Private military corporations and the evolution of modern warfare

The role of private military corporations in modern warfare has been a controversial one, and none has been in the news more than Blackwater. The organization has provided battlefield services to the United States for years, most notably in the War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. Erik Prince, the founder and Former CEO, has written a new book on the organization: Civilian Warriors: The Inside Story of Blackwater and the Unsung Heroes of the War on Terror. He joined Glenn on radio to discuss the role of PMCs in modern warfare, as well as his unique inside into the state of affairs in the Middle East.

"Let's start with the overall concept of private armies. Why should we feel comfortable with private armies and contractors now working for the State Department?" Glenn asked Prince.

"Blackwater was not a private army anyway, we were a service contractor that provided services to the U.S. Government that ranged from training to aviation support, resupply, logistics, construction and security. At no time did we ever have a standing army of people waiting around to do something. There were contractors that were contracted to the State Department, operating to the detail of a 1,000-page contract of a competitive bid, and their job was to provide a body guard services or in other cases we might be doing training training the Afghan border police or building a narcotics interdiction unit. So there's a lot of misconception," Prince explained.

In fact, a whole chapter of his book on Blackwater is dedicated to the history of battlefield contractors.

"The first colonists were actually private companies, listed on the London Stock Exchange, like the Jamestown and Massachusetts Bay colonies, and they hired former soldiers to protect the colony and assist with their logistics. I go through much of American history, even nine out of ten ships taken during the American revolution were taken by privateers, private ship, private crew issued a hunting license."

Ultimately, Prince argues that the issue of PMCs comes down to the private sector vs. the public sector. The private sector offers a less expensive, more effective, and more efficient option compared to the government - much like they do in other areas.

"When you send something overnight, you used to only be able to sent it via the postal service. Now you have FedEx, UPS, DHL, and other private vendors that could do something that used to be a government monopoly, they can do it better, cheaper, faster, and more reliably."

"I think the left doesn't like the military as it is, let alone, if a private organization does it. I mean, the hard left generally does not like capitalism or the free market."

"My only point about contractor supporting national security, because contractors have information at their hands about what something actually costs, we can make better, more rational economic decisions. And let me give you an example. We were hired on a competitive bid to provide helicopters to embark aboard a military sea lift command ship. We showed up with two helicopters and eight guys, replacing the Navy who was doing it with two helicopters and 35 guys. For every 35 guys they had deployed, they had another 70 or more back in the states. So apples to apples, pretty clear to see who does that job cheaper."

The conversation then turned to the Middle East and the conflict between ISIS and Syria. Prince believes that the United States was running missiles into Syria - a theory Glenn discussed shortly after the Benghazi attack.

"Now we have ISIS," Glenn said. "We are dropping missile systems and weapons, and ISIS is getting them. We are arming the wrong people. I think we are going to try to help take down Assad, which is only going to destabilize things more. What should we be doing?" Glenn asked.

"If the Assad regime were to fall right now then ISIS one running Syria as well. We can do the whole post-analysis of what was done wrong that led to ISIS being in charge, but now, the people we should be supporting vigorously are the Kurds. They have yet to receive any serious weapon systems despite all the promises and assurances from the U.S. Government. So these poor guys are still going head-to-head with ISIS, who captured five heavy divisions of American equipment, new, state-of-the-art stuff, and another three major logistics bases worth of ammunition. Think stingers, hell fire missiles, that they captured from a resupply convoy coming to Baghdad from Kuwait. So they are well-equipped to fight for years to come."

"The Kurds, on the other hand, are fighting with old Saddam-era stuff completely outgunned and outmatched. They fight bravely, but it is hard to take on a fully armored vehicle with just an AK. That's not a fight you want to be in. Giving them serious horsepower weaponry is the first thing. Second, you have to be able to push back the Iranian influence in Baghdad. The Iranian army, the Revolutionary Guard Corps is effectively running much of the Iraqi army, particularly all the Shia militias that have come in to supplement the Iraqi army, so at some point, some force is going to have to crush ISIS and prevent them from spreading, because they will spread. They are now trying to get going in Egypt. You have radical Islamists in Libya that have professed allegiance to ISIS as well, to the caliphate. So now you have Egypt with some crazies on their western boundary. They have problems in the Sinai, and this cancer will spread."

"You are going to have to deal with some of the primary tumors to suppress them, or they are going to continue to metastasize."

You can get Civilian Warriors: The Inside Story of Blackwater and the Unsung Heroes of the War on Terror in stores now. 

COVID is back! Or that is what we’re being told anyway...

A recent spike in COVID cases has triggered the left's alarm bells, and the following institutions have begun to reinstate COVID-era mandates. You might want to avoid them if you enjoy breathing freely...

Do YOU think institutions should bring back COVID-era mandates if cases increase? Let us know your thoughts HERE.

Morris Brown College

Both of Upstate Medical's hospitals in Syracuse, New York

Corey Henry / Senior Staff Photographer | The Daily Orange

Auburn Community Hospital, New York

Kevin Rivoli / The Citizen | Auburn Pub

Lionsgate Studio

AaronP/Bauer-Griffin / Contributor | GETTY IMAGES

United Health Services in New York

Kaiser Permanente in California

Justin Sullivan / Staff | GETTY IMAGES

There was a time when both the Left and the Right agreed that parents have the final say in raising their children... Not anymore.

In the People's Republic of California, the STATE, not parents, will determine whether children should undergo transgender treatments. The California state legislature just passed a law that will require judges in child custody cases to consider whether parents support a child’s gender transition. According to the law, the state now thinks total affirmation is an integral part of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare.”

We are inching closer to a dystopia where the state, not the parents, have ultimate rights over their children, a history that people from former Soviet nations would feign repeating.

Glenn dove into the law AND MORE in this episode titled, "Parental Advisory: The EXPLICIT plot to control YOUR kids." To get all the research that went into this episode AND information on how YOU can fight back, enter your email address below:

If you didn't catch Wednesday night's Glenn TV special, be sure to check it out HERE!

The Biden admin has let in MORE illegal aliens than the populations of THESE 15 states

GUILLERMO ARIAS / Contributor | Getty Images

There are currently an estimated 16.8 MILLION illegal aliens residing in the United States as of June 2023, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). This number is already 1.3 million higher than FAIR's January 2022 estimate of 15.5 million and a 2.3 million increase from its end-of-2020 estimate. Even Democrats like New York City's Mayor Adams Mayor Adams are waking up to what Conservatives have been warning for years: we are in a border CRISIS.

However, this isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010. In the first two years of the Biden administration alone, the illegal alien population increased by 16 PERCENT nationwide, imposing a whopping net cost of $150.6 BILLION PER YEAR on American taxpayers. That is nearly DOUBLE the total amount that the Biden administration has sent to Ukraine.

This isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010.

These large numbers often make it difficult to conceptualize the sheer impact of illegal immigration on the United States. To put it in perspective, we have listed ALL 15 states and the District of Colombia that have smaller populations than the 2.3 MILLION illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration. That is more than the entire populations of Wyoming, Vermont, and South Dakota COMBINED—and the American taxpayers have to pay the price.

Here are all 16 states/districts that have FEWER people than the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration.

1. New Mexico

Population: 2,110,011

2. Idaho

Population: 1,973,752

3. Nebraska

Population: 1,972,292

4. West Virginia

Population: 1,764,786

5. Hawaii

Population: 1,433,238

6. New Hampshire

Population: 1,402,957

7. Maine

Population: 1,393,442

8. Montana

Population: 1,139,507

9. Rhode Island

Population: 1,090,483

10. Delaware

Population: 1,031,985

11. South Dakota

Population: 923,484

12. North Dakota

Population: 780,588

13. Alaska

Population: 732,984

14. Washington DC

Population: 674,815

15. Vermont

Population: 647,156

16. Wyoming

Population: 583,279

POLL: Should the Government control the future of AI?

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, tech titans, lawmakers, and union leaders met on Capitol Hill to discuss the future of AI regulation. The three-hour meeting boasted an impressive roster of tech leaders including, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and others, along with more than 60 US Senators.

Tech Titans and Senators gathered in the Kennedy Caucus Room.The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The meeting was closed to the public, so what was exactly discussed is unknown. However, what we do know is that a majority of the CEOs support AI regulation, the most vocal of which is Elon Musk. During the meeting, Musk called AI "a double-edged sword" and strongly pushed for regulation in the interest of public safety.

A majority of the CEOs support AI regulation.

Many other related issues were discussed, including the disruption AI has caused to the job market. As Glenn has discussed on his program, the potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real, and many have already felt the effects. From taxi drivers to Hollywood actors and writers, AI's presence can be felt everywhere and lawmakers are unsure how to respond.

The potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real.

Ultimately, the meeting's conclusion was less than decisive, with several Senators making comments to the tune of "we need more time before we act." The White House is expected to release an executive order regarding AI regulation by the end of the year. But now it's YOUR turn to tell us what YOU think needs to be done!

Should A.I. be regulated?

Can the government be trusted with the power to regulate A.I.? 

Can Silicon Valley be trusted to regulate AI? 

Should AI development be slowed for safety, despite its potential advantages?

If a job can be done cheaper and better by AI, should it be taken away from a human?

Do you feel that your job is threatened by AI?