Yes, the Contras were “international terrorists” and the US backing of them was illegal in the eyes of the International Court of Justice (and, as evidenced by the conspiracies used to fund them, also in the eyes of the Reagan administration and the other branches of the US government). But so what? As you point out, the same logic could apply to US support for the anti-Nazi resistance in WW2.

All war is terrorism. Humans make war. Thus, humans are terrorists.

I really just wish we could drop all of the false debate. It’s not “good vs. evil”, it’s “us against them”. We hire mercenaries to kill Iraqis. If the Iraqis were in our shoes, they would probably do equally horrible things to us.

My point is that people tend to do bad things to other people when they can, and mercenaries in Iraq in the first 5 years of that war were virtually unconstrained in what they were allowed to do.

Anyway, last night I found The War Nerd’s take on the subject, and he has stated the case much better than I could hope to, so I’ll just let him speak on the subject and be done with it:

http://exiledonline.com/blackwater-stop-acting-surprised/

The Contras were no more a big “Death Squad,” than the French Resistance was. They were the military arm of a coalition of factions who opposed the communist takeover of their revolution. This resistance movement existed well before US involvement. Of course, when the US did get involved, it became the senior partner and major source of funding and expertise. The Contra fighters were composed mainly of “Country Boys,” fighting a regime that confiscated their land, and defiled their religion. They did nothing more than what French resistance did. If this and giving assistance to the Mujudhideen (sp?) in Afghanistan is terrorism in your view, then FDR was surely a terrorist supported in supporting the Resistance in Europe against the Nazis.

I appreciate your realism about Blackwater. But Blackwater was never assigned to do “dirty work.” The “dirty work” of engaging with, and killing our opponents in Iraq was assigned to the regular military. Blackwater and other security firms were retained to guard people and things. The Iraq invasion and occupation was a folly of immense proportions. People died unnecessarily and to no end. Blackwater and the others were there because proud fools in Washington insisted on carrying on this war with far too few actual troops.

I’ve never confused “polite company” with that of the merely squeamish and hypocritical.

Enough said. So many people would be afraid of associating themselves with death squads. At least Mr. Meehan is unbridled by such fear and is willing to honestly and vigourously support the international terrorism that was perpetrated by the US government. These are important issues, and it would be very helpful if more people were courageous and honest and, like Mr. Meehan, willing to forego the niceties of polite company and actually discuss the world that exists and the people who inhabit it.

Mr. Prince *may* have killed a few people “illegally” and done some other things that were, strictly speaking, beyond the scope of the already extensive writ he was granted by King George W. But this is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

So, can we please just drop the pretense that Blackwater is somehow unrepresentative of the traditions of the US? A mercenary was hired and asked to do things that we wouldn’t ask our children to do. He took a few liberties.

For those who disagree with me and are aghast about Blackwater’s alleged misdeeds — please state whether you think the problem is the personal, moral/ethical failings of Mr. Prince, or the violent imperialism for which the US, from time time, employs mercenaries to do the dirty work?

Revolutionary War – Maritime operations carried out by privateers serving under letters of Marque, thus mercenary.

1804 – Greek mercenaries (about 500) employed by US navy in battle of Derne. on the coast of Tunis.

1862 – 1890 – Indian Scouts serve as mercenaries in most indian wars, these include the Seminole Scouts who are organized and paid separatley from regular forces. Also White scouts and guides are hired while not actually members of the US Army but take part in operations against hostile tribes.

1940 – US allows serving pilots of the Navy and Air Corps to serve as mercinary pilots for the Republic of China (Flying Tigers)

WWII – US forces employ the Karens and other Burmese tribes against the Japanese in South East Asia

Vietnam – US hires Chinese troops called Nungs for both base security and for clandestine operations.

Vietnam – Montanyards/Hmong paid to support operations against Ho Chi Minh trail.

Contemporary – Drug war in Columbia fought with contractors from private contractors such as Dyncorp and Military Professional Resources.

I suspect that this is not a complete list. Our French and British allies hired quite a few more mercenaries than we did.

Argument by association – I don’t like this guy, therefore whatever he says is wrong – is so dull. Preaching to the choir.

Anyone who puts their allegiance to the “conservative” or “patriotic” cause above basic morality, like Mr. Meehan, is a human failure.

Mr. Scahill may not be the story, but the credibility of the “explosive” allegations contained in these anonymous affidavits is.

These anonymous affiants allege that they have heard from other, unnamed sources, that various unnamed people may have died under mysterious circumstances and that various unnamed people think Mr. Prince and his gang must have had something to do with it.

To a journalist, that may sound like a juicy story. To a lawyer, it’s a joke. When you accuse someone of murder, you need at least some evidence. Beginning, perhaps, with evidence that someone actually died.

And yes, I realize the affidavits contain other, damning allegations besides the totally unsubstantiated murder conspiracy stuff. But without the murder nonsense, this wouldn’t be a news story at all.

I oppose the Iraq War and the expansion of the national security state. But a conservative should do so without falling for all the logical fallacies and emotive rubbish that is so characteristic of the Left.

I don’t know how a contractor could operate in the anarchic mess we made out of Iraqi cities without shooting the wrong people at least some of the time. But they were there a long while and the government that paid them continued to do so. Considering the way the Federal Government pays for service, I think fiddling with the books may be the only way to keep operations flowing smoothly. Personally, I’d like to see the war profiteers in the Bush Administration and they’re pals in Neo-con think tanks under investigation. Going after people we pay to go in harms way on our behalf is ultimately self defeating.

The United States has used mercenary assistance for a long while. The first time I’m aware of was against the Barbary Pirates. If we want to use mercenaries in the future, we need to recruit foreign nationals, who will serve overseas exclusively.

The “explosive” allegation of murder consist of two people who say that they have heard RUMORS from OTHER people that various UNIDENTIFIED informants have died mysteriously and that it SEEMS that Mr. Prince must have had something to do with their deaths.

Such gibberish wouldn’t get past the hearsay rule, even if there were evidence of actual dead people, which of course there isn’t. The sole purpose of these “explosive” affidavits is to gin up media coverage about what a monster Mr. Prince is. Sorry to see you play the fool and fall for it.

Mercenaries are problematic. But they have there uses. The US government used them in the past and we will probably have to use them in future. Perhaps we should debate there use. But understand that while we deplore the Iraq war, we will at some point be involved in a necessary war. When that day comes, Scahill, Goodman and Moyers will be as opposed to our legitimate efforts, as they now attack our misguided ones in Iraq. I suggest we decline their off to serve as useful idiots in this business.

I disagree with the implication that Ms. Vlahos is somehow doing bad reporting by relaying these allegations to all of us here at @TAC. As I understand it, and I’m no expert, admittedly, a journalist who blogs about what other journalists have alleged in print is purporting to give information about the allegation, not about the person.

As I see it, problems only arise when the allegations are so absurd that no reasonable person could believe them, and I don’t see how that applies here.

I could see your outrage if this were a blogpost about how Eric Prince and Queen Elizabeth had conspired to bury Barack Obama’s original birth certificate beneath the Mesopotamian Sand, but I don’t think it’s particularly shocking to suggest that the head of a mercenary organization might pull some strings to make an enemy turn up dead, employ personnel standards lower than those of the regular military, cut through red tape in the transfer of weapons and cast his life’s work in religious terms.

Are some people on the left prone to hysterics that limit their ability to investigate gun crime? Do they demonize Christians unfairly at times? Will they cast corporate behavior in the worst possible light? Yes, yes, and yes. None of that, however changes the fact that mercenaries operate under less oversight than regular soldiers, and that this is likely to make an already tense circumstance (wartime) even worse.