It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Blackwater building an airforce?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Blackwater building an airforce?


www.strategypage.com

August 27, 2007: Security company Blackwater U.S.A. is buying Super Tucano light combat aircraft from the Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. These five ton, single engine, single seat aircraft are built for pilot training, but also perform quite well for counter-insurgency work.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Is Blackwater now going to expand it's operations from the realm of security into offensive capabilities? I know they already have quite an offensive capability but this certainly moves them up a step into a fully fledged paramilitary force.
I find it worrying that these private security corporations are getting so much business, paid for by us taxpayers, whilst remaining outside of the military chain of command and as such are a politically deployed force. I believe they can also be deputised for domestic deployment too, which I believe happened in some places in the aftermath of Katrina.

So, to summarise, we have a large heavily armed force, paid for by taxpayers, doing the bidding of politicians without any military or civil oversight. Scary stuff indeed!

www.strategypage.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Why not? Genovese mercernaries were hired by France during the Hundred Years War. Before that mercernaries were also around. Why should the future be any different?



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Why not? Genovese mercernaries were hired by France during the Hundred Years War. Before that mercernaries were also around. Why should the future be any different?


So in essence, what you are saying is that it's ok for these guys to be hired by supposedly civilised governments to do their dirty work? Not forgetting the huge profits these private corporations make, paid for by people who have no say in the matter.
Then there is the accountability issue, something that is sadly lacking right now as they are not bound by military or civil law in their rules of engagement or operations.
What about domestic deployment? They are not all US citizens so many would not have a problem offing a few Americans to earn their high pay if ordered to do so.

Surely the work they do should be the duty of accountable forces, not a for-profit organisation?



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Not quite. In essence what I'm saying is that mercernaries are here to stay, so long as there are people who'll pay them. And the lack of accountability is what makes them even more attractive in this modern era where "civilised" governments are accountable for the actions their military undertake.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Britguy
I am in general agreement with your thoughts.

Some of the US public and to an extent the government seem to have concerns of the private 'so called militia' groups of citizens that get formed. Although some may be a bit 'out there', some are just worried citizens.

Here is a commercial for profit group in good with the government. If a perceived need against the public is needed I believe that they will but used and paid for by the US taxpayer. A US military unit outside the military rules. I am concerned and have been since the start.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   
I am a tax payer. And I don't mind it a bit. After all, I am an American tax payer and as far as I know their working for American green backs. They are on our side..... Maybe I'm not seeing the problem here. Please elaborate further on why I should be concerned with Blackwater's acquiring these planes.


As I may change my mind. If the concern proves to be valid. The only way I see that I would be concerned with this operation. Is if they turned and attacked us for some strange reason. Again maybe I am not seeing the whole picture here.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
It's worth noting that current law prohibits Federal troops from acting against U.S. citizens on domestic soil. No such provision exists in regards to mercenaries.

[edit on 28-8-2007 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
It's worth noting that current law prohibits Federal troops from acting against U.S. citizens on domestic soil. No such provision exists in regards to mercenaries.


I aree Justin. The texbook case was Hurricane Katrina. While police and other agencies were busy dissarming american citizens, Blackwate acted (by unofficial reports) as law enforcement in the disaster stricken areas, such as securing neighborhoods and confronting criminals.


Don Monkerud makes an interesting argument on the US use of mercenaries:


"As a new nation, after defeating mercenaries sent by King George III of England, America prided itself on having a citizens' army. Even after Congress abolished the draft and instituted a professional army, our soldiers were American citizens, protecting the nation. Today's "deregulated" military adds a totally new dimension. . . ."
Source


During the American Revolution, Americans fought mercenaries for your independence. Are you now to embrace them?"



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I and others on ATS have suggested for quite some time that Federal officials have been...attracted...to the idea of private contractors that are capable of acting on U.S. soil. Simple deputy powers can be conferred on these mercenaries to allow them the lawful authority to detain and hold (without Miranda) or to patrol and secure using establsihed self-defense guidelines. These minor legal powers would be enough to allow companies like Blackwater to shoot looters or to engage and repel street gangs.

At an earlier point in our history when we had greater faith in our government, these initiatives might have been welcomed with some patriotism. Today, they are questioned. The new reality is that mercenaries are not bound by most military conventions. They never have been.

In the unlikely event that it shouldh appen, we could see firms like Blackwater called in to deal with local or regional revolts. There's no doubt that backed-up search-and-strike elements from these companies could canvas a neighborhood in search of insurgents or illegal arms. Federal officials would have at least one layer of deniability at their disposal if something should go wrong.

As we've seen in Iraq, heavy maneuver formations are not neceesary for urban passification. Private sector contractors don't need main battle tanks, nor do they need some of the more high-profile tools of war. They do need mobility, fire support, comms, and an appearance of legitimacy.

Its not unreasonable to expect these private armies to acquire aviation assets. Their ground-attack needs are minimal, but their aerial observation and ELINT needs would be quite large and extensive. It goes without saying that troop movements and medical evacs would be greatly improved with the appropriate airplanes and helicopters on hand.

The 'vertical' nature of urban combat will most certain concern these contractors. They will most likely go out of their way to buy and use helicopters to facilitate tactical troop insertions in heavy built-up city sectors. We should expect to see LAV's of all sorts at work in these urban combat zones. Weapons carriers and troop taxis used by these companies will be smaller and less conspicuous than their military counterparts.

The simple fact of the matter is that today's American leaders have made a complete study of events in Iraq, as well as actions here at home such as Waco and Ruby Ridge. The flexibility of private units is tempting. The deniability they'd provide is appealing. The extra punch they'd provide for embattled politicians might be too much to resist.

Suggested Reading



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 08:59 PM
link   
They probably do need these types of planes since they are limited to helos watching over convoys which are easy to get shot down by the insurgents...and it has happened before.

Blackwater has already built vehicles design to be tougher against IEDs than our own armored Humvees. Who knows what else Blackwater can get their hands on.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:04 PM
link   
I consider Blackwater the only militia group backed by our administration and with the ability to get their hands on all kind of weapons even aircrafts as the thread suggested.

Let any America born militia do something like that and they will be prosecuted by the law.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I consider Blackwater the only militia group backed by our administration and with the ability to get their hands on all kind of weapons even aircrafts as the thread suggested. Let any America born militia do something like that and they will be prosecuted by the law.


The future of American militias is very much in doubt. I'm sure that in due time, the MSM will make a very sharp destinction between defense contractors and militias.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham

The future of American militias is very much in doubt. I'm sure that in due time, the MSM will make a very sharp destinction between defense contractors and militias.


Nah its not in doubt,

today.reuters.com...


By Laura MacInnis

GENEVA (Reuters) - The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.

U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.

About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said.


"There is roughly one firearm for every seven people worldwide. Without the United States, though, this drops to about one firearm per 10 people," it said.


Anybody who tries to invade the U.S. will be in for a big surprise.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 


Very good sir! I commend you on two well versed postings. You have obviously done your homework and are well read.

If I may add, Blackwater is not only purchasing air frames but is alo fabricating them. And I'm not just talking about the "Recon Airships" that everyone knows about, oh yes, there is more and not just for observation purposes. Stealth technologies are also in te works..lots of fun in the near future!

Ps: Not fair to just demonize Blackwater, you can throw in TITAN and CACI in the pot too. Pretty soon you won't know who is shooting at you.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Posse Comitatus is already gone, the police are already militarized. They have machine guns and black outfits. And according to the John Warner defense authorization act of 06, Bush can use troops to enforce laws using US troops during any emergency Bush declare, from riot to economic crash to anything he thinks is an emergency.

And maybe there are more guns in the US, but less people having guns. More guns per people, but less people using them and less people being able to use them. Also, if the government would declare martial law, there's a bunch of your neighboor who would call the police to say that you have guns and wants to fight them.

And see, in China they have 46 millions firearms... and they don't revolt trying to overthrow their dictatorship... why so? So if the Chineses don't overthrow their government with 46 millions firearms and plenty of fighters, why the americans would act differently?

[edit on 28-8-2007 by Vitchilo]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


There is a big difference in the heart of a Chinese and an American, and I don't mean physically.



posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by infiltr8u

It's worth noting that there are many private firms which are now capable of fielding a variety of military forces. America as a nation might have a lot of guns, but we are lacking the will to use them in a patriotic role. If and when these priavte forces are used by Federal officials, they'll do so with as much up-front legal 'cover' as they can.

I've been writing about this sort of thing since 2004. Federal law enforcement officials have been "wanting" this kind of capability for a long time. Yes, it can be used agaisnt us here at home, but its got other applicaitons, too. Some of you may recall that a mercenary outfit called Executive Outcomes played an important role in US. foriegn policy in the mid to late 90's. Imagine a scentario in which President Clinton would like to get something done, but she doesn't want to use the regular army. Who is she gonna call?



posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 

sorry to be off topic but your avatar looks like a life version of peter griffin from family guy



posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 10:45 PM
link   


Who knows what else Blackwater can get their hands on.


Ever heard of a SDB? They will probably arm those Super Tucanos with these little babies.

source

These little puppies are accurate to within 3ft from 40 miles!

Is it one minute to midnight, or one minute after?




top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join