Views on blackwater?

[FascistLibertarian]

Hi all
I was just wondering what your thoughts were on blackwater in paticular and the outsourcing of war (in blackwaters case mostly in Iraq) in general?
I dont really know enough (a few mag articles and online news and wikipedia) to make an informed statement.
cheers
FL

 

[GAP]

Sounds like an agenda....

 

[geo]

Hi all
I was just wondering what your thoughts were on blackwater in paticular and the outsourcing of war (in blackwaters case mostly in Iraq) in general?
I dont really know enough (a few mag articles and online news and wikipedia) to make an informed statement.
cheers
FL

FL,
Tell US, what is your initial opinion.... get the discussion started with YOUR point of view. We will then jump in and fill in the blanks.... but please don't just dump an open question without explaining what the heck you're about.

Thanks

CHIMO!

 

[FascistLibertarian]

Okay
First
I have no agenda. As I stated before I have just read a few things about blackwater. I am intrested, there seems to be positive and negative things about it.
I am not trying to be a troll.

My view is that from a money standpoint blackwater costs a lot, but this is not there fault really, the US government awards contracts to companies in Iraq, if they did not accept someone else would.
That being said if you are a trained special forces it is easy to see why blackwater would be a better move as you can make something like x3 more.
And this is clearly going to reduce the ranks of highly trained people in American forces.
On the other side they are doing a job that not a lot of people wish to do and a job that needs to get done. From PR standpoint the dead contract security do not get listed on the death toll.
This issue has been around for a long time, the Peloponnesian War being a great example.
In conclusion my view is that it would be better if the US did not need to use security contractors but as they did not plan for the occupation or train their troops to do the job they asked of them they need private security.
So it seems to me to be bad but necassarcy.
FL

 

[KevinB]

FWIW -- Its usually refered to as BlackWater,  - not blackwater

Second point, Clinton's masive reduction of military power is the cause of the outsourcing.
BW is but a small cog in the machine - they are a large PMC -- but they are hardly the majority of contracts or contractors.

When you look at contracting -- it is cheaper to do in a lot of respects -- as the support system inplace for troops is not required.  Especially in the short term since contractors do not get pensions.

BTW - your use of the word occupation smaks of an agenda -- as the US Gov't is here at the behest of the elected Iraqi Gov't in the same manner that ISAF is in Afghanistan.


Additional info -- the vast majority of BW's contracts are WPPS related (Worldwide Personal Protective Services) Department of State contracts -- which guard US Embassy's and PSD for the high value Embassy staff. 
  Yoou really cant have an effective recontruction effort with out security companies --why you ask?  Well the Army is not really in the reconstruction business -- it (CF and US Mil) have PRT's but the majority of PRT stuff is done by NGO's (in a functioning reconstruction) -- when NGO's dont have security -- they cannot help the reconstruction...
    IMHO this is one huge reason why the US efforts in Iraq are more fruitful than the efforts in Kandahar.