Visit the U.S. Politics Online Discussion Forum Archives!

Sponsored by:

U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum  

Bookmark Us! E-Mail DONATE NOW! Photo Gallery Document Archives Quiz! Register to Vote!!!
Go Back   U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum > Issue Politics > Economic Issues

Economic Issues Business, Commerce, Consumer Affairs, Economics, Public Finance, Trade

View Poll Results: On what levels, if any, should defense be private?
Local Only 0 0%
Local and State Only 1 2.44%
Local, State and National (All Levels) 5 12.20%
State and National 2 4.88%
National 1 2.44%
None 17 41.46%
None, and anyone who thinks it should be is a crazed lunatic! 15 36.59%
Voters: 41. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack (2) Thread Tools Display Modes
  1 links from elsewhere to this Post. Click to view. #61 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
underboss's Avatar
underboss underboss is offline
County Executive
Ron Paul Revolutionary

 
Member Since: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 375

United_States    
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrewl View Post
So did Bush Sr's son with respect to Iraq, and it turns out Bush Sr. was right. Also, it turns out that the great experiment of private defense with the iraq war has turned out to be mainly characterized by corruption, not better defense.

I think, in principle, the free market is a good thing. But some things require a state monopoly for the well being of a society.

Andrew
You could say that terrorism is the privatization of war. Terrorists are the free marketers of war. They are people who don't believe that the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.
__________________
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
~Thomas Jefferson

"There is Still No Such Thing As a Fair Tax"
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Andrewl's Avatar
Andrewl Andrewl is offline
President

 
Member Since: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,935

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by underboss View Post
You could say that terrorism is the privatization of war. Terrorists are the free marketers of war. They are people who don't believe that the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.
Good point. And i will add to it by saying that because terrorists are better at violence they will inevitably defeat any western privatized defensive/aggressive market.

Andrew
__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Ambiguous Ambiguous is offline
City Mayor

 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: my own hell
Posts: 197

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricOKC View Post
Perhaps because it is explicitly spelled out in the US Constitution as a legitimate power assigned to the federal government.
Where?
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Non Sequitur's Avatar
Non Sequitur Non Sequitur is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member

 
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Saginaw
Posts: 1,064

United_States     Netherlands

Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambiguous View Post
Where?
Article I section 8:
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress
Article II Section 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Ambiguous Ambiguous is offline
City Mayor

 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: my own hell
Posts: 197

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Non Sequitur View Post
Article I section 8:
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress
Article II Section 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
None of which precludes the people from utilizing a private security force to ensure their safety.
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Non Sequitur's Avatar
Non Sequitur Non Sequitur is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member

 
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Saginaw
Posts: 1,064

United_States     Netherlands

Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambiguous View Post
None of which precludes the people from utilizing a private security force to ensure their safety.
oh true, I just think it's a bad idea for various reasons that I have already listed. And since the Constitution says it's a responsibility of the federal government i see no real reason to change the status quo.
__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Ambiguous Ambiguous is offline
City Mayor

 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: my own hell
Posts: 197

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Non Sequitur View Post
oh true, I just think it's a bad idea for various reasons that I have already listed. And since the Constitution says it's a responsibility of the federal government i see no real reason to change the status quo.
Considering the federal government has ignored the Constitution with specific regard to national defense, I don't exactly feel safe with it at the helm.
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Steve's Avatar
Steve Steve is offline
President

 
Member Since: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 14,970

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambiguous View Post
Considering the federal government has ignored the Constitution with specific regard to national defense, I don't exactly feel safe with it at the helm.
Of course you would be referring to the federal government and the Constitution since their inception, correct?
__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Ambiguous Ambiguous is offline
City Mayor

 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: my own hell
Posts: 197

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Of course you would be referring to the federal government and the Constitution since their inception, correct?
It's just a goddamn piece of paper, after all.
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Dilettante's Avatar
Dilettante Dilettante is offline
Secretary of Defense
Hoping to one day be a Secretary of Offense.

 
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,595

Pennsylvania     United_States

Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambiguous View Post
It's just a goddamn piece of paper, after all.
...just like all those pieces of paper we write our laws on?
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Ambiguous Ambiguous is offline
City Mayor

 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: my own hell
Posts: 197

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dilettante View Post
...just like all those pieces of paper we write our laws on?
I was being sarcastic.

(For the record, I don't know that he said it. But the fact that it's not out of the realm of possibility scares the hell out of me.)
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
iTaliAN_ICe's Avatar
iTaliAN_ICe iTaliAN_ICe is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member

 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: US&A
Posts: 1,208

United_States     Virginia

Re: Privitizing Defense

It shocks me that this is actually an argument. Privatization of defense, and anarcho-capitalism in general, is outright insanity.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
Andrewl's Avatar
Andrewl Andrewl is offline
President

 
Member Since: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,935

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Non Sequitur View Post
oh true, I just think it's a bad idea for various reasons that I have already listed. And since the Constitution says it's a responsibility of the federal government i see no real reason to change the status quo.
The status quo has become the privatization of the armed forces, not completely, but it is a huge industry operating in many countries.


Andrew
__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2007
liberty1776 liberty1776 is offline
Secretary of Defense
A libertarian first, a Libertarian second

 
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Liberty
Posts: 2,518

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrewl View Post
Geez, not even the intellectual champion of free markets and privatization, Milton Friedman, would have privatized defense/security.

Andrew
Milton Firedman is not in any way for free markets. He is repsonsible for the with holding tax; there is a special level of hell reserved for him.

Try Walter Block, or Milton's son David.
__________________
"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question."
-Thomas Jefferson in his first inauguration address
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 06-19-2007
liberty1776 liberty1776 is offline
Secretary of Defense
A libertarian first, a Libertarian second

 
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Liberty
Posts: 2,518

   
Re: Privitizing Defense

Quote:
Originally Posted by underboss View Post
You could say that terrorism is the privatization of war. Terrorists are the free marketers of war. They are people who don't believe that the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.
Terrorists are not free markets of war. First, a good deal of their money comes from governments. Second, as I understand it, any of the money that they make themselves is made by doing illegal things, such as selling drugs. (If I am wrong on this, I am sure someone will tell me.) The only reason drugs are so expensive is because they are illegal. If they were not illegal, the price of drugs would come down as the supply increases, thus making the drug trade less profitable.

But, let's consider something else, also. Who was in charge of the security that allowed the terrorists to board the planes on 9/11? It was the TSA- part of the national government. What if we allowed each airline to be in charge of its own security? The airlines would have a vested interest in keeping their airlines safe. Look what happened to the airline industry after 9/11. The attacks were disasterous for the industry.
__________________
"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question."
-Thomas Jefferson in his first inauguration address
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/economic-issues/39107-privitizing-defense.html
Posted By For Type Date
Privitizing Defense - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum This thread Refback 06-20-2007 06:24 PM
Privitizing Defense - Page 6 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum This thread Refback 06-19-2007 04:07 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6
Copyright © 2000 - 2008 U.S. Politics Online