Several related or unrelated issues came to my mind simultaneously:
1- Bush wanting to turn millions of illegal immigrants into legal ”guest workers”, apparently because there are many jobs that the Americans do not want to do themselves.
2- To get re-elected in November, Bush will try to show some finality to the US involvement and debacle in Iraq and start bringing some US troops back home.
3- The US is hiring and paying over $2,000 per month for mercenaries from Chili to go and guard the oil wells in Iraq, in effect outsourcing the job of the US troops there.
4- The current hoopla about outsourcing American Jobs to India and China.
5- The Iran-Contra scandal where Oliver North declared in Congress that it was an “American ingenuity” to get money from Ayatollah (by selling Arms to him) and use the money to fund the Contras.
6- The role of the US in Haiti
Subject of the debate: As you take all the above 6 together, do you feel all is good, well and kosher about this administration and its policies?
Hiring mercenaries to do the work in Iraq! Brilliant! Howcome they didn’t think of this earlier? That way, we (i.e. the crowd supporting the war) could be totally indifferent about the casualties, instead of mourning the losses of our soldiers.
I’m giving you a big headstart, because I have all sorts of issues with the current administration. It would help, though, if you actually outlined a coherent argument of some sort.
Apartheid Enforcers Guard Iraq For the U.S.
South African Judge: ‘Horrible’
In Iraq, the U.S. government has tapped into the ever-growing pool of private security companies to provide a variety of defense services, including protecting oil sites and training Iraqi forces. Observers worry that a reliance on these companies and the resulting lack of accountability is a recipe for further problems in a volatile region.
Erinys Iraq, the subsidiary of the largely unknown security company called Erinys International, was awarded a two-year contract worth $80 million last August to protect 140 Iraqi oil installations and train some 6,500 Iraqi guards. It then subcontracted some of its security duties to a U.S. private security firm called SAS International.
The contract raised eyebrows in the industry because Erinys beat out better-known competitors.
Washington - U.S. authorities in Iraq have awarded more than $400 million in contracts to a start-up company that has extensive family and, according to court documents, business ties to Ahmed Chalabi, the Pentagon favorite on the Iraqi Governing Council.
But it is an $80-million contract, awarded by the Coalition Provisional Authority last summer to provide security for Iraq’s vital oil infrastructure, that has become a controversial lightning rod within the Iraqi Provisional Government and the security industry.
Soon after this security contract was issued, the company started recruiting many of its guards from the ranks of Chalabi’s former militia, the Iraqi Free Forces, raising allegations from other Iraqi officials that he was creating a private army.
Today security in the oil fields remains problematic; the number of guards is being raised from 6,500 under the original contract to 14,500, and so many changes are being made to the contract that the Coalition Provisional Authority, which governs Iraq, now says it may have to be rebid.
Erinys Iraq came into being last May, after the U.S.-led invasion.
From last year:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30C16FE395E0C708DDDA90994DA404482 America’s For-Profit Secret Army
ABSTRACT - American use of private military contractors grows as number of enlisted military personnel plummets; they operate in every phase of American military endeavors, both overt and covert, answering only to their employers, not their country; their activities and numbers do not require approval or knowledge of Congress and avoid public scrutiny; critics worry about their safety and commitment, about creation of secret army outside public view and about incidents in which private soldiers breached code of military conduct or made mistakes that killed innocent parties; challenge Pentagon’s assertions that contractors save money; operations MPRI provides example of how skilled retired soldiers cash in on their military training…
Hired guns from SA flood Iraq
Johannesburg: More than 1 500 South Africans are believed to be in Iraq under contract to various private military companies (PMCs) - and the number will grow as the hired guns increasingly fill the void left by departing Anglo-American forces.
According to a United Nations report, South Africa is already among the top three suppliers of personnel for private military companies, along with the UK and the US.
The Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance Act, passed in July 1998, prohibits South African citizens from direct participation as combatants in armed conflict for private gain. Such engagement includes recruitment, training, or financing and applies to South Africans acting outside the country as well.
All security companies working outside the country are required by law to register with the National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC), headed by Minister of Education Kader Asmal.
So far two companies, Meteoric Tactical Solutions and Grand Lake Trading 46 (Pty) Ltd have submitted applications to operate in Iraq.
Meteoric Tactical Solutions is providing protection and is also training new Iraqi police and security units. Erinys, a joint South African-British company, has received a multimillion dollar contract to protect Iraq’s oil industry.
Neither company has yet received formal approval from the NCACC, while Erinys failed to apply at all. “It seems as though foreign companies are using South Africans. If this is a loophole we need to try and close it,” said Democratic Alliance MP Raenette Taljaard.
Our source says most companies were acting in breach of the act. A popular loophole is for companies to register themselves as demining companies, a move which exempts many from the law as their efforts are seen as humanitarian. “They go in under the auspices of demining but they do everything but demining,” he said.
I’m disappointed with the administration. We could have avoided the losses life that we care about had they combined their business acumen with their warmongering.
But not all is lost. A lot of Republicans think that Saddam’s WMD have been moved to Syria. Perhaps we could use these thugs…er…private military companies to blaze a trail to Damascus and put an end to the discussion whether Saddam had any illigal weapons.
They did. We already have thousands of non-citizens, aliens, in our army. being a U.S. citizen, is NOT a requirement to getting into the US army, and non citizens, arabs, latins, etc. who hold Iraqi, Lebonese, Saudi Arabian, Mexican citizenship etc. are in our ranks and along side our boys.
Come on Cronos1, make up your mind. Are you with the Republicans, or are you against them?
If you are with us, why do you encourage us to be beaten by John Kerry, when he can easily condemn us in October 2004 (just before election) to be a bunch of neocon war mongers?
If you are against us, why don’t you let Assad stay put in Damascus, so that we can use him after November 4 as yet another Buggy-man to show another “Show of awe” on television, with new, improved “embedded journalists”, this time really impressing the hell of the US voter, enough for voting Republicans again in 2008. That should take care of Hillary !!!
In actuality, neither. From a Machiavellianpoint of view, the war would have had a lot less detractors if fewer American soldiers had died (or none at all). Using this method, all the anguish of the American public for its fallen soldiers would have been “outsourced” to people who we care about even less than Iraqis.