Hi,
The PMC vs "Uniformed" Service debate never seems to be able to meet in the middle and/or see the other persons perspective.
It is about as fragile conversation as who is the best Nascar driver, lolol....
IMO you NEED the PMC crews for specific task and you NEED the "Uniformed" crews for specific task!!
Like it or not...there are times and things that should/need to be done that are better suited for the "less accountable" per say (YES I know they are ultimately accountable
)
To finger paint the PMC guys as "SERVE US" is no different and just about as accurate as the leftist painting all gun owners as the next school shooter.
Sincerely,
Theis
There will always be some non mil in the war zone....press, Red Cross types, security for non mil VIPs. Check out pics of Roosevelt in Morrocco/Yalta lots of suits with guns in the era prior to mirrored shades and photographers vests.
If its not a war zone mil cant be used if we want to comply with international customs.
I question are Iraq and Afghanistan war zones or not?
We seem to be treating them as they are not which is why we are marking time.
I don't fault any person hoping on the contractor train and monetizing their skills.
The "Serve Us" aspect relates to the attitudes of those jumping on to profit from the wars. Some entrepreneur looks at it as "Here is my way to make money, Ill get some mil guys than bill for them and run my own private army."
Think along the lines of that Jonah Hill movie, supposedly based on reality, of the neophytes that set up their third party business to shuffle ammunition to the Iraqi security forces.
It seems that our current corporate concept of war is everything Smedley D Butler railed against in his pamphlet "War is a Racket".
Lets go back to declaring war eliminating all restrictions on the use of our military, eliminate as much as possible civil operations in country in order to maximize military functions to achieve military strategic goals.
Often times civilian/NGO goals and military goals require different tactics. The civilian BS needs to be put on the back burner until the mil objectives are met.
Once the country is secured either by our mil or by a functioning host govt bring on the civilian crap try and promote a functioning country.
I think the whole problem stems from the failure of our govt to define a quantifiable, achievable goal prior to entering into war.
War on Terror is a black box excuse for abuse.
In Iraq it should have been - 100% compliance with 1991 cease fire agreements or regime change followed by US withdrawal and UN receivership.
In Afghanistan it should have been capture/certified proof of death of those responsible for 9/11 followed by immediate US withdrawal.
The govt malfeasance in conducting these "wars" despite magnificent performance of the troops is shameful.
We still have mil active over there and Im betting they are accounting for themselves very well but reality is that their footprint is too small to ever accomplish anything and they are just hanging with unanchored flanks.
Whats the sense?
Pull em out. Let the shit hole sort itself but have accurate GPS coords for anything we need to blow up at a later date.
