Military Review

PMCs or not PMCs: the army of the future from libertarians

PMCs or not PMCs: the army of the future from libertarians

How tenacious our words are. Especially little-known and appeared in the vocabulary of most people recently. In particular, libertarianism. A beautiful word meaning freedom is the basic principle of human life. Freedom of choice, freedom of voluntary association of interests, freedom to live as one wants. Independence from the state ... 

It’s too difficult for me to distinguish between this very libertarianism and the old “good” anarchy. Yes, and there was no reason for me until recently. Remember, for a little over a year, the future president of one neighboring territory called this very libertarianism his ideology and the ideology of the state, which he was going to lead. So what? Very little time passed, and already the president of this territory even forgot this word. 

But our supporters of this idea remember. Moreover, they began to apply the principles of libertarianism in their conversations about the future. The future for which they are "ready to go on the chopping block." In the sense of a rally on the squares and streets of Russian cities. By the way, they even found examples of realizing this idea in real life. Volunteer fire brigades and units of the National Guard in Western countries and the USA! "People voluntarily unite and put out fires or eliminate the consequences of natural disasters and catastrophes."

The army should become a voluntary association of people to defend the homeland during the war

Discussions that today the army as one of the instruments of the state has become obsolete have been going on for a long time. The army has become obsolete, according to some philosophers, in the 19th century. Then the army became obsolete in the 20th century. The tradition continues in the first quarter of the 21st century. “The army is a huge ulcer on the stomach of the state, in which a huge amount of funds necessary to improve the life of an ordinary person disappears” - remember the tirade? ..

Indeed, the cost of maintaining, training and arming the army for any state is a rather burdensome expense item. Moreover, army spending is constantly growing. They grow even when the army does not conduct military operations, but simply exists and is trained in the possession of military equipment and weapons. In the event of the outbreak of war, expenditures increase manifold.

But, many still remember and quote the statement of the Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, though often confused about the authorship, about their own and someone else's army. "The people who do not want to feed their army will feed someone else's!" They remember it simply because our generation already has examples from life that confirm the correctness of Napoleon Bonaparte's thought. Tragic examples ...

Countries that paid little attention to their own army, which hoped to mobilize society in the event of war, quickly lost the war and lost part of their own territories, or even were occupied by foreign armies.

And vice versa, even small states that really cared about their own security, successfully opposed more powerful states, or served and serve as an excellent cold shower for hot heads of hawks from other countries.

Israel, surrounded by hostile countries, not only successfully opposes these countries, but also dictates the policy in the region itself. At the same time, it is hard to say that Israel is politically subordinate to its stronger allies, such as the United States or the EU countries. The Israelis perfectly embody the Russian proverb - "an affectionate calf sucks two queens."

North Korea does not wage war. Moreover, it does not have many types of modern weapons. But strong in fighting spirit, a fairly large army is able to scare any enemy. What we saw in the USA. The American "dog" ran around the fence, bounded the gate and ran on. Just because behind the fence it could have been bitten enough by a small North Korean trot ...

PMC - the prototype of the army of the future 

So much has been written about private military companies both in our country and abroad that it would seem it's time to close the question. Legal PMCs are just private security companies that can perform the functions of protecting objects in the territories of other countries. The participation of PMCs in hostilities on someone else's side automatically puts them outside the law. That is why there are quite secret PMCs. There is a market for "gray geese", mercenaries, "soldiers of fortune". These are combatants who are not subject to laws and international treaties.

A misunderstanding of the very essence of PMCs and mercenarism has led to the fact that today the voices of those who see in PMCs the prototype of the army of the future are getting louder. It is good that even supporters of this idea have an understanding that ordinary, normal people will not voluntarily go to war. The number of those for whom war is becoming a way of life is not large enough. 

Supporters of the idea call the voluntary nature of these companies the basis for PMCs to be the army. In principle, you can not argue with that. Indeed, in PMCs or in mercenaries go voluntarily. The reasons for this decision are not worth talking about. The man decided and decided.

But then a simple question arises. PMCs today exist due to the fact that they perform some tasks for money. This is a normal business. You pay, I do the work. Hence the inverse principle. No pay - no work. And the third principle. We carry out work with the one who pays more. And where is the state? Where is the motherland? Money as an incentive to do work ...

It turns out very badly for the supporters of the "new army". We taxpayers will have to pay PMC armies more than our adversary. At the same time, our “defenders” can quite legally go over to the side of the enemy simply because the salary there is higher. Nothing personal, just business.

The idea of ​​voluntarily uniting people to carry out the tasks of the country's defense is initially stupid. Outwardly, you can create a powerful army of those willing to serve. Moreover, you can train this army and make it really strong. But, you cannot make the army immortal! And the enemy cannot be made a gentleman who will shout “I'm coming at you” in advance. 

Modern wars are started by professionals and finished by reservists. I'm talking about global wars. Where do we get reservists in the volunteer army? Volunteers serve. And those who do not want to serve will not approach the army for a cannon shot. And what is the result?

As a result, another "defense of Moscow in 1941". Dozens, maybe hundreds, thousands of militias who did not even have time to shoot in their first battle? Thousands of people who will deliberately go to die just because the fools with the shoulder straps of officers and generals decided that the army could win on its own? How many percent of the conscripted militias returned home after the war?

When it comes to the country's defense, you need to forget the buzzwords

Sometimes I feel ashamed of the degradation of our society. We are missing something in the education and upbringing of our youth. We agree that our children are dumber than us. "He will grow up, become smarter, then he will understand ...".

And if you don’t understand? After all, not all grow wiser with age. Moreover, as the bitter experience of the adjacent territory shows, age did not measure the mind at all. And all that has been suggested all his life is easily “washed away” by counter-propaganda based on base instincts and desires.

Have you noticed in which layer of our society the ideas most often arise, similar to the one about which I wrote above? This is youth! Moreover, those young people who today "see on the neck of their parents." Most often these are students. People who study today! People who are being taught today! Teaching people of the older generation. We learn!

What will happen tomorrow? And tomorrow, these are no longer students, but specialists, who will become leaders. Not those who are at the machine today and they have no time to think about the fate of the world, but those who are studying. Tomorrow it will be junior and middle managers. And the day after tomorrow? In 15-20 years, one of today's students will be a minister, governor, deputy. They will lead the country. And they will determine the domestic and foreign policies of our country.

I remember the expression of Kozma Prutkov. "Not every man even has a hussar uniform." Therefore, I believe that our task today is to educate those to whom the "hussar uniform" really suits. So that these people decide the fate of the Russian army. 

And the "uniform" can be not only "hussar". Youth have many spheres of application of their strength. And everywhere there is a "uniform". As a familiar sniper training instructor once said: "Accuracy is the courtesy of snipers." It is necessary that all future leaders have their own "politeness".
Photos used:
Facebook / Academi
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Amateur
    Amateur April 29 2020 07: 44 New
    Swiss mercenary troops - Swiss mercenary soldiers and officers who were hired for military and security service in the army of foreign states, from the XIV to XIX centuries. (Wiki)

    Mercenaries were, are and always will be. From a fundamentally new - the name "PMC".
    Used to be
    Landsknecht (German: Landsknecht - literally, servant of the country) - German mercenary (soldier) infantryman (Wiki)

    Patrick Leopold Gordon of Okhlukhris (English Patrick Leopold Gordon of Auchleuchries), in Russia known as Peter (or Patrick) Ivanovich Gordon (March 31, 1635, Okhlukhris estate, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - November 29, 1699, Moscow, Russia) - Scottish and Russian commander, general (1687) and rear admiral (1694) of the Russian service. At the age of 16, he left his homeland covered by civil war and entered the Brownsberg Jesuit College (Braniewo, East Prussia, now Poland), without finishing which, in July 1655 he enlisted as a rank-and-file regiment in the cavalry regiment of the Duke of Saxe-Lauenburg in the Swedish army, King Charles X and bravely fought in the Northern War of 1655-1660. Captured after the battle of Warsaw, passed under the banners of Poland, fought with the Russians and Tatars and was promoted to lieutenant commander. He honorably acted against the Russians as the commander of the life dragoon of Prince Jerzy Lubomirsky in the 1660 Chudnovsky campaign. The Russian ambassador in Warsaw, Z. F. Leontyev, learned about Gordon’s abilities and persuaded him to transfer to the royal service.

    Well and on ad infinitum.
    1. Stas157
      Stas157 April 29 2020 08: 08 New
      Misunderstanding the very essence of PMCs and mercenaries

      Yes, who else would explain! Some questions!
      Are Russian PMCs private or public?
      If private, then it turns out private owners can organize their PMCs in Russia? Where is this enshrined in law?
      And if the Russian PMCs are state-owned, then this is no longer a private military company, but a professional army.
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 April 29 2020 08: 18 New
        If private, then it turns out private owners can organize their PMCs in Russia?

        In the note to Article 359 of the Criminal Code. A mercenary is not a person sent to perform official duties.
        The legislation of the Russian Federation does not prohibit PMCs from staying in Russia, only working.
      2. carstorm 11
        carstorm 11 April 29 2020 08: 38 New
        I'm afraid you are very mistaken. What does state mean? funded by the state? So Americans have been using PMCs in hot spots for decades and financing them from and to. but it did not and will not make them a professional army. they remained mercenaries. their losses are covered by trade secrets. their mistakes are denied by the state. all that the state does is give money and set a goal. this is not a service. it is a job. business.
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk April 29 2020 10: 29 New
          Quote: carstorm 11
          What does state mean? funded by the state?

          Yes. And they should be. Imagine a situation where the official presence of the Russian Armed Forces in a certain state for political reasons is undesirable, but very necessary. Then the PMC appears. And I don’t see anything reprehensible in that if PMCs are funded by MOs through nominees. Among the wolves live, howl like a wolf.
          Quote: carstorm 11
          but it didn’t and will not make them a professional army

          And good and right. The main thing is that the PMCs should "work" with professional military personnel with extensive experience and be patriots of their country. With good pay. Because, if something happens, the state has nothing to do with it.
          1. domokl
            April 29 2020 11: 00 New
            Quote: Krasnoyarsk
            And they should be. Imagine a situation where the official presence of the Russian Armed Forces in a certain state for political reasons is undesirable, but very necessary. Then the PMC appears.

            And why does it have to be PMCs, where the majority of employees are Russian speakers? Does it really matter to whom to pay the money? And for PMCs, does it really matter who pays the money? The example is very unsuccessful.
            Let me tell you a solution, the French foreign legion. But this is not PMCs but an army unit
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk April 29 2020 11: 36 New
              Quote: domokl
              And why it must be PMC

              Because we are considering a situation in which the presence of the state armed forces is undesirable for political reasons, but desirable for the state.
              Maybe you know another tool? He is unknown to me.
              Quote: domokl
              And for PMCs, does it really matter who pays the money?

              In this topic, I do not consider the interest of PMCs. I am considering the interest of the state.
              Maybe I don’t know, in this case it’s better to create a classified unit from volunteer fighters of the MTR, for example, to perform operations under the guise of and under the terms of PMCs? Probably all the same - no. A PMC fighter must be sure that he is financed by a private trader. You understand for what reasons.
              And if the state is interested in PMCs, then it must pay through a front man.
              Quote: domokl
              But this is not PMCs but an army unit

              For this reason, which I have already said twice, it cannot be used.
              All these are my fantasies. In addition to one, I am sure that the state needs such PMCs.
            2. Dart2027
              Dart2027 April 29 2020 19: 27 New
              Quote: domokl
              And for PMCs, does it really matter who pays the money?

              Yes, there are no independent PMCs in the world. They all walk under someone.
          2. carstorm 11
            carstorm 11 April 29 2020 11: 48 New
            what patriots? ) there you think some Russians are or may be?) this is the essence of the fact that the mercenaries do not have a nationality. there may be people from anywhere and their loyalty is excusable doubtful.
      3. domokl
        April 29 2020 10: 55 New
        Quote: Stas157
        If private, then it turns out private owners can organize their PMCs in Russia? Where is this enshrined in law?

        Name PMC, which is registered in Russia ...
        Quote: Stas157
        if the Russian PMCs are state-owned, then this is no longer a private military company, but a professional army.

        The second question is automatically removed after answering the first
        1. Stas157
          Stas157 April 29 2020 22: 43 New
          Quote: domokl
          Name PMC, which is registered in Russia ...

          Where is PMC Wagner registered? Can you answer?

          “PMC Wagner” does not appear either in law enforcement agencies or in the register of legal entities, and its fighters are absent in the formulary lists of personnel [18]. According to The Bell, the secret supervision of the Wagner group is carried out by the General Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation [13]. According to some Russian and Western experts, the Wagner Group is actually a disguised unit in the structure of the Russian Ministry of Defense, ultimately subordinate to the Russian government

          The Russian site The Bell in 2015 estimated the content of the Wagner Group from 5,1 to 10,3 billion rubles. in year

          All this looks like dirty political games of cheaters. The Kremlin cannot directly draw up their claims, so we have to catch it, like - we have nothing to do with it! In civilian life, those who hide their intentions are either scammers or weaklings.

          It is impossible to imagine that Stalin would equip the Soviet military in PMCs to achieve political goals.
  2. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 April 29 2020 07: 51 New
    I believe that citizens need to be taught how to use and use weapons and one person will need to know the tactics and strategy of a certain kind of troops in order to manage a group of people. From the age of 13 I was taught to use firearms, TOZ 8 and TOZ 12 at the school there was a shooting range and WWII participant M. Burkatsky taught us to shoot accurately.
    1. Living7111972
      Living7111972 April 29 2020 08: 55 New
      the war is won without shooting, my son is in the third year of the academy, after completing the cadet. I believe that he is not yet ready to become an officer ... He parachuted for the first time at the age of 14, when he began to weigh 45 kg, he shoots from a youngster. And blue takes to face. But still not ready for war
      1. domokl
        April 29 2020 11: 03 New
        Quote: sala7111972
        But still not ready for war

        And who is ready for war? My son went to war in the second year of his sentence. And he was not ready either. Nothing, I'm used to it. Even in the leg "reward" brought from an enemy sniper
        1. AK1972
          AK1972 April 29 2020 11: 57 New
          Quote: domokl
          Even in the leg "reward" brought from an enemy sniper

          It turns out that the inaccuracy is the politeness of a sniper.
  3. Far B
    Far B April 29 2020 07: 55 New
    Well, what kind of mercenaries? This is all chewed up by history. Mercenaries, for example, acted very successfully (robbed / killed / raped, and sometimes even fought) during the Thirty Years War. But in the end, all the same, the mother story chewed them and spat out. As unnecessary. And in the same Thirty Years, the Swedes, with their regular army, became a European superpower. Mercenaries can be used to solve local problems, but for a war, even if not with the largest state, no PMC is enough.
  4. Peter is not the first
    Peter is not the first April 29 2020 07: 55 New
    The world has already seen corrupt condottieri in Italy in the 14-16th century, and even then they were noted for their venality, not loyalty and desire to rob. So all this was already in this world, and now someone wants to make fortunes again, not by selling weapons, since this market has already been divided, but by selling "cannon fodder" for wars. Business and nothing more!
  5. strannik1985
    strannik1985 April 29 2020 08: 26 New
    Somehow the author is confused, PMCs are not mercenaries, they can be both commercial (for example, "Moran Security"), work abroad on request (within the framework of the law), and pro-state (Wagner PMCs, etc.), this is already an instrument of the state's foreign policy (not replacing the Armed Forces), right up to direct participation in b / d (violating the law against PMCs) and calling them "soldiers who pay the most" (despite the fact that the rank and file can be recruited basis) recklessly.
    1. carstorm 11
      carstorm 11 April 29 2020 08: 40 New
      exactly that tool. you pay they do. it has nothing to do with the state and service for its benefit.
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 April 29 2020 08: 49 New
        exactly what tool

        C'mon, in the interests of which state does Wagner PMC operate in Syria? Worked in L / DPR? laughing
        1. carstorm 11
          carstorm 11 April 29 2020 09: 05 New
          and tomorrow will be PMC Pupkin. It makes no difference to me who pays them. situational coincidences of interests do not matter much to me. I started with Suvorovsky. and a good way has passed. like my father and grandfather and great-grandfather. and we always served the country and not the joint-stock companies or whatever there is in the charter of their documents. so for me the mercenary will remain a mercenary. even if they will be on the side of those to whom I sympathize.
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 April 29 2020 09: 12 New
            and tomorrow will be PMC Pupkin. It makes no difference to me who pays them.

            This is an instrument of the state and the state pays them, in the case of PMC Wagner-Russia.
            1. carstorm 11
              carstorm 11 April 29 2020 09: 46 New
              and how does this cancel the fact that they are just mercenaries and do what they are paid for? the states also pay their PMCs in both Iraq and Afghanistan. So what? have they ceased to be mere mercenaries?
              1. strannik1985
                strannik1985 April 29 2020 09: 52 New
                have they ceased to be mere mercenaries?

                Stopped. The state has the right to delegate authority, including Syria. If PMCs Wagner works with the knowledge and permission of the ATS (within the law), as part of the agreements, they are not mercenaries.
    2. domokl
      April 29 2020 11: 10 New
      Quote: strannik1985
      can be both commercial (for example, "Moran Security"), work abroad on request (within the framework of the law), and pro-state (PMC Wagner, etc.)

      Is there evidence that the Wagner PMC belongs to the RF Ministry of Defense? But what about those claims that this is a Ukrainian PMC? All the information that circulates in the network and in the press is nothing more than publications from a not very clean St. Petersburg "small river, a tributary of the Neva." Let's all the same operate with facts, and not the next "in my opinion" or "everyone has known for a long time."
      Any PMC, including the one you mentioned, does not work in the interests of the state, but in the interests of a particular customer. If you recall when and how conversations about PMCs pop up, you will see that the matter there always concerns either deposits or some factories and other commercial organizations. PMCs do not fight with political enemies. Politicians pay little ...
  6. Doccor18
    Doccor18 April 29 2020 08: 31 New
    Mercenaries are people who make money. Comparing PMCs and the army is as pointless as it is silly to compare a husband and a lover.
    1. domokl
      April 29 2020 11: 15 New
      short and to the bullseye
  7. Hagen
    Hagen April 29 2020 08: 36 New
    The problem of evaluation by mature grandfathers of contemporary youth has always existed, obviously, will continue to exist. Nothing has changed. The number of people employed in private security structures will be governed by the demand for these services. Nothing new here either. The need to educate the younger generation has never been doubted by anyone, though all the way they searched for the performer for the role of educator - tutors, school, Komsomol, army, family. Always the problem rested in a balance between patriotism and economic feasibility. I think in the near future nothing will change dramatically. I would like to hand over my country in the hands of the citizens of my country in my late years. I think that in the end the state will come to the conclusion that without planting the right thoughts from the point of view of the state on the balance of interests of the individual and society in the minds of the younger generation, things will not go in a positive direction. And we will come to some kind of unified program on humanitarian disciplines, but, I think, not tomorrow.
  8. Oslyabya
    Oslyabya April 29 2020 08: 51 New
    It seems to me that the emphasis now is not much different: PMCs / private security companies allow the state to say about a conflict that "We were not standing here!" At the same time, they tried to solve their questions. And the Army - I think only a "pacifizd with a greenpeace of the brain" can seriously imagine that you can do without it! A normal person can only have questions about its principles of construction, but not on the fact of its necessity as such!
  9. knn54
    knn54 April 29 2020 08: 59 New
    Libertarians are neoliberals. Who are against ANY intervention of the state. And they need PMCs ONLY to pacify the disgruntled masses. The army and the security forces in "one" person.
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack April 29 2020 09: 10 New
      Quote: knn54
      PMCs they need ONLY to pacify the discontented masses

      (boring voice):

      - PMCs do not work in the country to which they belong
      - PMCs are controlled by the state (in the Russian Federation - so precisely controlled)
      - PMCs are needed to perform "delicate" (read - dumb) tasks outside the borders of the state, when intervention is necessary, and the state's participation in it is undesirable.

      And that’s it. Everything is very simple. No rams request
  10. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek April 29 2020 09: 01 New
    There are many ++++:
    1. The ability to hide the loss of the army.
    2. Hide operational budgets.
    3. Hide the participation of his army.
    4. Do semi-legal things ....
    5. Provide comm services to companies.
    6. Attract foreigners.
    7. Attract a variety of specialists.
    9. The ability to service specialists after the army.

    The only thing that needs to be regulated, for the greater weight of our PMCs, is the legal status and register cases when the Russian army can or is obliged to intervene (help) these PMCs. It can fuck someone from the air, well, so that the enemy knows that they are not just.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. Glory1974
    Glory1974 April 29 2020 09: 23 New
    I do not agree with the author. What is this statement?
    Voluntary association of people to carry out the tasks of the country's defense is an initially stupid idea.

    How clever to bring people together? To cordon off a bazaar (shopping center) and take it by force to staff the army? This was done in Afghanistan under Najibullah.
    But what is this passage?
    Thousands of people who deliberately go to die just because the fools with shoulder straps of officers and generals decided that the army would be able to defeat on its own? How many percent of drafted militias returned home after the war?

    Is it written for Victory Day? What does this have to do with PMCs? These are flies, honey, shit and bees.
    The topic of the article was not disclosed, questions were not posed, no answers. Chaotic article.
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 April 29 2020 10: 49 New
    Dm Medvedev, as president, often spoke of the need to reduce the role of the state in society. At the same time, the state believes that society should feed it better and better .... The creation of PMCs is from the same opera ... The state, as it were, has nothing to do with it ... it is ashamed to be responsible for not specious things ... But if the United States has PMCs, then we also need - the authorities believe ... to live with wolves - howl like a wolf ... something like that.
  15. Octopus
    Octopus April 29 2020 10: 57 New

    Just as in an old joke Rabinovich sang Caruso on the phone, so the author of the article spoke about his vision of ankap and libertarianism.

    Firstly. There are many Libertarians and they say different things. However, most of them do not promise to build communism right now. The elimination of those functions of the state that are associated with violence, as a rule, is not considered a priority.

    Secondly. Naturally, the concept of abandoning the army is not universal. It works in cases:
    1. Indeed, it is possible to feed someone else's army instead of your own. Napoleon disagrees, but it might be a reasonable idea. An example is Japan from the time of the twentieth century.
    2. Stable relations with a small number of neighbors, even if they are in trouble. An example is Costa Rica.
    3. The military strength of the neighbors is immeasurably higher, but they do not threaten the country. An example is the small EU countries not on the border, for example Benelux. Canada.

    In less favorable circumstances, militias against the army are worth the same as Toyotachanka against tanks.

    Thirdly. The professionalization of the army is an objective process. Everyone is moving in this direction, including Israel and Switzerland. The draft army is extremely expensive in economic and political terms. Unless, of course, replace it with profanity, as in Russia.

    Fourth. Returning to paragraph 1. The situation in Russia is so far from the ideas of libertarianism that the defeat by libertarians of the Russian army is the last thing I would worry about.
  16. iouris
    iouris April 29 2020 12: 46 New
    "And something very patriotic is asking me to speak":
    "Libertarians, ..... (insert last name according to the situation) gave the order,
    Libertarians, the Fatherland is calling us .... "
  17. Shadow
    Shadow April 29 2020 19: 08 New
    The renunciation of the armed forces would certainly be a crazy decision for any more or less significant power. Moreover, every full-fledged citizen must be a warrior and participate in upholding the interests of the whole nation - this requires the need to be strong, this disciplines and morally educates the people, gives an uninterrupted sense of responsibility.
    But in addition to the armed forces under the control of state bodies, it would be necessary, firstly, to have mercenary units for use in conditions of an undesirable demonstration of a country's involvement in a particular operation, for long counter-guerrilla actions in territories falling within the sphere of national interests, and for protection of state property, first of all, outside the country, and secondly, to have, under state protection, a non-national relatively closed military structure organized on the model of ancient orders, which can be transferred, including some educational, supervisory and police functions within the country.
  18. CTABEP
    CTABEP 1 May 2020 09: 59 New
    The author, in principle, not understanding the essence, writes nonsense.
    At the same time, our “defenders” can quite legally go over to the side of the enemy simply because the salary there is higher. Nothing personal, just business.

    How many times have Swiss mercenaries fought against other Swiss? How often did the Landsknechts fight against the SRI? How many Russians fought on the side of various Islamist formations? Money in this case is one of the components, but it is stupid to imagine a mercenary as a machine gun into which you pour money and he fights. Each person has his own principles, his own understanding of the correctness / incorrectness of war. And money is just an incentive - to fight for free, because one of the politicians decided that at the other end of the world our interests are certainly possible (we went through this in Afghanistan and the first Chechnya, for example), but not necessary. But when you are paid money for this, and you consider this war necessary in principle, why not? Let me remind you that a bunch of contract servicemen poured into the second Chechnya - they were paid money there, but they could have fought for the Czechs, they were also paid there (and specialists probably more than ours). So why didn't the "mercenaries" go to war for Ichkeria?
  19. Engineer
    Engineer 1 May 2020 11: 36 New
    The author changes his shoes in a jump.
    Less than six months ago, he assured that PMCs are healthy and tasty and generally serve the interests of Russia + self-sufficiency.
    And then bang. And mercenaries, and serve who pays more, etc.
    The funny thing is that in this case, as a weather vane, a person who likes to reproach liberals, including for this very reason