links about us archives search home
SustainabiliTankSustainabilitank menu graphic
SustainabiliTank

 
 
Follow us on Twitter

 

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 11th, 2011
by Pincas Jawetz (pj@sustainabilitank.info)

We wonder why the following is called a conflict – it seems to be rather an entanglement between various warlords with various ideas on how to use a geographic space that borders with important international waters. Sending US troops and being exposed to potential losses of US manpower never made sense here. Relying on contractors is not a bad idea – these are military for hire.

Following this logic, why does the US have to do the work of US and other National Oil Companies – even as disguised as International Companies? Could they not run their own hired guns for that purpose? Why hire the US government military for this purpose? Look at Iraq and Afghanistan these days? It clearly made sense to remove Saddam Hussein, like it makes sense today to remove Muammar Gaddafi and perhaps Bashar alAssad as well. That could be the job of specialized US National Military units. But after that? Why stay involved? If some company like the Dutch Trading Company or the British India Trading Company of yore want to push their luck, and organize their own military expeditionary forces – let the tea drinkers and the spice users pay for it when they buy those products – let the oil users pay for it when they pull up to the gas pump. Just think of this when reading the following article!

———————

U.S. Relies on Contractors in Somalia Conflict.

from MOGADISHU, Somalia, by  JEFFREY GETTLEMAN, MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC SCHMITT.

Published by The New York Times : August 10, 2011 – in print August 11, 2011.

PLEASE SEE:

 www.nytimes.com/2011/08/11/world/…

Be Sociable, Share!

Leave a comment for this article

###