It is public knowledge that the US employs contractors from "Private Military Companies" such as Blackwater. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_military_company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_USA What is your opinion on the subject? From my own experience, I know that Blackwater recruits heavily from the Special Operations Community and they also recruit those that have served in support roles such as truck drivers. Logistically, I can see how can be easier and sometimes actually more efficient to avoid all the red tape that's involved in putting military personnel where you need them when you need them and instead have contractors do the job. At the same time I can see how some of these contractors could be used to conduct operations that regular military personnel cannot conduct because the "Laws of War" do not allow them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war What do you think?
American's tax dollar is not only used for serving few but it is also used to operate out side of the law. Let's be honest and call it as what it is. It is not "contractors", it is armed mercenaries send to other countries to do the dirty work and also not to upset the American public when they get killed.
Private military, Haha, These people do believe they can fool the world. The use of Private military means that "Bush wants somebody else to break the law for him". Who (Bush) broke too many laws to get us in Iraq anyway. He lied to all of us for sure.
Here is one of USA's new friends and air transport supplier. A nice guy who supplied arms to talibans and every other scummy war lord in the world. Viktor Bout- Air transport supplier for Iraq and Afghanistan http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/wanted/2004/1021bout.htm
This is the point that concerns me, I don't really think most American's realize how these contractors can be used. You call them "mercenaries". Wikipedia defines a mercenary as: "a person who takes part in an armed conflict who is not a national of a Party to the conflict and "is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party"." I can't really object to your use of the term in this case as I agree with the wiki definition for the most part. I don't like the fact that we have US sponsored "mercenaries" in Iraq, but as you said, "let's be honest".
I don't think most Americans realize that their country is becoming more and more like a rouge state every day. Arresting and kidnapping people without charge, having secret prisons, justify torture with government approval, using mercenaries in wars, co-operating with international Arms dealer and criminals such as Viktor Bout. The only thing lacking for Bush and his administration to be a complete African Warlord is to be involved in drug or blood diamond trade to finance such activities and that is thanks to American tax dollars.
I was reading that we have been hiring mercenaries from all over the world many of which have been involved in much less honorable conflicts, stuff like apartheid wars in south africa
The small size of the all volunteer army mandates that we use contractors. We had never done this before. In all other wars these support functions were carried out by members of the military. I have read that there are as many as 100,000 contractors in Iraq. The figures are hard to obtain because the Pentagon holds back this information. Contractors include personnel from many countries including Iraq. In one report, Iraqi's who were hired as guards for a convoy didn't show up on a trip with over 30 trucks from Kuwait to Iraq to supply troops. The convoy was hijacked, several of the undermanned guard staff were killed and kidnapped, trucks were taken and troops did not receive their supplies. It is a weak link within the existing American military committment.
I have to interject because you do this every time you post. Rouge is a color. You mean to say "rogue" as in a scoundrel state. Normally I wouldn't correct a spelling mistake, but it ruins your whole rant.
Thanks. I don't mind if you correct my spelling mistakes since I hardly ever check my posts for such mistakes and I must admit that I am a very bad typist.