Blackwater, Again

So I wanted to take a moment to talk about Blackwater some more; I actually mean to do two posts on it – this one about the organization and some of the politics around it, and other about an idea about society and people that being there gave me.

Blackfive, Uncle Jimbo, and NZ Bear all wrote about the logistics and posted pictures and video, so let me refer to some of their pictures and cites:

blackwater-range2.JPG

…and of course they talked smack (and some compliments) about me…

Ok, so who taught you that you carry your weapon like some bag from Prada? MKH might get away with it.. but guys, c’mon. REAL dudes know better.

Someone tell A-L he’s carrying it LIKE a typical ‘liberal’- ”eww, someone take this!”

and

And, as much as we kid Marc Danziger (the best dressed range trainee I’ve ever seen – Italian shoes, even) about the huge money he has spent on training, we ate some humble pie as he demonstrated that his investment was worth it.

Yeah – a little anxiety shooting in front of those guys – and since United lost my suitcase, I was shooting in dress shoes (interesting shooting in leather soles) and suit pants from one of my favorite suits (hence the ‘don’t get gun lube on the gabardine’ that got me smack-talked on B5)

But enough about the trip, let me take a moment and talk about Blackwater.

My impression, as of Monday of last week, was that they had built essentially a body shop (placement service) for skilled trigger-pullers. I believed that they had levels of skill – from people who were basically somewhat more trained than I am up to the most elite operators. As of Friday night, my impression was very different.

I’m a big believer that people give you ‘tells’ about who they are and how they operate. The first thing I noticed was how buttoned-down the whole place was. Every building was neat, every building and door numbered, every vehicle had an ID on it. We walked into the vehicle shop where the Grizzlies (and the new secret vehicle) were being built and two minutes later a nice lady came around and offered us safety glasses.

When we did our hot laps (did I mention how fun they were? Did you see the videos?) course control – something I’m sensitized to from roadracing and motorcycle track days – was watertight.

The AR15 ‘sampler’ we did was absolutely great – they built skills with care to conceptually explain what we were doing and to carefully ‘pyramid’ skills. The tests they gave us were pretty easy – but they were sound, well managed, and at every moment they carefully managed us in terms of safety, attention, and action. And I’ll note that the conceptual points they made about what they were doing were simple, smart and even somewhat novel to me.

So every detail I saw wasn’t one indicating a loosely run placement agency for retired cops and operators, but an organization that proceeds with more than a little care in everything it does.

Look, I know about the accusations – of overaggressive fire at vehicles, of the shooting and deaths at Nisour Square. I honestly don’t know enough to have a real personal opinion on those events and others like them. I will suggest that in reality in any situation where people walk around with loaded guns the potential for tragic incident is there, and in any organization that ramps up as fast as they did they will get some losers and make some mistakes.

Overall, for me to judge them on those kinds of grounds, I’d want to compare them with a realistic standard – one with some grounding in history and fact – not one based on a kind of artificial notion of behavior. So I won’t judge or condemn them for those actions until I have facts that take my views one way or the other.

I also can’t comment in detail on their ‘profiteering’ except to suggest that you watch the clip from the Aviator where Howard Hughes confronts Senator Brewster. Large things need to get done quickly in wartime, and that means there will be large checks written and sometimes wasted. Anyone who can improve the procurement process – by saving the public money while still getting results – will have my support. But meanwhile, I’d suggest you read the CBO study on the costs of contracting in Iraq (pdf).

One of the things that impressed me the most about them was their ability to rapidly shift ground and innovate. Price – a wealthy former SEAL – started Blackwater as a training facility, intending to compete with Gunsite and Thunder Ranch, both schools I’ve attended. He put his school in North Carolina thinking that the population density and surrounding government facilities would give him an advantage over the remote Prescott, Arizona and Mountain Home, Texas locations of those schools.

They were approached by the Navy to train up sailors after the USS Cole, given that they could act in 30 days. Their response – “sure!” – and they created a huge training capability that became the basis of their business.

They have pivoted on a dime multiple times in order to respond to opportunities – and to create opportunities where they see them. Armored vehicles, energy, airships…that entrepreneurial “why not?” and “why not right now?” kind of attitude appears to drive the company.

I do think there are some interesting questions about the appropriate role for companies like this – and all the other contractors who support our military (see the CBO report, seriously). And I touched a nerve when I asked if they really believed that they had no impact on retention of highly trained operators (for the record, they strongly argued “no” and pointed me to Congressional studies that back them up – I’m still a bit cynical).

But I think it’s critical somehow to create space in the defense ecology for the kind of dynamic, responsive organization that Blackwater represents. I’d love to see more and more of our defense spending channeled to companies like this and less to the large multi-megabuck multi-decade projects (the Crusader, anyone?). I’m looking forward to an interesting discussion with Joe about this issue.

Blackwater is a Defense 2.0 company – finding half-million dollar solutions to what have traditionally been ten-million dollar problems. That’s something we need a lot more of, not less.

11 thoughts on “Blackwater, Again”

  1. They should have loaned you some BDU pants, Marc. Also, I always thought “purse carry” was when one used the carry handle on the upper (if present). I’d have called your style “dead fish carry”.

    ObOnTopic: Glad to hear Blackwater were on their game for you visitors. Very very hard to tell what happens “over there” and why. Non-trauma-related example: there was reported to be a strong tendency for some of the early / deep USan operators in Afghanistan to grow beards — in some cases, mullah-long. Were they going native, or were they winning hearts and minds? Hard to say.

  2. Marc,
    Despite all the “kool-aid” you’ve profesed to have ingested in the last few months, this post redeems all!
    I’ll even forgive you for pulling “the one” lever in November.
    Reads good, but we both know it’s a lie.
    Mike

  3. “Blackwater is a Defense 2.0 company – finding half-million dollar solutions to what have traditionally been ten-million dollar problems. That’s something we need a lot more of, not less.”

    As a fan of military Civil Affairs, I have to ask: can we generate same or better “half-million dollar solutions” within the military establishment or does the nature of the miltary mean that we always have to outsource? If can’t, why not?

  4. Here’s what Machiavelli would say:

    Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious, and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy. The fact is, they have no other attraction or reason for keeping the field than a trifle of stipend, which is not sufficient to make them willing to die for you. They are ready enough to be your soldiers whilst you do not make war, but if war comes they take themselves off or run from the foe; which I should have little trouble to prove, for the ruin of Italy has been caused by nothing else than by resting all her hopes for many years on mercenaries, and although they formerly made some display and appeared valiant amongst themselves, yet when the foreigners came they showed what they were.

  5. As an atheist, “atheist” is really embarrassing in his pitiful, unreasoned opinions.

    Blackwater’s huge presence in hot areas, their many losses of operators, and the source of their personnel all vitiate the advice from The Prince. There’s a very big difference between the quality of service you get when hiring random mercenaries under the leadership of a foreigner and that of a military contractor serving his own country using elite veterans of that country’s military. The ample motivation for those contractors in the current conflict is rather helpful as well – the jihadis have been killing American servicemen for 3 decades and only now is th US starting to hit back. Blackwater lets retired operaors get their chance to settle scores and fight one of the 2 perfect enemies.

    As to the inability of the military to have this capability in house? Firstly it’s because they’re a bureaucracy, and you don’t see any bureaucratic organization doing this. It’s Blackwater, not Lockheed, General Dynamics, or Boeing. Secondly it’s because of the ponderousness of Congressional meddling – 2 committees with a total of 535 members (plus staff), many of whom don’t believe in the existence of a military, make it shocking that the military works at all, nevermind being entrepreneurial and nimble enough to do what Blackwater does. Then there’s the constant churn of responsibility you see in the military…

  6. I think atheist missed the key point in his Machiavelli quote:

    bq. Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and *if one holds his state based on these arms*, he will stand neither firm nor safe…

    He was speaking to the contemporary practice of a state _solely_ using paid mercenaries as its armed forces, instead of having a standing army or conscripting a force from the populace. The US, on the other hand, is obviously _not_ relying on outside firms for their main source of military might and/or force projection, as that job is almost entirely handled by our professional military.

    I would agree with Machiavelli that total reliance is dangerous, and as such outsourcing should never fully take the place of our existing Armed Forces. (YMMV if you’re a micro-state, I suppose.) But augmenting our forces with paid contractors seems to be a good solution for the problem space, especially if you can use highly professional firms like AL portrays Blackwater to be.

  7. But augmenting our forces with paid contractors seems to be a good solution for the problem space, especially if you can use highly professional firms like AL portrays Blackwater to be.

    Interesting.

    To me, the concept of even a partially corporatized military seems fraught with danger, and unlikely to truly aid in national security.

  8. I’d like to see some argumentation behind the opinion that:

    bq. even a partially corporatized military seems fraught with danger, and unlikely to truly aid in national security.

    Not rejecting it out of hand, but considering mercenaries have been around almost as long as standing armies have, I don’t see a _prima facie_ case for your fears. (Assuming the end line “quality of product” remains consistent.)

    I’d even go so far as to say “partially corporatized” may be a bit of an exaggeration; I don’t believe any private contractors are a part of the regular composition of the Armed Forces. Instead they’re brought on for limited engagements, for specific tasks, and are released once the contract expires. I’m too busy to look it up right now, but I suspect the ratio of Blackwater personnel in Iraq+Afghanistan to US Armed Forces personnel would be very small.

  9. Oh, I get. Mr. Marc Danziger is carrying his AR-15 in the manner of Neville Chamberlain with an umbrella to not get gun lube on his fancy shoes and suit pants, owing to United Airlines being unable to do a simple thing like give him back his checked bag at the end of a flight. I first thought it was some critique of Blackwater being lax on training candidates about gun handling. Sorry to be slow on the uptake.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>