Everything I have ever heard about EO tells me that they were more capable than most nations armies. They went into Sierra Leone and did what nobody wanted or cared to do and when they kicked ass it scared the shit out of Bill Clinton and the UN. Maybe they figured they might be next on EO's list.
Way too much talk. EO's are needed to control sub-humanity on a worldwide basis. You have to agree that, in general, Africa is run by groups of military leaders who kill the opposition by means of rape, chopping off arms and legs, blood letting and burning people alive. Killing these thugs is an appropriate means of beginning to rebuild these nations. Law, education, industry and an armed population are the next logical steps. Executive Outcomes should be revered by all decent human beings.
He makes the case for EA being a firm that did it's job, but he also tries to say that EA had a a hand in the atrocities that the locals committed, which they most definitely did not. EA did what they were paid to do, and they did it well, efficiently and quicker than any UN force could have done.
dude blackwater is disgusting, do some research on them and you'll find out just how sick they are. Executive Outcomes so far has the greatest reputation and have achieved things not even the united kingdom could have (and they tried). The EO group is diamond compared to the dirt that is BW.
hey i have done some research and EO is not any better, they both deal in the bussiness of war and choosing between them is personel choice because i am american i will stick with an american company or firm
@AdemJashari56 To stop helpless people from being slaughtered seems a good reason to me. not to mention establishing order were none exist. as I understand it in angola the orginal concern was millions of dollars worth of oil drilling equipment. The Un should have stayed out of the way and let them do there job. its ashame that such a force got disolved cause generaly the UN ignores Africa dafar and rwanda for example the un could have done more but didnt
you can't, you smuck! because EO was dissolved on 31 December 1998. And even if it wasn't they wouldn't take a dumbass such as yourself. My father was part of SADF, so I would know
A Really good documentary on Sierra Leon and what EO did, and the idealism of mercenaries in today's view was made in like 2006 called "shady soldiers." really good movie definatrly should check it out.
and do not forget that at the Beginning on April 6, 1994, and for the next hundred days, up to 800,000 Tutsis were killed by Hutu militia using clubs and machetes, with as many as 10,000 killed each day.
Throughout the massacre, both the U.N. and the U.S. carefully refrained from labeling the killings as genocide, which would have necessitated some kind of emergency intervention.
The U.N. Security Council responded to the worsening crisis by voting unanimously to abandon Rwanda. The remainder of U.N. peacekeeping troops were pulled out, leaving behind a only tiny force of about 200 soldiers for the entire country.
EO played a major role in turning the tide for the MPLA with one U.S. defense expert calling the EO the "best fifty or sixty million dollars the Angolan government ever spent".
Executive Outcomes trained 4,000 to 5,000 troops and 30 pilots in combat in camps in Lunda Sul, Cabo Ledo, and Dondo.
NPRC hired several hundred mercenaries from the private firm Executive Outcomes. Within a month they had driven RUF fighters back to enclaves along Sierra Leone's borders.
Later, the United Nations agreed to send peacekeepers to help restore order and disarm the rebels. 13,000 peacekeeping troops.
some 500 peacekeepers were taken hostage as the peace accord effectively collapsed.
The hostage crisis resulted in more fighting between the RUF and the government.
How do you mean? If you are referring to weapons systems and munitions, then I would say that there is actually little problem for PMFs because the market is literally saturated with surplus. Moreover, there are enough out of work military men that human capital is not an issue. In terms of actual battlefield structure and logistics, most of what PMFs initially bring to the field is foreign to that particular battle space. Extended operations may require extensive on site purchases.
For example, maintenance and other sustainment activities require so much specialized man power that I would think that a "speared" approach could be supported but embedded security almost sounds impossible. Where to you eat, sleep, fix equipment, but new stuff, transportation (within the AO and in and out of AO). If the "shit goes down" what about CAS and Air Evac. Not to mention medical services.
I just put in an app in ALGIZ and I hope I get considered.
I was part of EO and Sandline, and proud of it!!! We were needed were other institutions failed!!! We did what the UN couldnt do, cheaper and faster! Someone had to do the "dirty work", and ofcourse, not country wanted to be blamed in case things got out of hands. Much easier to blame PMC's!
Not services for nothing--they were a business (& Southern Cross, and other subsidiaries still are). The EO foray into Angola was backed by DeBeers. I don't know about Sierra Leone, but I guess a similar arrangement. My problem is with your dismissal of critics of EO. EO did their work "well", but the whole idea of ex-SOF people taking their skills to the "enemy" (Hooper cites EO's S. African critics) is disconcerting; + doing it for VERY mercenary reasons ("blood diamonds") deserves criticism.
I don't dismiss all criticisms of EO. But much, if not most, of what has been written about them in the past has been false. If someone has something accurate and critical about them more power to him or her.
I'm sure you've read the book Bloodsong! by Jim Hooper. I think you're not going in depth enough w/the problem of EO in Angola. These were the same ex commando, SADF, Koevoet people who helped cause the destructive situation in Angola (and Mozambique) in the first place--forget the simplistic issues of race or being paid to do a state's job (the UN, US, UK have been using mercs for decades). They also set a bad precedent; Clinton tried to push MPRI on Angola. Did EO help poor governments?
No, EO did not help poor governments, if by help, you mean providing services for nothing. But they did what they were hried to do, and did it well. And they did it again in Sierra Leone.
Comment removed
arizonaboy77 10 months ago
Everything I have ever heard about EO tells me that they were more capable than most nations armies. They went into Sierra Leone and did what nobody wanted or cared to do and when they kicked ass it scared the shit out of Bill Clinton and the UN. Maybe they figured they might be next on EO's list.
klunk5150 1 year ago
Woolfscout,
I did read Eeben's book and if you ask him he will tell you that he has no problem with my writings and comments on EO
nidan1209 1 year ago
Too Many socalled experts on EO, rather go and buy Eeben Barlow`s book called executive outcomes. and read what the founder of the company writes.
Well done Eeben and Lafras you and your men made a diffrence.
woolfscout 1 year ago
Way too much talk. EO's are needed to control sub-humanity on a worldwide basis. You have to agree that, in general, Africa is run by groups of military leaders who kill the opposition by means of rape, chopping off arms and legs, blood letting and burning people alive. Killing these thugs is an appropriate means of beginning to rebuild these nations. Law, education, industry and an armed population are the next logical steps. Executive Outcomes should be revered by all decent human beings.
Umaxen 1 year ago
He makes the case for EA being a firm that did it's job, but he also tries to say that EA had a a hand in the atrocities that the locals committed, which they most definitely did not. EA did what they were paid to do, and they did it well, efficiently and quicker than any UN force could have done.
SuperChuckles007 1 year ago
@SuperChuckles007
I need to correct myself and use EO, not EA. My mistake.
SuperChuckles007 1 year ago
EO has sum of the best trained soldiers in the world i dont see why people from other countrys than south africa exept that
SYCOTIX666 2 years ago 7
Executive Outcomes was disbanded in the late '90s but some of its original members and founder do operate in Iraq today.
MasterGuns666 2 years ago 7
check out sandrail international. they are still around
joshmc0300 2 years ago
EO offered to assist in eliminating the militias in Rwanda that was committing genocide...
UN refused the intervention of EO and allowed the genocide to continue.
The best trained soldiers...
EgyptianPrinceCB 2 years ago 5
We should have sent EO into Iraq.
NateRiley3000 2 years ago 2
hell ya go EO but i am more of a black water guy but EO is still great.
Popsicle22754 3 years ago
dude blackwater is disgusting, do some research on them and you'll find out just how sick they are. Executive Outcomes so far has the greatest reputation and have achieved things not even the united kingdom could have (and they tried). The EO group is diamond compared to the dirt that is BW.
jdonaldsontcs 2 years ago 2
hey i have done some research and EO is not any better, they both deal in the bussiness of war and choosing between them is personel choice because i am american i will stick with an american company or firm
Popsicle22754 2 years ago
its not about war or not, its about ethics and why the choose to do that kind of job.
AdemJashari56 2 years ago
@AdemJashari56 To stop helpless people from being slaughtered seems a good reason to me. not to mention establishing order were none exist. as I understand it in angola the orginal concern was millions of dollars worth of oil drilling equipment. The Un should have stayed out of the way and let them do there job. its ashame that such a force got disolved cause generaly the UN ignores Africa dafar and rwanda for example the un could have done more but didnt
sass225 1 month ago
how can i join EO?
dikkebubba 3 years ago
you can't, you smuck! because EO was dissolved on 31 December 1998. And even if it wasn't they wouldn't take a dumbass such as yourself. My father was part of SADF, so I would know
Dipukas1 2 years ago
If only an executive outcomes was around today....
matjohnroe 3 years ago
the documentary is called "shadow company" not 'shady soldiers'
and it is very good. go watch it.
pridefc101 3 years ago
A Really good documentary on Sierra Leon and what EO did, and the idealism of mercenaries in today's view was made in like 2006 called "shady soldiers." really good movie definatrly should check it out.
RizzItUp 3 years ago
and do not forget that at the Beginning on April 6, 1994, and for the next hundred days, up to 800,000 Tutsis were killed by Hutu militia using clubs and machetes, with as many as 10,000 killed each day.
Throughout the massacre, both the U.N. and the U.S. carefully refrained from labeling the killings as genocide, which would have necessitated some kind of emergency intervention.
miki318 3 years ago
The U.N. Security Council responded to the worsening crisis by voting unanimously to abandon Rwanda. The remainder of U.N. peacekeeping troops were pulled out, leaving behind a only tiny force of about 200 soldiers for the entire country.
miki318 3 years ago
EO played a major role in turning the tide for the MPLA with one U.S. defense expert calling the EO the "best fifty or sixty million dollars the Angolan government ever spent".
Executive Outcomes trained 4,000 to 5,000 troops and 30 pilots in combat in camps in Lunda Sul, Cabo Ledo, and Dondo.
miki318 3 years ago
NPRC hired several hundred mercenaries from the private firm Executive Outcomes. Within a month they had driven RUF fighters back to enclaves along Sierra Leone's borders.
Later, the United Nations agreed to send peacekeepers to help restore order and disarm the rebels. 13,000 peacekeeping troops.
some 500 peacekeepers were taken hostage as the peace accord effectively collapsed.
The hostage crisis resulted in more fighting between the RUF and the government.
that says it all!!
EO RULES UN SUCKS
miki318 3 years ago
I tend to be on the side of those who believe EO generally did a better job than it is given credit for.
But unless I had a stroke EO hardly worked in all, or almost all, of Africa.
nidan1209 3 years ago 5
If it were not for EO, all of Africa (almost all) would be hell on earth - pure chaos. Look at SA now...
bananarepublics2 3 years ago 2
How did these organizations sustain their operations?
Did these orgs have a robust logistics infrastructure or was it limited to what was available at the local economy?
enshala123 3 years ago
How do you mean? If you are referring to weapons systems and munitions, then I would say that there is actually little problem for PMFs because the market is literally saturated with surplus. Moreover, there are enough out of work military men that human capital is not an issue. In terms of actual battlefield structure and logistics, most of what PMFs initially bring to the field is foreign to that particular battle space. Extended operations may require extensive on site purchases.
ExecutiveOutcomes01 3 years ago
For example, maintenance and other sustainment activities require so much specialized man power that I would think that a "speared" approach could be supported but embedded security almost sounds impossible. Where to you eat, sleep, fix equipment, but new stuff, transportation (within the AO and in and out of AO). If the "shit goes down" what about CAS and Air Evac. Not to mention medical services.
I just put in an app in ALGIZ and I hope I get considered.
enshala123 3 years ago
Though I have combat arms experience, I am hoping for a support role in operations. Maybe all these questions will be answered if I get hired.
enshala123 3 years ago
I was part of EO and Sandline, and proud of it!!! We were needed were other institutions failed!!! We did what the UN couldnt do, cheaper and faster! Someone had to do the "dirty work", and ofcourse, not country wanted to be blamed in case things got out of hands. Much easier to blame PMC's!
griffonsa 3 years ago 8
See message I just sent you. I don't think EO did dirty work; quite the contrary.
David
nidan1209 3 years ago
Vive la mort, vive la guerre, vive le sacre mercenaire!
Harry44Callahan2 4 years ago
Not services for nothing--they were a business (& Southern Cross, and other subsidiaries still are). The EO foray into Angola was backed by DeBeers. I don't know about Sierra Leone, but I guess a similar arrangement. My problem is with your dismissal of critics of EO. EO did their work "well", but the whole idea of ex-SOF people taking their skills to the "enemy" (Hooper cites EO's S. African critics) is disconcerting; + doing it for VERY mercenary reasons ("blood diamonds") deserves criticism.
otsuguairomas 4 years ago
I don't dismiss all criticisms of EO. But much, if not most, of what has been written about them in the past has been false. If someone has something accurate and critical about them more power to him or her.
nidan1209 4 years ago
I'm sure you've read the book Bloodsong! by Jim Hooper. I think you're not going in depth enough w/the problem of EO in Angola. These were the same ex commando, SADF, Koevoet people who helped cause the destructive situation in Angola (and Mozambique) in the first place--forget the simplistic issues of race or being paid to do a state's job (the UN, US, UK have been using mercs for decades). They also set a bad precedent; Clinton tried to push MPRI on Angola. Did EO help poor governments?
otsuguairomas 4 years ago
No, EO did not help poor governments, if by help, you mean providing services for nothing. But they did what they were hried to do, and did it well. And they did it again in Sierra Leone.
nidan1209 4 years ago
EO did the dirty work for the UN you fucking moron!
What do you know? From reading books?
Do you believe Cinderella was real cause you "read" so?
Shut up if u dont know what ur talking about!
griffonsa 3 years ago 2