We deserve a better standard of political discourse in this country, in my view. It sounds like Mark Mitchell has done some pretty impressive things in his career, including taking on gangs and uncovering war crimes.
Meanwhile, so many people on the left think Saddam should have been left alone, conveniently ignoring the horrible crimes he inflicted on the Iraqi people.
It’s also worth noting that a security contractor is a very different role to a mercenary, and by the nature of his work, it sounds like he was very much the former.
We need better opposition in this country.
Oh for goodness sakes. I Aagree with you. I’m so sick of this one. It’s so lazy. I don’t understand why people don’t look into it.
The irony is that the reality of what he was doing over there has serious implications for having him in government.
He was a defense contractor for a subsidiary of a company that was so corrupt it was subpoena-ed by a US Grand Jury and indicted on fraud charges for stuff it did when he was part of it.
They defrauded the US govt out of billions of dollars. Some of the people on Reddit dug into this years ago, I will never understand why neither the media or the left wing politicians picked up on it.
As far as I know from this story, everything he did was legal. Perhaps unsavory, but nothing illegal as is being suggested by Labour here.
I agree there should be a better standard of discourse from all sides.
Meanwhile, so many people on the left think Saddam should have been left alone, conveniently ignoring the horrible crimes he inflicted on the Iraqi people.
As a lefty, I’ve never heard this nor do I think it. Saddam was a monster, and honestly got what he deserved. I can accept thinking he shouldn’t have been killed, if you are against the death penalty, but is this something people actually think?
I’ve seen a lot of comments online saying the USA overthrew a legitimate government, the Iraq war shouldn’t have happened, etc etc. These people do exist.
I mean you can find just about any point of view online, I don’t think this is a fair representation of the opposition to the Iraq war. People against it were overwhelmingly anti war, not pro Saddam.
The reasons for it were incredibly flimsy, they didn’t find any wmds (except for some of the chemical weapons the US themselves supplied Saddam from when they were actively supporting him, go figure), it led to up to a million deaths, cost literal trillions of dollars (good for ‘security consultants’ though) and destabilised the region and led to ISIS.
Wow, ok. What morons.
I mean, that sounds more like something the hard right would say (supporting a dictator), but regardless it’s dumb as hell.
“appease the dictator” is a surprisingly common view, especially on the left, unfortunately. There’s been a surprising number of people suggest Ukraine cede territory and make a peace deal with Putin, most notably a handful of German politicians, for example.
The only people on the side of Putin are the on the right though. Hell the republicans are blocking aid to Ukraine as we speak in the USA.
That’s so weird
So you heard some people on the internet say it and then decided everybody on the left thinks it?
Looks like she, if not apologizes, at least acknowledges she went too far now. Apparently she also texted an apology, which is a bit lame but better than nothing I suppose.
Isn’t security contractor just management speak for mercenary? A mercenary is someone who fights in an armed conflict for money and isn’t connected to an army. Idk that sounds like what he did from what he’s said about it.
It can be a euphemism for mercenary work, but a mercenary in the true sense is a paid soldier who fights for a country they otherwise have no connection to, like what is happening in Ukraine.
If he’s being honest about what he did, and we have no reason to believe he isn’t, what he did is much more like a security guard or law enforcement, protecting convoys etc, where your role may include killing someone, but it’s not the end goal.
It can be a euphemism for mercenary work, but a mercenary in the true sense is a paid soldier who fights for a country they otherwise have no connection to, like what is happening in Ukraine.
What do you mean “true sense”. That’s not the definition of Mercenary at all. A mercenary is a person who doesn’t belong to a military but fights alongside one for money. Many mercenararies are citizens of the country they fight for.
If he’s being honest about what he did, and we have no reason to believe he isn’t, what he did is much more like a security guard or law enforcement, protecting convoys etc, where your role may include killing someone, but it’s not the end goal.
Why is the willingness to kill people and the killing of people moral, just, and laudable just because you say it wasn’t the end goal? If a person takes a job and he knows he might have to kill people in order to perform that job then he is ready, willing and able to kill people for money. If the job is just trying to increase profits for a multi national then that person is a vile piece of shit.
Do you know for certain he didn’t kill people but only supervised or help others kill people?
As for Saddam when he gassed the Kurds the UN wanted to pass a resolution condemning him but the USA blocked the resolution because he was their ally.
