US Army, its Mercenaries kill Civilians

Also from BBC:

US rights group sues Blackwater

Blackwater provides security to US diplomatic staff in Baghdad
A US human rights group says it is suing private security firm Blackwater for unspecified damages for war crimes and wrongfully killing Iraqi civilians.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is acting on behalf of an injured survivor and three families of men killed by Blackwater guards on 16 September.

The Iraqi government said the incident in which 17 people died was unprovoked. Blackwater denies firing without cause.

The case has put a spotlight on private military contractors in Iraq.

BLACKWATER USA FACTS
Founded in 1997 by a former US Navy Seal
Headquarters in North Carolina
One of at least 28 private security companies in Iraq
Employs 744 US citizens, 231 third-country nationals, and 12 Iraqis to protect US state department in Iraq
Provided protection for former CPA head Paul Bremer
Four employees killed by mob in Falluja in March 2004


What happened
Profile: Blackwater USA
The action claims Blackwater "created and fostered a culture of lawlessness amongst its employees, encouraging them to act in the company's financial interests at the expense of innocent human life," the centre said in a statement.

It has been filed in Washington on behalf of Talib Mutlaq Deewan and the estates of Himoud Saed Atban, Usama Fadhil Abbass, and Oday Ismail Ibraheem, the group said.

"This senseless slaughter was only the latest incident in a lengthy pattern of egregious misconduct by Blackwater in Iraq," said lawyer Susan Burke. The group say its complaint alleges Blackwater is liable for claims of assault and battery, wrongful death, emotional distress and negligence.

Blackwater has the contract for guarding US embassy staff in Baghdad and is also used both by visiting businesspeople and officials.

It insists its staff were acting in legitimate self-defence, and that they had been fired on by insurgents first.

Monitor allegations

Separately, the UN has called for private security contractors in Iraq to face prosecution if they are accused of serious crimes.

The UN's human rights official in Iraq, Ivana Vuco, said private guards were subject to international law, despite being given immunity by a US directive following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

"For us, it's a human rights issue," said Ms Vuco. "We will monitor the allegations of killings by security contractors and look into whether or not crimes against humanity and war crimes have been committed."

Iraqi ministers say they are determined to press ahead with legislation that would strip foreign security personnel in Iraq of this protection.

The behaviour of private security companies in Iraq was further highlighted on Tuesday with the killing of two Baghdad women by security guards from an Australian-run firm.
 
mercenary seems too nice a word, more like death-squads in the making. next thing you know the US gov't will be contracting to blackwater for their 'superior' interrogation techniques. non-state actors with immunity and therefore no accountability seem like such a self-evident no-no. they have less than a thousand people, it seems like it would not burden the US military too much to provide the needed security to US personnel. at least then they would be accountable under the geneva convention. the military industrial congressional complex, world peace is bad for the bottom line and doesn't fare well at the polls especially amongst out-of-work boeing employees who have way too much time to vote. war is corporately democratic and is the american way. convert to americanism or die!
 
mercenary seems too nice a word, more like death-squads in the making. next thing you know the US gov't will be contracting to blackwater for their 'superior' interrogation techniques. non-state actors with immunity and therefore no accountability seem like such a self-evident no-no. they have less than a thousand people, it seems like it would not burden the US military too much to provide the needed security to US personnel. at least then they would be accountable under the geneva convention. the military industrial congressional complex, world peace is bad for the bottom line and doesn't fare well at the polls especially amongst out-of-work boeing employees who have way too much time to vote. war is corporately democratic and is the american way. convert to americanism or die!
:goodjob:

I'm thinking how I might be able to offer terminology assistance. Instead of "mercenaries", or indeed "non-state actors with immunity and therefore no accountability", which is something of a mouthful, how about "unlawful enemy combatants"?
 
:goodjob:

I'm thinking how I might be able to offer terminology assistance. Instead of "mercenaries", or indeed "non-state actors with immunity and therefore no accountability", which is something of a mouthful, how about "unlawful enemy combatants"?

I can think of some even more accurate descriptions of them, but if I post them all you'll see is .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. etc.
 
:goodjob:

I'm thinking how I might be able to offer terminology assistance. Instead of "mercenaries", or indeed "non-state actors with immunity and therefore no accountability", which is something of a mouthful, how about "unlawful enemy combatants"?

thanks for the assistance and i think your suggestion is spot-on!
 
Not that I'm a fan of Blackwater or anything and frankly I don't think PMCs should exist. BUT... how can we tell whether these were just civilians? They could well be terrorists that we just think are civilians.
 
Not that I'm a fan of Blackwater or anything and frankly I don't think PMCs should exist. BUT... how can we tell whether these were just civilians? They could well be terrorists that we just think are civilians.
The Iraqi Government said they were civilians, their deceased family members said they were, their neighbours said they were, human rights groups have too, independent observers (like the press) also confirmed, and the freakin' US Government admitted they were civilians and apologised for killing them. Do you want to resurrect them from the dead to testify to their "civilianness" just to be sure?
 
:goodjob:

I'm thinking how I might be able to offer terminology assistance. Instead of "mercenaries", or indeed "non-state actors with immunity and therefore no accountability", which is something of a mouthful, how about "unlawful enemy combatants"?

If you want to be incorrect then by all means.
 
I agree. Using the term "unlawful enemy combatants" is always incorrect.
Stole the words right outta my keyboard.

Mobboss: Do please grow a sense of irony.
 
Stole the words right outta my keyboard.

Mobboss: Do please grow a sense of irony.

What irony? They are still accountable and are indeed not 'immune' from prosecution.

Like I said, you are simply incorrect on your 'definition'. No more, no less.
 
What irony? They are still accountable and are indeed not 'immune' from prosecution.

Like I said, you are simply incorrect on your 'definition'. No more, no less.
There is a certain subset of mercenaries that is immune from Iraqi law and does not fall under the UCMJ.
 
What irony? They are still accountable and are indeed not 'immune' from prosecution.

Like I said, you are simply incorrect on your 'definition'. No more, no less.


Accountable to the laws of a foreign country whose pay they are under. Not to the laws of the country whose inhabitants they are butchering
 
What irony? They are still accountable and are indeed not 'immune' from prosecution.

Like I said, you are simply incorrect on your 'definition'. No more, no less.
See the posts above. Those guys are quicker to the thread than I.

Really, you should spend more time doing your research and getting your facts straight, on war and its accompanying legalities (your fortes as you like to think), than sitting on OT telling people they are incorrect. I've got better things to do than babysit you through them.

Also, you've still managed to miss the irony in what I posted, which wasn't really a 'definition'. You can lead a horse to water....as they say.
 
OMFG drop the Blackwater issue already. There has been already two threads on it, I'm tired of debating it.
 
OMFG drop the Blackwater issue already. There has been already two threads on it, I'm tired of debating it.
What!!? Just when the Afghan Government is also beginning to make noises about the lack of accountability for private security firms?!! (Check my source baby).

Also, the article in the OP is primarily about a US Army air strike killing civilians, not Blackwater. This largest loss of civilian life in recent times is reported in the context of the criticisms against private security firms.
 
There is a certain subset of mercenaries that is immune from Iraqi law and does not fall under the UCMJ.

Oh...please educate us then.

Accountable to the laws of a foreign country whose pay they are under. Not to the laws of the country whose inhabitants they are butchering

Butchering? Sir, you simply overstate the issue.
 
See the posts above. Those guys are quicker to the thread than I.

Really, you should spend more time doing your research and getting your facts straight, on war and its accompanying legalities (your fortes as you like to think), than sitting on OT telling people they are incorrect. I've got better things to do than babysit you through them.

Also, you've still managed to miss the irony in what I posted, which wasn't really a 'definition'. You can lead a horse to water....as they say.

Sorry, Ram, but I have already done this in another thread and linked the law that does put such PMCs under the UCMJ for prosecution. Not my fault you missed it, or are too lazy to look it up for yourself.

Plus, your own link refers to raids on PMC offices and closure of operations. That doenst sound exactly like 'immunity and no accountability' does it?
 
Back
Top Bottom