ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
Ok SO HOW MANY SECURITY COMPANIES ARE GETTING PAID BY THE U.S. GOVERMENT IN IRAQ TO SUPPLY SECURITY PERSONNEL?
AS OPPOSED TO PRIVATE AMERICAN BUSINESS'S HIRING SAID PRIVATE SECURITY PERSONNEL?
GOP fiscal cliff counter offer: raise taxes on the middle class
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
Ok SO HOW MANY SECURITY COMPANIES ARE GETTING PAID BY THE U.S. GOVERMENT IN IRAQ TO SUPPLY SECURITY PERSONNEL?
AS OPPOSED TO PRIVATE AMERICAN BUSINESS'S HIRING SAID PRIVATE SECURITY PERSONNEL?
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
The fuck?
What are you, 12? I'm not going to research that answer that pertains nil to the discussion. You tell me, and then please tell me what resources you used because I'll be impressed.
Just make your point that's about nothing anyone but you is talking about already.
And while we are making points nobody else is talking about itt, why didn't we send a half dozen of those guys to Benghazi when they asked for security the last 3 months? Were they union mercs?
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
So you concede you are just a .blowhard. And now you are attempting to move the goal posts
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Um, yeah sure. Where were the posts, where are they now?
Still have no clue what gibberish you are spewing. Can't find someone else's blog to copy/paste?
Ffs man, be a grownup and just say what you think your point is.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
I want you be a man and admit that the US government does not have 15,000 mercenaries in Iraq.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Lol; I think I'll give it a rest. If only you'd settle down and add something of value, you'd be left alone. However with all your previous account activities, you wear the brand of the troll. (Pro tip: it's not permamnent, but its curse only gets stronger if you thrash.) cn
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Doer
Well-Known Member
A govt cannot have mercenaries, by definition. Even the French Foreign Legion is not "mercenary." So, perhaps if we count contractors and US expatriates with the Peshmerga, and other operatives, private consultants, etc...how can 15,000 be a bad guess? All involved in Conflict. Are these Mercenaries? You bet! They get paid, somehow. Are some US spy assets? Of course.
A mercenary[SUP][1][/SUP] 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 essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party".[SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP]
Doer
Well-Known Member
Looks like you have firecracker on your hands.
Nope, just a dud. He'll come down from the silly sauce.....or not.
If you mess with the Bear you get the yawn.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Again, if you don't like mercs, I'm fine with calling them ex-military security personnel. Mercs is the shorthand I used but if offends you i will change it emsp. Better?
Now, are you trying to say our government is not paying for them? Who is? The private security firm? Who pays them. Is the Iranian government paying our security bill? Because if so, just say it. You don't need plagiarize somebody's blog man.
I really don't get the gotcha you have going here. Am I wrong about security persons still being there? Say so, I can be re-educated. Are you saying they are there but on someone else's dime? Say so and link me, I could easily be wrong. Instead I feel you felt the need to defend Obama over the same thing you criticized Bushney for. And after a full day of your go to blogs you had nothing other than a syntax error to focus on. Just my opinion and could be reading you all wrong, but you really need to explain what you are harping on. If its just the word mercs...... Get over yourself.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Yay Obamacare because it was SOMETHING, it was an attempt, it was a beginning, something that the right has a real problem with. Recall that the right had total control over government and did nothing about universal health care - didn't even put it up as a priority. Then Obama took office with that as a major promise and what did the right do? they said "oh yes, there IS a problem with our health care and now look, we have a way - vouchers and limits and "the free market" but only after someone else rolled up their sleeves and threatened to accomplish something. yes, yay obamacare. I don't give the left a pass - the right is so off the mark that they garner all of my animosity, little of it remains to serve up on the other side. When the right stops acting like children, when they are able to quit with the petty shit, the retribution, the silliness, the utter bullshit that they are heaping on the American people - knowing full well that their ideas this time didn't pass muster then you can wake me up.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
It was SOMETHING BAD!
I know you claim to have read the healthcare bill and you love it but it's absolutely a payoff to pharmaceuticals and will actually cause costs to go up. We in the medical field have been screaming about costs, Obama/Pelosi did the opposite and then told us the grass is greener anyway. Obama voted against the auto bailouts while pubs were doing it, then takes all the credit for saving them while saying Romney would have let them go bankrupt (they did btw). He now wants to control the debt ceiling, basically doing away with it. He asked for 800B in revenues, Boehner gives it to him by closing loopholes and deductions and Obama says, nope, if we aren't raising rates it's a non-starter. He'd rather raise the rates to 50%, pick and choose his winners and losers through deductions netting the same or less in revenues in the name of fairness? You buy this?
The republicans absolutely dropped the ball on healthcare while Bush was in office. The neocons in charge during the Bush years need to be swept out of office. They suck donkey balls. This doesn't change the atrocity we call Obamacare.
"We've got to sign the bill before we know what's in it". "you lost, get in the back". "what is that a prop? I can't believe you brought a prop to try to make this political (no dumbass, it's not a prop, it's the friggen bill you want us to sign). "all negotiations will be on c-span, uh, we made a backroom deal with big pharma, it cuts costs". He had to bribe and threaten his own party to get it passed. Fort Hood is still classified as workplace violence and Benghazi was caused by a video. Yeah, it's the republicans only who are being childish.
And seriously, why can't I buy a cheaper policy from South Dakota that has the same coverage? Why is this such a bad thing? Where's the public option, that's actually what he campaigned on, not what was signed and passed. He campaigned on changing the climate in DC and then says, no, can't do that from the inside, it has to be an outsider to fix it. "Don't vote for Romney, he's an outsider".
I know you claim to have read the healthcare bill and you love it but it's absolutely a payoff to pharmaceuticals and will actually cause costs to go up. We in the medical field have been screaming about costs, Obama/Pelosi did the opposite and then told us the grass is greener anyway. Obama voted against the auto bailouts while pubs were doing it, then takes all the credit for saving them while saying Romney would have let them go bankrupt (they did btw). He now wants to control the debt ceiling, basically doing away with it. He asked for 800B in revenues, Boehner gives it to him by closing loopholes and deductions and Obama says, nope, if we aren't raising rates it's a non-starter. He'd rather raise the rates to 50%, pick and choose his winners and losers through deductions netting the same or less in revenues in the name of fairness? You buy this?
The republicans absolutely dropped the ball on healthcare while Bush was in office. The neocons in charge during the Bush years need to be swept out of office. They suck donkey balls. This doesn't change the atrocity we call Obamacare.
"We've got to sign the bill before we know what's in it". "you lost, get in the back". "what is that a prop? I can't believe you brought a prop to try to make this political (no dumbass, it's not a prop, it's the friggen bill you want us to sign). "all negotiations will be on c-span, uh, we made a backroom deal with big pharma, it cuts costs". He had to bribe and threaten his own party to get it passed. Fort Hood is still classified as workplace violence and Benghazi was caused by a video. Yeah, it's the republicans only who are being childish.
And seriously, why can't I buy a cheaper policy from South Dakota that has the same coverage? Why is this such a bad thing? Where's the public option, that's actually what he campaigned on, not what was signed and passed. He campaigned on changing the climate in DC and then says, no, can't do that from the inside, it has to be an outsider to fix it. "Don't vote for Romney, he's an outsider".
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I didn't vote for Romney, but it had nothing to do with his being an outsider. cn
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
cn, I wouldn't put you in the camp that blames everything on the right. Maybe most things, but you still have the ability to be honest with some of the shittyness coming from both sides.
If you seriously look at what a terrible candidate Romney was (not that he was worse than the other clowns up on stage) it would have been shocking if Obama had lost. He actually had less support against Romney than he did against McCain. That's telling for an incumbent.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Words have meaning, precision builds context.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
True, true.
Merc was just easier to type than hired ex-military security personnel. In this case, the meaning is the same, the image it conjures up is different. Cheesus just focused on the word because his Savior was being criticized and he felt the need to defend but had no other ammunition.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
Yes you are wrong. No matter how you pose it.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
First you said The US goverment had 15000 mercs in Iran
Then you said the US goverment has 15000 mercs in Iraq
Then you moved the goal posts and said 15000 private security
Well guess what buddie
The US goverment doesnt have any private security in Iraq
The few that are there work for Private business's who choose to use them
Private security personnel dont want to work in Iraq since they have no immunity to prosecution and there is a price on their heads
Bottom line
You are full of shit in every regard to your baseless claim, otherwise you would back it up.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Dude, you could have saved 3 pages of nonsense and posted that first.
Yes i goofed Iran/Iraq, guarantee I do it again, please be around to catch it.
As for the rest of your ramble.
The United States is far from out of Iraq. However, Congress has sharply cut into the administration's original request for $2.26 billion for fiscal 2013. The Senate Appropriations Committee included just $1.1 billion with the biggest cut being total disapproval of $850 million that was to pay for the Iraqi police training program. The House Appropriations Committee attached language limiting some fiscal 2013 funds until Iraq develops a logistic and maintenance system for its security forces and a sustainment program for granted free or purchased U.S. weaponry.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/w...-attack-in-benghazi-libya.html?pagewanted=all
http://news.antiwar.com/2012/10/01/...can-troops-in-iraq-despite-lack-of-authority/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...-money-hasnt/2012/06/27/gJQA4Q6l7V_story.html
There's a thousand more links if you need more use google like I did, took a minute.
I would had done this before if you had asked but I honestly thought this was common knowledge. I had no idea what you were talking about, I thought it was my q/n goof. The man up thing got me wondering, is he really this stupid or just a dick? Stupid dick?
I know you are not a stupid dick, i'm just yanking your chain with that, but you come off looking pretty lowlifish to me with your childish method of attack. It's cool though, it's just the internet, carry on.
Yes i goofed Iran/Iraq, guarantee I do it again, please be around to catch it.
As for the rest of your ramble.
The United States is far from out of Iraq. However, Congress has sharply cut into the administration's original request for $2.26 billion for fiscal 2013. The Senate Appropriations Committee included just $1.1 billion with the biggest cut being total disapproval of $850 million that was to pay for the Iraqi police training program. The House Appropriations Committee attached language limiting some fiscal 2013 funds until Iraq develops a logistic and maintenance system for its security forces and a sustainment program for granted free or purchased U.S. weaponry.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/w...-attack-in-benghazi-libya.html?pagewanted=all
http://news.antiwar.com/2012/10/01/...can-troops-in-iraq-despite-lack-of-authority/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...-money-hasnt/2012/06/27/gJQA4Q6l7V_story.html
There's a thousand more links if you need more use google like I did, took a minute.
I would had done this before if you had asked but I honestly thought this was common knowledge. I had no idea what you were talking about, I thought it was my q/n goof. The man up thing got me wondering, is he really this stupid or just a dick? Stupid dick?
I know you are not a stupid dick, i'm just yanking your chain with that, but you come off looking pretty lowlifish to me with your childish method of attack. It's cool though, it's just the internet, carry on.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
So local police are now mercenarys?
Failed attempt to move the goal posts once again
man you suck at this
Similar threads
