Author Topic: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq  (Read 2210 times)

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« on: November 21, 2008, 10:07:53 AM »
US officials on Thursday told scores of firms offering security in Iraq that their personnel will lose immunity from prosecution under a new US-Iraq security pact due to take effect in January.

The officials told reporters that they briefed delegates from 172 security contractors employing nearly 175,000 Americans, Iraqis and others in Iraq about the new rules under a pact set to replace a UN mandate expiring December 31.

Security firms heard how many rules and procedures for troops and contractors were "rightfully changed as a result of this historic development," the officials told reporters, quoting from a statement they read to the firms.

The firms provide armed escorts and other security measures to US and Iraqi government officials, as well as foreign diplomats and members of non-government organizations like aid groups.

Under the changes, contractors "can no longer expect that they will enjoy the wide ranging immunity from Iraqi law that has been in effect since 2003," when US-led forces invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, according to the statement.

The firms were reminded that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and other Iraqi political leaders have said publicly that "they plan to take the legal steps necessary to remove these immunities at an early date," the statement said.

Contractors "can expect to be fully subject to Iraqi criminal and civil law and to procedures of the Iraqi judicial system," it said, adding their status will be in line with that of contractors in Afghanistan and other countries.

The US embassy in Baghdad will work with the Iraqi government to help ensure that any US government contractor "accused of a crime is treated fairly," the statement said.

The official draft of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which has still to be approved by the Iraqi parliament, has not yet been made public.

A Department of Defense official told reporters that he was not aware of any security firm wishing to leave Iraq over the loss of immunity.

"We have had for months informal discussions," the official said on the condition of anonymity.

"Some of our contractors expressed concerns ... None of them, to my knowledge ... have made the explicit statement if 'I loose immunity, I will walk,'" the official said.

"I would suspect there is a wait and see attitude, to see how this in fact plays out," the official added.

The lifting of immunity was expected since 17 Iraqi civilians died in Baghdad in September last year when guards escorting a diplomatic convoy on behalf of private security firm Blackwater USA opened fire at a crossroads.

The firm says its guards were acting in self-defense.

There are more security contractors than there are US troops, which currently number around 150,000 men and women.

The Defense Department says it employs 163,000 contractors in Iraq, with 17 percent of them US citizens, 49 percent of them Iraqi and the rest from other countries.

The State Department says it employs 5,500 contractors, the vast majority of them US citizens, while the US Agency for International Development employs 4,800 security personnel.



MRDUMPLING

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1190
  • Getbig!
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2008, 10:25:24 AM »
As most of us know Eisenhower(sp?) warned of mercenaries in his farewell speech.  While no doubt a need commodity in this particular situation, diplomatic immunity is a little unneeded.  Things that make you go hmmm...

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2008, 11:00:34 AM »
Yes but many of the PMC's aren't employed just by the US or allies. Many Iraqi companies hire em, many multi-nationals hire em as well. Its the cost of doing business and if Iraq wants Western business they will have to deal with em short term. Bribary and looking the other way will be the norm. Until the security situation improves, they'll be able to do business.

Prince(Blackwater USA) was on Fox talking about the rash of Pirate attacks. He's prepared to do take-downs and go after the pirates. Apparently his phone has been ringing off the hook. Blackwater is SEAL centric and this crap is standard mission for those guys. Anybody here need a job, Blackwater offers a course, then u could hire out to a shipping company as security.
L

Slapper

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4299
  • Vincit qui se vincit
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2008, 05:11:06 AM »
Yes but many of the PMC's aren't employed just by the US or allies. Many Iraqi companies hire em, many multi-nationals hire em as well. Its the cost of doing business and if Iraq wants Western business [...]

They had no choice. Western business invaded them. It's considered an "ocupation" remember?

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2008, 07:29:49 PM »
"occupation"..............who cares.
L

Alex23

  • Guest
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2008, 07:34:52 PM »
"occupation"..............who cares.

How hard would it be to rebuild the pumping stations after nuking the entire region?
http://www.hydra-cell.com/applications/oil-pump.html

Just a question.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2008, 07:41:13 PM »
The oil would glow....might be bad for the cancer count.
L

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2008, 07:57:50 PM »
Isn't Iraq a sovereign nation?

don't they get to make and enforce their own laws?


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2008, 07:59:54 PM »
what happens when the mercenary industry collapses?


Alex23

  • Guest
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2008, 08:02:08 PM »
Isn't Iraq a sovereign nation?
don't they get to make and enforce their own laws?

HAHHAHAHAHAH @ "laws"!!!!!!!!!!!!!


the place has been a anarshit mess for 5000 years... like they can be "sovereign"... oh brother..

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2008, 08:06:08 PM »
HAHHAHAHAHAH @ "laws"!!!!!!!!!!!!!


the place has been a anarshit mess for 5000 years... like they can be "sovereign"... oh brother..

they seem to think they are

I wonder how soon we'll have to re-invade to protect them from themselves

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2008, 08:17:26 PM »

Iraq told: Keep US troops or face martial law

Iraq's defense minister Abdul Qadir Muhammed Jassim threatened to declare a state of emergency if Iraq's parliament refused to sign an accord allowing US troops to stay in the country for three more years.

His rhetoric was eerily in tune with Bush Administration officials' comments on domestic security and Iran, echoing language used by the Administration to bolster support for the Iraq war.

If the US withdraws, he said, "we shall wait for a strike against us, in our midst." He added that foreign intelligence services may be attempting to infiltrate Iraqi affairs -- a shot at Iran -- an identical charge made by US officials.

A state of emergency could allow Iraq's government to dissolve parliament.

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2008, 11:19:38 PM »
HAHHAHAHAHAH @ "laws"!!!!!!!!!!!!!


the place has been a anarshit mess for 5000 years... like they can be "sovereign"... oh brother..

Yes but they were better off before the invasion.

Dan-O

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9729
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2008, 11:24:18 PM »
Yes but they were better off before the invasion.

Oh brother.  Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Kurds Saddam slaughtered.

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2008, 11:26:00 PM »
Read the link bozo and stop fooling yourself - your country has seriously fucked up Iraq open your eyes and accept it.

http://www.unhcr.org/iraq.html

Dan-O

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9729
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2008, 11:36:05 PM »
Read the link bozo and stop fooling yourself - your country has seriously fucked up Iraq open your eyes and accept it.

http://www.unhcr.org/iraq.html

Here's a link right back atcha, "bozo"...  and this was from 2003...  does this sound like a place you'd like to live?  Oh it was so peaceful and idyllic back in the old days.  Whatever.

http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/19675.htm

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2008, 11:40:38 PM »
I see so the fact that there a "greater" number of people suffering now is OK because Saddam was a bad guy anyway so you guys can do just what you like.

Ok I've got it now.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #17 on: November 24, 2008, 05:59:57 AM »
we didn't go there to ease anyone's suffering

we went there as a means to siphon money from the US Treasury into the coffers of private companies who were cozy with the Bush Crime Family

no wait, I mean because Saddam had WMD's and was about to launch at any moment

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2008, 04:56:18 PM »
we didn't go there to ease anyone's suffering

we went there as a means to siphon money from the US Treasury into the coffers of private companies who were cozy with the Bush Crime Family

no wait, I mean because Saddam had WMD's and was about to launch at any moment

Yes that's what I always felt - but some of these neo-con supporters are delusional and actually believe the "company line".

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #19 on: November 25, 2008, 07:08:32 AM »
Unlike most democrats.
Most republicans don't see a conspiracy around every tree.

By almost every measurable standard Iraq is better off now.
Z

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2008, 07:16:53 AM »
Unlike most democrats.
Most republicans don't see a conspiracy around every tree.

By almost every measurable standard Iraq is better off now.

you could be right but if we were given the actual price upfront would we still have chosen to "purchase", especially given that it the sales pitch was a "bait and switch" job from the start

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #21 on: November 25, 2008, 08:13:04 AM »
you could be right but if we were given the actual price upfront would we still have chosen to "purchase", especially given that it the sales pitch was a "bait and switch" job from the start

The biggest problem I have had with the whole thing is that Iraq has not been paying its share.

The whole point of many of the programs set up after the invasion were to ensure that Iraq could help pay for reconstruction.

This hasn't happened.
Z

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2008, 08:26:45 AM »
The biggest problem I have had with the whole thing is that Iraq has not been paying its share.

The whole point of many of the programs set up after the invasion were to ensure that Iraq could help pay for reconstruction.

This hasn't happened.

The oil revenues were supposed to pay for the whole thing.

Instead it's bleeding us dry and they have a fucking budget surplus


powerpack

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3166
  • Time to get Buck wild!
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2008, 10:49:14 PM »
what happens when the mercenary industry collapses?


Second oldest profession in the world............ so it wont  :)
There is always a dirty little war some where

Slapper

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4299
  • Vincit qui se vincit
Re: US: Security firms told they lose immunity in Iraq
« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2008, 07:53:19 AM »
Oh brother.  Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Kurds Saddam slaughtered.

Or the more than 1 million Iraqui souls that WE killed. Oh brother, it's not like we give a shit about the Kurds now (who are still Iraquis by the way). And the deaths were not in the hundreds of thousands, it was an ESTIMATE between 100,000 and 175,000 thousand Kurds. Moreover, during the Iran-Iraq war, the local Kurdish government, via it's militias, made the terrible mistake of siding with the enemy, Iran, and allowing its territory to be used by the Iranians. Saddam, who was no Prince of Peace himself, paid back by attacking the Kurdish non-militant population in the bordering areas of Kurdistan.

By this I'm not trying to somehow sound as though I'm trying to morally diffuse a genocide: it was a genocide. The problem is that, unlike our motives, which seem to border the utmost stupidity, and within a belicous environment, there was a definite cause-effect/action-reaction type of response from SH.