Blackwater

[Brighteous]

This summer I had the unique opportunity to train at Blackwater's training center in North Caroline and work with a good number of their employees. They all had between ten and twenty years of experience in either the military or law enforcement and all had been overseas. What really surprised me was the amount of training that could be done on their property (which is completely self sufficient). They had their own LZ and 4 or five transport planes, about a dozen MH-6 little birds or something similar, and an entire fleet of heavily armored APC’s (looked similar to the French VAB) and an arsenal that would rival an IBCT.
I bring this up because I worry about the dangers of letting a civilian company have this much power. Despite their intentions, it is troublesome to see so much technology available to those with enough money. Perhaps this is an unfortunate consequence of living in a capitalistic society we’re sworn to defend but perhaps there is a line when economic theory must be set aside for national defense, or even good ethics.
The second problem I have with such an organization is the message it send to the world. It says that America cannot fight its own wars and needs to pay civilians to do the job of the state. This begs the question, “How sovereign is a state that privatizes a portion of its executive branch?” I don’t know the answer but it is certainly something to think about.
The men I trained with this summer at Blackwater taught me some invaluable tactical skills and every chance to speak with a combat vet is a gem. As a training facility it is top of the line. But in principle is it right to allow a private organization to be doing the work of the military, especially overseas?

[FeelinFroggy]

They all had between ten and twenty years of experience in either the military or law enforcement and all had been overseas. And yet you still refer to them as a "civilian company"?

I have no quarrel with a PMC founded by a fellow SEAL. To me, their help is welcomed.

[SGM]

They are a company with services for hire. Many private firms use them as they can't "hire" the U.S. Military. Many State department and other government offices use them (or other private firms) be cause their being there doesn't constitute U.S. military presents. Sometimes there might be caps on how many U.S. troops can be on ground, these firms don't count into that number.

I guess we could always make it different, take them into the system as the "American Foreign Legion" and go from there???

[Scrappy]

hmmmmmm.......

Perhaps we should just call it as it is.....A company comprised of prior-service military members.

You don't think they do mercenary work do you? That would be really scary.

[pingjocky]

How did I not see this thread until just now?? I'm losing my touch...

it is troublesome to see so much technology available to those with enough money

So the right to bear arms only relates to specific arms? Did you know that private citizens are "allowed" to own full-auto weapons? The catch is that you gotta be able to pay for them. They have almost been taxed and priced out of reach of the private citizen, but they are still available. So, if I have "enough money" as you say, I can buy MP-5's, Mk-43's, SAW's, M-2's...pretty much anything I want. What's so bad about that? Sounds like it's time for one of HE's speeches about the 2nd Amendment.

So why not helo's and armored cars. Those APC's that you saw are Blackwater's own creation. Heck, I say that if a person (or corporation) can build an APC...more power to 'em.

R/
Pingjocky

[mtnsldr]

This summer I had the unique opportunity to train at Blackwater's training center in North Caroline and work with a good number of their employees. They all had between ten and twenty years of experience in either the military or law enforcement and all had been overseas. What really surprised me was the amount of training that could be done on their property (which is completely self sufficient). They had their own LZ and 4 or five transport planes, about a dozen MH-6 little birds or something similar, and an entire fleet of heavily armored APC’s (looked similar to the French VAB) and an arsenal that would rival an IBCT.
I bring this up because I worry about the dangers of letting a civilian company have this much power. Despite their intentions, it is troublesome to see so much technology available to those with enough money. Perhaps this is an unfortunate consequence of living in a capitalistic society we’re sworn to defend but perhaps there is a line when economic theory must be set aside for national defense, or even good ethics.
The second problem I have with such an organization is the message it send to the world. It says that America cannot fight its own wars and needs to pay civilians to do the job of the state. This begs the question, “How sovereign is a state that privatizes a portion of its executive branch?” I don’t know the answer but it is certainly something to think about.
The men I trained with this summer at Blackwater taught me some invaluable tactical skills and every chance to speak with a combat vet is a gem. As a training facility it is top of the line. But in principle is it right to allow a private organization to be doing the work of the military, especially overseas?

To paraphrase ole Stuart Mackenzie:
BRIGHTEOUS! INTRO! NOW!

[Scrappy]

LOL


I smell cake

[63Bravo]

Theres a reason Blackwater and other companies like them, are having "eyes" turned toward them. They operate outside the normal structure of laws concerning US Forces, and that has resulted in some mistakes that got media attention, and ultimately Blackwaters hands being slapped.

Blackwater News Item (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/anniversary-civilian-shootings-blackwater-iraq/story.aspx?guid={09A78181-F23A-43EC-9026-9798172915FF}&dist=hppr)

I cant be the only person here who gets a slight "twinge" down my back when I think of all the military firepower, experience and training that a singular privately owned company has at its disposal?

Never fear though, I get almost the same type "twinge" when I think about Halliburton and KBR and how they have privatized everything else in war.

[pingjocky]

I cant be the only person here who gets a slight "twinge" down my back when I think of all the military firepower, experience and training that a singular privately owned company has at its disposal?

Last time I checked, the Second Amendment didn't specify what type of arms may be kept by private citizens. In all honesty, it was the writer's intent that the arms kept in private homes be equal to that of the US Military at the time...so that the citizens may overthrow the oppressive government (should it ever return to such). I have no problems with anyone keeping military hardware...it's their rights as much as mine.

R/
Pingjocky

[Des]

They operate outside the normal structure of laws concerning US Forces

One thing that the article doesn't state, is that Contractors working for DOD became subject to the UCMJ as of Jan 1 of last year.

And if CPA Order 17 is still in effect, it allows the home state of a contractor to waive immunity from Iraqi law.

A couple of other laws are available for use to prosecute. The groundwork is there, the systems just need to make use of it if they have to.

On a personal note, I'm cool with contractors. They are an means to an end when government forces are sometimes not available to be used or not suitable for the situation.

Besides, it's not like Governments using private soldiers is anything new.

[HairyEyeball]

Last time I checked, the Second Amendment didn't specify what type of arms may be kept by private citizens. In all honesty, it was the writer's intent that the arms kept in private homes be equal to that of the US Military at the time...so that the citizens may overthrow the oppressive government (should it ever return to such). I have no problems with anyone keeping military hardware...it's their rights as much as mine.

R/
Pingjocky

Not exactly, ping - not 'equal to': The citizens were 'the military' - the organized (aka 'well regulated') and 'unorganized' militia, and were directed to possess arms 'equivalent to' prevailing 'state of the art' - those in common use by the standing armies of the era.

Had FDR not begun undermining the Second Amendment (and the militia act of 1792 as amended in 1795, which eventually was expanded to Title X, Chapter 13 of the U.S. Code) with the National Firearms Act of 1934 (putting a 100% 'tax' on automatic firearms and a 1000% tax on noise attenuators ('silencer' was a term registered by Mauser) and set the pattern for illegal federal restrictions, as well as 'overlooking' the unconstitutionality of State and local restrictions and conferring an aura of legitimacy on subsequent infringements, we might well actually be a nation of free citizens.

As a sidelight, we might all check our State Constitutions for similar 'irregularities', such as this found in the Arizona Constitution:

Section 26. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men (emphasis added).

That would appear, strictly interpreted, that in the event of a natural (or man-made) disaster of sufficient proportion to overwhelm law enforcement and whatever Guard units might be employed (subject to what may be left of posse comitatus), any individual of sufficient stature calling on his armed friends and associates to maintain order in his immediate neighborhood might well, upon restoration of 'normalcy (such as it is)' be persecuted under a highly questionable provision of 'law'.

[63Bravo]

Last time I checked, the Second Amendment didn't specify what type of arms may be kept by private citizens. In all honesty, it was the writer's intent that the arms kept in private homes be equal to that of the US Military at the time...so that the citizens may overthrow the oppressive government (should it ever return to such). I have no problems with anyone keeping military hardware...it's their rights as much as mine.

R/
Pingjocky

And the last time I checked, it didn't take into consideration that "private citizens" would all group under a corporate banner and hire themselves out as armed combatants either. The 2nd Amendment was not an issue I was arguing, so I see no point in it being brought up, yet the proverbial cat is now out of the bag.

I wonder if any opinions would change if one of these contracting companies decided to go "rouge" and start a cout d'état that was not backed by all citizens? Or, if all of them decided to band together for a singular cause, and struck at a time when our national defenses are weak, such as they are at this day and age with us fighting a 2 front war and looking to start a third?

[mtnsldr]

Everybody back then were mercenaries. The Corporation was the Government. In the French and Indian Wars Roger's Rangers were essentially mercenaries roped together by "Major" Rogers, but essentially a "company (literally)" of Soldiers. US pilots acted as Aerial Mercs in Spain during their Civil War. Granted, Blackwater is a little different, but only because of the restrictions and large processes to get money out of the government. The military won't just "hire" Joe Snuffy off the street because he says he's got a band of guys who can help out. Its the same concept of Roger's Rangers adjusted to the current times.

Its the right of any group to "go rogue" and attack the government, that's one of the intents of the 2nd. And if the American People want to put them down, well they better get their asses over to Walmart and get something to defend themselves with.

[BronzeGoat]

I'm just jealous of those guys because they have better equipment than our "high-speed" Stryker brigade did when we deployed. Of course, they tend to travel around the battlefield in much smaller groups than we did. Nothing like having a Stryker patrol get hit with an IED and having 20 to 30 angry trunk-monkeys dismounting to win the locals' hearts and minds.

[HairyEyeball]

Everybody back then were mercenaries. The Corporation was the Government. In the French and Indian Wars Roger's Rangers were essentially mercenaries roped together by "Major" Rogers, but essentially a "company (literally)" of Soldiers. The US sent Aerial Mercs to Spain during their Civil War. Granted, Blackwater is a little different, but only because of the restrictions and large processes to get money out of the government. The military won't just "hire" Joe Snuffy off the street because he says he's got a band of guys who can help out. Its the same concept of Roger's Rangers adjusted to the current times.

Its the right of any group to "go rogue" and attack the government, that's one of the intents of the 2nd. And if the American People want to put them down, well they better get their asses over to Walmart and get something to defend themselves with.

Fact check, Cap'n: The U.S. did not send anyone to Spain during their civil war. Individuals and aircraft were contracted for by private entities. A similar situation was that in China prior to 07DEC41, when a number of American aviators officially 'resigned their commissions' and flew with 'Mister' Chenault - the famed 'Flying Tigers'.

[mtnsldr]

Fact check, Cap'n: The U.S. did not send anyone to Spain during their civil war. Individuals and aircraft were contracted for by private entities. A similar situation was that in China prior to 07DEC41, when a number of American aviators officially 'resigned their commissions' and flew with 'Mister' Chenault - the famed 'Flying Tigers'.

Edited for clarity. The majority of sites I've found missrepresent this as well then.

[63Bravo]

I`m not about to get into a pissing match over semantics. To compare Blackwater and other private security firms to armed militias of history is ludicrous. The primary difference is the fact that Blackwater pays its "troops" to perform, where a militia would be people grouped for a common cause, usually of the people, not the CEO or Board members of a company.

Feel as you wish, for I will not try and change your mind, but be well aware that you will not change mine either. Peer pressure works great on children and weak minded men, and I am neither.