They are associated with the coalition, but that interpreter will not do as much damage as a Blackwater team that shoots up a market place and is then whisked out of the country because they are immune to local laws. Governments can exercise much better control over their armed forces than...
The difference is that they are locals and fall under local laws. They are more like native auxiliary forces, different from foreign mercenaries. They do not represent the coalition as much in the eyes of the locals. When a local working for the coalition does something stupid it does not...
IMO, "contractors" should have no place doing warfighting in a place like Afghanistan. They are mercenaries, pure and simple. Let them drive trucks and do laundry, nothing more than that.
The BIG difference is that those were privateers, not pirates. Privateers operated in wartime and were commissioned by governments. They were pretty much auxiliary naval forces. Pirates were allways blood sucking scum
+1
Show them, through numerous examples, that the life expectancy of anyone going into to the Gulf of Aden or the Red Sea with piracy on their mind will be hours, not day. The only way to end this IMO. If they take their shenanigans on the sea they should be sunk on sigh
Well if they had to follow UK laws why is the UK deposit insurance system not protecting depositors? Icelandic government took over operations in Iceland and UK used counter-terror laws to give assets of the UK subsidiaries to other UK institutions. We may as well agree to disagree, because I...
The UK is on a serious downturn IMO, and might not recover from it. From the various stories I see on-line the PC is out of control, as are their entitlement programs. About 20% of all housing is "Council Housing (Projects)" and their debt is at about the same level as the US, which has over...
If an Icelandic institution is operating in the UK, would it not have to follow UK laws? I still do not see why the government of Iceland should be responsible for business transactions between private institutions and foreigners. People probably got better rates for not having protections...
Let me put it to you like this: Lets say TD or RBC decided to expand their operations south of the border and aggressively grew their business to the point that their business here was only a fraction of their total business. Then due to pervailing US economic conditions they went broke...
Well, PRIVATE companies from Iceland use their strong currency to buy up other PRIVATE institutions in the UK that hold deposits worth 10x Icelands GDP. Now the UK expects the government of Iceland to pay out this deposits and is basically holding a gun to Iceland's head in form of withholding...
If they can do this, why is the US not charging them, at least a nominal sum, for security costs. I heard somewhere that the Iraqi government is sitting on a $80 billion surplus.
From what I read elsewhere, it is the Brits that are fanning this situation. The Icelandic banks that are failing had extensive banking operation in the UK, may times the size of Iceland's GDP(something like 9-10x). When they started going belly up, the government of Iceland decided to...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.