The real terrorist was me - A US Soldier

reply to post by Ghandi


This video is almost a perfect replay of Senator John Kerry's anti Vietnam speech not long after he was out of the active military. Similar content, phraseology, pointed intent and disgust about being American. Senator Kerry's active overseas military service in combat areas was around 120 days, before he found loop-holes to get transferred out and away from the fighting. This references the thrice wounded; regardless of severity, could receive a redeployment out of combat areas.

The person giving the condemnation of our American Civilian and Military leadership doesn't reveal his length of deployment, specific duties, and areas of combat.

As a volunteer in the military, I question this persons intellectual prowess concerning his "understanding" of why and what the Military does. It's simply not realistic that his formal understanding is that combat soldiers are an all volunteer "Peace Corp" group carrying weapons.

His freedom to whine and whimper is guaranteed by the Civilian and Military leadership in America. His professed bravery of cowardice, was fought for for the last 200 years. His point that War is terrible is noted and understood. Everyone seems to understand the War always follows failures in foreign policy and negotiations. America has never, ever in any circumstance, just chose to go to war without prior efforts to negotiate, compromise, appeal, conduct behind the scenes discussions. War is expensive! We know that!

I would suppose that this gentleman, following his logic, is also against civilian police agencies; since they have powers to pursue, capture, use lethal force if necessary, and apprehend suspected criminals before a trial of his peers is conducted. How terrible this must seem to these people who agree with this man.

The viewpoint of his rant is to discredit all of America's top leaders in all sides of the Civilian, Military, and Industrial leadership.

My response to this person: Try pedaling this bovine-biomass in Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan. See how fast your yellow behind is hung up on a post, or decapitated in a video.
Or, he could run for an elective office of his choice, thereby changing the course of our policies. However that course would require great bravery!

We will have these types in every conflict, even if we are attacked, let's say just for an illistration. that people attack a major metropolitian area by using aircraft to slam into big buildings. I guess he would view this as our fault and should apologize to the world that we were just nasty Americas deserving of such punishments.

Our constitution gives him the freedom to be a committed coward!

TrustmeImasalesman

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by nenothtu

 

The lithium is backup, China has the biggest supply and if you note lately they are talking about a freeze on exports of rare eart minerals..

The Afghan war has been going on nearly 10 years now. Are you saying that the Chinese have been threatening this export freeze for 10 years, and have failed to either make good on it or back down from it? If not, then what was the stimulus 10 years ago to go in after it, with no threats hanging over us?

The drugs are mainly going into Russia..Good way to ruin the economy..

They haven't done much to hurt the US economy - bankers and wheeler-dealers saw to that. Since the cold war ended 20 years ago, why would we want to tinker with the Russian economy now, anyhow?

reply to post by nenothtu


Remember i asked you if had worked for blackwater ?
Theres a large number of mercs fighting alongside or on the same side as regular soldiers right ?
I heard that merc involvement will increase as time passes .
Would you summarize the difference between merc and regs for me , ie are mercs bound by or exempt from certain regulations as compared to regular soldiers
Is the increase in mercs a good or bad thing in your opinion ?

Thanks .

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Remember i asked you if had worked for blackwater ?
Theres a large number of mercs fighting alongside or on the same side as regular soldiers right ?

I'd say "on the same side as" rather than "alongside". They fulfill different roles generally than regulars in these conflicts - most usually these days they are on PSDs (Personal Security Details) for various dignitaries, and running convoy security for tanker convoys and the like. They're "on the same side", but do jobs apart from the regular military, keeping the regulars free to do more military things. Some are involved in training local Security forces, like the local police in Afghanistan, which if I recall is being done by DynCorp. They do some of the Embassy Security in some countries, and I know of a case in the Balkans where they pulled prison guard duty, another where they were guarding a military facility in Yemen while it was under construction, etc.There ARE some of the "Lear jet SWAT team" types out there, but they are by far in the minority.

I heard that merc involvement will increase as time passes .

I've heard the same thing. Several years ago I read a white paper that asserted that all militaries would eventually go to PMCs. I don't believe that, but it could happen I suppose, especially in the world climate of today. Once upon a time, long ago, nearly all the world's militaries were composed of mercenaries. A king could buy their loyalty where the local peasants would be as likely as not to cut his throat in his sleep.

The flip side of that is that if YOU can buy a man's loyalty, there's a good chance your opponent can up the price and buy it out from under you.

Would you summarize the difference between merc and regs for me , ie are mercs bound by or exempt from certain regulations as compared to regular soldiers

That's really a hard definition to pin down. There are nearly as many views of what constitutes a "mercenary" as there are people to hold a view. Some folks use only the financial criteria - i.e. a "mercenary" is solely motivated by profit. Others distinguish mercenaries as being foreign nationals, not a member or citizen of any nation party to the conflict at hand, regardless of financial motivation or military affiliation. Still others define it as any "soldierly" type not an officially inducted member of an national armed force.

Mercenaries are bound by the terms of their contract, which in turn is regulated by certain laws which may or may not coincide with the laws and regulations under which regular soldiers must operate. An example would be the Rules of Engagement. They may not be bound to a particular set of RoE that were put into force by a military general somewhere if they are, for example, under contract to the State Department and not the military. They would then be bound to the RoE handed down from the State Department to them rather than the RoE handed down to the regulars by the general in question.

Some laws are nearly universal, such as the Geneva Conventions. They apply to all of the signatory nations, which are most of the nations on Earth. Even so, the Conventions have different sections governing Regular Armed Forces, Mercenaries, Non Combatants, and Irregular Forces, for example. The mercenaries have to know the Geneva Conventions, and where they fall in the definitions therein under their current contract. Taking the war in Rhodesia in the late 70's as an example, scads of US Vietnam vets were flocking to Rhodesia to join the RLI. Most here would classify them as "mercenaries", but they didn't fall under that definition under the Geneva Conventions because they were official members of the RLI, an official national military in that war. Lots of South Africans fought there, too, which may be one of the reasons that South Africa, after the ANC terrorists under Mandela took over, instituted strict internal definitions of what constituted a "mercenary" for her own citizens, and strict punishment for such activity. I believe a conviction there now carries a 10 year prison sentence.

So then, their operating rules are nearly as variable as the definitions of what constitutes a "mercenary".

Is the increase in mercs a good or bad thing in your opinion ?

Thanks .

Not by itself, just for the sake of increase. There are a LOT of different outfits out there, some professional and pretty good, others dismal, staffed almost entirely by "cowboys". For this increase to be a "good" thing, there has to be a concurrent increase in standards, and development of a professional Code of Conduct that applies across the board, to all the outfits, and a meaningful means of enforcing that code. In other words, the "profession of arms" has to be seen by them as a profession, something one can be proud of with standards and codes that they are proud to uphold.

A step in that direction would be to change negative views of mercenaries, but I doubt that will ever happen in any great degree. They have been known as "the whores of war" for centuries, and that ingrained attitude isn't likely to change any time soon.

Development of, and adherence to, the standards I mentioned above would go a long way in changing the public perception of them, but I don't see that happening any time soon, either. There are just too many fly by night outfits willing to break the rules for a buck, and those types can always find some corporate jackass desperate enough to employ them. Until the profession itself enforces standards, no one else is going to.

So then, it becomes a "chicken or the egg" proposition. Personally, I'd like to see a few of the "good" outfits rain hell down on the "cowboys" who are really the ones giving EVERYONE a bad name.

Until that happens, I can't see going back to the all mercenary armed forces of days gone by as a good thing. They are better employed in specific tasks, as they are now, augmenting a National Service Army rather than replacing it. That keeps the influences of the "cowboys" to a minimum.

BTW, "mercenaries" generally take exception to being referred to as such these days, precisely because of the negative connotations inherent in the public perception, and now prefer to be called "contractors". Eventually THAT term will have the same connotation, and they'll have to move on to another if they don't fix the cowboy types first.

reply to post by nenothtu

Thankyou for your information , I appreciate it .

So then, it becomes a "chicken or the egg" proposition. Personally, I'd like to see a few of the "good" outfits rain hell down on the "cowboys" who are really the ones giving EVERYONE a bad name.

I agree with you there , ive seen you posts about your personal experience and I can see that your a man of morals .

I read info too about pmcs becoming more and more prominent . IMO its a negative aspect , i have read many articles about blackwater and I honestly believe that they dont have the same moral guidelines as you reg soldiers do . or at least the contracting companies don't

May I ask if contractors earn a much higher salary then reg soldiers ?


This piece of entertainment stoked my interest in pmc's ......
Army of Two
The game is centered upon two mercenaries fighting through war, political turmoil, and a conspiracy from 1993 to 2009
en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Doomzilla

I read info too about pmcs becoming more and more prominent . IMO its a negative aspect , i have read many articles about blackwater and I honestly believe that they dont have the same moral guidelines as you reg soldiers do . or at least the contracting companies don't

I've honestly got no use for Blackwater/Xe. They seem to be among those who have given the profession a bad name - or rather perpetuated that bad name. I looked into them some time ago, found they SEEMED to have fairly high employment criteria which appear not to have translated into the real world. In way too many cases the bottom line turns out to be... the Bottom Line. Companies have a business to run, and far too often are willing to fudge to get results. Sometimes, in that rush, they will accept substandard employees, especially on a tight time line, then you get what we have seen in some cases, notably Blackwater/Xe, Armor Group, and in at least one case DynCorp in the Balkans.

It's not always ALL the contractors, or the company. Sometimes bad folk will slip into a good company inspite of safeguards, and have to be weeded out. Sometimes, a company will "relax" it's standards to fill a contract - in that case, the company IS at fault.

Take Armor Group as an example. They're affiliated with one of the companies I used to work for, Wackenhut. Armor Group has has several "incidents" brought about by substandard employees, in one case having one of their own shoot another of their own in a drunken argument. At least ONE of those guys should never have been there to begin with (I believe he was a PTSD victim), and possibly BOTH of them. Bad hiring practices are to blame, a rush to fill a contract. In another incident, there was a "party" involving liquor in Afghanistan, a big no-no to begin with, that went horribly off the rails. It was either 8 or 9 contractors that got hauled out of the country post-haste, and who were immediately cashiered after their departure. In that case, Armor Group at least tried to clean up their own mess, and got rid of the offenders. They at least attempted to police their own, but too late. Meanwhile, they still have a lot of decent employees who have to bear the sins of the indecent ones.

When I was with Wackenhut, there were a lot of stand up guys there who knew their stuff, and were pretty professional. There were also some of the "cowboy" types interspersed among them. Real loons, guys who wanted nothing more than to be able to write cursive with Uzis and such like. They were there for the wrong reasons, and the rest of us had a tendency to weed them out ourselves, without waiting on management to handle it AFTER a complaint.

May I ask if contractors earn a much higher salary then reg soldiers ?

Generally, yes. I never went to Iraq, but as an example, I checked on a couple of the Iraq contracts early on. One was providing security to fuel convoys out of Kuwait, and it paid 80k in 2003 just for the trigger twitchers. High pucker factor, you'd have one hummer at point, and one at drag, crew served weapons on each, and maybe 20 or 30 40,000 gallon gasoline bombs in between, just waiting on an RPG to find them.

A year later, State Department had a contract that paid 160k for trigger twitchers, 240k for supervisory staff, but I can't get into any greater detail on what that one was doing. I didn't take either one.

So yeah, on the right contracts, a bundle stands to be made. Generally, government contracts (US government - some others don't pay quite so well) will pay higher, with the unfortunate side effect that if you get locked into that sort of work, and are good at it, they'll try to keep you there forever.

This piece of entertainment stoked my interest in pmc's ......
Army of Two
The game is centered upon two mercenaries fighting through war, political turmoil, and a conspiracy from 1993 to 2009
en.wikipedia.org...

Thanks, I'll check into that. I'm not a big gamer, but you'd be amazed at how many contractors are - it helps alleviate the boredom. One commonality between regulars and contractors is that both jobs are long stretches of pure unadulterated boredom punctuated by episodes of sheer terror.

reply to post by nenothtu


Yeah so just like any profession you have some @sses , I'd never heard of wackenhut or amour group but from researching blackwater , I know there are a lot of pmcs .

"After the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq the US State Department is reportedly planning to more than double the number of its private security guards, up to as many as 7,000. Defending five fortified compounds across the country,"

So theres at least 3500 contractors in Iraq alone at the moment .
Going back to blackwater , I think you were right to not join them lol , theyre shrouded in controversy . AND their the biggest of the 3 major us pmcs right ?

reply to post by Doomzilla


I would guesstimate that the total in Iraq are - or were - around 20k taking all the companies, nationalities, and job descriptions into account. It's not just US PMCs working there, and not just Security. It's my understanding that the new US Embassy alone opened with a Security staff of around 400 when it opened.

The first I heard of Blackwater was not long after startup, and then it was operating a training facility in Moynock, NC to train police and military. Should've stopped there, but I reckon Prince wanted to cash in on some of the government contracts by sending out troopers, and it seems to me that lax hiring practices got the better of him in his quest for money. Their website said that in order to be considered you had to be this or that, but they ALL say things like that. The proof is in the pudding - what they put out into the field. he put a few too many cowboys out, and the fallout from that was horrendous. Had to change the company name to Xe to try to get away from the bad press, but it followed on like a plague. I don't know if they've cleaned up their hiring or employee oversight at this point or not.

Wackenhut as a whole was bought out by Danish G4S, and last I heard it has two sections: TWC for domestic US work, and WSI for US government contracts. Then there is the offshoot Armor Group. I had heard through the grapevine that WSI was sabotaging some of it's own government contracts. Why they would do that I don't know, unless G4S has some other group they want to promote, and are trying to kill off WSI to do that. Armor Group has had some problems and negative press, but it says something that they've at least tried to clean up their own house in those matter. Whether or not it says ENOUGH I can't say.

You're right, there are literally thousands of PMCs worldwide, some smaller and some larger. In the aftermath of every war, there is always a certain class of former soldier who can't quite make it home, and some of those opt to sign on with various outfits, so that they have somewhere they "belong". Because of that, I think we can expect to see an increase in PMCs, but without a customer base, what are they gonna do? The market will only bear so much, and in an effort to increase the market, I expect we may see a push to privatize more and more aspects of "military" and "government" endeavors, but I doubt that pure mercenary national armies will take hold to any great degree yet.

reply to post by nenothtu


Thanks for the insight once more friend .
Check this -

www.timesonline.co.uk...
An article about Erik Prince being a cia operative , Note The Times is one of the better uk newspapers .

Have you seen Jeremy Scahill' s research on blackwater?
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...



Id like to know your opinions on this .
I take my hat off to you bro , you know a lot about this issue .
Imo the future of warfare looks bleak . Do you think the increased usage of techology such as unmanned drones will lead to a lower involvement of reg soldiers in conflicts ?
Regards .

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Thanks for the insight once more friend .
Check this -

www.timesonline.co.uk...
An article about Erik Prince being a cia operative , Note The Times is one of the better uk newspapers .

Interesting article.

An "Operative" and an "asset" are generally two different things. I've no doubt he worked with the CIA just as stated - as a private contractor putting together "unattributable" teams to do mayhem to AQ, but I'd imagine he pushed the boundaries of that charter or went beyond. One thing is certain - he never found bin Laden. I reckon "unattributable" must be the new catchphrase for "sterile" or "plausibly deniable". Looks like that went off the rails with his push for fame - can't be "unattributable" if everyone and their brother knows you're a big bad killin' machine with tight ties to a government. Then they know WHICH government you're roped in with, and there goes your "unattributability".

My guess is that's why he was "partially outed" - specifically BECAUSE the competing firms have "nameless, faceless management teams". He got too famous, never a good idea for a spook who wants to continue a cozy working relationship. So, in a way he WAS thrown under the bus over political expediency, but I personally think of it more as ineptitude in the form of vanity. Same thing, really, but a different perspective on it.

Have you seen Jeremy Scahill' s research on blackwater?
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...


Id like to know your opinions on this .

I couldn't find any factual inaccuracies in things I know or can surmise and extrapolate to through the logical extension of what I know, and so must presume that the things I don't know which were presented are factually accurate as well in the videos. Some of it was irrelevant, but likely accurate, like the allegations of "wife swapping". I don't much care what they do on their own time, so that makes that particular allegation irrelevant to me.

The first video seemed to me to be trying to tie in all PMCs with Blackwater, trying to create an impression of the "universal mercenary" if you will using Blackwater as his public face. While technically accurate as applied to Blackwater, it seemed to me to be applying spin attempts to create that impression as a blanket view. That's not necessarily a BAD thing, it just pushes factual data dangerously close to the realm of "opinion", of which everyone is entitled to his own.

PMCs are made up of individuals, and they will vary one from another nearly as much as the general population, considering the common thread of "armed response" tightens that variation up a bit - just not as much as some would have one believe. Another layer on top of that is that each different company exhibits it's own separate identity, and will handle things differently, just as individual people do.

Blackwater became the "rock stars" of the industry through self - promotion and trying to create a public image. That's bad business, really, when one whose livelihood exists in the shadows tries to step out of them, he steps away from his bread and butter and into another realm entirely. Blackwater in general, and Prince in particular, let that "stardom" go to their heads and ran with it - then have the nerve to complain that they were thrown under the bus for that very fame that THEY sought to begin with.

Some other folks saw that "fame" (or infamy, depending on viewpoint), and a certain class of those wanted some of that for themselves. They, in combination with Blackwater and detractors alike, made that fame happen, but it unfortunately has spread to be blanket opinion on all through that effort, and there are some that never wanted it to begin with.

Some folks just want to jump on a bandwagon, and are glory hounds. That sort never realizes how ridiculous that glory can make them look, and then wonder at the treatment they get. Another example would be "Bounty Hunters". I've worked with some of them in the real world, and the good ones don't call attention to themselves. They could be ANYONE on the street. Their success actually hinges to a great extent on that anonymity. A couple of years ago, I had to deal with some wannabe bounty hunters. They came to a place I was securing, all dressed up in their leather and studs like Dog the Bounty Hunter, attempting to capitalize on that and grab their own share of fame and fortune. They talked all loud and proud about how they WERE GOING TO do this and that, ignoring laws and doing as they pleased, and I think it may have hurt their feelings a bit when I sent them packing without their quarry, and told them in no uncertain terms just how it was going to happen if they ever came back.

Same idea, different industry. Posers will be posers, and they'll get what they get when they run across someone who isn't impressed by impressions. Fame isn't all it's cracked up to be, and Blackwater may have realized that too late. It's not necessarily the contractors' faults - some of the Blackwater guys may be standup guys for all I know - but the fame the company sought has also attracted a class of posers, which hasn't helped them any at all. Their quest for glory and recognition has worked against them. Try as they might to get back on track, they never will. You can't put toothpaste back into the tube, and too many people are watching their every move.

I take my hat off to you bro , you know a lot about this issue .

I wonder if I can get a government contract just off of what I know? The old tendons and reflexes ain't what they used to be for action...

Imo the future of warfare looks bleak . Do you think the increased usage of techology such as unmanned drones will lead to a lower involvement of reg soldiers in conflicts ?
Regards .

I tend towards a jaundiced view of technology, mostly because so many extol it's virtues. Technology breaks, requires upkeep and maintenance, and so will STILL require people to operate it. It can be defeated, and I already know of places and people right here in America who are "drone proofed" regardless of the operators or operational parameters. Those drones haven't helped 'em much in the hunt for bin Laden, have they?

The problem with technological solutions to insoluble problems is that people tend to come to an OVER reliance on it. At that point, it becomes a weakness, a liability rather than an asset. It's a fine thing, in it's place and within it's limitations, but that over reliance will kill ya.

I think they will TRY to limit human involvement in favor of machines, but there are just some things a machine can't do. I was watching a documentary not to long ago about the development of a mounted robot machine gun, a little 3 or 4 foot long robot machinegun mounted on tracks with an attached camera for target acquisition and aiming. It took me less than 2 minutes to figure out how to make that thing cease to exist, and at the very best (from the operator's point of view) leave it crippled to motion and blind to vision. There are just some things people can do that machines can't.

Besides, taking this to it's logical conclusion, if everyone has these things (and eventually everyone would) who are they going to hunt with them? The opposition's machines? Will they have their machine call my machine so we can do lunch, and sign a truce so that our respective machines stop disassembling each other?

Where does the pain of war that will make it stop enter the equation when it's only a machine, and you can just whip up replacements in a factory?

No, I think there will always be boots (and perhaps bots) on the ground. Even a tank, as big bad and awesome as it is, has dismounted infantry along for the ride to provide flank security.

The "human factor" will never be entirely eliminated, in my opinion, and as long as people are involved, some of them will figure out and distribute workarounds for the technological factor.

reply to post by nenothtu


Will we ever find Bin Laden ? Assuming hes still alive. Its needle in a haystack job , especially if he isn't even there !
They said this war may last for decades right at the start , Why ?
There are many reasons it could be but I am of the opinion that this is a war started over false pretences. We're to Grab the resources , hand over power eventually but not totally .
Going back to Bin Laden unless he dyes his beard to cover his grey , he seems to get younger looking ?
I'm assuming you've heard the Tim Osman rumours too right ?

reply to post by Doomzilla


I'm doubtful that we'll ever find bin Laden. Either they don't really want to find him, or he's got this thing down pat to a fine art. OR he may already be dead, and the Earth is a pretty big place to find one grave in.

I knew this war may last for decades at the start of it. No special insider knowledge required. I know the sort of people we're hunting, and I know the way the higher-up try to run these hunts. It didn't take a rocket scientist or super-spook to figure it out given those parameters. I've said from the minute they decided to send in troops in mass into Afghanistan that they were going about it wrong, and could only prolong the agony that way.

Frakkin' glory hound generals.

I've actually been on both sides of this particular fence - as the fox and as the hound. I can tell you that the foxes have the advantage when too many hounds are thrown into the mix. All the fox has to do is evade and escape, but the hounds actually assist that when there are too many of them. They bray and bay, announce their positions and intentions, whether they mean to or not, and just generally trip all over one another. There are other factors involved as well, and this is an over-simplification, but most of those other factors work to the advantage of the fox as well, when there are too many hounds in the mix.

Had they prosecuted this like they meant it from the outset, it would be all but wrapped up by now. They'll never get them ALL, but they could have crippled them beyond repair by now if they had known what they were doing. I've detailed the way they should have gone about it before, but these days I think it's prudent not to, because a) they aren't going to listen, and b) best not to give them any ideas, in case I'm the fox again. Some times, that appears to be increasingly likely.

Anyhow, while they were tripping all over one another to glad-hand, pat each other on the backs, and pass out the medals amongst the Old Boys Club, OBL was scurrying to what appears to be a dandy hidey-hole. Distraction and lack of coordination are BAD things, and ever-prevalent when too many cooks are in the kitchen. The foxes are not hampered by that disability - having too many cooks. 'Nuff said.

I've heard all the rumors about Tim Osman, but don't buy them - unless he has his own personal teleport device and can be in two places at once. The entire story appears to be based on a clumsily fabricated CIA "memo" that wouldn't fool anyone who was keeping track of things at the time it purports to come from. OBL is not Tim Osman, nor was that ever used as a cover name for him. He never came to the US to meet with CIA officials, and in fact has always harbored a mistrust and hatred of all things American, and especially the CIA. He wouldn't even meet with the CIA in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and refused their attempts to assist him. I can't see him making a trip all the way to the US to do so, when he could just as easily refuse them there.

Now, SOME of the mujahideen DID come to the US for meetings and whatnot, but OBL was never among them.

reply to post by nenothtu


Out of interest you were the hound most of the time? And fox when ambushed or flanked ?
Imo and it's only that , OBL is either dead or hiding somewhere totally different. I think they knew it would take decades because theyve worked out how long it will take to fully exploit the resources, infiltrate destroy rebuild . Remember its US companies that will profit from the weapons sold that are used to destroy and it's US companies that will profit from the rebuilding .
As for Tim Osman , who knows , probably never will .
At the end of the day depending on whether or not you believe 911 was an inside job ( I do .) there are many grey areas regarding this war .
But the elite will never be straight with us because its in their benefit to have perpetual war .

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Out of interest you were the hound most of the time? And fox when ambushed or flanked ?

More or less. That's one way of looking at it.

Imo and it's only that , OBL is either dead or hiding somewhere totally different.

You're more than likely right. There was a fairly long period of confusion during which he could have picked a spot anywhere on Earth and gone to ground, BEFORE all these "measures" we now have were put into place.

Border smuggling is an ancient and highly developed art.

I think they knew it would take decades because theyve worked out how long it will take to fully exploit the resources, infiltrate destroy rebuild . Remember its US companies that will profit from the weapons sold that are used to destroy and it's US companies that will profit from the rebuilding .

Could be. The only real problem I have with that assessment is that it's far more difficult to strip and exploit resources in the middle of a war. Too much uncertainty, not enough stability. What's "yours" today may be "the other guys" tomorrow. That's why you hear so much talk about "creating stable governments".

Only SOME of the companies profit off of war. Others want nothing more than stability so they can get on with the high-speed rape and ruin. It may be fun to watch the sparks fly when those differing factions collide. I wonder if BOTH sides will hire contractors?

But the elite will never be straight with us because its in their benefit to have perpetual war .

For SOME of them it is. Always remember, too much generalization leads to faulty conclusions, doesn't take conflicting variables into account. I think you ought to have a good supply of popcorn handy, because it's coming.

Bin Laden has been dead.

Interesting to notice that just when most people in this thread agrees with the soldier in the video, and recognices that the us army in irak is an invading force, and therefore, could fairly considered terrorists by the locals, just then, a long, long texted dialogue between two posters, with a lot of mutual responses and long phrasing (just the needed for everybody to loose interest) is happening.

I´m just saying....

One thing I've always hated about our military - everyone's quick to moan how "nobody supports us" but are even quicker to desribe anyone who actually says "I joined to defend my country" either "gay" or "sad".

Merceneries have a bad reputation for reasons already stated however soldiers are not perfect either (Unfortunetely). I beleive you could easily get muddled up if you mixed a bunch of regs and merceneries together and have a hard time defining who's who.

The way I see it, if I become a Merc, or a "PMC" (I don't like the term "contractor" because it reminds me of dodgy builders) I will be a British soldier wearing a different uniform.

Originally posted by SGTGerman
One thing I've always hated about our military - everyone's quick to moan how "nobody supports us" but are even quicker to desribe anyone who actually says "I joined to defend my country" either "gay" or "sad".

Merceneries have a bad reputation for reasons already stated however soldiers are not perfect either (Unfortunetely). I beleive you could easily get muddled up if you mixed a bunch of regs and merceneries together and have a hard time defining who's who.

The way I see it, if I become a Merc, or a "PMC" (I don't like the term "contractor" because it reminds me of dodgy builders) I will be a British soldier wearing a different uniform.

Careful, now, you're playing with terms that are attached to americans hearts...

....For the pure sake of wartime propaganda like this.

Never before has a country had so much unquestionable respect for their "heroes" in the military since mid-century Germany....

....Unfortunately, Germany only had to terrorize a few countries before the rest of the world -- except the US of course until it was made into our problem -- had enough.

Our political representation just has to make up some bullsh*t that makes people mad at Muslims every few years and the general public gives them a ticket to continue being global criminals.

Totally pathetic.

P.S. "Nobody supports us" because what we are doing makes absolutely no sense to anyone who isn't in bed with several oil companies.

Difficult vid to watch but the truth is always difficult having a conversation about the reason we went there can be polarizing, After viewing the block buster American Sniper and the pros and cons surrounding it I must say this was welcomed.
I said it on another thread and I'll say it again, CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES,hold your elected officials and the 5th estate to a much higher level,get involve ask the right questions stop accepting a lie just because you want to feel patriotic,tying a yellow ribbon around a tree and having the flag displayed proudly is not a substitute for being patriotic, getting involved in asking the question should we or should we not is.