What is a Merc?

[George Wallace]

Then again, we do tend to use "mercenary" quite liberally in common language......"He has mercenary business practices."

 

[Jarnhamar]

What really pisses me off about the whole mercenary topic is people making comments about how dishonourable they are and how they have no pride in their country and especially how they only do it for the money.

What world are you living in?
Ever see what happens when a troops pay gets a little screwed up?  Guess what they are more likely to say;

a. Thats alright, I joined the army to protect canada, i dont care about money, to the glory of the queen!
b. Jesus christ i didnt get paid this week! im so screwed i live my life pay check to pay check i need to go see the clerks!

Lots of people join the Canadian Forces for patriotic reasons but trust me, the money is right up there with the reasons.

People making comments and passing judgement on "mercenaries" is in the same boat as them making comments about working along side special forces. Their opinion is formed through word of mouth and the media, not hands on experience.

 

[Britney Spears]

Actually, I DO hold mercenaries in distain.

A mercenary as I define it is someone who serves in the armed forces of a nation PURELY for the purpose of monetary gain, with no regard for any other limiting factors. If the Taliban offered a better pension plan and stock options, and you decide to jump ship, join the Taliban, and fight against your own countrymen then yes, you are deserving of contempt. I believe this is the original reason why mercenaries were and still are held in low esteem. Not sure what any of this has to do with security contractors in Iraq though.

Hey, some people still think Iraq was behind 9/11. People are stupid, whaddyagunna do?

 

[PJ D-Dog]

But then don't the reserves kind of fit into the mercenary description? They get to choose the tasking to take or not to take and they get to choose the contracts and tours.

I really don't think you want to go down that street.  If reservists were mercenaries, they would be getting paid the full regular force wage and then some.  I would caution you to not paint the reserves with that wide "do what you want in uniform" brush.  Talk to reservists before you make general comments about what they can choose.  They are also very limited in what they can't choose to do.  Reservits are limited in what they can and can't do due to the structure in which they are forced to serve.

PJ D-Dog

 

[enfield]

PSD companies are not armies, they are not in Iraq to fight the war, or   conduct offensive operations,   how would employment in a PSD company make you a mercenary?

But they're armed, they kill people, they meet objectives, and they are definitely fighting for one side. They are usually paid by the US, whether the military or State Dept or through US-funded contractors. I would say they are most definitely there to help fight the war. How are they not mercenaries?

Britney; do you hold the Vatican Guard in disdain? Or the Gurkhas? They're mercenaries. I don't think the Gurkhas are fighting for God, Queen Elizabeth, democracy, freedom, or to defend their homeland. They fight for money, and the intangible benefits that come with soldiering.

But again, 'mercenary' isn't a bad thing. It just generally means fighting outside your nation's army.

I think very, very few people fight purely for monetary gain. But, many are willing to go where the monetary gain is greatest to do the same job. Joining the Foreign Legion (or Fijians in the British Army) is not the path to riches on any scale.

 

[paracowboy]

But they're armed,

Because they are security personnel.

they kill people

when they, or their principle, are endangered. Because they are security personnel.

they meet objectives

One objective, actually. To keep their principle alive. Because they are security personnel.

they are definitely fighting for one side

True. Their side. Their principle's side. Because they are security personnel.

whether the military or State Dept or through US-funded contractors

US based contractors, perhaps. Not necessarily US funded or even US sanctioned. But, even this can be a stretch, as there are a number of outfits from other nations than the US. The UK and South Africa, come to mind.

I would say they are most definitely there to help fight the war.

Then, you would be mistaken. Because they are security personnel.
How

are they not mercenaries?

Because they are security personnel.
Try talking to/with some of these guys, and then tell me what they do for a living. I do, and it's enlightening. Entertaining, too.

 

[Britney Spears]

Britney; do you hold the Vatican Guard in disdain? Or the Gurkhas? They're mercenaries. I don't think the Gurkhas are fighting for God, Queen Elizabeth, democracy, freedom, or to defend their homeland. They fight for money, and the intangible benefits that come with soldiering.

Since paracowboy answered the rest of your points for me already......

I should be more clear, The part I find distainful is when one values money more than principles. I don't think you could say that about the Swiss Guard (who are more of a PSD outfit than a real army anyway) or the Gurkhas. What is a Gurkha other than a Nepalese who is trained by the British Army to be  British Soldier? They wouldn't really exist without the Brits, so theyt're really no different than any other Brit Regiment. I think the same for the Foreign Legion. THey may have been mercenaries at one point, but it's not much more than regimental history today, since they have bee institutionalized to the point where they are no different thananother part of the national army. 

 

[Infanteer]

So they're just well armed bodyguards then?  I remember James Davis hashing out a list of definitions in his book.

Anyways, I think we are arguing over semantics here.  I think the arguement is grounded upon the fact that mercenaries (in the traditional Mike Hoare conception), personal security guys, and guys who head to other national forces all have the same thing in common - they are marketing the skill at arms.  Whether it is conducting offensive operations (attacking guerillas on behalf of a client) or defensive operations (running a convoy or protecting your principal), the fact is that they've brought these skills to a market where they are required.  As Enfield said, this isn't a bad thing in itself (some idealists like to think so, but that is their problem); Iraq is a good example of where private "men-at-arms" (hopefully this term won't put peoples backs up) are used in a fairly reactive way.

Of course, to an Iraqi who doesn't like the Americans in his country, these guys are hired foreign civilians running around with guns and protecting officials they don't like at all - so in their eyes, they are mercenaries.  However, we are all dirty kuffars to them anyways....

 

[George Wallace]

Just a side thought:

 

[Infanteer]

A thought about what?

I don't see how propaganda from the Arab/Israeli conflict has anything to do with a topic about mercenaries.  ???

 

[Younghusband]

Here is an interesting set of articles about some of the more famous mercs in the 90's. particulalrly those that worked for EO and Tim Spicer:

http://www.publicintegrity.org/bow/

Happy reading!

 

[Sergeant295]

These in days when heaven was falling,
The hour in which earth's foundations fled,
Followed their mercenary calling,
Took their wages and are dead.

Their shoulders held the sky suspended,
They stood and earth's foundation's stayed,
What God abandoned they defended,
And saved the sum of things for pay.

Whatever we think a merc is, foreign member of the army, French Legion, private security they do a job that sometimes even a professional soldier wont do and I saulte them for it.

 

[BDG.CalgHighrs]

I suppose it would be too simple to define a mercenary as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to money, and a soldier as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to country?

 

[paracowboy]

I suppose it would be too simple to define a mercenary as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to money, and a soldier as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to country?

nah, that don't work. Look at Rhodesia. Yanks, Brits, and Canucks all fought the Communists there, DESPITE all three nations actively working against the Rhodesians.

 

[Infanteer]

I suppose it would be too simple to define a mercenary as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to money, and a soldier as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to country?

Sure doesn't, especially when you consider that many soldiers in the CF don't place their highest loyalty to their country (it may be the money, or it may be to their unit, etc, etc).

 

[BDG.CalgHighrs]

I would argue then that the 'soldier' who places his loyalties to money is in fact a mercenary, and not a very bright one, as there are far better ways to make money.

Rhodesia (late 1979)  is an interesting and complicated subject, but for the sake of arguement I will see if I can get around it by saying that decisions of state i.e. 'intervention' in Rhodesia do not directly bear on the loyalties or motives of the soldiers sent.

 

[Infanteer]

I would argue then that the 'soldier' who places his loyalties to money is in fact a mercenary, and not a very bright one, as there are far better ways to make money.

Ok, but then you've muddied your definition, as mercenaries may exist in their nation's standing armies.

 

[BDG.CalgHighrs]

Ok, but then you've muddied your definition, as mercenaries may exist in their nation's standing armies.

I don't see how. "a mercenary as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to money, and a soldier as a combatant who's highest loyalty is to country?" in no way excludes the possibility of mercenary types, as defined, existing in national armies.

 

[dutchie]

Why try and separate absolutely the term 'soldier' and 'mercenary'? Too me the term mercenary is short for mercenary soldier. The core job is roughly the same (I am referring to true mercs, not PSD guys). The motivations behind their choice of trade, while distinguishing them from 'regular' soldiers, does not change the fact that they are professional 'men-at-arms', the same as you and I.

Guys doing stints in personal protection detail are merely doing a really dangerous body guard job. Does the fact that it is extremely dangerous make them mercs? If they are mercs because of their duties, and not the danger level, then celebrity body guards are mercs by that definition. Obviously, PSD is not mercenary work.

On a side note, my mother is engaged to a former merc. He is a British citizen, was briefly in the Brit paras (I've seen documents from his Brit army pension), and then did some merc work in Africa. He has ties to South Africa (has a house there) as well as Seychelles (another house). I noticed that there are some connections between Brits, South Africa, Seychelles, and various African wars involving mercs. I am pretty sure he's not feeding me lines, as his stories line up with what I know of the Congo conflict, and he certainly wasn't bragging. Interesting stuff, let me tell you. It was kinda strange listening to stories where the UN was the enemy. Talking to him definitely changed my mind about mercenaries. They are not the souless, immoral, greedy, unintelligent animals some would have you believe.

Anyhow, that's my take on it.

 

[paracowboy]

  They are not the souless, immoral, greedy, unintelligent animals some would have you believe.

I've known a few, and I fully agree. Sometimes, in order to do what you know to be Right, you have to break the rules, or go against your own government.