Why is US Ambassador Ryan Crocker protected by Blackwater and not the military?

[babylonsister]

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/16/1932/

Private US Security Companies Involved in Iraqi Hostilities

US private security companies are getting increasingly involved in military action in Iraq, fighting insurgents, enduring attacks and taking hundreds of casualties that have been sometimes concealed, The Washington Post reported Saturday.0616 03Citing unnamed US and Iraqi officials and company representatives, the newspaper said that while the military has built up troops in Baghdad, the security companies, funded by billions of dollars in US military and State Department contracts, have been engaged in a parallel surge.

They have boosted manpower, added expensive armor and stepped up evasive action as attacks increase, the report said.

One in seven supply convoys protected by private forces has come under attack this year, the paper said, citing previously unreleased statistics.

One security company reported nearly 300 “hostile actions” in the first four months.

The majority of the more than 100 security companies operate outside of Iraqi law, The Post said.

Blackwater USA, a North Carolina firm that protects US Ambassador Ryan Crocker, and several other companies have not applied for Iraqi licenses, according to the report.

more...

[baldguy]

1. Only corporations benefit from the occupation

Its only right that corporations should protect the investment.

[FreakinDJ]

5. BINGO - We have a winner

Where is the profit in using US troops when we have Blackwater

[whistle]

2. Because Blackwater takes their orders from the republican party

[MADem]

3. Because they're better at it, in that they don't have to follow the military ROE

They aren't subject to a Uniform Code, and if they get in any difficulty as a result of their actions, they're morphed into "diplomatic staff" and tossed on an airplane and spirited safely away.

They also don't have to wait on DOD to buy their equipment, they can buy the latest stuff with a State Department line item authorization, not the military issue crap, and they don't have to check foolish blocks in terms of age, weight and so forth. You'd be surprised how many very strong and, for all intents and purposes, fit, people are "out of standards" by military reckoning. Most of the foolish wrestlers you see on the tee vee who can pick someone up and toss them across a gymnasium would be put on the "fat boy" program-- in a peacetime military, certainly.

Also, you don't have to restrict your field of assets to American talent. You can hire from round the world, and there are more than a few people who have some real solid experience working for other agencies, and might not have that blue passport--or the diplomatic one, for that matter.

Lastly, you get what you pay for. When you're paying someone ten times the pay of a enlisted servicemember, at a minimum, you're going to get decent protection. There's that whole "You're fired" possibility, because there's competition for those positions, as the money is spectacular. Also, if you stay out of country long enough, a good chunk of it is TAX FREE....

[Kagemusha]

4. Being a bodyguard is not the same job as being a soldier. Simple as that.

Marines may protect the White House, but the Secret Service serves as bodyguards, not the Marines, for that simple reason.

[FreakinDJ]

6. Blackwater employs MERCENARIES not Bodyguards

thank you for your support

[Kagemusha]

7. Publicly or privately paid, people who protect VIP's are bodyguards.

Or if you like, "security personnel". Yes, everyone wants to call them mercenaries, but that's not on the pay stubs, and I'm trying to be informative. Regular infantry would never be used to protect embassy officials.