Mercenaries are in the Military to Stay: Get Used to It!

[TIC TAC]

Mercenaries are in the Military to Stay: Get Used to It!

By Lorelei Kelly, AlterNet. Posted February 20, 2007.

The bottom line is that the privatization of U.S. National Security is a trend that has been ongoing for years. And the billions of dollars disappeared by contractors in Iraq make disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff look like Little Bo Peep.

AlterNet: Mercenaries are in the Military to Stay: Get Used to It!

[Shek]

Mercenaries are in the Military to Stay: Get Used to It!

By Lorelei Kelly, AlterNet. Posted February 20, 2007.

The bottom line is that the privatization of U.S. National Security is a trend that has been ongoing for years. And the billions of dollars disappeared by contractors in Iraq make disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff look like Little Bo Peep.

AlterNet: Mercenaries are in the Military to Stay: Get Used to It!

Sorry, but by definition, mercenaries are not in the military, so the title is misleading. Next, based on the definitions of mercenary and who the US military has hired, I don't see that the definition fits on average.

That being said, the role of contracted personnel on the battlefield and how they subordinate to military authority has been poorly defined and has this poorly defined relationship has had some negative effects. On paper, this was recently remedied. How it's been applied, I don't know and suspect that there will continue to be those who act outside the interests of the command for whom they work for.

[Dreadnought]

I found it very interesting that certain American groups are protesting the fact that some soldiers have criminal records in their past. Felony etc are the latest scream of the Iraqi campaign. IMO Why not let them if they want to serve. Surely when they return their service record may be able to help them out somewhat if they have to face these charges (with exception to certain charges) afterwards if in fact they survive their tour.

And besides its not like its a normal day in your cell when your busy looking over your shoulder every few seconds because unlike in the U.S. you wont get a court date only a sniper bullet or IED.

Service in the Corps might even correct some of the waywardness about them and their troubled past. Leave it to the naysayers about this conflict to have the nerve to say who can and who cant serve just because they wont serve and they dont agree with what we are doing there.

Trying to have it both ways?

Dont we complain about prison population overflowing?

Why not get the most bang for your buck (taxes) and let them serve.

I got it lets reinstate the draft since they want to have so much say over our military and its processes and listen to them cry then.

[Confed999]

The bottom line is that the privatization of U.S. National Security is a trend that has been ongoing for years.

Ummm, it's been happening here in the US, before there was a US... Hooray for privatization over socialization!

And the billions of dollars disappeared by contractors in Iraq

Billions? What billions disappeared?

Maybe they should hire a fact checker over there...

[sappersgt]

...billions of dollars disappeared by contractors in Iraq...

Damn, I need to update my resume!;)

Seriously, private contractors do have a place and like it or not are here to stay. Command and control issues need to be resolved however. Things are better than they used to be.

[SnowLeopard]

I found it very interesting that certain American groups are protesting the fact that some soldiers have criminal records in their past. Felony etc are the latest scream of the Iraqi campaign. IMO Why not let them if they want to serve. Surely when they return their service record may be able to help them out somewhat if they have to face these charges (with exception to certain charges) afterwards if in fact they survive their tour.

And besides its not like its a normal day in your cell when your busy looking over your shoulder every few seconds because unlike in the U.S. you wont get a court date only a sniper bullet or IED.

Service in the Corps might even correct some of the waywardness about them and their troubled past. Leave it to the naysayers about this conflict to have the nerve to say who can and who cant serve just because they wont serve and they dont agree with what we are doing there.

Trying to have it both ways?

Dont we complain about prison population overflowing?

Why not get the most bang for your buck (taxes) and let them serve.

I got it lets reinstate the draft since they want to have so much say over our military and its processes and listen to them cry then.

Oh, Dreadnought, I hate to go against you because I usually like what you say ....... but not this time.

Problem is, that society has a history of placing it's problems in the military to get rid of it instead of taking care of them itself and the military is not meant for that. Ie, "Johnny, I'm going to give you six months, which I will waive if you go off and enlist in the Marine Corps this day."--the judge

There are probably a few different ways putting a criminal into the military can go wrong but two of them that come to mind are:

You have someone who you have to babysit all the time because they won't do their job, they are always on restriction, you are required to visit them in the brig to encourage them to do better, but they are a waste of time, and in the end, you toss them out as a lost cause with an other than honorable discharge. Now they have both a criminal record AND a bad conduct discharge and if they had any hope (whether they deserve such hope or not) of improving their lives, it is shot now. Who is going to hire them with both those hits against them?

OR

Remember, there are no screw up rates in the military. Every rate has a particular job to do, otherwise why have the rate to begin with? So one has this criminal who they expect will fly straight in a war zone. What if he doesn't? How are the other troops going to feel when they have this person around? What does that say of how others think of the job they are suppose to do? Further, this person is a potential public relations nightmare. Minorly, they might be the one that lets off a little steam, vandalizes some cars, and gets liberty cancelled for the unit. Majorly, well, let one's mind work on what damage a US criminal could do in a host foreign country.

Essentially, the US military is to fight wars, defend the country, but it's job is not to cure society's problems of crime. That's one of the jobs of the civilian world.
-------------------------------------
("By spending so much time on her, you are hurting the rest of us."--petty officer to me about a liar I tried to recover but eventually tossed out of the Navy, (w,stte))

[Gun Grape]

The "More waivers" thing almost had me screaming at the talk radio show the other day.

From the Marine Corps, if you admit to smoking dope 1 time then you require a moral waiver. Not have a conviction, but just check the block on the enlistment doc asking about drug use. Some of these waivers are because the poolie is being honest.

Felony waivers are for any crime that was committed that the max sentence is more than 365 days. Does not mean that it was a "Felony" in the civilian world but a crime that the military would sentence is more than 1 year. Also includes any civilian crime that the sentence is more than 1 year.

With the "Tough on Crime" movement a few years back, it isn't hard to find yourself looking at more than a year for what would, in the old days, be a minor offense.

The military isn't letting drug dealers, wife beaters or child molesters in.

[JCT]

I agree with Gun Grape. I worked at the HQ for one of the Marine Corps recruiting regions. Several types of waivers required the CG's signature for approval - while I was there I saw all of them through the normal course of my duties.

CG waivers were for certain types of crimes, for drug use above a certain level, and other criteria requiring waivers (certain tattoos, age, etc spring to mind). Unfortunately, I cannot remember the exact criteria for most of the waivers, it was awhile ago.

A good percentage of the time, a waiver was needed because a kid screwed up once. As long as there was some amount of regret expressed and the crime was not too heinous, the waiver was often granted. Certain crimes were never waivered.