http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jzixVUdWc9apDuVidRdsSfKyMsOg
2007-10-04 08:30:53 · 23 answers · asked by Page 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Shouldn't they be leaving by now?
Of course the question is only valid if you still consider Iraq a sovereign country-!!??lol
2007-10-04 08:32:14 · update #1
"They are not an army neither US armed forces. They merely present company services and consequently any violation on the land of Iraq should be subject to the Iraqi judiciary."
2007-10-04 08:33:42 · update #2
Sadly, the example we set is to ignore anything democratic that Iraq (or most any other predominantly Muslim nation) tries to employ.
Whether it is their laws, their elections, or even the SHOES they choose to wear, we rudely step on feet, smashing toes with little regard for their desires...
2007-10-04 08:46:44 · answer #1 · answered by outcrop 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
For all intents and purposes the answer is yes. This is due to the fact that Blackwater and other contractors are exempt from prosecution by Iraqi legal authorities. The use of private armies, or mercenaries if you will has always bothered me and this case has been a good example of why the practice should be discontinued by the United States.
2007-10-04 08:44:32 · answer #2 · answered by Bryan 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes it is. Really, truly, exempt. That's why they have gotten away with so much.
Please tell me where we have used a private security force during a war before. There are supposed to be thousands of men over there looking like our guys except for the helmets, and the laws that must be obeyed. When they go and shoot 17 people as they did this weekend, it makes us look like trigger happy lunatics. They have can defend themselves, but even in this country, you go to court if you are charged and you prove it. Many eyewitnesses said they fired first.
2007-10-04 08:36:31 · answer #3 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so I believe that they will still stand trial. If they do not then I would like to know why we have two border guards in jail for shouting an illegal alien drug dealer in the back side and these people could just walk away.
2016-05-21 00:09:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No and they need to be prosecuted in Iraq not in some monkey no justice court here in the USA.
2007-10-04 08:43:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
A report compiled by Democratic staffers for Representative Waxman's Oversight Committee listed 200 incidents involving Blackwater personnel. The report charges that Blackwater employees open fire on insurgents, hitting civilians in the process, and don't stop to check on the wounded but rather keep their vehicles moving. Now I'm not much of a military man but isn't the whole point of an enemy ambush to disable or stop the vehicles so that the occupants can be trapped and killed? And Democrats are complaining that Blackwater refused to commit suicide by stopping their vehicles after a firefight to help with the wounded?
2007-10-04 08:42:31 · answer #6 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 0⤊ 6⤋
Yes. The post-invasion contract was written in such a way that private contractors are immune from prosecution by Iraq. They also do not fall under the UCMJ.
Bush and the neo-cons want all of their minion to be above every law of every land.
2007-10-04 08:34:56 · answer #7 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 6⤊ 3⤋
at the present i think blackwater is not covered by any laws, at least not military law or iraqi law. bush has declared that iraqi law cannot apply to blackwater.
the american way. freedom and democracy.
2007-10-04 08:33:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Apparently so. Like I said we will find out just how much control has over their own country with this one.
2007-10-04 08:55:13 · answer #9 · answered by JF 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Iraq has laws?
2007-10-04 08:34:06 · answer #10 · answered by Incognito 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋