Yes, the Blackwater fighters were in a tough spot, surrounded by what they knew was a hostile population; if they'd been guarding someone in New York when a bomb went off, they wouldn't have fired wildly into a crowd of American civilians. But since that hostile Iraqi population is crucial to our effort in Iraq — not to mention being the people we're supposedly in Iraq to help — maybe Blackwater and the State Department ought to be a little bit more careful about increasing their hostility.not only that, but if blackwater had fired wildly into a crowd of new yorkers the company would be in deep shit, much deeper shit than they are right now. can you imagine the public outcry? especially if it came out that this type of thing has happened before? the government would have no choice but take immediate action, any remaining contracts with the company would be cancelled, there would be arrests (if even there were no legal basis for one, there would be tremendous pressure to make someone pay) erik prince might have spent yesterday in jail rather than testifying before congress. and i don't think my scenario would play out all that much differently if it happened in london or berlin or tokyo instead of new york.
but it didn't happen that way, and it won't. the only reason why is because it took place in baghdad and the victims were iraqi. there's no way to interpret the contrast except that a lot of people don't give a shit about iraqi lives. and that's what the folks in congress who defended blackwater are saying to the rest of the world, including to the iraqis. so why wouldn't they take up arms against the americans and their mercenary allies? who wouldn't under those circumstances? is it any wonder that the use of private contractors in iraq is hurting the u.s.' counter-insurgency efforts?
