Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The whole military thing needs to be rethought:

What is the mission? First of all national defense. We need a standing professional well trained well compensated happy group at all times for that. The standing army includes women.

Overseas and or cross border adventures? Unless it’s solely for prevention of imminent attack on our homeland, the standing military should not be involved except for volunteers from the standing army who should be immediately replaced. These volunteers could include anyone however whoever they are “fighting for” must pay them to the volunteers satisfaction. That’s right, paid mercenaries, as a profession. Volunteers from the standing military could choose to do this to make extra money with their place in the standing military open for them whenever they choose to return.

Mandatory training (limited to skills necessary for national defense) for lottery selected 18 year old men only drafted followed by enlistment for a max period of two years. The last group used to supplement standing military. After two years they can walk away, reup or apply to join the other two groups. Well paid when in action, reasonably paid for being available.

Paid fully trained at the ready volunteer military including women available to supplement standing military for national defense only. The compensation should be less than the standing military however the compensation should be both for training and readiness and more than received by the lottery draft group unless that group is fighting. The first group used to supplement standing military.

Military hardware of any sort paid for by US taxpayers only to be used for securing borders and national defense including used outside borders to prevent imminent attack on the homeland. Any and all other military hardware may be sold unless needed here for use elsewhere at full retail prices in some cases where appropriate rentals may be considered.

Compensation scales should be:

Standing military who may fight - as least as much United auto workers
Volunteer ready army - double minimum wage and when fighting same as standing military
Drafted lottery - minimum wage and when fighting same as standing military
Executives (non fighting officers) - same as standing military
Fighting executives. - same as standing army plus 59% when fighting
This seems to be a lot of mixed messaging. You are talking about both conscription and a standing professional army. Both exist for very different reasons.


Going all the way back to the Roman legions a professional army was invented for conquest and invading. It was specifically created to overcome defensive conscript based militaries.

So if you want a defensive force than a professional army is contrary to that goal from the start.

Part of the problem is in the West we have had a couple hundred years of propaganda thrown our way that professional soldiers are actually about defending the nation which is just factually wrong.

People are told it is just a difference in training and pay when they are fundamentally intended for opposite purposes.

Take a look at the rucksacks of most conscript militaries vs professional armies. There is a reason why most rucksacks from conscript militaries like in the former Com Bloc all are about the size of a child's school bag.

They are designed that way because they are operating under the assumption they will be performing defensive operations on friendly soil and can resupply with the locals.

Western professional militaries carry massive packs because they operate under the assumption they will be operating on hostile foreign soil so the supplies you have are what you can carry in with you.

Personally as a Canadian I am all for going all conscripts and mandatory service. It is also in practical terms the only way to have the numbers to even be useful from a defensive standpoint.

It was even briefly considered during the cold war. In the 1980s the soviet airborne alone outnumbered our entire army.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
What I’m saying is that I want my nation defended by a professional military. Ukraine is not and things aren’t going well there. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
@jackjjackson Professional soldiers are designed for one thing. Conquest.


Not having professional soldiers is why it is not going well for Russia either.

They are trying to conquer territory with a defensive force.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Ok. I’ll rephrase it. Well trained well paid military paid to provide permanent defense better than the power any offensive military could muster. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
fanuc2013 · 51-55, F
Not a bad idea, but instead of a lottery, ALL 18 year olds serve two years service! No exemptions! For example, paraplegics can be trained in office jobs, divinity students can be placed in the chaplain corps. Anyone can be trained to do a useful job!
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@fanuc2013 Even the Lawyers??😷
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Sure. They can respond to correspondence from crackpots like you 😂 @whowasthatmaskedman
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
That sounds remarkably sensible. However I have my doubts regarding conscription/national service. I dont want anyone in the armed forces who isnt there by choice..AND, I would make military service and an honourable discharge as a qualification for anyone running for any elected office. I do read your proposals as removing the need for a lot of the massive naval hardware, like supercarriers and their escorts with global reach, which would save a bundle in the defence budget.😷
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
The draft part is for a possible shortfall in the reserve/national guard who do the bare minimum. May not be necessary if the rest of the program is implemented properly. I agree with and like your adding military service to elected office requirements. @whowasthatmaskedman
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
With todays technology surface boats are sitting ducks and planes can fly from Kansas worldwide and back. @whowasthatmaskedman
MarineBob · 56-60, M
Are you saying take away their food stamps
By 1948 war was considered criminal, and was to be phased out under the League of Nations and the UN.
Turning back the clock to a more violent and idiotic world order was the greatest triumph of twentieth century USA.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I say bring home ALL overseas Troops, close those bases, leave NATO and the UN, and force all those other countries to defend themselves, they do have their own militaries after all.
@jackjjackson During the cold war times were different, now the US is demanded to protect every European country that hates us.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
As finances collapse someone will likely rethink NATO. @NativePortlander1970
@jackjjackson So then, you admit to being a war monger.

 
Post Comment