(Untitled)

[chrysoberyl]

A phrase I read in Newsweek that I can't stop thinking about is "Young men join the Marines to be like the warriors in those recruiting ads....They do not imagine they're joining a military version of the Peace Corps to be humanitarian workers."

I am wondering if anyone else has a reaction to this.

Comments

[thereject]

I think that's been the cause of a lot of the issues in the Iraq occupation. We have hundreds of thousands of troops over there that aren't trained to be peace keepers and theey don't want to be peacekeepers.

Personally I think the proper route would be to create a new military branch that focuses on this kind of thing.

[perkyczarlet]

Dude, that's a really cool idea.

[chrysoberyl]

I would worry about whether or not it would be possible to actually staff such a force. The incentives we have now don't seem to appeal to the type of person who would be interested in being a Peacekeeper. Also, could we afford to carry a fifth branch of the military?

The way I see the distribution of duties currently is Marines as a fighting force, Active Duty Army as a peacekeeping force, and Reserves and National Guard as a back-up resource for for peacekeeping. If we market the Army as a Peacekeeping force, and train the Army as a peacekeeping force, I would think we wouldn't need to create a separate armed forces unit. Do you know if the Army currently has any missions that do not involve peacekeeping?