Bassman62 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Sorry but you are completely wrong. I don't know what you're getting at with this 'there is no evidence' line, it's not even a secret. If you were to phone up the PR departments of these companies they'd tell you they've got people in Afghanistan. This isn't some conspiracy made up by pacifists. "Between 500 and 700 British contractors operate in Afghanistan, the British Association of Private Security Companies (BAPSC) estimates... Most contractors in Afghanistan are from the US, and make up the vast majority of the estimated 30,000 staff from 52 registered private security companies." source EDIT: Here, have some more tasty sauce: "In Afghanistan, there are 1.42 contractors to every US soldier" I can't believe this, security contractors being classed as merceneries, when was the last security contractor out on patrol fighting insurgents alongside the coalition. When was the last security contractor patroling the streets of kabul? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 There is major difference between mercenaries and contractors. I won't insult your intelligence by defining it. I disagree, and don't worry I would not consider it an insult if you explain why you think I'm wrong. I think the differences are small enough that it is perfectly reasonable to call private security contractors mercenaries. What I do find a little bit insulting is your implication that anyone who disagrees with you about this alleged major difference is stupid. It would have been far less insulting if you'd just explained yourself in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 So a soldier cut a few fingers off a corpse, so what. The corpse was dead I assume, so the operation was quite painless. What's the problem here. Regards Angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Remembetr this:- What exactly, or are you going to fudge the issue as you did on another thread? A straight answer please instead of your usual Westernerphobic ramblings. I'm still waiting. People on this forum have sussed you out, you're just the playground sneak who went round making snidy remarks and stiring it Ah, so Westernerphobe is a meaningless term you invented to describe anyone who doesn't share your bizarrely twisted worldview. Thanks, thought as much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Orange Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 I disagree, and don't worry I would not consider it an insult if you explain why you think I'm wrong. I think the differences are small enough that it is perfectly reasonable to call private security contractors mercenaries. What I do find a little bit insulting is your implication that anyone who disagrees with you about this alleged major difference is stupid. It would have been far less insulting if you'd just explained yourself in the first place. The only similarity is they are hired help. That's the where the similarity ends. A few of my ex military friends, who I served with, work in this capacity and I have friends, currently serving, that work alongside them in Afghanistan right now. So, you could say, I have enough knowledge to make that distinction. Besides, these security contractors are made accountable. They cannot go around shooting and killing needlessly. They are accountable, as are the coalition forces. So, the OP is incorrect when he/she say otherwise. If he/she is referring to mecenaries, as these are illegal, they operate outside the law so they cannot be held accountable. Not that there is evidence to suggest the coalition have illegal soldiers in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 So a soldier cut a few fingers off a corpse, so what. The corpse was dead I assume, so the operation was quite painless. What's the problem here. Regards Angel. Let's assume that the body in question belongs to your son - and they've had his ears, nose and manhood off too. Still not a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 The only similarity is they are hired help. That's the where the similarity ends. A few of my ex military friends, who I served with, working in this capacity and have current serving friends that work alongside them in Afghanistan right now. So, you could say, I have enough knowledge to make that distinction. Armed hired help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prospective Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 So a soldier cut a few fingers off a corpse, so what. The corpse was dead I assume, so the operation was quite painless. What's the problem here. Regards Angel. It was a stupid thing to do. It gives the enemy a soundbite. It does nothing positive for the war. It helps create enemies. Our soldiers are risking there lives buy not shooting the enemy unless the risk to civilians is minimal. They do this because they understand the big picture. One or two soldiers have damaged the effort thousands have made with these actions. Look at the comments on here, imagine whats been written in Pakistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Orange Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Armed hired help. You are just nit-picking now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 You are just nit-picking now. Scarcely! If the hired help is armed and being paid to provide 'security' what else do you call it other than mercenary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.