"Peace Keeping" with guns?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-02-2012, 10:53 AM
"Peace Keeping" with guns?
So the U.S. has over a hundred military bases outside of the U.S. They go on "peace keeping" missions. They "protect" the poor and the innocent with tanks and machine guns. I do get the theory behind it. But what about a better solution? Here's my idea of how the U.S., and all other first world countries can help our fellow humans on this planet.

I would propose, that as an experiment, the U.S. takes just one of these military bases and does the following: Remove all the weapons. Leave only buildings, with whatever they are furnished with. Then pull all military out of the area. Replace them with crews, made up mostly of local craftsmen, and convert those buildings into schools, hospitals, community centres, shelters, etc. Use only the money that was previously allotted to fund the former military presence. After one year, continue to contribute half of the budget, and use the other half to help the people in need within America.

This will accomplish several things. Primarily it will contribute to the welfare of the poeple in the country they had a military presence, instead of bringing fear and intimidation. Yes I understand that some countries also need help with regard to protecting it's citizens, but the money that is being contributed could go, in part, to helping the people help themselves in that respect. This would also benefit people in the U.S., because after only one year, there would be an increase (a dramatic one at that) in funds going to help the needy in the U.S. "Charity begins at home" and all that.

Secondly, this is how to truly keep peace. By helping your neighbor instead of trying to control them. Will a country really attack the U.S. if they are recieving help from them? I doubt it. It is at least less likely that a country would attack another if that other country is helping them instead of sending an army to control them. Can you imagine how many children you could feed with just half the budget spent on a military base?? That's a lot of full bellies.

Now imagine if most or all of those bases were treated the same way? That's a lot of good done, both abroad and at home. Now I do have a realistic bone or two. I am not suggesting eliminating military all together. It would never happen whether it's a good idea or not. But the idea is to help other countries by helping with food, shelter, and clothing, instead of guns, bombs, and jet fighters.

What do you guys think? Could this work?
(remember, it's a thought experiment, so although there's a lot of complexities, generally speaking, do you think it's possible to overcome those complexities and create a feasable model to aid others?)

Just want to mention one last thing. I use the U.S. as an example here, because of the strong and controversial military presence they have throughout the world. This model can also apply to any other country, including here in Canada.

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Stark Raving's post
03-02-2012, 12:49 PM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
I think it's flawed at the "remove all the weapons, leave only buildings" part. All it would take is one attack on the base and the "peace keeping with a hollow point" would start right back up again. You would need at least some security. Otherwise you face hungry desperate people trying to overrun the base for supplies, and "bad guys" looking to taking out an American base. "Terrorists" tend to do that a lot. They don't like Americans being seen as the good guys. We used to get attacked a lot when we were handing out water and shoes to people in Iraq. It creates fear and causes civilians to avoid accepting aid from Americans.

I'm reminded of Somalia as well, when the supply shipments would get taken over by "the bad guys" and if you wanted any, you had to join their cause.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Buddy Christ's post
03-02-2012, 12:53 PM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
Several attempts at redeucing US military presence from countries that don't want them have been attempted in recent decades. Okinawa and West Germany come to mind in particular. The population of these western countries is not as terrified as those in third world nations where Western interests own the local government strongmen and thugs.

Enormous amount of pressure (threats, bribes) was applied to these countries to back down on their demands for removal of US bases.

So the experiment could (and should) start in these countries because the media is not as suppressed as elsewhere and the population would vocally support it.

It is a terrific idea and would be a hell of a lot cheaper on the taxpayers of the countries owning those bases (primarily the USA).

Just imagine the propaganda value of showing the world how the US is turning weapons and intimidation into humanitarian assistance and goodwill.

The purpose of these bases is so transparent for anyone with more than 3 functional brain cells, that the majority of the general public would have no problem seeing a change in the wind: instead of domination, exploitation and intimidation, finally the biggest superpower on the planet is involved in fairness and real peace-making.

Nice dream but I don't believe it will happen in the near future. It will have to get a lot worse before it gets better, people will have to suffer a lot harder (like not being able to feed their children) on a big scale before they demand changes to foreign and domestic policy.

Not too far away now: within this decade or the next the latest, I think.

Even I may live to see it. Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Zat's post
04-02-2012, 08:02 AM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
(03-02-2012 10:53 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Secondly, this is how to truly keep peace. By helping your neighbor instead of trying to control them. Will a country really attack the U.S. if they are recieving help from them? I doubt it. It is at least less likely that a country would attack another if that other country is helping them instead of sending an army to control them. Can you imagine how many children you could feed with just half the budget spent on a military base?? That's a lot of full bellies.

I think your suggestion is well-intentioned but not well-informed by actual experience. For example, you seem to assume that the problem with filling bellies is money. These places with mass starvation are notoriously difficult to assist due to corruption in their local "governments." You send money and it goes into pockets, not bellies. You send food or medicine, the people in power sell it and keep the money.

On the topic of helping neighbors, that's what our foreign aid programs are all about, but if you've ever discussed it with the people who work for agencies such as USAID (and I have) you learn that it is very difficult to do good, with few successes and many very frustrating failures.

As for peace-keeping missions, aren't most of those U.N., not U.S.?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeff's post
04-02-2012, 09:15 AM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2012 09:20 AM by Peterkin.)
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
(03-02-2012 10:53 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  I would propose, that as an experiment, the U.S. takes just one of these military bases and does the following: Remove all the weapons. Leave only buildings, with whatever they are furnished with. Then pull all military out of the area.

Bring craftsmen, by all means - not necessarily just local, if there is a shortage of expertise - but leave half the soldiers. They can help; their presence will discourage bullying among the natives until a police force is established, and they can also learn something. After all, if you disband the big armies, you'll have a lot of young men and women suddenly set adrift with no skills but violence: the army needs rehabilitating as much as the refugees do. When they come home, they can be deployed helping to build schools and hospitals, levees and tornado shelters in the long-neglected communities of their own country.
In Canada, there is no need to disband the army: it has an honourable record in disaster relief, which will be needed more than ever as climate keeps changing, and there is plently of work, between Red River floods, in the north, and wherever in the world earthquakes and tsunamis threaten helpless populations.
The US has too many troops; could keep maybe half, to rebuild communities ruined by weather and industry.

Quote: Could this work?

Better than anything else so far proposed.

PS But only if the same government sponsoring this project with its left [social] hand, stops, with the right, [holding money] hand, supporting corrupt dictators and selling them arms and crippling their economies.

It's not the mean god I have trouble with - it's the people who worship a mean god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Peterkin's post
04-02-2012, 02:23 PM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
(04-02-2012 09:15 AM)Peterkin Wrote:  After all, if you disband the big armies, you'll have a lot of young men and women suddenly set adrift with no skills but violence

(Facepalm)

The misconceptions about the military on this forum are staggeringly abundant. Yesterday the military was a bunch of brainwashed, obedient serfs. Today they are simple minded robots who only know how to kill.

Here's the breakdown of most military bases.

5% Cooks
40% Mechanics
5% Interpreters
5% Intelligence/Strategy
45% Combat

And of those combat troops, ALL of them are well trained in other skills. They don't even give you a gun in Basic until week 7. You're too busy learning land navigation, sanitation, and Iraqi customs. Hell, I didn't fire a shot my entire second deployment. We spent the whole 15 months giving shoes and food to civilians and moving to new places and building entire bases to be given over to the Iraqi police.

Just saying, when Bob Smith the Carpenter joins the army, he doesn't forget everything he knows and become Bob Smith the Killer.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2012, 02:33 PM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
(04-02-2012 09:15 AM)Peterkin Wrote:  But only if the same government sponsoring this project with its left [social] hand, stops, with the right, [holding money] hand, supporting corrupt dictators and selling them arms and crippling their economies.

And seeing it all depends on whether you are watching the trees or watching the forest. Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Zat's post
04-02-2012, 02:55 PM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
(04-02-2012 02:23 PM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  Here's the breakdown of most military bases.

5% Cooks
40% Mechanics
5% Interpreters

Perfect! Leave them. Exactly half.

Quote:5% Intelligence/Strategy
45% Combat

Retrain them for something useful.

On second thought, that's far too many mechanics, once you remove the military vehicles, tanks and heavy guns. Take half the mechanics home; train half the combat troop in construction, water conveyance/purification and food production.
Give the spies jobs in financial security or some damn place.

Quote:And of those combat troops, ALL of them are well trained in other skills. They don't even give you a gun in Basic until week 7. You're too busy learning land navigation, sanitation, and Iraqi customs.

I'd no idea - these are some skilled folks! Seven whole weeks of education in latrine digging and finding your way back from somewhere you shouldn't be in the first place. Okay, that could be useful in peace.

Quote: We spent the whole 15 months giving shoes

Projectiles for the natives to use against visiting heads of state? Hostile, that!

Quote: and food to civilians and moving to new places and building entire bases to be given over to the Iraqi police.

All of which building have been duly handed over, of course, to a a huge, enormous Iraqi police force... who didn't have their own housing, shoes, food and clean water for some reason entirely unrelated to 23 years of sanctions, bombing and shelling.

Quote: Just saying, when Bob Smith the Carpenter joins the army, he doesn't forget everything he knows and become Bob Smith the Killer.

That's good news for Stark's plan. Welcome aboard!

It's not the mean god I have trouble with - it's the people who worship a mean god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2012, 03:02 PM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2012 03:18 PM by Zat.)
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
(04-02-2012 02:55 PM)Peterkin Wrote:  
Quote: We spent the whole 15 months giving shoes
Projectiles for the natives to use against visiting heads of state? Hostile, that!

You mean the shoes that were handed out to US President G.W. Bush by Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi?

Quote:On December 14, 2008, during a press conference at the Prime Minister's Palace in Baghdad, Iraq, journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi threw his shoes at United States President George W. Bush. "This is a farewell kiss from the Iraqi people, you dog", yelled al-Zaidi in Arabic as he threw his first shoe towards the U.S. president.[1] "This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq", he shouted as he threw his second shoe.[1]

Besides handing out shoes they handed out 'other' things to Iraqi civilians, as shown by Wikileaks:

Quote:A secret video showing US air crew falsely claiming to have encountered a firefight in Baghdad and then laughing at the dead after launching an air strike that killed a dozen people, including two Iraqis working for Reuters news agency, was revealed by Wikileaks today.

Watch the whole video here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Zat's post
04-02-2012, 03:23 PM
RE: "Peace Keeping" with guns?
[Image: usgs_line.php?title=Defense%20Spending%2..._g_g_g_g_g]

Safe, shmafe. What's wrong with this picture ? The defense establishment/complex say they are "protecting" us, when in fact, it will be seen as having played one of THE largest roles in weakening the underlying financial structure of the nation, and, ironically in the end, may have done a great deal to contribute to our eventual weakening/bankruptcy. Angry

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: