Mercenaries are second largest force in Iraq: UN official

Sat Feb 3, 9:45 AM ET

Between 30,000 and 50,000 mercenaries are working in Iraq, making them the second largest military force there after the occupying United States.

The case of Iraq "is a new manifestation of the use of mercenaries that has caughts the US by surprise", Spain's Jose Luis Gomez del Prado -- a member of the UN working group on mercenaries -- said Fridayduring a visit to Peru.

The United States has 130,000 soldiers in Iraq, he noted. Britain has 10,000 troops.

Gomez del Prado told a news conference thousands of Peruvians, Chileans, Colombians, Hondurans and Ecuadorans had been contracted to work as mercenaries in Iraq, thanks to an array of legal loopholes.

The trend has caused widespread public concern in Peru.

Rights workers have voiced concern that people are being hired to work as security guards in Iraq but are then given military training and asked to perform "previously unforseen tasks" which draw them into full combat.

Gomez del Prado's Colombian colleague, Amada Guevara, told the news conference that in some cases, workers were contracted by existing companies who exploited legal loopholes. But in other cases, they were taken on by ghost firms who arrived in a country, opened an office for a month, contracted workers and then disappeared without trace.

"This amounts to privatisation of warfare," she said.

Gomez said new legislation and better government oversight was necessary to prevent citizens desperate for well-paid jobs being lured into a mercenary career which put their lives, health and rights at risk.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AFP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Agence France Presse.

Mercenaries are second largest force in Iraq: UN official

Sat Feb 3, 9:45 AM ET

Between 30,000 and 50,000 mercenaries are working in Iraq, making them the second largest military force there after the occupying United States.

The case of Iraq "is a new manifestation of the use of mercenaries that has caughts the US by surprise", Spain's Jose Luis Gomez del Prado -- a member of the UN working group on mercenaries -- said Fridayduring a visit to Peru.

The United States has 130,000 soldiers in Iraq, he noted. Britain has 10,000 troops.

Gomez del Prado told a news conference thousands of Peruvians, Chileans, Colombians, Hondurans and Ecuadorans had been contracted to work as mercenaries in Iraq, thanks to an array of legal loopholes.

The trend has caused widespread public concern in Peru.

Rights workers have voiced concern that people are being hired to work as security guards in Iraq but are then given military training and asked to perform "previously unforseen tasks" which draw them into full combat.

Gomez del Prado's Colombian colleague, Amada Guevara, told the news conference that in some cases, workers were contracted by existing companies who exploited legal loopholes. But in other cases, they were taken on by ghost firms who arrived in a country, opened an office for a month, contracted workers and then disappeared without trace.

"This amounts to privatisation of warfare," she said.

Gomez said new legislation and better government oversight was necessary to prevent citizens desperate for well-paid jobs being lured into a mercenary career which put their lives, health and rights at risk.

Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AFP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Agence France Presse.

They are ALL mercenaries, in a sense. The US GI's joined up, in part, for the benefits. Looked like a good deal since we were at peace at the time. National Guard folks who joined up after 9/11 did so to protect their homeland never expecting to be sent to Iraq (surprise surprise).

Blackwater Security gets paid triple for the same work.

God only knows how many others there are or what they get paid.

The real issue, IMHO, is that they are not all paid the same.

WHO AM I

I AM YOUR BROTHER
I AM YOUR SISTER
I AM YOUR COUSIN
I AM YOUR SON
I AM YOUR DAUGHTER
I AM YOUR FRIEND

WHO AM I

I AM A SAILOR
I ENSURE THE WORLDS WATERS ARE SAFE
I PATROL AND DEFEND MY NATIONS COASTLINE

WHO AM I

I AM AN AIRMAN
I ENSURE THE WORLDS SKY'S ARE SAFE
I PATROL AND DEFEND MY NATIONS AIRSPACE

WHO AM I

I AM A MARINE
I AM MY NATIONS QUICK REACTION FORCE
I TAKE THE OBJECTIVE AND HOLD IT TIL RELIEVED

WHO AM I

I AM A SOLDIER
I DEFEND MY NATION FROM THOSE WHO ATTACK US
I TAKE THE OBJECTIVE AND HOLD IT TIL RELIEVED

I DONT ASK YOU TO UNDERSTAND
FOR I KNOW YOU NEVER TRULY WILL
THE SAYING SAYS THAT FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT
FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW

I DO HOWEVER ASK THAT YOU RESPECT MY LIFE
AND WHAT I DID SHOULD I FALL WHILE DEFENDING MY COUNTRY
DONT USE ME FOR YOUR OWN PERSONAL GAIN OR AGENDA
DOING SO CHEAPENS MY DEATH AND THE IDEALS FOR WHICH I DIED

I FIGHT, KILL AND DIE FOR YOU
THAT YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO WHAT I HAVE HAD TO DO
THAT YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO SEE WHAT I HAVE HAD TO SEE
THAT YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO KILL ANOTHER AS I HAVE HAD TO

I DO NOT ENJOY KILLING
I DO NOT ENJOY WATCHING MY FRIENDS GET WOUNDED, MAIMED AND KILLED
I SURE AS HELL DO NOT ENJOY DIEING

I FEEL EVERY SINGLE DEATH OF A MILITARY MEMBER
THEY ARE MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS
EVERY TIME ONE OF THEM DIES I FEEL THE LOSS

TRY AND REMEMBER TO SAY THANK YOU AS YOU SEE ME WALK PAST AND UNDERSTAND WHEN I SAY ITS NOT NECESSARY
I DO WHAT I DO BECAUSE I WANT TO
NOT BECAUSE SOMEONE MADE ME
I SAID I WOULD AND I WILL


WHO AM I

I AM YOUR BROTHER
I AM YOUR SISTER
I AM YOUR COUSIN
I AM YOUR SON
I AM YOUR DAUGHTER
I AM YOUR FRIEND
I AM A MEMBER OF THE ARMED SERVICES


JOE TOLEDO
SGT USMC 87 -93
SGT CA ARNG 93-2000

I have to disagree with you Jeffmoskin. The issue is full time Defense Department employees. Both Rumsfeld, OMB, Bush, and Clinton Administrations have gone to great lengths to ratchet back the full time DOD employees and their respective benefit prorgrams - (Rumsfeld was known as being the "lean and mean" machine) in favor of contracting out those services to minimize the impact on the federal deficit. Moreover, they have kept the military numbers low for the same reason. For each soldier hired, back up support of at least 8 people is required. This is all about fun and games with the budget numbers. When employment is contracted out, the govt. contractors have to provide all the benefits - eg. medical, etc. And we all know what has been going on in the health care arena. I don't consider contracted employees mercenaries. And I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the civilian casualty rate is higher than the military casualty rate. We won't know though, since DOD doesn't publish those statistics.

"Mercenaries"

Posted By Grim Blackfive - Mercenaries

What does it mean to say that a US soldier is a "mercenary"?

Mercenary isn't just an adjective. In the context of war, it has a specific legal meaning. That meaning is established in the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949:

So, the first thing to say about Arkin and the Kos kids is that they're just wrong.

The second thing to say is this: the Conventions provide consequences to being a mercenary. A mercenary is a form of unlawful combatant, like a terrorist who fights without uniform.

The consequences are spelled out:



So, to say that US soldiers are "mercenaries" is to make a moral as well as a legal claim. The moral claim is that they are no better than the terrorists. It is to claim that the insurgent is right simply to shoot a US soldier if he should capture one. It is to claim that our soldiers deserve no better.

"Screw them," more or less.

The legal claim is flatly wrong. The moral claim is worse. The Coalition soldiers and the Iraqi forces they've trained are the only parties in the conflict who uphold the Geneva Conventions. They are the one side who has sought to defend the idea that there is an honorable way to conduct a war, and that morality isn't to be set aside just because you take up arms.

And no, I don't want to hear about how 'Bush has blah-blah-blah with the rule of law.' The President is not the military. Whatever your opinion of the Bush administration, it should be noted that LCDR Charles Swift was the man who went to the Supreme Court in defense of the expansive reading of the Conventions, and in defiance of the administration, and who won there.

The Geneva Conventions have no greater defender than the US Military. Those who care about limiting the horrors of war owe that military their thanks and friendship, as well as their support. There is no excuse for slandering them in this way.

Let mercenaries be the LARGEST force in Iraq.

Paid for by ExxonMobil.

Who are the beneficieries.

Let the US Army serve the food and supply the ammo.

From a safe warehouse.

Well...ya copted out of that one pretty good, Jeff!

To put it simply...A mercenary "doesn't have a dog in the hunt"!

Put another way...

A country goes to war (as a last resort) when it or its people are in danger, and the state causing that endangerment is known. We have always had a draft for such occasions, but Nixon eliminated the draft in order to get re-elected while keeping the war going in Vietnam.

The USA is not in danger from Iraq. Never was. This war is a BushCo lie. It is all about the control of the last remaining huge reserve of cheap oil on the planet, as well as the use of the dollar to pay for it. It is therefore an imperial war, a war for resource control and economic world domination.

Let the bankers and the oilmen send their sons and daughters to fight it. THEY have a dog in the hunt.

All others paid cash.

The same could be said for me joining my company!...Am I a mercenary?

Webster: "Mercenary - one that serves merely for wages; especially : a soldier hired into foreign service"

Do you fight for your company?

Do you work for Blackwater Security?

Nope...but neither does a US serviceman.

Bill Clinton: "If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Madeleine Albright: "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Sandy Berger: "Saddam will use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983."

Harry Reid: "The problem is not nuclear testing; it is nuclear weapons. ... The number of Third World countries with nuclear capabilities seems to grow daily. Saddam Hussein's near success with developing a nuclear weapon should be an eye-opener for us all."

Dick Durbin: "One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that...Iraq...may acquire or develop nuclear weapons."

John Kerry: "If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me."

John Edwards: "Serving on the Intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it's just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons."

Nancy Pelosi: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process."

Sens. Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry in a letter to Bill Clinton: "We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Ted Kennedy: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

John Kerry: "I will be voting to give the president of the U.S. the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. ... Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein."

Hillary Clinton: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile-delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including al-Qa'ida members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Carl Levin: "We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein...is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Al Gore: "We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Bob Graham: "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

Yeah, right.

Clinton did not invade Iraq. Bush did. Iraq did not attack us on 9/11 Al Qeada did. Bush let Osama go to die in his old age or choking on a chicken bone as he laughs at us invading Iraq just like he wanted us to. The Bush's Administration was the one who selected the Intel in 02 to give to only a few Senators on the run up to Iraq. The earlier Intel was flawed because we had no inspectors after 98 until 02. Bush is the one who kicked out the inspectors in 02 and rushed to War. He was in charge of the Intel. The investigations will show he and Cheney cherry picked it. In other words Bush lied to Congress on War and Peace.

You can believe what you want Marine, but if I were a Congress person who was persuaded to vote to give Bush that option to invade under the shadow of 9/11, I would vote next to impeach and convict him and Cheney, and his whole crew.

So did Clinton, but Sandy Bergler would know more about that than me!

Man do you have issues Frenchy. I guess we all choose to believe what makes us comfortable. Skoal! Facts be damned!

Lot's on them!

Can this be proven?

I don't think so.

We do know that Khalil Sheik Mohammad "masterminded" the idea (he is in solitary at club Fed), and that Osama cheered the destruction of WTC (the dinner party tape). Other than that, we don't really know for sure, do we?

And since the 911 commission was another Warren Commission, and since Giuliani sent all the evidence to China for recycling, we may never know.

I saw the video on C-Span with Osama talking about the details of the mission, including about the squad leaders knowing they were going to die that way, and the rest being just muscle. Unless the translation was false he was clearly the CIC of the attack. It may have been detailed and carried out by underlings but he was head honcho.

UBL: (...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all. (...Inaudible...) due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only. This is all that we had hoped for.

UBL: We were at (...inaudible...) when the event took place. We had notification since the previous Thursday that the event would take place that day. We had finished our work that day and had the radio on. It was 5:30 p.m. our time. I was sitting with Dr. Ahmad Abu-al-((Khair)). Immediately, we heard the news that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. We turned the radio station to the news from Washington. The news continued and no mention of the attack until the end. At the end of the newscast, they reported that a plane just hit the World Trade Center.

UBL: After a little while, they announced that another plane had hit the World Trade Center. The brothers who heard the news were overjoyed by it.

"I've been mulling over an NBC Nightly News report from Iraq.in which a number of soldiers expressed frustration that with opposition to war in the United States.Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order. So we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them.and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war. [This] NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for mercenary — oops, sorry, — volunteer force."....William Arkin NBC News military analyst

This guy better hope he is never alone somewhere with some vets, he may not get a chance to ever retract this stupid comment.

I understand that there was a half-hearted retraction the next day, but I haven't seen it.

I sort a got a kick out of Uncle Jimbo's thoughts about what William (quotes in blue) Arkin said. No one can say Uncle Jimbo trys to hide how he feels about someone, eh?


A hearty F*** You to William Arkin
Posted By Uncle Jimbo
Update: Marc Danziger, the Armed Liberal over at Winds of change is much less hyperbolic about Arkin than I am and check on Fuzzy Bear's stuff too.

Apologies for the F bombs bursting in air, but...well just read on.

Wow, William Arkin has just dropped a stellar entry in the biggest asshole in America contest. I was stunned by the incredible amount of disgusting, deranged, disrespectful drivel the wanker was able to cobble together in one hearty F U to the troops. Well Mr. Arkin in true blogospheric fashion F U right back atcha'. Ymarkasar, who could explain his handle, already whacked him around pretty good in the comments to Matt's post, but I gotta bring out the big guns for this douchebag. Prepare for a full-frontal fisking with airborne envelopments and plenty of precision strike rhetoric.

I'm all for everyone expressing their opinion, even those who wear the uniform of the United States Army. But I also hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people.

Let's start your education with the US Constitution, say maybe those bits after the main document. The first one has a little thing about freedom of speech and yes Mr. Arkin it even applies to soldiers. Imagine that, they get to fight and maybe die so you can write this venomous shite and they actually get to reap the fruits of their sacrifice as well. Oh and just for the record, they also happen to be the American people to a degree you and the rest of the hater clowns with your Grinch-sized hearts will never understand.

Friday's NBC Nightly News included a story from my colleague and friend Richard Engel, who was embedded with an active duty Army infantry battalion from Fort Lewis, Washington.

Engel relayed how "troops here say they are increasingly frustrated by American criticism of the war. Many take it personally, believing it is also criticism of what they've been fighting for."

These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President's handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

Hell they ought to be thankful not to be hung for the illegal war they are helping the Bush crime family perpetrate right Billy?

Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order.

The indulgence of the public, but more importantly smarter-than-us lefties is another thing I am thankful for every day. I mean you have to realize that without the rapes and murders, soldiering kinda sucks. And how kind of you to smear the military command structure as enablers or even commanders of rape and murder. Why I remember the civilian-slaughtering course at Bragg, and the rape rooms., oh wait that was freakin' Sadaam. More of a satisfyingly wicked beatdown of a professional punkass after the jump. Billy's email address is warkin@igc.org. tell him I said hey.

Sure it is the junior enlisted men who go to jail, but even at anti-war protests, the focus is firmly on the White House and the policy. We just don't see very man "baby killer" epithets being thrown around these days, no one in uniform is being spit upon.

Have you been to a "peace" rally lately you chump, better to call them anti-war, anti-America hate fests. Good lord the slogans there would make anyone with a shred of decency sick to their stomachs. Don't you even read the rest of that dog-training rag you call a paper. Even they covered the recent clown car emptying in DC, where Joshua Sparling got a bit of lefty love via a wad of spit.

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

How decent of you to allow them a decent wage, and that vast social support system really comes in handy when they wait months for medical care or counseling for their families. And really it was good of you to mention the obscene amenities. You remind us that soldiers should be focused on raping and murdering, and when they are not actively doing that they should be lying in the prone thinking of more and better ways to rape, kill, pillage and burn, they're gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn EAT BABIES! Sorry, cadence jumped out there, must be my sociopathic training kicking in again.

Heaven forbid that after a day of bayoneting children for sport, these savages kick back and play video games or let their wife or mother know they are still alive. That can wait until we have killed all the Iraqis. Obscene! You are an obscenity you pampered little pussy, sitting safe in Washington disrespecting your betters who allow you the opportunity to pollute the world with your garbahj.

None of those complaining said that you had to STFU, but somehow you feel empowered to say that to them. STFU and just get blown up quietly. We are busy trying to lose the war back here and letting the public see that you are pissed about all the negative coverage makes that harder. 1st F***ing Amendment asshat! You have shot your wad working to ensure that nothing good about the war gets printed, now back the F*** off and let those who actually earned their free speech to use a little of it. I realize you spent a little time in uniform back in the 70's as an intel weasel and I can only assume that the Soviet's flipped you, removed your spine and balls and gave you a dumbass transplant, 'cuz your kind of sorry BS doesn't come naturally.

I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don't get it, that they don't understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoover's and Nixon's will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If I weren't the United States, I'd say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

WTF was that inane tripe? With the incomprehensible writing paired with reprehensible "logic" and apparent complete lack of editing
If I weren't the United States, I'd say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

Or maybe you do think you "are' the United States, you seem arrogant enough to.

But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

F*** You! And I mean that in the heartiest sense of the words. F*** You Mr. Arkin. You have the right under our laws to write something like that, but you need to remember that you just crossed a line with a whole bunch of people well and truly able to make you pay for that punk ass comment. You took the time to write it, edit it, rewrite it and in the end you looked at your little insult and thought you were cute. You are not cute you are someone whose ass I would kick around the world if I had not become a pacifist. You had better hope we never end up in adjacent stalls in the mens room though because I haven't foregone pissing on the legs of pussies like you.

The notion of dirty work is that, like laundry, it is something that has to be done but no one else wants to do it. But Iraq is not dirty work: it is not some necessary endeavor; the people just don't believe that anymore.

The notion of military service is that you take an oath to obey any lawful orders you are given. There is no page in the Ranger Handbook that says to conduct a freakin' poll of the citizenry prior to assaulting a machine gun. Those Soviets really f***ed your head up huh Billy?

I'll accept that the soldiers, in order to soldier on, have to believe that they are manning the parapet, and that's where their frustrations come in. I'll accept as well that they are young and naïve and are frustrated with their own lack of progress and the never changing situation in Iraq. Cut off from society and constantly told that everyone supports them, no wonder the debate back home confuses them.

Back to those poor mindless drones who are too stupid and got Stuk in Irak as F Jaques Kerry noted. They are obviously not capable of the lucid reasoning you have demonstrated in this substance-free screed. What if they actually do understand, maybe even better than you? What if all the college-educated patriots serving who chose to do so out of a higher purpose actually understand what is at stake in a way that pampered, punk ass liberals like you are incapable of. Well the spine and balls the Soviets removed can't be helping you much.

America needs to ponder what it is we really owe those in uniform. I don't believe America needs a draft though I imagine we'd be having a different discussion if we had one.

And now, the end is near, and so you've reached, the final curtain. I'm done with you BIlly. Hell I wasted more time than you're worth, but by God I think the troops might just get a kick out of this. Plus since I have exited the ass-kicking business this will have to do for me too. Oh and Billy........F*** You!

Posted by Uncle Jimbo on January 31, 2007 • Permalink

Who made the tape?

Cheney?

Michael Ledeen?

Did CNN vet it?

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind.