Drilling for black water

You need Java to see this applet.

Drilling for black water
Post-Game Questions that arise from the Blackwater Hearing of the House Oversight and Government
Reform Committee, first drafted on Oct. 8, 2007, published on Oct. 9, 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last week’s Blackwater Hearing was certainly necessary. And even if it did not reveal the gross negligence that
one might have hoped for, it did raise some questions, that, at least in our mind, warrant further investigation.

These questions are as follows:

A) To the State Department Diplomatic Security Service:

a) Why is it that the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service (SDDSS) thinks that Blackwater will

naturally

be able to

field the necessary number of “highly trained dignitary protection specialists” when the

SDDSS itself

believes that it will take

up to two years to turn an ex-special forces member into a well-trained

dignitary protection

agent. After all, Blackwater too

had to increase its total staff number in a relative short

period of time. And so it is

only reasonable to presume that they too

will not have been able to give each

their newly hired the necessary

preparation that “a highly trained specialist” needs. For

too staggering has

Blackwater’s growth pattern been that

they could nos still have exercised the preparatory diligence that

SDDSS obviously requires.

b) Why is it, that the SDDSS believes that it makes more sense for it to “temporarily” use the service of

private

dignitary

protection companies, when all military and defense experts predict, that the wars of the

future will be in

large part

asymmetric and that, consequently, the threat level for (some) international posts

will likely continue to

be high. After all, the

ongoing globalization of terrorism makes it by no means

unreasonable to conclude that the

need for body guards will

remain high for some time to come. And so it

is surely not certain that the high number

of protection agents that is required

in Iraq will in deed be as

temporary as the SDDSS presumes it to be.

c) Why is it, that the SDDSS believes that local hires are not a possible solution for the Iraqi protection

dilemma.

After all, the

army leadership keeps telling us that the readiness of Iraq’s armed forces is steadily

improving. And

so it is only logical to

presume that there will also be some candidates in the local special

forces that might fulfill

the dignitary protection duties

well. For too valiantly have they already fought side by

side with US troops that one

could now continue to not trust them still.

d) How is it possible, that the SDDSS believes that it is actually possible to in practice adhere to its

escalation of

force policy

when a potential suicide bomber will certainly not wait until all peaceful warning

signals have been

exhausted by the

accompanying guards before he enters the 100-meter protection

perimeter that a dignitary

motorcade prescribes for itself?

e) How is it possible, that SDDSS apparently holds the view, that dignitary protection activities do not have

submit

themselves to the overall

hearts and minds campaign, that the US army is trying to win? After all,

these body guards too will

be perceived

as Americans by the Iraqi population. And so it does not make

sense to measure their behaviour with a

different

stick, than the one that the US military applies. For too

much would one thereby counteract the overall plan, that

one

could now still hope to achieve it.

f) How is it possible the testifying State Department officials cannot remember whether certain Blackwater

incidents have

been internally investigated by the relevant State Department units.

B) To Mr. Prince:

How come that the Blackwater management can in good faith declare that it is providing highly

conscientious and

professional services when the sheer number of its short-term growth is so stunning that

it is next to impossible

for any

company to digest that while maintain orderly and diligent procedures?

C) To Chairman Waxman:

As welcome as this hearing was in the first place, the question remains, how could the Committee Chairman

have

entertained the hope that this hearing would expose the recklessness with which Blackwater

employees go about

their job

in Iraq, if there are no (preferably Iraqi) witnesses at hand that can give vivid

and first-hand accounts of

the effects that

Blackwater activities have on their hearts and minds? After all

written email testimony from

members of the Army is not

enough to clearly illustrate the outrage that the

insensitivity of Blackwater agents

create.

© Landei Selbstverlag, owned by Wilhelm ("Wil") Leonards, Gerolstein, Germany. All rights reserved.

Reminder: Noah denkt™ is a project of Wilhelm ("Wil") Leonards and his Landei Selbstverlag (WL & his LSV). Consequently, all
rights to the texts that have been published under the Noah denkt™brand name are reserved by WL & his LSV.

The commentary and the reasoning that was provided on this page is for informational and/or educational purposes only and it is not
intended to provide tax, legal or investment advice. It should therefore not be construed as an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to
buy, or a recommendation for any security or any issuer by WL & his LSV or its Noah denkt™ Project. In fact, WL & his LSV
encourage the user to understand that he alone is responsible for determining whether any investment, security or strategy is
appropriate or suitable for him. And to leave no doubt as to what this means we urge our user to also note our extended Legal
Notice.

Back to Homepage

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Noah denkt™

Project for Philosophical Evaluations of the Economy

Back to "Politics/IR"- Page