Jump to content

military contractors


Sisyphus

Recommended Posts

You would give them an honorable death and elevate them to the status of heroic defenders of our nationalistic beliefs, then?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seppuku

Seppuku as capital punishment

 

While the voluntary seppuku described above is the best known form, in practice the most common form of seppuku was obligatory seppuku, used as a form of capital punishment for disgraced samurai, especially for those who committed a serious offense such as unprovoked murder, robbery, corruption, or treason. The samurai were generally told of their offense in full and given a set time to commit seppuku, usually before sunset on a given day. If the sentenced was uncooperative, it was not unheard of for them to be restrained, or for the actual execution to be carried out by decapitation while retaining only the trappings of seppuku; even the short sword laid out in front of the victim could be replaced with a fan. Unlike voluntary seppuku, seppuku carried out as capital punishment did not necessarily absolve the victim's family of the crime. Depending on the severity of the crime, half or all of the deceased's property could be confiscated, and the family stripped of rank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackwater (and any similar org) is a blite on everything the United States of America (should) stands for. I can't believe that they have been allowed to go on unrestrained for as long as they have. I still can't believe it......a cowboy missionary force fully scantioned and endorsed by the president and his cronies......Unbelievable. It is a simple get around strategy; a short circuit of the system to get around prudent checks and balances in the name of expediency, power and corruption. As an American, I am ashamed of this.

Please, no stories about how missionary forces have been used in the past (E.g., Bay of Pigs, etc)......that was different and if it wasn't, it still wouldn't make it right....it was wrong then, it is wrong now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How was it different?

 

For the most (whole?) part, the non-military combatants at Bay of Pigs were US-backed Cubans.

The military is held to standards, but paid missionary forces are a big crack where standards and accountability can be conveniently neglected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the most (whole?) part, the non-military combatants at Bay of Pigs were US-backed Cubans.

 

Okay, I appreciate you attempting to explain your point a little more thoroughly, but I'm still not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying that Bay of Pigs is more acceptable because the participants had a vested stake in what happened there, as Cubans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I appreciate you attempting to explain your point a little more thoroughly, but I'm still not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying that Bay of Pigs is more acceptable because the participants had a vested stake in what happened there, as Cubans?

 

 

Exactly. Do you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting distinction. After pondering it a bit, I would agree that the comparison is not valid and should not be made. The reasons behind the two events seem very different.

 

I don't know that I agree with your blanket castigation of Blackwater and/or the purpose behind contractors. It's not new and it can be handled correctly. I think it's more a matter of whether it was/is being handled correctly. At the moment it doesn't appear to be, but new developments this week may address the issues.

 

I am not particularly concerned about civilian casualties to Blackwater contractors during firefights. All civilian deaths are a tragedy, but I've no particular reason to think that the contractors in question did anything wrong.

 

They should be accountable for any mistakes they make, though, just like anybody else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure that Blackwater and some other contractors (e.g., those that serve meals or clean latrines) are in the same catagory, but they should all be held accountable.

If there is potential for abuse, it will likely be abused. Blackwater seems to be a loophole, much like Guantanamo is a loophole, that is being abused. Totally unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone can believe that men who have been trained to kill (some enemy), then deployed in civilian areas, can hope to "avoid" shooting civilians. Especially if they can't or don't discrimate between innocents and insurgents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone can believe that men who have been trained to kill (some enemy), then deployed in civilian areas, can hope to "avoid" shooting civilians.

 

Doesn't that pretty much describe every conventional military?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone can believe that men who have been trained to kill (some enemy), then deployed in civilian areas, can hope to "avoid" shooting civilians. Especially if they can't or don't discrimate between innocents and insurgents.

 

I don't. In fact I expect numerous civilians will die any time that situation comes up, and while I think it sad, I don't feel in the least bit responsible for it, nor do I regret it. On the contrary, I rejoice in the birth of a new democracy, and honor those who died to create it.

 

Freedom isn't free.

 

That having been said, if they can't discriminate between valid targets and innocent people on the streets, then I'm all for beefing up their equipment, improving their training, and whatever else we can do SHORT of hindering our efforts in the arena. Or if we find that they have a problem with wanton shooting, then we need to fix that problem with appropriate enforcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if they can't discriminate between valid targets and innocent people on the streets, then I'm all for beefing up their equipment, improving their training

 

My earlier comment was also a hint about how soldiers are not in general trained to be policemen. They are not assumed to have any skills dealing with civilians (I believe the US at least, specifically does not do this), just skills with other soldiers, and these skills involve efficient killing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.