Vanilla or Strawberry. Private or Public? It's ALL ICE CREAM!

Day 800, 13:03 • Published in Australia Australia • by Ranger Bob

I've been watching with interest the debates on the forums, and reading several articles recently where there seems to be some undercurrent of tension and flaming about the Private (private militia) vs. Public (government militia) Military Debate.

Why is the private military a _good_ thing?

Well, that much is obvious. A private funded military not only presents a massive saving to the government of the day in ongoing costs, it also means you are seeing another generation of fighters supported in ranking up and overall, making a nation stronger. This has implications for almost ALL aspects of your country - from economy, productivity right down to your country ranking.

BUT

There are some reasons why maintaining your own military, and keeping a strong sense of your own nationalism is VITAL.

1. I don't think you can answer to two different masters.

While the alignment of the private and public will often coincide, there is no guarantee of this. You are either committing your interests to following the orders of the people who give you your 'paycheck' (and, arguably following the highest bidder for their services), or the people who are representing the interests of your nation FIRST.

As I said, they often align.

But - there are never promises, and a fighting force (particularly in the case of it being foreign established and run) may ask you to fight in a battle that is either not sanctioned, nor in the interests of a particular nation, or, in another battle where the government for reasons of their own, have other priorities.

2. For exactly the above reason, you _still_ need a military force answerable to government.

Given 1 above, you need to ensure you maintain your own forces which are answerable to this country. Otherwise, you will always be asking for help, and leaving it up to others to decide whether they will assist you or not in a particular battle plan/strategy.

I kinda see this as adding a third step - the PM or the Government decide on a plan of attack, or defence etc. Then, rather than deploying or enacting their plan immediately - they must then ask for assistance, or "procure" (ie pay for) private military support. Of course, this may take as long or as short a time as the private army decides.

You could of course let them know early what you are planning to see if they are on board - but this would also mean you would be involving them IN the government decision making process rather than letting the government have it's own say. "Shall we attack XXXX? Well, we need to see if the private military is behind that idea. Oh, no they said it's not a priority for them, I suppose we should scrap that idea..."

3. Private IS privately funded. Government IS government funded.

Unless they wish to procure the services of this private force, Government does not and should not have an ongoing funding role. As I said at the top, the benefit is that the private military is funding itself - and generally, many of these members will still live in Australia unless called upon by their boss/leadership for a battle. This therefore is assisting in making Australia a stronger country, while leaving government money to focus on other things (yes, which includes ALSO supporting their own military).

It's not so much never the twain shall meet - but more that if the Government get's into an ongoing funding role, then in time, the leadership becomes messy - government would expect in return for this ongoing funding they would have a say in how the forces are deployed.

And I suspect the leadership of the private military would NOT like that very much, for their own reasons.


So what does this all mean?

Do private milita's poach? Sure they do. They want to become a strong fighting unit, otherwise who would WANT to procure their services. But, people have a choice - they can choose to join the private military, OR they can stay with their government military. No one is twisting arms, or forcing anyone here to make a choice. Of course, it won't stop the sales-people each trying to get you to buy their own personal version of AMWAY, be it private or government.

Basically, I believe there is a place for private military as I say above. There is also a place for government military - these are the people who have a loyalty beyond the funding they receive, and weapons etc. AND, they answer first the orders of the elected government of the people, NOT the highest bidder.

SO, WHICH ONE IS BETTER?

_NEITHER!!_

But, it is a philosophical difference and always will be.

For the record, my personal priority, loyalty and love will ALWAYS lie with my nation first. THEN, my allies. THEN, the people I respect.

I will not compromise that. And, as a political party based in eAustralia that is putting the priority of our nation FIRST, I believe that the AMP shall not do this either.

This is a battle of philosophy that should not be. The senseless flaming and crap in articles should stop - as both are here to stay and regardless of what the government, or the private forces sling at each other, you can't change it folks.

So, when it comes time for you to choose - choose what you want to do. Being in a mercenary/private force can be exciting. So, can being in a government one. They don't have to be set at each others throats.

😛