TexasCHLforum.com

AndyC wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

AndyC wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:I'd say illuminate me but then again I don't care enough to keep arguinga nonsexistent point.

You'll find illumination within the definition of "mercenary" - too bad for you that you're too proud to look it up for fear of realizing you're wrong, but feel free to wallow in bias and ignorance.

A mercenary[1] is a person who takes part in an armed conflict, who is not a national or a party to the conflict and is "motivated to take part in the hostilities by the desire for private gain."[2][3]

sounds pretty on point.

Right - because Wikipedia is an authoritative legal source which trumps the UN

Again, when this is a court case we can cackle on legal definitions. until then its nonsense.
You seem stuck on this to the point of insulting other board members. Its very interesting.
Now I know everyone on this board but me are Seal Team 6 super secret operators, but for us normals, its just an argument in the basement of a board about CHL.

AndyC wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Nah. don't need to. If you're paid by a foreign government and carry a gun, you're a merc. Whatever you want to call it, the US has no interest in saving you.

You do realize you are insulting someone who was a security contractor for the US over in the sandbox, right? He has forgotten more about security contractors and mercenaries than you will ever learn.

I'm pretty proud that we saved a good number of American and British lives, both directly and indirectly, to say nothing of directly saving the lives of numerous Iraqi civilians. We lost a few of our own boys in doing so, but hey... "Contractors bad! Contractors bad!"

And how much were you paid?

AndyC wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:And how much were you paid?

A LOT - commensurate with my experience, skillset and market-demands for them.

How much are you paid?

Envy? My aversion to heat knows no bounds. Now if you had said Bavaria, then I'd be jealous.
Looking to see where I besmirched anyone.
Were you there under penalty of imprisonment or death?

AndyC wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Were you there under penalty of imprisonment or death?

No, Iraq was a stroll in the park. What do you think?

I think thats a no, you were not there under penalty of imprisonment or death if you didn't go.

Could you quit at any time? What happened to you if you quit?

Also, why did you do it?

You are still lumping mercenaries in with contractors. That is wrong.

I have a friend that is a retired ICE agent that was hired and sent over to Afghanistan to help train the locals on boarder control and other border policing tactics. He was highly paid, highly trained and highly regarded by the troops with whom he work. They treated him no different than they did other Americans there. The US government seeked him out for his experience and expertise and sent him over. He was also paid by the contractor group that was paid by the US government. He served his country. He was worth getting out. He was a contractor and not a mercenary just like many of these people.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

AndyC wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Were you there under penalty of imprisonment or death?

No, Iraq was a stroll in the park. What do you think?

I think thats a no, you were not there under penalty of imprisonment or death if you didn't go.

Could you quit at any time? What happened to you if you quit?

The US hasn't executed someone going AWOL or deserting since WW2. Furthermore, the military doesn't chase down those who go AWOL or desert, so refusing to go is pretty safe as long as you don't mind a dishonorable discharge. Desertion in the face of the enemy is different but as old Bowe B has shown, that apparently no longer brings prison or death. So, you're speaking to technicalities not realities. Futhermore, Joe Schmoe doesn't get employed as a contractor.....those who do have a warrior ethic and they don't desert their compatriots. Your comments suggest to me that you have never been in the military and therefore have absolutely no concept of what it means to be a warrior.

It needs to be said, because it hasn't yet been said, that many of the contractors that worked in Iraq and Afghanistan were not warriors. I personally know a woman who was a truck driver. She wasn't even armed. (They drove in armed convoys with US military security, but the contractors were not armed.) She suffers from PTSD, because her co-driver was hit in the head by an RPG and his brains splattered all over her. I guess she's not worth saving either.

How far we have come from the days when this country was proud and its people patriotic. How sad a day it is when we can argue about whether or not the lives of contractors are worth saving. We sacrificed over 400,000 lives in WWII to save others. Now some would suggest we don't sacrifice a single life to save our own people. {{smdgh}}

Whether they be DOD civilian personnel, civilian contractors, or indigenous people that work for us, or just plain civilians. It's matters not who pays them, whether they get paid as a direct gov't employee, or paid by the contractor with funds paid by the gov't, etc. All of them are free to leave at any time, and all are there of their own free will. I cannot imagine being sent on a mission to rescue contractors, and asking who is paying them or are they worth it. That, to me, is ridiculous. They are all part of our national effort. As a former military helicopter pilot, the thought would never cross my mind.

Here's another example of putting our military in harms way all the time to save civilians who aren't even contractors. Our medivac and combat rescue teams are deployed all the time to save indigenous people seriously injured and evac them to either civilian or military hospitals, and the vast majority of them are not even contractors. These flight and medic crews put their life at risk everyday in a combat zone doing this.