That seems extremely unlikely to me, but it got me thinking about what this company that never does anything without a reason might be up to. Here's what occurred to me as a possible interpretation:
The U.N. mandate that makes the U.S. invasion and continued occupation of Iraq "legitimate" in terms of international law, if in no other, expires at the end of the year.
For months, the Iraqi parliament and U.S. negotiators have been working to try to hammer out an agreement or contract between the two governments for what happens at the end of that time -- a document that "legitimizes" continued U.S. presence there. (For anyone who's been following the story of that negotiation, Maliki's public statement about timed withdrawal of U.S. forces was very old news, indeed.)
After much posturing by both the Suni and Shiite members, including walkouts and threats of disbanding parliament and throwing the whole country back into the chaos that preceded the Iraqi election, it appears that there are two items which both major Iraqi factions agree are non-negotiable: 1) the timed (subject to conditions "on the ground") withdrawal of U.S. troops, and 2) under absolutely no circumstances will there be amnesty for actions (atrocities) committed by private contractors in Iraq.
The parliament and the U.S. are still miles apart on reaching a final agreement, and in fact may not, presenting an even more interesting set of circumstances for the U.S. administration, but it now appears clear that the two items above are set in stone from the Iraqi point of view.
If I were Blackwater and I knew that, I'd be making noises about getting out of the security business, too. I'd be setting the stage for telling the DOD that business considerations make it impossible for us to continue in that line of business; sorry, but the contract's canceled; here's a little of your money back; thanks for the good time -- and airlifting my guys out of there in the dark of night before they're all rounded up in some kind of war crimes proceeding.
No one (except Bushco) is more hated by the Iraqi people than the Blackwater mercenaries, and now that the end of the occupation appears near, they want their pound of flesh! And while I'd rather give them Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, et. al., (and I'd throw in Wm Kristol and some of the other neocon cheerleaders for free), it's hard to find fault with their sentiments.
Much has been said about where U.S. troops would be without Blackwater, and it's possible that the out-of-business noise is a threat to Bushco to harden U.S. dedication to an agreement that includes Blackwater amnesty.
Or not. Everything I've suggested here may be nothing more than me farting in the bathtub, but it seemed worth throwing the suggestion out there.
For months, the Iraqi parliament and U.S. negotiators have been working to try to hammer out an agreement or contract between the two governments for what happens at the end of that time -- a document that "legitimizes" continued U.S. presence there. (For anyone who's been following the story of that negotiation, Maliki's public statement about timed withdrawal of U.S. forces was very old news, indeed.)
After much posturing by both the Suni and Shiite members, including walkouts and threats of disbanding parliament and throwing the whole country back into the chaos that preceded the Iraqi election, it appears that there are two items which both major Iraqi factions agree are non-negotiable: 1) the timed (subject to conditions "on the ground") withdrawal of U.S. troops, and 2) under absolutely no circumstances will there be amnesty for actions (atrocities) committed by private contractors in Iraq.
The parliament and the U.S. are still miles apart on reaching a final agreement, and in fact may not, presenting an even more interesting set of circumstances for the U.S. administration, but it now appears clear that the two items above are set in stone from the Iraqi point of view.
If I were Blackwater and I knew that, I'd be making noises about getting out of the security business, too. I'd be setting the stage for telling the DOD that business considerations make it impossible for us to continue in that line of business; sorry, but the contract's canceled; here's a little of your money back; thanks for the good time -- and airlifting my guys out of there in the dark of night before they're all rounded up in some kind of war crimes proceeding.
No one (except Bushco) is more hated by the Iraqi people than the Blackwater mercenaries, and now that the end of the occupation appears near, they want their pound of flesh! And while I'd rather give them Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, et. al., (and I'd throw in Wm Kristol and some of the other neocon cheerleaders for free), it's hard to find fault with their sentiments.
Much has been said about where U.S. troops would be without Blackwater, and it's possible that the out-of-business noise is a threat to Bushco to harden U.S. dedication to an agreement that includes Blackwater amnesty.
Or not. Everything I've suggested here may be nothing more than me farting in the bathtub, but it seemed worth throwing the suggestion out there.
