Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90

 ... 484

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 18, 2007 04:44 PM



Hot on the heels of Iceland's critical withdrawal from the Coalition of the Willing, it seems that the Iraqi government is beginning to lose patience with having a 20,000 to 30,000 strong collection of foreign mercenaries on their soil.

After a firefight on Sunday in which Blackwater security contractors allegedly killed eight civilians, the Iraqi Interior Ministry revoked the company's license - banning the company from working in the country - and commenced a criminal investigation into the incident.

The Iraqi government has also vowed to prosecute the contractors involved - a decision likely to provoke tensions with the United States, not only because Blackwater USA is notoriously well-connected, but also because the Coalition Provisional Authority, while in power, decreed that both American soldiers and mercenaries would be immunized from Iraqi prosecution. That decree, Order 17, has apparently never been formally overturned.

Though details of the shooting remain unclear as of this writing, the Iraqis have characterized the incident as a "vicious assault" and "a big crime," while the State Department has issued a singularly lackluster denial.

“There was a firefight,” said Sean McCormack, the principal State Department spokesman. “We believe some innocent life was lost. Nobody wants to see that. But I can’t tell you who was responsible for that.”


Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has promised American assistance and support in dealing with the matter.

Blackwater, meanwhile, is less shy about claiming innocence of any wrongdoing.

“The ‘civilians’ reportedly fired upon by Blackwater professionals were in fact armed enemies, and Blackwater personnel returned defensive fire,” said Anne Tyrrell, a company spokeswoman, in an e-mail message. “Blackwater professionals heroically defended American lives in a war zone.”


Heroic or not, the scene was certainly confused. Initial reports indicated that a State Department in Nisour Square had come under fire, but witnesses claim that a pair of car bombs provoked the mercenaries to start shooting "in response" and call in air support.

"The car bomb was in proximity to the place where State Department personnel were meeting, and that was the reason why Blackwater responded to the incident,” he said on a conference call for reporters in Baghdad on Monday afternoon.

Mirenbe Nantongo, an embassy spokeswoman, said directly, “Our people were reacting to a car bombing.”

But typical for Iraq, confusion prevailed over who was firing at whom. Iraqis who had been at the scene said they saw helicopters, though American officials did not speak of air power. Ms. Tyrrell said helicopters came but did not shoot.

A grocery shop owner, Abu Muhammad, reported seeing two helicopters firing down into the area, around the time of the bombing. “I was hearing the shooting continuing every now and then, for about 15 minutes,” he said, adding that the gunfire sounded low and fast, different from the sound of an AK-47 firing.


It's hard to blame a man for shooting some rounds out of his gun after somebody's just tried to blow him up. Nevertheless, it's not clear at this point whether the Blackwater fire was at any point returned.

Regardless, the event has underscored some longstanding criticisms of mercenaries in Iraq.

The deaths on Sunday that were linked to Blackwater have struck a nerve with Iraqis, who say that private security companies are often quick to shoot and are rarely held responsible for their actions.


Moreover, the Iraqi government has used the incident to initiate a thorough review of all mercenary companies currently serving in Iraq, not just Blackwater, emphasizing the growing gap between the political interests of Washington and Baghdad.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

SEP 18, 2007 05:15 PM

It might actually do us some good if we allowed the government to prosecute.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 18, 2007 05:20 PM

FearTheReaper said:
It might actually do us some good if we allowed the government to prosecute.


Possibly. But that would be opening a hell of a can of worms. It seems unlikely to me (for what it's worth) that the administration is going to want to set that precedent.

mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

SEP 18, 2007 05:24 PM

Zarth said:
Possibly. But that would be opening a hell of a can of worms. It seems unlikely to me (for what it's worth) that the administration is going to want to set that precedent.


This administration has so far been completely unwilling to permit anyone connected with it - no matter how remotely - to be held accountable for absolutely anything. So I'm guessing that you're right.

d20

d20

San Francisco, CA
September 2003

SEP 18, 2007 05:42 PM

wouldn't be a kick in the pants if the whole "we'll stand down as they stand up" thing were resolved by the Iraqi government standing up to foreign mercenaries occupying their country? i mean just for the irony of it... it'd be Alanis song worthy.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 18, 2007 05:47 PM

mingol said:

Zarth said:
Possibly. But that would be opening a hell of a can of worms. It seems unlikely to me (for what it's worth) that the administration is going to want to set that precedent.


This administration has so far been completely unwilling to permit anyone connected with it - no matter how remotely - to be held accountable for absolutely anything. So I'm guessing that you're right.


Given their demonstrable corruption and probable criminality, I can't even really blame them.

d20 said:
wouldn't be a kick in the pants if the whole "we'll stand down as they stand up" thing were resolved by the Iraqi government standing up to foreign mercenaries occupying their country? i mean just for the irony of it... it'd be Alanis song worthy.


Maybe. A lot depends on what happens there - whether the government in Baghdad can really advance a plausible, legitimate claim to being a national one.

I'm given to understand that most non-Kurdish Iraqis actually favor that. Sectarian parties have lost a lot of popularity as a result of the violence. Nevertheless, our own policies of strengthening local governments are helping to promote warlordism along with security.

Gerry_D

Gerry_D

Los Angeles, CA
May 2003

SEP 18, 2007 05:58 PM

It seems the country may be unable to rid themselves of the armed group calling itself "Blackwater in Iraq"

mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

SEP 18, 2007 06:07 PM

Zarth said:

mingol said:
This administration has so far been completely unwilling to permit anyone connected with it - no matter how remotely - to be held accountable for absolutely anything. So I'm guessing that you're right.


Given their demonstrable corruption and probable criminality, I can't even really blame them.


Exactly. I mean, would you want to accept responsibility for this mess? I sure wouldn't.

And by "this mess" I don't only mean Blackwater, or even the whole Iraq war.

OhSoOrdinary

OhSoOrdinary

New York, NY
July 2006

SEP 18, 2007 06:17 PM

I never really understood the necessity of Blackwater in the first place.

Sonofabeach

Sonofabeach

Camp Pendleton, CA
November 2004

SEP 18, 2007 06:20 PM

I wouldn't be suprised if BlackWater was a fault. I worked with those guys when I was with the SEALS. They are pretty trigger happy.

code_red

code_red

Portland, OR
July 2005

SEP 18, 2007 06:25 PM


It's hard to blame a man for shooting some rounds out of his gun after somebody's just tried to blow him up.



If a Soldier or Marine shot randomly after a roadside bomb attack, would you say its understandable?

My point is that for $600/day, they should learn some trigger control.

r00kers

r00kers

Nederland, CO
February 2003

SEP 18, 2007 06:27 PM

I saw some mention of 'rules of engagement' for the mercs. I wonder what they are and if they are comparable to the military rules of engagement?

I don't think Blackwater will be kicked out. The founders/principals of the company are completely embedded with the neo-con rebublicans and ms. Rice will smooth things out. The Iraqi government has already backpedaled significantly. Maybe Blackwater will have to not shoot so MANY civilians next month.

I find it almost unfathomable that we employ mercenaries. What an ugly, soulless profession.

Syntropia

Syntropia

Oakland, CA
February 2004

SEP 18, 2007 06:46 PM

Mercenaries... just another way to shirk accountabilty and mask crime. ARRR!!!

abracadabra

abracadabra

Seattle, WA
April 2004

SEP 18, 2007 07:01 PM

Bush makes money from Blackwater .
Cheney makes money from Haliburton .
Why are we there again ?

NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

SEP 18, 2007 07:04 PM

How the fuck does a private contracter "call in air support."

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

SEP 18, 2007 07:04 PM

double

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

SEP 18, 2007 07:06 PM

OhSoOrdinary said:
I never really understood the necessity of Blackwater in the first place.



Paying Blackwater is cheaper than maintaining the surge capability of troops.

Also, it is a way for the military to retain top talent at "market" wages. Great for a military who is having terrible retention problems with special operations folks.

My cousin makes over 100k a year at Blackwater as a short term contracted soldier who travels around the globe doing private security. It seems like an awesome job, especially for him, as he barely passed high school.



How the fuck does a private contracter "call in air support."



I think they can use US/Coalition assets, but also, Blackwater has their own planes and helicopters

Red_Russian13

Red_Russian13

Dayton, OH
February 2004

SEP 18, 2007 07:11 PM

I'm duly impressed with this post, Zarth. If this is the quality of the stuff you'd contribute, I hope we see more.

I'm no fan of the massive use of contractors in Iraq or elsewhere, but they are needed to one extent or another. Remember, there are many contractors other than "trigger-pullers". But I do not like the privatization of combat arms or intelligence. Nonetheless, traditional security services like the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) are incapable of providing the numbers of bodies necessary to protect all the assets for which they are responsible (embassies, etc.), so their use is necessary. Please keep in mind that I am looking objectively at the situation, not judging the war/situation as wrong or right. Ignoring 'wrong or right" these contractors are quite necessary, both for logistics and personal security now.

However, they must be held accountable, and they are not in many cases. Many times, one contractor will fire a team member and he'll be hired on by another in a few weeks and be back doing the same thing he was doing in the same place.

Also bear in mind, the ridiculous figures on dollars "per day" that are thrown around are somewhat misleading. Yes, they may in fact be true. Some may make $1,000 a day. But the military is also justly rewarded for their service and have at their disposal a number of perks and benefits that surpass most of America by a long shot (and as a former military member, I never thought of it that way until long after I got out). Pure "dollar vs. dollar" comparisons ends with contractors winning virtually every time. But when you start thinking in terms of fringe benefits...

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 18, 2007 07:15 PM

code_red said:


It's hard to blame a man for shooting some rounds out of his gun after somebody's just tried to blow him up.


If a Soldier or Marine shot randomly after a roadside bomb attack, would you say its understandable?

My point is that for $600/day, they should learn some trigger control.


Oddly enough, I'm not happy any time an innocent person is murdered. But whenever you're put in a deadly, confusing situation, mistakes are going to happen.

Pending further investigation, there are a lot of questions still unresolved here, and until the answers start coming in, the contractors' degree of blame - and their level of professionalism - remains uncertain.

freshprncebelair said:

OhSoOrdinary said:
I never really understood the necessity of Blackwater in the first place.


Paying Blackwater is cheaper than maintaining the surge capability of troops.


I'm pretty sure that this is actually not true. It's arguable, of course, because you're dealing with counterfactuals, but I've never seen any genuinely convincing evidence that the present military model of specialized combat troops and support contractors is either economically or militarily effective.

Stiles

Stiles

Oakland, CA
November 2002

SEP 18, 2007 07:19 PM

freshprncebelair said:

Also, it is a way for the military to retain top talent at "market" wages. Great for a military who is having terrible retention problems with special operations folks.



Dude, the military is having terrible retention problems precisely BECAUSE of Blackwater and its' ilk.

keving_138

keving_138

New Orleans, LA
November 2006

SEP 18, 2007 07:48 PM

The pic in this is not Blackwater or any other PMC. Its a .gov agency in NOLA post Katrina. Sorry I'm a stickler for details.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 18, 2007 08:05 PM

keving_138 said:
The pic in this is not Blackwater or any other PMC. Its a .gov agency in NOLA post Katrina. Sorry I'm a stickler for details.


Well, I certainly hope you've complained to the management.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
For the record, I have nothing to do with the pictures.

triskadekafobic

triskadekafobic

Germany
April 2006

SEP 18, 2007 08:50 PM

Sonofabeach said:
I wouldn't be suprised if BlackWater was a fault. I worked with those guys when I was with the SEALS. They are pretty trigger happy.



I'm not in the seals or anything, but the when I was in ramadi we had some hoity-toity fancy pants people come to visit and they had blackwater security. I swear if those guys hear a stick break in their vicinity they start at everything.

they've been pulling crap like this (what happened on sunday) since the war began. I know lots of people with stories about how ate up blackwater is. granted everyone wants to sign up with them after getting out because they pay so well.

pariah002

pariah002

Yugoslavia
July 2003

SEP 18, 2007 08:57 PM

Stiles said:

freshprncebelair said:

Also, it is a way for the military to retain top talent at "market" wages. Great for a military who is having terrible retention problems with special operations folks.



Dude, the military is having terrible retention problems precisely BECAUSE of Blackwater and its' ilk.



It is true. I am a lower end security contractor, not Blackwater, but a security contractor.
So many of the people I work with are Iraq/Afghanistan military vets that saw the money that could be made contracting.
Throw on top of that the lack of rules, the freedom to leave at any time, the pay, it is a good deal. You basically do what the military does with out all the bullshit, more freedom and better pay.
Heck, many of the people are still in the Guard or Reserve and do this for a year and go back to Guard/Reserve.

shadowsoldier

shadowsoldier

Fayetteville, NC
May 2004

SEP 18, 2007 09:56 PM

i think they should be commended for a job well done... im sure we are not hearing their side of the story..... id do the same exact thing if i were in their shoes.... i can almost guarntee that it was a complex attack that started of with an IED. so until everyone gets the whole story lets not start talking bad about blackwater

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next