View Full Version : If Military was privatised
Abro100
09-10-06, 11:56 AM
Would there be less war?
Which bit of the military....
I'd think there'd probably be more. Much like the story in Tomorrow Never Dies, but instead of a newspaper baron, it would be a company trying to start a war in order to boost profits :D
Mumsafan
09-10-06, 12:14 PM
Anyone else think Abro is bored?
What's with the deep questions Abs? Fuck, i don't even know where to begin... What your saying is, ultimately, if the military was privatised they'd need a return, therefore they'd be less inclined to spend the vast sums of money on war.
You could say to an extent the military in America is privatised to the only extent that is practical i.e. companies control government e.g. through the funding of a political party's campaign for power.
Hence the war in Iraq i.e. the control of Middle Eastern oil. Or does that sound like a conspiracist?
MrMichael
09-10-06, 12:35 PM
It already more or less is, and it can only lead in future to more war. The current "war" in Iraq is, at least on a logistical basis, and arguably on a military one too, being fought by private companies and private armies (on both sides really).
Interesting doco on this I saw the other day; "Iraq for sale: The war profiteers" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815181/
In conflicts in Africa as well as in Iraq more security firms are being used. They are cahepare than the UN forces and often more effcetive, and for the politocaians, no-one gives a shit when a contrat soldier is killed, therfore no plotical fall out.
I think it increasingly likely that some conflicts will be contracted out
Would there be less war?
No, but we'd be paid a hell of a lot more! :rock:
Red_Polo
09-10-06, 03:25 PM
Would there be less war?
No Maggie, there wouldn't. :shake: :D
Neil Young
10-10-06, 09:27 AM
No, but we'd be paid a hell of a lot more! :rock:
Don't be too sure - that's not how it works in many privatised industries. Look at the miners, steelworkers, hospital cleaners...
Abro100
10-10-06, 01:42 PM
I was thinking of this yesterday. You know when you say they are Private Companies, its not like one competing against the other toproduce the best weaponry and using a war for a excuse to use them is it?
Don't be too sure - that's not how it works in many privatised industries. Look at the miners, steelworkers, hospital cleaners...
Hey, at the moment, we make guys (and gals) redundant from the forces and then, the following week, re-employ them as civilians doing the same job and pay them 3 times as much money. Crazy. :eyebrow:
Abro100
10-10-06, 01:49 PM
I dont follow?
I dont follow?
Exactly. It's supposed to save money in the long term by not having to pay out for pensions and all the medical care, food and accomodation, etc. Just an accountants way of hiding how public money is actualy spent as it no longer shows as direct funding for the military. :handshake:
Abro100
10-10-06, 01:52 PM
Ohh so people in the Army are paid under a diffrent structure/Title so to speak,
Mumsafan
10-10-06, 01:53 PM
They do it in the police too
They do it in the police too
They're doing it everywhere it seems. :sigh:
Ohh so people in the Army are paid under a diffrent structure/Title so to speak,
Yes, they get military pay which is considerably less than the civilian equivalent.
Abro100
10-10-06, 01:55 PM
Yeah the pay is crap, my brother is on about 260 a week in Basrah at the moment,
Yeah the pay is crap, my brother is on about 260 a week in Basrah at the moment,
Must be a foot-slogging private. :)
Abro100
10-10-06, 01:57 PM
Havent a clue what he is mate, i think he is a Private.
Havent a clue what he is mate, i think he is a Private.
Must be, on that money. We need 'em though! :handshake:
When trained, assuming he's in a good regiment, that private could probably qaudruple his money in the private sector in Iraq, and probably be better equipped into the bargain. I know three guys who have recently left the Army and done this.
Red_Polo
10-10-06, 03:32 PM
Must be, on that money. We need 'em though! :handshake:
Agreed, I don't know where I'd be without my privates.
Red_Polo
10-10-06, 03:38 PM
I was thinking of this yesterday. You know when you say they are Private Companies, its not like one competing against the other toproduce the best weaponry and using a war for a excuse to use them is it?
Don't know if it's what you're getting at, but you've touched on a startling point. Take a massive arms company, say McDonnell Douglas. They get given multi-billion dollar contracts on a regular basis. For them war is good. War means new contracts, more money. So you have a massively rich company whose only responsibility is to make money, and whose way of making money is through war. There are all sorts of conspiracies out there, but one thing is for sure, the arms companies present a hugely influential, powerful war lobby.
Don't know if it's what you're getting at, but you've touched on a startling point. Take a massive arms company, say McDonnell Douglas. They get given multi-billion dollar contracts on a regular basis. For them war is good. War means new contracts, more money. So you have a massively rich company whose only responsibility is to make money, and whose way of making money is through war. There are all sorts of conspiracies out there, but one thing is for sure, the arms companies present a hugely influential, powerful war lobby.
Especially if they help fund an American President's campaign for election... :source:
Red_Polo
10-10-06, 03:48 PM
Scary, eh?
Essentially that is what happens at the moment in the US.
One of the reason's why un-restricted Capitalism isn't the way forward...
Neil Young
10-10-06, 04:18 PM
Essentially that is what happens at the moment in the US.
It is here too only it is getting worse in both countries in terms of actually employing contractors for "security operations" who can be safely disowned when it all goes wrong. What about the case of that ex-special forces bounty hunter in Kabul who was found guilty of torture but whose defence was that he was acting for the government? And wasn't there the Sandline case in Sierra Leone - anyone remember the details?
Thing is, after the Thatcherite privatisiations of the 80s, there are three remaining big areas of public spending that hitherto the private sector has been kept out of - health, education and defence (defence contractors already clearly get a major share of the budget but there is still scope for growth). All three are under threat, indeed are already been eaten alive by the private sector.
And why? Because businesses need to grow in order to satisy their shareholders, they need to find new revenue streams, they need to increase yield. Yet we have a developed economy, most markets are saturated. The West is already interconnected - the big benefits of European cooperation have already accrued and been siphoned off by big business. Emerging markets can be slow and difficult to develop.
In a globalized world, the West's health, education and defence sectors are are easy pickings for business, especially when it has "business-friendly" governments (i.e. money-hungry political whores) in charge of spending and provision policy. So they privatise it or contract it out or bring in private companies to manage these sectors and 'provide services' - the comapnies get massive amounts of taxpayers money, change the terms and conditions of workers (often removing any secirity of employment) and seek to maximise profits and turnover.
Abro100
10-10-06, 04:20 PM
most markets are saturated - what does that mean, run by a number of companies already?
What I really hate is news headlines that state job cuts because profits were lower than expected.
For fucks sake, the business has probably still made several, if no hundreds of millions in profit - but that isn't enough for a Capitalists greed.
Neil Young
10-10-06, 04:28 PM
most markets are saturated - what does that mean, run by a number of companies already?
It means they are mature markets, with little scope for growth. It often means that they are in the effective control of a few companies. Usually only genuine product innovation leads to real change and that is quite difficult to achieve.
Abro100
10-10-06, 04:38 PM
Like Coca Cola - Fast Food as a example?
What you usually find is that there will be a pioneering company that creates a new market, this leads to early adopters people buying the product, being impressed and spreading word of mouth comments about it, gradually the market becomes bigger (if we assume the new product is good!) and other competitor companies want a piece of the growing market, around this time usually the public at large will have cottoned on to the new product and the market should be pretty big.
The market is in full swing now, lots of customers and potentially a fair few companies - all competing together, all trying to capture the majority of the market share. They might do this via advertising, price wars, product diversification, or by buying their rivals. Usually, the numbers of businesses offering the product will then reduce, as companies join together or get taken-over (think NTL and Telewest for example.)
What you are then often left with is a mature market, where there are a handful of companies (e.g. Pepsi & Coke) and a customer base that is pretty much stagnant.
It is here too only it is getting worse in both countries in terms of actually employing contractors for "security operations" who can be safely disowned when it all goes wrong. What about the case of that ex-special forces bounty hunter in Kabul who was found guilty of torture but whose defence was that he was acting for the government? And wasn't there the Sandline case in Sierra Leone - anyone remember the details?
Thing is, after the Thatcherite privatisiations of the 80s, there are three remaining big areas of public spending that hitherto the private sector has been kept out of - health, education and defence (defence contractors already clearly get a major share of the budget but there is still scope for growth). All three are under threat, indeed are already been eaten alive by the private sector.
And why? Because businesses need to grow in order to satisy their shareholders, they need to find new revenue streams, they need to increase yield. Yet we have a developed economy, most markets are saturated. The West is already interconnected - the big benefits of European cooperation have already accrued and been siphoned off by big business. Emerging markets can be slow and difficult to develop.
In a globalized world, the West's health, education and defence sectors are are easy pickings for business, especially when it has "business-friendly" governments (i.e. money-hungry political whores) in charge of spending and provision policy. So they privatise it or contract it out or bring in private companies to manage these sectors and 'provide services' - the comapnies get massive amounts of taxpayers money, change the terms and conditions of workers (often removing any secirity of employment) and seek to maximise profits and turnover.
You are right Neill. However I was driving at the Miltary Industrial complex in the US and the need for periodic conflict to keep things going for them. This was never a problem in the Cold War as the threat of the Soviets provided the US miltary with a blank cheque that ultimately fed the defence companies.
Private security companies - such as Sandline (led by Colenel Tim Spicer ex Scots Guards) don't as yet have a link with the arms companies, and the size of their operations would not make a dent in the revenues of the arms companies. This breaks a link between the army and the defence comnaies avoiding derived, or contrived, demand for weapons.
I have herad cases made for private armies interveneing in conflicts and to an extent it made sense at economic level, however this is a multi-faceted issue in which economics should play a small part.
Neil Young
10-10-06, 04:52 PM
Like Coca Cola - Fast Food as a example?
Yes, Coca Cola, that's quite a good example. Washing powders, cars, lager, razor blades (5 blades FFS!), trainers, cafes, supermarkets...
Neil Young
10-10-06, 04:54 PM
You are right Neill. However I was driving at the Miltary Industrial complex in the US and the need for periodic conflict to keep things going for them. This was never a problem in the Cold War as the threat of the Soviets provided the US miltary with a blank cheque that ultimately fed the defence companies.
Private security companies - such as Sandline (led by Colenel Tim Spicer ex Scots Guards) don't as yet have a link with the arms companies, and the size of their operations would not make a dent in the revenues of the arms companies. This breaks a link between the army and the defence comnaies avoiding derived, or contrived, demand for weapons.
I have herad cases made for private armies interveneing in conflicts and to an extent it made sense at economic level, however this is a multi-faceted issue in which economics should play a small part.
Talking of the Military-Industrial Complex did you ever read a book called Vodka-Cola?
No, sounds pretty interesting - assuming its about the links between US Multi-nationals and the USSR.
Where can i get a copy neill?
Neil Young
10-10-06, 05:03 PM
Ooh, dunno, it was published decades ago, I read it at university and I left there in '83. It's probably out of date.
But, yes, you're right it was about trading links between the two supposedly implacable superpower enemies and how they fed off each other. Some of what you were saying brought the book to mind so I was wondering if you'd come across it.
If you're interested I'll see if I've still got my copy and send it to you if you like.
Ooh, dunno, it was published decades ago, I read it at university and I left there in '83. It's probably out of date.
But, yes, you're right it was about trading links between the two supposedly implacable superpower enemies and how they fed off each other. Some of what you were saying brought the book to mind so I was wondering if you'd come across it.
If you're interested I'll see if I've still got my copy and send it to you if you like.
Thanks Neill i'd love to read it, have a look see if you've still got it. Let me know and i'll pm you my address.
Red_Polo
10-10-06, 05:08 PM
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vodka-Cola-Charles-Levinson/dp/0860330702/sr=8-1/qid=1160496462/ref=sr_1_1/026-6465124-6788457?ie=UTF8&s=books
Looks interesting.
Neil Young
10-10-06, 05:08 PM
I'll see what I can do, JRGG. :D
:handshake:
I'll see what I can do, JRGG. :D
:handshake:
cheers mate
:handshake:
singlerider
10-10-06, 07:26 PM
I'd think there'd probably be more. Much like the story in Tomorrow Never Dies, but instead of a newspaper baron, it would be a company trying to start a war in order to boost profits :D
Isn't that pretty much what already happens?
Neil Young
12-10-06, 03:10 PM
Thanks Neill i'd love to read it, have a look see if you've still got it. Let me know and i'll pm you my address.
:confused:
I've had a fairly good look and can't find it. I can't think I gave it away and although I suppose I could have lost it it seems unlikely.
I'll try to have a really thorough search over the weekend. Remind me if I don't get back to you.
:confused:
I've had a fairly good look and can't find it. I can't think I gave it away and although I suppose I could have lost it it seems unlikely.
I'll try to have a really thorough search over the weekend. Remind me if I don't get back to you.
Tie a piece of string around your finger, might help you remember old man.... ;) :D
Neil Young
12-10-06, 03:19 PM
Cheers, I was wondering why I had a piece of string tied round my finger.
Snigger
12-10-06, 03:21 PM
The forces have no way of being profitable - they are a money drain - ergo why privatise when they can only sell to the government anyway.
:confused:
I've had a fairly good look and can't find it. I can't think I gave it away and although I suppose I could have lost it it seems unlikely.
I'll try to have a really thorough search over the weekend. Remind me if I don't get back to you.
Cheers Neill, now I have a piece of string to remind me - I think.
The forces have no way of being profitable - they are a money drain - ergo why privatise when they can only sell to the government anyway.
You privatise so that you can sell to other governments, NGOs and large corpoarations. Or the Governmnet can buy you services as is happening in Iraq where securty companies satffed by ex british forces are making a fortune out of ststic guarding, bodyguarding and convoy protection.
Snigger
12-10-06, 03:39 PM
You privatise so that you can sell to other governments, NGOs and large corpoarations. Or the Governmnet can buy you services as is happening in Iraq where securty companies satffed by ex british forces are making a fortune out of ststic guarding, bodyguarding and convoy protection.
Precisely - I don't want British forces being sold as mercenaries to the highest bidder, they raison d'etres is to protect Britain and Britain's interests.
Precisely - I don't want British forces being sold as mercenaries to the highest bidder, they raison d'etres is to protect Britain and Britain's interests.
Agreed, but would there be less war if the miltary were privatised?
I think no as the politicians would be given carte blanche if they could use a private army.
Snigger
12-10-06, 03:47 PM
No - we'd probably be fighting ourselves.
Mattshark
12-10-06, 04:19 PM
A privatised milatry would be terrible, for many reasons, what if the owners for a start decided they did not like the current government.
Snigger
12-10-06, 04:33 PM
A privatised milatry would be terrible, for many reasons, what if the owners for a start decided they did not like the current government.
Actually you've just found the one positive - if we had private army they could overthrow his Tonyness and his Scottish lapdog and get the country back on the rails - while they are there they could torture Prescott and Straw.
Mattshark
12-10-06, 04:41 PM
Actually you've just found the one positive - if we had private army they could overthrow his Tonyness and his Scottish lapdog and get the country back on the rails - while they are there they could torture Prescott and Straw.
Yes but would then want a corporation in change of the country? I wouldn't. Be worse than toryscum.
Snigger
12-10-06, 04:44 PM
why not? works in the states.....oh wait...
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.