From: Paul Hughes (planetp@aci.net)
Date: Wed Feb 10 1999 - 22:15:47 MST
"Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote:
> First, who's "they"? Who's "the military"? The officers? The generals and
> admirals? The privates? High-level bureaucrats in the DoD? Second, "the
> military" is not a political force in this country. The Department of Defense
> has so little clout, in a nation where budgets are determined by nothing else,
> that the army is deteriorating.
Yes, I was specifically referring to the high-level bureaucrats in the DoD and
higher ranking officers and their immediate underlings. Obviously, the middle
ranking officers would have to go along with the program in order for Martial Law
to remain effective. The infantry are irrelevant - for the most part they will
do what they're told. If there *is* dissension within the middle ranks, then
Martial Law has an increased chance of disintegrating.
> The various elements in the military don't have a cohesive interest group
> strong
> enough to have its own agenda.
>From what I hear there is in fact an interest group within the military ranks -
which has its own underground magazine devoted to these types of issues. But
that is only rumor.
> "The military" hasn't "long sought" _anything_. It simply isn't a power
> bloc; it doesn't have the power, and it isn't a bloc.
I have to disagree with you here on the simple grounds that power is only real at
the end of a gun. You can write as many laws as you want, but they are useless
unless backed by the barrel of a gun. Which in our current state of affairs, is
the firepower of police, BATF, FBI, DEA, and local SWAT. Eliminate those groups
and are laws become silly scribblings on paper in some far way fantasy land
called Washington D.C.
The President, Congress, CIA, NSA and what have you may dictate policy and
courses of action to the Joint Chiefs, yet it is military force itself that
actually makes a particular policy fatal to those unfortunate enough to be
declared "enemy". Martial Law by its very definition changes the roles of power
drastically - usually interpreted as a suspension of the constitution and all
its guarantees - that includes representational democracy (i.e. Congresspeople
are declared irrelevant). Besides, if the situation becomes as chaotic as I have
portrayed, what does it matter who gives the orders - the CIA, NSA, joint chiefs,
president Clinton, VP GORE or some other high ranking set of officials? The end
result is the same - Martial Law - suspension of the constitution enforced by the
superior firepower of US military weaponry.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:01 MST