NationStates Jolt Archive

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now, I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops? Or should corporations stay away from training men to earn contracts with guns and grenades.

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now, I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops? Or should corporations stay away from training men to earn contracts with guns and grenades.

Colombia.

AUC.

That's a reason why that should be avoided big time.. it could end up in a total disaster, and these forces could end up fighting against the government. Corporations are excellent at providing jobs... that's what they should stick to.

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now, I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops? Or should corporations stay away from training men to earn contracts with guns and grenades.
Ummm...sure bro. Hey, can I get a hit off of that shit you're smoking?

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now, I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops?

What makes you think that the heavily regulated atmosphere of the USA is the side that multi-national corporations would fight for?

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now, I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops? Or should corporations stay away from training men to earn contracts with guns and grenades.



"And in further news: McDonald's declares war on Burger King"

To Mesa

I got this idea from nobility back in the middle ages and how they have heavy armored knights, so I though that corporations should start raising armies for american forces so they will have an "elite" division. Basically the idea was that we let them raise their own elite guard and can outfit it with anything they want as long as it is in their budgets. This elite guard can be used by the US in case we run of recruits and such. The elite should be better equiped then the army.

"And in further news: McDonald's declares war on Burger King"
mmmm, capitalism at its greatest!

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now,

Hey hey HEY. Our soldiers are pretty damned elite. Sure they don't belong to rich or powerful families (necessarily), that really has little to do with elite status. Well trained, well lead volunteers with state of the art equipment and a mission. That's elite. We have 'em.

I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision

Bad idea on so many levels. Corporations are about making profit. Military is about ignoring the cost because the 'product' is nothing less than the survival of the nation and the implementation of foreign policy for the nation. No corporation I can think of would have much use for an army at all.

so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops?

It wouldn't provide any extra troops. If you want more soldiers, increase advertising for the military or enact conscription.

Or should corporations stay away from training men to earn contracts with guns and grenades.

Yes. Really, Microsoft isn't about to start spending the time and money to do anything like that. Corporations wage war on an entirely different, and generally less violent level, and thats how it should be.

To Mesa

I got this idea from nobility back in the middle ages and how they have heavy armored knights, so I though that corporations should start raising armies for american forces so they will have an "elite" division. Basically the idea was that we let them raise their own elite guard and can outfit it with anything they want as long as it is in their budgets. This elite guard can be used by the US in case we run of recruits and such. The elite should be better equiped then the army.
Of course! Why should the U.S. military have all the weapons on the cutting edge when corporations could have them!? Why don't we just rely on McDonalds and Microsoft to defend America?

To Mesa

I got this idea from nobility back in the middle ages and how they have heavy armored knights, so I though that corporations should start raising armies for american forces so they will have an "elite" division. Basically the idea was that we let them raise their own elite guard and can outfit it with anything they want as long as it is in their budgets. This elite guard can be used by the US in case we run of recruits and such. The elite should be better equiped then the army.

What happened in Colombia was something similiar. The rich and businesses wanted to defend themselves against the FARC and ELN. However, these armies they raised eventually went out of control and went on blood thirsty rampages. I don't think this is a good idea. We have marines and special forces units that are better then the Army. We don't need some uncontrolled militia.

Someone explain to me what is in it for the corporations here.

To Mesa

I got this idea from nobility back in the middle ages and how they have heavy armored knights, so I though that corporations should start raising armies for american forces so they will have an "elite" division. Basically the idea was that we let them raise their own elite guard and can outfit it with anything they want as long as it is in their budgets. This elite guard can be used by the US in case we run of recruits and such. The elite should be better equiped then the army.



Hmm, sounds like a good idea. Kind of like the Pinkertons were an elite security firm to protect businesses from rioting communist workers back in the 30's. Except, this would be for the military. Of course, I suspect Special Operations funding would drop. Also, there's the issue of having to give confidential information to the company so they can carry out the operations, which could potentially endager national security if in the wrong hands.

hmmm, I got this idea from how nobility back then had plenty of armored knights while the commoners had only meager weapons against the enemy army and were easily cut down by the elite forces. I was thinking of how Corporations can fund elite armies to augment the ranks.

Also to the one who asks what corporations has to benefit from this, well bankrupcy protect and supporting them as long they had their army. Yearly stipend from government and tax reductions.

Kind of like the Pinkertons were an elite security firm to protect businesses from rioting communist workers back in the 30's.

You might want to read up on the Homestead Strike before you say that bringing the Pinkerton's in is a good idea. How many died then? Wasn't it seven labourers and three rent-a-cops and order was only returned when the National Guard were called out.

While it is true that in the middle ages you had knights and archers who had trained for their whole lives in their craft, the majority of the armies back then were made up of conscripted peasant folk who were armed with what ever they had available. On occasion they would be issued pikes or some such thing but not very often. Anyway, well trained forces often were a minority on a middle age battlefield. Modern nationalistic, volunteer armies are much better.

Also to the one who asks what corporations has to benefit from this, well bankrupcy protect and supporting them as long they had their army. Yearly stipend from government and tax reductions.

So basically the government ends up paying for it all, and the only difference is that the GIs have Starbucks logos on the side of their helmets?

hmmm, I got this idea from how nobility back then had plenty of armored knights while the commoners had only meager weapons against the enemy army and were easily cut down by the elite forces. I was thinking of how Corporations can fund elite armies to augment the ranks.
Nobility nowadays is a bit different from back then. But all you have to do is wait a few years, we'll soon have the bridge back to the 12th century completed and you'll have your fun. We don't need more companies in the drawings for profiting from war, we have enough already.

hmmm, I got this idea from how nobility back then had plenty of armored knights while the commoners had only meager weapons against the enemy army and were easily cut down by the elite forces. I was thinking of how Corporations can fund elite armies to augment the ranks.

Also to the one who asks what corporations has to benefit from this, well bankrupcy protect and supporting them as long they had their army. Yearly stipend from government and tax reductions.

Give me one reason why these armies raised by corporations won't turn into the AUC.

I'm going to laugh when I see men in Mcdonald's uniforms march through the streets with the little logo 'we love to see you smile' on their helmets. They'd be armed with hamburgers and fries, knocking from door to door and extorting citizens. You might even be asleep one night when a mcgriddle crashes through the window, and a message is attached saying 'stay away from Burger King'. Then, when you go to Burger King to spite them for breaking your window, a clown jumps out from behind a bush and snipes you. :sniper:

You might want to read up on the Homestead Strike before you say that bringing the Pinkerton's in is a good idea. How many died then? Wasn't it seven labourers and three rent-a-cops and order was only returned when the National Guard were called out.

Yes, but people who happen to subscribe to the communist ideology are sub humans and it doesn't matter if they are killed, leaving widows and orphans.

"And in further news: McDonald's declares war on Burger King"Taco Bell is the sole survior of the Fast Food Wars, so all resturants are Taco Bell.
-Demolition Man-

No the government helps support the corporations if they run of cash and they have an army. Also any plan to use their elite army against America will be responded by being turned to government controlled and the CEO executed. And what do you mean by: " But all you have to do is wait a few years, we'll soon have the bridge back to the 12th century completed and you'll have your fun"

*Cough*Blackwater USA (http://www.blackwaterusa.com/)*Cough*

A business in and of itself bro.

No the government helps support the corporations if they run of cash and they have an army. Also any plan to use their elite army against America will be responded by being turned to government controlled and the CEO executed.

Hint: quotation gives context to your remarks which helps everybody understand what is going on.

Surely it would be a safer bet for the corporations to actually use their money in the field of business, rather than dabbling in financing an army - something which will never make them a profit, and is far more likely to generate bad PR for them rather than good?

Sounds to me like the government here is getting all the benefits according to your model: so, why not just keep things simple, and increase tax on the corporations and use it to fund the actual standing army of the state?

That is the point, for the government to benefit from all this.

That is the point, for the government to benefit from all this.

Not the people?

You might want to read up on the Homestead Strike before you say that bringing the Pinkerton's in is a good idea. How many died then? Wasn't it seven labourers and three rent-a-cops and order was only returned when the National Guard were called out.


They did a good job in most cases, and a small group of private police cannot take on an entire mob of angry workers. I say, use them for whichever situation they are appropriate in, and, assuming you have an all-out riot on your hand, use the National Guard.

Yes, but people who happen to subscribe to the communist ideology are sub humans and it doesn't matter if they are killed, leaving widows and orphans.



Once you commit a crime, you relinquish your rights as a citizen. That allows the entire criminal justice system to exist. Rioting, assault, and murder are crimes, therefore the workers deserved anything they got.

Once you commit a crime, you relinquish your rights as a citizen.

Nope. Palpably untrue. Once you are charged with a crime certain of your rights as a citizen are temporarily suspended. If you are then found guilty of a crime then other of your rights are likewise suspended. Upon serving your time or taking your punishment nearly all of these rights are returned to you (death penalty excepted).

What country are you talking about where you lose your rights if you commit a crime?

Nope. Palpably untrue. Once you are convicted of a crime certain of your rights as a citizen are temporarily suspended. If you are then found guilty of a crime then other of your rights are likewise suspended. Upon serving your time or taking your punishment nearly all of these rights are returned to you (death penalty excepted).

What country are you talking about where you lose your rights if you commit a crime?


My goodness, you know what I meant!!! Sheesh.

My goodness, you know what I meant!!! Sheesh.

If I was actually psychic I wouldn't need to mess about with the interweb.

If what you meant was a different thing from what you said, then why didn't you say it?

Once you commit a crime, you relinquish your rights as a citizen. That allows the entire criminal justice system to exist. Rioting, assault, and murder are crimes, therefore the workers deserved anything they got.

Anyhow... surely, seeing as how the workers were killed outside of the functioning of the criminal justice system, your claim that they deserved what they got doesn't actually follow on from the argument that you provide to support it.

Basically back then we had elite soldiers which belong to rich or very powerful families, while that concept is gone now, I was wondering should we make it mandatory or allow all corporations to raise a personal elite army with almost no supervision so they can fight for us in case we need extra troops? Or should corporations stay away from training men to earn contracts with guns and grenades.

Mmmh...this time I'll just give you an info...

Some corporates even now build private armies...they don't call them "mercenaries" as once they were called...now they call them "contractors", but mercenaries they are...armed people paid to follow orders just like soldiers, but not belonging to a national army...

Now mercenary companies are called "private security companies"...

Actually as far as I've heard...in Iraq the US use "contractors" a lot and since they are paid by US Government, but they belong not to US army, they are counted as "civilians" when the iraqi resistance kill them.

They are definitely a good investment for US Government and other governments since they are counted as "civilians" so make look the enemy "badder" when he kills them, since they aren't counted in the army losses, but
they work and kill as if they were soldier...and may be better, since a soldier
who fights for his Country for ideals (may be he does wrong thing thinking he's doing the good of his Country, but he has them...) , but a "sold gun" has crossed the thin line that one could put between a "soldier" and a "hired killer"...so one could expect he does whatever he's told as long he's paid.

So...well...man...corporates already have their elite armies...
Jashkar

Can't corporations hire PMCs anyway?

I mean ok they don't have battalions of men and they aren't directly in control of them but they are still basically a 'merc' army.

Also I believe many corporations in dangerous parts of the world hire PMCs to protect their assets anyway.

hmmm, I got this idea from how nobility back then had plenty of armored knights while the commoners had only meager weapons against the enemy army and were easily cut down by the elite forces. I was thinking of how Corporations can fund elite armies to augment the ranks.

Ever heard of Agincourt? :D

Yes, the battle of Agincourt was when British Peasants beat an entire French Knights which were well armed and larger and were in better shape... ah I see. But however terrain had an important part (trying to hold back on the french comment) in the battle.

Peasents?

Yeah ok I see ordinary joes.

But don't be under any illusions they were lead by nobility and were for the most part well trained (longbowmen, billhookmen etc). But of course there were just peasents in there.

If you really go into it the thing that won us English the Battle of Agincourt was the Longbow and the Billhook, the latter was an extremely brutal way to die, a billhook could literally slice a man in two in the correct hands.

The Longbow was also a potent weapon as when the French came charging across the muddy fields the long range of the Longbow meant many Knights were hit and fell off their horses onto the boggy ground, which meant they drowned slowly (as their armour was to heavy for them to be able to get up alone).

But bah thats off topic, sorry I'm at work and I am very bored. :/

Yes, the battle of Agincourt was when British Peasants beat an entire French Knights which were well armed and larger and were in better shape... ah I see. But however terrain had an important part (trying to hold back on the french comment) in the battle.

English and Welsh peasants, not British. The Scottish were practically ruled by the French until the late 16th century and would be far more likely to help the French than English.