It’s cool and all that people are realizing that we’re not exactly nation building in Iraq but what’s with the overemphasis and obsession with Blackwater? Private security firms and armies have existed since before this country was in existence? Hessians wtf?

If you are Bush and have, as we now know, an openly stated desire to turn the US into a fascist state. Then you need some loyal thugs willing to do your bidding without question. Something which has also “existed since before this country was in existence”. And don’t look now but the borders are already closing. Peace activists are now finding they are not allowed to leave the country.

Blackwater provides sicurrity, they protect VIPs and shit.

They do more than that. There is every reason to think that they are the death squads in Iraq. Oh look! and here is David Addington, the man behind the death squads in Nicaragua, working with Dick Cheney.

Partition has always been the goal for Iraq. Death squads are the means to attain that goal. Blackwater is just the sort of company to do it. This will turn out to be bigger than Abu Griab.

But it’s OK. The free market will ensure that they won’t kill anybody you care about. It’s not like the government, which is forced by lawmakers to shoot people in the street on a random basis.

Switchblade Crisis (1977)
Kobra Kai (1979)
Da Inferno Corps (1981)
Hell’s Devils (1985)
Ratt (1988)
Soprano Infantry (1996)
X-Warriors (1999)
Toddler Fists (2000)
Street Sweepers (2001)
Blackwater (2005)
Venti Soy Chai (pending 2008)

(However is contracting them right thing to do by US gov is another story.)

There’s a well-reasoned argument. Maybe tone the rhetoric down just a hair? And a few paragraph breaks here and there would be nice, too. I’m getting a headache parsing your response so I can reply.

When did I say I was for no-bid contracts? When did I say “Corruption forever?” When did I say that the armed forces should be stuck with M-16s? (They’re M-10s, a version of the M-16, but nevermind.)

Please stop misrepresenting what I said and just make your points.

Um, you didn’t give any examples, but don’t you think there are reasons why soldiers aren’t allowed to do some things? Legal and ethical reasons, and reasons of military discipline?

“I just often wondered how much a reliance the government should be putting on “private” security.”

I’m very dubious of the whole idea because I’m dubious about the amount of oversight that’s going on. I mean, there’s a system in place in the military that’s a part of our tradition (whether it’s being used is another question), but what’s the process for oversight of private security?

“The government is using private security to keep the “official” body counts low.” (#17)

Dead on, Andrew. Compare the figures with and without private security casualties figured in. Their casualties increase the number dramatically.

“Blackwater may be dirty as hell(arms smuggling, Katrina wthf), but you can’t call bullshit on them on the parts where they’re doing the right thing on the job. Sometimes that means shooting a civilian who probably just wanted to cross the street quickly.”

Are you saying we should look the other way because they often manage not to murder anyone unnecessarily so they’re not all bad? What’s a few atrocities when they’re getting the job done, right? Notice I said “atrocities,” I’m not talking about accidents such as occur in the fog of war.

“Shit, give some war/rebuilding/aid contracts to Walmart, you can bet your ass wherever they go people WILL greet us with open arms…”

I’m having trouble figuring out just what you’re saying here. Contractors are better than government? Sounds to me like the garden-variety cynical knee-jerk reaction about government inefficiency–as if coporations are never inefficient or corrupt.

“The government is the problem here, not the companies. Get rid of the regulations, stop the lawmakers from setting up a rigged system, and real competition will help get rid of all this corruption.”

So you’re assertion is that if we get rid of regulations and have less government, the free market will somehow self-correct for coruption? I don’t follow the logic.

The free market is about making money. If corruption increase profits, then corruption will flourish. It’s as simple as that. The only brakes on that are laws and (gasp!

“But right now in Iraq look at all the ‘weekend warriors’ of the reserves and guard that have been sent over there. Compare that to the ranks of Blackwater…”

Why aren’t they serving in the military? Offer them competitive compensation, and make them legitimate soldiers in the US forces.

Their corporate headquarters is located in Moyock, North Carolina, in a very swampy and marshy area of the state (in fact, adjacent to the Great Dismal Swamp in northeast NC and southeast VA)… thus, “Blackwater.”

And that last unintentionally italicized comment is mine.

To me having private contractors guard the coalition headquarters, and conducting military operations in Iraq is very questionable. Especially when you start throwing in border security and the like as their duties. Conversely the people a company like Blackwater has working for it are mostly better trained and experienced than the average soldier in Iraq.

I get nervous thinking about the possility that the people watching me and protecting me are working for a company that’s goal is to make a profit.

Gosh, all kinds of reasons people focus on Blackwater.

As for evil wizards and their mercenary armies, see the end of the Lord of the Rings, when Frodo comes home to the Shire.

What, nothing happened in the movie?

READ A BOOK!

It’s like getting angry at vultures for eating your dead family members, when it was the invisible disease that killed them. Business is just doing what business does, taking advantage of the situation, which was created by a government thats too big.

I guess its just easier to hate big business than it is to hate the real cause, big government. People always miss the point of everything.

They are very capable personnel, and there certainly is a place for them. I just often wondered how much a reliance the government should be putting on “private” security. At what point does outsourcing get completely our of hand?

Not that this is a new practice. Using “soldiers-of-fortune” is something that has gone on for centuries. During the renaissance the Swiss were particularly well known for their ability with pike and shot, and mercenary regiments could be had by the highest bidder.

Although anangbhai mentioned Hessians, mercenary is really a misnomer, the Germanic soldiers of King George III are a result of the crazy nature of the aristocracy in Europe, involving planned and convenient marriage. King George’s line was intimately linked to many of the Germanic states to the point that he was Prince Elect of Hanover. Many of the Germanic troops that fought for the English in the American Revolution were actually King George’s subjects, the rest all belong to principalities and states that were family of King George. In essence what he did was use conscripts from the different states to campaign in America in their own regiments under their own officer corps, mostly using their own equipment and being paid for by their state. Then the English reimbursed the monarchs for their cost. They were more like German auxiliaries and not really mercenaries as we think today.

Although in America at the time of the Revolution some Continental regiments were raised out of areas that were composed primarily of German immigrant, and the French also employed Germanic troops coming from the western borders of France that fought in America.

Also some regiments of the British army had strong Germanic backgrounds, such as the 60th Foot the Royal Americans raised in 1755 to fight in the colonies. After recruiting the colonies proved sparse, much of the regiment ended up being recruited out of Germanic subjects of King George II. In fact the regiment also contained a number of foreign officers, such as Colonel Henri Bouquet of the first battalion, who was a Swiss officer.

With all this in mind maybe the United States could just raise a foreign corps to fight in Iraq?