Ollie North article on Contactors-"Road Kill"

[bmbsqd]

Great article by Ollie:

http://www.townhall .com/Columnists/ OliverNorth/ 2007/03/30/ road_kill

Road Kill
By Oliver North
Friday, March 30, 2007


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- On March 27 the solons of the U.S. Senate voted to
assure defeat in Iraq by setting a "date certain" -- one year from now --
for the withdrawal of U.S. forces. As the 50-48 vote was being tallied, 15
British sailors and Royal Marines were being held hostage somewhere in Iran.
While the barons of bombast were rushing to the microphones to crow about
repudiating this president's failed strategy, U.S. aircraft from two carrier
battle groups were screaming into the air over the Persian Gulf. And in a
little-noticed footnote that same afternoon, the newswires from Baghdad
reported that "a U.S. soldier and a civilian contractor had been killed
inside the 'Green Zone' in Baghdad."

In keeping with tradition, the American soldier's next of kin will be
notified by his service, his body will be escorted home on an "Angel Flight"
and at his funeral, a military honor guard will solemnly present his family
with a carefully folded American flag and a Purple Heart Medal on which the
profile of George Washington appears. The U.S. civilian contractor, killed
by the same "indirect fire" as the U.S. soldier, will be accorded none of
these courtesies. She is simply a statistic: the 161st American civilian
contractor killed in Iraq since 2003. When I called a friend in Iraq to ask
about the circumstances, I was told, "Who cares about the civilian? We're
just road kill."

A woman carries food rations she received from the Red Crescent at a church
in Baghdad March 29, 2007. REUTERS/Namir Noor-Eldeen (IRAQ) The disparity in
how these two American casualties are treated in death may be stark -- but
it's nothing new. Civilian contractors have served beside -- and been
treated differently than -- the U.S. military since the American Revolution.
From 1775 when he arrived in Boston to assume command of the Continental
Army, Washington depended on civilian contractors to provide food, weapons,
ammunition, transport, armories, engineering, construction, clothing and
medical assistance for his troops. Though many of these civilians shared the
same hardships and privations as the troops they supported, they were more
often criticized than honored by our government.

Modern warfare has made civilian contractors even more essential to our
military -- and placed them at higher risk. Three weeks after Pearl Harbor,
nearly 100 American civilian construction contractors were killed and
wounded standing shoulder-to- shoulder with U.S. Marines and sailors
defending Wake Island. When the tiny garrison was overwhelmed on Dec. 23,
1941, more than 1,000 contractors became prisoners of the Rising Sun and
scores were subsequently worked to death and massacred by their captors.
None of those who died received so much as a Purple Heart.

By the time I arrived in Vietnam in 1968, tens of thousands of American
civilians were backing our efforts on the battlefield. My tiny platoon
outpost overlooking Khe Sanh had a half-dozen American civilians manning
sophisticated communications and detection equipment. At Con Thien, our
infantry battalion was supported by U.S. civilian "tech reps" who maintained
and operated fire control radars, ran generators and repaired everything
from sensors to heavy equipment. One of the most famous photographs of the
Vietnam War's ignominious end was an American civilian contractor's UH-1
"Huey" helicopter evacuating desperate Vietnamese refugees from the top of
22 Gia Long Street, a half mile from the U.S. Embassy.

Today's globe-spanning war on terror -- and a much smaller U.S. military to
fight it -- place even greater burdens on civilian contractors. In
Afghanistan, Iraq and Kuwait, more than 350 U.S. companies and nearly
100,000 American civilians are directly engaged in supporting U.S. and
coalition efforts. In Iraq, civilian contractors man and protect more than
900 convoys a month delivering food, water, clothing, fuel, weapons,
ammunition and equipment to the new Iraqi police and army. Nearly all major
maintenance is performed by civilian contractors, including that for U.S.
forces.

On each of my eight trips to Iraq reporting on U.S. combat units for FOX
News, I have eaten food prepared by these civilian contractors, bathed in
and drank the water they supplied, ridden in vehicles they had armored and
communicated with equipment they had installed. In northern Iraq, I
documented American contractors destroying millions of tons of Saddam's
ordnance so that it wouldn't fall into the wrong hands. In Fallujah I saw
the bridge where the mutilated bodies of four civilian contractors were hung
by Al Qaeda in March 2004. And on every trip I've seen well-armed civilians
from private security companies -- called PSCs -- protecting diplomats,
sensitive installations, oil pipelines, news bureaus, Iraqi government
officials and even senior U.S. military officers.

Though Gen. David Petraeus testified at his confirmation hearing on Jan. 23
that he was "secured by contract security in my last tour there," and
described the PSCs as essential to his strategy for victory, he appears to
have changed his mind. Last week the Maliki government issued regulations --
enforced by the U.S. military -- stripping weapons from all civilian
contractors unless they have a new permit issued by the Ministry of the
Interior (MOI). The Catch-22 in all of this is that the MOI has yet to issue
any new permits.

Lawrence T. Peter, director of the Private Security Association of Iraq,
says that the new regulation "disarms virtually all PSC personnel not
working directly for the U.S. government and prevents any coalition civilian
traveling through Baghdad from legally carrying a weapon." He added, "we now
have American troops disarming American civilians. It just got a whole lot
more dangerous to be a reporter, a reconstruction worker or a coalition
diplomat in Iraq. The terrorists must love this."

Road kill, anyone?

[kpel308]

My God.

[Argyll 50]

Its already happening, I'm talking to an GI about this, he's disgusted at having to take weapons from Westerners......but he's only following orders, anyone carrying a weapon, without a CENTCOM mandate, or an MOI weapons card will have that, and any other weapons confiscated...apparently they took 200 weapons from CTU in recent weeks...seems JASG-C are coming down heavy on this, under instructions from the Iraqi MOI themselves.

And they're not issuing cards these days, so there are thousands of dudes out there without a legit card, company issued cards are only good for company locations......Hide your gats gents, the sherrif in town is on the hunt down.

[JCastro]

Its already happening...he's disgusted at having to take weapons from Westerners...apparently they took 200 weapons from CTU in recent weeks...

WOW!!! I certainly wouldn't be caught out there without being armed! That is a tough article. I hope that things are put on hold or the orders are reascended before anyone gets hurt or killed. That really sucks!

[Argyll 50]

This isn't good, seems only DOD/DOS contracts are exempt....
Taken from another forum.

Folks:
FYI: MOD 6 to MNF-I FRAGO 05-134 {Iraqi Weapons Cards) is UNCLASS/FOUO and signed by Petraeus.


22 March 2007
Baghdad


Colleagues,

Please read attached new FRAGO Mod 6 to 05-134. The language is quite clear. While not a lawyer, I interpret the FRAGO language to mean that only those Private Security Companies performing security work for the United States Government (i.e. Department of State or Department of Defense), are authorized to carry weapons of any sort. Period. I don't read any exceptions in the FRAGO.

Thus, for instance, if you are a PSC guarding various media (e.g. ABC, BBC, CBS, FOX, NYT, Sky WaPo WT, etc) you are NOT authorized to carry any weapon at all.

Thus, for instance, if you are a PSC guarding international donations efforts (e.g. Japanese donation) you are NOT authorized to carry any weapons at all.

I know some companies have both DoD/DoS contracts and commercial contracts. Your USG authorization does NOT extend to operators on your commercial contracts.

It does not matter if you are a licensed Private Security Company, becasue even if you are a licensed PSC, in view of the fact that there is NO weapons card program in place, it is not possible for you to have a valid weapons card in your possession at this time.

JASG (Zone Security) has displayed a very strict interpretation of FRAGO Mod 6. Please be aware that if you drive in the Zone with a weapon and you are not performing on a USG contract (e.g. moving media reps in and out of the Zone), you will be apprehended, your weapons will be confiscated and there is virtually no recourse. It matters not who your client is, if you are traveling back into the Red Zone, whether you are an MoI registered PSC or how long you have been operating in Iraq.

I know there are multiple other examples.

In view of the foregoing, I must advise that until there are modifications to the FRAGO and the Government of Iraq State of Emergency decree--or until such time as a functioning weapons card program is in place and you receive those new weapons cards-- your company is legally and financially at risk if you continue to utilize weapons in the conduct of your current valid commercial contracts. In view of the current weapons restrictions, you may place your company in an untenable financial position regarding insurance issues if you continue to operate with weapons.

The Association understands the impracticality of this situation and is working toward relief. Further, the Association understands the dilemma that confronts you between either proper execution of your commercial contract or compliance with current MNFI FRAGO direction I highly encourage your clients to contact me with any specific questions on this issue.


all the best,
L

[kpel308]

How much does anyone care to bet that the companies will be telling their people to go in harm's way unarmed? Sounds like a lot of PSC companies are going to be losing some people, to me.

[Argyll 50]

It's kind of bizarre, I just don't see the GI's enforcing this one, unless in the presence of their superiors, it's a strange one, the MOI has not produced weapons cards for almost 2 years I believe, and this directive is supposed to have been driven by them......
Whether this is for the IZ only, or Iraq wide, I'd be pretty livid to have our teams weapons removed from vehicles through the MOI's ineptitude to get their fingers out their arses and restart the card program...where does this stand for Other Governments Contracts, such as CRG's FCO contract....
It put the Military guys on the ground in an unenvious position having to carry out such a confiscation....
There are thousands of PSC's out there without Iraqi MOI weapons cards, so I guess there is a sense of urgency needed to avoid any "stupid" moves.

[Typhoon]

I am sorry to hear about this. Why is this happening? Is it some bureaucratic screw up, or is there some ulterior motive behind the change?

Stay safe out there, guys...

[ktek01]

I am sorry to hear about this. Why is this happening? Is it some bureaucratic screw up,

Ongoing, since the start. They never came up with a way to keep contractors 100% legal unless they were working a DOD contract. No matter if the contract they were working was in direct support of the war or re-construction efforts, non DOD meant you could not get a DOD card legally. Without a card its impossible to move about the country and get anything done, so people had to get creative and bend a few rules. Once the CPA stood down and the Iraqi's started taking control they started cracking down a little bit at a time, this is just the latest. Wonder why its taking so long to re-build infrastructure? Many of those contracts are non-DOD, in fact many are directly with the govt of Iraq, and the westerners on those have to work around many catch-22 rules like this one and worry about the insurgents at the same time. Some of it is national pride, some hatred or resentmeant of the westerners, and a lot of it is about their officials trying to line their own pockets.

[Silverbullet]

While I'm not entirely up to speed on the complete issue I was under the impression that this only effected those not on US contracts. I also understood this as only US model weapons were being confiscated as well as models sold to the Iraqi's. (Army, police=Glocks) I did not see this as something that was being enforced on the open roads as long as the element was armed with non M-16, M-4 type weapons and instead was carrying AK variants. While this doesn't solve the problem of getting in and out of FOB's/ bases armed I didn't think the effort was being made to make anyone defenseless on the road.

As stated I'm am not as up to speed on this as needed but that is what I was led to believe was going on.

It's been in the works for awhile now and I also have heard rumors that other PMC's were behind this idea. They claim they support it due to supporting industry regulation but I think there's an ulterior motive behind their support as well.

I wouldn't go to general quarters, just yet.

I plan on researching this issue so I can speak from a better knowledge base.

[seapig173]

I asked a friend of mine working over there on a reconstruction contract if they were aware of this, the reply "yes they are - we stop just before coming in to the iz and put ours away - IZ police have been to our villa twice this week looking for weapons"
I remember when I left in 06 we couldnt get MOI weapons cards for new guys, the office had closed and no one knew what was going on,,, should be another interesting development

[JumpmasterK]

That sucks; how can you do PSC without weapons?

[snaquebite]

I have an MOI issued Weapons permit....still good until April 2008

[Argyll 50]

There is a certain irony to all this,especially the M4/16 issues, the Mil at one stage wanted all PSC's to have weapons that Identified them as Westerners, and American weapons seemed to the consensus, add to that, there were those on DOD/DOS contracts who also wanted a smaller calibre than 7.62mm short, again the 5.56mm was what was recommended, which kind of leaves very little to the imagination as to what type of weapons that points to!!

There were rumours that the Iraqi MOI wanted to restrict the amount of ammo PSC's carried as well, it was a ridiculous amount, something like 75 rounds per man, at the mo, I carry what I can beg borrow and barter for, I would not like to go out with any less than Basic Load.
Then the question arrises, of personally purchased weapons, how many blokes in country have bought their own Uppers?.....Hundreds no doubt, and I'm sure there were plenty lowers making their way into Iraq before the clamp downs as well.....where do these weapons , once confiscated , go to, and what happens to them, are they then filtered back into the DoD/DoS system for issue to somebody else?

I'm wondering if this is response to the IP and IA units flogging their "issue" Glocks to anyone with the right cash on them?.....
Legislation and regulation are welcomed, but at the expense of lots of guys being left high and dry on a FOB without the tools for the job is more than bizzare, it's almost criminal, and Draconian....I'm wondering as well if this is a move implemented by the Big US Players to weed out all the unregistered/Non American companys that are operating without Licences, in an attempt to monopolise the contracting,specificaly on DOD/DOS contracts.

Where would this leave the PSC's who run the PWC , and other Logistical contracts ? Especially those who stage IN the IZ and Major FOB's....with deliveries to outlying FOB's?.....

Intersting times ahead for sure.

[Silverbullet]

Then the question arrises, of personally purchased weapons, how many blokes in country have bought their own Uppers?.....Hundreds no doubt, and I'm sure there were plenty lowers making their way into Iraq before the clamp downs as well.....where do these weapons , once confiscated , go to, and what happens to them,
I wouldn't expect any country to worry about this and those that have this issue should read the writing on the wall and sent their stuff out of the country ASAP.

I'm wondering if this is response to the IP and IA units flogging their "issue" Glocks to anyone with the right cash on them?.....
Not really relevant.

I'm wondering as well if this is a move implemented by the Big US Players to weed out all the unregistered/Non American companys that are operating without Licences, in an attempt to monopolise the contracting,specifically on DOD/DOS contracts.
First of all this doesn't make sense if it's in support of what I alluded to. There is no monopoly. Not all companies are even able to bid on DOS/DOD contracts to start with. They either don't meet the minimum business benchmarks or they are not able to bid due to being from a specific nation. My comment was really based on what I heard about long term goals of some companies. Contrary to what most of the dudes carrying a gun over there think, the big companies have strategic goals that go out 5-10 yrs. My comment was more in line with the whispers I've heard about companies positioning themselves in the potential future Iraqi market, not next month bidding on a DOS contract.

Big companies already dominate the market. It has nothing to do with being US, it has all to do with being able to competitively outbid the smaller company's. Notice I didn't say out perform. The reality is that if you have big bucks behind you, you can usually win the big contracts. Smaller company's may win the one out or win a big one but how many win it again on the recompete? What happens is they win it and the then whatever contract it may be comes to the attention of the big boys and they go after it hard on the next go aground.

[iraqgunz]

FYI- I have contacted the BATFE regarding sending home weapons and parts, i.e uppers etc...back to the states upon completion of a contract. They advised me per email that because Iraq is still on a list of countries with an arms embargo in place that these items may not be brought back into the states. If so, they are subject to confiscation and of course all the other legal shit that can follow. The only exception to this are weapons owned by the U.S gov't.

Looks like there is going to be a little problem if PSC's or other security personnel get their weapons taken away. I have a feeling there is some type of ulterior motive here.

[bmbsqd]

I spoke to someone by IM today in the IZ and was told their company had some weapons confiscated but it is not being taken too serious. The JASC had some CAA compliance issues. They are getting them all back, just a speed bump.

A few years ago we occasionally used the IZ as a shortcut through B'dad and would have to go thru the never-ending changes at the gates. When the new rule came out you could only carry the EXACT weapons (by serial number) which appeared on your weap. card or they would screw with you a little. We had some taken away from our Iraqis but we (ex-pats) usually did not get screwed with. It was usually the same gate, meaning the same CoC being hard-ass. A talk with the LTC usually took care of it and when all the troops got finished taking pictures with our MP5s, Scorpions, and other weapons they had not seen before they eventually grew tired of the issue and just stopped checking.

I believe this general issue was also part of the thought behind Bremer's directives just before he departed.

[snaquebite]

When the new rule came out you could only carry the EXACT weapons (by serial number) which appeared on your weap. card or they would screw with you a little.

The solution to that we found was to have have the cards indicate "Weapons Pool" for guys that may be using different weapons based on mission requirements. My MOI weapon permit lists a specific Serial number but also states weapon's pool. We printed cards with the company's logo etc which listed the serial numbers from the weapons in the arms room. Cards were printed up by weapon type, AK's, M-4, MP5, etc etc. Individuals would just carry this card with their permit. Cards were printed up using a ID card machine so they were laminate making them sturdy and easy to carry with your permit. Other companies had their folks carry a memorandum with the numbers listed.

[low country]

This is possibly off thread, and if so, apologies up front. With all the talk about specific weapon systems, are there companies currently working that are not carrying typical US issued weapons (military or LEO), M-4, MP-5, M-16 etc..... Is this because of the problems of bringing said weapons in theatre or simply economics. I have also read previous posts stating that equipment is shipped over and a "fixer" gets the items in country. With this in mind,( off thread post in 3,2,1) are the contractors generally issued quality equipment commonly found with the US military or law enforcement ie armor, plates, optics etc or are they given items that you can only find in theatre. Does this vary oon the size of the company and whether they are a DOD or DS contract? Thanks.

Be safe

ps. To get back on topic, I could not imagine having your weapons confiscated and still being expected to do tour job until the cards are issued.

[Argyll 50]

There are companies out there who still use AK's, and there are also companys who use Sig552's and Sig Variants, unless a company has an "end user certificate", they cannot ship weapons in via legal channels.

[Xdeth]

I feel this is the right move, I'm sorry it comes so late in terms of any real enforcement if it's even going to be enforced, this has happend before with the weapons cards in '04, it was quickly forgotten about.

Business models and opportunity for all aside, the only real training or vetting standards albeit as crippled as those systems are in some aspects, are on the DOS style contracts, where contractors directly integrate in the field with Govt ID holders. Outside of that I can find no legit arguments for putting some expat coalition civilians armed on the streets in Iraq/Afghanistan, I don't care what your background is, combat is a team sport. I'm not even going to talk about the aspects of cultural and security awareness which are practically non-existant in the PSC world, "they" are the enemy out "there", we protect our assets and the strategic goals of colaition forces in the area be damned.

Who should pick up the security for say, a US Army Corps of Engineers rebuilding contract then, the Army, yes, the Army. But since the whole war was undertaken with the cavalier cowboy attitude that it was, the Army couldn't support this, they could have moved to such a model after the invasion but the gravy train was on then. Even if that had be done, only select units of MP's have the ability to carry out that mission correctly in the first place. Most in theater were quickly converted to MP's from Guard units with only JRTC training prior to deployment. They can create as much havoc and trouble as the PSC's, but at least they fall under a proper chain of command and legal framework which can be used to affect their behaviour when required.

I appreciate Ollies sentiments, but the situation is BS, pistols only should be the rule after a qual course at CRC, one round on a keychain for yourself in case your overrun.

[Silverbullet]

Your political judgments aside I agree that there is not "real" vetting procedure but fail to see why someone should be restricted to just a pistol. It is very easy to "vet" a crse and it also requires very little oversight to ensure that said company complies with the standard.

There were companies on the ground who had higher and more stringent standards for hiring and continued employment than anything DOS ever used. What happened was they found out it wasn't economically feasible to maintain those standards vice not wanting to have those standards. It was the awarding authorities (DOS, DOD)who drove the standards down and made the "industry" what it is today. Gravy train comments are not really factual since the gravy was provided by a lazy ass State Dept who found it easier to complain and outsource vice implement. Look how screwed up their major program is and the problems that come out of that. The only difference is that they are able to silence dissent and cover their issues from being public knowledge.

The present situation isn't really the fault of the companies who provide security at different levels. The Army Corps of Engineers is just a small part. It's a failure of DOS and the new Iraqi gov't to take proactive actions early on and now they are throwing the baby out with the bath water vice implementing a set of reasonable standards and then following through by enforcing those standards..

[bmbsqd]

Xdeth,

As far as taking away weapons I have said for years it should not be the contractors or military having their taken, it should be a long-term, no-shit effort to de-gun the Iraqi people. A process should have been started three years ago to do just exactly that, then once it was close to being accomplished initiate a legal process like we have in the US (and please...no discussions about how our gun rights are being taken away, different topic altogether). The gun problem in Iraq STARTS with the fact that every citizen can own one. That is fine in a civilized state, but not where we are trying to combat terrorism. JMO.

I disagree about the vetting but then again what is your definition of vetting? Is it clearances? Well, military guys have bad credit but still get Interims and go to war with bad credit. Is it weapons quals? There are companies out there with better courses and training than what the military has....and most are direct models of the mil courses to begin with? Is it cultural understanding? Did PFC Green understand it is not ok to rape and set fire to Iraqi women?

The military does not have the market cornered on doing it right in a combat zone. The idea that any large percentage of military personnel have this aura of knowledge around them about how to act culturally or how to handle unpredictable situations is not valid. Senior NCOs, mid-level O's and higher....maybe...but the average troop is not much different than the average contractor.

Also, you are glossing over the fact that MOST contractors doing security in Iraq and A'stan were former NCOs and Officers. I believe it was 2005 the average years of experience for security contractors was 14. What is the average years of experience in the average MP or Infantry unit in Iraq or A'stan? 4, maybe 5?

We had this same argument when training the Iraqi Army at MPRI. General Eaton bitched and moaned about civilians training the new army. However, it was determined the average mil. experience in his units available to train was about 5 years. The average exp. of MPRI trainers was 12.4 years. Our requirement was to have been at least an E-6 (in my division).

Most of the "problems" encountered with contract security guys are unique and not indicative of the whole bunch....no more than the raping and setting fire to a young Iraqi girl and killing her family members is the norm for troops with ALL THAT TRAINING.

As for who should do the security for the USACE...it should be whoever is qualified to do it, has the resources, and can do it safely. But, for example, if you want military to protect the COE....do you also require that the military do all the ordnance destruction? Before you say yes please do some research on how much has been done, how much is still needed, and how many EOD techs are required. There are not enough military EOD techs to do it even if their ranks quadrupled overnight.

And as for DoS standards...wasn't phony(Mod edit) on a DoS contract with Aegis? So much for the value of DoS vetting!

So, that leaves it to picking and choosing the sexy jobs to hand over to the military and PSD/Security is always up high on that list. Frankly you might be surprised to find out most NCOs and officers do not want that mission.

[Argyll 50]

So would the bottom line here be simply to replace ALL Private Security personnel in Iraq, with US Military Personnel?

Replace all the Jundee Security on the CMC project with GI's, all the Mobile Teams with GI's?

Good luck with your recruitting drive, you're going to need it!!

[bmbsqd]

...and let's not forget the thousands of Ghurkas, Nepalese, Ugandans, etc. AND...there is no way the military is going to allow all those Iraqi and Afghani nationals who carry weapons while they pull security on all those projects to keep carrying in their presence, the military just does not have that trust factor to lower their guard with local nationals...so there is about another 50,000 to replace.

[Silverbullet]

Lets not get off topic. Soldiers and politics are off limits in the area.

I don't think that the average company has a employees who are generally more mature than the average military unit. I also don't think PSD is what most guys in Iraq are doing even if they call it that. The average "PSD" team is really a security escort team.

The issue is the industry being what it is, is due to many factors, not the least of which is the contract award procedures. They do not always award the contract to the best or most vetted. This is the rule vice the exception.

I'd also prefer not to have any references about isolated incidences of mil guys committing crimes. Points can be made without using that as an example. The mil guys have a much harder job than any contractor. Any indication other wise is off the mark. We don't need to ID their bad apples to discuss this issue.

In closing, I agree there is a problem with the "industry". My disagreement is the idea that it's due to a political shortcoming or even due to companies trying to run rampant. Some companies suck. Some contractors suck. As noted above there are a myriad of jobs/functions that need to be outsourced that would otherwise detract from the mils main mission. It's much easier to get away with sucking when the people who should provide a standard and oversight sit around drinking tea vice doing their job.

[Xdeth]

So would the bottom line here be simply to replace ALL Private Security personnel in Iraq, with US Military Personnel?

Replace all the Jundee Security on the CMC project with GI's, all the Mobile Teams with GI's?

Good luck with your recruitting drive, you're going to need it!!

I know, it's what we have made it, but, yes to answer your question.

Contracting makes sense for knowledge workers, techs, engineers, trainers, consultants, but not in roles that facilitate direct combat with the enemy.

I think there are programs where this can be done due to proper background qualification, standardized approach to training, full access to intelligence and adjacent operating units, proper support in the field, official oversight, and means for incident remeidaition. How many contracts offer all that, and I didn't even mention the insurance and liabiltiy issues for the contractrors.

Pvt Schmukatelli may mistakenly blow away an enitre village, but if he does it's assumed he and his chain of command are aware of, and acting to pursue the broader US and colaition objectives leading to that action, whether it's the case or not.

[Argyll 50]

Good Post SB, I'm sure this will all be resolved when common sense prevails, many many contracts in Iraq are paid for by Iraqi businessmen, who's clients themselves are indeed the US Mil, it makes no sense to suddenly remove their weapons, and then leave yourself without the provider for said logistics.

I believe all companies that are fulfilling their obligations and meeting the laid down requirements in the MOI registration process, will have nothing to worry about, there is still a lot of work to be done in Iraq, and the Military just doesn't have the manpower to replace PSC's ...Look who's providing security for The Oil Infrastructure, it's not just .Mil who are providing securtiy on these convoys coming into Iraq, it's private companies.

If the MOI want to crackdown , let them begin with expelling all NON registered companies, then get their arses in gear, stop going out and killing Sunni's , instead get back into their offices, and begin the re issuing of weapons cards....2 years since the last machine was used!!

[10thvet]

I heard the term "Combat Zone Escort" used before and it fits what I do

[Argyll 50]

Sounds a shit load better than PSD as well mate!!

[KevinB]

I know, it's what we have made it, but, yes to answer your question.

Contracting makes sense for knowledge workers, techs, engineers, trainers, consultants, but not in roles that facilitate direct combat with the enemy.

I think there are programs where this can be done due to proper background qualification, standardized approach to training, full access to intelligence and adjacent operating units, proper support in the field, official oversight, and means for incident remeidaition. How many contracts offer all that, and I didn't even mention the insurance and liabiltiy issues for the contractrors.

Well I can only guess you have little experience with the issue.
With 17 years of Army service - I would guess that my experience baseline is a little better than the avg solider in Iraq.
Secondly a DECENT (and their are shitty ones out there - but thats life there are shitty Army units - for example I might say that based on my experiences I feel anyone other than a Tier 1 unit is incomptetant with weapons) company has some screening and vetting program prior to threatre and some in theatre selection.
Thirdly ANY contractor "facilitates the ARMY (and MARINES) job of direct combat with the enemy" -- why because every body filled by people like me dont get filled by AD CAG/DEVGRP guys or others that could be out laying a shitkicking to the enemy. Even Bob the fat KBR dude is fuflilling a roll in bringing mail, food, water, hookers and blow -- whatever---




Regarding the GHEY weapon laws -- the companies where required to import everything thru the US -- since the Sig 522's which came in via US DOS end user fr the companies on the DOS contract in that instance. NOTHING is legal to get into Iraq unless it is via US DOS and Iraqi MOI end user -- I'd be more interested in how some of the companies brought in those Serbian M21 rifles and CZ99 pistols -- I have a feeling no one got a enduser for that crap.
If the rumoured IZP stuff continues all the DOS and DOD support (grant, or other supported non direct ventures) contracts will be running around with squirt guns and the IZP will have effectively delivered vicotry into the hands of the insurgents.

Just my $0.02

[Xdeth]

Well I can only guess you have little experience with the issue.
With 17 years of Army service - I would guess that my experience baseline is a little better than the avg solider in Iraq.
Secondly a DECENT (and their are shitty ones out there - but thats life there are shitty Army units - for example I might say that based on my experiences I feel anyone other than a Tier 1 unit is incomptetant with weapons) company has some screening and vetting program prior to threatre and some in theatre selection.
Thirdly ANY contractor "facilitates the ARMY (and MARINES) job of direct combat with the enemy" -- why because every body filled by people like me dont get filled by AD CAG/DEVGRP guys or others that could be out laying a shitkicking to the enemy. Even Bob the fat KBR dude is fuflilling a roll in bringing mail, food, water, hookers and blow -- whatever---




It doesn't matter the quals or selection to be contractor vs mil, personal experience level, pistol qual, whatever. Military members act in an official capacity under a military chain of command that answers to a civilian government, appointed by me, or us if you prefer.

A contractor unless explictly integrated into a military chain of command or government agency COC which directly supervises and takes responsibilty for his actions, answers and acts on behalf of corporate stockholders, a board of directors, an owner, none of which are even remotley required to have the interest of the overall US mission at hand. Good business practices tend to keep the mission statements parallel, but very frequently, they are not.

Your third point, there is no front line for combat that troops are manning which contractors help facilitate. In Iraq driving down the highway supporting the log train is a movment to contact, your just likely easier pickings if your a contractor, rack up some DBA on top of the ~160% cost increase contractors represent, nice, your hat looks cool though.

[Argyll 50]

It's a kind of moot point, because the US Mil, simply isn't going to replace all Security personnel in Iraq, or Afghanistan or anywhere else, neither are they going to replace all the KBR cleaners, mechanics, Welders, fitters, or fuel handlers on FOB's.
Throw in the site security onto these FOB's as well, all the Ugandans,Sri Lankans,Chileans/Nepalese,El Salvadorians......add to this all the LN's on NGO contracts.......The manpower just isn't there,but there are Contractors on every single FOB in Iraq, by definition, surely these can/could be classed as "Front Line"?
If a contractor has a CAC is he then not encompassed into a COC, that is overseen by the Military?.....without one, try telling a Major to get fucked, out on the ground, and see if you don't get into some serious bother, contractors DO answer to the military, and the overall Mission at hand, if that wasn't the case you could drive right through any area you wanted to,and disregard OOB areas.......again, try it and see what'll happen to you, so in effect your still complying with the Military COC whether you like it or not.
The vast majority of Security contractors have no beef, or ill feeling towards the Mil, and vice versa , and most will listen to, and adhere to what the Mil tell them to do, even if it's an NG Specialist , if he tells you that you cannot do something or go somewhere, generally, you don't.
Contracting, and in particular Security contracting in HRE's has by all accounts been going for eons, it's not likely to dissapear because of a really bizzare circumstance, that wants to see all NON DOD/DOS contractors disarmed, why should these contracts be any different ? Because they go through some Training?.....So what about Ronin, Phoenix, CRG's HRCO courses and qulaifications, because it's not Stamped Dept of State, it's dismissed out of hand as being "useless or inferior"?.....I'd be willing to bet there have been some real class assclowns go through DOS training schools and made their way out here, or another HRE, and have been out of their depth, and totally inept a what they are supposed to be doing, same with any other HRE courses, British, South African, Israeli.....it is the man himself , complete with the knowledge and background and training, that makes the clients feel secure , there are plenty companys not on DOS/DOD contracts who conduct training on a regular basis in theatre.

There is no quick fix to this soloution, for sure the industry needs regulated, singling out Non DoD/DoS contractors isn't the best course of action in these circumstances........haji doesn't care if you wear ACU's or 5.11's, he wants to kill you just as much, we're all supposed to be on the same side.

[Xdeth]

of a really bizzare circumstance, that wants to see all NON DOD/DOS contractors disarmed,

Yea, like the people of the host country not wanting it, that's bizzare. I'm sure they just don't know whats good for them.........

[SOTB]

....because it's not Stamped Dept of State, it's dismissed out of hand as being "useless or inferior"?.....I'd be willing to bet there have been some real class assclowns go through DOS training schools and made their way out here, or another HRE, and have been out of their depth, and totally inept a what they are supposed to be doing....Yes, totally. WPPS-certified is just a cert. And said cert is ONLY as good as the instructors, the students, and more importantly -- the equal and consistent use of standards when giving said certification(s).

On this very trip alone -- just a hair over two weeks, I have seen a very sad number of WPPS-certified assclowns....

[10thvet]

Yes, totally. WSSP-certified is just a cert. And said cert is ONLY as good as the instructors, the students, and more importantly -- the equal and consistent use of standards when giving said certification(s).

On this very trip alone -- just a hair over two weeks, I have seen a very sad number of WSSP-certified assclowns....


AHHH I think it's WPPS(Worldwide Personal Protective Services) and stop calling me an assclown :)

In my 18 months of doing this, I have came across my share of said wannabe's and assclowns that were "WPPS qualifed". Most(but by no means all) are found out and sent home with a quickness... The smaller the detail the quicker they are sent home...

I think the cert is a good place to start but by no means an end.

[Argyll 50]

Yea, like the people of the host country not wanting it, that's bizzare. I'm sure they just don't know whats good for them.........

Is this driven totally by the host nation?......I highly doubt it, when their own refusal to disarm Militias such as the MM, and the Peshmerga are not imposed.

Like I've said, what makes the WPPS certificate so special that it makes those holders exempt?

The Host nation my friend knows only too well that without Private Security providing escorts for it's logistical requirements from Oil, to construction materials, it just isn't going to be able to move forward, and that goes for the US Military as well..........Do you honestly believe that when the Oil companies eventually start doing business with the Iraqi Government, they will not want their OWN Security personnel on the ground, you know , the people they can trust not to fuck them over, because it's not in their nature?

Isn't it quite ironic that it's Private Security that provide the Iraqi Government ministers, and influential businessmen, the protection, that they seek to rid from their country? Are people looking to blame the Security Industry for the State of affairs in Iraq?

As SOTB pointed out the WPPS is a certificate, it most certainly does not make these individuals any better, than those operating with Non DoD/DoS contracts, time on the job, and on the ground operating under different conditions are very bit as good as having a certificate, if not more so.

Fix the broken parts of the industry, get rid of the scheisters who sneak in under the radars who don't have the MOI Permits to work, or the companies who simply are not fulfilling the criteria laid down by the same said Ministry.

As I've stated before Malaki didn't wake up one morning with a brainstorm, and go to Gen. Patraeus and say," I want you to start disarming all the Security contractors in Iraq, unless they're WPPS qualified!!"........sorry dude, but at the end of the day having a certificate in your hands that says your good to go because it's stamped by DoS, does not make you the be all and end all when dealing with Private Security, especially in Iraq, a super dooper black clad ninja it makes you not.

I'm wondering what percentage of MOI approved contracts are not in the hands of DoD/DoS.......a hell of a lot more than I expect that are, I'd take a stab at saying at least 75% are non DoD/DoS related......that's a lot of projects to close down and replace these personnel, if that is the intention?

If it's about giving Iraqi's the work, then perhaps if their own Ministry wasn't involved in the dodgiest acts in Iraq, then things could be better for them, maybe if they started to show that they could be trusted not to sell out their clients, they also ge the chance.......it's not in their nature for many of these Iraqi's, and the ones that do show more trust and respect seem to be Kurds anyway.

[Silverbullet]

Is this driven totally by the host nation?......I highly doubt it, when their own refusal to disarm Militias such as the MM, and the Peshmerga are not imposed.

It's not completely driven by the host nation. That idea shouldn't have been floated since there is no proof behind it. There are dudes who are members of the Iraqi gov't who own security companies that hire non Iraqis' tot run the roads armed.

Like I've said, what makes the WPPS certificate so special that it makes those holders exempt?

I'll have to take exception with you here. No one said they were special. What they are for better or worse is a DOS stand in for a job DOS can't do. They also have a consistent standard and the oversight I spoke of earlier. Asking why they are so special is not advancing your position. I've already discussed why it would be easy for DOS/DOD to standardize a cert that could be used "industry" wide and then provide oversight to ensure that it's being met and maintained.

They could also implement a rule that if the employees screw up then the company gets thrown out of the country. On second thought that wouldn't work since they would have to had thrown out their favorite WPPS company at least 5 times:D

[Argyll 50]

SB, Is WPPS to be the standard ?, that is the question I should have asked, what makes WPPS better in terms of Standardisation over say Ronin SA's , or Armour Groups Phoenix, or the Israeli run type courses?

I know nothing of what is required to go through WPPS, how long it is, but I do know it gets you your secret clearance....

I'm all for standardising the Industry, the problem here is who's standard is the best one?...Is WPPS the best standard to apply to Non American companys?......There are countless Training schools out there, there are so many that it's almost impossible to chose from, and in the end it comes down to Finance.....by all accounts the WPPS program is a superb one, but it's the most expensive, and as SOTB pointed out, it's by no means exempt from having clowns on it

WPPS is also a blanket that keeps contractors from falling foul of the local law, in that it protects the contractor from prosecution, which is both a good thing, and as we seen at xmas, a bad thing as well......

Do you agree or disagree, that American run companys and employees, should all have a certain standard that must be reached, in an effort to standardise the Industry.........and that British, or any Non US Run companys should have their own set standards, which must be similar to USG ones?

What we also need to remember is that this Industry isn't just about Iraq, it's global, and standards and Operational Procedure differ in different Countries, and also that in many cases, being armed is considered a luxury!

Would the guys on DoS/DoD contracts with WPPS under their belts still come to Iraq, or Afghanistan if they were not armed to go about their daily business? If that answer is no, then it's ignorant to think that anyone else would be expected to work under the same, if not at times, a much greater risk?
Would these Diplomats feel fine, if they had to go to Ramadi by vehicle, into the centre of the town, where their PPO's and CPO's were not armed, or with just a sidearm?.....I don't believe they would feel all warm and fuzzy about such a trip.....so why should those contracors clients, not on DoS/DoD backed contracts have to feel any less secure?

[Silverbullet]

What I'm saying is that a good standard implemented and accepted as the "standard" is better than the ongoing issue of who is better than whom or who has higher standards, etc.....

In my opinion 99% of the problem is that there is no accepted standard. This issue is caused by DOS/DOD awarding contracts to start ups with no history of performance as well as awards to companies that employ the lowest common denominator. If the awarding authorities actually ensured that contracts went to the best performers who vetted employees properly, standards would not be an issue.

In my opinion the problems that are known from different companies are a self inflicted wound due to DOS/DOD policies and internal politics. Keep awarding contracts to companies with low standards and then complain about the lack of standards out of the other side of their months.

[Argyll 50]

yep, I agree totally, the monster was self created so to speak!

[SOTB]

AHHH I think it's WPPS(Worldwide Personal Protective Services) and stop calling me an assclownYou're right -- my dyslexia is showing again. BTW, you two weren't the assclowns referenced. You'd actually have to work at it to gain the shit-titling these guys have garnered.I think the cert is a good place to start but by no means an end.Exactly....

[desmor]

First strange no news network have picked up on this issue/story but maybe one of the US based network stations will when their security detail get taken their weapons outta the IZ one day.:D

Interesting stuff reading the opinions supporting and against security contractors operating in Iraq, but in my point of view one thing is certain the campaign in Iraq would not/never have been possible without the security contractors supporting the US defense.

I don't know what other people here have of experiences but i for sure now that i in the past have been on project where we had an excellent co work with the Marines and US Sf units, not to offend the army units course i haven't really worked with them but Marines and the Sf units were always willing to help and seemed to know that we were all in the same boat taking care of each specialty.

I'm now closing up on my third year here on stage and through the last year im over and over getting amassed by US Gi´s as Officers i meet on a weekly basis who confronts me or collages with an attitude (all of us who legally with a signed contract supporting the US Government) that stinks why is that its not me who have contracted me thats the US Government we actually do a job that the United States of America have asked us to do !!!.

If You wanna change it well so be it but then join politic and get in a position to make a change in the way things are run, but guess what there has always been a need for contractors and in the future there will be a even bigger demand on willing and loyal security contractors US as NON US citizens.

Maybe just my opinion i don't know.:confused:

[SOTB]

....in my point of view one thing is certain the campaign in Iraq would not/never have been possible without the security contractors supporting the US defense....Its a WRONG POV, nonetheless you are entitled to it....

[desmor]

I of course meant the reconstruction part which would have been impossible without security contractors to haul a.. around country with workers left and right, and of course not the OIF campaign done by the coalition forces was just reminded the other day by a buddy of mine from here of the way my words were put together hope that should be cleared by now.

[iraqgunz]

So what is the real deal with this weapons shit. Apparently now at Al-Asad the CG is requiring that you have "their" weapons cards. Our guys were promptly disarmed at the gate as well as all of their ammo. It get locked into a conex box. Did I misunderstand something about this? I thought that it did not apply to DoD/ Dos contracts.

[Silverbullet]

What is your boss or PM telling you?

[iraqgunz]

SB,
To be honest not a heck of alot. I don't know if it is being ignored or the info. just isn't filtering down. Like I stated earlier- I was under the impression that it only applied none DoD/ DoS entities. It just seems rather absurd that you need a weapons card and yet there is not clear running system in place to get them.

[Silverbullet]

I understand where you're coming from but if your leadership isn't doing anything about then you have a bigger issue than can be solved in this forum.

For the short term I'd find out what the weapons card that they require at Al-Asad is and get one issued. That would solve your short term problem. It may also assist in the appearance of cooperation when you finally get someone in your chain of cmd to sack up and confront the issue head on.

[Argyll 50]

I'm not sure that the CMC falls directly into the DoD category, although you'd expect it to, seing as the client is the COE, but I never once recieved a weapons card from COE in the 6 months I was there, but my old Kroll one was still valid, the company I'm with now issue temp weapons cards, and from what I can gather, all old MOI issued cards are to be honoured until July and that temp company issued cards are to be treated similarly....

I think this DoD/DoS issue, is more looking towards the WPPS/ROC/GRD stuff, where the client is actually Military personnel, just a wild guess?

It does seem strange you have to have a camp specific weapons card, but it doesn't sound that it' a disadvantage though...Some kind of weapons card is better than nothing at all.....It's like company issued ones, they should be mandatory as well, how many times does false company information get passed onto MP's on FOB's when they fire you up for some reason.....it's all too easy to say you're with company X,Y or Z, when you're really with Company A.......especially if you're in unmarked SUV's.

[iraqgunz]

SB,
I know exactly what you are saying and that has been an issue. We'll see what happens again in a few days.

Argyll,
I would think that it does since they are supposed to be working with the DoD and they are the Army Corps of Engineers and their rep is wearing a uniform. It just seems like are bigger fish to fry than some BS weapons card. At least it would seem like the info. would get passed down better to the companies operating here and then allow a grace period until they unfuck themselves.

[PanaVet]

...it's all too easy to say you're with company X,Y or Z, when you're really with Company A.......especially if you're in unmarked SUV's.

Aren't company names supposed to be on the doors?

[Argyll 50]

They're supposed to be, but I see dozens of unmarked SUV's in and around the Victory area, and the IZ..

Iraqgunz, yeah I hear you, but that being said, the Corp reps I've worked with were civilians, and not military personnel, even though they wore DCU's, the only time I seen a ranked officer was during the COE range quals at Baghdad before we left for the South.....but as I said already, because it was under a DoD contract you would think they would be exempt, from the confiscations, although the weapons cards should still be a requirement irrespective of the company....even if they were DOD/DOS....they too should be accountable to the Iraqi MOI as well.

[Silverbullet]

I think this DoD/DoS issue, is more looking towards the WPPS/ROC/GRD stuff, where the client is actually Military personnel, just a wild guess?


WPPS client is DOS not military.

[BigRed]

An email came out from the ROC about a month ago reference Al Asad weapons cards. Along with the email was an attached document that had columns to fill in serials for M4s and Glocks and who to forward the completed form to. I'm sure if you guys contacted the ROC they could send it out to you again.

[Argyll 50]

SB, thanks for the clarification, I suspected as such, hence why I kind of grouped the 3 with the 2, just wasn't sure which belonged to which.

So Big Red, the Al Asad weapons cards, I take it are for those PSC's who actually work out of, and live on Al Asad, and not card required for transits through, or short stop overs?

[MixedLoad]

Aren't company names supposed to be on the doors?

Thank god this isn't being implemented/enforced.

Terrorist: "Oh...look...there goes company X and they provide security for Y....let's wait for the next company with client Z to come through...they're much more worthy of a target".

[PanaVet]

Thank god this isn't being implemented/enforced.

Terrorist: "Oh...look...there goes company X and they provide security for Y....let's wait for the next company with client Z to come through...they're much more worthy of a target".

It has been mandated and implemented...some are exempt based on their clients. Enforced... not sure how zealously it's pursued.

[Massgrunt]

Every time I see that, I think "there's goes an opportunity for the bad guys to collect intell".

[bellbottommarine]

Wow!... I feel so un-informed. Thank God for these forums. Guess I should crawl out from under my rock a bit more often.

As far as I can tell, no one has heard anything about this here in the South Central. Of course news travels slow to the far reaches of space. haha

In the couple of years I've been here (with several different companies) I've only ever carried an LOA and a "company issued" weapons card.

So how does it all work then, since I am DoD, the contract is DoD, but the company I work for (UK) is NOT DoD?? They must be granted some clemency since they are awarded a DoD contract?? Or it's based on the contract itself, not the company for whom you work?? --Hmm, I think that is the same thing I just said previous.

I always hear the usual line, "its on a need to know basis", and being just a "grunt" I guess I don't need to know, cuz this S**t is confusing the F**k outta me!!... Anyone else??

Sounds like we should all be well informed on this one.

Thanks for the info...Be Safe out there guys.... out!

[bellbottommarine]

Originally Posted by PanaVet
Aren't company names supposed to be on the doors?

Yes, and I'm sure its caused quite a few of our company's casualties recently.

NOT a fan of it.

[BigRed]

Aren't company names supposed to be on the doors?

It's not names anymore, now each company is assigned a number. You don't make your own signs, you buy them from MOI for the low, low price of 150,000 Dinar each, 3x per vehicle. They are not magnets, they are poor quality stickers so you can't swap from car to car.

Thank god this isn't being implemented/enforced.

Unfortunately it is. I already had a problem with it going into the BIAP. The guard said there were already two vehicles from our company inside the garage so we couldn't enter (saw the numbers). After a little talking he relented but it shows people are watching.


So Big Red, the Al Asad weapons cards, I take it are for those PSC's who actually work out of, and live on Al Asad, and not card required for transits through, or short stop overs?

I believe the memo mentioned ALL teams entering the camp would require these weapons cards. Those without them will have to check thier weapons at the gate.

[Argyll 50]

Sounds like insanity, and here's me thinking, that is was AIF who were our enemies in country, I'm all for tightening things up, and bringing legislation, but not at the expense of peoples lives.