Mercenaries

[Vern_S]

Is it possible to mod Shock Force to incorporate mercenary elements such as Blackwater USA as a fighting element and create scenarios for the mercenary forces?

[hellfish]

They're not mercenaries.

[acrashb]

Blackwater USA is not a merc shop. They do high-risk protection of "nouns" - people, places and things. Obvious examples are protecting embassies in Iraq. Others would be oil rigs in Nigeria, the Sudan, and other non-permissive environments. And they do less heavily armed, more traditional work in permissive places (like the USA) - bodyguarding, close protection, PSD, whatever you call it.

It's a great facility (in NC). Some of the courses are open to the public - sign up and learn better shooting skills.

[Dogface]

I am sure that if you did a

You could answer your own question.

However, from what I can recall you should be able to pick a force that could simulate a Blackwater group. Maybe even mod the uniforms to look more like them. But I can not remember what will be graphically modable. Some one else should be along shortly with some more info, possibly a link also.

[Vern_S]

Well call them a "Security Force" if you will, I'm not wanting to get into a dissertation on the definition of "Mercenary" and what entities should be classified as such.

My question still stands, can "Security Forces" such as Blackwater USA be incorporate/Mod'ed into Shock Force.

By the way, according to the Geneva Convention a contractor from a "Private Military Company", which Blackwater is, who engages in combat is classified as a Mercanary.

"The 1949 Third Geneva Convention (GCIII) does not recognize the difference between defense contractors and PMCs; it defines a category called supply contractors. If the supply contractor has been issued with a valid identity card from the armed forces which they accompany, they are entitled to be treated as prisoners of war upon capture (GCIII Article 4.1.4). If, however, the contractor engages in combat, he/she can be classified as a mercenary by the captors under the 1997 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions (Protocol I) Article 47.c, unless falling under an exemption to this clause in Article 47. If captured contractors are found to be mercenaries, they are unlawful combatants and lose the right to prisoner of war status."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_USA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_military_company

There sure is a lot of Blackwater USA Combat footage on YouTube. Just some food for thought.

[Vern_S]

Dogface, I did a search for Mercenary, as well as Blackwater, and read all of the post's and this question was not answered.

[Capt. Toleran]

Yeah, that one sniper vid (recently posted on this forum) with the Blackwater sniper taking out all those guys offscreen didn't seem entirely defensive, especially since he was taking out Mahdi army guys at distances far beyond the perimeter of whatever facility he would have been guarding. Seemed pretty pre-emptive to me, like he was just an extension of our military force in the area.

[Vern_S]

There is another video of Blackwater fighting side by side with US troops in Najaf. Interesting....

[hellfish]

Yeah, but Blackwater (or any other PSD) doesn't conduct offensive operations. CMSF doesn't model the post-war environment.

[Calvin]

I realize the following opinion won't go over well with most of the posters on this board.

Blackwater and their ilk are mercenaries. They soldier for money, not country. They observe none of the professionalism or professional ethics of US soldiers and marines. Many of them decided to leave active duty in order to accept the high salaries that these private outfits provide.

Soldiering is a noble profession, motivated out of patriotism and the desire to fight for our national values, to guard us while we sleep. There is nothing noble about working for a private corporation like Blackwater (and special thanks to Dear Dick Cheney for ensuring that huge portions of our defense budget go to these private war profiteers).

Call it what you want. Blackwater employees are mercenaries. Mercenaries are hired killers. Blackwater employees are people willing to kill another human being for a !%^!^$@#$^ paycheck. That is all there is to it. Same thing as a mafia hit man, just without the Italian last names.

And before any of you get high and mighty, two guys I've known since childhood just got back from their second tour in Iraq, because that was their sense of duty. Both of them wounded. The last tour cost one of them his job and the other his wife.

Ask either one of my buddies what they think of Blackwater and the other merc cowboys out there with their designer sunglasses, HK submachineguns, and uncanny ability to get stuck in situations requiring US soldiers earning about 10% of Blackwater's base pay to come bail out those merc %!@%#@$%ers. Soldiers die on those operations.

Save me the hairsplitting. It's an insult to every man and woman wearing the uniform in our name.

[ChrisND]

Cue arguement...

[NoxSpartana]

Watch the CNN video (bottom) at this page.

"[blackwater] can assemble hundreds of battle ready men, a small private army, at a moment's notice."

Sure sounds like mercs to me.

As abhorrent as the idea of our government employing these guys is, it really highlights a problem with our military... our soldiers out there risking their necks every day don't get paid nearly enough for the insanely dangerous job they do.

[Mace]

Originally posted by Calvin:

Save me the hairsplitting. It's an insult to every man and woman wearing the uniform in our name.

So blame the governments of all the key players for not providing enough resources to bring about stability in the first place.

If there was stability there would be less need to contract out to security contractors.

[Panzerfest]

Originally posted by Mace:

So blame the governments of all the key players for not providing enough resources to bring about stability in the first place.

If there was stability there would be less need to contract out to security contractors. [/QB]

So its the fault of all the countries that weren't convinced by the sketchy reasoning for going to war in the first place?

Any blame for the current situation rest squarely on the current administration.

Considering how shoddily the whole situation has been run, no-bid contracts and all, and after seeing the disturbing video of that S. African outfit shooting up random civilian vehicles, I call em as I see em, mercs...

[FAI]

The only acceptable (to me at least) reasoning of hiring mercenaries is in the long run it's cheaper than maintaining a standing army of equal strength. Or is it? I'm not familiar with any in depth cost/benefit analisys of this, though...

[Wisbech_lad]

Don't professional soldier and mercenary mean the same thing? Some one who fights as a career, and in return for payment.

Modern merc groups (e.g. Sandline) do work very closely with their national government (Sandline went in instead of the British Army for example to Sierra Leone, because politically more feasible, and that was an offensive action)

Most governments have non-citizen merc units (Gurkhas, Irish Regiments for the UK, French Foreign Legion, US used Hmong in Vietnam, plus you can be in the US armed forces as a foreign national)

Heck, they even rent out their own units (Brunei paid UK for military protection for a long time, friend of mine fought for the Sultan of Oman while in the British Army, both he and the UK govt were recompensed well)

To me, I would criticise Blackwater for being cowboys, not mercs. They have a reputation ISTR for hiring wannabes, vs Sandline's ex-professionals, with slightly higher ethics.

[Mace]

Originally posted by Panzerfest:

So its the fault of all the countries that weren't convinced by the sketchy reasoning for going to war in the first place?

I suggest you go back and read what I typed as I didn't say that all.

By key players I meant organizations/governments actively involved in going to war in the first place

Any blame for the current situation rest squarely on the current administration.

I'm not disagreeing with you but which administration? There's more than one player as I indicated.

Considering how shoddily the whole situation has been run, no-bid contracts and all, and after seeing the disturbing video of that S. African outfit shooting up random civilian vehicles, I call em as I see em, mercs...

Whatever. If you want to taint everyone by the same brush go for it.

[ July 20, 2007, 03:01 AM: Message edited by: Mace ]

[nijis]

Wisbech_lad and Mace are right to emphasize that there is a world of difference between different organizations -- particularly between firms like Blackwater, who really do justify the overused word "cowboy", and the more established (usually British-based) security companies. The latter are some of the most effective armed forces in Iraq, in my opinion. They tend to hire very experienced military professionals -- former SAS in many cases, with decades of counterinsurgency experience under their belt.

In addition to their pool of experience, they don't rotate out like regular military units do, and thus tend not to suffer the near crippling loss of institutional memory that accompanies a battalion's deployment in a new AO. The individuals go home, but the organization remains. They're also there long enough to which Iraqis can be trusted, and integrate them into fairly high levels of decision-making, which again makes a tremendous difference in counterinsurgency. I don't know how they would fare if they had to perform regular military duties, like cordon and sweep operations, but for the jobs that they do perform, including ferrying people back and forth routinely to sites in some of the worst areas of the country, I would bet that they are among the most cost-effective forces out there.

Some folks I've met from one particular US-based firm, on the other hand, were pretty effing scary. I don't know if they were representative of their entire company, but they did make me wonder about its hiring practices.

As for the Aegis video, it's not entirely clear what is going on there. Some of the shots fired may be warning shots. At other times the vehicles really are behaving like a VBIED. The setting of the video to music is in somewhat questionable taste, but hey, that's Iraq.

[ July 20, 2007, 05:03 AM: Message edited by: nijis ]

[Matthias]

Blackwater don't show up on any casualties list, so while being a Expensive/inept force to field, they have the political advantage of fielding extra men that the public don't need to know are there, or if they are taking casualties.

Blackwater are a Totally War Profiteering company if there ever was one...along with K.B.R.-Halliburton, CACI, and Titan

[Vern_S]

Well since it seems that I have smacked the proverbial bees nest I might as well put my 2 cents in.

"Private Military Company" is a politically-correct euphemism for Mercenary.

They do provide mainly security related functions as well as training support but they do occasionally get involved in offensive military actions which makes them Merc's pure and simple.

[Wisbech_lad]

And you think the UK and US troops are not paid to do what they do? Seriously, given a volunteer paid military, what is the difference, apart from standards? As Nijis says, some merc groups are better at what they do than national troops, some are worse.

Vern_S, what is wrong with being a merc? Professional soldiering is an honourable job. Should all gurkha's, who often got involved in offensive military actions, be denigrated because they fought for money? It is a job.

[hellfish]

Originally posted by Vern_S:

Well since it seems that I have smacked the proverbial bees nest I might as well put my 2 cents in.

"Private Military Company" is a politically-correct euphemism for Mercenary.

They do provide mainly security related functions as well as training support but they do occasionally get involved in offensive military actions which makes them Merc's pure and simple.

Please name me an instance in Iraq where PMCs have been involved in offensive military action.

They provide security for static installations, supply routes and individuals. This, basically, makes them security guards if anything.

[MikeyD]

"They're not mercenaries."

Civilians (often foreign ex-army) going into a warzone with guns and getting paid exponentially more than a G.I. - tax-free i believe? Not mercenaries? Hmmm...

Back to the game. You can design your scenarios to be Blue vs Red or Red versus Red. And I think one undocumented (and not much tested) cool thing in the scenario editor is you might be able to switch options in mid-scenario-construction and sneak some Red forces in among your Blue. Black clad Syrian special forces could be considered your 'Blackwatter' guys. MAYBE it'll work. Attempting it might blow up your computer tho

[Vern_S]

MikeyD, Thank you for your input to my oiginal question. Looks like the editor is going to be interesting to work with.

Wisbech, I never said there was anything wrong with being a Merc. Merc's have been around since the dawn of warfare. Merc's will always be involved in any conflict where money is to be made and there is a need for them.

It is a dangerous profession that normally stay's in the background doing it's job and loathes publicity. Especially when things go wrong since it is subject to extremely adverse criticism thus the attempt to "Mask" what they truly are in Iraq by calling them Security Contractors or whatever.

fytinghellfish, there are a number of examples that have made there way to the internet such as the Blackwater Sniper and the Blackwater in Najaf videos on YouTube which clearly show highly armed non-military forces, aka Merc's, in Iraq taking "Offensive" action, some alongside US Military.

[Ryujin]

Wrong window *deleted*