Does America need a standing army?

[Cutlerzzz]

Well, taking a look at the map of the world, the US has 6,000 miles of ocean to the West, 3,500 miles to the East, a mountainous arid border with an undeveloped country to the South, and a frigid border with a small country to the North.

Canada could not invade if they wanted to. Their population is a 9th of ours, their economic output is a 10th of ours, our economies are too intertwinned to risk it, and the natural ostacles are extreme(the extreme cold, the mountains to the west, the Great Lakes to the East) . If Mexico tried(cue illegal immigration joke) I can't imagine that they would have much success either. They are an undeveloped country with a fairly small economy, a much smaller population than us, an economy heavily dependent on ours, and nearly our entire border is covered by mountains.

Cuba is far too small and poor to do much of anything in any case.

A strong Navy and Air Force can keep virtually any country away from the US mainland. Even if any countries managed to somehow gain a foothold(almost impossible), the US could create an army by the time they have arrived. Any enemy advance would be stalled, as there would be "a gun behind every blade of grass" to quote Yamamoto; the Second Amendment protecting the people's natural right to bear arms is the ultimate "standing army". This would make any occuptation by a foreign army virtually impossible. Any foreign armies would get bogged down and an American army could then be created to defeat the enemy.

Of course, nuclear weapons and MAD make any wars with major powers unlikely.

For these reasons, I view a standing army(especially a government army...) as unneeded. A decent Navy and Air Force, the Second Amendment, and the state national guards is all that is needed to protect the United States.

 

[Kludge]

America has more guns than citizens, and we have plenty of citizens. We need nothing for self-defense as-is.

We could be exterminated, but why if we have no standing army oppressing abroad? I would as readily give my revenue to the Canadian government as the US. That is to say, governments can go fuck themselves, and I would rather die than be enslaved, no matter how many children I leave behind. (-And I hope they follow in my footsteps.)

 

[Jace]

..

 

[pcosmar]

America needs a standing army if Americans want to continue to occupy foreign countries and engage in costly wars overseas. A standing Army is a necessity for those who want to maintain an Empire.

If Americans want a Republic, the National Guard works fine for homeland defense. Volunteers serving a weekend a month and two weeks a year in the Army and Air National Guard is all the defense we need for a fraction of the cost we are paying now. I can see the need for an active-duty Navy, but what we have now is bloated and excessive and is not defending American interests or waters. Our current Navy is going to get us into a shooting war once the Chinese start asserting themselves in the South China Sea.

We need a Constitutional Militia.

 

[tremendoustie]

I'll do ya one better: the federal government shouldn't have a standing air force or navy either. Well funded, well trained militias are all that's needed. Plus, they enjoy three major advantages: they cannot be used to impose tyranny on people at home, nor for foreign adventurism, and they needn't be funded by extortion.

 

[dean.engelhardt]

Standing Army, National Guard, Militia, what ever you call, we need one. We are very good at making enemies. I don't think they should go outside our borders though.

 

[nobody's_hero]

We need more blades of grass to hide our guns behind; we don't need a standing army.

EDIT: FYI, there is some controversy over whether or not Yamamoto actually ever said those words, but it's a good quote (or non-quote, lol). I'm sure the Japanese knew the U.S. mainland could never be occupied, though.

 

[Uriah]

The United States has over 310,000,000 people; and is the third most populous country in the world behind China and India. If we have more guns than people then we don't need a standing army. The people are the army.

 

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Standing Army, National Guard, Militia, what ever you call, we need one. We are very good at making enemies. I don't think they should go outside our borders though.

Standing Armies are prohibited by our constitutions most importantly because they aren't supposed to exist INSIDE the borders. Caesar destroyed the roman republic when he led the legions across the Rubicon and headed for Rome. This time around one of the benchmarks that will be cited will be when the American military hegemon retreats back across the Rio Grande and seals the borders and smothers our last gasp of freedom in the U.S.

Its not a question of whether or not the US government should have a "standing army". Standing armies are prohibited by the state and federal constitutions. The principle that is enshrined by these prohibitions is the ancient common law idea that the people shall not trust weapons in the hands of the government.

Just as the powers to pass judgement on the laws and fact, assign guilt, and punish for crimes are not delegated to the government and are reserved by the people through the jury system, likewise the power to use force against people with weapons cannot be delegated to the government and is reserved by the people through the militia.

If the government needs to round up criminals within the country, let them get a posse. If they say they need to defend the country from invaders, let them request the militia. The great thing about this system is there are more checks/balances/vetoes possible as people sort out the information and decide whether the call to arms is a bunch of b.s., based on a false flag, etc.

My tag lines below cite 3 constitutional prohibitions against "standing" (i.e. permanent) armies.

 

[Brett85]

Yes. America should have the largest military in the world and be the world's leading superpower. However, we should use our troops to defend our own country rather than using them to police the world.

 

[TCE]

Yes. America should have the largest military in the world and be the world's leading superpower. However, we should use our troops to defend our own country rather than using them to police the world.

What is your opinion on shifting the powers back to the states and their militias? As opposed to the U.S. having a giant military, each state could have as big or small of one as they wanted and protect their borders to their liking? For instance, Texas could raise a large military of their own to protect their borders versus Nebraska, which wouldn't need much of a military presence.

 

[Brett85]

What is your opinion on shifting the powers back to the states and their militias? As opposed to the U.S. having a giant military, each state could have as big or small of one as they wanted and protect their borders to their liking? For instance, Texas could raise a large military of their own to protect their borders versus Nebraska, which wouldn't need much of a military presence.

I'm generally a big advocate of states' rights, but I just think that the number one priority of the federal government is national defense. The federal government shouldn't do much else besides national defense. I think that we need a strong military to defend our country. I would put our troops along the U.S-Mexico border and the U.S- Canadian border. Illegal immigration is a big threat to our national security, and putting our troops along the borders would stop illegal immigration cold. I don't think it really makes sense to have 50 different states that have their own national defense. The states do have the right under the Constitution to form militias, but I also think that it's necessary for the federal government to have an army. The articles of Confederation were abolished mostly because our founders realized that it didn't make sense for 50 different states to have their own national defense.

 

[aGameOfThrones]

Of course we need the police!

 

[lynnf]

after Hitler, Tojo, Mussonini, Norriega, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Stalin, and Hugo Chavez, this question has to be asked?

you can't just raise up an Army, Navy and Air Force from dry bones (as in the Bible) on a moment's notice without a miracle. I believe in miracles but I don't advocate voluntarily relying on them for my existence.

this is a no-brainer. if you don't think a standing army is needed, you have no brains.

 

[affa]

Wolverines!

 

[asurfaholic]

I believe a strong army (AF/Navy/Organized Infantry) should be PART of the plan to defend America. We have technology, and we could easily defend our entire coast and borders with a military 1/4 size of what we have now. The other part of national defense should lie with a well armed populace. Community organizations, such as the North Carolina Citizen Militia, would be the secondary line of defense, should a threat ever come across a border either by defeating the government army or sneaking past.

http://www.ncmilitia.org/

Having bases all over the world and being what some people like to call a "super power" is not part of a good national defense plan. Set up bases and bunkers along the coast and borders, maybe even open the military up for volunteers to man the bases (as Volunteer Fire Departments do) and we are virtually untouchable.

The worst thing that can be done for our defense is to take away the guns from Americans.

 

[affa]

after Hitler, Tojo, Mussonini, Norriega, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Stalin, and Hugo Chavez, this question has to be asked?

you can't just raise up an Army, Navy and Air Force from dry bones (as in the Bible) on a moment's notice without a miracle. I believe in miracles but I don't advocate voluntarily relying on them for my existence.

this is a no-brainer. if you don't think a standing army is needed, you have no brains.

Damn it. I guess I have no brains. Again. Darn internet logic.

 

[aGameOfThrones]

Damn it. I guess I have no brains. Again. Darn internet logic.

I blame zombies for you having no brain.

 

[AFPVet]

We need a Constitutional Militia.

This. Groups of unregulated citizen volunteers are not enough... they should have all of the resources they need for defense under the leadership of elected officers—especially at the border states! What is going on down there is a nightmare. Interestingly, the Constitution allows for both an active military and militia.

 

[Brett85]

Having bases all over the world and being what some people like to call a "super power" is not part of a good national defense plan.

We can be the world's leading superpower without having foreign military bases. We can bring all of our troops home and create more military bases here in the U.S.