armslore14 (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} armslore14) wrote,@ 2006-03-19 21:40:00 |
|
Private Military?
I received this as a response to my last entry:
"ha-HA! most military men are republicans and prefer government to stay out of nearly everything because it's just so inefficient. what do you think about a privatized military? there'd be no redundancies if the government were to hire the fittest corps to fight their wars."
Whoever posted this (Katrina?)was correct about the military's political affiliations. Most are Republicans, although I sometimes doubt whether they understand what that encompasses.
As for the privatized military, I think we are on our way in that direction. Take, for instance, private military contractor companies like Blackwater USA. These guys are ex special forces soldiers that are getting paid $100,000 or more- 2-3x more than what the US Military was paying. You see that a lot. People generally leave the military for the private sector after the military trains them. But now the government is rehiring them.
Personally, I am fully against a privatized military. One of the few things that the Constitution actually spells out that the government is required to provide for the people is to "Provide for the common defense." While this could technically be satisfied through a private military, the last thing we need is a "General Electric Army," "Boeing Air Force," "Watercraft Navy," and "McDonnell-Douglas Marine Corps." Who would control training regulations? Should there be competition from other PMC companies? Most importantly, who would their troops be loyal too? The US or Boeing?
I can foresee massive corruption as well. It would be like the African military governments or the Praetorian Guard of the Roman Empire- whoever the military backed would become President.
No, as inefficient as a government-run military may be, it is necessary. It is also necessary to keep the military under civilian control for the same reasons.
Checks and Balances must be preserved. I don't approve of the way we're heading these days. I see disturbing parallels between both what the Nazis and Romans did when they switched to dictatorships.
C'mon America, not even 250 years and we're already on the decline? The Romans managed more than 1,000 years on top; we can do at least as well.
I received this as a response to my last entry:
"ha-HA! most military men are republicans and prefer government to stay out of nearly everything because it's just so inefficient. what do you think about a privatized military? there'd be no redundancies if the government were to hire the fittest corps to fight their wars."
Whoever posted this (Katrina?)was correct about the military's political affiliations. Most are Republicans, although I sometimes doubt whether they understand what that encompasses.
As for the privatized military, I think we are on our way in that direction. Take, for instance, private military contractor companies like Blackwater USA. These guys are ex special forces soldiers that are getting paid $100,000 or more- 2-3x more than what the US Military was paying. You see that a lot. People generally leave the military for the private sector after the military trains them. But now the government is rehiring them.
Personally, I am fully against a privatized military. One of the few things that the Constitution actually spells out that the government is required to provide for the people is to "Provide for the common defense." While this could technically be satisfied through a private military, the last thing we need is a "General Electric Army," "Boeing Air Force," "Watercraft Navy," and "McDonnell-Douglas Marine Corps." Who would control training regulations? Should there be competition from other PMC companies? Most importantly, who would their troops be loyal too? The US or Boeing?
I can foresee massive corruption as well. It would be like the African military governments or the Praetorian Guard of the Roman Empire- whoever the military backed would become President.
No, as inefficient as a government-run military may be, it is necessary. It is also necessary to keep the military under civilian control for the same reasons.
Checks and Balances must be preserved. I don't approve of the way we're heading these days. I see disturbing parallels between both what the Nazis and Romans did when they switched to dictatorships.
C'mon America, not even 250 years and we're already on the decline? The Romans managed more than 1,000 years on top; we can do at least as well.
