private armies for the rich corporations.
just think The Umbrella Corporation in the Resident Evil movies.....that's where we are heading folks!
Private Armies: The Rising of the modern Mercenary
- Thread starter TerraN_EmpirE
- Start date
private armies for the rich corporations.
just think The Umbrella Corporation in the Resident Evil movies.....that's where we are heading folks!
you mean Trump might hire is own PMC?? as in I'm not taking campaign contributions, and I am self funding our military???? LOL sorry Sampan, I saw the header and thought you were forming your own Army my brother???? I thought maybe you and I could go to Cuber and take over for the Castro Bros.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Well, Since I was the one who opened the Thread long ago Brat wouldn't that be me looking to Produce the Sequel to the Bay of Pigs? The Bay Of Pigs, The Squeal Sequel.
So that nailed down.
"
indeed private armies in Corporate Entities and that these Corporations will be owned or at least controlled by a wealthy individual.
This really is to me, the modern face of Feudalism and a very unhealthy turn of events."
Some here would say " SO is that any different?"
Now you could here that and take it jadedly as a comment on the developed national armies. Yet it also works just as well to the 3rd and Failed states, What is a Warlord but just the guy who has got the money and the weapons to keep his men paid to fight his war?
Cigarette smuggling funds Hezbollah
Heroin and Opium fund the Taliban,
FARC funded by Cocaine and Marijuana,
The So called Caliphate funded by Oil,
Each centered around a commander in a Allegiance together funded by there profit making venture.
You call it " The modern Face of Feudalism" I say that's the way the World has frankly always worked to some degree.
Corporation based PMC's raise questions absolutely, Questions of Morality, Judiciary and Ethics.
What if A PMC group engages in war crimes? who prosecutes? Who investigates? What rights does a Accused PMC have in a International Court of Law? What Roles should a PMC be allowed to perform and what should be blocked from them? would a nation looking to save money be allowed to say contract maintenance and operations of there Police, Emergency, Corrections, Intelligence, Ground, Naval, Air, Space, Cyber, nuclear forces? Could a PMC go Nuclear? I mean Dr. Khan Sold Nuclear tech across the World why could a PMC not be contracted to maintain a Deterrence?
Over all though this is not a question of if but when. PMC companies are here and have been for longer than many would like. So how do we deal with them?
First things First, There is not the American IMC not today, Today there is the GLOBAL MIC and fact to face China has PMC's to!
So that nailed down.
"
indeed private armies in Corporate Entities and that these Corporations will be owned or at least controlled by a wealthy individual.
This really is to me, the modern face of Feudalism and a very unhealthy turn of events."
Some here would say " SO is that any different?"
Now you could here that and take it jadedly as a comment on the developed national armies. Yet it also works just as well to the 3rd and Failed states, What is a Warlord but just the guy who has got the money and the weapons to keep his men paid to fight his war?
Cigarette smuggling funds Hezbollah
Heroin and Opium fund the Taliban,
FARC funded by Cocaine and Marijuana,
The So called Caliphate funded by Oil,
Each centered around a commander in a Allegiance together funded by there profit making venture.
You call it " The modern Face of Feudalism" I say that's the way the World has frankly always worked to some degree.
Corporation based PMC's raise questions absolutely, Questions of Morality, Judiciary and Ethics.
What if A PMC group engages in war crimes? who prosecutes? Who investigates? What rights does a Accused PMC have in a International Court of Law? What Roles should a PMC be allowed to perform and what should be blocked from them? would a nation looking to save money be allowed to say contract maintenance and operations of there Police, Emergency, Corrections, Intelligence, Ground, Naval, Air, Space, Cyber, nuclear forces? Could a PMC go Nuclear? I mean Dr. Khan Sold Nuclear tech across the World why could a PMC not be contracted to maintain a Deterrence?
Over all though this is not a question of if but when. PMC companies are here and have been for longer than many would like. So how do we deal with them?
solarz
Brigadier
Terran, I'd say the difference is that sovereign nations are governed by a set of rules. We have the UN for that very purpose. Outside the UN, international relations form a framework by which nations operate.
For example, if country A directly invades country B, then country B can ask for the UN to intervene, or enemies of country A could use this as an excuse to ally with country B.
However, what if country A hires a PMC to start an insurrection in country B? If country A is careful to keep any smoking guns hidden, then the UN's hands are tied, and other countries would similarly be prevented from acting overtly.
So far, PMCs have limited capabilities, as they still need to be based somewhere for supplies and logistics. What if, in the future, they were no longer limited by this? What if a country decides to allow PMCs to operate from their country in exchange for a portion of the revenue they generate, and the commitment to defend that country if attacked?
I think Terrain, that it has always been that way has been the point, but maybe misses the significance, although Solarz and AFB definitely show the way.
Warlords/Feudal Barons take the stage when there is a power vacuum to fill. In weak countries this is the norm and the national ruler is "King of Kings" who depends on the support of the Barons to keep him in power.
Modern Republics are supposed to do away with the need or role for Private Armies and the right to bear military grade arms is a right reserved by the state.
I definitely agree with Solarz with his point about plausible deniability, but this is where the PMC's are simply "Arms Length" companies undertaking actual state policy (overt or covert).
The risk is as AFB states, where suddenly in a very modern developed republic Billionaires (lets call them Oligarchs) start building Private Armies that are only ultimately answerable to them.
As I said, such forces only tend to appear in a power vacuum....
Warlords/Feudal Barons take the stage when there is a power vacuum to fill. In weak countries this is the norm and the national ruler is "King of Kings" who depends on the support of the Barons to keep him in power.
Modern Republics are supposed to do away with the need or role for Private Armies and the right to bear military grade arms is a right reserved by the state.
I definitely agree with Solarz with his point about plausible deniability, but this is where the PMC's are simply "Arms Length" companies undertaking actual state policy (overt or covert).
The risk is as AFB states, where suddenly in a very modern developed republic Billionaires (lets call them Oligarchs) start building Private Armies that are only ultimately answerable to them.
As I said, such forces only tend to appear in a power vacuum....
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Classic feudalism yes, but the same model is the norm in fallen to failed states.
That second part is a very very modern liberal interpretation, As "Military Grade Arms" is a concept that only really emerged in the last century prior to the 1850's with the exception of possibly cannon everything was what we would call dual purpose. and even today nations like Sweden and Israel entrust their citizens enough to allow them to take there weapons home ( perhaps not tanks or howitzers) . yet these are modern Republics. the Objective is the belief that was emphasis by the Quote attributed to Admiral Yamamoto about attacking the US homeland "a Rifle behind every blade of grass." the modern standing army only really emerged in the early 18th century. and even into the modern era many considered "Military grade arms" are still Dual Purpose.
I have yet to see a PMC deploy heavy heavy weapons, however the majority of witnessed PMC's are armed in a manor either Ad hoc from onsite stores or like a well equipped police department, there are exceptions of course but specialized like those who fly aircraft for training and support of air forces who may operate tankers or retired first line fighters. the logistics of shipping and maintaining weapons and equipment is as yet a hurdle for many PMC's, Now that obviously doesn't mean it's not possible in the future.
Heck in a way it already happens in republics all the time. I mean who build the weapons used by the Armies of these nations? Private companies we entrust them to build fix and maintain military grade equipment all the time, Even test it on their own.
Now Private Armies are also not exactly new to republics or history. An American president, ( my Favorite President ) Theodor Roosevelt assembled and lead his rough riders in the Spanish American war. He paid for outfitted and fought with them. and that's just one case.
The Flying Tigers another, The West India company... the list can go on. heck even private space could be classified as a private entity with military technologies under a single Owner.
Again their is nothing here that is really new.the west India Company case in point. A private venture that was created to assert the power of the Royal crown across the globe.
The only new is that this is happening in the modern information age.
solarz
Brigadier
It's not a question that it's not new to the history of mankind, but it is new to the current, post-WW2 world order.
The crux of the matter is, who controls military power? As Mao once said, political power comes from the barrel of a gun. Military power begets political power. As PMCs grow in military power, the amount of political power they can generate for their clients also grows. Will we start seeing billionaires taking over 3rd world countries in the future?
Let's say a Chinese billionaire is being investigated for graft. He flees overseas and still has access to most of his funds. China seeks extradition for whichever country he stays in.
What if said billionaire decides that, instead of living his life as a fugitive, he will hire a PMC to take over a small country? Will the UN intervene in this case? Would it even have a mandate to intervene?
LOL, check out this article:
Last edited:
It's true that mercenaries, private military companies, whatever their name or size have been around for a long time throughout history but the capabilities of modern weaponry make them even more powerful relative to unarmed or poorly armed civilians as well as authorities.
It is akin to how private militaries reporting to business interests with access to state-of-the-art weaponry, including heavy weapons, of the time played a major role in Western colonialism around the world, most peoples and authorities outside of Europe were much less well armed.
The devastating capabilities of even infantry weapons and small arms, the ability to operate clandestinely, the mobility of people and resources, and the advanced baseline societal infrastructure of today means the threat of mercenaries is on the upswing as more potentially stealthy and destructive than ever.
So the always pertinent questions of who do they answer to and what would they do if they were simply answerable to themselves need to be as vigilantly addressed as ever by authorities and the public.
A fresh story on Erik Prince, this time building up aerial mercenary capabilities, illustrates the many questions mercenary activities pose to society and authorities:
Case in point is Ukraine. It was IIRC the oligarch Kolomoiski who was prosecuted and convicted in a London court some years ago ( no Ukrainian court could serve ) for using his private army to force a fellow oligarch ( name forgotten ) to sell him some company.
The same oligarch owned private armies are used to support the Ukrainian army, or the other way round, in fighting in the Donbass.