'Mercenaries' to fill Iraq troop gap from UK

I found this article interesting, I wonder if some of our fellow UK members knows if this is true or not.

MINISTERS are negotiating multi-million-pound contracts with private security firms to cover some of the gaps created by British troop withdrawals.

Days after Tony Blair revealed that he wanted to withdraw 1,600 soldiers from war-torn Basra within months, it has emerged that civil servants hope "mercenaries" can help fill the gap left behind. news.scotsman.com...

I guess that our own private mercenaries in the US are having some hard competition with their fellow friends of the UK.

Now now, just because they get paid to fight a war doesn't make them mercinaries. They are heavily armed "security professionals" who fight wars for corporate interests rather than for the good of the employing nations. Totally different from a mercinary... because mercinaries sound bad. They are only called mercinaries if a drug cartel or somebody else we don't like hires them... of course if its one of OUR drug cartels they aren't mercs either- that would make them contract employees of the CIA. lol

Vagabond that is funny, I never saw it that way before.

I have not seen anymore news on this so I guess is just one of those things that nobody wants to be known to much.

Originally posted by marg6043
I found this article interesting, I wonder if some of our fellow UK members knows if this is true or not.

To be honest Marg, I'd be surprised if it was true. If there is one thing the British Military has never been able to stomach its mercenaries, especially if they are ex-forces staff.

It goes against the whole ethos of having a fully proffessional army, and I honestly cannot believe that UK Forces would consider working alongside what is ostensibly an armed paramilitary force operating outside the army's rules of engagement.

"If there is one thing the British Military has never been able to stomach its mercenaries"

The British army is the largest employer of mercenaries on the entire planet, mostly with former Executive Outcome and Sandline International forces which are now Northbridge Services Group. We use them a lot in Africa.

I think militaries differentiate between using mercs because you don't have the troops and using mercs because you don't politically dare risk your troops.

I can certainly see why no nation that prides itself on having a professional military would want to stake its security on the abilities of mercs operating alongside the regulars, and if I were in charge of the regulars I'd have my FO establish preset artillery targets behind the mercs to make sure they didn't run off and expose my flank.

On the other hand, it's a politicians dream to not have to answer to angry mothers about casualties or to even officially "be in" the war, and I'm sure some generals don't mind being able to tell the head of state, "make the new guys do it" when there's a dangerous little situation that really doesn't merit the sacrifice of patriots.

So whenever some rebel group starts to make a ruckus in some obscure little jungle nation that has a sizeable diamond mine in it, or some other such thing, even Britain, for all its sophistication and virtue, is succeptible to the temptation to hire somebody to make the situation resolve itself before it becomes front page news.

That's an interesting way to make sense of the Mercenaries use by the government.

I guess they have been successfully in some way while been use by the US that why not the UK.

I know that many American troops do not like them either, but they are paid by private groups and the government so they see them as civilian workers.

Mercenaries or what ever you want to call them
are they bound by the same rules reg soldiers are?
or are they above the laws?

Just to be sure I'm not misunderstood, I understand why governments do it, but I don't agree with their reasons.

A mercinary of any kind is a thug, plain and simple. There is a certain nobility to fighting for what you believe in, even if violence is always an ugly thing. There is no such nobility- and no respect for right and wrong- in fighting for something you don't believe in because the price is right.

Mercinaries are inherently dangerous because they can be paid to do things that should not be done, while a volunteer soldier in a national army who serves a specific ideal has limits to what he will do under normal circumstances (although, of course regular troops are succeptible to wrongdoing as well from time to time).

I read that more often than not the mercs working for private companies in the US get involve just like regular soldiers.

The extend of what they can do is often disregarded by the government.

The extent of these firms' combat role is largely off policymakers' radar screen. Not only is Congress woefully ignorant of the contracts that its budgets have paid for, but senior Pentagon officials are, at best, in self-denial about the depth of the outsourcing. When pressed on the issue at a news briefing just days after the Fallujah deaths, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's response was a prototypical nonsensical Rummyism.

www.brook.edu...

This article is old but it talks pretty good about what kind of resources the private companies in Iraq have and who are the groups involved.

Plausible deniability, basicaly a good way for goverments not to get the real dirty poo linkd back to them.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 21/3/2007 by Mirthful Me]

There's quite a few UK security firms over here already. Most if not all on the list below are here in Iraq presently. Most provide diplomatic security. I know Erinys did security for the Army Corps of Engineers for awhile here.

Aegis Defence Services
Andrew Kain Enterprises, Ltd.
ArmorGroup International PLC
Blue Hackle Limited
Britam Defence, Ltd.
Centurion Risk Assessment Services, Ltd.
Control Risks Group
Edinburgh International
Erinys International, Ltd.
Global Strategies Group
Henderson Risk, Ltd.
Janusian Security Risk Management, Ltd.
Olive Group
Oriel Solutions, Ltd.
Saladin Security, Ltd.


www.sourcewatch.org...

As was mentioned in other posts, it's a big gray area and allows plausable deniability.

Kevin Sites did a pretty good story (4 parts) about private security firms in his Hot Zone series.

hotzone.yahoo.com...

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Just to be sure I'm not misunderstood, I understand why governments do it, but I don't agree with their reasons.

A mercinary of any kind is a thug, plain and simple. There is a certain nobility to fighting for what you believe in, even if violence is always an ugly thing. There is no such nobility- and no respect for right and wrong- in fighting for something you don't believe in because the price is right.

Mercinaries are inherently dangerous because they can be paid to do things that should not be done, while a volunteer soldier in a national army who serves a specific ideal has limits to what he will do under normal circumstances (although, of course regular troops are succeptible to wrongdoing as well from time to time).

You're assuming that none of the contractors cares about anything but money first of all. Secondly, these guys aren't out conducting offensive ops, which mercs in the traditional sense would be doing. They are guarding facilities, VIPs, convoys, not out conducting raids, ambushes, HVT snatches, etc...

First of all the US government is pouring money for private mercs while turning a blind eye to the extend of the contracts private firms are using while hiring them.

I found this nice story about one British well know retire from British army Tim Spicer, he is under hire by our government, with a very shady scandal in Sierra leone and Equatorial Guinea.

After his scandals on arms dealing he is now under the pentagon contract.

$293 million Pentagon contract to coordinate security for reconstruction projects, as well as support for other private military companies, in Iraq. This effectively put him in command of the second-largest foreign armed force in the country—behind America's but ahead of Britain's. These men aren't officially part of the Coalition of the Willing, because they're all paid contractors—the Coalition of the Billing, you might call it—but they're a crucial part of the coalition's forces nonetheless.

One more reason for Iraqis to keep finding love for the US occupation of Iraq.

Many of this pay for hire mercs are nothing more than killers and trouble makers finding a good mine gold in business in Iraq.

One of their tactics has been to shoot first and ask questions later, and Iraqis have referred to some of these contractors as "black death." Some of them have been accused of shooting Iraqis for sport.

Yes we have the strict security forces to take care of the elite living at the expenses of tax payer money in Iraq

Then you got the shady guns for hire to do the dirty work that soldiers can not do.One of their tactics has been to shoot first and ask questions later, and Iraqis have referred to some of these contractors as "black death." Some of them have been accused of shooting Iraqis for sport.

That is what is happening in Iraq.

They are in Iraq not to win the hards and minds of Iraqi but to shot to kill and with a government that turns the eye the other way.

In November of 2005 a disgruntled Aegis ex-employee posted a so-called "trophy video" on the Internet depicting Aegis contractors—Tim Spicer's men—shooting at Iraqis in civilian cars. In one sequence, the Aegis team opens fire with an automatic weapon at an approaching silver Mercedes.

If you want to carry a gun and become a gun for hired is about 48,000 or more firms operating in Iraq and most of them are of the caliber as dirty as Mr. spicer one.

According to a February 2006 Government Accountability Office report, there were approximately 48,000 private military contractors in Iraq, employed by 181 different companies. There may now be many more. These are the kinds of people Tim Spicer and Aegis are supposed to coordinate. The bulk of the military contractors are American and British, with a sprinkling of other nationalities.

www.corpwatch.org...

Very soon soldiers will be no needed in Iraq after all, the mercs for hire will be doing all the dirty work at the expenses of tax payer money.

Isn't that sweet.

Sooner or later goverments will just be honest about it and instead of joining the U.S Army youll just go for a security job interview at Haliburton.

Originally posted by marg6043
If you want to carry a gun and become a gun for hired is about 48,000 or more firms operating in Iraq and most of them are of the caliber as dirty as Mr. spicer one.

Let's try not to generalize too much about contractors...sheesh.

Not every contractor over here is a gun-toting Rambo wanna be.

Originally posted by neformore
To be honest Marg, I'd be surprised if it was true. If there is one thing the British Military has never been able to stomach its mercenaries, especially if they are ex-forces staff.

Umm what about the gurkas? They are technically mercenaries since we pay them to fight for us.

There's a huge difference between "security professionals" and "mercs". Traditionally we think of mercs to play in an offensive roll. Most of the guys in Iraq working for Aegis, Blackwater, etc... are doing security details, escort and other defensive roles....for the most part.

There's nothing wrong with getting out of the service and using your skills to make a little extra $$$. Most of the contractors just do a 1-3 year gig, they were probably getting out of the service anyways.

Yes is many firms that are only to perform the security for dignitaries and the elite that grace the green zone.

But Aegis is one of those that have no only a shady CEO but also has been under investigation for gun happy trigger.

Of over 48,000 thousand firms working under British and US pay roll, you can guess how many more are nothing than trigger happy mer cs doing what the soldiers and the government agencies dare no to get involve into.

This brings memories of so call special ops that has been blame on US and British but nobody can point out or find out if they are truth.

Something I dig out on the well known Blackwater group that we are aware of the loses they have endured in Iraq during the war.

Controversy "America's Holy Warriors"
Erik Prince (bio) is "the secretive, mega-millionaire, right-wing Christian founder of Blackwater, the private security firm that has built a formidable mercenary force in Iraq," Chris Hedges wrote December 31, 2006, in Truthdig. Prince "champions his company as a patriotic extension of the U.S. military. His employees, in an act as cynical as it is deceitful, take an oath of loyalty to the Constitution. These mercenary units in Iraq, including Blackwater, contain some 20,000 fighters. They unleash indiscriminate and wanton violence against unarmed Iraqis, have no accountability and are beyond the reach of legitimate authority. The appearance of these paramilitary fighters, heavily armed and wearing their trademark black uniforms, patrolling the streets of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, gave us a grim taste of the future. It was a stark reminder that the tyranny we impose on others we will one day impose on ourselves."

I will be worry of this leader of the Blackwater mercenaries, this one is having a ball under the protection of the US here in our nation also. . .

Blackwater USA was co-founded by former Navy Seal Erik Prince, a "billionaire right-wing fundamentalist Christian from a powerful Michigan Republican family. A major Republican campaign contributor, he interned in the White House of President George H.W. Bush and campaigned for Pat Buchanan in 1992. He founded the mercenary firm Blackwater USA in 1997 with Gary Jackson, another former Navy SEAL."

www.sourcewatch.org...