View Full Version : No more Blackwater in Iraq.....
....at least, that's what it looks like.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090129/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq
Iraq won't allow Blackwater to operate in country
By SINAN SALAHEDDIN, Associated Press writer Sinan Salaheddin, Associated Press Writer
42 mins ago
BAGHDAD – Iraq will not allow Blackwater Worldwide to continue providing security protection for U.S. diplomats in the country, Iraqi and U.S. officials said Thursday, a move that would deprive U.S. officials of their primary protection force.
Blackwater's image in Iraq was irrevocably tarnished by the September 2007 killing of 17 Iraqi civilians in Nisoor Square. Five former Blackwater guards pleaded not guilty Jan. 6 in federal court in Washington to manslaughter and gun charges in that shooting.
Even before the shooting, Blackwater had a reputation for aggressive operations and using excessive force in protecting American officials, an allegation the company has disputed.
Anne Tyrrell, a spokeswoman for the North Carolina-based company, said the company had not yet been notified of the Iraqi decision.
"I can tell you that we have received no official communications from the government of Iraq on this matter," she said.
The decision not to issue Blackwater an operating license was due to "improper conduct and excessive use of force," said Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf.
Neither Khalaf nor a U.S. Embassy official gave a date for Blackwater personnel to leave the country and neither said whether they would be allowed to continue guarding U.S. diplomats during the interim.
A U.S.-Iraqi security agreement approved in November gives the Iraqis the authority to determine which Western security companies operate in Iraq. A joint U.S.-Iraqi committee is drawing up procedures for licensing and regulating security companies under the security agreement and it is unclear when it will finish the process.
"We have followed the procedures to apply for and secure operating licenses in Iraq," said Tyrrell, the Blackwater spokeswoman. "Any further questions about that the licensing process should be directed to our customer."
Khalaf said Blackwater employees who have not been implicated in the 2007 shooting have the right to work in Iraq but must find a different employer.
"We sent our decision to the U.S. Embassy last Friday," Khalaf told The Associated Press in a phone interview. "They have to find a new security company."
The U.S. Embassy official confirmed it received the government's decision, saying that U.S. officials were working with the Iraqi government and its contractors to address the "implications of this decision."
The official made the statement on condition of anonymity under embassy regulations.
In the 2007 shooting, Blackwater maintains its guards opened fire after coming under attack after a car in a State Department convoy broke down.
The Iraqi government has labeled the guards "criminals" and is closely watching the case.
The State Department relies heavily in Blackwater since it is the largest and best-equipped security company here.
But the company has become a lightning rod for Iraqi complaints about the behavior of Western security companies, whose employees were immune from prosecution under Iraqi law until the security agreement took effect this month.
Voodoochild
01-29-09, 07:33
This will have some pretty big implications. Who will be left to pick up the slack?
There are only two other companies who are WPPS (Worldwise Personal Protection Service) certified, Triple Canopy an Dyncorps. I'm willing to bet that neither of those companies has the manpower on hand to assume the responsibilities from Blackwater.
Interesting times indeed.
Nathan_Bell
01-29-09, 08:45
There are only two other companies who are WPPS (Worldwise Personal Protection Service) certified, Triple Canopy an Dyncorps. I'm willing to bet that neither of those companies has the manpower on hand to assume the responsibilities from Blackwater.
Interesting times indeed.
So can Triple Canopy or Dyncorps subcontract BW to handle it? Or does it not work that way?
There are only two other companies who are WPPS (Worldwise Personal Protection Service) certified, Triple Canopy an Dyncorps. I'm willing to bet that neither of those companies has the manpower on hand to assume the responsibilities from Blackwater.
If one of them gets the new contract, they will. You think the Blackwater guys will stay with a company that has no work for them? Or that Blackwater would keep them with no money coming with which to pay them? TC, Dyncorp, or whomever gets the new contract will get all the people they need, easily.
The funny thing will be all the members of the tea-and-crumpet crowd who will either be 1) punching each other in the kidneys to leave the country, or 2) all of a sudden going to the military with hat in hand asking for protection until this thing settles itself. Anybody remember the story a while back about how some high-level State Dept wog was castigating the rank-and-file in that organization for begging off of what they deemed high-risk postings? Just think about all the sissies that will suddenly be able to pull the "There's no security!" card.
John_Wayne777
01-29-09, 08:58
So can Triple Canopy or Dyncorps subcontract BW to handle it? Or does it not work that way?
I'm not an expert, but in my non-expert, uninformed, unprofessional opinion it looks like Iraq is gunning for a sign on their borders that looks something like this:
http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/09/18/blackwater.gif
John_Wayne777
01-29-09, 09:06
If one of them gets the new contract, they will. You think the Blackwater guys will stay with a company that has no work for them? Or that Blackwater would keep them with no money coming with which to pay them? TC, Dyncorp, or whomever gets the new contract will get all the people they need, easily.
I don't think it's just a matter of guys on the ground. There are management and logistical issues that go along with a switch to a new company. IIRC everybody on the DOS WPPS contracts had to be individually approved by DOS. If they go to TC or Dyn then will that process have to be done over again? How long will it take to draw up and approve the new contract? What happens to the security personnel in country in the meantime? What resources will the new DOS contracting company need to spin up operations? Where will they get them? What sort of timeframe does all of this have to happen in?
Etc. All of that has got to be a huge headache for the DOS and for the guys working the contracts.
CarlosDJackal
01-29-09, 09:41
Who wants to lay odds that we will start loosing Diplomats and such until whoever picks up the slack can get up to speed? Right or wrong, BW's record of not loosing a single Client speaks for itself and is going to be a little hard to equal.
Well there is a rumor that the contract could be split among TC and Dyncorp. I personally believe that a more plausible scenario is the contract being awarded to XXX and then those personnel from BW who desire to remain on WPPS will have their bios re-screened by XXX company personnel and then the appropriate DoS weenie. The one thing I am curious about is the Task Order 10 (aviation) part of BW's contract. Since neither TC nor Dyncorp has the air assets or trained personnel to fill that void.
It's hard to say how this whole thing will unfold, but one thing for sure is that things are changing here in country w/o a doubt. Whatever happens look for it to be a goat**** of mega proportions while everyone looks around to see who is holding the horns.
03humpalot
01-29-09, 11:53
Dyn can swing the Air portion dude.
Dyncorp has their own little birds and Hueys and trained personnel that can be in country to fulfill the role? Not including the air support personnel, armorer, etc...? I wasn't aware of that.
Dyn can swing the Air portion dude.
So the Iraqi government is unhappy with the people providing these security roles, and their solution is to create a dust up in which those same people will keep their same jobs, just under another company's banner.
My God, we truly have brought American-style democracy to the Middle East. Huzzah!
03humpalot
01-29-09, 12:12
Dyncorp has their own little birds and Hueys and trained personnel that can be in country to fulfill the role? Not including the air support personnel, armorer, etc...? I wasn't aware of that.
Yep,
they got started as an aviation company after all and still provide those services all over the world. They bid on the Air contract last it came up for bid but BW picked it up.
John_Wayne777
01-29-09, 13:18
So the Iraqi government is unhappy with the people providing these security roles, and their solution is to create a dust up in which those same people will keep their same jobs, just under another company's banner.
My God, we truly have brought American-style democracy to the Middle East. Huzzah!
I guess they figure Iraqis are as stupid as Americans have proven to be on this matter.
So the Iraqi government is unhappy with the people providing these security roles, and their solution is to create a dust up in which those same people will keep their same jobs, just under another company's banner.
My God, we truly have brought American-style democracy to the Middle East. Huzzah!
We could top it off by giving them OUR Hussein as a replacement to their Hussein! :cool:
Nathan_Bell
01-29-09, 13:46
If the threat analysis about the instability of Mexico is accurate perhaps BW and its assets will find work a good deal closer to home.
Wayne Dobbs
01-29-09, 13:47
This is the standard Arabic business practice of extorting a bribe to continue doing business. Someday soon, everybody will be back in bed together and the hadjis will have lots more money (US$) in their mattresses...
Nothing runs in the M.E without some type of Baksheesh. It's a part of life here.
I saw this coming. I mean, I am just a guy on the street but the media hit Blackwater pretty hard over the past year or so. And depending on which side of the story you listen to, a couple BW guys screwed up pretty bad.
I am not saying this is a smart decision, because honestly I don't think it is, but I am not at all surprised by it.
Don't worry because no one at DoS or BW is surprised either. Oh yeah, it just so happens that elections are taking place here this weekend. ;)
I saw this coming. I mean, I am just a guy on the street but the media hit Blackwater pretty hard over the past year or so. And depending on which side of the story you listen to, a couple BW guys screwed up pretty bad.
I am not saying this is a smart decision, because honestly I don't think it is, but I am not at all surprised by it.
dont worry, the new SecState HRC will take care of this :(
They just need a new image.
http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/12/20/blackwater3.jpg
......more....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090129/ap_on_re_us/ml_iraq_blackwater
Blackwater says it could leave Iraq with 72 hours
By MIKE BAKER, Associated Press writer Mike Baker, Associated Press Writer
1 hr 59 mins ago
MOYOCK, N.C. – Blackwater Worldwide, which guards American diplomats in Iraq, said Thursday it would be prepared to leave that country within 72 hours after Iraqi officials denied the North Carolina-based company an operating license because of a deadly shooting spree in Baghdad.
But Blackwater founder Erik Prince told The Associated Press that while losing the State Department contract would hurt the company, the move would cause more harm to the diplomats it has protected since soon after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.
"Our abrupt departure would far more hurt the reconstruction team and the diplomats trying to rebuild the country than it would hurt us as a business," Prince said Thursday in an exclusive interview with the AP.
Iraqi officials said the lingering outrage over a September 2007 shooting in Baghdad's Nisoor Square that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead led to its decision.
The shooting strained relations between Washington and Baghdad and fueled the anti-American insurgency in Iraq, where many Iraqis saw the bloodshed as a demonstration of American brutality and arrogance. Five former Blackwater guards have pleaded not guilty to federal charges in the United States that include 14 counts of manslaughter and 20 counts of attempted manslaughter.
Blackwater maintains the guards opened fire after coming under attack, an argument supported by transcripts of Blackwater radio logs obtained by the AP. They describe a hectic eight minutes in which the guards repeatedly reported incoming gunfire from insurgents and Iraqi police.
The Iraqi decision to deny Blackwater an operating license was made public Thursday. A U.S.-Iraqi security agreement, which took effect Jan. 1, gives the Iraqis the authority to determine which Western contractors operate in their country.
"We sent our decision to the U.S. Embassy last Friday," Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf told the AP. "They have to find a new security company."
State Department spokesman Robert A. Wood said the department has yet to determine its next step.
"We have to study and see what we're going to do next," said Wood. "We haven't made a decision on how we're going to move forward yet."
Prince said his company had yet to receive orders from the State Department to evacuate.
Neither Khalaf nor a U.S. Embassy official speaking on condition of anonymity gave a date for Blackwater personnel to leave Iraq, and neither said whether they would be allowed to continue guarding U.S. diplomats in the meantime.
Blackwater president Gary Jackson told the AP the company has plans to remove its nearly two dozen aircraft and 1,000 security contractors from Iraq within 72 hours of receiving such an order. "If they tell us to leave, we'll pack it up and go," Jackson said.
Two other U.S.-based security contractors working for the State Department — DynCorp and Triple Canopy — have licenses to operate in Iraq. But Prince played down the possibility that Blackwater contractors would simply move to another employer.
"It is a big assumption for someone to say, 'Fire Blackwater (and) all those guys will migrate over to one of the other competitors.'" Prince said. "It's not that easy."
Blackwater has been operating in Iraq without a formal license since it arrived in the country. The State Department extended Blackwater's contract for a year last spring, despite widespread calls for it to be expelled because of the shootings.
Blackwater's work in Iraq, which includes a reputation for aggressive operations and excessive force it disputes as unfair and inaccurate, turned the company into a catchall brand name for private security contractors. Executives said last year that the unwanted attention had them shifting their focus away from private security.
If banned from protecting diplomats in Iraq, Blackwater executives said Thursday the company remains on track to reach a goal of $1 billion in annual revenues in the next year or two. The State Department contract comprises about one-third of the company's overall revenues, though the work of providing actual boots-on-ground security is only part of the deal.
The private security firm, which trained some 25,000 civilians, law enforcement and military personnel last year, continues to expand even as its future in Iraq becomes less promising. Blackwater has a fleet of 76 aircraft, and almost all of them are deployed in hot spots in places like Afghanistan and West Africa.
On Thursday, three international teams were at the company's compound in North Carolina going through classes: Authorities from Yemen flipped through four-inch binders as they learned how to identify the components of an explosive by looking at X-rays. A group from the country of Georgia was practicing SWAT techniques in a makeshift building, taking instructions through a translator from a Blackwater official.
A Canadian team was also on site, along with a number of other law enforcement, Coast Guard and civilians who kicked up burning rubber on a driving track and rattled off rounds on shooting ranges. Members of the Army and Navy were practicing their driving skills in Blackwater's mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles.
"When you first hear Blackwater, you automatically, instantly think about the overseas stuff," said Jim Sierawski, Blackwater's vice president for training. "That overshadows the training center. Here, we've been on a steady incline every year."
John_Wayne777
01-29-09, 18:28
Well, if they want to throw you out, no sense in making it easy on them.
Todd,
That is funny. We have a little joke amongst ourselves here and a name that one of the females came up with was "Catwater". It would also have a kinder, gentler paw. :D
They just need a new image.
http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/12/20/blackwater3.jpg
I don't think it's just a matter of guys on the ground.
Oh, agreed. Hell, where the spear carriers end up is the easiest part of this whole thing. The shift of the admin and log train might not be a nightmare, per se, but it'll put a serious crimp in everybody's way of doing things until the dust settles.
John_Wayne777
01-29-09, 18:51
Oh, agreed. Hell, where the spear carriers end up is the easiest part of this whole thing. The shift of the admin and log train might not be a nightmare, per se, but it'll put a serious crimp in everybody's way of doing things until the dust settles.
...especially if BW wants to pull out 72 hours after being asked to leave.
I like that. Smart and pragmatic move on their part, that also contains a bit of attitude.
I've seen nothing to indicate that DoS went to bat for them in any substantive way, so I admire that BW is prepared to just jet, and leave their former principals to their own devices until they can make new security arrangements, whatever they may be. It's got a very "F--k me? No, f--k YOU!" feel to it.
I have a reliable source on the ground there. So far nothing concrete, lots of speculation. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
One thing is very likely, if they yank Blackwater out suddenly, much of the diplomatic mission there will come to a screeching halt.
I like that. Smart and pragmatic move on their part, that also contains a bit of attitude.
I've seen nothing to indicate that DoS went to bat for them in any substantive way, so I admire that BW is prepared to just jet, and leave their former principals to their own devices until they can make new security arrangements, whatever they may be. It's got a very "F--k me? No, f--k YOU!" feel to it.
My thoughts exactly.
I like that. Smart and pragmatic move on their part, that also contains a bit of attitude.
I've seen nothing to indicate that DoS went to bat for them in any substantive way, so I admire that BW is prepared to just jet, and leave their former principals to their own devices until they can make new security arrangements, whatever they may be. It's got a very "F--k me? No, f--k YOU!" feel to it.
I like it :cool:
Ain't that the truth.
I have a reliable source on the ground there. So far nothing concrete, lots of speculation. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
One thing is very likely, if they yank Blackwater out suddenly, much of the diplomatic mission there will come to a screeching halt.
trunkmonkey
01-30-09, 09:59
Anyone here that actually works or has worked for BW?? doesn't seem like it.
Holy shit:
dont worry, the new SecState HRC will take care of this :(
I had never put those 2 pieces of the puzzle together. For most of her career she has enjoyed lots of authority but not much responsibilty.
Should be interesting.
TM,
I worked for them briefly and have lots of friends there. I'll never say anything bad about them.
Anyone here that actually works or has worked for BW?? doesn't seem like it.
I never worked for BW while in Iraq, but I had a great relationship with both individuals and BW as a whole. We have several BW and former BW members on this board.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090130/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_blackwater_iraq
Official: Blackwater's Iraq deal not to be renewed
By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer
37 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The State Department will not renew Blackwater Worldwide's contract to protect American diplomats in Iraq when it expires in May, a senior U.S. official said Friday. The official told The Associated Press that the contract will lapse because of the Iraqi government's decision to deny Blackwater a license to operate.
The Iraqis informed the State Department last week of the denial, which was made amid lingering outrage over a September 2007 shooting in Baghdad's Nisoor Square that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead.
The official said that renewing Blackwater's contract was "basically a moot point because they were not going to be allowed to operate in Iraq anyway." The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision has yet to be announced.
The State Department says it is still considering how to protect U.S. diplomats in the wake of the Iraqi denial of Blackwater's operating license.
Officials have said one possibility would be to replace Blackwater with one or a combination of guards from two other U.S.-based security contractors that work for the State Department in Iraq, DynCorp and Triple Canopy. Both have had licenses to operate in Iraq, but its not clear if they are current or have been renewed.
Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell declined to comment on the status of the contract, saying the company understood the State Department "is exploring its options."
"We are awaiting direction from our customer," she said. She stressed that Blackwater had always known that its services in Iraq would be temporary.
Blackwater executives say the company could leave Iraq within 72 hours of being told to do so, but they cautioned that such a move would cause more harm to the diplomats it protects than to the company itself.
In a Thursday interview with the AP at the firm's North Carolina headquarters, Blackwater founder Erik Prince said he had not received any indication that the company would be ordered to evacuate in light of the license denial.
The Nisoor Square shooting strained relations between Washington and Baghdad and fueled the anti-American insurgency in Iraq, where many Iraqis saw the bloodshed as a demonstration of American brutality and arrogance. Five former Blackwater guards have pleaded not guilty to federal charges in the United States that include 14 counts of manslaughter and 20 counts of attempted manslaughter.
Blackwater maintains the guards opened fire after coming under attack, an argument supported by transcripts of Blackwater radio logs obtained by the AP. They describe a hectic eight minutes in which the guards repeatedly reported incoming gunfire from insurgents and Iraqi police.
A U.S.-Iraqi security agreement, which took effect Jan. 1, gives the Iraqis the authority to determine which Western contractors operate in their country.
Blackwater has been operating in Iraq without a formal license since 2006. The State Department extended Blackwater's contract for a year last spring, despite widespread calls for it to be expelled because of the shootings.
Blackwater's work in Iraq, which includes a reputation for aggressive operations and excessive force it disputes as unfair and inaccurate, turned the company into a catchall brand name for private security contractors. Executives said last year that the unwanted attention had them shifting their focus away from private security.
Executives also acknowledged that losing a contract that comprises one-third of the company's annual revenues could disrupt its growth.
"It would hurt us," Prince told the AP on Thursday. "It would not be a mortal blow, but it would hurt us."
However, Blackwater has also repeatedly said that it performs the contract at the request of the government, noting that while revenues for the contract are high, the margins are low, and the work in Iraq has sullied Blackwater's brand. Executives said this week that they'd prefer to focus on other endeavors, such as international training and aviation support, where they see greater room for growth.
Separate from its State Department work in Iraq, the company trained some 25,000 civilians, law enforcement and military personnel last year. It has a fleet of 76 aircraft, with many of them deployed in Afghanistan and West Africa.
___
Associated Press writer Mike Baker contributed to this report from Moyock, N.C.
John_Wayne777
01-30-09, 21:48
Anyone here that actually works or has worked for BW?? doesn't seem like it.
Lots of board members have worked various contracts for BW at some point.
I bet Greystone tries to move in if their assets are what I recall, but few other PMC companies have the manpower BW does.
I dont see this actually happening though, A bud of mine said BW does MOST the security for US personelle over there such as Politicos etc;
John_Wayne777
01-30-09, 23:14
I bet Greystone tries to move in if their assets are what I recall, but few other PMC companies have the manpower BW does.
I dont see this actually happening though, A bud of mine said BW does MOST the security for US personelle over there such as Politicos etc;
BW has the Department Of State WPPS contract at this moment. It's one of the largest contracts in Iraq.
I never worked for BW while in Iraq, but I had a great relationship with both individuals and BW as a whole. We have several BW and former BW members on this board.
. . . including at least one instructor.
Joe Mamma
Actually only partially true. They have a large portion of the contract in Iraq. Triple Canopy provides security to the embassy in Baghdad directly (separate contract) as well as the locations in Tallil and Basrah. They also have the contract in a country near Gaza.
Both DynCorp and Triple Canopy have WPPS qualified and trained personnel that sit on the shelf until the need arises. The problem will be how many of those will be ready and deployable if the word comes down. I'll almost be willing to bet that the pay goes down as well.
BW has the Department Of State WPPS contract at this moment. It's one of the largest contracts in Iraq.
With the specific niche that BW fills over here, I'm not sure how they can just "pull out". There would certainly be a skillset gap not easily filled--even by the other top tier PMC/PSCs. I'm sure there are contingency plans, but I'm going to guess this is an area that will have to be filled with military personnel while they figure out how to re-staff the positions. I'd also venture to guess there are "other" companies that will simply absorb specific capabilities with a behind the scenes agreements. There is too much experience and expertise invovled to just have it disappear. Plus, I don't think there are enough flights to extricate the number of people involved in a timely fashion. Even with their own mini-airline--they have to get approval for those flights and then schedule around the Military and Commercial carriers.
Actually there are other companies that have the personnel and skillsets. ;) The military will not be doing PSD for the DoS. What will more than likely happen is a curtailment of movement except for mission essential travel by DoS personnel. The Iraqis have already said that BW personnel can continue to work for whoever the next company is as long as they haven't been involved in any "controversies". So in reality there will be upper management personnel leaving and then primarily a big shirt changeover. Getting the people out of country in 72 hours is also not an issue as they can MILAIR and civilian fly them out BIAP. I still predict that it will be a large goat****.
With the specific niche that BW fills over here, I'm not sure how they can just "pull out". There would certainly be a skillset gap not easily filled--even by the other top tier PMC/PSCs. I'm sure there are contingency plans, but I'm going to guess this is an area that will have to be filled with military personnel while they figure out how to re-staff the positions. I'd also venture to guess there are "other" companies that will simply absorb specific capabilities with a behind the scenes agreements. There is too much experience and expertise invovled to just have it disappear. Plus, I don't think there are enough flights to extricate the number of people involved in a timely fashion. Even with their own mini-airline--they have to get approval for those flights and then schedule around the Military and Commercial carriers.
I can't even imagine the mess moving thousands of unscheduled personnel through BIAP would create. I fly Gryphon now so I don't mess with Embassy Flights/Air Force uncertainty anymore. It would be a total disaster.
I still predict that it will be a large goat****.
And heaven knows none of the Iraqis want to see DoS personnel injured or killed as a result of this ... :rolleyes:
trunkmonkey
01-31-09, 12:42
This is how it is going to go down.
This will not be nearly as much as the goat**** that many anticipate. All the weapons, equipment, vehicles and such are all DOS property. Those of you that envision a massive exodus of BW people from the country are pretty far off base.
The new company moves in, and all the boys that wish to stay on the contract simply sign a new one with that company. End of story. This is not the first time a changeover like this has happened, but it will be the largest.
Not that I've got any experience with this stuff. But I did stay in a holiday inn express last night.
Trunkmonkey,
It will be a goat**** because DoS is involved and everything they do turns into one. Also, whoever assumes the contract has every right to review the files of those on the contract and they don't have to offer them a position since Dyncorp and Triple Canopy have WPPS qualified personnel on the shelf they can use them first and then backfill the shortfall with the leftovers.
Not that I have any experience in any of this either. I am also not down the street from the mancamp in Baghdad.
This is how it is going to go down.
This will not be nearly as much as the goat**** that many anticipate. All the weapons, equipment, vehicles and such are all DOS property. Those of you that envision a massive exodus of BW people from the country are pretty far off base.
The new company moves in, and all the boys that wish to stay on the contract simply sign a new one with that company. End of story. This is not the first time a changeover like this has happened, but it will be the largest.
Not that I've got any experience with this stuff. But I did stay in a holiday inn express last night.
trunkmonkey
01-31-09, 13:16
Yep, they sure don't have to do an easy changeover.
Because it totally makes sense to put a 1000 guys in those positions that may or may not have
experience running those routes.
But hey that's my prediction. And your current location has literally nothing to do with it.
03humpalot
01-31-09, 13:53
Well i have experience with it,
it will be a goat**** of that i have no doubt. Both of you guys (Iraqgunz and trunkmonkey) have valid points. We will see what happens.
Something i havent seen brought up yet is Afghanistan...Karzai stated after the Nissour Square shoot that if BW was not welcome in Iraq they wouldnt be welcome in Afghanistan either. Anyone heard anything further on that angle?
Interesting times these.
trunkmonkey
01-31-09, 14:02
You can bet the state dept will look to distance themselves from BW when the renewal of the contract comes up. That is of course if BW isn't booted out same as Iraq first.
Whatever you say, Chief.
Yep, they sure don't have to do an easy changeover.
Because it totally makes sense to put a 1000 guys in those positions that may or may not have
experience running those routes.
But hey that's my prediction. And your current location has literally nothing to do with it.
furyfighter20
01-31-09, 16:57
Everyone is forgetting one important detail. the us government is switching more and more power to the Iraq gov. and giving the IA the lead on most ops and the us army is there for support rolls. now don’t get me wrong we still take care of the important roles because the IA is not up to par yet but they r getting better but I won’t put my life on it. Now to my point with the new security agreement the IRAQ gov. has the ability to prosecute civilian’s contractors for crimes here in Iraq. I will try to find the link I read and post it.
The IAs can get as good as they're possibly capable of getting, and they'll still suck, because nobody in the Mid-East, except Israel, has a professional military tradition. At least not in the way we westerners think of it.
I hope you're not bringing them up under the idea of them providing security for our diplomatic mission, because that's a patently ridiculous concept (because of that whole "sucking" thing I mentioned...). No matter how much of a lead they may or may not be taking in other matters, there's no way in hell we'll let them be the lead agency in providing the immediate physical security of our people. Not only no, but HELL no, and them sucking is only the most obvious reason. It would be politically stupid, too.
If that's not your angle, I don't see where you're going by mentioning the IAs. They're not a factor in this regard.
Littlelebowski
01-31-09, 21:13
But hey that's my prediction. And your current location has literally nothing to do with it.
Because his current location has nothing to do with him being in that profession, in that AO for literally years, right?
You're a bright one.
Well it looks as if contrary to others predictions that Triple Canopy has been awarded the contract to replace Blackwater on the WPPS contract in Iraq. A source of mine had told me this a short while back, but I kept it close and still kept hearing rumors that Dyncorp was the winner. I guess we'll see. I am also surprised about the decision to force BW's air wing out as well.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/01/us.iraq.security/
VooDoo6Actual
04-02-09, 21:26
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/CopyofKabul02June6toAugust6th472Lar.jpg
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.