turms 0 Posted May 16, 2004 Quote[/b] ]To the best of my knowledge, Hollow point bullets are banned by the Geneva (spelling?) convention due to the nature of the wound they cause. Hollow point bullets are not banned by Geneva convention, they are banned within Hague Convention in war "The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, agreements outlawing the use of certain types of weapons in warfare." Since you are a policeofficer, this doesnt apply to your line of duty. AFAIK every country gets to determine themselfs what kind of bullets they use in law-enforcement duties. Quote[/b] ]Geneva convention is over rated. Ask the North Koreans about their efforts during the korean war, not long after the geneva convention was made... and then even some of the Americans in Iraq that have made the news around the world these days... Do you think that war needs no rules then? now theres a law everywhere that prohbits one to kill, but if someone kills someone, that doesnt mean the law is outdated and unneeded. Quote[/b] ]Also, you refer to PMC's as soldiers for profit? What percentage of people would stay in the armed forces if they werent making a profit??? if it was voluntary, i think you'd find your armed forces a hell of a lot smaller.... From vikipedia ( here  )  "A mercenary is a soldier who fights for money, regardless of ideological, national or political considerations. When addressed to a professional soldier in a regular national army, the term is normally used as an insult or epithet." So the difference is that if you obey a corporation, not regarding goverments position, ideologys and stuff, then you are a mercenary. Quote[/b] ]I work for the state government as opposed to the federal government, in an organisation of around about 15,000. There is no way in hell that ANY portion of my work is ran efficiently. In every job i had prior to this in the private sector, bosses were generally hired because they were good, whereas my industry has bosses employed because they are "yes men" and ride on their superiors coat tales.. where their superiors are generally as incompetent as they are. Systems are worked out because they are efficient, not because of a knee jerk political reaction... Ithink that is a normal standard in every country, and every politicals system, in every branch that has communal and private sector ;) As for the Mercenaries; Killing for money is illegal, unless you are a mercenary, and i think that the international community should fight to ban mercenaries equally everywhere. If you kill for money, thats wrong, isnt it? EDIT: Private military contractors are the third biggest military group in Iraq right now. And 1 BIG difference in privat military is that pmcs are not responsible to the kongress (in US ) unlike military. DynCorp Blackwater USA Kellogg, Brown and Root Military Professional Resources Carlyle Group, a private military investor Control Risks Group LLC These are the pmc working in Iraq now (the American ones) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mick78 0 Posted May 16, 2004 Quote[/b] ] Hollow point bullets are not banned by Geneva convention, they are banned within Hague Convention in war "The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, agreements outlawing the use of certain types of weapons in warfare." Since you are a policeofficer, this doesnt apply to your line of duty. AFAIK every country gets to determine themselfs what kind of bullets they use in law-enforcement duties. So, if you are right, I got it wrong - either way, they are banned by a multi-national agreement, suggesting they are terrible weapons to use for war, but not on civilians? but i dont see how thats relevant. id rather get hit by a .40 hollowpoint than a RPG... If you give a war rules, does that make it like a game? The "rules" were made by the winners to prosecute the losers after WW2. I know that will upset some of you. But, were any of the allies prosecuted for war crimes? no, im not comparing them to the atrocities of the Nazi SS etc.. but you can not assume just because they were on the 'allies' side that they did not commit crimes - shooting people that surrendered, whatever. Maybe some were charged, I'm not suggesting i know it all..... Quote[/b] ] So the difference is that if you obey a corporation, not regarding goverments position, ideologys and stuff, then you are a mercenary. But, theoretically, the corporation is obeying the government. detachment from the idealogy of defending/serving a certain country could lead to one being more professional in their duties and not as emotional... especially if a good portion of the staff at these private staff are ex special forces or from lenghty military careers. I think everyone can safely assume that there are unscrupulous characters in every industry, including the Govt armies etc that are "open to suggestion".... money makes the world go round these days... Quote[/b] ] As for the Mercenaries; Killing for money is illegal, unless you are a mercenary, and i think that the international community should fight to ban mercenaries equally everywhere. If you kill for money, thats wrong, isnt it? id say that the PMC's are there to fulfil a role, not to kill.. just like the regular forces.. there being any particular area, like the other person in this threat that is involved with search and rescue, like security guards to private contractors/engineers whatever.. PMC's seem to me to be an effective way to cover certain areas, while regular troops cover the main areas.. im not suggesting a total conversion to PMC's at all - just using them in appropriate, and monitered areas... Quote[/b] ] And 1 BIG difference in privat military is that pmcs are not responsible to the kongress (in US ) unlike military. The person that is responsible for hiring the PMC's is no doubt accountable for their actions.. and the PMC's would quickly find themselves without further work if they "mess up" their contracts... mick.. (my quotes might not turn out right.. never done them before) Â Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toadeater 0 Posted May 17, 2004 In a related story, I read today that 25% of the reconstruction money in Iraq has gone to paying Republican security contractors. Out of 2000 projects, only 42 have actually been completed. Beyond Prison Abuse Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jinef 2 Posted May 17, 2004 If George Bush announced tommorow that a referendum will be made in the US to determine whether he should give the US military to a nice Saudi who runs a US oil firm he met at his ranch the other day....would I trust the US public to stop it..... I doubt it quite honestly, all Mr Bush would need to say is - "There is WMD in the country of Michigan, where terrorist groups of homosexuals are threatening to destroy the US!" He would get 100% support most probably. Sound absurd? Well look at this title's topic and relate. Have a wonderful Norwegian Indepence Day. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brgnorway 0 Posted May 17, 2004 Have a wonderful Norwegian Indepence Day. Thanks Jinef - you are my favourite welshman Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
red oct 2 Posted May 17, 2004 heres some interesting pages http://bulletin.ninemsn.com.au/bulleti....ocument http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=4299 http://www.newsaustralia.com/Austral....ops.htm http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,11816,1071086,00.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
