Getting Away with Murder
Although private military cooperation, or PMCs, are significantly more effective than standard organized national military forces that they originate from, the growing international concern about how these group behave in the midst of conflict might very well lead to their downfall. The reason that these groups are so lethal and cause such a high degree of apprehension, is that their loyalty, for the most part, goes out to the highest bidder, which tends to be the United States and its allies. The less political reason for all the aggravation is that anyone from the United States Army Rangers to the Green Berets to the counter terrorist group of Israeli, the Yamam, who is well above average in terms of combat expertise, …show more content…
This makes a near irresistible offer to highly trained individuals whom are still looking to put their remarkable skills and training to work. Countless experts in the field strongly believe that the continued use of relatively unregulated PMCs could steer the US straight into the world’s next major armed conflict.
In the work, Privatization of Military Capability, a knowledgeable writer in the area of PMCs is critiquing another author and expert in the field of international studies. This type of “third” level analysis gave an alternative perspective and made reading it a significant amount more fluid in regards to what the author is trying to convey however, it becomes slightly more complex when trying to understand their outlook on these P.M.C issues. Another noteworthy observation is the last seven pages are all devoted to works cited and many are extremely specific. After reading over this work, it is quite clear that the two authors, Paul R. Camacho and Lindy …show more content…
The main ideas portrayed in the book are almost mirrored in the journal article. Concepts that range from frequency of deployment to future wages of operators are discussed in detail and after review the credentials of the journal, it was apparent that the two authors have been known to cite one another’s work and have even worked on at least three works collaboratively. One would think that two minds are better than one, but not when they seem to agree on most ideas and theories. This almost led to the deletions on these article form perspective source pool. After some contemplation, I believed they would make a prime example of how when two authors work too closely together it can diminish their work. However, this criticism is more apparent in other works by the authors and less in the two that were chosen. The purpose of these two documents seem to be quite close in nature as both give a brief overview of PMCs and their international
Although private military cooperation, or PMCs, are significantly more effective than standard organized national military forces that they originate from, the growing international concern about how these group behave in the midst of conflict might very well lead to their downfall. The reason that these groups are so lethal and cause such a high degree of apprehension, is that their loyalty, for the most part, goes out to the highest bidder, which tends to be the United States and its allies. The less political reason for all the aggravation is that anyone from the United States Army Rangers to the Green Berets to the counter terrorist group of Israeli, the Yamam, who is well above average in terms of combat expertise, …show more content…
This makes a near irresistible offer to highly trained individuals whom are still looking to put their remarkable skills and training to work. Countless experts in the field strongly believe that the continued use of relatively unregulated PMCs could steer the US straight into the world’s next major armed conflict.
In the work, Privatization of Military Capability, a knowledgeable writer in the area of PMCs is critiquing another author and expert in the field of international studies. This type of “third” level analysis gave an alternative perspective and made reading it a significant amount more fluid in regards to what the author is trying to convey however, it becomes slightly more complex when trying to understand their outlook on these P.M.C issues. Another noteworthy observation is the last seven pages are all devoted to works cited and many are extremely specific. After reading over this work, it is quite clear that the two authors, Paul R. Camacho and Lindy …show more content…
The main ideas portrayed in the book are almost mirrored in the journal article. Concepts that range from frequency of deployment to future wages of operators are discussed in detail and after review the credentials of the journal, it was apparent that the two authors have been known to cite one another’s work and have even worked on at least three works collaboratively. One would think that two minds are better than one, but not when they seem to agree on most ideas and theories. This almost led to the deletions on these article form perspective source pool. After some contemplation, I believed they would make a prime example of how when two authors work too closely together it can diminish their work. However, this criticism is more apparent in other works by the authors and less in the two that were chosen. The purpose of these two documents seem to be quite close in nature as both give a brief overview of PMCs and their international