Proposed Global Defense Force to replace individual national militaries

reply to post by mydarkpassenger

I have done my best here to articulate my position but you seem to not understand it in the least. It is kind of strange. I do not know how to respond to illogical situations.

four freaking pages and not one star of flag even when people mention it in the thread.







hard to understand.

ATS is truly stupid. There is no intelligent discussion of anything of importance so continued debate here is fruitless. We might as well discuss a subject of importance with monkeys.

reply to post by mydarkpassenger


It is like talking to people who can only hear what is going on in their own mind and can not actually hear the arguments of other people. I have to ask are you aware that the outside world exists? Is there any reaching you? You do not seem to respond to my direct communications in a logical and reasoning manner. I have to assume that you are not aware of my posts at all considering your response.

Considering that not one person has addressed me directly I have to consider the fact that I am speaking to and responding to Fake web persona accounts. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here I am 4 pages down in this thread and no one has even thought they want to hear more of this thread and flagged this thread? This is without doubt proof that robots are rampant on this site.

reply to post by wayouttheredude


Isn't this the UN Peacekeeping Force? NATO? EU?

reply to post by Throwback


That is not being discussed here. This is about a private global security force of every nation providing for the common defense of all of us. Not a already established notion that does not work.

reply to post by wayouttheredude


I'm pretty sure that's what the UN is.

reply to post by wayouttheredude


Who decides when and where this force is used?
Who decides what is right and what is wrong?
The biggest contributor is always going to want to get the more say - so can easily use this force for their advantage, gain or dirty work. People have different views of right and wrong that are based on religion, politics, circumstances and hate.
I will flag the topic though because I feel it needs to be discussed. Could see this working but it would have to be a system where everyone who contributes .5% of GDP gets equal say - and their say would have to refelect the peoples wishes not their own - and it would need a lot of rules that can not be amended by "executive orders"

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
55 responses and not one star or flag? You folks want to discuss this but also want the discussion to go away it seems. Weird.

NO Not "weird":
I agree we truly spend way too much on "defense": and mingling in the worlds affairs; but That is a choice WE can change without entangling treaties. and supporting a world army.
Lets say we try it:
So We signoff signature #1for the united states Barak obama: a.k.a.Barry Soetero" The last President of the united states of America..: Britain(?)Eu nations follow inline( except Scotland and Ireland them boyz got bawlzzz!!);Thailand and malaysia sign on
Russias motherland pride says: "Nyet"
China says "No" in order to not be out in the cold China and Russia form an axis alliance
Northkorea signs the russian treaty
Japan teeters: hmmmm east pac/westpac????
We just stepped back to 1953 !Thanks! idiots.

WHAT ABOUT the middle east left to form their own caliphate;? They would never side with the "great satan" and capitalist oil exploiters

Do you honestly believe these forces will be immune to high level political corruption ( votes are bought in the u.n.all he time) or will they be seen enforcing privatization of water in central and South America for the corporations????
Added:!
Global collectivism is a truly BAD IDEA.and anybody supporting it should be considered an enemy of his countrymen.

If Liberia is overrun by Morroccan regular troops they can go to the U.N. today! or the ambassador can go to see Hillary over lunch promise a few oil leases; and and We'll be barbecuing Morrocan regulars with close air support aircraft by the weekend.Probably out of U.S.Iraq bases
no need to help bring in a new world police force any sooner than it will probably happen. If you try to relinquish U.S. sovereignty to a world body you will thrust this country into a hellish civil war.and folks would take that personally.

reply to post by wayouttheredude
so it is contract police work just like black water, who has the highest pay gets the force, i just do not see it as a valid deterrent, for one what about all the nukes? would this GDF have them all under there control or would the countries still have final say?

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
ATS is truly stupid. There is no intelligent discussion of anything of importance so continued debate here is fruitless. We might as well discuss a subject of importance with monkeys.

intelligent discussion?
You refuse to accept the negatives and still press on with the idea. as if its a good thing and we are too stupid to realize it.
Sorry; you are being used to further the advancement of one world central government and collectivism. ...

you know it's interesting, i was thinking about how earlier, there was a thread posted about how an alien invasion might bring world peace that i caught at work and didn't have time to post in. the thing in the op that sticks out to me in this global defense force is the thought of an "external attack". more interestingly, there was a lot of talk early february on these forums as well as other UFO/alien-type discussion forums about how some business meets had talk of "opening up business deals with extra-terrestrials", and i was trying to think of a possible connection. maybe i'm just over-thinking it.

ETA: wow, reading that over again, that was pretty out-there coming from me. but, i'd feel bad not posting my thoughts.

Wow. The mafia on a global scale. And with military power too. Sorry, this screams to much of the ability to be taken advantage of. Corruption would run rampant. And how would you put together the leading body that governs the actions of this GDF? Would it be a representative from each nation sitting on a council? How would one elect said representative to the position? Because if forced to do this, I would want to elect a representative. Well that's not entirely true. I wouldn't want one person representing the interests of the approximately 300 million people in America. How can one person possibly be able to represent a nation of 300 million people. I mean come on! Sure we have a president leading this nation. But the piece of paper that the founding fathers decided to draft a couple of centuries ago, explicitly put protections in to prevent one person from having all the power.

Sorry to go on a rant, but this is folly. There is no reason at this point and time in our human history to form a Global Defense Force. Unless like others have stated, we, as a planet, have an external threat from an Extraterrestrial source.

If anything, we should be pushing for proliferation, and reduction in defense spending. This idea would just propagate the mentality of the sick and twisted mentality that we as a human population are so extraordinarily different that we have to resort to violence every time there is any kind of disagreement between ourselves.

And what would we do with approximately 35 million soldiers? When the GDF is activated to protect a country the size of Malta, where do you fit that many soldiers? Oh, that's right, they wouldn't be activated at once, which begs the question: How is this any more financially responsible than a country spending their own money on national security, where there is a better understanding by the local population of what needs spent on the nations defense?

Threads like this are the reason why Heinlein said humans should be generalists and only insects can afford to specialize and survive.

What the OP fails to understand is WHY warfare happens and what purpose it actually serves in society.

War is what happens when a dispute (usually over something that can make or cost money for the nations involved) becomes so untenable and or just plain more favorable to solve by force than by negotations or compromise.

It is a natural follow on to commerce and diplomacy. Period end of story! the reason why multinational forces never work is because as benjamin disraeli said to paraphrase: No nation has permanent allies only permanent national interests.

Beyond that there is Economics which the OP obviously fails to grasp. Namely the economics of how do you arm said gdf? What contractors will be used to procure equipment? at what rate? and how do signatory nations decide when there is a disagreement about what country arms and etc will be built in? And what about logistics? You do know every single country who gave up their military for this would be looking to fold not just the people employed in their militaries but also the employees of their arms and logistics industry into this new force right?

And if country X cannot still guarantee that by joining the gdf it's logistics groups and etc will keep getting paid because country Y is getting acontract this year you'd be more likely to START A WAR than anything!

Military's are a tool in the toolbox of nations. a multinational force liek you speak of would vastly decrease the utility of said tool while probably actually costing member nations MORE once you factor in the political and economic concessions that would have to be made to get businesses and people to accept this idea.

reply to post by wayouttheredude


I don't waste my time with that stuff. Why do people need stars or flags? Do they think they'll get prizes for them?

Regardless, good discussion thus far.

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

But think of the savings. The US currently spends nearly 5% of our GDP on defense. Under this scheme we would only spend .5% or a savings of more than 3 trillion annually. We can not afford our current expenditure so by this method we could provide for the common defense of all nations for a very low cost.

The control of this GDF would be by the contract of the GDF which would provide for common defense only.

Do you understand POLICE STATE? It costs too much is not an argument against a police state.

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
Proposed Global Defense Force to replace individual national militaries. Well what do you think?

What do I think? This is wrong on so many levels. Who would be in charge of it? Who decides where they would be deployed? Who decides why they would be deployed? No, bad idea.
Let's say just for the fun it that china is the one in charge of it. Since china's in the drivers seat and china has very few natural resources of their own, lets say they want our (The US) oil, coal, natural gas, ect and we won't give it to them. china call a meets and says that since the US won't give them what they want that's concidered an aggressive move on our part and china demands the GDF come in and take it.
You see what i'm getting at? Who ever is going to be incharge of this huge force is going to be weilding a lot of power.

By giving up our military, we give up our sovereignty. We become subject to the UN and its "democratic" determinations. US citizens would lose their Constitutional rights immediately. And since Muslim countries are the ONLY countries to declare themselves as Theocratic democracies, freedom of religion would be wiped out in no time at all.

A One-World military is one of the WORST imaginable scenarios I can imagine. Ordinary citizens would have no "real" advocates...

reply to post by AOA2012


I think your name says it all. You are way out there. You should probably do a little reading up on history, tyranny, and police state. What other force would they be protecting the globe from? NO ONE they would be global police to keep people in line. F that!!!! hahaha