Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you are a conservative who wants a small government, do you favor privatizing the military? Why not farm out the job of defending the nation to independent contractors? It doesn't make sense to scream about the huge size and cost of government without screaming against a major contributor to that cost - the defense establishment. If you oppose government run health care, why should you support government run national defense?
If you are a conservative who wants a small government, do you favor privatizing the military? Why not farm out the job of defending the nation to independent contractors? It doesn't make sense to scream about the huge size and cost of government without screaming against a major contributor to that cost - the defense establishment. If you oppose government run health care, why should you support government run national defense?
They already have. Blackwater now known as Xe. They just extended a contract with them.
Why not? There is some question (to me, anyway) as to whether Section 8 of the Constitution permits a permanent standing army in the first place, but no specific ban on a private army being raised and equipped.
And, there would be precedent, both with the hiring of Blackwater mercenary soldiers of fortune to fight in Iraq and with the disbanding of the Continental army after the Revolution.
Originally posted by ndfmnlf
If you are a conservative who wants a small government, do you favor privatizing the military? Why not farm out the job of defending the nation to independent contractors? It doesn't make sense to scream about the huge size and cost of government without screaming against a major contributor to that cost - the defense establishment. If you oppose government run health care, why should you support government run national defense?
Absolutely. I mean, if the government can't do anything right, then wouldn't this be the logical conclusion?
If you are a conservative who wants a small government, do you favor privatizing the military? Why not farm out the job of defending the nation to independent contractors? It doesn't make sense to scream about the huge size and cost of government without screaming against a major contributor to that cost - the defense establishment. If you oppose government run health care, why should you support government run national defense?
This one is easy.
The military and how it is managed for the common defense is in the constitution.
Health care is something the government has no right to be involved in, and the reason the "system" is in trouble now is too much government intervention.
My question is directed at conservatives who hypocritically attack government run health care but do everything they can to bloat the government run defense establishment.
If you are a conservative who wants a small government, do you favor privatizing the military? Why not farm out the job of defending the nation to independent contractors? It doesn't make sense to scream about the huge size and cost of government without screaming against a major contributor to that cost - the defense establishment. If you oppose government run health care, why should you support government run national defense?
Because providing a military for the "common defense" is one of the few true and legitimate jobs of the federal government. First, you need to educate yourself on our history, and on the US Constitution and our founding fathers, and then you can ask questions that make some sense, rather than questions that make no sense designed to bait people into a useless debate.
If you are a conservative who wants a small government, do you favor privatizing the military? Why not farm out the job of defending the nation to independent contractors? It doesn't make sense to scream about the huge size and cost of government without screaming against a major contributor to that cost - the defense establishment. If you oppose government run health care, why should you support government run national defense?
Didn't you get the memo? We already have. There are more private contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, then there are actual regular army on the ground.
Because providing a military for the "common defense" is one of the few true and legitimate jobs of the federal government. First, you need to educate yourself on our history, and on the US Constitution and our founding fathers, and then you can ask questions that make some sense, rather than questions that make no sense designed to bait people into a useless debate.
Should we have a permanent standing army, or does the Constitution only provide for an army to be raised in wartime?
The naval clause is specific in Section 8, the army clause less so, to me, anyway.
The military and how it is managed for the common defense is in the constitution.
Health care is something the government has no right to be involved in, and the reason the "system" is in trouble now is too much government intervention.
Why would too much government intervention not work in health care but work splendidly in national defense? And please don't answer "it's in the constitution", because that's not really an answer. It doesn't explain why government is effective in one case but not in the other.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
