US Contractor Charged in Shooting of AFG Accused of Torching Scientist

[KevinB]

Dont get me wrong contractors have screwed up by the numbers too.

BW's shooting last year of 17 unarmed Iraqi's was an utter atrocity
  * I have spoke to three people involved (BW) all who claim the Iraqi's where unarmed and did not fire on the BW TMST (QRF team)

However any situation can sprila out of control when one shooter make a bad call (or worse) as one can look at the USMC's elite Det1 guys that got booted out of country following overreaction to a VBIED.

 

[TCBF]

Very good points here especially. I too am extremely against the use of such mercenary organizations. The so-called "Private Military Contractors" used by the US in for example Iraq are nothing more than unaccountable cowboys. Military force needs to be only wielded by governments with transparency and legitimacy, not organizations fostered by profit margins and stock holders.

-C/D

- You can always screen and test PMC's, as the professionals in their midst demand a high standard among their peers.  For the most part, they get it.  The politically motivated, however, are far more dangerous than the financially motivated.  They tend to see the planet in terms of black and white and claim that hatred is a force multiplier.  The Canadian and American 'internationalists' who joined the Communist crusade during the Spanish Civil War are an example.

 

[PAT-Platoon]

Moral high ground in who's eyes? yours? mine? theirs?

And for the record wars are won by the side willing to do what the other is not...Cruel and inhumane you betcha but that is why war is such an abhorrent thing. If you are putting Canada on a pedestal crack your history books..Fire Bombings of Dresden come to mind...

Utterly disgusting if you believe that there is any justification for cruel and inhumane acts. Not only is it everything that our country stands for, its everything that is against the Laws of War. The ends do not justify the means in this case whatsoever. I don't know why you are citing a horrible event such as the fire bombings of Dresden as a good thing.

Cruel and inhumane acts do nothing but harm in a war such as the ones we are fighting in. COIN operations only become hampered by such disgusting acts, and it has been proven in the past. If you are a member of the Canadian Forces I suggest you look carefully at some of the principles, ethos and laws that you are subject to. Otherwise I question your motives for being in the CF.

Insert Quote
I must say as a previous "unaccountable cowboy" I have seen much worse discresion used by armed forces personnel.  Keep in mind the vast majority of armed contractors are former mil personnel, who usually have a lot more experience and skill than the average soldier on patro

True, in regards to experience and skills. As well, there has certainly been much much worse discretion by armed forces personnel in other events. However, in the end, such events of discretion can be handled in a proper context with such platforms as our Code of Service Discipline. Private Military Contractors on the other hand have some very wary motives, and anything that has a motive for pure financial (or sadomasochistic) gain is something to be cautious of. I understand that they provide a service that we are in need of, however if the war and the ability to wage such a war is only possible with the use, and direct use (i.e. within combat roles/ "security" roles) then maybe that is a war we should be rethinking on how we are conducting it.

Yes I have no experience as a PMC, does that mean I am not allowed to comment on it? There has been plenty of events around the world to justify my comments, so by throwing away my comments as those of someone of no background is utterly ridiculous and academically preposterous. The massacres and atrocities committed by PMCs in the past, as well as their continuing problems in many nations, as well as the base question of employment (Should we be privatizing, of all things, the military?), is base enough for my opinions. For those who wish for everyone to be an accredited professionnal in every single opinion they voice, I say then you probably cannot speak a lot about things in your day to day life. How many here don't have a political science background and still speak about politics? How many hear are not qualified film-makers yet still criticize and review movies they have seen? Finally, how many here aren't PMCs but can still comment on their history and detriments without having been involved in that field? I am certainly one of those people, as are many.

-C/D

 

[Infanteer]

Yes I have no experience as a PMC, does that mean I am not allowed to comment on it? There has been plenty of events around the world to justify my comments, so by throwing away my comments as those of someone of no background is utterly ridiculous and academically preposterous.

No, but have you ever worked in an environment with PMCs?  Do you know any people who've worked as a PMC?  So aside from some newpaper clippings and the latest book from the library do you really feel you can sit here and tell people that anyone working for a PMC is an unaccountable cowboy?  Pretty nice blanket statement there - just like the other ones you've made that have got you introduced to the warning system.

It's not what you're saying, it's how you choose to say it.  You're like that annoying guy knocking at the door at 0830 to give me some religious literature.  Try a different approach, one that doesn't involve you telling the rest of us how the world really works.  You'd be surprised to find that many people here have lived through stuff you like to make casual observations about and that you may learn something.

 

[Loachman]

How many hear are not qualified film-makers yet still criticize and review movies they have seen?

At least when we criticize a movie we've seen it first.

You beak off without doing the equivalent.

Try a less confrontational approach. You'll be the one who benefits the most.

Or carry on as you are. It doesn't really matter to us. We can just ignore you and watch as you move up the warning system.

Your call.

 

[George Wallace]

Utterly disgusting if you believe that there is any justification for cruel and inhumane acts. Not only is it everything that our country stands for, its everything that is against the Laws of War. The ends do not justify the means in this case whatsoever. I don't know why you are citing a horrible event such as the fire bombings of Dresden as a good thing.

Cruel and inhumane acts do nothing but harm in a war such as the ones we are fighting in. COIN operations only become hampered by such disgusting acts, and it has been proven in the past. If you are a member of the Canadian Forces I suggest you look carefully at some of the principles, ethos and laws that you are subject to. Otherwise I question your motives for being in the CF.

True, in regards to experience and skills. As well, there has certainly been much much worse discretion by armed forces personnel in other events. However, in the end, such events of discretion can be handled in a proper context with such platforms as our Code of Service Discipline. Private Military Contractors on the other hand have some very wary motives, and anything that has a motive for pure financial (or sadomasochistic) gain is something to be cautious of. I understand that they provide a service that we are in need of, however if the war and the ability to wage such a war is only possible with the use, and direct use (i.e. within combat roles/ "security" roles) then maybe that is a war we should be rethinking on how we are conducting it.

Yes I have no experience as a PMC, does that mean I am not allowed to comment on it? There has been plenty of events around the world to justify my comments, so by throwing away my comments as those of someone of no background is utterly ridiculous and academically preposterous. The massacres and atrocities committed by PMCs in the past, as well as their continuing problems in many nations, as well as the base question of employment (Should we be privatizing, of all things, the military?), is base enough for my opinions. For those who wish for everyone to be an accredited professionnal in every single opinion they voice, I say then you probably cannot speak a lot about things in your day to day life. How many here don't have a political science background and still speak about politics? How many hear are not qualified film-makers yet still criticize and review movies they have seen? Finally, how many here aren't PMCs but can still comment on their history and detriments without having been involved in that field? I am certainly one of those people, as are many.

-C/D

OK Kid.......And that is what you are; a Kid.  It is time for you to go on "Listening Silence".  Too often you have spouted off on matters that you know absolutely nothing about and have no experience in.  You are the type of twit who doesn't accept the fact that people who walk the surface of the earth and look up daily to blue skies tell you that the sky is blue; all because you and your comrades skulking in a dark hole somewhere deep beneath the surface have debated the fact that it is "green".  Once again you are wrong in your assumptions, and you should know by now after reading so much here on Milnet.ca what "assume" means.

You are nothing but a smartass ill-informed kid who thinks he knows more than he does.  You will someday find out how wrong you are.  Now go on "Listening Silence" (being polite here) and save some face.

 

[KevinB]

You know back in 2003-2004 the Unaccountable cowboy moniker would have had some weight.

The U.S. Military had no idea on how to get a grip on the unnumerable compnaies and thousands odf contracts flooding into Iraq (and to a point Afghanistan).  However in this intial flood, very few worked for the U.S. Deparment of Defense.  Many came across the border in TPOH, companies and people.  Thousands of people who where not entitled to CAC cards (DoD badge ID) received one, and became DoD contractors on the face of it, despite having no ties to DoD other than an ID badge.

There still needs to be more checks and balances on the contracting system.  Very few people understand it, and very few have the experience and intelligence in a such a combination to make a viable system.  I won't get into some issues to deep as I intend to finish a book off next year and dont want to spoil my potential buying public with the answers now 

 

[Drag]

I was debating, whether or not to get back to this topic after it was highjacked by the resident troll....   I do not consider PMCs trigger happy cowboys, most are highly trained professionals doing a valuable service in the roles that they are employed in.   My opinion is still is that warfighting should not be outsourced to PMCs and should be done by military forces.  In a way governments skirt the responsibility to fund their armed forces properly by hiring PMCs.  There as still roles I find PMCs uniquely suited for, as I posted previously.

That being said, the particular individual in the article was wrong and deserves to be punished.  As for the firebombing of Dresden, large scale bombing was an acceptable military tactic at the time used by all sides.  While today people may disagree withit, it was accepted at the time, and with the limitations of technology, saturation bombing IMO was a legitimate tactic.  A more accurate comparison is the treatment of POWs and enemy civilians by the Western Allies and the Axis.  We did not shoot civilians in reprisal, the enemy did.  We did not work our prisoners to death in slave labour camps, the enemy did.  We did not shoot prisoners for escaping from POW camps.  We never ordered our troops to execute an entire class of POWs on sight (ref Commissar Order).  The whole Holocaust thing.  So hence we did maintain the moral high ground on our enemies

 

[KevinB]

Warfighting is not done by PSC.

Certain companies do have a different contract - and are used in SAP/SCI work for selective targeting.  However 99.9% of the PMC's are used in some sort of security role - be it static guard forces, convoy escort teams, or personal security detail.  Those jobs are defensive non-combatants.

If warfighting is done - then that jumps off the PSC and into the realm of Executive Outcomes, Sandline etc. fully and completely the mercenary corporation.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I was debating, whether or not to get back to this topic after it was highjacked by the resident troll....   I do not consider PMCs trigger happy cowboys, most are highly trained professionals doing a valuable service in the roles that they are employed in.   My opinion is still is that warfighting should not be outsourced to PMCs and should be done by military forces.  In a way governments skirt the responsibility to fund their armed forces properly by hiring PMCs.  There as still roles I find PMCs uniquely suited for, as I posted previously.

That being said, the particular individual in the article was wrong and deserves to be punished.  As for the firebombing of Dresden, large scale bombing was an acceptable military tactic at the time used by all sides.  While today people may disagree withit, it was accepted at the time, and with the limitations of technology, saturation bombing IMO was a legitimate tactic.  A more accurate comparison is the treatment of POWs and enemy civilians by the Western Allies and the Axis.  We did not shoot civilians in reprisal, the enemy did.  We did not work our prisoners to death in slave labour camps, the enemy did.  We did not shoot prisoners for escaping from POW camps.  We never ordered our troops to execute an entire class of POWs on sight (ref Commissar Order).  The whole Holocaust thing.  So hence we did maintain the moral high ground on our enemies

..and that C-D is how one can disagree with the "site status quo" and still make an interesting worthwhile contribution to the topic so actual debate can occur.

I don't suppose you are takin' notes?

 

[HItorMiss]

Utterly disgusting if you believe that there is any justification for cruel and inhumane acts. Not only is it everything that our country stands for, its everything that is against the Laws of War. The ends do not justify the means in this case whatsoever. I don't know why you are citing a horrible event such as the fire bombings of Dresden as a good thing.

Cruel and inhumane acts do nothing but harm in a war such as the ones we are fighting in. COIN operations only become hampered by such disgusting acts, and it has been proven in the past. If you are a member of the Canadian Forces I suggest you look carefully at some of the principles, ethos and laws that you are subject to. Otherwise I question your motives for being in the CF.

I promise not to feed the Trolls..I promise not to feed the Trolls.... Ah Screw it!


All things are justifiable, it simply matters if you are willing to go far enough. Example I can fight a war that takes 20 years and cost 200 Million lives or I could fight a war that last 1 year but cost one a nation an entire city of 3 Million...Abhorrent Absolutely but can you justify that action?....Think before you speak.

Who the heck are you to site CION Ops to me.... You have no idea who or where or what I do...

Next you part time rent a toy soldier (Apologise to legitimate Res F pers but he is what I am describing!) My motivations for being in CF are crystal clear, I defend my country in places others are not and I hold dear to the ideals of my country. I can quote to you the laws of armed conflict if you like, simply because I acknowledge that in terms of warfare wars ARE won by the side willing or able to do the acts that the opponent is not does not mean I cannot acknowledge the abhorrent nature of that action. For the record I never cites the Dresden bombings as a good thing what I cited was an action taken by our Military created by our command to use terror or as they called it back then the Total War concept to demoralize the civilian populace...Dresden was not a legitimate military target it was however a legitimate WAR target in terms of the Total War operation.


What the contractor did was wrong and illegal and thus he will be punished but let the country or nation without sin in the area of killing POW's throw the first stone...Guess what there isn't one! Canadians soldiers did it, American soldiers did it, British, German etc etc etc the list goes on almost none of those acts (Save some very clear orders by Nazi High Command) were condoned by their respective governments or commands but they happen.

As I said before Base emotions are sometimes an over riding factor hence the sections of laws covered by Crimes of Passions!  Sometimes as wrong as it is Anger will equal Violence, what we can hope is that his comrades will stop him from making a large mistake.

 

[GAP]

You really shouldn't feed the trolls.....  ;D

 

[Sig_Des]

Who the heck are you to site CION Ops to me.... You have no idea who or where or what I do...

Next you part time rent a toy soldier (Apologise to legitimate Res F pers but he is what I am describing!) My motivations for being in CF are crystal clear, I defend my country in places others are not and I hold dear to the ideals of my country. I can quote to you the laws of armed conflict if you like, simply because I acknowledge that in terms of warfare wars ARE won by the side willing or able to do the acts that the opponent is not does not mean I cannot acknowledge the abhorrent nature of that action. For the record I never cites the Dresden bombings as a good thing what I cited was an action taken by our Military created by our command to use terror or as they called it back then the Total War concept to demoralize the civilian populace...Dresden was not a legitimate military target it was however a legitimate WAR target in terms of the Total War operation.

And a fair warming to Cognitive-Dissonance, before you even consider getting your back up and answering in kind to this post, you were asking for it.

You are without floatation device, and barely wading in a pool where BM is a lifeguard.

 

[PAT-Platoon]

Next you part time rent a toy soldier (Apologise to legitimate Res F pers but he is what I am describing!) My motivations for being in CF are crystal clear, I defend my country in places others are not and I hold dear to the ideals of my country. I can quote to you the laws of armed conflict if you like, simply because I acknowledge that in terms of warfare wars ARE won by the side willing or able to do the acts that the opponent is not does not mean I cannot acknowledge the abhorrent nature of that action. For the record I never cites the Dresden bombings as a good thing what I cited was an action taken by our Military created by our command to use terror or as they called it back then the Total War concept to demoralize the civilian populace...Dresden was not a legitimate military target it was however a legitimate WAR target in terms of the Total War operation.

In that case I misinterpreted what you were getting at. I thought you were sayin that terms of warfare are won by the side willing to do abhorrent acts, and that Canada should ultimately resort to those tactics. Your post seemed to imply that in order for us to win the war we have to resort to those tactics. Am I correct now in understanding your post that you are merely stating that, the side most willing to do abhorrent acts will win the war, however despite that Canada shouldn't necessarily be involved in such acts? My apologies then if I went on a little harsh, because you should understand that to support abhorrent acts as a tactic is quite disgusting in my opinion.

If I understand your point correctly, then I slightly disagree. I would say historically speaking, not all nations that resorted to abhorrent acts necessarily won a war, nor were they necessarily inclined to have better results doing that. In fact I'd say that the opposite happened in many wars, Vietnam and Afghanistan (for the USSR) for example. Anyways either way, you make a fair point.

Moving on to the topic at hand.  I agree with D3s assertations above in that PMCs are, in the end something that should be avoided. The responsibility of warfare should continue to be on the government, and with organizations accountable to only the public. My reasonings for this are that, since warfare is ultimately an act done (in our case at least) by our government, then any forces utilized need to be able to be accountable and transparent to the public at hand (afterall, they are tools of the government, and thus tools of the public in a large sense). While I admit my initial comments of PMCs as "trigger happy cowboys" was a little harsh and brash, I still believe there has been plenty of prior events that question the motivations and professionalism of some PMCs. While we certainly shouldn't "throw the baby out with the bathwater" necessarily, these events show a possibly larger problem with the base foundations of PMCs as an entity, and therefore we need to shine a bigger spotlight and have more scrutiny when dealing with PMCs. I contend that with this scrutiny we will find the need to hold higher standards and transparency to PMCs. I will go out on a limb to say that maybe we should nationalize PMCs in Canada. Thus, we can have the flexibility and availibility of PMCs, however we can also add onto it being a crown corporation and having that public transparency. This can also give it national standards of training, which can ensure that their force projection is weilded properly. That however is just something that came to mind, but I'm sure others have ideas on bringing the standards and accountability up.

-C/D

 

[The Bread Guy]

I know, I know, don't feed....

The responsibility of warfare should continue to be on the government, and with organizations accountable to only the public. My reasonings for this are that, since warfare is ultimately an act done (in our case at least) by our government, then any forces utilized need to be able to be accountable and transparent to the public at hand (afterall, they are tools of the government, and thus tools of the public in a large sense).

In many cases, PMCs ARE working for the public - if they're protecting other government-funded-and-employed assets, it's the funding-and-employing government that's paying for them, right?  Should there be better oversight?  I think maybe yes, but I leave that as an opinion informed only by the worst of what I read, and without experience in the other (I'm guessing) 99.999% of the time when the system works.  Has lots been done in this respect?  You bet.  Still, if PMCs are employed by the state, they are protecting state assets at state expense - sounds like working for the state to me...

I will go out on a limb to say that maybe we should nationalize PMCs in Canada. Thus, we can have the flexibility and availibility of PMCs, however we can also add onto it being a crown corporation and having that public transparency. This can also give it national standards of training, which can ensure that their force projection is weilded properly.

Greeeeeeeeeeeeeat, a two-tiered military force for Canada - just what we need to make things more efficient  :

As for the use of said forces (highlighted in yellow), I'll leave detailed comment to those with direct experience, but I'm guessing how the force is projected is a function of the terms of the contract between the employer (the state) and the employee (the PMC/company).  As a taxpayer, I believe the state can employ PMCs, using good contract language to prevent/sanction the worst abuses, to free up soldiers for more offensive tasks.

 

[PAT-Platoon]

I know, I know, don't feed....

In many cases, PMCs ARE working for the public - if they're protecting other government-funded-and-employed assets, it's the funding-and-employing government that's paying for them, right?  Should there be better oversight?  I think maybe yes, but I leave that as an opinion informed only by the worst of what I read, and without experience in the other (I'm guessing) 99.999% of the time when the system works.  Has lots been done in this respect?  You bet.  Still, if PMCs are employed by the state, they are protecting state assets at state expense - sounds like working for the state to me...

I never argued that they weren't working for the public, in fact its the opposite. I am arguing that because they are working for the public, therefore they should have better accountability, directly, to the public. Contract stipulations are an interesting argument, I however am hesitant to agree because a legitimate public institution (for example, the Canadian Forces) has better foundations for accountability. A contract only has so much power, and a contract is by nature only proscriptionary, not prescriptionary.

I don't think necessarily we should have a crown corporation of PMCs, I am merely saying that if we wish to continue employing PMCs then perhaps that is the only way I can see that we can maintain accountability and transparency to the public. I think due to the implications of the situation that PMCs are involved in, a contract-contractor relationship isn't strong enough to maintain the proper control we should have. The results of the actions of PMCs are enormous, they have the power to take lives and to effect foreign affairs. As such, a piece of paper I think is not proper nor strong enough to ensure legitimacy in my eyes.

-C/D

 

[The Bread Guy]

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

'Human Terrain' Murder Suspect Out on Bail (Updated)
Noah Shachtman, Danger Room, 25 Nov 08, 8:12:00 PM
Article link

Don Ayala, the military contractor accused of a revenge killing in Afghanistan, is now back in the United States, and out on bail.

Ayala began working in Afghanistan in late September, as part of an Army Human Terrain Team, which embeds cultural advisors in combat units. Six weeks later, Ayala allegedly shot Abdul Salam in the head, after Salam set one of Ayala's co-workers on fire in an Afghan village. Ayala was immediately taken into custody, and held at a detention facility at Bagram Air Force Base. Last week, Ayala was charged with 2nd degree murder in U.S. District Court in Virginia.

In a November 21st phone call, Ayala agreed to be returned to the United States. On the 23rd, he was "first brought into the... custody of Deputy U.S. Marshals, having flown nonstop from Kuwait to Dulles International Airport," according to court documents.

This afternoon, Ayala was released on a third-party, unsecured bond of $200,000. He's now in the custody of a "Ms. Santwier," who lists New Orleans as her home address. Ayala is "not to move from third party residence without prior approval," from the court, documents show.  His travel is "restricted to the New Orleans metro area and the DC metro area for court purposes."

A hearing, scheduled for this afternoon in Alexandria, Virginia, has been postponed.

 

[Loachman]

they should have better accountability, directly, to the public.

And how do you know what accountability they have?

Huh?

Do you have any real idea?

No, you don't. You're just beebling again.

All that you are accomplishing with your posts is to provide further evidence that you have absolutely no clue about anything.

We already have enough such evidence.

We really do not need anymore.

Now, if you read the post after your last, you will see that the US justice system is reacting as it should.

I hope that you find that level of accountability enough.

 

[Loachman]

Well, I just noticed on another thread that he's already been banned, and that my previous post is delightfully redundant.

Unfortunately, the means of celebration available to me in my current locale are rather limited.

Pity.

 

[Infanteer]

Funny how people can get so wrapped around the axle with PMCs, as Infidel-6 defined them, and yet have no problems with armoured car guards or bodyguards in Canada.