Prev: MPs Next: Re: [SGII], [DSII] More Terrain

Mercs

From: "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@f...>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 02:57:15 -0500
Subject: Mercs

1) Why wouldn't the Mercs Guild buy a nice AE 
rock? The rationale for a potentially deeply 
buried subterannean hard-to-destroy HQ for 
the Guild is obvious. A great place to house 
arms factories, medical short and long term 
care facilities, R&R facilities, training areas, 
recruiting offices, contract lawyers, financiers, 
reps from various countries, etc. And of course 
a decent defence force (such a Guild World 
would probably be able to call up ALL available 
Mercs on-planet for emergencies). 

2) There will undoubtedly remain Guild and non-
Guild mercs. Many smaller or shadier ops will 
have either no Guild sanction or a fake one 
(mind you, not a good idea to get caught with 
fake paperwork....)

3) In order to threaten the NAC in any way AT 
ALL, a mercenary company would have to be 
able to field a Division I would imagine with 
corresponding support assets. I see this as 
very uncommon. And the only people who'd be 
able to hire such a force would be the Big 4. Or 
UberMegaGatesCorp of Seattle. I see most 
merc ops as "below radar" of most powers. 

4) People talk about the expense of a fighter 
versus its manpower in a specious way. Sure 
the fighter costs $40 million, but the base of 
technical training required to fly it and maintain 
it is probably a big chunk of that. Remember, it 
isn't just the pilot. It's weapons techs, avionics 
techs, flight systems techs, computer systems 
techs, and all the people and apparatus to train 
and support them plus logistics, etc. And the 
fighter is the FAR end of that wedge. Look at 
infantry - the ratio of hardware to trooper 
training can be much closer here. 

5) When you hire a mercenary force it is usually 
because: 1) you want to augment your own 
maximum strength (hence you can't just recruit 
more), 2) you need it NOW (don't have time to 
train more), 3) you don't want to lose your own 
guys (cultural, religious, or just economic 
reasons), 4) you don't have the base of military 
experience to draw on (small colonies without a 
Big 4 backer), 5) you have money but 
manpower is a rarer resource (though note 
that mercs let into the city without some local 
protection can lead to a new government....), 
6) You want to attack or defend and save your 
own troops for later stages of the conflict 7) 
you don't need force very often, so it isn't cost 
effective to maintain your own. 

6) Let us not ignore the fact that not everyone 
is cut out to be a soldier. This is sometimes a 
good reason to hire mercenaries. I expect the 
IAS or some NGOs or small corporations might 
hire merc security or other special teams on 
the rare occassions where power projection or 
personal security forces are required. Mercs 
bring expertise, experience, and many times the 
basic disposition of the career soldier. 

Think of the type of Merc Missions:
1) Striker/Assault - short term, often with 
success bonuses or sometimes success only 
payments
2) Security - short or long term security, often 
not to bonusworthy (this might constitute 
garrison or field work)
3) Cadre - training locals or other mercs, 
sometimes bonusworthy
4) CounterInsurgency - mostly patrolling and 
other counter insurgent warfare, rarely 
bonusworthy
5) Insurgency - assisting a revolution, success 
only bonuses most likely
6) Bodygaurd - for key people, often smaller 
forces, short or long term, can be lucrative if 
attached to the right patron
7) Specialist - recce, assassin/sniper, demo, 
EW, etc. small forces or individuals recruited 
and well paid for specialist skills
8) Recovery - this is a form of strike/assault,
but might also involve investigation, often with
success only bonus

As risk to life and limb and requirements for 
deniability or expertise go up, so does the cost 
of hiring the merc unit and the % of the 
payment that must be posted as a completion 
bond with the bonding authority (Mercs Guild 
approved financial institution). 

FYI:
The real world UN is debating the concept of 
using professional soldiers for peacekeeping 
and other UN interventions. The arguments for 
it include a higher standard of training and 
professionalism, fewer "ax to grind" forces with 
inter-racial or religious issues (merc forces are 
often mixed race and staunchly irreligious), and 
a loyalty only to their employer not some other 
outside power (a BIG problem in peacekeeping 
ops). I think the GZGverse calls out for this kind 
of use for Mercs and I think it would even make 
good sense in the real world. 

Ultimately, IMV, Mercs are like "working-girls". 
The fact they exist says our world isn't a perfect 
place. But they can be very professional and do 
a good job within their field and get paid well in 
their chosen* profession. A lot of times we 
dump on people for having such occupations, 
but the occupation exists to fill a viable market 
niche and we should perhaps be fixing our own 
carts (the environment that creates this niche) 
rather than beating on the people who try to 
make a living filling it. 

* I'm well aware that undoubtedly some mercs 
and many "working-gals" don't intentionally 
choose their field. It's what they end up doing 
and they often want out but various reasons 
keep them in their respective trades often to 
their detriment. 

However, that's a divergent line of thought. I 
just think there is an obvious place for contract 
service military professionals (and note they do 
tend to be very loyal to their paymasters and 
fight very hard because they might lose their 
bondability and hence lose out on the secure 
and large scale jobs). They're often a better 
option than a military riddled with internal 
dissention, factionalism, racial and ethnic 
clashes, etc. 

I suspect there are days Pres. Musharef (sp) 
wishes he had a bunch of Mercs instead of the 
guys he has to depend on.... less likelihood of a 
Coup with bonded professionals. 

Tomb. 
-----------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Barclay
Instructor, CST 6304 (TCP/IP programming for the Internet)
kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca 
http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/CST6304
http://stargrunt.ca/tb/CST6304
-----------------------------------------------------------


Prev: MPs Next: Re: [SGII], [DSII] More Terrain