Hired Guns For Corporate Freedom
On Sunday, July 18, 2004, The History Channel ran a show which caused a lot of comment this morning among my Orange County (CA) Republican co-workers. They were amazed and impressed, and they found the programming to be favorable to their interests. And they missed the point entirely.
So what was this program that caused all this commotion among these rabid Rush Limbaugh listerners?
Once called mercenaries, highly trained killers have offered their deadly services for a price--from ancient Rome to the War on Terror.
Today, they've marched from the back pages of Soldier of Fortune to form vast corporations with the power of the most advanced militaries. The payday for these private soldiers has reached $100-billion annually!
Unregulated by governing forces, they wage war for those who can afford it. Find out if they are the future of conflict resolution in our 2-hour special.
A typical comment by a viewer?
"It only took 60 guys to take care of 1500 insurgents!"
All I could think of is that these people would kiss the toes (and maybe other body parts) of these macho killing machines in fawning wonderment at their exercise of raw power - something they themselves have naught.
Might Makes Right. What else can you call this attitude of awed admiration of those who mercilessly kill for corporate gain? There is no cause, no defense of loved ones nor of a nation.
I have not seen this show, but as it was described to me, these corporate militarists were sent in to 'recover' an oil facility in Western Africa (no one could tell me which country it was in) from 'insurgents' because the local government 'couldn't' accomplish this. Then, once the facility was in 'friendly' hands, these men then went on a 'revenge rampage', killing 'those who harmed our friends'.
So here they have appointed themselves judge, jury, and executioners - all without any oversight by any national or international body. These vigilantes answer to no one but their corporate bosses - he who signs the checks and makes their rules of engagement.
I tried to make the point to one of these war groupies that if his landlord decided that he was going to evict him from his apartment because he was going to level the entire block and erect luxury condominiums for millionaires, and he wasn't going to take no for an answer, and he hired these guys to do the evictions, what good would his 9mm do him? If these guys could take on odds of 25-to1 against and still win, what chance would he have?
As the show asks, is this the future of disputes? Are we to believe that the future is going to abandon respect for law and the orderly resolution of differences in favor of the fast and lethal quick fix?
Certainly, if left to the big corporate interests as represented by those who back BushCo, this is easier than allowing lawyers to debate the merits of each side's case while millions in profit are lost waiting for a decision to be reached. And what if such a case was lost? Is that to be deemed just cause to use militaristic aggression to get what they were after anyway, instead of acceptance of the decision - to 'pay them back' for winning?
We claim to be civilized, yet we utilize the most barbaric methods to get our way should things not go as we wish. We want law and order, but only for everyone else. We want swift and harsh punishment for everyone who transgresses against us, but for ourselves, we seek understanding and 'justice' when we are accused of transgression.
We are such hypocrites. Are we to claim to be Christians and not to heed the words of Christ when he says to offer the other cheek when we are smote?
I remain puzzled as to how anyone can be so impressed with such negativity! We decry similar activities by gangs and terrorists, but is the fact that they are not corporate funded or sponsored (that we know of) the differential between angry admonition and astonished adoration? Is the fact that mercenaries get paid $100 BILLION annually to perform acts that earn Al Qaeda approbation for no monetary reward what makes these hired guns respectable and Osama's operatives reviled?
I'm sure you all have an opinion, so please share.
Copyrighted source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.