"Notorious mercenary group is back in business after 20" Topic

… years

"Executive Outcomes- the mercenary group made famous for their operations in Africa and other parts of the world, is reportedly on its way back into the scene, according to Eeben Barlow, the Northern Rhodesian-born South African founder of the organization.

Founded in 1989, EO was well-known prior to their most notable action in Sierra Leone, quelling a mid-1990s rebellion by guerrillas and restoring order to the region.

No mere "consultants" or "contractors," EO had a feasome arsenal of mostly ex-Soviet weapons, including an Mi-24 Hind gunship…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

There will always be a need for "Professionals" of this type. They have been around forever. Of course the term "Private Military Contractor" is what is generally used today.

I have no problem with them. In many cases they are very effective. Sometimes in the past they have been vilified for causing CD/non-combatant losses. In an insurgency where uniforms are not worn. That is expected, does and will occur …

Sorry, never heard of 'em. And 'Executive Outcomes' sounds kinda sterile, not as colorful as 'The Wild Geese,' 'The Dogs of War' or 'The Expendables.'

Then again, it's not much different from 'Blackwater' or 'Wagner Group' I guess. The name just sounds more results-oriented.

I like "the Varangians" for a name.

The problem is that a lot are barely trained thugs for hire, like those Blackwater security guards, who killed a load of civilians in an unprovoked attack in Iraq in 2007

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

The problem is that a lot are barely trained thugs for hire, like those Blackwater security guards, who killed a load of civilians in an unprovoked attack in Iraq in 2007

That's because PMC's are not accountable under the government like armies are. They operate by their own rules, or no rules if you look at it that way. Playing God is a lot easier, but then they're also disavowed by the government and can be left out on a limb to fend for themselves unsupported.

who killed a load of civilians in an unprovoked attack in Iraq in 2007

I have heard something like this, do you have a link …

That's because PMC's are not accountable under the government like armies are. They operate by their own rules, or no rules if you look at it that way. Playing God is a lot easier, but then they're also disavowed by the government and can be left out on a limb to fend for themselves unsupported.

Do you have a link to support this ? I am interested as I have heard stories both ways.

E.g. IIRC, A group PMCs in Iraq in two black SUVs in 2009(?). Driving thru a village, and their rear SUV was hit by some sort of incoming fires. The rest of the PMCs opened up with suppressive fires into the buildings around them. To cover and recover the other PMCs. They were charged with killing civilians … Hmmm ?

I would have done the same in that situation really. Any soldier would. What else could you do ? Return fires or die. IIRC they were pardoned recently by the POTUS.

Were there ever any records of PMCs, doing something like My Lai, etc.?

Notorious, yes – notoriously effective.

In the US PMC's are mainly contracted by politicians, State Department, and the high-up military. Many of their assignments are to protect local VIP's and politicians. These are not missions left to the rank and file military or rent-a-cops.

Regarding "excessive force" – tell me how you can determine what is or isn't excessive force in the middle of an ambush/firefight in a foreign country that does not abide by the Geneva convention where you can't tell friend from foe or even trust a 3-year-old kid walking towards you. After it is over the non-combat attorneys get to make that call – BS.

Excessive force is determined AFTER the engagement, not during as you don't have sufficient intel to know what's going to happen next and the FoW keeps you guessing.

PMC's have an important mission and if they lose someone they'll lose contracts. Besides, if your life is in danger do you want your bodyguards second-guessing everything or doing what needs to be done to get you extracted safely? Whose life is more important? A Western VIP/politician or a 3rd world civilian? What do you think the answer is to the people contracting the PMC's?

This is all from a friend of mine that was on the Board for Triple Canopy. I used to work at one of those three-letter agencies and in certain circumstances, operators had standing orders to kill innocent civilians that got in the way or saw something they were not supposed to. Just being in the wrong place at the wrong time gets you dead. These orders came from the highest levels. I know guys that had to do that and live with it, it's not something they enjoyed. So when you complain about no accountability maybe that's the reason. If they are held accountable by their employers they are not going to sign up again.

IIRC UN Peace Keepers are not to engage in combat, they come in after it is over. Check out their record: corruption, executions, drug running, trading sex for food, etc. In the Ivory Coast (or near there) the local gangs rounded them up, took their gear, and stripped them naked. They hid out in their hotel after that.

Executive Outcomes is notorious because they solved a problem in Africa and were going to get the compensation that the IMF and World Bank had their eyes on. It set a bad precedent for the Global Elites too that would lose out if that kept happening.

Remember, like Smedley Butler said, "War is a racket". When the men who fight to make a country safe get paid it is notorious. When someone else fights, does not get paid and the banks and the world's rich elite come into the country to loan money to a corrupt government they helped install using the countries natural resources as collateral it's called "civilized".

Wolfhag

The problem is that a lot are barely trained thugs for hire, like those Blackwater security guards, who killed a load of civilians in an unprovoked attack in Iraq in 2007

Except that in the case of the "unprovoked attack" you mention, the individuals were not "barely trained thugs" but former decorated military who had previously served in combat. The investigation into that incident was a sham. The initial investigating officer on scene spoke with Iraqi witnesses who corroborated the contractor's accounts. He also took photos of spent AK47 shell casings where the contractors stated they took fire from. The initial officer on scene also saw Iraqi police picking items up which were believed to be the shell casings. Additionally the FBI relied upon the Iraqi police for the majority of their investigation and evidence collecting. The aforementioned photos were never provided to the defense counsel until after the Iraqi witnesses had already testified and left the country.

Pmcs are going to be a dirty fact of life as more western countries pull back from less obvious winnable situations. If things go south the hiring group can easily walk away since there's no national skin in the game besides money, and that's nothing. Look at shipping. Gulf of guinea is a new hotspot and just a handful of ex-mil Joe's (not uber seal super guys) would be able to repel boarders, but it's not done yet although it is a cheap and effective way to prevent potentially millions in losses. Unless a country is going to act and f* the bad press to get a job done (French from what little I've read lately) pmcs are the answer.

I Agree with Wolf's & Prince Albert's posts. +10 Each !

The 4 PMCs in that 2007 incident, and the POTUS just pardoned were not "barely trained thugs". 2 USMC, 1 US Paratrooper, 1 US Army Ranger or Combat Infantrymen. They knew what they were doing and were caught in a very nasty ambush in the middle of a built up area/village/town. As I said in that situation they had no choice but to return fires. I would have done the same. So would any capable soldier and leader.

As we know or should, the insurgent will/did/does strike in a populated area, and hide among civilians, etc. Some of those non-combatants support the insurgents or are the insurgents when the sun goes down, etc. Again a classic from the Moa and Che' playbooks. If the insurgent was concern about non-combatants they would not attack in an urban/populated area. But again, that is generally not how it works in an insurgency …

Until we can read minds, in a firefight you return fires, maneuver, etc. That is the way we are trained. You should call-in FA, CAS, etc., if available, but it would most likely be denied for fear of CD. Which is little comfort to the guys under fire, regardless of their military status, Regulars, PMCs, etc. Most likely PMCs would not have supporting fires? Making their situation even more dire.

You are going to have to shoot your way out [or die] and use a lot of suppressive fire, etc. And those rounds marked "To Whom It May Concern" may/will hit some non-combatants. Sad fact of the situation …

And again, in a situation where the enemy does not wear a uniform, and can be the paddy farmer or goat herder you saw before. But this time they may have an RPG round with you and your comrades' names on it.

I ask anyone to show me an incident recently where any PMCs did a "My Lai". If so it would be very, very, rare.

The non-combatants in this situation and many others were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. And the PMCs did not have time in the middle of a firefight to ask if they were good guys or bad guys or support those bad guys, etc.

And yes as we know women and children are used in this and other insurgencies. Brings to mind the old Vietnam saying I had heard from some of the Vietnam Vets I served with … "Kill'm all and let God sort them out." That is what happens in an insurgency. Again you don't have time to ask who is who in this type of situation and others that are similar.

And to make it very clear. I do NOT or would NOT support any action like My Lai. We were trained to stop something like that before it starts.

Going from memory, but I believe it was EO that offered to put a top to the Rwanda massacre. They were turned down by Anon and the UN because they were too distasteful to work with. How many tens of thousands would have been saved if they had been listened to.

I had heard, IIRC, the Canadian General in command of the UN Forces interviewed on the History Channel[IIRC?] … He requested the UN if he could intervene to stop the massacre, but he was told to stand down basically.

Yes sadly some don't get, modern PMCs can be very effective if used properly, e.g. EO. And based on what I know about their "work" history. They could have stopped the this slaughter.

I hope whoever made these decisions knows the blood of the slaughtered are on their hands.

Albeit recently we have seen Russian based PMCs, the Wagner Group, IIRC. It appears they generally do what seems to be Putin's biding. The USAF reportedly last year took out around 200 of them in Syria, IIRC.

Rumor is Wagner Group are actually Russian Spec Ops, e.g. Spetsnaz playing the role of PMCs. An interesting "situation" if so. Clancy couldn't have written a better storyline … en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spetsnaz

"I hope whoever made these decisions knows the blood of the slaughtered are on their hands."

I doubt it. It was Kofi Anon who made the decision and he later became Secretary General.

Why is PMC's a "dirty fact" when militaries have been using them for centuries? Many countries use contracted privateers that shared in the loot. In WWII and VN the US used thousands of private and civilian contractors and companies sent their tech reps into combat areas. It appears the CIA has been using them for decades too.

Countries are going to do what they need to do. They'll follow the rules of warfare as long as it suits them and no longer. In WWII the US refused to target civilians in cities until they got desperate and started firebombing cities – but at least dropped leaflets telling people to evacuate.

For more detailed info try Global Security .org
link

It appears that at least into the near future most conflicts are going to be fought with proxies and PMC's.

There is a US company called Vinnell Corp that has been supplying retired military personnel to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia "National Guard" (SANG) since the early 1970s. It's not really a national guard. I used to recruit contractors for them.

SANG is really a palace guard recruited from the king's tribe who will remain loyal to him in the event of an attempted coup. While the retired US military is contractors/trainers, as retired military they can be called to active duty. This means in the event of an attempted overthrow the US can immediately have an active military on site. Why you may ask? To protect the PetroDollar which allows the US to maintain its economic dominance and print trillions of worthless Federal Reserve Notes. If Saudi stops accepting the USD for oil the US will have a problem.

In exchange for protection, the Kingdom helps subsidizes the US Defense industry with millions of dollars in purchases of weapons and arms that will most likely never be used. It's a symbiotic relationship. Saudi hires US K-Street lobbyists that petition Congress on their behalf and makes political contributions. How much of a role they had in pressuring the US into invading Iraq, if any, is unknown to me.

Protecting the PetroDollar is the reason for building KKMC (I'll bet some of you have been there) and other military bases. There is not much of an expectation they will fight for themselves but will depend on US help.

Wolfhag

"Why is PMC's a "dirty fact" when militaries have been using them for centuries?"

Well, in the West at least, they have traditionally been looked down on because they fight for money instead of patriotism. In the early existence of the US even our own military was considered mercenaries because they got paid. During the incident at Harper's Ferry, Robert E, Lee offered the local militia the honor of leading the assault on the fire house. He was rebuffed by the local militia commander who told him his mercenaries, (US Marines), could do it.

Yes, it appears the West and even the UN IIRC, look down somewhat on PMCs/Mercs. However, I don't see it that way. I see them another force that may be available to defeat the enemy.