Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site oliven.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!oliveb!olivej!oliven!danw
From: danw@oliven.UUCP (danw)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: disjointed armys
Message-ID: <746@oliven.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 8-Dec-84 00:08:17 EST
Article-I.D.: oliven.746
Posted: Sat Dec  8 00:08:17 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Dec-84 02:25:22 EST
Organization: National Cobalt Testing Range
Lines: 54

[]
>National defense is one of the few enterprises for which a unified effort
>is far superior to a disjointed one.  Therefore having two or more
>"national defense corporations" would be utterly disasterous[sic] Furthermore,
>these companies could use their own resources to police the nation.

	There have been recent postings to the effect that the Irish
with their disjointed armys, did very well indeed against the Brits.
A single unified army is of course best for meddling in the affairs
of others. It does not  follow  that one army is the ONLY way to 
defend our homes. (With a libertarian army we are ONLY talking about
the best way to defend our homes.)
	Libertarians have an instinctive distrust of centralized authority,
making the one army concept impossible.
	An army that specializes in , for example , the defense the west 
cost of the U.S. would not necessary be the people you should give money
to for the defense of the Rocky Mountains or the deep south. As with all
things free market forces can determine what is best, not bureaucrats.
	Small regional specialized armies, do not face the terrible specter
of a single catastrophic defeat that looses the entire nation to the
enemy. One can make a case for the argument that Ireland would have been
conquered in much less time if the English had faced one single army
run by the local "government" ! 
	The fear that the National army will 'turn' on the population
and enslave them , is one of the best arguments against nonlibertarian
government 
	ALL national armys are financed with money collected using force,
as a result they have ALL enslaved their indigenous populations to one 
degree or another.  
	It is fuzzy thinking however to transfer this current problem ,
to proposed Libertarian solutions, without some thought.
	A small local libertarian army will have few full time career
people on the staff,(the limitation of volunteer funding make this 
unavoidable.) The backbone of libertarian defense is (and MUST be) the
civilian soldier , they outnumber professional career soldiers by at least
1000 to one. In the Swiss tradition a majority of these civilian soldiers 
will probably keep their battle rifles and ammunition at home , they have
access to cashes of sophisticate weapons, they know how to use their weapons. 
	The relationship of the libertarian 'professional' soldier to 
the citizen soldier is much like the relationship between a professor
and a student.  The professional has a PHD in soldiery , he holds week-end
and summer camp classes. He is a teacher , and in times of crises a leader
he is NOT the army , the citizens are the army.
	Full time military types are  visible , and accountable to ,
the community by virtue of the fact that they are perpetual involved 
with fund raising activities. This is markedly different from our
current system.
	An army that is distant , unaccountable ,or aloof to the needs
of the community, will find it's funding will dry up overnight.
	There is simply no opportunity for these individuals to get 
together and "take over".


						danw