5
5
0
Mercenaries have been around for thousands of years. They have been used and extolled by some leaders and condemned and decried by others.
At their best they offer deniability, they offer loyalty, they offer competence.
At their worst they mask atrocities, they betray employers, they are second-rate.
On net are mercenaries a good thing? Do they offer a necessary gray area?
Are they bad? Diminishing accountability and threatening freedom and liberty?
If you have experience feel free to weigh in, if not please read this excellent article from the Atlantic:
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/03/return-of-the-mercenary/388616/
Or this absolutely outstanding book:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Profession-Thriller-Steven-Pressfield/dp/ [login to see]
Then provide thoughts.
At their best they offer deniability, they offer loyalty, they offer competence.
At their worst they mask atrocities, they betray employers, they are second-rate.
On net are mercenaries a good thing? Do they offer a necessary gray area?
Are they bad? Diminishing accountability and threatening freedom and liberty?
If you have experience feel free to weigh in, if not please read this excellent article from the Atlantic:
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/03/return-of-the-mercenary/388616/
Or this absolutely outstanding book:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Profession-Thriller-Steven-Pressfield/dp/ [login to see]
Then provide thoughts.
Posted in these groups: 
Professionalism
Politics
Professionalism Politics
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 33
1
1
0
I've seen examples of both good and bad contractors/mercenaries. Attached is a good example of one of the worst. They were suspected of having ties to money launderers and drug traffickers...
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/a-colombian-merc-firm-was-the-pentagon-s-shadiest-afghanistan-contractor-38be49b01da8
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/a-colombian-merc-firm-was-the-pentagon-s-shadiest-afghanistan-contractor-38be49b01da8
A Colombian Merc Firm Was the Pentagon’s Shadiest Afghanistan Contractor — War Is Boring
The U.S. military let an allegedly mobbed-up military company take American money … and sensitive information
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Given limited off-the-cuff recall of my memory I can only think of a few "renowned" mercenaries. Roman auxiliaries (particularly Thracians) and the complementary forces of Hannibal.
More recently the Swiss in service to the French during the Napoleanic era.
Arguably much of the Middle Ages was mercenary warfare until the emergence of nation states.
The bad: German (Hessian) mercenaries during the Revolutionary War. The local/proxy wars in Africa.
More recently the Swiss in service to the French during the Napoleanic era.
Arguably much of the Middle Ages was mercenary warfare until the emergence of nation states.
The bad: German (Hessian) mercenaries during the Revolutionary War. The local/proxy wars in Africa.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
CPT (Join to see) If you look hard enough I'm confident you'll find them in the margins of every war throughout history. What's your overall assessment?
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Not the books I've read, but an interesting article nonetheless. There is almost a required niche role for mercenaries most campaigns simply due to the time delay required to train up a sovereign military force for initial small incursions and discrete operations which history has shown are more publicized by normal Soldiers/Sailors/Marines/Airmen than the professional mercenary.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I'll let someone much more qualified speak for me:
"I say, therefore, that the arms with which a prince defends his state are either his own, or they are mercenaries, auxiliaries, or mixed. Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy." Niccolo Machiavelli.
The bottom line is they are the worst of ways. They do what they do for money. The ones we deal with in the wars in which we have employed them are generally not going to turn for money, because they fight fundamentalists who are xenophobic with no chance of being swayed by giving coin. In a "regular" conflict, I'd show much more distain for them due to their reliance on a contract versus allegiance. Modern mercs are much different that what Machiavelli dealt with, but in the course of politics and war, I'd prefer to deal with Soldiers in my own Army who are equipped and trained well, who have sworn an oath, and who you have something deeper connecting them than money and the fight at hand.
"I say, therefore, that the arms with which a prince defends his state are either his own, or they are mercenaries, auxiliaries, or mixed. Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy." Niccolo Machiavelli.
The bottom line is they are the worst of ways. They do what they do for money. The ones we deal with in the wars in which we have employed them are generally not going to turn for money, because they fight fundamentalists who are xenophobic with no chance of being swayed by giving coin. In a "regular" conflict, I'd show much more distain for them due to their reliance on a contract versus allegiance. Modern mercs are much different that what Machiavelli dealt with, but in the course of politics and war, I'd prefer to deal with Soldiers in my own Army who are equipped and trained well, who have sworn an oath, and who you have something deeper connecting them than money and the fight at hand.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
One thing to consider is that reputation is essential for the financial success of a mercenary unit (which is the ultimate goal). In order to guarantee future business, mercs have to show that they are not only competent but trustworthy. So they may not have sworn an oath like us Regulars, but if they have not shown that they can be trusted, they are not going to be in business for very long.
(1)
(0)
SSG Michael Underwood
I always have a sick feeling when I see a hired gun working for us. I get war, something that should never have to happen but justifiably is needed at times. A service member doing his job, taking a life or giving it if necessary. A mercenary killing someone is pretty much murder. If the action is something the civilian or military command is requiring then send in a military force. Perhaps it is a naive point of view.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
It depends on the decade.
In the 70-80s they were classified as bad and dark operators.
In 2000 they became contractors and the government openly used them and condoned such use.
They do not operate under the ucmj so depends on the action of the moment.
In the 70-80s they were classified as bad and dark operators.
In 2000 they became contractors and the government openly used them and condoned such use.
They do not operate under the ucmj so depends on the action of the moment.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SGT Joe Sabedra Lots of people have been going for the "it depends on the employer" answer. I would argue all eras have their "white gray and black" contractor/mercenaries.
(1)
(0)
SGT Joe Sabedra
It doesn't depend on the employer.
History is written by the Victor.
It's an opinion based on the times.
Snipers are held in high regard.
In Vietnam they were portrayed as dirty fighters.
As we grow and live through times our public opinion changes.
In years to come they may be looked down on again.
History is written by the Victor.
It's an opinion based on the times.
Snipers are held in high regard.
In Vietnam they were portrayed as dirty fighters.
As we grow and live through times our public opinion changes.
In years to come they may be looked down on again.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is a real can of worms! It all depends on who is running the show. Like Blackwater, recently, they got into big trouble because of loose cannons . With Military Operations, we know who the leaders are but with Private Armies, God only knows. I have utilized, sub-contracted, several of these so called mercenaries and I've always had retired or former Military personal calling the shots. All I know is that some of these so called "guns for hire" guys can be very difficult to keep them in check. It's like a "catch 22" situation. Make sure you know who you are dealing with because you can get caught up into something that you will be sorry for. One thing for sure, there is a whole boat load of money out there to make, but you are responsible for everything that everyone does under your Company's Flag.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
Sgt David G Duchesneau Great input from personal experience. I'd be interested in even more of your input and thoughts on the topic. How does someone close to the industry differentiate between the functions of logistics, communications, security , investigations, defense and offense?
What do you think of the article (the author comes from a background in Private Military Contracting)? How do his opinions compare to yours?
What do you think of the article (the author comes from a background in Private Military Contracting)? How do his opinions compare to yours?
(0)
(0)
Sgt David G Duchesneau
All I can talk about is what we have done and what we do. No way in hell does my Company and what we do compare to these big Companies like DynCorp and Blackwater. When I fist opened our Company back in 1991, I was foolish enough to think that we could go after some of these US Government Contracts and I quickly learned that we could not even compete with these giants. Hell, their founders and Board of Directors are either X government officials or retired high ranking military. But over the years, we were able to get involved on a much smaller scale. First, as far as the article, the author was a private contractor and his main objective was to provide a service to clients and make money for his employers. The more money he made for them, the more money he made, and let me tell you, there is so much money that can be made if you have the resources and contacts. which they did and still do. I totally agree with his comments and views on Private Armies and Mercenaries and the bottom line , it's all about making money. These types of Companies are here to stay. It is just the nature of the beast and it falls under "supply and demand." As long as there is a supplier, Governments and 3rd World Countries that have problems, these private armies will be in demand. Depending on how long the deployment is, the more money they make. I had one of our guys who wanted to go over to Iraq , which he did, and he made so much money, tax free, that he was set for life. It has been my experience that one of the biggest problems that we have encountered is "egos." Everybody has an ego and some of the personnel that we have used in the past just did not work out. Some of these people are "legends in their own mind" and think that they have too much knowledge and experience to take orders from any body. Another problem that we have experienced is personalities. Some people, no matter how exceptional they may appear to be, just cannot get along with others. I have a rolodex of over 250 resumes that we maintain if we are called upon to assist in any emergencies or disasters. By using these contacts that we keep on file, we can deploy as many people, men and women, that are needed anywhere in the World. In the past, we have sent teams made up of former Military and Law Enforcement, to various parts of this Country and abroad. My Associates and I have had two, four man teams made up mostly of former military personnel, to the Somalia Straights performing Security Details for a client who was involved in the Shipping Industry. After the earth quake in Haiti, we sent another team there to assist as Armed Security. We have also deployed over thirty personnel to New Orleans after Katrina hit. Everyone on our details were armed and were mostly veterans of various ranks. But everyone knows, that works with us on these details, what and who the Chain of Command is! When working these types of details, our personnel are loyal to one thing, the paycheck and they all know that if they get out of line and do not do what they are told, they are going home. And once the word gets out about anyone who is a trouble maker, they are hard pressed to get hired by any other Firm. And to answer your other question, Captain, we do our own backgrounds and investigations on everyone who is a sub-contractor working with us. We have our own Communications, we are the security and we can deploy anywhere within a forty-eight hour window. And by the way, every bit of the cost is passed on to the client and I can also tell you that before they sign a Contract for Services, that they do pay a hefty retainer, including one months pay and per diem, per man/women on that detail. One side note, I was recently contacted by a well know celebrity who is going on a concert tour. He asked if we would consider doing all of his Security while he is on tour. I asked him who he has for security and I told him that we would consider providing him with security as long as he terminates his current security detail, in other words, get rid of his "knuckle draggers!"
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Merc's have been around since there have been warriors. The only good or bad is in the way they are managed. Those who hire them are their guiding force, if that force is led towards bad, that is the way it will end up. So, the Mercenaries have potential for both.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SFC Charles S. A weapon is not inherently good or bad: well put. Similarly people who wield force are not inherently good or bad, but are morally guided by their leadership. many people would make arguments that a guiding code has to arise out of a loyalty to nation (like Machiavelli) some challenge that in interesting ways (like the author of the referenced article and book).
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Coming from my vast experience (zilch) I can authoritatively state that a good mercenary can be bad and a bad mercenary can be good. As for whether their existence is good or bad that would be determined by which side of the conflict was looking at them.
King John of Evil Fame liked them a lot.
King John of Evil Fame liked them a lot.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
PO3 (Join to see) A clever turn of phrase, kudos. Perspective is indeed important. What did you think of the article?
(0)
(0)
PO3 (Join to see)
Capt Richard I P. i think the article did a good job of highlighting the pros and cons of a nation state utilizing PFC's in the modern era and in the years to come I don't see them fading away again but will adapt their strategies to fit the market. I personally don't agree with the traditional mercenary role but I see the usefulness in PmC's for security roles and training missions. Fighting pitched battles not so much. Sorry I'm on my phone and it's hard to type a decent response!
(1)
(0)
PO3 (Join to see)
Again, on my phone so as usual I have errors I can't edit. Insert PMC in place of PFC where appropriate! Sorry
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
How about more of a necessity, companies are out there specialized in doing things (normally at night), "things that don't really happen but that needed to happen".....
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
CSM Michael J. Uhlig I think that's a fair point. I met some of these deniable types of guys on my travels, they seemed like good dudes doing things that needed to be done, to be fair they were working for a governmental agency just doing security at the moment I met them and were all form USMIL special guys.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google