|
|
|
 |

May 4th, 2004, 06:42 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas, yall
Posts: 956
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
In one report they said that some "security specialists" can make $10k to $20k per month in Iraq. That's hard to walk away from.
|

May 4th, 2004, 06:53 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
Puke, I can never quite tell when you are being serious or simply sarcastic. 
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|

May 4th, 2004, 07:06 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,323
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
Many of the abuses not yet made public may have been committed by these 'private contractors' as well. That means there is no clear legal jurisdiction for many of these crimes. Not only will this be a scandal for the US, it's probably going to lead to a new UN treaty about the use of 'private contractors' in war.
[ May 04, 2004, 21:51: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]
|

May 4th, 2004, 08:05 PM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,254
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
You're right. Prior example, well documented: In Serbia, a number of contractors for Dyncorp were running private brothels with enslaved serbian underage women. Someone blew the whistle on them, I think, after many months. What could be done? Nothing. They weren't responsible to anyone but the company, and so...they got fired. I think that's it, since the crimes were committed abroad they couldn't really be prosecuted for them...I'll google it to get more info, but IIRC that's what happened...remarkably similar to the grey area here...(er, there) in Iraq...
EDIT: http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/i...id/163052.html
Or just Google "Dyncorp serbia scandal" et al
Quote:
Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Many of the abuses not yet made public may have been committed by these 'private contrators' as well. That means there is no clear legal jurisdiction for many of these crimes. Not only will this be a scandal for the US, it's probably going to lead to a new UN treaty about the use of 'private contractors' in war.
|
[ May 04, 2004, 19:07: Message edited by: alarikf ]
|

May 4th, 2004, 08:11 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: CHEESE!
Posts: 10,009
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
Quote:
Originally posted by sachmo:
quote: Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
Private security could be turned into the new governments army. In the meantime, the US army needs to back them up!
|
I don't agree. Since these security troops have basically no rules of engagement, the US military should stay as far from them as possible, lest they be dragged into the inevitable public relations nightmare that these mercs will find themselves in. No, they shouldn't have been there. But they are there, and it sounds like the US military isn't backing them up.
Wether you agree with them being there or not, now that their there, the US military has a responsibility to them. And a responsibility to make sure they follow the ROE.
Quote:
As far as the private security firms becoming the core of a future Iraqi military, I am pretty sure that would be highly illegal. Their preseance now is a bit of a gray area. They don't fit the legal definition of mercenary according to the UN because they are not a third party but actually citizens of the US and, at least theoretically, under the control of the US. If they transition under the direct authority of the Iraqi government, then they become Mercenaries in name as well as deed. Unless they all become citizens of Iraq first.
|
Sorry, maybe it was just posting somewhere between 12:00 and 1:00 at night, but it sounded like at least half where Iraqi citicens.
[ May 04, 2004, 19:14: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]
__________________
If I only could remember half the things I'd forgot, that would be a lot of stuff, I think - I don't know; I forgot!
A* E* Se! Gd! $-- C-^- Ai** M-- S? Ss---- RA Pw? Fq Bb++@ Tcp? L++++
Some of my webcomics. I've got 400+ webcomics at Last count, some dead.
Sig updated to remove non-working links.
|

May 4th, 2004, 08:24 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas, yall
Posts: 956
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
Narf,
My point is that the military has a lot to lose by backing these guys up. If these contractors were under strict military control, then I would have no problem with them getting military support, but without it, I don't see how it's possible.
|

May 4th, 2004, 08:43 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 155
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Privatized War
Quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
perhaps military service should come with a non-compete agreement (like in private sector employment) prohibiting a soldier from defecting to another militant company for some number of years after his military career ends, or until he has served some minimum length of service.
|
You are kidding, right?
Look, a lot of people serve in the military for a bunch of years, and when they get off the horse they find out that they have to work for minimum wage, or join a security company. If your non-compete thingy is created you are condemning a lot of veterans that have done a valuable service for your country to starve. Additionaly, it would demoralize the core of professional soldiers in active service because they will now what's in store for them.
__________________
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|