Matters Blackwater (Merged thread)

[Tom Odom]

In other words, you can question the wisdom of the use of contractors, or you can justify their use. But the connection of the two issues (a) the use of them, and (b) potential or actual losses, elludes me.

The linkage is quite simple: if the US government decides it is necessary to put armed forces on the ground, then the US government needs to equip train and deploy US government forces to do that job. Contractors are offered as a "cheap" or "short term" fix for what are often self-created shortfalls. Sustained use of PMCs is hardly cheap or short term--and those self-created gaps remain gaps.

As for losses, the seemingly invisble use of contractors--especially in a direct action mode--only gets pulled aside when losses like this occur. Contract direct action forces are used in this manner because their losses are less an issue in Congress.

This was in the case in using mercs in Africa, especually the Congo.

Tom