Certainly better than the damned Red Cross, they turned up 600,000 hits. But they could stand to improve things and get down to 77,000 like the Peace Corps or 81,000 like Jerry Lewis.
Presuming the plan existed, had merit and wasn’t, y’know, completely batshit, killing the (bad) people that are killing the (innocent) people is one of the best ways there is to stop (innocent) people from being killed.
As a Massachusetts resident, I applaud the actions of Jim McGovern and will make a point of letting him know so. (Although I’m not in his district, so my opinion of him doesn’t make any practical difference.) I opposed the Iraq war, but I would absolutely support military action in Sudan to stop the genocide. Hell, I’d fucking join up if I knew I’d be sent out on humanitarian missions.
Well, what would you expect? I’d be shocked if any country’s military didn’t cause orders of magnitude more casualties than mercenaries. Doesn’t mean the mercenaries aren’t scumbags (nor does it follow that the military necessarily are). But to be sure, the body count is on both groups.
Well, DUH!:rolleyes:
Alright. So why then is it worse to send Blackwater to assist in the Sudan than it is to send American troops to assist in the Sudan?
I know that if I was in Darfur right now, and someone asked me if I wanted Blackwater to come help me and my village which was being burned to the ground, women raped, kids killed, people decapitated, etc, my answer would be: YES, FOR GOD’S SAKE, PLEASE SEND BLACKWATER!
The people in Blackwater are human beings. The vast majority of them are former US military personnel who joined Blackwater because it paid better than the US military. They are just trying to make a living doing what they know how to do. I fail to see how Blackwater is some evil, sinister entity. Like I said, it has a stupid name, but outside of that I can’t really see how the soldiers in Blackwater are that different from the soldiers in the Army.
Because one of the few things more disgusting that fucking for cash is killing for it?
Buh? I guess you’re right – Dahmer and Bundy were dedicated, caring craftsmen, not mere subcontractors. They’re much less morally disgusting than, say, Jenna Jameson.
Well, one argument is that the people serving in the US military are doing so out of a desire to serve and protect their country and the citizens thereof, and not strictly for the paycheck. While most of them wouldn’t be there if there weren’t money and career options involved, neither would most of them be willing to serve in a mercenary organization that obeyed no higher principle than, “Will work for highest bidder.”
Oh, and another thing. Mercenaries don’t “kill for money”. Killing might be something they do, but it is a means to an end, not an end in and of itself. You hire mercenaries to “protect a convoy”, “guard a site”, “capture insurgents”, or “stop genocide”. You don’t hire them to “Kill people”.
I’m not a huge fan of Xe or whoever, but that sort of glib thinking is why the level of discourse about these topics is so low – why argue the points when you can win with a poorly-thought-out soundbite instead?
And you thought you’d raise the tone of things by bringing in porn stars and psychotic cannibals?
Why not? Say I’m the evil overlord of Terrivania, and I want some insurgents killed, but I don’t want to send in my own troops for political reasons. So I offer a bunch of mercenaries beaucoups bucks to go kill them instead. What are they going to do, cite the International Mercenary Creed that no mercenary can ever spill blood for profit?
If I can hire mercenaries to “capture insurgents” or “stop genocide,” I’m pretty sure that I could also hire them to “kill insurgents” or “commit genocide.”
This isn’t true. It’s a myth that everyone in the military is there to “serve and protect their country.” That may be one argument, but it’s not a very good one. And again I’ll say that the official US military has committed far more atrocities than Blackwater has. So you could just as easily say that the US military is worse because it kills more innocent people, under the guise of “serving the country.”
And everything ivn1188 said is true.
[massive derail]Of course that family member is wrong on more than one level. Not only was “that one thing” really really big, it was two things. And there were other things. Lots of other things.
[/md]
The researchers, of course, were themselves uttely without prejudice. It’s all so very scientific, I’m sure. :rolleyes:
redundant post removed
Why do you keep repeating this truism as if it makes your argument better?
If the US military is a morally suspect organisation (and it is), then hiring another organisation composed largely of personnel from said morally suspect organisation is not the smartest move one could make, morality-wise, even if the new organisation wasn’t, itself, already burdened with a reputation for shooting first and asking questions…never.
The Sudanese embassy is Voltron?
This pretty much goes for everything you’ve ever posted.
So you really think that Colbert is an actual conservative? Have you read his book?