OT: Privatized War

[dogscoff]

I don't know, but I think eventually, one of these forces is going to attack the wrong building, or shoot up the wrong car, or some other horrible situation will arise.

Well... the military have been blowing up the wrong vehicles/ buildings and shooting the wrong people all the way through this war. I don't see why it would be any more scandalous when private contractors do it.

[sachmo]

Originally posted by dogscoff:

quote:

---

I don't know, but I think eventually, one of these forces is going to attack the wrong building, or shoot up the wrong car, or some other horrible situation will arise.

Well... the military have been blowing up the wrong vehicles/ buildings and shooting the wrong people all the way through this war. I don't see why it would be any more scandalous when private contractors do it.

---

Because there is accountibility in the military, or at least the illusion of it.

[solops]

Originally posted by dogscoff:
Well... the military have been blowing up the wrong vehicles/ buildings and shooting the wrong people all the way through this war.

And in every other war in history. Today, we hear about it and, occasionally, try to correct it.

[ May 05, 2004, 17:50: Message edited by: solops ]

[Yef]

Originally posted by solops:
And in every other war in history. Today, we hear about it and, occasionally, try to correct it.

You can't correct anything after it happens. You can try to prevent this kind of incidents, but honest mistakes are happening all the time.
You can modify and strictly enforce the ROE, punish infractors, Psy evaluate your servicemen periodically, but in the end sh@t happens, and there is nothing you can do about it. When the bullets start flying all the thinking stops, the training kicks in, and soldiers will shoot by reflexes anything that is threatening.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Originally posted by sachmo:
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.

The mercenaries where sent in there by the US. If the merceneries are under attack, the US should back them up. I'm talking about a combat situation, not allegations of torture. In such a case, the US should have the power to enforce the ROE.

[Puke]

Originally posted by Yef:

quote:

---

Originally posted by solops:
And in every other war in history. Today, we hear about it and, occasionally, try to correct it.

You can't correct anything after it happens. You can try to prevent this kind of incidents, but honest mistakes are happening all the time.
You can modify and strictly enforce the ROE, punish infractors, Psy evaluate your servicemen periodically, but in the end sh@t happens, and there is nothing you can do about it. When the bullets start flying all the thinking stops, the training kicks in, and soldiers will shoot by reflexes anything that is threatening.

---

heh, yeah. like when we bombed that chinese embasy from three directions at once, all at the same time. that wasnt just combat stress, that was a colossal screw-up. oh sure, id like to think that it was a calculated stab at the chinese because we were having diplomatic problems with them at the time - but the truth is that people are too stupid and uncoordinated to have any real conspiracies.

thats right, there are no conspiracies or secret power elite - conspiracy theories are just shallow attempts at explaining why people do colossaly stupid things.

but regarding private armies, there has to be some way of setting it up so that its profitable for the mercenary company, profitable for the soldier, and not a giant waste of money for the government. im all for private armies, i just dont think that the military should be flushing away one million per soldier that does not re-enlist. maybe if the mercenary company paid for the training.

[sachmo]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sachmo:
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.

The mercenaries where sent in there by the US. If the merceneries are under attack, the US should back them up. I'm talking about a combat situation, not allegations of torture. In such a case, the US should have the power to enforce the ROE.

---

Do you not think that know that the military will be there to pull their bacon out of the fire may cause the contractors to take chances they might not take otherwise? Also, we've heard how the military is understrength and overextended as it is...what happens when they have to go off-mission to save a bunch of yahoos who went somewhere that they didn't belong?