Genuine question. I feel like there’s too much division and that people should find common ground. I really don’t like the two-party system in the US either.
Genuine question. I feel like there’s too much division and that people should find common ground. I really don’t like the two-party system in the US either.
Paid young adult mandatory military training/service is an entirely reasonable policy where if pay is high enough, enough old people will force the young to do it. Even mandatory “go die in vietnam because domino theory will destroy capitalism” can have more old people force the young into draft. Though obviously, exposing those reasons to kill our youth makes the vote less favourable.
Our military slave numbers are public.
The extreme cost of maintaining offensive and diminishment operations is the first thing likely to be eliminated in favour of cash dividends to voters. There can be constititutional limits on what can never be voted against. Legitimate defensive needs/preparation of the nation would be covered. Funding a proxy war on Russia or Palestine or Israel would come from personal individual donations rather than forced social budget support. Constitutional limits against offensive war propaganda are just as important as defense preparation.
There needs to be an administrator (President) to respond quickly to emergencies. Review of adminstrator behaviour after emergencies is a liquid democracy process. You’re right that genuinely required secrets (as opposed to frequent national security classified corruption and evil) would require private judicial review, but liquid democracy would select the judges.
I don’t think we could implement your suggestion. Our wartime maximum strength is about 700 000 soldiers and our population is around 5 600 000. That means, in wartime, one out of 8 inhabitants will be in different forms of military service. There’s no way we could pay an adequate salary for that many soldiers. And, that number is still a third less than how many soldiers Ukraine has, and Ukraine is just barely able to keep the Russia from advancing.
I’m not sure why you’re taking Vietnam war as an example, as it’s an offensive war and for example Finland has no plans to do anything like that.
Yes, but the speed at which one can recruit soldiers in an emergency is not public.
This is irrelevant, because most countries do not have any offensive operations to maintain in the first place.
You may not know what the phrase “proxy war” means, because in this context it’s rather insulting. And I do not think you meant to insult me or others. But do tell, why and how would Finland wage an offensive war?
Yeah, this is getting a bit off topic, but you’re making wild claims that would really need some clarification.