Private Armies

[Zippyjuan]

NO maximum. It's ur damn money and if you feel like bankrupting yourself over your paranoia, go for it.

Now if you start commanding those guards to activately violate the property of others...there will be hell to pay, one way or another.

You will need your own private army to do that.

[tttppp]

Google or Microsoft would have the resources. An invasion would not have to be large to cause the other country to retaliate against the US.

Or perhaps Exxon invading say Saudi Arabla to take over their oil fields for economic profits?

How about the second questions? Domestic abuse by private armies?

Investors would rather keep the tens of billions of dollars they have.

[kcchiefs6465]

Investors would rather keep the tens of billions of dollars they have.

Yeah, war is a drain on the economy. No matter who says elsewise. I'm sure top share holders of EXXON have no ambitions to privately fund and invade a country. They'd much rather pay ex-general lobbyists what amounts to .00001 percent of profit returns to persuade congress to invade a country. (That statement is close, but by no means an exact figure. I don't have my references handy.) As well as the propaganda campaigns financed by said corporations. Maybe my memory fails me, but was it not BP that had us intervening in Syria the first time. (in the '40s) I will say that while my statements may or may not be incorrect, they are the truth. As in, I might confuse a name with a particular intervention (we've had over a hundred) but I'm only human and really can't remember everything I've read. Now that I think about it, wasn't the Iraq-Kuwait conflict instigated by BP? (rather our intervention)

[mport1]

If I were president the very first thing I'd try to do is immediately abolish the military. Private defense would be better in every single way and would not require the immoral initiation of force of the current system.

[osan]

Don't have much time so I'll keep this short. Should American citizens be allowed to employ private armies overseas?

This question stems from, first, the belief that a non-interventionist foreign policy is vitally important to the peace of our nation. Second, the freedoms I believe we should have to pursue economic and other goals. And also, watching the documentary Burma VJ, in which one of the individuals is an oppressive dictator that deserves to be killed-- but not by our government.

Problems I see is that foreign troops wouldn't be allowed to pursue onto an American's home territory, making it virtually impossible to force peace or retaliate. And stemming from that, the appearance that the US is safeguarding the combatants. I'm sure many foreign governments wouldn't care to differentiate either way.

What say you?

Jesus... the shit that keeps some people up at night.

The nation, so to speak, is falling into ruin about your ears and you concern yourself with this?

This is right up there with should we be able to own nukes.

Short answer, yes.

Either you are free or you are something else.

We are SO doomed... now my head hurts again.

[osan]

Who are the private armies responsible to? What if WalMart financed one with their own money and decided to take over China? How would one deal with any domestic abuses by a private army?

Say perhaps they wanted to extort money from local citizens for their own pay or forcebly conscript people?

Did I miss the mass electric kool-aid party?

God I get such headaches when people turn off their brains. There is NO FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE between "public" and "private" NONE. The only difference, usually, is degree. So-called "government" is usually far better funded across the years. There is ZERO difference between "government" using armed men to expropriate the fruits of YOUR labor and Walmart doing so. None. Zero. Zilch. Nulla. Nada. Nyichevo. Semmi. Nichts. Tween. NOTHING.

Strip away labels. Strip away all uniforms and clothing. Now tell me who is "government" and who is "private"? All this bullshit tyranny is NOTHING other than one subset of a population acting criminally against the other. HELLO? ANYONE HOME?

Seriously folks, if one cannot see and understand these basic truths, then they are flying blind.

[tttppp]

Yeah, war is a drain on the economy. No matter who says elsewise. I'm sure top share holders of EXXON have no ambitions to privately fund and invade a country. They'd much rather pay ex-general lobbyists what amounts to .00001 percent of profit returns to persuade congress to invade a country. (That statement is close, but by no means an exact figure. I don't have my references handy.) As well as the propaganda campaigns financed by said corporations. Maybe my memory fails me, but was it not BP that had us intervening in Syria the first time. (in the '40s) I will say that while my statements may or may not be incorrect, they are the truth. As in, I might confuse a name with a particular intervention (we've had over a hundred) but I'm only human and really can't remember everything I've read. Now that I think about it, wasn't the Iraq-Kuwait conflict instigated by BP? (rather our intervention)

If the oil companies had tp spend their own money to start wars for oil, they might choose to innovate and find better sources. Unless of course their plan is to nuke countries and then just take the oil aftr, maybe that would be cost effective.

But you also have to consider other companies would be gearing up to defend themselves too, so its not like a Sandy Hook situation where you can walk in and take target practice.

[klamath]

I think where the line should be draw is when a private army supported, trained and supplied out of the US is in a foreign country offensively assualting foreign armies and governments. I don't think anyone has the right to leave from our joint home stir up a fight in a foreign area and then run back to the common home bringing the wrath of those they attacked down on me. If they leave this country and start an offensive war don't expect to come back home.
It is very much like when my dog intentionally runs around in the woods, digs in a yellowjackets nest and then comes running back to me with thousands after him. I DON"T welcome him back by my side.

[pcosmar]

Private Army?

Why? An Army is for conquest.
I have no problem with an individual joining another in defense. Foreign or domestic.

the idea of a "private army" would likely be defeated by the local militia,, or it should be.