Blackwater mercs drew weapons on the U.S. Army.

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: palehorse74
And I'd rather fight side-by-side with the Boy Scouts than some of you...

Why not, you might learn a thing or two from a Boy Scout.

I'm a former Eagle Scout myself... The Boy Scout Law and US Army Values are very similar!

A Scout is trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent.

Army Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage.

Funny, you seem to have abdicated those values standing up for these blackwater scumbags.

And you seem to have abdicated some of America's basic tenets by condemning all of them without due process.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: palehorse74
And I'd rather fight side-by-side with the Boy Scouts than some of you...

Why not, you might learn a thing or two from a Boy Scout.

I'm a former Eagle Scout myself... The Boy Scout Law and US Army Values are very similar!

A Scout is trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent.

Army Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage.

Funny, you seem to have abdicated those values standing up for these blackwater scumbags.

And you seem to have abdicated some of America's basic tenets by condemning all of them without due process.

I suppose that's to counter the people willing to declare them innocent without due process. Of course that's the major complaint here, that there is no such thing as due process for these guys...they're innocent until declared guilty, but there isn't anyone around to do that.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: palehorse74
And I'd rather fight side-by-side with the Boy Scouts than some of you...

Why not, you might learn a thing or two from a Boy Scout.

I'm a former Eagle Scout myself... The Boy Scout Law and US Army Values are very similar!

A Scout is trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent.

Army Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage.

Funny, you seem to have abdicated those values standing up for these blackwater scumbags.

And you seem to have abdicated some of America's basic tenets by condemning all of them without due process.

I suppose that's to counter the people willing to declare them innocent without due process. Of course that's the major complaint here, that there is no such thing as due process for these guys...they're innocent until declared guilty, but there isn't anyone around to do that.

...which, by default, leaves them innocent... for now. That's just the way it is!

Like I said before, the best we can hope for is a resolution that involves installing new laws and mechanisms to properly investigate and prosecute future crimes committed by contractors. People will just have to accept that past offenses may go unpunished because of the current absence of proper oversight and enforcement.

 

[Lemon law]

If blackwater behaved like scouts or even lived by US military codes, these abuse by blackwater would have never happened. Yet they did some 200 times. At what point do these rise above isolated incidents to become evidence of systemic abuse?

 

[Lemon law]

As palehorse74 contends---Like I said before, the best we can hope for is a resolution that involves installing new laws and mechanisms to properly investigate and prosecute future crimes committed by contractors. People will just have to accept that past offenses may go unpunished because of the current absence of proper oversight and enforcement.

And I contend we need to learn the lesson and dispense of private mercenaries period. My method eliminates all future abuses by blackwater in Iraq.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
And I contend we need to learn the lesson and dispense of private mercenaries period. My method eliminates all future abuses by blackwater in Iraq.

And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
And I contend we need to learn the lesson and dispense of private mercenaries period. My method eliminates all future abuses by blackwater in Iraq.

And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

So you think the whole 48,000 are all guilty?

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
And I contend we need to learn the lesson and dispense of private mercenaries period. My method eliminates all future abuses by blackwater in Iraq.

And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

So you think the whole 48,000 are all guilty?

To answer the 1ezduzit question, no all 48,000 are not guilty, but since the system can't segregate between the innocent and guilty, at least all 1000 blackwater must go. And if nothing else, Eric Prince's answers are a living testament to that clear evidence of zero training and oversight.

But on the larger private security companies question, I have seen more reliable estimates that the figure is more like 30,000 at max involved in security in Iraq. Out of that 30,000 or
maybe the more chartable 48,000, only a very tiny fraction of those are directly employed by the US government using taxpayer funds. The vast bulk are directly hired and paid by private for profit companies involved in doing for profit work in Iraq. And for private firms,
they are free to hire whomever they choose for security. With the proviso that they meet US and Iraqi law.

So the Palehorse74 contention of needing to institute a military draft to replace the private security firms is more palehorse74 pure bunk scare tactics. Who the US taxpayer hires should not be private militias is the lesson we must learn.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: datalink7
They are lucky they didn't draw weapons on my platoon. It would have ended badly for them.

You were not there, if the blackwater mercs had their weapons drawn first, a hot head idiot like you could have gotten yourself and your entire platoon killed. You may have been dead within your rights but dead none the less.

As it is our troops survived and lived to tell and more importantly report the tale. Or would you have preferred the likely blackwater version of they are all dead and blackwater arrived too late to save those American troops.

"hot head diot like me"? I'm not sure where that personal attack came from. You know neither myself nor my platoon. I was simply making a statement of fact based on my observations in country of both blackwater and my own experiences with my platoon. Making commments like that makes you sound like a hot headed idiot, not me.

You seem to be unaware of how a combat infantry platoon operates in sector. "if the blackwater mercs had their weapons drawn first" would never even come into play. We always have our weapons "drawn." Everyone walks around with their fingers on the trigger well, ready to put their finger on the trigger in a split second. And the gunners on the trucks (of which I have weapons not available to blackwater and which are armored far better than blackwater) are ALWAYS pulling security 100% of the time. At best they would have pulled a "suprise" attack and gotten a few of the dismounts who would be rushing to see if they were hurt. The rest would be behind cover of the vehicles and that would be the end of that.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

Of course he doesn't.

The left always attacks and critiques the current plan, but offers nothing as an alternative. Nothing other than BDS-fueled rants.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: palehorse74
And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

Of course he doesn't.

The left always attacks and critiques the current plan, but offers nothing as an alternative. Nothing other than BDS-fueled rants.

-----------

I see you can't read Pabster, if you will go up two posts, the one I wrote at 11:37 PM on 10/16/2007, you will that there is no plan needed and palehorse74 is greatly inflating the number that the US military would need to replace by a probable factor of 25 or so.

Private sector company's security is not a US taxpayer responsibility.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
And I contend we need to learn the lesson and dispense of private mercenaries period. My method eliminates all future abuses by blackwater in Iraq.

And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

So you think the whole 48,000 are all guilty?

uhh, what?! I won't think ANY of them are guilty until they are found guilty by a legitimate court of law.

I wrote what you quoted in response to those calling for the total removal of security contractors from Iraq.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
And I contend we need to learn the lesson and dispense of private mercenaries period. My method eliminates all future abuses by blackwater in Iraq.

And I'll once again challenge you to find 48,000 replacements without instituting a draft or doubling the number of tours for every MP and infantryman in the military.

Since their security services are obviously required, who the hell will take their place?!

You do have a plan, don't you?

So you think the whole 48,000 are all guilty?

uhh, what?! I won't think ANY of them are guilty until they are found guilty by a legitimate court of law.

I wrote what you quoted in response to those calling for the total removal of security contractors from Iraq.

ONCE AGAIN. THEY CANNOT BE FOUND GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW SINCE THE U.S. HAS A TREATY WITH IRAQ SAYING THEY CAN'T BE TRIED IN A COURT OF LAW.
WHAT PART OF THIS DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?
OR ARE YOU JUST SAYING EVEN IF THERE A MILLION WITNESSES, AND YOU ARE A WITNESS YOU WON'T THINK THEY ARE GUILTY?
COME UP WITH A RATIONALE THAT AT LEAST IS BELIEVABLE.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
But on the larger private security companies question, I have seen more reliable estimates that the figure is more like 30,000 at max involved in security in Iraq. Out of that 30,000 or
maybe the more chartable 48,000, only a very tiny fraction of those are directly employed by the US government using taxpayer funds. The vast bulk are directly hired and paid by private for profit companies involved in doing for profit work in Iraq. And for private firms,
they are free to hire whomever they choose for security. With the proviso that they meet US and Iraqi law.

So the Palehorse74 contention of needing to institute a military draft to replace the private security firms is more palehorse74 pure bunk scare tactics. Who the US taxpayer hires should not be private militias is the lesson we must learn.

So based on your "more reliable" sources, just how many contractors need to be replaced by US military personnel? Or perhaps you're interested in expanding the federal government with a few thousand new employees?

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
But on the larger private security companies question, I have seen more reliable estimates that the figure is more like 30,000 at max involved in security in Iraq. Out of that 30,000 or
maybe the more chartable 48,000, only a very tiny fraction of those are directly employed by the US government using taxpayer funds. The vast bulk are directly hired and paid by private for profit companies involved in doing for profit work in Iraq. And for private firms,
they are free to hire whomever they choose for security. With the proviso that they meet US and Iraqi law.

So the Palehorse74 contention of needing to institute a military draft to replace the private security firms is more palehorse74 pure bunk scare tactics. Who the US taxpayer hires should not be private militias is the lesson we must learn.

So based on your "more reliable" sources, just how many contractors need to be replaced by US military personnel? Or perhaps you're interested in expanding the federal government with a few thousand new employees?

Perhaps, if George wanted this nation to fight this war, he should have called for a return of the draft - instead of taking the cowardly way out....

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: techs
ONCE AGAIN. THEY CANNOT BE FOUND GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW SINCE THE U.S. HAS A TREATY WITH IRAQ SAYING THEY CAN'T BE TRIED IN A COURT OF LAW.

Then, "once again," they remain innocent by default.

WHAT PART OF THIS DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?

I understand it perfectly well which is why those men will remain innocent. I just hope there are processes put in place to handle future incidents.

OR ARE YOU JUST SAYING EVEN IF THERE A MILLION WITNESSES, AND YOU ARE A WITNESS YOU WON'T THINK THEY ARE GUILTY? COME UP WITH A RATIONALE THAT AT LEAST IS BELIEVABLE.

I never pass personal judgment on men in situations when I was not present and/or involved in any way.

Call me crazy, but I believe in the concepts of justice for all, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the mechanisms are missing to provide the public with such legal judgments, then I fault those responsible for failing to put the processes in place. In other words, them's the breaks!

In a perfect world, the men involved would face a fair trial; but, alas, since someone screwed up the accountability and oversight mechanisms, the men are free to go and remain innocent for the rest of their lives.

Besides, hearsay and simple witness testimonials are hardly, if ever, enough to convict someone of murder - at least not by US standards, which are the ones I tend to respect and uphold.

PS: Please take your meds and lose the CAPS...

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
But on the larger private security companies question, I have seen more reliable estimates that the figure is more like 30,000 at max involved in security in Iraq. Out of that 30,000 or
maybe the more chartable 48,000, only a very tiny fraction of those are directly employed by the US government using taxpayer funds. The vast bulk are directly hired and paid by private for profit companies involved in doing for profit work in Iraq. And for private firms,
they are free to hire whomever they choose for security. With the proviso that they meet US and Iraqi law.

So the Palehorse74 contention of needing to institute a military draft to replace the private security firms is more palehorse74 pure bunk scare tactics. Who the US taxpayer hires should not be private militias is the lesson we must learn.

So based on your "more reliable" sources, just how many contractors need to be replaced by US military personnel? Or perhaps you're interested in expanding the federal government with a few thousand new employees?

Perhaps, if George wanted this nation to fight this war, he should have called for a return of the draft - instead of taking the cowardly way out....

How does his belief that these wars can be fought without a draft, based primarily on the advice of his top advisers, indicate "cowardice" on his part?

Are you implying that GWB is afraid to institute a draft? That's very odd given the consistent accusations against the Executive Admin claiming that they do whatever the heck they please...

 

[UberNeuman]

You know he's a coward - and his administration attempted to have this war on the cheap, as per Rumsfeld's notions of how to conduct war....

Never mind that back then, those in the Military told them they needed more troops and were ignored or shown the door, because all the draft dodgers in the Bush White House knew best of the subject of war.....

So, here we are now - and you continue to ask "who's going to replace these contractors," when in fact, they should have never been there - all because of Bush and Company.....

The Cowards of County......

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
But on the larger private security companies question, I have seen more reliable estimates that the figure is more like 30,000 at max involved in security in Iraq. Out of that 30,000 or
maybe the more chartable 48,000, only a very tiny fraction of those are directly employed by the US government using taxpayer funds. The vast bulk are directly hired and paid by private for profit companies involved in doing for profit work in Iraq. And for private firms,
they are free to hire whomever they choose for security. With the proviso that they meet US and Iraqi law.

So the Palehorse74 contention of needing to institute a military draft to replace the private security firms is more palehorse74 pure bunk scare tactics. Who the US taxpayer hires should not be private militias is the lesson we must learn.

So based on your "more reliable" sources, just how many contractors need to be replaced by US military personnel? Or perhaps you're interested in expanding the federal government with a few thousand new employees?

Perhaps, if George wanted this nation to fight this war, he should have called for a return of the draft - instead of taking the cowardly way out....

How does his belief that these wars can be fought without a draft, based primarily on the advice of his top advisers, indicate "cowardice" on his part?

Are you implying that GWB is afraid to institute a draft? That's very odd given the consistent accusations against the Executive Admin claiming that they whatever the heck they please...

Yeah, i'd say that the admin IS afraid to institute a draft.

You know as well as i do that people like Pabster would flee to Canada as fast as his vehicle (the mule) could carry him.

I don't like them around me, this among other reasons i have already told you is a reason why.

We would not have been caught with men with drawn weapons though, we probably could have found cover and let the 870's clean it up but we do not ever go without a higher post, that would have spotted it beforehand so the accident would never have happened.

I am not trying to shift blame, i am actually not trying to do anything but telling you that this is the way they work, it's not the first time, it's not even the first of one hundred times but it is rarely reported.

These people do not belong in a war zone at ALL and you FUCKING WELL KNOW THAT! Security and war is NOT the same and you know that too, i'd rather have no one covering my back than one of ANY of these people.

Your defense of these clowns makes me question your sanity.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Your defense of these clowns makes me question your sanity.

I only defend them because NO American, especially our vets, deserve to be tried, convicted, and hung, solely in the court of public opinion - or in something akin to the Salem witch trials.

All along, I've challenged others to find an alternative force who could provide the security services BW currently handles, and they've failed to do so.

I've also described how I wish for the installment of oversight and investigative processes necessary to prevent future incidents from going without proper prosecution. That is what needs to come from the current mess, and that is what I still haven't seen addressed.

I believe deep down in America's basic tenets, and one of those is the concept of everyone being innocent until they are proven guilty, during a fair trial, in a court of law. Anything that disparages or disregards that tenet is wholly unacceptable...

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
You know as well as i do that people like Pabster would flee to Canada as fast as his vehicle (the mule) could carry him.

Don't put words in my mouth or pretend to know what I would (or wouldn't) do. Thanks.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Your defense of these clowns makes me question your sanity.

I only defend them because NO American, especially our vets, deserve to be tried, convicted, and hung, solely in the court of public opinion - or in something akin to the Salem witch trials.

All along, I've challenged others to find an alternative force who could provide the security services BW currently handles, and they've failed to do so.

I've also described how I wish for the installment of oversight and investigative processes necessary to prevent future incidents from going without proper prosecution. That is what needs to come from the current mess, and that is what I still haven't seen addressed.

I believe deep down in America's basic tenets, and one of those is the concept of everyone being innocent until they are proven guilty, during a fair trial, in a court of law. Anything that disparages or disregards that tenet is wholly unacceptable...

Palehorse, i do wish that the fucking politicians could listen to us once in a fucking while.

I don't doubt you in any way.

I don't want them anywhere near me or my troops, and that is the way it has been, i have the authority to request it, it also means that there are special forces waiting for their drunk as skunk arses (and this is proffessiona?) are going to sober up so they at the fucking least know their left from their fucking right.

I do not want them near me or my troops, let these chickens dance on their own and no where near us, alert us on their fucking whereabouts because these morons do NOTHING but draw fire to the target they are meant to protect, so pretty much everyone got there OK.

When you get fucking done with your speeches, thank the SAS.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
You know as well as i do that people like Pabster would flee to Canada as fast as his vehicle (the mule) could carry him.

Don't put words in my mouth or pretend to know what I would (or wouldn't) do. Thanks.

You are probably for the invasion and retribution of the terror that Al Qua... oh wait, no, you're one of those who don't give a shit about 9/11.

Or the Taliban, only thing you know about them is that they are called the Taliban, right, oh so cute...

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Your defense of these clowns makes me question your sanity.

I only defend them because NO American, especially our vets, deserve to be tried, convicted, and hung, solely in the court of public opinion - or in something akin to the Salem witch trials.

All along, I've challenged others to find an alternative force who could provide the security services BW currently handles, and they've failed to do so.

I've also described how I wish for the installment of oversight and investigative processes necessary to prevent future incidents from going without proper prosecution. That is what needs to come from the current mess, and that is what I still haven't seen addressed.

I believe deep down in America's basic tenets, and one of those is the concept of everyone being innocent until they are proven guilty, during a fair trial, in a court of law. Anything that disparages or disregards that tenet is wholly unacceptable...

What the hell are you talking about? Maybe I haven't been following Democratic Underground, but most folks I've heard want a fair trial in a court of law to determine if these guys are innocent or not. But that's not what's happening, is it? Instead of presuming them to be guilty (which I agree would be unfair), they are presumed innocent and not tried at all. Now tell me you don't think that's bullshit? Honestly...no evasion, no bitching about some strawman conduct you THINK people are engaging in. I agree that it's wrong to treat them as guilty without a trial, isn't it just as wrong to just declare them innocent of any wrongdoing and move on?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Your defense of these clowns makes me question your sanity.

I only defend them because NO American, especially our vets, deserve to be tried, convicted, and hung, solely in the court of public opinion - or in something akin to the Salem witch trials.

All along, I've challenged others to find an alternative force who could provide the security services BW currently handles, and they've failed to do so.

I've also described how I wish for the installment of oversight and investigative processes necessary to prevent future incidents from going without proper prosecution. That is what needs to come from the current mess, and that is what I still haven't seen addressed.

I believe deep down in America's basic tenets, and one of those is the concept of everyone being innocent until they are proven guilty, during a fair trial, in a court of law. Anything that disparages or disregards that tenet is wholly unacceptable...

It's not your place to defend them.

i'm not going to tell you that if they went and did that to us they would have gottten shot, we wouldn't even be there anymore, retreat, regroup and follow orders, one high would not have allowed this to happen and YOU KNOW THAT.

Look, i am not even claiming they did wrong, i just do NOT like them around me and our troops, if i wanted to be a fucking dartboard i'd sign up for warhead duty. Take that as you may, but there are issues that i don't think you are aware about.

I'd trust you with my life, i wouldn't trust them with my fork, have you ever been in a combat zone with these arseholes (and yeah, they do turn into complete arseholes) for a month?

You ever had them stop you in the middle of a fucking firing zone while having officials in the back?

They are complete and utter morons, if they were ever sensible vets they sure as FUCK left that sense in some creek at home.

I'm not going to discuss this anymore, i'll probably be warned for this fucking discussion... yeah yeah... it's worth it... that what you wanted to hear?