Military Weighs Private Security on Front Lines

wapo ^ | July 26, 2009 | By Walter Pincus

[Flavius]

The U.S. military command is considering contracting a private firm to manage security on the front lines of the war in Afghanistan, even as Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates says that the Pentagon intends to cut back on the use of private security contractors.

[Flavius]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0UcQDUR-fU

[D. Brian Carter]

I can say from personal knowledge (which I cannot reveal for obvious security reasons) this is not only accurate, it’s not just PROPOSED. Private firms are ALREADY providing such security and force protection services in Afghanistan. I don’t see much wrong with it except for possible violation of Geneva Convention agreements, as many of these personnel are non-uniformed (but fully armed) combatants who do not have to follow the rules of engagement that handcuff our Soldiers. There are self-evident positives and negatives to this arrangement.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Yeah, private Security is nice, but I’d rather just have general security around all of our bases and borders.

[R_Kangel]

OK, Now that the media has already demonized BlackWater.......

[randomhero97]

Know of any PMCs hiring currently? I have a clearance, I won’t say how high because of OPSEC, so that wouldn’t be an issue.

[D. Brian Carter]

Try SAIC. In Afghanistan.

[randomhero97]

My previous job was I worked for SAIC working with an AF intel unit.

[D. Brian Carter]

They’re hiring. And KBR has lost a lot of business there, so others likely are too.

[Caipirabob]

Didn’t Rome hire mercenaries to guard their borders before they fell?

[Americanexpat]

I did this kind of work in Iraq, Kuwait and Qatar and was subject to the same rules of engagement as the military.

[Tainan]

It sounds like setting up a scenario for scape-goats.
Who has the contractors back in this?
Who negotiates for them?
Who established their ROE?

Although the money may be good, I remain skeptical of this being a good situation for the shooters.