God help us. Now the news is demonizing Blackwater any chance it can.

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
If you read the book Blackwater you'd quickly realize that the demonization is rightly deserved.

He won't trouble himself to read the link he posted and you want him to read a book?? It's all a lynch mob, he knows without even looking into it. He's either a genius, a mind reader, or a tool.

This thread should be locked. The OP didn't even read the links he posted, how can he comment on them? Besides, we already have a Blackwater thread.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

If something on this order isn't worth making an issue of, then what is - Paris Hilton's new dress?

Hell ya... what color was it?

I think the color you're looking for is marginalize....

With a slight tint of denial.

 

[Atrail]

When the wounds of the women and children are headshots, it makes you wonder...

 

[Starbuck1975]

The real question should be why our armed forces rely so heavily on contracted labor to perform combat and even peacekeeping missions...the line of blame extends well beyond W and Cheney.

After the Cold War, Bush Sr. set into motion a plan, heavily debated by the Pentagon, that called for the rapid downsizing of our armed forces...shifting a lot of the logistics and support military services to the reserves, or eliminating those capabilities entirely.

Clinton continued these series of cuts, while increasing the deployment footprint of our military through missions in the Balkans and elsewhere. When I served in Europe, Brown & Root, a subsidiery of Halliburton, performed most of the basecamp establishment, construction and sustainment...capabilities once deployed by the Corps of Engineers, Navy Seabees and other engineering units...we essentially outsourced to the military industrial complex, which came with a significant pricetag, and arguably negated the benefits of a smaller standing military force.

Shinseki raised the red flag several years ago, well before 9/11...calling for the development of a lighter, more lethal and easier deployed forces as required by a post Cold War world, and the nature of the missions that our military would undertake in that world...the Stryker platform is the only surviving remnant of Shinseki's vision.

Then 9/11 happens, and Bush Jr. over extends our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq...again, without the resources or manpower to support those missions, and resulting in our military developing an even larger dependance on contracted labor...now extended to security missions, and hence the rise of BlackWater.

BlackWater and Halliburton are the results of three consecutive Presidents failing miserably in responding to the Pentagon's concerns about the force structure of our armed forces, given the emergence of global threats for which a downsized conventional military force lacked the resources to counter.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

If you want to have ex officers, many of them dishonorably discharged to patrol your neighbourhoods while not being subject to the scrutiny and not having to follow procedures that is all fine by me, just keep those fucking mercs to yourselves, they can police your area.

In a combat zone these people are not welcome no matter how fucking needed you think they are (they are not but money talks).

It's like the wet dream of anyone who can't follow orders, become a fucking merc and you won't have to, do what you like and blame it on the situation, all will be well.

I have no idea why some military members glorify these arseholes, they aren't worth the dirt i brush of off my boots before going to bed.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
The real question should be why our armed forces rely so heavily on contracted labor to perform combat and even peacekeeping missions...the line of blame extends well beyond W and Cheney.

After the Cold War, Bush Sr. set into motion a plan, heavily debated by the Pentagon, that called for the rapid downsizing of our armed forces...shifting a lot of the logistics and support military services to the reserves, or eliminating those capabilities entirely.

Clinton continued these series of cuts, while increasing the deployment footprint of our military through missions in the Balkans and elsewhere. When I served in Europe, Brown & Root, a subsidiery of Halliburton, performed most of the basecamp establishment, construction and sustainment...capabilities once deployed by the Corps of Engineers, Navy Seabees and other engineering units...we essentially outsourced to the military industrial complex, which came with a significant pricetag, and arguably negated the benefits of a smaller standing military force.

Shinseki raised the red flag several years ago, well before 9/11...calling for the development of a lighter, more lethal and easier deployed forces as required by a post Cold War world, and the nature of the missions that our military would undertake in that world...the Stryker platform is the only surviving remnant of Shinseki's vision.

Then 9/11 happens, and Bush Jr. over extends our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq...again, without the resources or manpower to support those missions, and resulting in our military developing an even larger dependance on contracted labor...now extended to security missions, and hence the rise of BlackWater.

BlackWater and Halliburton are the results of three consecutive Presidents failing miserably in responding to the Pentagon's concerns about the force structure of our armed forces, given the emergence of global threats for which a downsized conventional military force lacked the resources to counter.

It's not that they are even needed, no other country uses this system, all other countries have their own troops for safety during transport, the US can't do this even though they have 70X the troops in the area? No, this is about money, nothing else.

 

[Atrail]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

It's not that they are even needed, no other country uses this system, all other countries have their own troops for safety during transport, the US can't do this even though they have 70X the troops in the area? No, this is about money, nothing else.

For half of that $1200 per day per contractor we are paying, the US Military would have no problem meeting recruitment goals. This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

If something on this order isn't worth making an issue of, then what is - Paris Hilton's new dress?

Hell ya... what color was it?

I think the color you're looking for is marginalize....

With a slight tint of denial.

Oh yeah? The fact that a bunch of people will puff their chests out and get a little red-faced over this issue, and pound it into the ground for as many political points they can muster, and then forget it about as fast as they jumped on it to "Move On" to the next issue... hmmm, bigtime denial.

By you.

All I'm saying is the media is the latest and greatest battleground of antagonistic and sophisticated political factions. It's real similar to the Britney or Paris slop, just of a different level. People eat it up and jump on the next juicy tidbit.

 

[Mxylplyx]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
US media, be it politics, sports, or what have you, has gone downhill since the communications boom. I'm hoping it's merely temporary.

Dont count on it. Once ethics start sliding in any particular area, I dont think I've ever seen the trend reverse itself.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
If you read the book Blackwater you'd quickly realize that the demonization is rightly deserved.

He won't trouble himself to read the link he posted and you want him to read a book?? It's all a lynch mob, he knows without even looking into it. He's either a genius, a mind reader, or a tool.

This thread should be locked. The OP didn't even read the links he posted, how can he comment on them? Besides, we already have a Blackwater thread.

Genius, I like that one.

I read one of the links. Nonetheless, you are not listening; you are not learning, are you? Do you understand the point of this thread and my original intent? Obviously not. If you did, you'd know why I'm not going to read about BW from a mother of one of the guys killed years back in a closed-case matter. It would be hypocrisy for me to deride CNN's obsession with BW and then read everything it had to say about BW, wouldn't it?

And this thread is not really about BW. It's about the media, using BW as an example. It could have been about Janet Jackson's boob or Imus and the message would be the same.

It's not that they are even needed, no other country uses this system, all other countries have their own troops for safety during transport, the US can't do this even though they have 70X the troops in the area? No, this is about money, nothing else.

Other countries do outsource. Canada cannot move jack crap around and relies on civilian cargo ships to move around some of its heavy equipment. PMCs have also operated in other countries, often to great effect. I don't know if they are a net positive or negative, but there are some benefits to them, one example I can think of a small outfit in Sierra Leone in the late 90's that was far more effective than the sloppy standing military that the country was trying to use at the time to weed out rebels.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

If something on this order isn't worth making an issue of, then what is - Paris Hilton's new dress?

Hell ya... what color was it?

I think the color you're looking for is marginalize....

With a slight tint of denial.

Oh yeah? The fact that a bunch of people will puff their chests out and get a little red-faced over this issue, and pound it into the ground for as many political points they can muster, and then forget it about as fast as they jumped on it to "Move On" to the next issue... hmmm, bigtime denial.

By you.

All I'm saying is the media is the latest and greatest battleground of antagonistic and sophisticated political factions. It's real similar to the Britney or Paris slop, just of a different level. People eat it up and jump on the next juicy tidbit.

I guess you missed the fact Blackwater has been in the news off and on since that guy (who has still not been charged with anything) got drunk and shot the Iraqi VP's bodyguard 3 times, killing him.

Like I said, that's seems to me to be slight hint of denial, but please prattle on with your delusions that this story is in the same league as a Paris or Brittany story.

 

[Mxylplyx]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
US media, be it politics, sports, or what have you, has gone downhill since the communications boom. I'm hoping it's merely temporary.

They have been going down a lot long than that. The internet and communications age has greatly hastened their demise. Now they are desperate to keep people viewing, reading, listening. In the end they will fall and the centralization of media power will disperse.

Media needs to become completely decentralized. I'm tired of hearing about shit that happens half way around the country that doesnt affect me. No, I dont care to know that some kid went missing halfway across the country. I dont care about a workplace shooting halfway across the country. I dont care about celebrities. I care about stuff based on fact and actual events, not speculation. TV news needs to go back to 30min/day news cycles, because 30min is enough to cover all the national newsworthy events that take place.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Atrail
This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

:roll:

This is just more left-wing shilling and demonization. Cheap political points, per usual.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
If you read the book Blackwater you'd quickly realize that the demonization is rightly deserved.

He won't trouble himself to read the link he posted and you want him to read a book?? It's all a lynch mob, he knows without even looking into it. He's either a genius, a mind reader, or a tool.

This thread should be locked. The OP didn't even read the links he posted, how can he comment on them? Besides, we already have a Blackwater thread.

Genius, I like that one.

I read one of the links. Nonetheless, you are not listening; you are not learning, are you? Do you understand the point of this thread and my original intent? Obviously not. If you did, you'd know why I'm not going to read about BW from a mother of one of the guys killed years back in a closed-case matter. It would be hypocrisy for me to deride CNN's obsession with BW and then read everything it had to say about BW, wouldn't it?

And this thread is not really about BW. It's about the media, using BW as an example. It could have been about Janet Jackson's boob or Imus and the message would be the same.

It's not that they are even needed, no other country uses this system, all other countries have their own troops for safety during transport, the US can't do this even though they have 70X the troops in the area? No, this is about money, nothing else.

Other countries do outsource. Canada cannot move jack crap around and relies on civilian cargo ships to move around some of its heavy equipment. PMCs have also operated in other countries, often to great effect. I don't know if they are a net positive or negative, but there are some benefits to them, one example I can think of a small outfit in Sierra Leone in the late 90's that was far more effective than the sloppy standing military that the country was trying to use at the time to weed out rebels.

Your stating the obvious if all your arguing is that news organizations do whatever they can to sell news.

Blackwater is the wrong example IMO because the taxpayer is now footing a bill for 3.6 BILLION DOLLARS to support the protection of diplomats in Iraq. It's costing us 6 to 10 times what it would cost us to have the military do the same job. Is our military so broken it can't handle the protection of US diplomats in Iraq?

Like it or not that's news.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Atrail
This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

:roll:

This is just more left-wing shilling and demonization. Cheap political points, per usual.

Cheap, you call 3.6 billion to protect a few diplomats cheap??

Your a tool for a fool.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Atrail
This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

:roll:

This is just more left-wing shilling and demonization. Cheap political points, per usual.

And this is nothing more than marginalization of a real problem. Instead of attacking the person why don't you present your rationale for supporting Blackwater?

State your points, then I will rebut them with mine. Or do you not even have anything of worth?

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Atrail
This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

:roll:

This is just more left-wing shilling and demonization. Cheap political points, per usual.

No, Atrail is quite accurate on this. It seems to be more and more evident that Blackwater does not belong in Iraq, and is only really acting as cheap political cover so less screwups get publicized and the number of regular military looks lower. Get 'em out.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Atrail
This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

:roll:

This is just more left-wing shilling and demonization. Cheap political points, per usual.

I agree with him fully, does that make me a leftie? I don't buy the "need" for civilian security firms from the US at all, explain to me how British officials can travel safely with us protecting them but the US that has 70X the amount of troops cannot provide protection for US officials.

If you think that this has nothing to do with money then you are a moron.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Atrail
This is just more war profiteering under the guise of patriotism.

:roll:

This is just more left-wing shilling and demonization. Cheap political points, per usual.

I agree with him fully, does that make me a leftie? I don't buy the "need" for civilian security firms from the US at all, explain to me how British officials can travel safely with us protecting them but the US that has 70X the amount of troops cannot provide protection for US officials.

If you think that this has nothing to do with money then you are a moron.

Naturally, anything that has to do with not agreeing with Pabster makes you a "lefty". Any disagreement with how Iraq, this country, or the economy is running makes you a lefty.

In essence, any dissenter is a lefty. Thus, no matter how loyal, serving, logical, or comitted you are to this country, if you dissent, you are a red communist bastard who needs to be kicked out.

That's the way they work, either your with them or against them. There is no middle ground, no room for dissent. That's how the PNAC knob jobbers live and breathe and that's how Erik Prince does his business and personal life.

 

[Lemon law]

Personally, I think the whole idea of private militias is a very dangerous one. Nor does it extend to blackwater alone because there are quite a number of such companies that have sprung up. And its also valid to point out that allowing any such company to operate under zero accountability rules raises the danger level through the roof. But the question of how these companies operate, how they recruit, what they charge, what abuses have already happened, and why we should rely on them when military personnel are cheaper has already been well covered in this and other threads.

I will pose the question of what happens to these companies if GASP PEACE BREAKS OUT. And suddenly the services these companies provide are no longer needed in Iraq, Afghanistan, or other current theaters of operation. And now the executives of these companies suddenly have their contracts with the US and quite possibly other countries go from unending infusions of money to near zero. Suddenly they have a large number of buildings and infrastructure to maintain sucking cash, their own bloated salaries to pay, and a large number of employees that want paid. In short, the problems that any company in the private sector encounters when they grew too big too fast and suddenly have to tighten their belt while waiting for better times.

The danger for any of these private security companies is that their cash outflows will be too large and they will go bankrupt. Other will downsize drastically while shedding personnel waiting for the day when boom times return. The question is, can they rehire the personnel they laid off or will they find other employment? Because an experienced merc is somewhat a special breed and as such does not grow on trees.

The danger I worry about is the set of companies that decide to take a third route and decide to create their own sidelines businesses to stay in business while retaining their personnel. And even get a chance to cherry pick laid off mercs from other companies in a down market. Then the question is who will hire them and what jobs these companies will be willing to undertake to keep the big bucks rolling in?

It does not take much rocket science to speculate the potential employers of these companies may be foreign governments and international corporations. Who are likely going to be shopping for limited special ops type contracts. Need a neighboring country destabilized, they can advise the opposition and help them secure arms. Need someone assassinated, it can be arranged. Need a manufacturing plant to catch fire, that too can be arranged. As for the employees, they no longer directly work for the entity but they can be paid by some mystery paymaster that can't be connected back. The number of shadowy ways they can operate is nearly infinite and as long as the existing US administration runs some cover for them, the accountability will be minimal. Gradually such companies will incorporate in third world countries to avoid any accountability at all
which means they can undertake any job that pays. And such private militia companies that do not downsize will have an almost insatiable need for incoming money.

All in all I just see these private militias as not just dangerous now, but also of having a huge danger of transforming into a out of control monsters that will create the war atmosphere that keeps them in business. With a high probability that one or more of these companies will be perfectly willing to bite the USA and British hands that fed it.

 

[jackschmittusa]

At least the BW issue is something newsworthy. Much better than all the crap about celebs.

The trail of connections between BW and various Republicans is also interesting, if not noteworthy.

There is much to suggest that the actions, cost, etc. of BW makes it a bad bargain.

While there have been some notable successes of mercs in Africa, even those have brought up many questions about using merc forces.

I am all in favor of the military returning to being self-sufficient. Military construction workers, cooks, etc., are subject to military discipline, rules of engagement, are immediately responsive to the military's needs, cost effective (with far more accountability of funds), but they represent a pool of reserve riflemen (Bastonge being the classic example).

So, let's look at BW, and see what we get for our money.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

If something on this order isn't worth making an issue of, then what is - Paris Hilton's new dress?

Hell ya... what color was it?

I think the color you're looking for is marginalize....

With a slight tint of denial.

Oh yeah? The fact that a bunch of people will puff their chests out and get a little red-faced over this issue, and pound it into the ground for as many political points they can muster, and then forget it about as fast as they jumped on it to "Move On" to the next issue... hmmm, bigtime denial.

By you.

All I'm saying is the media is the latest and greatest battleground of antagonistic and sophisticated political factions. It's real similar to the Britney or Paris slop, just of a different level. People eat it up and jump on the next juicy tidbit.

I guess you missed the fact Blackwater has been in the news off and on since that guy (who has still not been charged with anything) got drunk and shot the Iraqi VP's bodyguard 3 times, killing him.

Like I said, that's seems to me to be slight hint of denial, but please prattle on with your delusions that this story is in the same league as a Paris or Brittany story.

What we have here, is, failure to communicate. Put your political angst aside. You, along with many others here, are going on at length about Blackwater... but I thought there's a perfectly good thread over there ----> to post that stuff. I am talking more about the media and people's attitudes or behaviors concerning current events.

Just like the popculture airheads who live Paris and Britney, you're wallowing in your own little world, oblivious to the fact that people beyond your immediate grasp are manipulating you to be a good pavlovian puppy. Just keep doing what you're supposed to do... follow along. The flavor of the week will change soon and you'll forget all about this...

 

[teclis1023]

I'm not against BW, against mercenaries or against them making profit. It was the US that hired them. I personally don't care whether they're patriots or whether they even give a crap about the politics - that's their business.

What I do care about is anyone (the army, insurgents, Black-Water, etc.) killing, maiming and generally causing havoc in a nation which is currently stricken with poverty, war, terror and fear. If we hold ourselves to the standards of "American Values," we should be doing our best to reach out to this nation and rebuild our credibility on a grass-roots basis.

I constantly see Conservatives who, in all other threads, make a huge stand about Patriotism and America and all that jazz. Well, what are you so riled up about if you're not even going to demand that we preserve those essential aspects of American Values. If it's okay for BW and the US Army to kill whoever they want without punishment, then stop bitching about other nations doing the same to us.

In the end, we can work to be great Americans and promote peace, understanding and Justice, or we can keep shilling for those who want to be cowboys.

 

[StageLeft]

Is our military so broken it can't handle the protection of US diplomats in Iraq?

Like it or not that's news.

Not sure it's news, but it's certianly an important debate, because these guys are not cheap. However, it's really an offshoot of the BW issue; the articles I linked were not debates or policy discussions--which should take place.

if GASP PEACE BREAKS OUT...number of buildings and infrastructure to maintain sucking cash, their own bloated salaries to pay, and a large number of employees that want paid.

I don't know the ratio, but a company like BW isn't keeping a great number of people on full time staff. Undoubtedly many of their contractors are also contractors, since as you said they cannot possibly keep these people on retainer when there is no killing to be done.

In theory, if peace broke out, they could move their operations elsewhere, but they'd have to charge less...maybe sell some people to Nigeria. Nonetheless, your point is valid that peace is not in their best interest and rich nations like the US are their bread and butter.

The rest of your post, LL, is very accurate. Companies hate to shrink. Currently, BW and kin can walk the line between patriotism and money but if a war dries up and the US doesn't want to pay them and no European country can, they may get desperate and do what mercs do best which is simply fight for money. In theory, the US could rehire them for another war and be using people that had been tied to an atrocity somewhere.

At least the BW issue is something newsworthy. Much better than all the crap about celebs.

Yes it is more important than britney's parenting rights.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
And this is nothing more than marginalization of a real problem. Instead of attacking the person why don't you present your rationale for supporting Blackwater?

Kinda funny that nobody has said much about Blackwater before the latest scuffle. Why are they all of a sudden the demons here? I will defend them, in as much as they have a difficult job to do in a dangerous environment. I don't envy any of them, no matter the size of the paycheck. I fully agree that anyone running around killing civilians needs to be punished appropriately - Blackwater or not - but I think the mass demonization of the entire company has been a bit overboard. It reminds me of the left pointing out a rogue soldier who does something stupid and pretending it is indicative and representative of the entire Armed Forces.