Contact
Lifestream
Someone once said that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. And it has never been proved to be more true than during the last couple of years. Now consider this …
US outsources war to its private armies in Iraq –
Reports suggest that the United States is using between 10,000 to 15,000 private “contractors,” more than the size of the British armed forces in Iraq, for policing and protection of its operations.
Most of these ‘contractors’ — who would be called mercenaries or militias or vigilantes in other situations — are former US armed forces personnel employed through private agencies. They are said to earn as much as $1000 a day.
So, it’s good old Blackwater Security Consulting again. Unlike the cover story they weren’t contractors, they were in fact mercs. And they were in fact not delivering food but rather on security detail. Allegedly protecting a food convoy but that is anyone’s guess.
Thus, all I see is one paramilitary organization taking out another paramilitary organization. And the four men in question would most likely have had a military background and thus not be quite as easy a target as just “some civilians”. Also they would obviously have been armed. Not exactly the saints they were made out to be. And the same goes for most of the “civilians” killed in the last couple of weeks.
As for putting their corpses on display it is nothing out of the ordinary. Remember what US forces did with the bodies of Saddam’s two sons (if you believe that they were in fact Uday and Qusay in the first place).
From what I’ve read, there will be a massive investigation into why exactly Blackwater Security Consulting is involved in Iraq at all. And why they protect key US personnel instead of letting US armed forces do the job.
I guess it’s irony. As much as certain people were bitching about Saddam’s paramilitary forces last year and how they fought with no regard for military ethics, they have no qualms about outsourcing themselves. And I have no reason to believe that armed US civilians will be on a better behavior. In fact, it seems like extremely bad practise to have a private organization running around with little or no insight. From a psychological point of view one can also wonder why exactly these are former members of armed forces. Were they too greedy, too merciless or insubordinate to fit the mold? Maybe they just served the contract with their former masters and retired early. Maybe there is nothing shady about this practise but one can’t help wonder.
As far as I am concerned it’s time to stop bitching and for the US propaganda machine to stop spreading lies. The rest of the world WILL NOT stand for the lies and the double standards.
Further reading:
Americans Killed in Iraq Were Employed by Blackwater Consulting
Outsourcing War: The growing role of mercenaries
US outsources war to its private armies in Iraq
How should we have reacted to 9/11?
1) Do nothing
.
.
10) Nuke somewhere
We chose an 8. We’re fighting with every weapon at our disposal, including with our money, short of nukes and ‘daisycutters’. Our putative ‘allies’, who should be with us, can’t seem to figure this out and don’t seem to care. They don’t even seem to remember history very well.
Bottom Line:
1) This war is in the beginning of a 50-100 year struggle of ‘western’ people against muslim people. Its critically important for history that ‘we’ win. We used to think that mutual defense treaties would help. Now its not so clear.
2) In the short term the war will be fought with and for oil. Western societies run on oil. Without it there will be old people dying in the streets. We used to think that mutual defense treaties would help. Now its not so clear.
3) The next fight will be with asian people specially the North Koreans. We need to get ready. We used to think that mutual defense treaties would help. Now its not so clear.
Well, even if I think it is a little besides the point (of mercs in Iraq) this debate is probably inevitable …
I think the US could have accomplished more or at least just as little after 9/11 had they used more delicate instruments. If the point is to deal retribution for the suicide attacks and Osama is indeed the head honcho behind it all, then I don’t see what all of this has accomplished. It would have been easier to nab him without the ruckus that ensued in Afghanistan (if he was indeed there).
Also. The display of power was crude. I fear that these operations often have an unintentional psychological effect on the enemy as well as the rest of the world. Plus not even the US can bear the cost of these field campaigns. The economical situation was in a critical stage as it stood, towards the end of the “official” Afghanistan campaign.
Don’t you worry that all of this will dent the economy beyond repair? And have you ever considered that this is exactly what the enemy wants. Money is indeed the best weapon the US has, so expending as much of that as possible would be a good thing. And since suicide attack is their style in the first place I think they are prepared to take a beating to accomplish this.
Thus in many ways, doing nothing could have accomplished a lot more. But this course of action is obviously more satisfying. Kicking ass and everything. And I’m not saying I would have had the strength to act differently myself … probably but …
I would be interested in what you mean by “allies”? NATO? The UN?
Anyway, I assume your reference to history means WW2? Well, first of all the US sure took its time before getting involved there. Not unlike what Europe is doing now. And at the time, German tanks were rolling across Europe. I mean, this “war on terror” is but a trivial sidenote compared to the horrors of WW2 I am afraid. Or at least it should be. The US however is unwittingly turning it into so much more. That troubles me a little.
I too have pondered the possibilities of the future. And indeed, all the outcomes seem grim. I’m not so convinced that there will be a lasting conflict in the middle east though. Not that there hasn’t always been a ruckus there, but for it to escalate beyond what we see now seems unlikely.
Unless “we” let it of course.
But on their part I see nothing but small ragtag bands with a fighting spirit. Ignore them and they will go away in time. Try to beat them with the second best weapon we have instead - television, media. And not propaganda but simply to quietly extend our cultural influence.
Do not engage in battle. We already have the perfect yoke holding us all in place. They have to sell their precious oil to someone after all. Thus conflict between us and them (on a national level) seems remote. Iraq only happened because we invited ourselves in.
As for SE Asia I probably agree. Even if I see N Korea as a sidenote. They might have nuclear capability but that is about it.
The real “problem”, if one must be sought, is China. I sense they are looking for a rematch after years of being held back by everyone and everything. They had nuclear weapons for decades and no one objected. Now they are in a position where they can threaten the US on other levels. Mostly so in the financial sector. The fact that they aren’t the most powerful country on earth is just a historical / statistical glitch about to be corrected. Like you hinted, the background to the current conflicts could very well be purely economic. Will the US stand idly by and watch this? Given the US history in SE Asia, the differences in culture and political systems and the current impatience that seems to be spreading like the plague .. who knows ..
I guess N Korea and / or Taiwan could still be a spark to ignite the flame of conflict. But only if we let them. Obviously the US is aware of this and hopefully wont do anything rash. I wish.
All in all I think it is time for the US and other players as well to consider the global community, and not in terms of allies (which sounds a bit guilt-ridden). And to be prepared to make less heroic and more humbling sacrifices than billions of dollars worth of ammunitions and priceless human lives. What I’m saying here is that e.g. selling the SUV and commuting isn’t so kick-ass perhaps but in the end the only sensible course of action.