Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sat Sep 01, 2007 2:23 am

Quoting Zak (Reply 47):
it is rather simple: if you go to war, and implicitly kill people, with prime motivation being money, then i consider you about the lowest, most despicable member of mankind. killing for money IS about the lowest thing that exists.

Well there you go... this is my biggest problem with your argument. You're lumping a lot of people - a lot of good and decent people, whom you've never met - into this category of "lowest and most despicable persons".... because you think they "kill for money."

Your angry at the wrong people. Blackwater personnel are not soldiers, they are body guards. You ought to be angry at the Islamic extremists who are willing to kill innocent people, civilians, and non-combatants. The people Blackwater is protecting.

You ought to be reserving the title of "most despicable person" to the muslims who are perfectly willing to take innocent life. Because I don't consider protecting people with deadly force as "murder"... however, I do consider kidnapping noncombatants, torturing them, and cutting their heads off, as murder.

DL was right:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 48):
You're fairly twisted in this.



Quoting Zak (Reply 47):
dont revert to semantics. they have helicopters with people who are proficient at using weapons inside, it does not matter if there is an operator with a SAW in his hands in the door or a fixed mount m240, technically, one helicopter is unarmed whilst the second one is armed. practically, both can kill people.

Negative... semantics has nothing to do with it. They don't have helicopters with fixed stores. You were wrong.

Quoting Zak (Reply 47):
as i said before, they might be nice guys, but in the end, they kill for money, that is uncalled for.

Well... as an Army soldier... so do I. Am I a "most despicable person?"

I went to Iraq, I got paid a lot of money, which was tax free including my addition pays. Granted, my pay wasn't as high as a pilot who worked for Blackwater, but it wasn't small beans.

Quoting Zak (Reply 47):
you can not build a nation on guns for hire.

Well there you go... they're not building a nation. That's not their mission objective in Iraq. Their purpose is to provide highly trained, highly motivated security, for people who are not fully protected by US forces.

Like I told you - they're not out there working towards securing peace, and stability, in Iraq. That's our job. What their doing is a legitimate need on this battlefield.

Quoting Zak (Reply 47):
insurgency has always been a component of territory occupying warfare. it just happens to be, for the first time on this scale and in modern times, that the insurgency managed to hold out longer than the traditional army. mostly due to the unprecedented unequality in parties involved. if you look at the way the ww2 progressed, similar status was attained within BeNeLux, PL, CZ and other countries. i love how the u..s always claims to have reinvented the wheel.

Wrong.

I agree that the concept of an "insurgency" is not new... but for the first time in our military history, we're fighting an insurgency that is not solely focused on military targets, but noncombatants and civilians. This is unlike past wars, and my assessment was dead-on: this is a unique war.

You're awfully angry at Blackwater, but where is your outrage and contempt for the men who force the hand of Blackwater security guards?

If an employee of Blackwater kills an Iraqi without provocation, then just like any US soldier, he deserves to be punished under the law. But you have provided no proof that, as a whole, Blackwater is out there wildly killing people for no reason.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
md90fan
Posts: 2798
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:15 am

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting Zak (Reply 47):

exactly. why do you train on a certain aircraft? for fun?

The link you posted called them a "bomber". Nobody is really sure what they are getting 1 for, it could be to fly their corporate jets.
http://www.devanwells.blogspot.com/
 
AirportSeven
Posts: 309
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:08 am

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:06 am

 
User avatar
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3691
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:33 am

Quoting AirportSeven (Reply 52):

 faint 
Picked a hell of a week to quit sniffing glue.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sat Sep 01, 2007 6:29 am

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 49):
Bullshit. It took hundreds (some reports suggest almost 1,000) of civilians being slaughtered by Uzbek security forces at Andijon in May 2005 for Rice and the rest of the Bush Administration to express "concerns" about human rights in Uzbekistan when it was already well known that Islam Karimov's security forces routinely round up political dissidents and engages in widespread torture.

I'd have to say that the idea of not antagonizing the lesser of the potential evils in power there was foremost on their minds. We lost access to their base a while back and it hasn't really slowed us up too badly. The problem we now face by confronting their human rights record in the more forceful way is that they disengaged with us to a large degree and turned to the PRC who doesn't give a rats ass about their human rights record.

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 49):
Heck, they practically sided with the guy at first so as not to jeopardize their access to Khanabad Air Base. The State Department gave Karimov nearly as much financial aid (much of it military) in 2001 and 2002 as Clinton did in his entire eight year term.

The State Dept under President Clinton started the Central Asian initiative as a means of engaging them in economic and military cooperation so as to keep them away from the influences of their Eastern natives. Now we that we've done this, and you have to acknowledge that we've confronted them and in doing so we knew we would lose influence and access, we've given the Chinese and Russians a means to attempt to consolidate influence and power over the oil rich states who are faced with either near-totalitarianism or Islamic insurrection for the near term. The slow engagement and turning was a much better way to get them to stop being dictators, and I would have thought that the people who didn't want more war would have appreciated that.

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 49):
That's just one recent example. Don't try and tell me these people care more about human rights than their political agendas, it's not very difficult to see that's not the case.

I'm going to state that the State Department's mission is to carry out the political and economic agenda of the United States through peaceful diplomacy, and that the agenda of the United States is freedom....economic and political....spreading everywhere. World peace is a pipedream because someone will always want power, but we can prevent the big wars from happening as long as their is free trade of resources and people have a say over their own lives. When they don't there's always someone trying to take over so they can be the big banana and they're the ones more likely to try to forcefully take other people's resources away fro mthem.....resulting in the big wars.

Mark my word....looking after people's human rights on a specifically small scale is going to cause us to lose the big scale influence battles and that'll result in conflict over the water in the middle east (see Turkey and the damming of the Tigris/Euphrates pissing off Syria and everyone else downstream), oil in the Spratly's and Paracels between half the nations of Asia, food in every nation in Africa, and resources of all kinds everywhere as the world becomes more crowded and less sustainable.

Big picture thinking often looks less than friendly, and often seems cold-hearted....but it's got to happen.

[Edited 2007-08-31 23:30:06]
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
zak
Topic Author
Posts: 1926
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 12:17 pm

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sat Sep 01, 2007 2:53 pm

i am convinced that apart from copy+pasting previous points, any further elaboration of the differences between the concepts of hired guns and classical military, basic human conduct based on kants categorical imperative or any other aforementioned item is a waste of time, hence i'll stay out of this  wave 
10=2
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad?

Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:56 am

Quoting Zak (Reply 55):
basic human conduct based on kants categorical imperative or any other aforementioned item is a waste of time, hence i'll stay out of this

Nobody mentioned kant. Its best to leave the semantics of most philosophers out of any pragmatic polemic.

Besides, its been 8 hours without a post when you just posted.  Wink
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Fco1967, Google [Bot], jrfspa320, ltbewr, Tiredofhumanity and 14 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos