Do you support abolishing the military?

[Sola_Fide]

Fine, Mexicans and homosexuals will invade if we abolish the military since al-Qaeda and North Korea aren't big enough threats in your eyes.

Are you serious?

 

[eduardo89]

Are you serious?

As serious as a fat kid wanting an extra scoop of ice cream.

 

[fr33]

What a dumb question. Why not send al-Qaeda and North Korea an invitation to invade us?

Who is us anyways? You aren't even from here and you don't even live here.

 

[Pericles]

Well, I don't think it was stupid. The notice to register is pretty scary, although we've discovered they have not prosecuted anyone for declining to register. We will never apply for government assistance of any kind, even for higher education.

When I got mine, I headed for the copy machine, pulled my Army ID card out of my wallet and made a photocopy. Sent the photocopy back with their letter that would give retards a bad name, and never heard from them again.

 

[oyarde]

On my priority list is the following departments - Education, Staatssicherheitsdienst, Justice, Commence, Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, Energy, Transportation, and a few others I fail to remember at the moment, then take on DoD for a reengineering effort.

Oh yes Ed, Ag , H & H "HUMAN' services etc, that shit has to go .

 

[oyarde]

Who is us anyways? You aren't even from here and you don't even live here.

Well if the North Koreans invade my humble area, I am taking him,arming him and showing him how this is done

 

[BuddyRey]

I vote yes. Scrap the military and go back to locally accountable citizen militias. Then you might actually have a military whose job it is to defend America, instead of going abroad looking for monsters to slay.

 

[Neil Desmond]

The problem with the military is how it's being used by the government, not its existence - just like with guns & individuals using them.

 

[DamianTV]

When the Cops finally declare War on the Citizens, the only ones who will be willing to fight for the People will be the Vets. So no, I dont support abolishing the military. Some of the things about the military I absolutely dont like, but I would not abolish the military by any means.

Instead, I might support abolishing the Police, if the idiots in this country that watch MSM day in and day out could behave themselves without a figure of authority glaring at them over their shoulder and shaking their fingers in disapproval of their considered criminal actions...

 

[robert68]

The problem with the military is how it's being used by the government, not its existence - just like with guns & individuals using them.

The government is not an individual.

 

[enoch150]

What a dumb question. Why not send al-Qaeda and North Korea an invitation to invade us?

A country which would starve to death without food aid and a disorganized force of probably less than 10,000 are going to invade a country with 275 million guns. It's sad that there are people who actually believe this.

The ironic thing is that both Al-Qaida and North Korea are only hostile to us because of the US government's use of the military. The government would cause us a lot less trouble if we took away its toys.

 

[Neil Desmond]

The government is not an individual.

Who thinks that it is & why does that matter?

 

[presence]

In his book War Is A Racket, Butler argued for a powerful navy, but one prohibited from travelling more than 200 miles from the US coastline. Military aircraft could travel no more than 500 miles from the US coast and the army would be prohibited from leaving the United States altogether. Butler also proposed that all workers in defence industries, from the lowest labourer to the highest executive, be limited to `thirty dollars a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get'. He also proposed that a declaration of war should be passed by a plebiscite in which only those subject to conscription would be eligible to vote.

I'd support disbanding the army and auctioning the gear off for domestic market only.


I'd support a mandate for every adult male to own and maintain a M16, exemptions for conscientious objectors.

The structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their own personal equipment,

The constitution, 1 sec 8, requires the maintainance of a Navy. I support the same, inclusive of the Air Force. I'm with Butler, neither should venture more than a few hundred miles from our coast line.




I vote disband the Army

 

[Brett85]

Those are some crazy poll results. Apparently anarcho capitalists now make up a majority of the members of this forum.

 

[FrankRep]

Why do countries invade other countries?
To take over their tax farms.

We need to get rid of the income tax, federal reserve, and military so we can live in peace.

Other countries would invade us then.

 

[pcosmar]

abolishing the military?

No.

Limiting it,, Reducing it. putting it on a very short leash,, Yes.

 

[AFPVet]

I don't support a standing army, I do support a Federal Navy, for basically the same reasons as the Founders.

I think air force would fall more under navy than army, but I could be convinced otherwise.

I agree since during the writing of the Constitution, the Founders wanted defense—not offensive capabilities. Since that time, we've had strides in air and space technology. This is why the Air Force is also called the Space Force. We even shouted Air Force, Space Force, during training.

So if we have a Navy, it would be logical to have an air/space force as well.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I vote yes. Scrap the military and go back to locally accountable citizen militias. Then you might actually have a military whose job it is to defend America, instead of going abroad looking for monsters to slay.

The army, at any rate.

Not sure how citizens militias would handle the navy.

When the Cops finally declare War on the Citizens, the only ones who will be willing to fight for the People will be the Vets. So no, I dont support abolishing the military. Some of the things about the military I absolutely dont like, but I would not abolish the military by any means.

Instead, I might support abolishing the Police, if the idiots in this country that watch MSM day in and day out could behave themselves without a figure of authority glaring at them over their shoulder and shaking their fingers in disapproval of their considered criminal actions...

The Vets obeyed when they were told to deploy overseas, what makes you think they'll rebel when we're attacked by the police?

I mean, I'm not saying none of them will, but how many do you think we can count on?

Those are some crazy poll results. Apparently anarcho capitalists now make up a majority of the members of this forum.

If you assume every "Yes" vote is an ancap its like 40%. I don't really see why that's a problem.

As I've said, I agree with the Founders.

I agree since during the writing of the Constitution, the Founders wanted defense—not offensive capabilities. Since that time, we've had strides in air and space technology. This is why the Air Force is also called the Space Force. We even shouted Air Force, Space Force, during training.

So if we have a Navy, it would be logical to have a air/space force as well.

Why a Space Force? Unless extraterrestrials actually show their faces, and decide to attack... Earth?

If you're talking about space exploration/NASA I see no reason not to leave that kind of thing to the free market.

 

[qh4dotcom]

How would China and Russia invade? The logistics would be mind boggling and they would both need giantic expansions of their military. Furthermore, what would their incentive be? China would destroy their economy completely. Russia is far too poor to attempt something like that if they wanted.

Exactly....and juleswin forgot about the two big deterrents....two big oceans and 300 million guns in the hands of citizens.

 

[willwash]

Navies operate very, very expensive equipment and highly trained and proficient operators, relative to armies. This was true even in the 1700's, but it is even more true now with nuclear powered vessels. As a result, the Founders realized that a standing Navy was necessary to national security.

An Army can be trained and equipped in a comparitively short time in response to a legtimate threat to national security, especially when people are already trained as militia. To present an effective naval defense, however, a standing Navy is essential. You cannot respond to a threat then and decide to build an aircraft carrier (and carrier Airwing) and train its crew in a timeframe appropriate for national defense. The process takes years and many many billions of dollars. So, some may say unfortunately, this is one case where we are better off having a fleet of ships and trained crews at the ready at all times.

Additionally, combatting piracy on the high seas is a specifically authorized power of the federal government. This requires a Navy.

I'd argue the same principle naturally extends to an Air Force for the same reasons.