Comments on: You Can’t Handle the Truth

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

LOL! I think I remember the exact same paragraph in The Pentagon's New Map…

By: phil

phil — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I found it at the newsletter for Blackwater USA one of the private security contractor organizations that employs a lot of ex-special ops guys. At their main site I found this interesting description of their operation. Note the last sentence; on the website it is in bold:

BLACKWATER USA IS THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE PRIVATE MILITARY COMPANY IN THE WORLD.

We have established a global presence and provide training and tactical solutions for the 21st century in support of security and peace, and freedom and democracy everywhere.

We customize and execute solutions for our clients to help keep them at the level of readiness required to meet today's law enforcement, homeland security, and national and global security challenges. We continually prove to be more efficient and effective than conventionally managed forces.

Our customers include local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, the Department of Defense, Department of State, and Department of Homeland Security, multi-national corporations, and friendly nations from around the world.

Blackwater is the solution to 4th generation warfare (4GW).

http://www.blackwaterusa.com/

So they are conscious of and selling themselves as a player in 4GW. I'm curious to hear their sales pitch and their ideas on dealing with 4GW threats.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It's nice to see that even "private security contracts" use buzzwords. I think "4GW" for the pscs is like "grid" or "solution" to a major software provider.

A PSC would seem pretty useless in the "Back half" of a 4GW, which obviously is a domain of the "contracting" government.

PSCs would excelt in fast-decision-cycles, as they are less constrianed by bureaucracy, and physcially Isolating the enemy.

I wonder how for one could go to outsourcing an entire war -- the entire five-step penetrate-isolate-subvert-reorient-reharmonize process?

By: Joel Helgeson

Joel Helgeson — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Keep in mind that Blackwater does not conduct offensive operations. They fire only when fired upon. They have the same skill set as our military forces and use their training to teach the military forces of other friendly governments. With the backing of our government resources they can help influence foreign policy without people claiming we are forcing our military might on country X. They can also work for private corporations to help stabilize a foreign government or offer stability in a region to keep supply lines open all without the involvement of the state department.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Joel,

You're right that Blackwater's role is pretty limited right now. I hope that changes [1,2].

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2005/12/23/embracing-defeat-part-iv-embracing-victory.html
[2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2007/07/07/describing-the-military-industrial-sysadmin-complex-how-we-w.html

By: Joel Helgeson

Joel Helgeson — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I can see it changing as the role and capability of gathering field intel has changed. The Government intelligence agencies and their vertical towers of information hoarding can't hold a candle to the lateral connections available today. Who needs gov't intel when you have "Google"?

Operating outside the thumb of the State Department has its advantages. Blackwater et. al. offers huge advantages, especially when getting foreign executives in front of Iraqi officials to structure deals that will help rebuild the economy, working in conjunction with the military who is rebuilding infrastructure and training police forces, launching offensive ops, etc.

I'll be posting a blog post soon on my irritation with intel services.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Joel,

I'm looking forward to the launch of your blog!!!