Quote :

" BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraq's Interior Ministry has revoked the license of Blackwater Security Consulting, an American firm whose contractors are blamed for a Sunday gunbattle in Baghdad that left eight civilians dead. The firefight took place near Nisoor Square about noon, an Interior Ministry official said Sunday. In addition to the fatalities, 14 people were wounded, most of them civilians, the official said. Details were sketchy, but the official said witnesses reported that one side of the gunbattle involved Westerners driving sport utility vehicles, which security contractors often use. The state television network al-Iraqiya reported that a Western security company was involved in the shootout, but it did not identify the firm. "

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/17/iraq.main/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

It's about fucking time.

9/17/2007 9:21:28 AM

This is pretty big news. From what I've read, Blackwater is a collection of mercenaries with a CEO who completely buys the neo-conservative platform and is intent on putting together the ability to field a brigade size unit in under 30 days.

Shady.

At best.

9/17/2007 9:26:14 AM

800 million revenue for a company of 1000 people? That's a fucking shitload of money. I'm guessing some republican twit was trying to prove that private industry was better than public industry at war.

9/17/2007 9:32:36 AM

^ No one knows this, but there are more civilians for us in Iraq then military.

[Edited on September 17, 2007 at 9:34 AM. Reason : .]

9/17/2007 9:34:00 AM

To be fair, the vast majority of those civilians are not even remotely armed.

9/17/2007 9:35:47 AM

wow. this will really put to test the US Govt rhetoric of allowing the Iraqis to run their own country.

9/17/2007 9:38:42 AM

I HIGHLY doubt that this will be any sort of permanent ban. Blackwater has its hands in way too many pockets in Iraq to be outright banned. The security vacuum that would ensue would be a nightmare for all involved and the interior ministry knows this. My bet would be that the Interior ministry will impose a temporary ban to make a point that the contractors need to be reigned in quite a bit and then it will be back to business as usual.

Quote :

"intent on putting together the ability to field a brigade size unit in under 30 days. "

I remember when Cofer Black mentioned this in Egypt some time ago, but wasnt the statement quickly retracted soon after? Of course, that doesnt mean that they arent gunning for it.

Quote :

"800 million revenue for a company of 1000 people?"

It sounds like a ridiculous amount at first glance. But you have to realize that they only maintain a skeleton staff as actual employees. The vast majority of people working for them are contractors and thus arent included in that 1000 count.

Quote :

"^ No one knows this, but there are more civilians for us in Iraq then military."

So if no one knows this, where are you getting your info? Besides, being a civilian in Iraq, does not mean that you are gunslinger running around as a PSD. If I had to guess, I would bet that the vast majority of civilians working on USG contracts are unarmed.

Quote :

"wow. this will really put to test the US Govt rhetoric of allowing the Iraqis to run their own country."

It'll be an exercise in Diplomacy, not running their country for them

[Edited on September 17, 2007 at 9:44 AM. Reason : 0]

9/17/2007 9:43:02 AM

Quote :

"So if no one knows this, where are you getting your info? Besides, being a civilian in Iraq, does not mean that you are gunslinger running around as a PSD. If I had to guess, I would bet that the vast majority of civilians working on USG contracts are unarmed."

People that've been there.

I wasn't talking about gunslingers, I'm talking about people brought in doing jobs that the military previously did but no longer do cause they're not capable, like maintenance of aircraft, just cause all the squadrons are full of enlistees that some branches of the military never trained. There's also a large number of what are called TCN's (or third country nationals), that are brought in for very menial labor from poor countries as contracts. Which to me yells "security risk" for their presence on bases.

I can't speak for USG contracts, but USG employees on bases are encouraged to carry a gun. However, if they die and have a gun in their possession, their government life insurance policy is automatically void, which is really a s*** way of doing things.

When I say no one knows this, I mean it's not talked about and the press don't put it in the newspaper. Americans have an opinion of what a war looks like, and it's our brave soldiers going off into battle defending the country. They don't like to think of it as a Kuwaiti security firm receiving a multi-million dollar paycheck from the US government and one of their employees carry out an attack that kills two soldiers.

That's why when deaths from Iraq are reported, military ones take precedence and few in the media or Congress pay attention or give a s*** about civilian ones unless they're journalists. They're seen as no better than mercenaries, and yet without them, we would've lost this war at the start. It disturbs me that there's been no discussion on this on a national scale, both to discuss the potential in the future by entrusting multi-national corporations that can have non-American directors control them play such an important role in our military's fortunes and results, and the impotency of our military in certain sectors whenever they face a war against an enemy with much higher capability to inflict damage.

[Edited on September 17, 2007 at 10:06 AM. Reason : /]

9/17/2007 9:59:38 AM

I pretty much knew what you mean when you mentioned that no one knows, i was just trying to have a little fun. Of course there are tons of civilians in formerly military roles but this isnt just limited to Iraq. Many of these civilian positions are available here in the U.S. It is honestly a pretty interesting subject and I can see reasonable arguments from people on both sides of the fence.

I know quite a few Bosnians who have gone to Iraq as TCNs doing menial jobs for decent pay (by their standards). I agree that there is an inherent security risk if you don't vet your contractors properly, and even then you can never be 100% certain. When I worked for the USG in Bosnia, we had lost of local nationals working around us and even providing some of the security. They were properly vetted but their movement within the compound was very limited. The bottom line for the US is that there are far more foreigners willing to do these menial jobs in Iraq for relatively low pay than there are Americans lining up.

Are the USG employees officially encouraged to carry a weapon or is it an unspoken type of thing. As I understand it, in the last few years they have been clamping down on who is allowed to be armed and those that are possess some type of credentials stating such.

9/17/2007 10:10:32 AM

im glad to hear this, im still baffled as to how the goverment thinks that private armies are a good thing,

it is inevitable that anything that can go wrong with private armies, will.

9/17/2007 11:55:08 AM

Are private colleges a bad idea? The North Carolina government, for example, pays grants to students to encourage attendance at private colleges. A big reason for paying this money is that NC public colleges simply cannot accommodate every student that will be attending.

Similarly, the current size of the US military force cannot accommodate every security situation that will be needed. The Iraqis, of course, should be providing for their own security from their own forces. In the interim, however, private security forces will continue to be needed, whether it's Blackwater or other security organizations.

But I, too, have concerns about an overreliance on private security firms in war zones, particularly when they become involved in specific missions.

9/17/2007 12:13:13 PM

^ a well-reasoned post.







































... holy shit, was that hooksaw?

9/17/2007 12:17:36 PM

9/17/2007 1:10:32 PM

I really don't know what to think of Blackwater now...

they started off as a LEO training type company, but now it seems that they've gotten their "big break" with this war... but I do understand the point... these guys are better trained than most any noob soldier that comes out of basic so it's cheaper to pay these guys...

it's a cool place though, I've taken classes and such there...

My ex's father was an instructor there so I got to learn a lot for free

9/17/2007 1:34:47 PM

I think what many are failing to realize in this particular situation is that the PSD in question was part of a department of state convoy. The US military likely wouldnt be providing security for State convoys if contractors werent in play, that would fall on the Diplomatic Security Service. It makes perfect sense to augment the DSS asst regional security officers in Iraq with already trained personal security details rather than train a new cadre of DSS agents only to lay them off when the security situation chills out a bit.

Quote :

"im glad to hear this, im still baffled as to how the goverment thinks that private armies are a good thing, "

In their current incarnation, these PMCs aren't really classifiable as private armies. This isn't Executive Outcomes in Sierra Leone (yes, I am aware that Aegis Defence is founded by former members of EO). While Blackwater may have aspirations of creating a brigade sized rapidly deployable force, their guys in Iraq are defensive in nature and not armed much past small arms. In theory, they aim to minimize engagements with the enemy. Should they be tightly regulated, absolutely. They fall into a grey area in Iraq as a result of the CPA.

9/17/2007 7:05:47 PM

Quote :

"Blackwater was also hired during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina by the Department of Homeland Security, as well as by private clients, including communications, petrochemical and insurance companies.[20] In each case, Blackwater received a non-bid contract. Overall, the company has received over 500 million dollars in government contracts.[21]"

9/17/2007 7:24:01 PM

won't last long since the man who bank rolls the current administration is the man behind blackwater.

9/17/2007 9:38:17 PM

is he, by chance, a dirty jew?

9/17/2007 10:48:58 PM

BW will not be leaving Iraq. DoS security providers (meaning BW, Triple Canopy and DynCorp) do not operate under a MOI license like commercial contract providers do.

The rules of engagement, equipment, training standards and personnel selection are ALL established and managed by the State Department. The guy's on the ground are operationally controlled by the Diplomatic Security Service Agents.

The bottom line (as stated by the initial reports) the Team encountered an IED initiated complex attack and covered and evacuated their principles with no loss of life. They did their job.

Insurgents routinely use civillians as cover.

9/17/2007 11:53:09 PM

word. i grew up/live bout 20 mins from Blaqwater.

9/18/2007 12:01:56 AM

Quote :

"BW will not be leaving Iraq. DoS security providers (meaning BW, Triple Canopy and DynCorp) do not operate under a MOI license like commercial contract providers do. The rules of engagement, equipment, training standards and personnel selection are ALL established and managed by the State Department. The guy's on the ground are operationally controlled by the Diplomatic Security Service Agents."

And political pressure trumps all of this. Iraqis already hate blackwater, and the US will not engage in an open showdown with one of its biggest supporters in the government the US is trying to setup.

9/18/2007 12:04:06 AM

^^^ Regardless of their status, it looks pretty damn bad if contract soliders we hire kill 6 Iraqi civilians, Iraqi gov. tells them to GTFO, and we spit in their faces and ignore them.

This will not, in any way, reflect positively on America, Americans, or the occupation.

[Edited on September 18, 2007 at 12:05 AM. Reason : ]

9/18/2007 12:05:05 AM

^well since thats really not what this administration cares about, i'm sure blackwater will remain.

9/18/2007 12:16:46 AM

Quote :

"a well-reasoned post. ... holy shit, was that hooksaw? "

joe_schmoe

Yeah, when you agree with me--or something akin to it--I've somehow managed to spew forth a "well-reasoned post." Try taking off the left-wing ideologue's bug-eyed goggles more often--you'll be surprised at what you see.

Quote :

""

JCASHFAN

You, too.

9/18/2007 1:19:09 AM

Quote :

"Similarly, the current size of the US military force cannot accommodate every security situation that will be needed. The Iraqis, of course, should be providing for their own security from their own forces. In the interim, however, private security forces will continue to be needed, whether it's Blackwater or other security organizations."

Iraqis WERE providing their own security until G.W.B. came in and bombed the hell out of it, toppled the government and provided a new anarchy.

9/18/2007 1:23:00 AM

You call this security?

9/18/2007 1:32:08 AM

no, I call that a photograph.

kind of like this photograph....


[Edited on September 18, 2007 at 1:33 AM. Reason : .]

9/18/2007 1:32:37 AM

i had never heard of blackwater until today

9/18/2007 1:34:31 AM

/message_topic.aspx?topic=479007

9/18/2007 1:36:09 AM

thanks, i'll read that and wiki some stuff

9/18/2007 1:37:39 AM

There was a guy on TDS talking about them... watch The Daily Show some more.

9/18/2007 1:39:01 AM

Quote :

"Yeah, when you agree with me--or something akin to it--I've somehow managed to spew forth a "well-reasoned post.""

Nah, it had nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing. It had everything to do with the fact that you synthesized information from a number of different viewpoints, arrived at a conclusion and stated your opinion without:
a) using essentially meaningless graphics
b) questioning the mental abilities, sexual habits, or rabies state of those who disagree with you
c) and without resorting to a

Its almost as if someone hacked your account to try and make you respectable, but you smashed that idea pretty quickly.

Quote :

"You call this security?"

Not in the least but, and I'll put this out there, to the question that is repeated ad nauseum by Sean Hannity, "is the world better off without Saddam Hussein in power?" the answer is: no.

While there is no questioning Saddam's evil, the net effect of the invasion and subsequent occupation has been a precipitous drop in the security of Iraq and stability in the Middle East as a whole. Since our economic well being is so closely tied to the availability of (relatively) cheap oil, the overall security of the United States is arguably lower. Couple this with the over-extension of the military, the loss of any kind of moral capital in the world (right or wrong) and the fact -- now readily admitted -- that Iraq had little to nothing to do with al Quaida, and you have a net loss for national security. The mere absence of a terrorist attack in the years since September 11th belies the fact that more people are at least ambivalent if not downright opposed to the United States and its foreign policy than any period since at least the Vietnam war.

[Edited on September 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM. Reason : .]

9/18/2007 12:04:13 PM

"And political pressure trumps all of this. Iraqis already hate blackwater, and the US will not engage in an open showdown with one of its biggest supporters in the government the US is trying to setup."

I will bet my salary nothing comes of this. These incidents would happen if the Team was a Military Team or a Team of DS Special Agents. Maliki is on the way out and is feeling pressure from all sides, this incident just shows how little control he actually has. He is trying to revoke a license that doesn't even exist. He is trying to placate some of his cronies.

9/18/2007 1:52:54 PM

^i think you win the thread

Quote :

" The bottom line (as stated by the initial reports) the Team encountered an IED initiated complex attack and covered and evacuated their principles with no loss of life. They did their job. Insurgents routinely use civillians as cover."

Why was this not used as a defense by those in charge? Maybe the media failed to report on it...

9/18/2007 3:04:27 PM

Canohana adsoluely wins the thread. I was really hoping/waiting for him to pop in and drop the knowledge. Maliki is on his way out and the MOI is in shambles and they are grasping at anything that can gain momentum with their constituents. Revoking an imaginary license just further illustrates this. Even if said license existed and Blackwater were to be expelled from the country it wouldnt change anything for joe-Iraqi. They would still run into contractor run convoys from any of the dozens of other PMCs out there.

Quote :

"Why was this not used as a defense by those in charge? Maybe the media failed to report on it..."

I would guess that the media absolutely failed to report on it or more importantly, it should go without saying. The convoy had a vehicle disabled in the attack that lasted twenty minutes according to witnesses. They managed to break contact and bring everyone home safely. They did their job and it is a shame that civilians were killed/injured in the process.

9/18/2007 3:21:23 PM

Quote :

"800 million revenue for a company of 1000 people?"

That's only $800,000 per person. And as a civillian group in a war zone, I would demand to be paid top dollar too. Of course, that number is high because it's accounting for 0 overhead.

9/18/2007 3:31:45 PM

https://secure.blackwaterusa.com/

(job application)

9/18/2007 3:44:13 PM

If this had happened to KBR instead of Blackwater I'd really have something to jerk off to in the bathroom at Whole Foods.

9/18/2007 4:18:52 PM

i heard something about a drunken blackwater guy shooting an iraqi security guard last christmas eve. blackwater flew him out of iraq immediately. The DOJ said they were going to look into it, but nothing has come of it.

9/18/2007 4:40:39 PM

might not work

9/18/2007 7:30:25 PM

so, is it true that the US passed a bill that says that BW doesn't have to abide by Iraqi laws? If so... wow... just wow.

9/18/2007 8:02:55 PM

Shaq actually just visited Blackwater's trainning facility last week in Camden NC. They train people for lots of different things mainly body guards.

9/18/2007 9:46:28 PM

Quote :

"a) using essentially meaningless graphics"

JCASHFAN

What, you mean like this one posted by you?

/message_topic.aspx?topic=485359&page=3

And have you been checked for rabies? Just asking. (The emoticons are here for a reason--you use the ones you like when you like and I'll do the same, okay?)

Concerning the topic at issue, I would just like to point out that it's easy as hell to sit here and judge these Blackwater security personnel--who are mostly ex-US soldiers--when you are not under heavy fire as they continually are. I daresay that many of you would react the same way these guys did--and if you didn't, you'd probably be dead.

Click on the video tab in this link and look at the animation of the bombing and the crossfire these guys were facing:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/18/iraq/main3271151.shtml

You tell me.

[Edited on September 19, 2007 at 12:31 AM. Reason : .]

9/19/2007 12:29:52 AM

Just a couple of remarks on a few of the posts above:

The State Department said exactly what it should have said, which was "that the Diplomatic Security Service would investigate the incident for ROE compliance". Every incident of what is called "Escalation of Force" (which can mean everything from shooting a small pen flare at fast moving vehicles, to throwing a smoke grenade to shooting a vehicle and finally the shooting of a person) is investigated fully.

Everyone needs to understand that their are many different levels of what the media calls "Security Contractors". The three contract providers for the Department of State (Dyn, BW and TC) do not operate under an Iraqi MOI license because they are part of the Diplomatic Mission in Iraq. People need to understand that these companies also have what we call "commercial contracts" as well. These programs are completely different from the DoS programs. Clients dictate the personnel requirements such as level of experience, qualifications and such. These are the programs that waver in quality.

The $800 million for a company of a 1000 people is very inaccurate. They have a 1000 people in Iraq plus people in many other countries and some of that money comes from training programs they run.

The average BW guy makes $525 a day in Iraq.

The druken BW guy shooting the guard last Christmas was something that we all thought was going to blow up pretty big but really didn't. That was an incident deserving of total outrage, not this current one. It should also be noted that the BW guy was a support guy (armorer) and not a Personal Security Specialist. PSS are screened and selected to a much higher criteria then support guy's.

The US did not pass a bill that says BW doesn't have to abide by Iraqi law. What everyone is refering to is a line left over from the CPA day's that simply states that civillian security personnel cannot be tried or held by Iraqi government officials. This is in large part due to the fact that Iraqi Police and Security Services are knee deep in death squad, K&R, hijacking convoys and other criminal activity.

The BW training facility at Myock trains mostly law enforcement and DoD personnel in many skill sets, it is not mostly teaching protection operations what most people refer to as bodyguard operations.

With all of that said let me say that BW has had issues. They got to big to quick and grew at a rate that the leadership couldn't really mold their people like other companies could. They also have a high turn over rate so institutional knowledge and on the ground experience is lacking on some teams.

I do not work for BW. I never have.

I actually work for another provider on the same contract and have for the last three and a half years now.

9/19/2007 11:40:18 AM

update:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/19/iraq.fateful.day/index.html

interesting. seems the two sides have exactly opposite stories

[Edited on September 19, 2007 at 5:29 PM. Reason : .]

9/19/2007 5:29:18 PM

hmm, each side as a story that is its own best interest. who would have thought....

9/19/2007 6:12:30 PM

Quote :

"The US did not pass a bill that says BW doesn't have to abide by Iraqi law. What everyone is refering to is a line left over from the CPA day's that simply states that civillian security personnel cannot be tried or held by Iraqi government officials."

Interesting. I was listening to NPR yesterday (oh noes, NPR!) and they said that the US had passed a law that said BW "didn't have to follow Iraqi laws," which is quite different than what you are saying. Someone call Drudge!!! It's that evil liberal bias at work!!!


ftr, a cursory glance at some articles on CNN reiterates what canohana said about the subject

9/19/2007 6:59:40 PM

i dont like the fact that we encourage private companies to stock up on arms
and make a living on private and government contracts
and as they grow this all leads to a potential abuse by someone to use their force for evil

and how come they can carry automatic weapons when regular people cant? please enlighten me.

9/19/2007 7:37:39 PM

regular people can...you can get a class 3 permit...however, just like BW, you are subject to random searches of your property...you essentially sign over your constitutional right to prevent illegal search and seizure....course if you know your sheriff well you might be able to prevent that...

9/19/2007 7:42:41 PM

Quote :

"and how come they can carry automatic weapons when regular people cant?"

many of the BW guys are certified and sworn LEOs anyway

plus getting a class 3 can be done

not to mention that it's even easier to get a C3 permit when used for "business purposes"

I think law abiding citizens should be allowed to own and operate automatic and supressed weapons anyway...

^ and what he said

9/19/2007 7:51:03 PM