I've been to many places you can't even imagine, and it was the experience of my life. I dealt with armies from the U.S. to Israel to Austria to India. I've been everywhere and I earned around $200,000 a year from the job. It's dangerous at times but exciting. You must have experience.
Our military is bound by too many rules. Contractors are not. This doesnt make them any different than the common soldier. If someone was shooting at you then ran away and tossed his gun you cannot engage that person because of ROE. So now that guy got away with what he did and can do it again. Contractors would be able to end it. Pay is great but I dont see how Contractors do it just for money seeing how most are prior military anyway. Its the same thing as the military, just pays way better and there are less rules.
First off, I'm glad to see I have the majority here, usually I only see protesters. Now, off to the debate. Note that I said private SECURITY CONTRACTORS, and not military. You see, private military contractors can range from logistics, to security, to intelligence, etc etc. I'm limiting it down to security contractors because those companies seem to be less greedy and less "In for them-selves", you feel me? I also support them because it gives ex-military veterans a chance to continue to make a living. This gives some ex-military a chance to escape the PTSD and urge to return to the military. Also, it gives the army relief. If you're in a high-conflict area and need to take action immediately, then you certainly do not want to be held up with protecting a diplomat or representative. So, the PSC's can take care of that.
Because mercenaries are not tethered to the laws that military soldiers are, they have more freedom to get their job done. Sure, it's not always pretty, but it is more effective when your troops are able to do the job they are hired to do when they don't have to worry about how someone else might feel about their actions
Private contractors, such as mercenaries, provide a vital service in the protection of government employees, such as state department personnel, traveling about foreign countries, without the protection of military force. These companies also allow private companies to provide protection and security to their assets that are located overseas.
The use of these contractors also allows countries that cannot afford a standing military to provide for their own defense.
Now that making money has expanded throughout the world, we are seeing more and more violent crime in foreign countries. These countries, by and large, allow foreign workers to enter, but offer little if no protection to them at all. In these cases, workers are often taken hostage, or worse, robbed and killed, while trying to obtain or transport goods. Allowing local mercenaries or private military contractors to help protect these workers is a good thing for not only the employees and their companies, but for local governments, as well.
I think the Mercenaries and private military contractors are the perfect answer to many of the countries problems. There are those who are ex-military and are therefore very qualified to get the job done and even those who are not are quite trained to specific guidelines and cannot strike out acting like "walking tall". I think that name dropping like hired killers are just plain rude and it sends the wrong signal to all the wrong people. Love your freedom? Then think about this. Who do you call upon when your freedom is threatened. It is never the six week basic training that makes a field soldier. Its his/her dedication to their country. Thank you.
Mercenaries and military contractors are helpful in dangerous situations. They provide an extra amount of support to the troops that are already fighting in war zones. They provide a service that allows them to enter areas that the military may be unauthorized to enter, and get jobs done that the military may not be able to legally accomplish. They put their lives on the line, just as the military does, and contribute an extra hand in the fight against injustice and wrongdoing.
Mercenaries and private contractors are hired, typically, to do the jobs either too dirty, or too dangerous for our ordinary service men and women. They are paid better for the service as well. Most of the time, their business, whether we like it or not, is necessary for our freedom to be upheld. Better to have an outsider do it, rather than someone connected to the government.
It is not technologically feasible to get all of the supplies needed to fight a war from America to whatever hot zone we happen to be in if it is too far away. The current solution is to establish military bases in other countries, however this is unjust. Therefore, the only alternative is to have a private military firm whose base of operations is in or near the hot zone who can use its military capital.
Private militia groups are known for being loonies. Seriously. Most private militia groups are neo-Nazis or white supremacists or paranoid crazies. Who would want to hire them to do any serious government military work? I think the world would be a very scary place is private military contractors were used for real military operations.
Mercenaries and private military contractors are a bad idea because they are not bound to law in the same way that direct military personnel are. Mercenaries and contractors only care about money, they don't really care how many people they have to kill, how much property they have to damage, or anything else. A great example of how mercenaries can get out of control is that of pirates in the Caribbean a couple of hundred years ago. Pirates started out as Privateers, state sponsored actors in the theater of battle or prisoner retrieval. That situation eventually got out of control and pirates became stateless mercenaries. While that example is extreme it provides a great illustration of the dangers of hiring mercenaries and/or military contractors.
When a state hires mercenaries to go to battle, the only reason the soldiers have for entering combat is the money they will receive. This is not necessarily a strong enough motive to ensure cooperative, loyal soldiers. A military person is much more likely to give his best energy to a cause if he feels passionate about it. The allure of money for military services often decreases when lives are at stake. Mercenaries have a much higher risk of mutiny or rebellion than voluntary citizen soldiers. Mercenaries are also less likely to accept the authority of a general than soldiers fighting for their own country.
It'd basically be like inviting civilians with profit interests into hot war zones. When you fight in war, it should be because you believe in your country - keeping it safe, not going after a monetary profit.
Mercenaries and private military contractors me, are kind of like hired guns. These people can go into situations and act with impunity whereas their military, to counterparts could be put on trial and sent to prison for the same actions. This seems to be a way to pass along the questionable assignments to outside sources in a way that absolves the military of blame.
If you ever get captured as a mercenary, you'll be killed immediately or tortured, while servicemen of a actual country will be respected to the point of the UN national laws on humanity. Mercenaries don't fall under that rule so you'd better lie that you're a soldier like the rest. If they find out you're a mercenary you're toast.
PMC are absolutely not a good idea. Just checkout Blackwater and their history with killing civillians for no apparent reason, there was barely any accountability! the only reason that Americans would ever supports PMCs is simply because they don't want to see the bodies of their troops coming back home. That is understandable, but why would you want to put a contracting company - that would remain accountable to no one, on the battlefield? Anything can happen, and who will ensure the right people are held responsible? According to the current UN definition and the previous actions of the US government, they would remain scott-free.
pirats where disbanded by the crown. this caused them to go roug they where a key military element semilair to our navy seals ........ not a good refrence
I think we can look at history and see quite a variety of people that have done things in battle because they were paid mercenaries that we would look upon regretfully. If one has the funds to purchase mercenary services or military contractors, why not just use those funds to do it ourselves? This saves the possibility of duplicity.
While private contractors may work well for some security only operations, having them visible as a front line presence lessens the ability of the regular army command to keep track of and control situations. If there is more than one point of command there is more chance of a breakdown of communications and less control over behaviors of individuals not under direct control of the military.