[UnderseaLcpl]

I returned home from that predictably lousy date intending to respond to Sky's post but instead I have two other posts to respond to. Fortunately, OTH's post kind of segues into what I was going to talk to Sky about so I think I can respond to everything tonight.

And I will try not to write a book this time

Originally Posted by Snestorm

@UnderseaLcpl

You've spent quite a-bit of time on a very well written post.

The only statement you've made that is debatable is:
"Haliburton and companies like it will eventualy merge themselves with the state".
You speak Truth. The only thing debatable about the statment is whether it will happen, or has already happened.

"The Natural Progress Of Things" is in reality, not very natural at all, but highly manipulated.
The destination for "The Natural Progress Of Things" is none other than "The Great Trust".
The vehicle is driven by Haliburton and companies like it, under the supervision of their controlers. It is in all actuality Super Organized Crime which continues to step on and/or swallow it's competitors, as it gains and tightens control over states and their populations.

How one percieves The Great Trust is relevant to how one percieves Haliburton, and companies like it.

First, thanks. Second, I don't really know anything about a "Great Trust". To be honest, the idea of a Great Trust in the form you describe sounds a little bit like a stretched conspiracy theory. I don't mean to be offensive by saying that, just open.

I'm not willing to disregard the idea, as it certainly could happen and I would certainly describe many facets of the state-industrial complex as Super Organized Crime, but I'd have to see a decent case made for its existence. I will also say that I know for a fact that there is some merging of state and corporate interests going on. There has been for years - in some cases there has and continues to be nationalization of private enterprise. My fear is that it will get worse.

Now who, exactly, are these controllers you mention? You have piqued my curiosity by claiming that there is an organized body orchestrating all this. It is my experience that centralized bodies who try to control things usually fail utterly and end up using open oppression in a manner directly attributable to them in a desperate attempt to maintain control. I could look it up myself, but I'd rather have your persepective on it. I find it easier to avoid bias if someone tries to convince me of something rather than simply reading about it myself. When I've no one but myself to consult I often form false assumptions that could easily be avoided if put in the proper context.


Now on to OTH and Skybird.

Originally Posted by OneTough Herring

to answer a couple of points you made, Blackwater/Xe/Triple Canopy/etc. create jobs? Well to the Iraqi hearse people sure, and unfortunately it's been quite a few innocent civilians as was mentioned in the link in the OP.

Well yes, they do create jobs. Every mercenary serving overseas has a job that was provided by companies like these, as do their support staff. I hope Iraqi morticians are not relying on them for business, though, or they'll be having a pretty lean profit margin.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Contractor casualties (another euphemism that includes mercs and similar) in Iraq as to date number 462. That's a pretty high number when compared to the total US casualties in Iraq. A lot of civilian casualties have been caused by the haphazard activities of the mercenary forces, a good example of their conduct is this video that was released some time ago. In the vast sea of violence in Iraq it's more then likely that incidents of acts of violence by the mercenary troops have gone unreported.

Aegis video.

Well, first of all, 462 is not that high of a number considering the length of the occupation and the number of attacks, especially compared to the number of military casualties, which are in the tens of thousands already, and insurgent and civilian casualties, which are incalculable but very much higher. It may also be tempting to link KBR truck drivers and the like in with combat casualties suffered by armed PMCs but doing so does not give us a clear picture of the situation. Every single day there are lightly-guarded miles-long convoys of unarmored semi-trucks and other civilian transport vehicles driven by contractors in broad daylight or with headlights on at night, driving all over the country but particularly in Al-Anbar and around Baghdad.. What is really amazing is that their casualties are so low, and those casualty rates say volumes about the performance of suppression measures and the ineptitude of the insurgents.

I watched the video, and I wonder how you or anyone else arrived at the conclusion that the Iraqi vehicles in the video were being shot at "for fun".
In every single clip shown there was a vehicle approaching quickly from the rear - a favored tactic of suicide vehicle bombers in the first years of the occupation, and one that remains in some areas. Watch the clip carefully. It may seem like the camera vehicle is using an unusually large number of bullets, but that's because they are trying not to kill the driver. The first shots are warning shots. As the vehicle gets closer they fire at the tires, then at the grill, and finally at the windshield. Most of those clips showed legitimate procedure for engaging potential vehicle-borne threats and all of them were within acceptable parameters.

Tragically, both mercenaries and regular US forces kill a large number of innocent Iraqis in this manner. Most of the Iraqis in the AO I served in (Camp Fallujah, Al-Anbar province and subsidiary OPs) knew that when you see an American convoy, military or contractor, you pull the hell over and don't do anything stupid. Some, however, either just don't get it or aren't paying attention or are visitors to the country. The really dumb ones will actually try to pass the convoy, and the one thing you do not ever, ever want to do in Iraq is accelrate towards a convoy, checkpoint, ro*******, or guard station in a civilian vehicle. You will be dead, wounded, or severely shaken in no time flat.

Yes it's true that the US military based on more or less voluntary joining is a kind of mercenary force in itself. Although for the US military recruiting for cannon fodder in places like the slums and other areas devoid of possibility of eduction etc. could be seen to be quite immoral.

And I wholeheartedly agree. You should hear some of the things they tell those poor fools to get them to join up. Ask anyone in the service if they got what they were promised. A few will answer in the affirmative, the rest will tell you stories with the general purpose of explaining how their recruiter screwed them and how badly. I am one of those. I endured a lot of rigorous and difficult testing in an effort to become a cryptologic linguist, that is, a cryptologist who deciphers codes in foreign language. After passing my exams I was informed that there were no slots available. "Too bad, pick another MOS". So then I wanted to be a tanker. I figured if I couldn't get in as a technical specialist in a field I had great aptitude for then I might as well do something cool, like driving a tank. Again, I was refused because no slots were open, despite the apparently grave need for personnel in all fields. I finally decided to become a reservist because I didn't think I could endure 4 years of doing whatever garbage jobs were needed and was finally granted a position as a Field Radio Operator. I'm a communicator by nature, so the idea appealed to me, but I was sorely disappointed by what I experienced afterwards. For one thing, I was not given my original enlistment bonus; something I learned after I was sworn in and had completed recruit training. I was also denied immediate promotion to E-3 despite recommending two other poor SOBs who subsequently enlisted, and despiute being the company standard-bearer (which involves the dubious honor of carrying a big flag on a heavy pole in all marches and runs) and despite being what essentially amounted to the administrative recruit co-ordinator.

Nonetheless, I pursued my occupational specialty with fervor and determination. I went to great lengths to learn about the nuances of radio and wire communications and delved into antannae theory and waveform propogation with singular force of will. In less than two years I was regarded as the preeminent radio operator in 14th Marines HQ Battery. Communications officers with a lifetime of experience sought my aid, and everyone in the comm field sought my advice and training. When the Iraq War came I was eager to prove my worth in an actual theater of operations. I volunteered three freaking times before I was finally granted a chance to deploy and they made me a goddamn truck driver.

Even then, I was undeterred. I strove to be the best freaking truck driver ever and I worked constantly to improve the performance of the Marines placed under me, as well as my own. One of the few things I consider as a real accomplishment in my life is that no truck under my command was ever hit, and no personnel in them were ever injured. Some of my drivers were wounded in convoys commanded by others, and some of the trucks in my care were destroyed, but not while I was leading them. Nobody under my command dies without me dying first! I will not allow it!

Hmm.. I seem to have gone off on quite a tangent there. I'm tempted to delete it, but I won't, since it feels good to type it.

Moving on.....

Even if the US military shares some qualities with a mercenary military doesn't mean that it's ok for the US to fight it's dirty wars with a mercenary military or even to create them. This is yet another attempt by the US to try to evade the rules of war and codes of conduct that govern warfare. The issues of torture etc. are another example of the same mindset. By following this route the US is doing exactly what the those that oppose it want it to do, to be the bad guy. That's the only thing the extremist such as Al Queda want, for the US to use mercenary militaries, to torture, etc. That is their victory.

I don't entirely agree but I agree enough that it is not worth all the typing to expose and debate minor differences of opinion.

What I will say is that my philosophy is that the US should not be involved in any wars at all. If we weren't so damn interventionist we wouldn't have three-quarters of the rest of the world hating us and the remaining quarter intent on our destruction. Trade with all nations, alliances with none, don't get involved in foreign wars, all that crap. The world would be better off without us trying to fix everything all the time.

None of that precludes the use of mercenary forces, however. The world still needs help from time to time, and mercenaries are the perfect agencies to project American military force where it is needed without the political agenda and related nonsensical horse-crap that usually accompanies it. If a nation wants a military solution to a problem it can simply hire an American mercenary firm (or one of any other nationality) and that is that. Mercenaries will accomplish the task in the most efficient and public-friendly means possible, because that is what they do. We have already seen the drastic measures Blackwater has taken to avoid negative PR, including changing its own name and radicaly revamping its organization in a matter of months. It has to do such things or else it risks losing credibility, and credibility means a lot to consumers, whether they are individuals or nations. Nations themselves are not so subject to such concerns. Right or wrong, they are developed and seriously entrenched power structures with the life-earnings and lives of millions at their disposal.

As for the labour union-stuff, not sure what you mean with all that. In Finland the labour unions have done a pretty good job in securing all Finns with basic rights that even Canadians don't have and can't believe when we tell them. Feel welcome to visit and acquaint yourself.

Well I can't blame you for not understanding. Finland is Finland, and it is full of Finns. It is not a culturally diverse super-state whose whims can seriously affect the entire world both economically and politically. Whether or not Finnish labor unions are superior to US labor unions I cannot say, never having been there myself and without really understanding the culture. A quick glance at the finances of the Finnish government s per the CIA world factbook tells me that your nation is in debt and does not posess the economy to make your lifestyle sustainable. Your nation, as well as many others, has fallen prey to the belief that more unsustainable spending today will result in a sustainable future. Most of that belief is based upon hedged bets upon the US economy in the form of foregin investiture and monetary policy. Believe it or not, if the US suffers, your nation will suffer. We literally hold the weight of the world's economy on our shoulders and we are rapidly losing our strength because of unwise fiscal policy. Mark my words, there will come a day when US fiscal policy will really destroy the consumer base of the world's most prosperous and populous free nation and the resultant gap in demand will be felt all over the world, even moreso than the current recession.

I would, however, love to visit Finland sometime, as well as the rest of Scandanavia.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

There are evil people in corporations too and not just in governments. Corporations and big global companies aren't limited by treaties that govern the nations, they can and do crap on things such as human rights and antipollution measures. This serves as the base on which the US wants to build it's new, unrestricted mercenary military.

Originally Posted by Skybird

War should not risked to become object of market and economic enterprise again. It will bring oyu more war. It should be kept under national government'S control whether or not a naton declares war or not - not a board of profit-hungry entrepreneurs.

And here we come to the crux of my response to you and Skybird.

It is true that there are "evil" corporations to some extent. Whether or not calling any corporation evil is subject to debate. Corporations, after all, are comprised of people who are just trying to make a living by providing a product or service. There is nothing immoral about that. The actions they take can be considered immoral sometimes, particularly when they try to co-opt the state's fiat power to further their agendas, but does that make the whole corporation immoral? I think it does not.

Furthermore, though there may be many examples of firms, companies, and corporations acting in an immoral fashion, virtually all of these examples involve co-operation with the state. Even if every corporation in the world was inherently evil and devious they must still produce goods that you choose to buy or they will die. They can bombard you with advertising and try to influence your opinion in every way possible, but the ultimate responsibility lies with you, the person who is free to buy their products or boycott them. The person who is free to work for such an entity, or seek other employment. In a free-market environment, the responsibility lies with everyday people who make everyday choices, which is exactly where it belongs.

Corporations do not start wars because wars are counterproductive to trade and stability, which is something the vast majority of legitimate business needs to function. Even military companies cannot sustain themselves through war. People hire mercenaries with the understanding that there will be an end to the conflict and they expect results or they will not pay. States, on the other hand (and this is aimed squarely at you, Skybird, my longtime friend and respected adversary) have a tendency to prosecute ideological wars with hidden and often plutocratic motives that result in casualties and suffering that cannot be described by the English language. There are simply no adjectives that can adequately portray the amount of horrible, painful, literal, and spiritual death that states have committed and/or endorsed. Medieval mercenaries and the 30 years war and whatever else you can throw out be damned. All the casualties of mercenary conflict were still bought and paid for by states, and I am somewhat insulted by the idea that you would imply that paid mercenary companies were somehow responsible for the suffering and war that plagued our mother continent in the dark and medieval ages. Do you honestly believe that the existence of mercenaries somehow caused more conflict? You should take another look at the horrendous consequences of state conflict. There is nothing you can say, and no incident you can point to, where mercenary warfare resulted in more casualties than state warfare.

I will readily admit that I do not fully understand your as-yet unexplained views on a neo-feudal society and as such I am not prepared to dismiss them entirely but I will now and always remain steadfast on the view that feudalism itself was inherently wrong. The reason that feudal societies hired paid, professional mercenaries was because their own populace was too ignorant, poor, and inept to form a professional military force or afford proper equipment. The populace was made so because it was subject to the whims of an emplaced power structure that was doubly enforced by a religious power structure that discouraged literacy and individualism.

As a foolish aherent to protestant religion I swear to Christ the Saviour Almighty, I would really like to know what method lies behind your apparent madness, Sky. I have read tens of thousands of your words and spent countless hours contemplating them, but I still can't really figure out what makes you function in the way do. For the sake of my own sanity, please describe what makes you say the things you say. Spare nothing. If you think I am an idiot, just explain why you think so and why, but be honest. You have my word as a Christian, bound by the Nicene crede, that I will neither judge you nor condemn you.