Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

  1. #31
    Sage
    EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 12:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,027

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Yup, they've never been used ever, until Bush, right?
    Not for security. Our military has always been responsible for that previously.
    Last edited by EnigmaO01; 12-20-09 at 12:14 PM.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Showing you have no clue as to why the fuel cost in Afghanistan is so high. Hint: it has to do with the fact the region is at war, and is not transportation friendly.
    I know the drawbacks to transporting most anything into and out of Afghanistan, trust me, I've tried to send numerous items in and out, and for a while was working with my Dad to get him out on a flight. I mean, do you know how hard it is to wheel an 80 gallon drum down a goat path? Not. Fun.

  3. #33
    Educator ScottD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    06-27-11 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    977

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Wait for it!

    *** it's Bush's fault***
    If you say so, even though I am surprised you are blaming Bush. I thought us liberals were the ones who did that.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    10-14-11 @ 10:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,164

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Enemy View Post
    Yeah, but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
    Actually, it makes perfect sense. Their primary job is protection, not offensive operations. They don't own battlespace, they don't partner with HNF, they aren't required to gather or report intelligence. They aren't contracted to conduct recon, nor lethally target.

    You don't join the invading side to play defender. Their PR may say that they only play defense-tackle, but there's substantial evidence that they've run a few plays of their own, or two, or three.
    They very well could have done their own targeting, but that isn't their job and I am pretty sure that any targeting they may have done wasn't sanctioned by any U.S. HQ.

    In my experience seeing Blackwater, they usually just rolled out on convoys providing force pro to whoever they were guarding. They are entitled to protect themselves if engaged, but that's the extent of it.

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Enemy View Post
    they've run a few plays of their own, or two, or three.
    you silly.

  6. #36
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    That sound a little different than this case. Essentially, as I understand it, the contractors are paying protection money to the enemy, and essentially billing us for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I'm surprised that people are pretty quiet about this. Their tax dollars are indirectly funding the enemy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I thought it was a big deal when I saw it. I think the quietness has to do with the fact it's not really a debate topic. Who is going to come out in favor of paying protection money to the enemy?
    US and allied forces have been doing this exact same thing for years:

    US bribe insurgents to fight Al-Qaeda - Times Online

    AMERICAN forces are paying Sunni insurgents hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to switch sides and help them to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

    The tactic has boosted the efforts of American forces to restore some order to war-torn provinces around Baghdad in the run-up to a report by General David Petraeus, the US commander, to Congress tomorrow.

    Petraeus will tell Congress that there has been great progress at a local level in Iraq following a surge in the number of troops this year, but little sign of political reconciliation.

    In a letter to US troops, the general wrote that “local Iraqi leaders are coming forward, opposing extremists and establishing provisional units of neighbourhood security volunteers”.

    The Sunday Times has witnessed at first hand the enormous sums of cash changing hands. One sheikh in a town south of Baghdad was given $38,000 (£19,000) and promised a further $189,000 over three months to drive Al-Qaeda fighters from a nearby camp.
    Army tells its soldiers to 'bribe' the Taleban - Times Online

    British forces should buy off potential Taleban recruits with “bags of gold”, according to a new army field manual published yesterday.

    Army commanders should also talk to insurgent leaders with “blood on their hands” in order to hasten the end of the conflict in Afghanistan.

    The edicts, which are contained in rewritten counter-insurgency guidelines, will be taught to all new army officers. They mark a strategic rethink after three years in which British and Nato forces have failed to defeat the Taleban. The manual is also a recognition that the Army’s previous doctrine for success against insurgents, which was based on the experience in Northern Ireland, is now out of date.

    The new instructions came on the day that Gordon Brown went farther than before in setting out Britain’s exit strategy from Afghanistan. The Prime Minister stated explicitly last night that he wanted troops to begin handing over districts to Afghan authorities during next year — a general election year in Britain.

    Addressing the issue of paying off the locals, the new manual states that army commanders should give away enough money to dissuade them from joining the enemy. The Taleban is known to pay about $10 (£5.95) a day to recruit local fighters.
    If it's okay when the US and British governments do it, then why is it being investigated when private contractors do it? From my perspective, it sounds like the Dems in Congress are simply returning to fertile soil to find something to attack the Republicans.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #37
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:22 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,326
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Nice to see you RightInNYC, you have not been around enough lately.

    I think there is a difference between paying people to fight for us, and paying the enemy not to attack us. One works us closer to success, one only delays the fighting, and adds resources to the enemy.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #38
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Nice to see you RightInNYC, you have not been around enough lately.
    Nice to see you too - I just finished up finals, so I should be around more now.

    I think there is a difference between paying people to fight for us, and paying the enemy not to attack us. One works us closer to success, one only delays the fighting, and adds resources to the enemy.
    I just don't see that much of a difference, especially if we don't know the exact details of what was going on here.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #39
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:22 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,326
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Congress to probe private military contractors in Afghanistan

    Wonderful news there. Your presence has been missed.

    As I understand this, the issue is that money is going directly from contractors to the Taliban in this case. In other words, we are funding them at a single remove. I think that is not acceptable. Needless to say, the investigations are not complete, but if we are funding our enemies, that I think has to stop.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •