

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/grizzly/

[MikeD]

Ok 3x




I almost forgot, is this vehicle lightly armored car?

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/grizzly/


Yes, with a medium machinegun, just like I said.

[MikeD]

Ok, I'll quote you 2x.

Kindergartener on crack?

First of all, I never said that Blackwate(or other companies) is not a diplomatic security company, I said that they might also do military tasks(logistic). But you said that guarding civilians-diplomats is their only task.

No, I didn't; however, I can see how you could think that. But the scope of the discussion is Private Military Contractors (PMCs) doing Personal Security Details (PSDs) in Iraq, not other missions. And Blackwater's not a logistics company; it's a security company. They provide other services (training, convoy escort for civilian convoys) which actually could be military missions, but the PSD mission, which we're discussing, is not. The economics of using private vs. military assets is ongoing and has been since the founding of the US. Lots of private companies have provided stuff for the military to varying and changing degrees over the course of history. But that's basically an economic argument, and completely irrelevant here.


And nobody in this thread did not say that Blackwater started the war in Irak. It was said that it's a part of the war machine and for some reason you are trying to deny that very simple fact and you keep talking about proper grammar terms.

Actually, someone pretty much did say that. And it's extremely significant that people think that Blackwater is actually doing the military's mission. Because it isn't, and people have a very distorted view. They think Blackwater is an offensive combat unit. This is far more than a grammatical distinction.


I'm sure you'll check the first link, they were keep talking about privatization of the US military, contractors taking over millitary tasks and such stuff. But obviously they were on crack or something. (To be clear I'm writing about all contractors not only BW)


So you're blindly mixing arguments. The privatization issue is really an economic one. I'm not an economist and don't claim to be. But in the short term, since PSDS FOR CIVILIANS ARE NOT A MILITARY MISSION, contractors were the answer. I still think they are the only answer for diplomatic security in Iraq, because we can't/shouldn't hire more diplomatic security agents (part of the US Dept of State) to do this very short-term mission in a combat zone. They wouldn't be trained and working for another 2 years minimum if they were hired, and the training is extensive and expensive...and then you have hundreds more government employees, who you can’t fire, with no viable job positions when the war's over. Which it might be (hopefully) by the time they finish training.


You said that it's not even a traditionally military role to protect their OWN leaders and I ask you simple question. Again, are you joking?


No, you just don't understand what I've said...I put it to what I assume to be a non-native level of English and no military experience. I said military units don't provide PSDs...protecting their leaders as individuals rather than members of a unit. I've been a member of an armored military unit whose task was to protect a commander as part of my unit. I've also worked PSD missions as a civilian; I’m a specialist in international security and law enforcement. I know the difference. You don't. (I also know what a lightly-armored vehicle is…you obviously don’t.)

I also think it’s great that you obviously don’t like the “war machine,” but love to use military sources to denigrate PSD professionals. There are lots of reasons the military doesn’t like PSDs. Lots of these are historical reasons, with bad blood over the contractors not being fully integrated into the local situation and plan. Some are because of jealousy over the money. Some are because of the beards and the sunglasses. Some because, like the military, there are idiots and psychos in every group that needed weeding-out.

The PMCs have had their issues. Some continue to do so. The military does as well. Many issues, especially deconfliction with the military in-zone, have been largely worked out as the industry grew. I, and any other real professional, thinks accountability is a great thing. That’s why Blackwater is so tightly controlled now…and why the remaining contractors like it that way, as well. The rejects have been weeded out…from the WPPS State Department contract. I can’t speak much to others, and I know there are lots of third-country wierdos running around with guns in the hinterlands around here.

And this pedantic arguing-by-quote has never been my style. Too much computer geekery involved. I feel like I'm arguing with Old Man G-Funk all over again, but in his second language.

[bohorec]

No, I didn't; however, I can see how you could think that. But the scope of the discussion is Private Military Contractors (PMCs) doing Personal Security Details (PSDs) in Iraq, not other missions.

Ok ok they are doing PSD, but they are still merceneries and they are involved in all kind of sh1t going on there.

However here is a story of BW's employee, he actualy thinks he's defending his land :shocked::biggrin::

"We have to be willing to go abroad to fight, to go after these guys here so my family at home can stay safe,"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10547-2005Apr22.html


And it's extremely significant that people think that Blackwater is actually doing the military's mission. Because it isn't, and people have a very distorted view. They think Blackwater is an offensive combat unit. This is far more than a grammatical distinction.


Ok point taken. However in reality it's reported that their defensive units often act offensive.
One thing is for sure, Blackwater is actually doing a lot of money.
Here is the link to the article which describes relationship between BW and GWB. They did not start the war, but they might had few drinks together and discuss it, but this is speculation. However claiming they didn't is also speculation.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/10/02/blackwater_bush/index.html?source=rss&aim=yahoo-salon


So you're blindly mixing arguments. The privatization issue is really an economic one. I'm not an economist and don't claim to be. But in the short term, since PSDS FOR CIVILIANS ARE NOT A MILITARY MISSION, contractors were the answer. I still think they are the only answer for diplomatic security in Iraq, because we can't/shouldn't hire more diplomatic security agents (part of the US Dept of State) to do this very short-term mission in a combat zone. They wouldn't be trained and working for another 2 years minimum if they were hired, and the training is extensive and expensive...and then you have hundreds more government employees, who you can’t fire, with no viable job positions when the war's over. Which it might be (hopefully) by the time they finish training.

As I said point taken, well if BW would act professional this thread would not even exist. However you can call guarding L. Paul Bremer peace keeping operation if you like.


No, you just don't understand what I've said...I put it to what I assume to be a non-native level of English and no military experience. I said military units don't provide PSDs...protecting their leaders as individuals rather than members of a unit.


Historicaly, leaders were usually part of military while other "important" people were protected by mercenaries (now called psd or something).


I've been a member of an armored military unit whose task was to protect a commander as part of my unit. I've also worked PSD missions as a civilian; I’m a specialist in international security and law enforcement. I know the difference. You don't. (I also know what a lightly-armored vehicle is…you obviously don’t.)

That's why I asked you about it, thanks for ekplanation.

If anyone is interested here is video about saving ambassador:

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/242674.php