RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners"

RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

missturbation -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/1/2007 1:24:48 PM)
I will gladly work towards dismantling every standing army in the world. We can start with England's first [;)] from what i hear about the state of your army at present i think this may be an empty threat lol [;)] Of course i understand what you are saying though.

Zensee -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/1/2007 1:32:37 PM)
Stephann: I put no words in your mouth. Nor was I the only person who read yours as a statement of essential superiority of American lives over those of foreigners. I even offered that I might have misunderstood you or that your initial statement was incomplete. I told you what your words said to me and you clarified them. Presuming a particular war is unavoidable, I agree that mercenaries should be on the front lines, since they choose to take pay for fighting, and that morally speaking, their use is preferable to consccripts or even the professional troops of a standing army, regardless of it nationality. Z.

ferryman777 -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/1/2007 1:49:02 PM)
Hello all, Just a little; governments donot place any value on human lives. Value of life is only when it concerns the indivual person themself, who ever they are. Governments just count the numbers, that is all; if 5,000 die, so what; they'll send in another 5,000.Simply as that. What we have now, with the US is a 'mercenary' army. Most enlist because they can't get a job; and the gov. offers a good salary, plus perks, benifits, and if you serve and re-enlist get a bonus. Food, clothing, medical and the like is supplied, etc. Consider that the military has certain training other than crawling in the mud; schooling you can't get on the outside, or at an outrageous expense, not to mention the job you need to pay for it all. Military is rather attractive as a vocation; with all that....it's a mercenary construct. A typical belief of a mercenary is...one who hires himself out to a gov. to fight. What's the difference? And, after , X years, you retire, get a nice bonus again; get your retirement allocation; get a job at the post office; or police department, or some other gov. organization. So, would not you say, we have a mercenary army now ? Or, am I decieved.

Zensee -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/1/2007 2:26:07 PM)
I think there is a clear difference between a professional army which, though it pays, is recruited and maintained in service of a nation, and mercenaries, who generally work for the highest bidder. Professional soldiers usually supplement their pay with patriotism, whereas mercenaries are rarely idealistic in that way. Z.

Dtesmoac -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/1/2007 3:02:26 PM)
traditionally the problem with mercenaries is that the other side may pay better then you at certain pints in time........... The use of mercenaries seems a sensible way of providing effective fighting units when required. I think the UN is the organisation that should be using mercanaries in large and well equiped numbers.

UtopianRanger -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 1:21:21 AM)
quote: The problem that arises is that with our belligerent attitude to the globe in general, we will find ourselves on slippery slopes in these matters (cites: machiavelli, clausewitz, sun tzu et al) Most definitely. And this is what happens when the Neocons view the US Military as a cornucopia. I listened to William Arkin the other day deliver a great analysis that equates our recruitment of foreigners into the US military as nothing more than the recruitment of mercenaries. And since you've been so good to bring him up.....the basis of all modern military doctrine in terms of recruitment and the sociology of military forces, is Machiavelli and The Prince and The Art of War. As you know.....both works place a huge emphasis on the fact that mercenaries are useless and dangerous. The more mercenary oriented a fighting force becomes the more unreliable it is. The whole venal nature of it sucks the morale right out from under your conscripts/volunteers. Haliburton and the private contractor aspect of the war has caused irreparable damage to our military and it's ability to recruit new membership. - R

Real0ne -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 1:54:07 AM)
i look at it from the brite side, when the american people get fed up with the tyranical imperialist aristocracy, the so called democratic us gov, the extension of britain, and once again take up arms at least there will be soldiers willing to shoot back us. If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. ---James Madison The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ---Thomas Jefferson

meatcleaver -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 2:12:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee I think there is a clear difference between a professional army which, though it pays, is recruited and maintained in service of a nation, and mercenaries, who generally work for the highest bidder. Professional soldiers usually supplement their pay with patriotism, whereas mercenaries are rarely idealistic in that way. Z. Britain built an empire using mercenaries employed by private companies, though now people often think of them as government armies but they weren't. Nelson's pursuit of the French at the Nile and Trafalgar was as much to do with monetary gain as patriotism. Hell, a great number of his sailors were French and Spanish and they wanted their % and it didn't matter where it came from.. Governments have never and will never, give a shite about human life or they only will give a shite if it effects their chances in an election. I can't understand why people want to fight and die for a bath towel (which is basically what a flag is), fighting for money might not be idealistic but it is far more rational and sane than patriotism.

deadbluebird -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 2:16:51 AM)
why not let felons serve.

caitlyn -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 7:22:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I remembered it stuck out in my mind because Rome doing the same thing is part of what caused its empire to collapse... but people rarely learn from history I don't buy this logic as presented by Gibbon, and neither do most modern historians. Offering citizenship for service, was part of the Reforms of Marius in 106BC. Well managed, it worked for hundreds of years in the Western Empire. It eventually became poorly managed, which allowed too high a percentage of foreign troops in the Legio Palatina and Equites Commitas. Judging a system by poor management, isn't a good judge of the system. In the Eastern Empire, they never offered citizenship for service. All foreign troops were on a strick mercenary pay basis. Eventually, they also fell.

Stephann -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 7:45:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ferryman777 Hello all, Just a little; governments donot place any value on human lives. Value of life is only when it concerns the indivual person themself, who ever they are. Governments just count the numbers, that is all; if 5,000 die, so what; they'll send in another 5,000.Simply as that. What we have now, with the US is a 'mercenary' army. Most enlist because they can't get a job; and the gov. offers a good salary, plus perks, benifits, and if you serve and re-enlist get a bonus. Food, clothing, medical and the like is supplied, etc. Consider that the military has certain training other than crawling in the mud; schooling you can't get on the outside, or at an outrageous expense, not to mention the job you need to pay for it all. Military is rather attractive as a vocation; with all that....it's a mercenary construct. A typical belief of a mercenary is...one who hires himself out to a gov. to fight. What's the difference? And, after , X years, you retire, get a nice bonus again; get your retirement allocation; get a job at the post office; or police department, or some other gov. organization. So, would not you say, we have a mercenary army now ? Or, am I decieved. Perhaps it might enlighten you to know, that had I chosen to work at McDonald's or Wendy's instead of enlisting in the Marines, I would have easily made three times as much money in my four year contract (not including the overtime required by military employees that border on abusive employment practices; certainly no fast food worker is 'required' to work 36 hour shifts, and threatened with jail time if they refuse.) Then again, I would expect the kind of attitude from a man who views the dedication towards one's country as a 'financial' investment. Don't suppose the name 'Socrates' means anything to you. Social Contractor

Nosathro -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 11:05:59 AM)
Yes KenDckey I also recall there is a restriction of the French Foreign Legion from fighting on French Soil. However in World War 1 and 2 they did. I wish you well Nosathro

Nosathro -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 11:23:27 AM)
*quote:* traditionally the problem with mercenaries is that the other side may pay better then you at certain pints in time........... I am only formural with one incident in History of this happening. The German Landsknechts switched sides not because of money but Germany joined the War on the otherside. *quote:* The use of mercenaries seems a sensible way of providing effective fighting units when required. I think the UN is the organisation that should be using mercanaries in large and well equiped numbers. Actually they did, in the early 1960 they paid a South African Colonel to from a Mercenary unit, the 5th Commandos to fight in the Chad against the Simba Upraising. *quote:* ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I remembered it stuck out in my mind because Rome doing the same thing is part of what caused its empire to collapse... but people rarely learn from history As I understand, at the hight only about 35% of the entire Roman Legion were Romans. The rest were Germans and Spainish mostly . In fact it was a former German who was General in the Roman Legion that lead to the worst defeat the Romans suffered, He destoried 3 of the 10 Roman Legions in one battle, the Romans never recoved from it. quote: why not let felons serve. That has been tried. It has not been proven effective, it seems most Criminals do not respond well to military discipline.

popeye1250 -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 11:47:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee I think there is a clear difference between a professional army which, though it pays, is recruited and maintained in service of a nation, and mercenaries, who generally work for the highest bidder. Professional soldiers usually supplement their pay with patriotism, whereas mercenaries are rarely idealistic in that way. Z. That's true. If I were in the Military (again) I'd feel a lot more patriotic if I were stationed along our border with Mexico than I would in Iraq.

Real0ne -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 2:29:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I remembered it stuck out in my mind because Rome doing the same thing is part of what caused its empire to collapse... but people rarely learn from history Judging a system by poor management, isn't a good judge of the system. People are always to arrogant to see it coming till its way to late then they cry how could this happen..... Duh.... look i guess those mean gov guys lied to us! "We will never fall for that again"!!! (but your kids will!!!) LMAO Their poor management? or management by design and our poor judge of character?

KenDckey -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 2:37:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro Yes KenDckey I also recall there is a restriction of the French Foreign Legion from fighting on French Soil. However in World War 1 and 2 they did. I wish you well Nosathro Yeah it always seemed sorta contradictory to me. But then I never understood the French much.

Vendaval -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 2:52:22 PM)
There is the inevitable quality control issues with such a population. quote: ORIGINAL: deadbluebird why not let felons serve.

sleazy -> RE: "Military considers recruiting foreigners" (3/2/2007 3:15:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann No question there. Yet, there's still the practical problem, of how to wage war. As a representative of the American people, I will gladly work towards dismantling every standing army in the world. We can start with England's first [;)] Well you will have to find it first, there aint much of it these days. As a sort of on topic point as regards many of the posts on this thread guess which is the second largest non-native fighting force in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Those who guessed mine are correct, OK its not all mine but mine and other fellow practitioners of my trade. If you lump all the private military contractors together (mercenaries is sooooo congo these days) they form the 2nd largest standing foriegn forces after the US in both those current hotspots. So not only are people paying for nations to spill blood, they are doing it directly hiring real professionals with no political agendas too. In addition to that we serve in those many countries that are either forgotten or ignored by political types, but are still there protecting national interests in places such as Mogadishu, Rwanda, still in the former Yugoslavia, infact pick a country either side of the prime meridian and between either pole and I could probably dig up a company that has paid for its own military experts in that country. Like it or not your country does hire mercenaries already, but rather than having them pledge to the state and be paid for by the same the "middle man" has been cut out and we are payed for directly by those that desire our services, be it a 24 hour news station, a manufacturing corporation or even a charitable body.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02