<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><BR><DIV><DIV>On Dec 15, 2005, at 5:29 PM, <A href="mailto:Mike15007@aol.com">Mike15007@aol.com</A> wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT id="role_document" face="Arial" color="#000000" size="2"> <DIV>In a message dated 12/15/2005 8:11:49 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, <A href="mailto:neptune@superlink.net">neptune@superlink.net</A> writes:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face="Arial" color="#000000" size="2"> </FONT><DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face="Arial" color="#000000" size="2"><FONT size="2">And a better way to lessen wars would be to slash government military budgets (down to zero if possible), lower the size of the government military (again, down to zero), abandon many foreign commitments, and foster, as much as possible, free trade through unilaterally opening markets. Privatizing military forces would probably be best too. If each person had to pay the direct cost of all the military she or he wanted, I think most people would opt for purely defensive forces and there would be a marked drop in foreign adventures -- save for those few who felt some kind crusading spirit. Those few would be very few indeed and their leaving on such adventures would likely be no great loss and even a welcome respite from their bleeding heart asinine harangues.</FONT></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> As neat as this sounds, a state that did this would likely lose to any neighbors that maintained a large, well-funded, tightly centrally controlled military. This option (slashing military budgets and the size of the government military down to zero, or as low as possible) is only a viable strategy - or a safe one at least - if everyone else one knows about is doing the same.</DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV> A country without a huge State burden is likely to advance over other peer states still under such a burden. Defense today is largely a matter of technology. Such a state would probably have little trouble raising a defensive force that was quite capable. It would have trouble raising an offensive force. Yes you need some R&D in defense. But you don't need to spend hundreds of billions even in peaceful times to have standing forces all over the world. Yes you need a certain amount of military readiness to guard the country against aggression. But this is a tiny fragment of today's US military spending. </DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"><DIV>- samantha</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV></BODY></HTML>