NYT Slimes Private Guards in Iraq as 'Mercenaries'

Photo of Clay Waters.

In an editorial with the misleadingly bland title "Legal Loopholes in Iraq," the Times editorial page took a leap into left-wing logic Monday, referring to private security contractors like Blackwater as "mercenaries."

"Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refers to the lack of legal accountability that allows mercenaries working for the American government to kill Iraqis without fear of prosecution as 'a lacuna' in our law."

The editorial writer seemed determined to rub readers' faces with the word, using it three times in a short editorial, even though "private contractors" would have been more accurate and less inflammatory.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

"Baghdad's attempt to prosecute United States mercenaries for crimes against Iraqis is not unreasonable. Fuming after Blackwater agents contracted by the State Department mowed down 17 Iraqis in Baghdad on Sept. 16, Iraqis were incensed when they found out that State Department agents investigating the incident offered the guards a form of immunity from prosecution under American law.

"Beyond corroborating the State Department's incompetence, the spectacle of Washington letting its trigger-happy bodyguards off the hook wiped out whatever residual sense of legitimacy Iraqis may have still attached to the United States' mission.

….

"That folly was compounded by the decision to allow gun-toting mercenaries to run around Iraq without any clear legal tether holding them accountable to Iraqi law, American criminal law or military law.

"The killings in Baghdad last September were not the first crimes involving private contractors working for the American government. Still, four years after the start of the war, not one contractor has been prosecuted for crimes committed against an Iraqi."

As Ace of Spades put it:

"Am I to understand that when a NYT reporter actually bothers himself to leave his hotel, his security is being provided by -- as his paper terms them -- 'mercenaries'?"

Indeed, Times reporter Dexter Filkins was recorded at a journalism conference in a January 2005 Frontline special talking of his experiences in Iraq:

"'We go through money like jet fuel. We have two houses with blast walls on all sides, machine guns on the roof, 45 armed guards. We have three armored cars -- they cost about $250,000 each. We have at least one security advisor there all the time -- he's about $1,000 per day. Sometimes we have two."

And of course, Times reporters often hire armed guards to accompany reporters on assignment.

—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Couldn't Secret Service

Secret Service Agents agree to guard any President, whether they agree with his policies or not, simply because they are being paid to do so.

Does that make them "mercenaries"?

 

Nope.  No more than

Nope.  No more than writing things that wind up in a newspaper make NYT reporters journalists.

I just realized that when I

I just realized that when I edited that comment, I removed the <sarc off> tag. I love your comparison. ;-)

I hope others don't think I was serious. You never know.....

I knew what you meant...

I knew what you meant...

federal employees vs private sector

Aren't the secret service US Federal employees? They're serving our country. Blackwater serves its shareholders.

Typical of the NY Times

Lets not acknowledge how many of these "mercenaries" got killed protecting US and Iraqi missions to every part of the war torn country.  Not to mention, with all that's been written about this incident, I've yet to hear anyone explain how, if this was an unprovoked attack on the citizenry, how did their vehicles get riddled with bullet holes.  Lets not explore that aspect of the incident, better we focus on the "hired gun" aspect.  One last question, would the NY Times or Wash Post care to comment on whether they, and organization like them, had engaged these same mercenaries when they were on the ground in Iraq?  If so, why, they're heartless mercenaries. 

One last question, would

One last question, would the NY Times or Wash Post care to comment on
whether they, and organization like them, had engaged these same
mercenaries when they were on the ground in Iraq? -
Bourbeau

Here's your answer from the article: (emphasis added)

Indeed, Times reporter Dexter Filkins was recorded at a journalism conference in a January 2005 Frontline special talking of his experiences in Iraq:

"'We go through money like jet fuel. We have two houses
with blast walls on all sides, machine guns on the roof, 45 armed
guards. We
have three armored cars -- they cost about $250,000 each. We
have at least one security advisor there all the time -- he's about
$1,000 per day. Sometimes we have two."


Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

nyt vs the gov't

the nyt, wapo, etc are companies that have a choice to be there or not, thus they have the choice to use security services. the gov't using them brings up other issues. it's really two separate things. you can't compare nyt using security services to the federal gov't hiring secruity services.

My Question Is This

Are the security services protecting the MSM and their colleagues considered mercenaries vs. those same security guards used to protect goverment representatives.  Seems to be a pretty simple question, and I don't understand why you can't compare them - same people, in the same place, doing the same thing; just paid for by a different entity.  You're not suggesting the government can't hire extra security people if they deem it necessary, are you?

ill explain it for you...

there is definitely a distinction between security for MSM, etc and gov't hiring security. corporations that choose to be in iraq for reporting, construction, or whatever choose to be there for money. they're trying to make a profit, and thus incur expenses in attempting to make money for their shareholders. they're using security as part of their business. it's not soldiers' job to protect Fox News reporters.

But it is the job of soldiers to provide security for the country that we are currently occupying. The gov't has hired these security companies to do some security portions of the occupation. There is a difference between the gov't hiring security instead of bringing more troops to Irap and corporations hiring security in order to be able to do their business.

I have no problem with Blackwater or whomever being used in Iraq. It is a great way to increase the return from all the training and experience the US gov't gave those former soldiers. I do have a problem with them receiving more pay, I don't think that's right.

Anything...

to sell a newspaper. And this was written while sipping a latte' from the hotel balcony of course while seething....Asshats, plain and simple, but let me tell you, want to talk about some whining and crying, let these guys attempt to go anywhere without them. I know they would never consider, or have the guts, but that's typical for the limpwrist....

"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"

Clay, What else do you

Clay,

What else do you call soldiers that profit off of war?

If I was an American soldier I'd hate these guys, and I'm sure most of them do. 

They ruin the work of our troops, while making a lot more money than our troops.  They're the worst of the worst scumbags. 

 

}}---> Cheap shot Leon

They are security guards, Leon, not soldiers.

Do you have the same contempt for the Secret Service?

Cool, They do an awful

Cool,

They do an awful lot of killing for mere security guards.

Ask any soldier you know that has served in Iraq how they feel about Blackwater.

 

}}---> Anecdotal Leon

You can't back up that statement, Leon.

Blackwater is not a paid assault unit as the Hessians of American Revolution days.

Since "any soldier" refers also to all soldiers returning, I would expect a huge outcry from those soldiers against Blackwater.

Please don't refer me to a PBS website for your refutation.

Leon, blackwater is a

Leon, blackwater is a security company that employs professional, well trained SeALs, Army Special Forces and Rangers and Marine Recon. They have very good security skills. They kill, yes, but they do not go out hunting to kill. They kill when they are themselves attacked. At that point, they do get agressive, very agressive. Thats their training, and that agressiveness is what keeps them alive. You are trained in the matters that agression is the best defense. And it is true. If you want to get your 70 virgnes, you attack blackwater. Seems to me, blackwater is simply granting the wishes of Mohammads followers.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Ok Bass, So they get paid

Ok Bass,

So they get paid to be soldiers, thus they are mercenaries.

Look up the definition if you don't believe me.

Ouch Leon

Perhaps YOU should look up the definition before spouting off.

But to save you the time while you drink your Mad Dog 20/20, here it is.

: one that serves merely for wages; especially : a soldier hired into foreign service

Don’t our men and women in the military get paid wages to fight? Sure they do. So your Blackwater “they get paid to be soldiers” argument is baseless.

Let’s look at the definition shall we?

“: one that serves merely for wages;” - Can you say that this is true of all Blackwater employees? That they have no interest in protecting America and are only in it “for the money”? Go ahead – say so if you believe it.

“especially : a soldier hired into foreign service.” These are AMERICANS fighting to protect AMERICAN interests.

By contrast, during the American Revolution, the Hessians were true mercenaries as they were German citizens hired and paid by the British to fight a war in America. They themselves had no vested interest in the engagement, and were truly “in it for the money”.

What else you got Leon?

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Jimbo - 1 Leon - 0

Jimbo - 5

Leon - 0

Jason - 0

v

simple and plain

This new scoreboard trend

This new scoreboard trend has got to be the most childish recent development around here. Do you have anything to add? No? I guess using basic arithmetic to express your foregone conclusion that the pro-Blackwater person is winning the debate is just as edifying as formulating an argument?

Shall I assume your next move will be to lower my score to -1?

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Why is it that only the

Why is it that only the Trolls hate keeping score???

LOL!

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Hey I would love to have

Hey I would love to have regulated, Robert's Rules-style debates on here, scorekeeping included. What I don't appreciate is the interjection of someone who has nothing to add but wants to snidely express support for their side. That is far more trollish than anything Leon or I have done.

And, since I am doing horribly on this thread (I don't need anyone to point it out for me with scorekeeping) I will now concede the Blackwater issue to you Jimbo, and move on.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Proposal for cease fire

Proposal for cease fire (however temporary it may be) is accepted!

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Do you have anything to add? No? - JasonC

I don't but FowlerK9 does... 

*New
IdiotNovember 7, 2007 - 12:13 ET by FowlerK9

I don't talk about alpine skiing. I can't ski and I've never been to the Alps. So I suggest you use the same guidelines in regards to Iraq. I however have spent the last 4 years in Iraq. These security contractors are NOT mercs. The only time they engage is in self-defense. Having served in the US Army as a Military Police SGT and as a security contractor in Iraq, I can tell you the active duty military DO NOT hate the contractors. And what you fail to realize is the contractors are all prior military themselves.

The men I served with are all highly expierenced men. Combat-medics, weapons experts, communications, Rangers, SAS, SF, Seals, ect. They are not gun-totting jocks looking to kill women and children and I resent you implying it. We don't have better equipment than the military we do our job with alot less. With the exception of Blackwater's own helo's, we didn't have close air support, no heavy armor vehicles, and we travel in places where help is hours away.

We protect ViP's because we have years of experience that privates and most SGT's dont have yet. I expect an apology.

 

FowlerK9

Security Team Echo 7

...thanks FowlerK9...chew on it JasonC and Leon...

v

FowlerK9: +100

JasonC:  -100

Let me return for one more

Let me return for one more post, albeit still in the spirit of having conceded the argument to Jimbo.

While I certainly understand the point of the analogy about alpine skiing, the major difference is that skiing is of no consequence to people who don't ski. All Americans, on the other hand, ought to learn about and develop an opinion, regarding how our military is used (I don't mean that pejoratively) and how we define our foreign policies. Therefore, while I may not know the inner workings of private security firms in Iraq, I think it is my right and responsibility to develop a stance on them, particularly when 'incidents' occur that expose potential problems with them.

Now, if you want to take the stance that dissent has no place in discourse during a time of war, that's something else entirely. I disagree, but I respect the absolutism of that idea.

Now having said all that, I do apologize if I came across like Blackwater employees are only in it for the money. Not my intent, I was only trying to illustrate the problem of increased conflation between the military and private sector.

Anyway, an illuminating post from Fowler. Thanks.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

JasonC..in case you missed it...

FowlerK9 had this to add to Leon's post:

 

Wrong again muppetNovember 7, 2007 - 13:16 ET by FowlerK9

3) The fact that the US military works hard to establish trust with
the people in the territories they work only to have Blackwater come in
with no understanding of what the troops are trying to accomplish, kill
some innocents, and ruin everything
  - Leon

 

Having worked on a RLT (reconstruction liason team), we go out in low profile suv's, meet with local Iraqi's and tribal leaders. We find out what is needed in the area, ie bridges, care clinics, water treatment plants, electricity upgrades. We then report back to the Army Corp of Engineers. I had daily contact with the locals in their homes and towns. Oh and by the way every morning in the IZ (international zone) there is a morning intel briefing attended by all security companies and military so everyone is on the "same page" so to speak. The security contractors do not operate in a vacuum like you suggest. Stop spreading lies.

v

to Leon:

"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

Thank you for your

Thank you for your cut-and-paste-intensive service as liaison between myself and Fowler. I think I can take it from here.

Do I get a few points for admitting I was wrong?

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

JasonC: 1 vrwc13:

JasonC:  1

vrwc13:  0

v

o.k.?

Awww yeah. And you

Awww yeah.

And you thought only Democrats tried to score points by giving up.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

So V, You're actually

So V,

You're actually going to cite a guy that claims to have worked for Blackwater to support the argument that Blackwater isn't a merc force?

Intersting.  I like it. 

Well, hey, Louis C. Camilleri told me that cigarettes don't cause cancer.  What do you think of that?

I never claimed to work for

I never claimed to work for Blackwater. I've worked for other security companies. Leon, what is wrong with you?

Ok Fowler, I apologize, in

Ok Fowler,

I apologize, in reading your post you seemed to imply a personal connection to Blackwater.

Allow me to revise my previous post:

So V,

You're actually going to cite a guy that claims to have worked for a private security firm to support the argument that another private security firm isn't a merc force?

Intersting.  I like it. 

Well, hey, Louis C. Camilleri told me that R.J. Reynolds cigarettes don't cause cancer.  What do you think of that?

OK leon

I'm going to make this post very clear so even you can understand it. The private security companies are NOT mercs for the simple fact is they are not conducting offensive operations. They are reactive only in self defense. They only fire when fired at first. The men working for these companies are highly experienced and are vetted throughly before being hired. If they break the rules they are fired. Some have been. They are have not been trained to or have they ever conducted raids, staged attacked, or been used as a first strike force. They provide close protection to ViP's, help gather information and assist the military at logistical support. What part of that is a merc in anyway? They do the jobs so the military can do the raids.

And I know several friends that work for Blackwater and they are all good men. But that doesn't mean I would lie.

 

FowlerK9

heart of the matter

if we had, let's say, 200,000 more troops in iraq, would we still need private contractors? i don't think so. they security professionals are doing the jobs that previously have been done by soldiers. in other occupations soldiers normally performed security, recon, and other tasks. so just because they're not raiding houses doesn't mean the title mercenary is so off limits.

they're doing jobs normally performed by soldiers and getting paid much, much more money for it. that is the problem with using private contractors.

at the end of the day we're not (financially) supporting the troops as much as blackwater employees, and that should be the issue.

Instead of 200,000 more

Instead of 200,000 more troops we could do what we did in WWII, no troop rotation. They could simply stay until the job was done. A soldier in WWII didn't deploy for 12 months and then return home, they stayed. Would you prefer that? Do contractors make more than a soldier? Yes. But consider this. Figure in the cost of a tank in that soldier pay that man said tank. There are other cost to figure in. Security contractors do not have these weapons systems at their disposal. And has I stated before, the average soldier does not have the experience in providing close protection. And there is a reason that the military prefers using contractors in suv's traveling during certain missions than a miltary convoy.

And your agrument is weak in that security contractors do jobs soldiers do so therefore they are mercs. Contractors also are cooks and janitors, are they therefore mercs?

you missed the point

weren't soldiers in WWII cooks, janitors, etc...so were they not soldiers?

please clarify your tank argrument. i didn't understand it.

but if you're trying to say that if you include the cost of equipment and using the military as security to the soldier's pay is equal or greater than the cost of outsourcing security to blackwater, i'm not sure that equation adds up.

these professionals are paid to do the job of a soldier. if they weren't there a soldier would be. in reality this whole arguement is a silly game of nomenclature, and in the end the blackwater employee is still getting a ton more money for driving the SUV than the soldier driving the Humvee, and I don't think thats proper.

you missed my point

You stated that because a security contractor does a soldiers job he therefore is a merc. First , he's not. Second a security contractor doesn't do a soldiers job. My point is no contractor is a merc, regardless of his job, security, cook, IT, truck driver. Security contractors are paid more for their experience and knowledge. It is cheaper for the government to hire a civilian team to protect someone then a military unit. It's not just the individuals pay to consider. For every soldier in that humvee there is a huge amount of support that costs money. With contractors that cost isnt the military's.

there are 2 issues here

that cost is not directly the military's, but we as taxpayers still pay for it.

so you're saying just because he's called a contractor the task becomes non-military? you're using some strange circular logic here.

in previous wars all the jobs contractors do currenlty(food service, sanitation, security) were performed by soldiers. now in iraq instead of the US military soldiers doing those jobs, hired contractors perform those jobs. were those jobs never the military's? when did they switch in your eyes?

having non-military(they may have been previously, but they're not wearing a US military uniform now) do the tasks and jobs until recently the military performed with its soldiers fits my definition of mercenary. but again, it's a game of nomenclature.

now if you want to say that it's beneficial to outsource these tasks, that's a completely different topic and i might agree with you on some aspects of that argument.

By your logic any civilian

By your logic any civilian working for or in support of the military is by definition a mercenary. That is just wrong. Mercenary: working or acting merely for money or other reward. A professional soldier serving in a foreign army.

The above was taken from websters. Now you can't possibly apply that definition to an American working for the State Department or a civilian working for the DoD, either as a close protection, cook, truck driver, ect. Calling them mercs is a distortion of the english language. Why would you do this? What are you trying to do?

And as to why we use contractors now and didn't in the past? Maybe one reason was between 1993 and 1999 4 complete Army divisions were disolved. I served during that time and I can tell you from first hand experience it was not fun to watch.

reading comprehension

my point was that in previous wars or military occupations jobs that were classified as military are now non-military jobs in iraq. the US used to have soldiers providing armed security, now non-military personnel perform that job. not "any civilian working for or in support..." that's not what i wrote, poor interpretation.

my motive? i didn't start this silly game of nomenclature and i've been saying that the real issue is the discrepancy in pay. basically i thought your argument is flawed and thought we could engage in some debate about the issue. why are you arguing? what are you trying to do?

i agree, seeing rummy continue making the army smaller and saying that we need a smaller, quicker-reacting army is painful. for this type of scenario we need a large, occupying force.

You are one of those "Bush

You are one of those "Bush is profiting from the war" people, huh? 

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

what?

how is bush profiting from the war? erik prince might be, but bush, no.

 

Get to know Leon...

He has some great "positions"

  • fat people are bad people
  • humskolers are wierd
  • his opinions on music counts, yours don't
  • he reads his "good old Bible" but doesn't believe it

...need I say more?

v

"V,

You've officially won the award for least value added to Newsbusters."  - Leon

FowlerK9 sounds

FowlerK9 sounds credible...Leon, you don't. 

American Medical Association says:

Fat is healthy? Overweight people have lowest death rate...

Again, they sound credible...Leon, you don't.  Simple and plain.

v

V, You've officially won

V,

You've officially won the award for least value added to Newsbusters.

We can all read the thread.  We don't need you to cut and paste a statement from one part of the thread to another part of the thread.

Did Fowler tell you he'd invite you to his birthday party if you carried his water for him?

V, You've officially won the award for least value added to NB..

"V,

You've officially won the award for least value added to Newsbusters."

Coming from you Leon, I wear that as a badge of honor.  Thanks.

v

"V,

You've officially won the award for least value added to Newsbusters."  - Leon

Therefore, while I may not

Therefore, while I may not know the inner workings of private security
firms in Iraq, I think it is my right and responsibility to develop a
stance on them, particularly when 'incidents' occur that expose
potential problems with them

 

How can you have a stance on something that you dont know the full details? You have an opinion on a subject that you are completely misinformed on. Which was my point. Oh and by the way, a friend of mine who I served with in Iraq was on that Blackwater team and is now recooping in Houston from shrapnel wounds taken during that very attack. Just because the media dosen't report it or tells the truth doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

I guess the WMD's I saw with my own eyes in 2004 were a figment of my imagination too.

 

FowlerK9

For us civilians, all we

For us civilians, all we have to go on are what's reported to us and our own ideologies to interpret those things. Your perspective, obviously, is an important addition to that mix, and we appreciate it.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

How can you have a stance

How can you have a stance on something that you dont know the full details? - FowlerK9

Shoot, Democrats do that all the time.

Shoot, Democrats do that all the time.

 How can you have a stance on something that you dont know the full details? - FowlerK9

"Shoot, Democrats do that all the time."

Leon too.

v

"V, You've officially won the award for least value added to Newsbusters."  - Leon

 

Jimbo, Def. 4 that you

Jimbo,

Def. 4 that you conveniently left off:

Any hireling.

Furthermore, these guys are working solely for money.

Would they still be there if they didn't get paid?

No.

Would our troops still be there if they didn't get paid?

Yes.

Their pay is commensurate

Their pay is commensurate with private sector standards (ie 300% more than enlisted men) and they are not enlisted members of the military. Seems to me like that's all you need to make the connection.

But rather than quibble over the term mercenary or fetishize Blackwater's super-bad-assness, wouldn't it be more productive to look at this from the points Leon has brought up concerning their lackof vested interest in the mission and the incident a few weeks ago, points which have been mysteriously ignored thus far?

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

No.

It would make sense only if your intention is to undermine their efforts to support the mission in Iraq.

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

As far as I can tell from

As far as I can tell from what people have written on this board, they're far too busy being badass and delivering swift, ninja-like punishment to any insurgent who even thinks about setting foot outside his hovel, to feel undermined by anything I say. Yet, as an American citizen, I think their very existence warrants discussion if not criticism.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

No surprise Jason

For someone who has no concept of what it is like to fight an enemy that doesn’t wear a uniform and exploits that fact to kill you and your friends, it doesn’t surprise me that you would want to criticize them.

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

OK Jason

OK Jason - let’s entertain your ridiculousness from your post above.

“Their pay is commensurate with private sector standards (ie 300% more than enlisted men) and they are not enlisted members of the military. Seems to me like that's all you need to make the connection.”

I guess a Blackwater employee’s decision process goes something like this:

Hmmmm…. Let’s see. I can enter the private sector or go to Iraq and support the mission, either way making the same amount of money.

I choose Iraq. Even though I don’t give a damn about the mission.

Sound about right Jason?

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Did I say they don't care

Did I say they don't care about the mission? Nope. I said they don't have the same vested interest as enlisted soldiers who have been there for a long time and have established non-combat ties with the various communities. As Leon astutely pointed out, Blackwater's recent behavior exposed that exact problem.

My point about the private sector is not that they could enter the private sector at home for the same amount of money; it's that they already are private sector workers and, as in most things, members of the private sector are able to command higher wages.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Leon said they were in it

Leon said they were in it only for the money and you supported the idea. That means you don't beleive they care about the mission.

Nice try troll.

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

If I were a troll I

If I were a troll I wouldn't still be around, would I?  Neither I nor Leon fit any plausible definition of "troll".

And your first statement is childish and reductive.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Yet Again Jason

Yet again, you don’t know what you are talking about. In this case, you have no concept of the definition of a troll. If you did, you would know that both you and Leon fit that definition to a T.

In an effort to educate yet another troll, here you go.

“An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response”

Keep on trollin’!

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Well, Leon and I both stay

Well, Leon and I both stay and stick out the argument, and the whole point of this forum is to debate stuff, so if that's the definition, then almost everyone on here is a troll. I thought trolling involved posting inflammatory stuff and then bailing. How are your responses to us not also meeting the exact criteria you've just posted?

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Interesting Leon

I guess you know more than Mr. Webster.

http://www.m-w.com/c...

"Furthermore, these guys are working solely for money."

So the American citizens working for Blackwater could care less about protecting America. Interesting concept. Perhaps you can mention that to one of them if you ever met one and have the courage to do so. Let me know in advance if you intend to do it, so I can say goodby to you.

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Leon, my nephew loved those

Leon, my nephew loved those guys. Said they did a marvelous job, very professional. He is now leaving for his 3rd tour.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Bass, What did your nephew

Bass,

What did your nephew like more:

1)  The fact that they get paid 300% more than him for performing a similar task

2)  The fact that they have far superior equipment

3)  The fact that the US military works hard to establish trust with the people in the territories they work only to have Blackwater come in with no understanding of what the troops are trying to accomplish, kill some innocents, and ruin everything

Which part was his favorite?

Privatized military: the

oops, double post

Yeah, you're right Jason

She always approved big government throwing money at things!! Keep trying....
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

Of all posters, you should

Of all posters, you should recognize sarcasm.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

No emoticons...

And it didn't sound like sarcasm, it sounded like a(nother) dig at libertarians despite a clear lack of libertarian policy in realityville.
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

I hate emoticons. It was

I hate emoticons. It was sarcasm, through and through. I'd prefer to convey that with my tone. Sometimes I fail.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Leon, the part he likes

Leon, the part he likes about them is they provided security for the instillation in which he worked. Intelligence officer, freeing up the soldiers to patrol around the sector and actively hunt terrorists. Blackwater employees are no mercs. If they were, they could be hired away from blackwater and go to work for the terrorists. If it was just money they were after. Its not.

Folks like you called our Moung allies in vietnam mercs. They were not. They fought for their country, not ours, but we paid them. They were loyal and fearless and fought for their famlies and homes.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Wrong again muppet

3) The fact that the US military works hard to establish trust with
the people in the territories they work only to have Blackwater come in
with no understanding of what the troops are trying to accomplish, kill
some innocents, and ruin everything

 

Having worked on a RLT (reconstruction liason team), we go out in low profile suv's, meet with local Iraqi's and tribal leaders. We find out what is needed in the area, ie bridges, care clinics, water treatment plants, electricity upgrades. We then report back to the Army Corp of Engineers. I had daily contact with the locals in their homes and towns. Oh and by the way every morning in the IZ (international zone) there is a morning intel briefing attended by all security companies and military so everyone is on the "same page" so to speak. The security contractors do not operate in a vacuum like you suggest. Stop spreading lies.

"If I was an American

"If I was an American soldier"

So why aren't you?

Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"

Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."

Jimbo, Simple answer:  I

Jimbo,

Simple answer:  I didn't want to be a soldier. 

I wanted to go to college and I wanted to get a job in the private sector.

I didn't want to be a

I didn't want to be a soldier.


I wanted to go to college and I wanted to get a job in the private sector.
Leon

Leon, I hope you remember that, and mention it when liberals are whining about why the Bush twins are in Iraq.

MB, Furthermore, my

MB,

Furthermore, my father was a Commander in the Navy and we moved around a lot as a kid.

When I do have a family, I don't want to have to put them through that.