Warning!!! : There Is Some Photos May Be Harmful And Violence pictures To You, Please Leave This Article If You're Not 18, Do NOT Read This Topic If You're Not 18 Or You Can't Watch Some Harmful Photos... I Repeat Do Not Watch-Read the Article If You Can't Handle The Photos...

[The role of private security and military companies in human rights violations in Iraq]

Private military and security companies are the second largest occupying power in Iraq after the US military. Iraq is the first armed combat situation in which military and security companies are widely used. In the summer of 2006, the US Government Accountability Office stated that there are more than 84,000 operating in 181 different private military and security companies. By May 2006, at least 428 employees of those companies had been killed in Iraq.

Iraqi contracts raised the income of private military and security companies from 320 million pounds in 2003 to more than 1.8 billion pounds (2.7 billion dollars) in 2004. [Aegis turnover] income increased from 554,000 pounds in 2003 to 62 million £ 2005 flag. This increase was mainly due to contracts in Iraq.

"Armor Group" estimated that the security protection services market in Iraq increased from $ 300 million in 2003 to 900 million in just one year.

Security and military companies are a profitable opportunity. According to the British newspaper "The Sunday Times", the British Special Forces Unit ((SAS)) had to increase the wages of its soldiers by 50% to stop the influx of soldiers from them to join work in private security and military companies.

"Carl Hurst" said the commander-in-chief of the US Army's 3rd division responsible for security in Baghdad in 2005 and 2006. “These boys in private security and military companies are not subject to the provisions of this country (( meaning Iraq )) and do whatever they want and commit foolishness. Without any responsibility or consequences for them, and they will not be harmed if they use excessive force. They (( shoot people )) without consequences »

There are recent estimates of hundreds of PMS and PMCs operating in more than fifty countries, earning $ 100 billion in profits. In this context, the British government spent 179 million pounds on private security and military companies in Iraq, and 46 million in Afghanistan in the period 2003-2008.

Warning !!!!! : The Violence-Harmful Photo Gonna Be Below , DO NOT WATCH IF YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEM With These Kind OF PHOTOS , I REPEAT ,,, DO NOT WATCH , Leave If You had Any Problem Please,,, Thank you ...

Why do private security and military companies pose a problem ??

These companies cannot be held accountable. Whereas in the democratic systems, the national armed forces (the Iraqi army) are subject to rules and physical systems of accountability and trial through organized political processes, security companies are not subject to any of them.

(((Private security and military companies are involved in violating human rights. For example, the US military's investigation of a human rights violation at [Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq], accused tenants of TitanCICA violating human rights)))

Another problem created by the presence of PMSCs is that they have enabled governments to circumvent legal barriers, or have allowed countries to use them as covert foreign policy. For example, the US Congress imposed restrictions on a number of military figures to prevent them from operating in Colombia.

However, these restrictions could be circumvented by private security and military companies. It enabled governments to get rid of the "vitamin complex" as public opinion refuses to sacrifice soldiers in combat. (As is the case in the (current Syrian crisis), where Russia uses private security and military companies such as Wagner Security Company to defraud Russian public opinion.)

Despite the spread of mercenary activity and the problems resulting from it, there is no legislation, there is no effective international legislation to regulate this activity or deal with it and all efforts that attempted it have failed.

Some countries have taken steps in this regard. In 2007, the US House of Representatives passed the Military and Security Contracting Act to establish a US legal authority over private security and military companies. The Iraqi government tried to lift the judicial immunity enjoyed by such private companies and succeeded in closing nine companies operating without a license.

Current events reveal the need for continued pressure to act against private security companies. In this context, 2007 witnessed the disclosure of many documents related to the killing of Iraqi civilians by PMSCs.

Although the Organization of African Unity condemned in its 1977 meeting of mercenary activity and called for its elimination, its call was limited to condemning this activity if it was directed at recognized governments. After that, the five permanent members of the Security Council refused to ratify the United Nations International Treaty against the Recruitment, Financing and Use of Mercenaries, issued in 1989.

The 1970 law still regulates mercenary activity in Britain, which is one of the ((largest countries in which private security and military companies are active)), but these companies are not regulated by appropriate new laws. The British government has explored many options for regulating private security and military companies, but has yielded little, claiming that these companies are of considerable value to the British economy.

Some Videos About Black Water ( The Company That Has Bad Reputation)

Thank You For Reading This Article ,,, I'm Sorry For the Harmful Photos And Violence pictures ...

-EnRi