War and Peace – Part Deux

If one looks at American history from a distance, our singular characteristic has been commerce. Tocqueville noted it in his highly accurate examination of America of the 19th century. He specifically commented on just how sharp and energetic we were in business competition. This far exceeded anything on the European continent.

A perusal of national income in the late 1700’s shortly after our founding, shows we Americans, we tiny 13 colonies, made an absolutely prodigious amount of money. It was done mostly via trade. At the time boats for trade were being built as fast as they could be. A vessel would go off on a voyage and pay for itself – on one voyage. Everything afterward was profit. So even in the vagaries of the sea and the battling countries, where loss of a vessel was quite possible, we found we could make huge profits from trading – mostly between belligerents. Indeed, it was one of the points of contention among the English traders that we Americans were making great profits by buying French products, much desired by the Brits, and then selling them to the Brits. AND vise versa. And they couldn’t.

Today we seem to be called upon to be the world’s policeman. One reason may well be that we are less avaricious, land wise, than others. Of course raw materials are now the land of olden days, but that’s a minor issue. We have repeatedly been drawn into fights, large and small, to police the world. Of course many of those have been to combat a world-wide enemy – the USSR.

Reagan killed off the old Evil Empire. Vlad is a mere shadow of their former self. No matter how much he might like to change things, the old USSR is never going to be resurrected. Yet today we find ourselves patrolling the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea for pirates, fighting in Afghanistan, Mosul, Syria, Columbia and staffing places around the world like South Korea and Japan – and Europe.

?So why can’t we convert this into a business model. NATO almost is; only problem is that Europe doesn’t pay us enough. We could take over NATO and provide them with military protection – at a cost. They would now no longer need to have their own militaries, and young men who wish to join a military could join ours. World contractors, so to speak.

To those of you who read SF, think Dorsai. The model there is a world where they ALL train as military units and farm out their use to other worlds, who pay them for the effort. AND because they are so much better trained and armed, they are also so much more effective. Because they think better strategically they often win without having to “kill ’em all”. Perhaps unrealistic but a goal.

Of course it might take a lot more cutthroat mentality to succeed. Somalis and Yemenis seem genetically predisposed to simply fighting each other – constantly. Arabs likewise. You move into the Caucuses you get the same issues. Of course in order to GET us, there has to be pay, else being in “the business” isn’t worth it.

So excluding them, the world is relatively peaceful. If we could convince China to hire us, we would have it made.

?What say you.

Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to War and Peace – Part Deux

  1. TKC1101TKC1101 says:

    I would have said fine, do it to this proposal until the American electorate showed they could elect Obama.

    I prefer a military that supports America First, Second and Third. Rescue, disaster relief, no problem. Protecting our shipping, no problem. Evacuating our civilians? No problem

    Intervening in a civil war? Problem. Nation building? Problem.

    Invading to secure American safety? No problem. Break things and get out. Let it be known in advance that threats result in massive damage and no rebuilding.

    Defending an ally who has proven true and shared blood? No problem.

    America needs to cultivate more self defending Allies, and stop kissing up to the nations that will not fight.

  2. DevereauxDevereaux says:

    Some of this is us wanting the power base.

    Case in point – South Korea. We have significant troop deployment there, but to what avail. S. Korea is more than rich enough to protect itself from the North, and we could stand-by if China intervened. Lately there has been noise in SK about our presence. ?So why do we stay there.

    Japan. We again have bases and troop deployments there. This is certainly a rich enough nation to defend itself. It has. constitution that allows it defensive military forces.

    Elsewhere in the Asiatic sphere we have turned over previously American bases to the local military with the agreement that we would have prepositioned supplies there and an agent who is in charge of it and co-ordinates with the local military. What we’ve done there is periodically hold joint military ops, where we bring in our forces and then have some big exercise with the locals. It keeps lines of communication open, it keeps co-ordination working, it allows the locals to catch up on our latest tactics and strategy and equipment.

    Despite your thinking, it is notable that there are still calls for beating ISIS, for intervening in Syria, for involvement in Yemen and Somalia, two of the nastiest area in Africa. The Tamil Tigers were nicer than these guys.

    Sometimes we seem schizophrenic.

    • TKC1101TKC1101 says:

      Because humans react emotionally and plan as if emotional events will never occur.

      I would rather we sent cruise missles when the videos of gassed children hit the net, rather than ground troops.

      The calls for beating ISIS is because ISIS has declared war on us.

      Yemen and Somalia can be questioned. If we are there to kill enemies, fine. If we are propping up the less nasty scum, not fine.

  3. BrentB67BrentB67 says:

    Japan’s Debt:GDP is 200%+ and their economy beset by demographic deflation. I am not sure they are that equipped to defend themselves.

    I think our defense industrial base profits handsomely selling arms around the world. They have an outstanding showroom – U.S. Armed Forces.

    • DevereauxDevereaux says:

      We do. But we most often “sell” them the equipment at taxpayer expense. Yes, our corporations making the stuff prosper, but this is not a solid business model.

      Far better se sell our services.