Blackwater guards think shootings were ‘unjustified.’
Blackwater USA CEO Erik Prince has repeatedly insisted that his company’s guards were “defending” themselves in the Sept. 16 shooting that killed 17 Iraqi civilians. But many Blackwater guards serving in Iraq disagree:
They described a grating sense among many of Blackwater guards, especially those with years of experience, that the killings on Sept. 16 were unjustified.
“Some guys are thinking that it was not a good shoot, that it was not warranted,” said one Blackwater contractor, using military jargon for an episode that results in a wrongful death. “I don’t think there was criminal intent involved. I just think it was the application of the use of deadly force gone horribly wrong.”
He added, “To mitigate one threat, 17 people had to die?”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
The comments by a few Blackwater guards who were not involved in the actual situation on the ground could very well be biased. These guys could have acted in self defence, under very tense situations. We should cut them some slack and focus our attentions elsewhere
October 25th, 2007 at 9:53 am“…it was not a good shoot,”
Sickening, even from a “contractor” acknowledging the mistake.
Think this is what Cheney says to himself when he thinks about that quail hunt?
October 25th, 2007 at 9:54 am#1 - “These guys could have acted in self defence, under very tense situations.” Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 9:53 am
The key work in your post: could have
There is no proof that their actions were based on “self defense”.
Based on your statement, nobody should take responsibility for their actions, correct?
October 25th, 2007 at 9:58 amThere was no threat and 17 people died. Just a bunch of trigger happy cowboys having a fun day in Iraq. Of course the Blackwater guards are saying “it wasn’t a good shoot” (that’s pretty creepy) because they see their fat paycheck being threatened.
And please folks, don’t let hits take over this thread too. Once a day is enough, no need to give him another thread.
October 25th, 2007 at 9:59 amRight #1… look away nothing to see here… go shopping!
October 25th, 2007 at 10:01 amapathy of the people is what led us to this mess, and is what will continue to drag us deeper.
We should cut them some slack and focus our attentions elsewhere
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 9:53 am
so you’re infavor of cutting suspected murderers some slack? No wonder you hate America and the laws of our land.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:01 am“hits” shows us the absolute moral depravity of the right wing and conservatives in general, as if their pederasty and lies about their closetted homesexuality weren’t enough to convince Americans of the stupidity of listening to any rightwinger about anything.
Thanks, hits, for proving your antiAmerican, immoral ways.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:04 amDemocrat Soldier,
Your argument that there is “no proof” has yet to be debated in a court of law. My point - give them the opportunity to defend themselves in a court of law before maligning them.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:04 amI actually agree with Bilbobaggins on this one
October 25th, 2007 at 10:05 amLefty patriot,
I am in favor of granting them their day in court and letting them defend themselves in front of a jury. I am also in favor of not judging them before that.
Thank you
October 25th, 2007 at 10:06 amHits
hits is Jake D. Ignore the old fool, if you can.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:06 amLefty Patriot,
What you call depravity, I call logic. What you call “UnAmerican”, I call survivalistic.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:07 amHe added, “To mitigate one threat, 17 people had to die?â€
I think that pretty much sums it up right there. The person with enough money to hire the mercenaries are viewed as more valuable than any perceived threats to that person. A lot more valuable.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:07 amhil_1,
I agree with you - apathy of people is what got us here. By the way, I think we should get out of Iraq now.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:07 amalpuz3,
Hits is not Jake. However, you could ignore me.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:08 am“I am also in favor of not judging them before that.” Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:06 am
So, judging someone without proof or “their time in court” is an action you would be against?
But, it was OK to attack Iraq with NO proof, and no “time in court”.
Interesting double standard you seem to have.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:11 am#10:
In an Iraqi court? I think they should be prosecuted in an Iraqi court; it’d give that government much more credence, and surprise, they’d actually see retribution for what they did.
Stop spamming, hits.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:12 amBecause Blackwater was allowed to operate ‘above the law’ thanks to the current regime’s decision (just another brilliant decision in a long line of brilliant decisions), it became inevitible that somewhere along the line, Blackwater and their employees would become convinced that no law applies to them.
You give a pyromaniac matches, and no oversight, and eventually, something or someone gets burned.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:16 amDemocrat Soldier,
I do maintain a double standard when it comes to ensuring my survival. I don’t claim to be altruistic. In fact, down and beneath, maybe you are like me too. If someone’s pointing the gun at you, you won’t look for proof that’s it’s loaded. If the gun’s pointed at me (an enemy, let’s assume), you may argue for proof that there is a bullet inside my would be assailant’s gun before prosecuting him. See my point
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:17 amXbot,
I actually think they should get a chance in our court - they were our citizens
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:18 amHits–this statement of yours will never happen:
…that there is “no proof†has yet to be debated in a court of law. My point - give them the opportunity to defend themselves in a court of law before maligning them…
The problem with this argument is that Prince says that his warriors are above the law. Prince has fought against any oversight of his army. He also claims that no one has jurisdiction over his warriors–not Iraq, not the US, not a UN tribunal.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:19 amBlackwater is a disgrace to America and the miltary.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:19 amWar profiteering? What war profiteering?
Blackwater Mercenaries Take Risks for Right Price
October 25th, 2007 at 10:21 amMeYeZone,
Well, then you should rally opinion against Prince, shouldn’t you?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:22 am#20 - “I actually think they should get a chance in our court - they were our citizens” Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:18 am
So, if someone was from Mexico, and they killed an American on US soil, they should be judged in a Mexican court of law?
So, if we ever catch Usama bin Laden, he should be judged by a Saudi Arabian court of law for the deaths he “allegedly” caused on US soil?
Or is this another apparant double standard??
October 25th, 2007 at 10:23 amYou don’t become a mercenary because you DON’T want to kill people.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:23 amThe comments by a few Blackwater guards who were not involved in the actual situation on the ground could very well be biased. These guys could have acted in self defence, under very tense situations. We should cut them some slack and focus our attentions elsewhere
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 9:53 am
Funny.Considering the guards you speak of ARE in Iraq and you are not. They’re testimony is far more believable than your ass covering for the administration and its baby,blackwater.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:23 am#20 - Why? If you commit a crime in England, you should face trial in England. If you commit a crime in Iraq, you damn well should face an Iraqi trial. Unless of course you’re ready to call this government illegitimate?
October 25th, 2007 at 10:24 amBlackwater is a disgrace to America and the miltary.
Comment by Guido OBGYN Lover — October 25, 2007 @ 10:19 am
I agree they are a disgrace to America but they AREN’T part of our military, just Darth’s personal SS Korps. And the sooner we clean this scum from the face of the earth, the better. And I agree that the Iraqi’s get first crack at them. After all, the people killed were Iraqis, not Americans.
They were in NOLA after Katrina and will most likely show up in SOCAL after the fires.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:24 amhits: “rally opinion against Price”?? Certainly but the opinion also goes against the one employing the murderer - say, like the “hitman”. The employer (Bush) and the mercenary (Prince) both go down in flames and fine their sorry butts in prison.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:25 amHits, if you’re so gung-ho for the idiot fascists ruining this country, why are you trolling around in a progressive blog? Go play your war games somewhere else.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:25 amthat was “find”…..but it’s also “fine with me” to see their sorry butts in jail, too.:)
October 25th, 2007 at 10:25 am#19 - “If someone’s pointing the gun at you, you won’t look for proof that’s it’s loaded.” Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:17 am
I think do see your point.
So, based on your argument, everyone in Iraq who has a weapon from a US soldier pointed at them should be able to shoot back to kill the US soldier based on the possibility that the US soldier just might possibly shoot them. Remember, the people in Iraqi don’t know for sure that the weapon is loaded.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:26 amHits is right as to awaiting trial for the imposition of criminal sanctions against individuals. Our system of law calls for a trial and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. However, that is not what we are talking about in this instance.
We are talking about policy decisions concerning the use of armed contractors in what has been traditionally a role for the armed forces. It is a policy question as to whether the Iraqi’s should withdraw immunity that the CPA granted to such groups as Black Water prior to the formation of the current Iraqi government. It is a policy decision as to whether appropriate laws exist to permit the US government to under take a prosecution for such actions. It is a policy decision as to whether appropriate rules of engagement exist. It is a policy decision as to whether Black Water appropriately trains, arms and controls its contractors.
We are not required to await the results of a trial to make such decisions. It does not require the higher standard of proof. These are the questions that need to be examined now. There is substantial question as to whether the private contractors actually make the job harder for the military and complicate relations with the Iraqi people.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:28 amWell said JMOHR.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:31 amDemocrat Soldier,
Your hypothetical situation is too far removed from the content of this thread for me to respond. But I do think that’s another case for a double standard
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:31 ambob h,
Are you in Iraq? How do you know I am not? What if I claim to be in Iraq and I am actually not? Or Vice versa? Have you intellectually considered these parameters before posting?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:32 amI just think it was the application of the use of deadly force gone horribly wrong.â€
Cause the use of deadly force has gone OK in some other times…
October 25th, 2007 at 10:33 amYour hypothetical situation is too far removed from the content of this thread for me to respond. But I do think that’s another case for a double standard
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:31 am
coward.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:35 amThe existance of high priced goobers stealing soldiers from the real military is an insult to the military.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:37 am#36 - “Your hypothetical situation is too far removed from the content of this thread for me to respond.” Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:31 am
So, US Soldiers pointing weapons at people in Iraq is “hypothetical”?
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. (From the movie Princess Bride.)
Well, it’s been fun, but I’ve got work to do! At least you’re reasonable in your responses and don’t get all huffy just because people disagree with your (wild) assertions. Post at you later, Hits!
PS - Does your moniker have anything to do with illegal substances and taking “hits”? ;-)
October 25th, 2007 at 10:37 amMaybe he just read your comment in the other thread where you said you prefered to leave the fighting to those stronger than you.
Were you lying then or now?
October 25th, 2007 at 10:38 amCorrect me of I am wrong, but I don’t think these murderers can be brouht to trial in either Iraq or America. The US says that the Iraqis can’t prosecute our mercenaries over there and we don’t have any handles on them over here.
A drunk Blackwater puke murdered a guard in Iraq on New Year’s Eve and his punishment was to be fired and sent home.
Prince whined that he wanted to do more, but withholding the guy’s last paycheck was as harsh as he could go.
And STFU Hit/Jake/Michael, your intent is not to engage in dialogue but to derail a discussion.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:38 am“To mitigate one threat, 17 people had to die?â€
October 25th, 2007 at 10:39 am- - To mitigate one threat (Saddam), tens of thousands had to die?
Yawn.
Another boring troll.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:39 amAbsolutely right, nanlichi. We should just ignore the provacatur and not give it the attention it so pathetically craves.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:40 amImpeach junior, torture is uncle dik.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:42 amI tend to believe that the other members of Blackwater would have a good foundation of understanding that they can make that statement. Not all Blackwater employees are unhinged. Some Mercs have a moral compass.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:43 amDemocrat Soldier,
The real situation you describe is hypothetical - I think you lost track of your thoughts.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:49 amTheToonGuy,
I am not in Iraq. That’s a fact. I am merely pointing out the limitations of our medium of interaction. Thanks for clarifying.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 10:51 amSomebody remember that Power Point Presentation that US officers used to blame Iran of smuggling weaponry…
You know your INTEL is in deep sh*t if the only thing you have are electronic slides…
October 25th, 2007 at 10:53 ambob h,
Are you in Iraq? How do you know I am not? What if I claim to be in Iraq and I am actually not? Or Vice versa? Have you intellectually considered these parameters before posting?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:32 am
because if you were youd not be spouting a rush limbaughesque dodge.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:54 amRather than slinging sh@t around this site like so many of the Administrations flying monkeys that fling their vitriol around these threads I would like to pose an option to the latest TP disrupter known as “hits”:
October 25th, 2007 at 10:55 amyou seem to be so obsessed with “your own survival”. Rather than spend your days derailing threads on a blogsite where no one but the dilluded trolls would possibly agree with you, why don’t you simply move your terrorized, fear filled ass out of America where you might be safer from the terrurists? You obviously don’t respect our Constitution, have a double standard when it comes to “burden of proof”, you fall for every fear tactic this Administration throws at you, you claim to actually form your own opinions but it is my observation that your opinions are soley based on sheer terror (brought to you by Bush/Cheney). Teddy Roosevelt once said, “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.” So your fears fill you with a false sense of patriotism, your suggestions fly in the face of our Constitution and your another chickenshit chickenhawk who feels they can “win over hearts and minds” here at TP…I suggest again that you just move the f#ck out of our country and take your fears and warmongering thoughts with you! Maybe then you will truly be safe from all the boogeymen your Dear Leader spooks you with so much.
That’s my rant and I will now refrain from engaging any more trolls.
Democrat Soldier,
Your hypothetical situation is too far removed from the content of this thread for me to respond. But I do think that’s another case for a double standard
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:31 am
what other fallacious arguments will you use to avoid acknowledging your own premise is flawed
October 25th, 2007 at 10:55 amHits, you were quick to assume the other Blackwater employees may have an axe to grind instead of believing the death of 17 bystanders were unjustified. The Blackwater employees would have a much better understanding of the situation given the information known (and most likely circulated within Blackwater, either thru official or other channels) then you or I.
Our own military says the incident was the use of excessive force. Why do you ignore evidence but stand on opinion?
October 25th, 2007 at 10:56 am“To mitigate one threat, 17 people had to die?â€
- - To mitigate one threat (Saddam), tens of thousands had to die?
Comment by Badmoodman — October 25, 2007 @ 10:39 am
his comparison is not even close. if it were it woul d be justification for the murder of any head of state.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:57 amSomebody remember that Power Point Presentation that US officers used to blame Iran of smuggling weaponry…
You know your INTEL is in deep sh*t if the only thing you have are electronic slides…
Comment by Juan C. — October 25, 2007 @ 10:53 am
youd think theyd have a video or something - anything but powerpoint
October 25th, 2007 at 10:57 amOur own military says the incident was the use of excessive force. Why do you ignore evidence but stand on opinion?
Comment by hellinabucket — October 25, 2007 @ 10:56 am
monkey see monkey do-he is imitating bush
October 25th, 2007 at 10:59 amA Patriot Acting,
Your rant, although intellectually sub-standard, is well received.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:00 ambob_h,
My premise is based on my observations. Your claim of my arguments being fallacious is unsupported by anything remotely intelligent.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:01 amA Patriot Acting,
Your rant, although intellectually sub-standard, is well received.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:00 am
yours isnt. find a clue and respond trollboy. or can your intellect only stand some much battering of its flawed logic that you dare not respond to a refutation of your own idiotic sttments
October 25th, 2007 at 11:02 amhellinabucket,
I do not think the Blackwater folks who weren’t on the scene present an unbiased audience. In fact, I believe they can be extremely biased.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:02 ambob_h,
My premise is based on my observations. Your claim of my arguments being fallacious is unsupported by anything remotely intelligent.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:01 am
name your observations
October 25th, 2007 at 11:02 ambob h,
Again, you do not make a point. I explicitly challenge you to make a single stand alone point, and support it.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:03 ambob h,
My observations span my entire life. To understand them, you will have to become me.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:05 amTroll known as “hits” considers himself the most intellectual of the shit flinging flying monkeys
October 25th, 2007 at 11:06 ambob h,
Again, you do not make a point. I explicitly challenge you to make a single stand alone point, and support it.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:03 am
for a guy blathering for an hour not wanting to talk about what hes already said youve certainly got a nerve
October 25th, 2007 at 11:06 ambob h,
My observations span my entire life. To understand them, you will have to become me.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:05 am
you should read kierkegarde. everyone knows he was full of crap too. so are you.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:07 amA Patriot Acting,
I do not.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:07 ambob h,
Thank you. What is kierkegarde? I do not know
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:08 am‘New, constructive ideas’ in Iran nuclear talks: Larijani
What? They…they are using DIPLOMACY now?
And now what about those cool bombs from Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, and those hard-working Americans in those companies that could lose their jobs because Iran might not be bombed?
This is so wrong. /I dont have to put it.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:09 amHits,
Forgetting the legal issues of the charges against Blackwater in Iraq, tell us this:
Do you support the use of mercenary forces by the US government? And tell us why, with either answer.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:11 ambob h,
Thank you. What is kierkegarde? I do not know
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:08 am
apparently your life experiences are limited.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:12 amupside99,
What do you consider “mercenary forces”, and where were you supposing the US Govt would use them (in your example)
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:13 amHits,
Forgetting the legal issues of the charges against Blackwater in Iraq, tell us this:
Do you support the use of mercenary forces by the US government? And tell us why, with either answer.
Comment by upside99 — October 25, 2007 @ 11:11 am
heres a clue hits - when you respond read up on mercenary forces and the detrimental effects of their use in warfare.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:13 ambob h,
Oh quite so! I couldn’t agree more with you on that one
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:13 amupside99,
What do you consider “mercenary forcesâ€, and where were you supposing the US Govt would use them (in your example)
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:13 am
so your a member of the renaming brigade eh hits? its not a bomb unless i call it a bomb. that semtex over there is actually cooking dough. real smart.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:14 am“We have to get rid of Saddam. There are two weeks left. In two weeks we will be ready militarily. We will be in Baghdad at the end of March,”
Oh, right who said this?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:14 amapparently your life experiences are limited.
Comment by bob h — October 25, 2007 @ 11:12 am
that was obvious with his first post. the brain of an underdeveloped 5-year-old.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:15 amWhat do you consider “mercenary forcesâ€, and where were you supposing the US Govt would use them (in your example)
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:13 am
I am asking you. Blackwater is currently deployed as a mercenary force in Iraq, do you agree that is acceptable for the US to do or not.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:16 ami think this summs uphits
Cookie Monster Echoes The White House Argument On Torture
By Oliver Willis on October 5, 2007 12:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)
image Q: Cookie Monster, why did you eat the cookie?
CM: I didn’t eat cookie. Cookie Monster don’t eat cookie.
Q: But Cookie Monster, you’ve got the cookie right in your hand. There’s cookie crumbs all over your fur.
CM: But I didn’t eat cookie. Cookie Monster does not eat cookies. Period.
Q: So what is that in your hand?
CM: What?
Q: That thing that looks like a cookie in your hand?
CM: Oh this. This am not cookie.
Q: It’s not.
CM: No. Media is mistaken. Biased. Left-wing. Cookie Monster could not be holding a cookie because Cookie Monster, as previously stated, do not eat cookie!
Q: So what is it?
CM: Freedom.
Q: It’s not a cookie, it’s “Freedom”.
CM: That is right. Cookie Monster redefine “cookie” as “freedom”, so when Cookie Monster eat cookie, Cookie Monster can lie right to your face and say Cookie Monster don’t eat cookie. He eat FREEDOM.
Q: Seriously?
CM: 9/11 changed everything.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:16 amhits, what do you mean they are biased? They work for the company and their very existence depends on making Blackwater look good. That’s a good reason to believe what they are saying now.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:17 ambob h,
You are extrapolating into utopia, but that’s your prerogative.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:17 amBlackwater are worse than mercenary forces, as they are undermining the US military and creating more danger and hatred towards the US troops. This is how chimpy supports the troops: by giving hired mercenaries more rights and money than the real soldiers he has enslaved with his stop-loss treason. for that reason alone, Bush should be hanged.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:18 amupside99,
Acceptable for the US to do what using Blackwater? To build roads?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:18 ambob h,
You are extrapolating into utopia, but that’s your prerogative.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:17 am
cookie monster does not live in utopia.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:19 amBlackwater are worse than mercenary forces, as they are undermining the US military and creating more danger and hatred towards the US troops.
which is exactly what mercenaries do….undermine…everything.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:20 amHits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:20 amKierkegaard was an existentialist philosopher who believed in Abraham as the ultimate example of what a person should be, so he believed that one needed to give up that which he loved most and God will return it to you, so he left his fiancee at the altar and died a sad man.
Acceptable for the US to do what using Blackwater? To build roads?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:18 am
how far up your ass does your head actually go? can you see you tooth?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:20 amupside99,
Acceptable for the US to do what using Blackwater? To build roads?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:18 am
ah right hits when you cant answer the question without looking more like a retard just ignore it completely.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:20 amCandyce,
Exactly. The want to make Blackwater look good, by making a few bad apples look bad. So, they do have a motive to demean the folks on the ground, don’t they?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:22 amHits, what do you base your assumption of bias by other Blackwater employees? If you have some evidence, I would like to see it. Otherwise it’s just an opinion that ignores several reports that contradicts what you want to believe.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:22 amcome back hits…i didnt mean to scare you off.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:22 amCandyce,
Exactly. The want to make Blackwater look good, by making a few bad apples look bad. So, they do have a motive to demean the folks on the ground, don’t they?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:22 am
now that isnt logic at all. its idiocy.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:23 amthis is typical michael the cowardly liar behavior, ignore the issues raised, act like an idiot (what? that’s not acting!), and run away. what an ass.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:23 amThank you Wilco. Sounds to me like the keiker guy didn’t know much of what he wa preaching.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:23 ammaybe hes bigfoot…..hits? god wanted you to act likean idiot today right? or was it your own decision?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:23 amhellinabucket,
It is an opinion. Just like the opinion that the Blackwater guards acted erroneously in Iraq
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amHits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amIn that regard, no. But such is the way of philosophy. He sure was committed to his beliefs, though.
God just let him down.
Hits,
Just answer the damn question: Should the US government be using mercenaries in ANY foreign country?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amExactly. The want to make Blackwater look good, by making a few bad apples look bad. So, they do have a motive to demean the folks on the ground, don’t they?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:22 am
How have they made Blackwater look good by these statements? You think the “few bad apples” meme is working? If anything, it sounds like maybe these guys are trying to paint themselves in a better light because Blackwater is about to go kaput and they need to look for jobs elsewhere.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:25 ambob h,
What you mean is - “what I don’t understand as logic, I prefer to call idiocy”. That’s a good way to stay in utopia.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:26 amHits, you are defending the blackwater employees that killed 17 people and then you call them bad apples. That’s a flip and a flop. So are they justified in what they did or are they bad apples?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:26 amIf anything, it sounds like maybe these guys are trying to paint themselves in a better light because Blackwater is about to go kaput and they need to look for jobs elsewhere.
Comment by Candyce — October 25, 2007 @ 11:25 am
Yea, maybe Putin can hire them to protect his takeover of Russia.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:27 ambob h,
What do you think is “God”? Do you even understand what you write?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:27 ambob h,
What you mean is - “what I don’t understand as logic, I prefer to call idiocyâ€. That’s a good way to stay in utopia.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:26 am
your a dense nut hits…like a rock only dumber
October 25th, 2007 at 11:28 amBlackwater ranks right up there with the top 5 things that are most scary about the Bush admin. Privatization of the military, privatization of the State Dept., cannot stand.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:28 ambob h,
What do you think is “God� Do you even understand what you write?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:27 am
answer the question.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:28 amupside99,
To ensure its eventual survival, if the US believes that merceneries provide incemental benefits over the military, we should use it.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 ammaybe hes bigfoot…..hits? god wanted you to act likean idiot today right? or was it your own decision?
Comment by bob h — October 25, 2007 @ 11:23 am
answer the question.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 amanswer the question.
Comment by bob h — October 25, 2007 @ 11:28 am
He can’t do that, without looking totally stupid and a complete BushCo tool.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 amCandyce,
That’s entirely possible. We will find out in due time.
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 amIt is an opinion. Just like the opinion that the Blackwater guards acted erroneously in Iraq
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:25 am
So, besides not being a patriot, you don’t know the difference between fact and opinion? Blackwater guards did not act erroneously, they murdered 17 unarmed people. Those people are dead at their hands; that’s not an opinion, it’s a cold, hard fact. Your denial of same shows your lack of critical thinking ability.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 amupside99,
To ensure its eventual survival, if the US believes that merceneries provide incemental benefits over the military, we should use it.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:29 am
you read up on the definition of mercenaries now and cookie monster convinced you no tto look like his kind of ass, nice.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:30 amTo ensure its eventual survival, if the US believes that merceneries provide incemental benefits over the military, we should use it.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:29 am
That’s the biggest non-answer I’ve seen here in days. It doesn’t even mean anything.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:30 amhellinabucket,
We do not know what happened. Do you understand of the concept of the “hypothetical”?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:30 amanswer the question hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:31 ammaybe hes bigfoot…..hits? god wanted you to act likean idiot today right? or was it your own decision?
Comment by bob h — October 25, 2007 @ 11:23 am
answer the question.
Comment by bob h — October 25, 2007 @ 11:29 am
answert he question
October 25th, 2007 at 11:32 amTo ensure its eventual survival, if the US believes that merceneries provide incemental benefits over the military, we should use it.
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:29 am
NOW we know where his head is! He is a total Cheney ass-licking chickenhawk! At least he has admitted it.
He is also a supporter of Saddam’s use of private armies aas well as that of Putin in Russia; any force is good as long as it supports his fearmongering beliefs.
Thank god he is only one of the 24%er minority and will be flushed in ‘09.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:32 amOh, still playing with the cotton ball. Sorry.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:32 amLefty Patriot,
You say “murdered”. I call it “self defence”
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:33 amhahah, Juan!
*bats cotton ball back to bob h*
October 25th, 2007 at 11:34 amLefty Patriot,
You say “murderedâ€. I call it “self defenceâ€
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:33 am
How in TF can killing 17 unarmed civilians be “self defence”? Where did you go to school? Hitler Tech?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:36 amSo troops on the ground say the shooting was unjustified, the first troops on the scene say the shooting was unjustified, the US Embassy is handing out money to the victims’ families, and now even Blackwater contractors are saying the shooting was unjustified. Gee, I wonder if it was unjustified?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:36 ambob h,
Let me indulge you a bit. I do not believe in God. I do not believe that there is a concept called “your decision”, because in my opinion, “free will” is a myth. So, your question is flawed at multiple levels
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:37 amLefty Patriot,
You say “murderedâ€. I call it “self defenceâ€
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:33 amanyone can call it self defense but if the jury says its murder your ferked, think about it a bit
October 25th, 2007 at 11:38 amYou say “murderedâ€. I call it “self defenceâ€
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:33 am
Unarmed civilians, nutcase. murder is what it is, what you call it is irrelevant. you’re dead wrong, as usual, and you show no sense of morality. you should be locked up, for society’s protection. you are a dangerous sociopath.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:38 amupside99,
How do you know that there were 17 unarmed civilians alone in the group, and not a single arms wielding terrorist amongst them?
Hits
October 25th, 2007 at 11:38 ambob h,
Let me indulge you a bit. I do not believe in God. I do not believe that there is a concept called “your decisionâ€, because in my opinion, “free will†is a myth. So, your question is flawed at multiple levels
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:37 am
so no god but u believe in predestination? silly. explain yourself fully. if there is no god or pre determiner why would you consider thinking that your decisions have somone elses stink on them?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:39 amSo, your question is flawed at multiple levels
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:37 am
questions are not flawed. evasive, nonsenical answers like yours are flawed. at all levels. you make no sense, and have no sense.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:40 amupside99,
How do you know that there were 17 unarmed civilians alone in the group, and not a single arms wielding terrorist amongst them?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:38 am
they couldnt even provide a pic of an armed corpse at the scene…even cops can plant guns in a crowded place but these giuys couldnt?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:40 amupside99,
How do you know that there were 17 unarmed civilians alone in the group, and not a single arms wielding terrorist amongst them?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:38 am
Your strawman has more of a chance of surviving in the SOCAL wildfires than it does here. Go do some RESEARCH before you spout off on things you can’t defend.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:41 amHow do you know that there were 17 unarmed civilians alone in the group, and not a single arms wielding terrorist amongst them?
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 11:38 am
all the reports show exactly that, and your grasping at straws does nothing to cast any doubt on the varioous reports that are unanimous in the view that there were no arms among those murdered in cold blood.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:41 amthat infant was packing…had to be. he and his mom who was driving away from the scene…
October 25th, 2007 at 11:43 amThe bad apples were acting in self defence.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:43 ammaybe they loaded an explosive penetrator up the babies arse and flung it at the blackwater mercs? how much semtex can u get in a baby?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:44 amPuta Madre, Peaches Christ, how hard can it be to ignore the fcking troll? Just don’t take the bait. There is no information flowing, just an occasional regurtitation of some putrid chunk he picked out of Bush’s waste stream.
Just because the idiot throws a question out there or a stupid opinion doesn’t mean you have to rise to the bait.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:45 ami dont come here to ignore them.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:45 amHits his head over and over again hoping the pain will go away.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:45 amadvil hellinabucket
October 25th, 2007 at 11:46 amBad apples, self defense, others biased, hypotheticals. It all makes sense in your head. only your head.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:48 amSo Hits,
You believe that the first soldiers on the scene, who say that the shooting was unjustified, have some vast left-wing agenda? Dude, I’ve been to Iraq. Just like any occupation in the world, there are some bad eggs in with the good. Most soldiers are honestly good people with strong discipline and an incredible sense of morals and work ethic. But there are some truly evil ones out there too. Especially with mercenaries, and especially since they started allowing ex-felons to join. After multiple tours to a war zone, human life does not mean what it used to, and Blackwater has had a bad reputation with the military for a long time. This was murder.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:48 amHit’s is so Bushed up he can’t think straight.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:48 amChris L., your post at 142 says that the first soldiers on the scene say the shooting was unjustified. I had heard this but can’t locate any info. Do you have a link? Maybe Hit’s could learn something from it as well.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:50 amAs unlawful combatants, the Blackwater mercs that killed civilians should be considered terrorists and sent to Syria for a couple of years so they can be “interrogated”.
Or maybe they are feeding information to the terrorists in order to be attacked so they can look good and keep themselves hired.
Is it plausible? Hell no, but it’s possible, and therefore there’s no alternative but to send them to GITMO to be Waterboarded, just to be sure. After all, if they have nothing to hide, they should have nothing to fear, right?
/Snark
October 25th, 2007 at 11:52 amHits is once again an example of the conservatives who hate the United States, its constitution and the rule of law:
1. The US government consists of the people of the United States. Three quarters of the people believe that we should be removing our troops from Iraq.
‘
2 Hits believes that the death of the 17 people was self defense. This is the same Hits who said that there should be a trial before we made any decision as to the culpability of these individuals. Nice going fool. We already know the bias of your mind.
3. Hits will not even recognize that Black Water and other such armed troops are mercenaries. Hits - you are really a quivering little idiot. Like most Orwellian fascists, he wants to define away even the most simple concepts to misrepresent the truth.
You little simpleton, armed men who have not taken the oath of military service to the country and who operate under corporate as opposed to military control and perform those duties that have traditionally been performed by military organizations are mercenaries. History has shown that mercenary forces rarely have the training, management or accountability as do military troops. You are what is wrong with this country. We have no room for freedom hating, little unthinking fascist toadies such as you. GO DIE.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:52 amSorry to focus on another issue about the story, to me the most important:
What are armed guys from another country doing in Iraq? Huh?
That sums it up. Anything from there are details.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:52 amit was a washington post article
From The Washington Post:
Blackwater Guards Fired at Fleeing Cars, Soldiers Say
First U.S. Troops on Scene Found No Evidence of Shooting by Iraqis; Incident Called ‘Criminal
By Sudarsan Raghavan and Josh White
BAGHDAD, Oct. 11 — Blackwater USA guards shot at Iraqi civilians as they tried to drive away from a Baghdad square on Sept. 16, according to a report compiled by the first U.S. soldiers to arrive at the scene, where they found no evidence that Iraqis had fired weapons.
“It appeared to me they were fleeing the scene when they were engaged. It had every indication of an excessive shooting,†said Lt. Col. Mike Tarsa, whose soldiers reached Nisoor Square 20 to 25 minutes after the gunfire subsided.
His soldiers’ report — based upon their observations at the scene, eyewitness interviews and discussions with Iraqi police — concluded that there was “no enemy activity involved†and described the shootings as a “criminal event.†Their conclusions mirrored those reached by the Iraqi government, which has said the Blackwater guards killed 17 people. …â€
October 25th, 2007 at 11:52 amhits? did your head explode?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:55 amChris L., your post at 142 says that the first soldiers on the scene say the shooting was unjustified. I had heard this but can’t locate any info. Do you have a link? Maybe Hit’s could learn something from it as well.
Comment by hellinabucket — October 25, 2007 @ 11:50 am
#
No problem.
http://www.cbsnews.com/ stories/ 2007/ 10/ 12/ iraq/ main3360379.shtml?source=RSSattr=World_3360379
October 25th, 2007 at 11:57 amI do maintain a double standard when it comes to ensuring my survival. I don’t claim to be altruistic. In fact, down and beneath, maybe you are like me too. If someone’s pointing the gun at you, you won’t look for proof that’s it’s loaded. If the gun’s pointed at me (an enemy, let’s assume), you may argue for proof that there is a bullet inside my would be assailant’s gun before prosecuting him. See my point
Hits
Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:17 am
This kind of dishonesty always bothers me. Hits, you should modify your example to make it more accurate…
In this case the person with the gun is an old friend of yours. He lives thousands of miles away, you used to sell him guns on a regular basis, he says he no longer has any guns. You didn’t believe him so you sent inspectors out to look, they also found none. You tell him to give up the guns or you’ll attack him. You lose patience and attack his home, causing 1/2 of his family to leave the country, 1/4 are dead or imprisoned, you found no weapons (but you’re convinced he hid them at the neighbors) and now you’re staying at his place fighting with his brother until it cools down (you’ve since killed your friend). You don’t understand why the dude’s family hates you & fights back. Deep down you know you won’t leave until you find whatever cash there is to find. His neighbors are starting to help him fight so you’re considering attacking them too.
October 25th, 2007 at 12:16 pm#49 - “The real situation you describe is hypothetical - I think you lost track of your thoughts.” Comment by hits — October 25, 2007 @ 10:49 am
So, it’s “hypothetical” for US Soldiers to point weapons at people in Iraq???
Wow, I didn’t realize that you lived in a bubble from which real live situations only are “hypothetical”.
I think I can now understand your point of view: anything in which you believe is based in “fact”, anything that doesn’t conform to your predetermined views is “hypothetical”.
How. . . . .. convenient.
October 25th, 2007 at 12:22 pmThanks Chris L., I’ll check back to see if Hits reads it as well.
October 25th, 2007 at 1:06 pmHits misses again. This is from the link Chris provided:
The first U.S. soldiers to arrive on the scene after Blackwater USA guards shot and killed 17 Iraqi civilians at a Baghdad intersection on Sept. 16, found no evidence that the Iraqis fired any weapons at the guards, the Washington Post reported Friday.
A report compiled by the soldiers concluded that there was “no enemy activity involved” and called the incident a “criminal event,” the Post reports.
“It appeared to me they were fleeing the scene when they were engaged,” said Lt. Col. Mike Tarsa, whose soldiers arrived at the scene 20 to 25 minutes after the shootings ended. “It had every indication of an excessive shooting.”
The soldiers’ conclusions - based upon their own observations, eyewitness interviews and discussions with Iraq police - are similar to those reached by the Iraqi government and contradict Blackwater’s contention that its guards acted in self-defense after being shot at by the Iraqis.
“I did not see anything that indicated they were fired upon,” said Tarsa, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division.
He also said several Iraqi drivers had apparently made U-turns and were heading away from the intersection when their cars were hit by gunfire from the Blackwater guards.
So this thread is showing additional support to what a Lt. Col of the US Army concluded when he first arrived at the scene.
Hits follows a fool
October 25th, 2007 at 1:11 pmI do maintain a double standard when it comes to ensuring my survival. I don’t claim to be altruistic. In fact, down and beneath, maybe you are like me too. If someone’s pointing the gun at you, you won’t look for proof that’s it’s loaded. If the gun’s pointed at me (an enemy, let’s assume), you may argue for proof that there is a bullet inside my would be assailant’s gun before prosecuting him. See my point Hits
I see the point now hits. You, like many other conservatives are really just little panty-waste cowards. First, having served in the military and having been a civilian and military prosecutor, I understand that people over react. Doesn’t matter whether its is a military soldier, policeman or mercenary. Second, I understand the role of discipline, training and leadership in preventing fear from causing the use of violence when inappropriate.
The published reports on this incident do not bode well for the Black Water force. They reacted to a bomb going off, not in the immediate area. There was no evidence of violence directed against the convoy. US military troops who arrived immediately on the scene also noted the lack of evidence of an attack. Additionally, State Department rules of engagement were inconsistent with the rules utilized by the military. Finally, mercenaries are more likely to place their life and health ahead of all else. A properly trained military or police force will indeed temper their fear. Yes, indeed, they will die at times because of it. However, the willingness to sacrifice one’s self for the mission or to avoid wounding and killing the ones you have sworn to protect is the mark of a military or law enforcement professional. It is not and should not be the sacrifice required of a civilian contractor.
October 25th, 2007 at 1:21 pmeww, stepped in troll poo on this thread. Got to go wipe my feet now.
October 25th, 2007 at 1:23 pmrepublicans are good at double-speak. Nice job hits.
And before you get all “how do you know I’m a republican”
I don’t, I don’t care….you’re speaking conservative talking points…
October 25th, 2007 at 2:01 pmBetter yet, how do we know hits is not an alien, writing his posts from Uranus? How do we know I’m not a PB&J sandwich, lusting after crackers?
OMG what a tool.
October 25th, 2007 at 2:02 pmhits = Mr. P
New name, same rubbish.
October 25th, 2007 at 4:30 pm