Blackwater: Why Is It So Hard to Have a Conversation About the Non-Ambiguous Problems We Face?

Side note: I wrote this piece over the summer while interning @ Fox News Channel, after an argument with my superior about doing a story on a NYTimes piece concerning the plight of military contractors who don't have access to health services upon their return from Iraq, but do have the same mental health problems our soldiers come home with. I was angry (still am, by the way) that these types of stories don't make broadcast news "because they [the contractors] choose freely to go over there...and they make plenty of money." So I wrote about it, and I'll keep writing about it.

I'm a strong believer in the adage 'it is what it is.' However, there is little adherence to such logic in the mainstream media today, as news stories and pundits ceaselessly label and report issues in the simplest possible frame: Republican v. Democrat. Highly important stories (that contain highly nuanced context) are whittled down until they're barely recognizable; apparently, American minds lack any sort of capacity to take the real stories in. Hence the realities and inaccuracies of TV News.

American contractors continue to enter into the chaotic situations in Iraq and Afghanistan by the thousands, yet, to paraphrase an entire industry's attitude, 'that's the contractors choice - we can't debate that.' But that's where they're wrong - for some people, signing onto potentially deadly contracts with companies like Blackwater is more of a last-ditch option than a free choice. "He was divorced but continued to support his ex-wife and two children. His mother says he took the job with Blackwater because the company offered short-term two-month contracts, and Scott viewed it as an opportunity to turn his life around. He said, 'I'm gonna go over there, make some money, maybe make a difference. I'll only be away from my kids for a couple of months. That's why I chose Blackwater,' she recalls." (excerpt from Jeremy Scahill's article in The Nation, "Blood Is Thicker Than Blackwater")

That brings me to one of the leading stories in the NYT today, which reads, "Contractors Back From Iraq Suffer Trauma From Battle." An apolitical story, right? Wrong. Anything that criticizes Blackwater and other sore subjects for Repubs and/or Dems in Congress is a sore subject for everyone, it seems.

But what's the real issue here? The mental and physical health of men and women serving our country, albeit voluntarily, is in decline; yet, no one wants to raise the issue but a "liberal-leaning" magazine.

This kind of rhetoric (the kind that aims to label one network or another 'liberal' and 'conservative' is hurting us, the citizens and consumers of news sources, and not hurting a political party or media executive. Until we stop thinking in terms of us v. them, and start analyzing pressing issues in terms of just us (i.e. citizens of the USA), we will never elect the kinds of leaders who will actually get things done.

Nothing is more unAmerican than unrestrained self-interest, especially when money runs all.

Did our Founding Fathers envision a country whose leaders would constantly look towards the next election season? Or did they envision a democratic government? One that would take its job seriously, and make thoughtful decisions on behalf of voters that would actually benefit them?

Comments

[Hoosier84]

Ms. Sere makes solid points - and contractors are not new to operations in conflict and post-conflict situations. The United States had some 80,000 of them in Vietnam, and in Bosnia there were more contractors than soldiers - this is nothing new.

There is insurance for contractors providing services to the U.S. government - DBA or Defense Base Act insurance. And yes, there is a lot that could be improved.

But as to the other commenters here – please keep in mind that it is private firms that underpin not just U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also UN and African Union peace operations in Haiti, the Congo, Darfur and everywhere else we have international operations. Demanding that the enormous skills and resources of the private sector *not* be utilized would undermine international operations globally and frankly make UN humanitarian missions impossible.

Having support networks and programs for contractors who risk their lives and health to serve in conflict and post-conflict environments makes sense.

-Doug Brooks
IPOA
www.IPOAonline.org

[DemandTruth]

As far as the us vs. them argument, you must not be paying attention as all our Democratic congressmen & women bend over backward to try to compromise with the Republicans who won't let them get ANYTHING done! You must have missed the last many years in Congress when the Republicans in charge steamrollered the Democrats and decided to rule by the majority of the majority. (Meaning - we don't want to hear anything from you and we won't listen to you, so you might as well take this session off)

You must have missed it when right after 9/11 the entire nation rallied around GW Bushco and accepted them as our leaders, giving them the benefit of the doubt until they started lying to us to drag us into a war of choice.

Maybe you should spout your lecture about national unity to the people who cry TREASON, TRAITOR, TERRORIST ENABLER at everyone who dares disagree with them or demands the truth from this regressive right administration (and that includes "our" Mr. Deciderer bashing the Democrats and also me by association in every speech he's given since he was appointed in 2000).

And that's before we get to wedge issues like gay rights and a bible in every classroom.

[Iownpeterbilt]

It has been reported that Ms Pelosi met with a group of people who apparently convinced her not to ROCK the DAMN BOAT. aformentioned meeting took place shortly after the last election.........

[NewArtz]

I think the greatest quote of the 20th century may well be Walt Kelly's Pogo's "We have met the enemy, and he is us." If we heeded this wisdom, we'd recognize that the responsibility for the people controlling power rests with just us. If we don't use the power we each have to control the overwhelming power that others have to steal our power, we will lose what little power we actually did have.
Our freedom only gives us the right to work to maintain itself. If our leaders, our press, our culture and our own minds accept facism, then fascism will see to it that any choice we may have had in the matter will evaporate into the ethereal atmosphere of an ideal of freedom that never worked.

[mommadona]

Well said.

[oldpotsmuggler]

Have you ever wanted to ask The Founding Fathers questions like: (1) What mechanism in the Constitution you wrote did you design to be powerful enough to control the propensity of massively wealthy multi-national corporations to buy as large a piece of the U.S. government as each could afford? and (2) What did you envision as the primary limitation on a President who glories in the bloodshed of and by our military, who throws our power at the rest of the planet as a challenge, who uses deceit shamelessly in order to assert control, and who exhibits utter disdain for any and all persons that voice any element of dissent?

Do you think that they would answer things like “checks and balances”, and “impeachment”? Or would they be more inclined to say “What the hell is a multi-national corporation? We planned for our world, and what we could envision it becoming, and we figured that future generations would accept the same responsibility to govern themselves well and intelligently as we did. We took several shots before getting it right, but we never pretended that we had it right for all time and every circumstance.”

I mean clearly these were some sharp guys with their heads in the right place. But, let’s face it, the odds that a Constitution that is over two hundred years old and that was written entirely by rich, middle aged, white men is the best we can do for ourselves are not very good. In fact it’s not a stretch to look at any number of things that Bushco does and say that exactly the reason we have the problem we do is because we have a system, including our present Constitution, that is simply not capable of keeping these new age power thieves under control.

We, The People, clearly have no effective way of ensuring that our will controls the fate of our nation right now, and have no other way to correct this situation than to do the heavy lifting entailed in convening and implementing The Second American Constitutional Convention.

[munkeyfuk]

They might know what a corporation is but they would have a collective shit-fit if they knew corporations had "rights" like private citizens, but without any responsibilities or accountability AND were allowed to conduct business at the EXPENSE of and to the DETRIMENT of the American citizenry.
I think they might have a problem with that part of our "Corpocracy".

[mommadona]

Did our Founding Fathers envision a land where PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTORS were the PARALLEL ARMY for a bunch of rightwingnuts intent on a POLITICAL COUP?

You BET they did.

And THAT'S why Blackwater, et al are the EXACT OPPOSITE of what America is all about.

BUSHCO will be using Blackwater, et al in the near future in our very own country.

They tried it out in New Orleans. They almost got away with it until the "Ragin Cajun" General came to call

"PUT THOSE ARMS DOWN. PUT THOSE ARMS DOWN NOW!"

SHUT BLACKWATER DOWN NOW.
First priority:
REMOVE SEN. LINDSAY GRAHAM.
REMOVE REP. DUNCAN HUNTER
ARREST GEORGE SHULTZ
ARREST JAMES BAKER III
and finally - to remove all the "finances"

SHUT DOWN THE ATLANTA NATIONAL GOLF CLUB.