View Full Version : Mercs
AngelsSix
07-18-2004, 23:06
There was a great special on History about them tonight.....I saw quite a few familiar faces......good history. I think everyone should see it, especially because it show the real situations, especially in Africa.
Did they mention a guy called Roland?
I hear he was good with a Thompson..
:D
The Reaper
07-19-2004, 05:45
Originally posted by Solid
Did they mention a guy called Roland?
I hear he was good with a Thompson..
:D
Roland was a warrior, from the land of the midnight sun.
He was only TDY to Africa.
TR
Contracted out of Denmark, I believe he headed for Biafra to help the congolese.
Asprin isn't going to help that headache, that's for sure...
brewmonkey
07-19-2004, 09:14
I would have rather just sent the envoy and tried to work it out first.
As for the show, it was a POS that made PMC's to be nothing but a bunch of money hungry people who only want to kill. The part on the Africa bush wars really made it worse. They showed a rather lengthy piece on EO and how they were hired by the governments of some countries to fight the wars in Africa.
They started the show with an interview from Mr. Battles and then only briefly mentioned some of the others like KBR & Dyncorp. They never mentioned Blackwater but they did show the aftermath of the March ambush. Way to go dickheads!
Sorry but the show missed the mark on educating Joe Q. Public on what the PMC's are doing today as opposed to the 60's-70's.
I find that most documentaries lack complete information. This is probably because they have to simplify for audience and time constraints.
Can you buy these documentaries on video or DVD?'
Thank you,
Solid
Kyobanim
07-19-2004, 10:18
Originally posted by brewmonkey
I would have rather just sent the envoy and tried to work it out first.
As for the show, it was a POS that made PMC's to be nothing but a bunch of money hungry people who only want to kill. The part on the Africa bush wars really made it worse. They showed a rather lengthy piece on EO and how they were hired by the governments of some countries to fight the wars in Africa.
They started the show with an interview from Mr. Battles and then only briefly mentioned some of the others like KBR & Dyncorp. They never mentioned Blackwater but they did show the aftermath of the March ambush. Way to go dickheads!
Sorry but the show missed the mark on educating Joe Q. Public on what the PMC's are doing today as opposed to the 60's-70's.
I didn't read it that way. Sure, in the begining when they talked about the mercs in the Congo they did portray them that way but that's the way they portrayed themselves, IMO.
I thought they portrayed EO in a better light. I refer to the part about Siera Leone (sp?). EO went in for 20 mil and 150 people and cleaned up the mess the government made. Then the UN pretty much forced the GVT to cancel their contract and bring in 17,000 peace keepers at a cost of 1 billion who blew it. They were back to square one.
There was a good case made by some of the talking heads for PMCs. I thought the things that were brought up such as how would a PMC contractor be treated if captured were good points. The best part was the guy at the end that answered the question about who polices the PMCs was good. They police themselves. Simple economics.
Not an easy answer to any of the questions raised in the show, to be sure. But PMCs are going to be a way of life in modern conflict. Better to get the cards on the table now.
Just so you know, I have no problem with PMCs. They serve a purpose and usually serve it well.
brewmonkey
07-19-2004, 10:34
Don't take me wrong, I too believe they have a place in current times. I just did not think they did a great job or even a good job of what today's PMC are all about. They focused way to much on the 60's-70's and while they did say that PMC's can do a lot more for a lot less that again was the earlier periods. They did not cover much of modern PMC's and were I someone not as familiar with them as I am, I would have ended the show thinking that PMC's are nothing more then hired thugs whose only concern is how much do we get paid and when does the killing start.
Today's PMC's are for the most part not paid to fight the war like those from EO in Africa.
Just my take on the show. Like I said, they could have put more emphasis on current rather then days gone by.
Kyobanim
07-19-2004, 10:44
Yeah, I wasn't looking at it from the point of view of the average person. I can see your point on that.
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 11:21
PMC employees aren't mercenaries, there's a difference.:munchin
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
PMC employees aren't mercenaries, there's a difference.:munchin
I was waiting for someone to point out the distinction between the two...there is a difference between PMCs and PSCs :munchin
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 11:49
Originally posted by Guy
I was waiting for someone to point out the distinction between the two...there is a difference between PMCs and PSCs :munchin
i'm there for ya brah - always!:lifter
Roguish Lawyer
07-19-2004, 11:56
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
i'm there for ya brah
Whoa dude, are you from California? LOL
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 12:00
Hawaii - LOL
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 12:01
Hawaii, Cundinamarca
Smokin Joe
07-19-2004, 12:02
Okay I'll bite.
I'm Joe Q. Public and I watched the show. I'm not completely ignorant as the to topic but I will be the first to admit that I really know very little about Private Contractors.
Would you gentlemen mind clueing me in on what PMC's and PSC's are as compared to Merc's?
Also what are the differences?
Thank you for your time.
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 12:09
Who signs the checks mostly.
Mercenaries serve the forces of a foreign nation. They are contracted by a government, king, mullah, whatever, of another country. PMCs work for the USG (their) government.
Now, if I went to work as a Captain in the Iraqi National Guard, paid by the Iraqi government, I would be a merc. If I go over to train the Iraqi National guard at the behest of the USG, paid by the USG, I am a PMC.
Roger?
I thought they made EO look good. The UN on the other hand, looked ineffective. It's gotta be nice to just worry about your mission instead of politics, but they made a good point, when the heat in the kitchen gets crankin they can bolt, but the regular military joe has to suck it up and drive on.
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 12:24
True, but professionals don't bolt. They analize the risks before they accept the job. And you won't bolt but once, then you'll be PNG and unable to find a job as a parking lot guard in Kuwait.
Kyobanim
07-19-2004, 12:30
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Who signs the checks mostly.
Mercenaries serve the forces of a foreign nation. They are contracted by a government, king, mullah, whatever, of another country. PMCs work for the USG (their) government.
Now, if I went to work as a Captain in the Iraqi National Guard, paid by the Iraqi government, I would be a merc. If I go over to train the Iraqi National guard at the behest of the USG, paid by the USG, I am a PMC.
Roger?
There was the one example of the American company contracted by one of the Balkan countries to set their military straight. I can't remember the name but they were out of Virginia I think but they did say the company was comprised of former SF. They were paid by the host country though they did go in with the blessings of the US gvt.
Could it be that the term "mercenary" is evolving? It seems as though the stereo typical "mercenary" has all but dissapeared and has been replaced by, for lack of a better term, professional soldiers. The overall mission has changed but the problem is Society is going to have a hard time distinguishing the difference between who signs the checks verses what the PMC is doing mission wise.
I hope that mades sense. It did when I was thinking it up.:D
DunbarFC
07-19-2004, 12:31
That was MPRI
NousDefionsDoc
07-19-2004, 12:34
Well, exceptions to every rule. But I doubt the Balkans had the money, it probably came from the US anyway and was cut out.
The definition I gave was my own personal one. Echanis and crew in Nico was another example - they were paid by the Nicos, but had State's blessing, so..
brewmonkey
07-19-2004, 13:56
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
PMC employees aren't mercenaries, there's a difference.:munchin
Another problem with the show. They implied that all PMC's were mercenaries. Like I said before, the show was a POS and did not do justice at all to the current PMC's and the job they do.
The Reaper
07-19-2004, 14:54
Originally posted by Kyobanim
There was the one example of the American company contracted by one of the Balkan countries to set their military straight. I can't remember the name but they were out of Virginia I think but they did say the company was comprised of former SF. They were paid by the host country though they did go in with the blessings of the US gvt.
Could it be that the term "mercenary" is evolving? It seems as though the stereo typical "mercenary" has all but dissapeared and has been replaced by, for lack of a better term, professional soldiers. The overall mission has changed but the problem is Society is going to have a hard time distinguishing the difference between who signs the checks verses what the PMC is doing mission wise.
I hope that mades sense. It did when I was thinking it up.:D
Not mostly SF.
Mostly retired GOs, the same company went into Colombia to conventionally train the Colombians and made a big mess SF had to clean up.
TR
AngelsSix
07-19-2004, 17:34
Methinks that Brew did not like the show......:p
I have thought rather highly of the men who do jobs like that (PMC's) in today's environments. Especially after having hearing the stories of the companies they work for not properly arming them, or providing them the proper gear/tools to get the job done right. We won't even get into the dishonesty of some of them with regard to pay and contracts.
PMC= Private Military Company
PSC= Private Security Company
EO was a PMC that took an offensive posture. Most PSCs take a defensive posture and only become offensive when contact is probable/inevitable.
MERCS= Will work for anyone that is willing to pay!
During the commercial breaks they said the show was available through the history channel for about $30.
I thought they cast EO in a pretty good light, contrasting the effectiveness of EO vs. Angolan government forces in their struggle with domestic rebels. And then they went on to shed some light on the success EO had against insurgents in Sierra Leone.
They contrasted those efforts with the efforts of the UN.
When they talked about MPRI they said that they retrained the Croats which led to an offensive operation that was very effective against the Serbs. One interesting segment in that story was that they mentioned that some reports said the Croat offensive was led by MPRI personnel.
There was however no mention of blackwater at anytime during the show.
brewmonkey
07-19-2004, 18:21
Originally posted by Guy
PMC= Private Military Company
PSC= Private Security Company
EO was a PMC that took an offensive posture. Most PSCs take a defensive posture and only become offensive when contact is probable/inevitable.
MERCS= Will work for anyone that is willing to pay!
And that is what I am talking about. The show failed to make any distinction between the different types of contractors and what roles they play in world affairs. One could easily say that they were labeling ALL contract personnel as mercenaries.
Originally posted by brewmonkey
One could easily say that they were labeling ALL contract personnel as mercenaries.
Some countries do, mainly because their PMCs are left out of the action. Some do it for payback, SA for example. The show didnt even mention PSDs, which is probably what the vast majority of security contractors are doing in Iraq. Baby sitting clients doesnt sound much like a merc mission to me, maybe why they didnt bring it up? :rolleyes:
brewmonkey
07-21-2004, 09:18
Originally posted by ktek01
Some countries do, mainly because their PMCs are left out of the action. Some do it for payback, SA for example. The show didnt even mention PSDs, which is probably what the vast majority of security contractors are doing in Iraq. Baby sitting clients doesnt sound much like a merc mission to me, maybe why they didnt bring it up? :rolleyes:
But that is the problem. While they did not cover some of the more prominent companies they did cover PMC's in Iraq. They called them mercenaries and not security companies. They made no distinction at all.
I belong to a board that is populated by some of the worlds biggest liberals. They have been debating PMC's for some time and they all believe them to be, no matter what capacity they serve in, to be mercenaries. The airing of this show by the History Channel probably only solidified that for them. Now they believe all hired guns are mercenaries.
That is to bad because we all know different.
BadMuther
07-21-2004, 11:30
Who was that guy from Oregon? (ICI or something like that?) seemed like he had an axe to grind against private contractors....my guess is that he lost a contract and was pissed about it.
Just want to chime in that, technically (according to the above definition), green card holders in the US Army are mercenaries.
Not all are bad. Language evolution perhaps?
Martin sends
Just watched it again. The Clinton admin dropped the ball on that one with EO when it came to dealing with Africa.
The UN made a bundle of $$$ for nothing.
I thought the program was okay for what it was.
You can purchase from Amazon, I believe.
Most EO which was, as stated in another post, far different than PMC in Iraq/Afghanistan in '03-'04 - especially Iraq under the CPA umbrella.