Friday, November 27, 2009

Army

I feel I must agree with Heinlein. It is my feeling that the only reason a nation can function with relative stability is that it has an army to keep some measure of control. If that was not the case, than any person with a couple of followers and some weapons could have a coop and topple any nation. The army is necessary to also stop outside invasions. This is important obviously for a nation’s survival. In World War 1 and World War 2, we were just entering the era when a nation could be attacked at any time. We realized the need for a standing army because in both cases we had to wait before we could enter the war. This waiting caused a lot of time to be wasted in our campaign and left us vulnerable to attack. We needed the security. We will always need the security. I can sleep at night knowing that there is an army defending me at all times. If not, then this world would unfortunately become chaos. It is nice to believe that socialism would work, and everybody will get along, help each other, and work together, but it didn’t work. Instead communism rose. The human thirst for power is too great. If a nation gives up its military strength, then others with strength will take it over. Unfortunately, this is the world we live in, and unfortunately, it will probably change. The need for military is important to a society in order to survive against other societies with a competing military. The idea in Heinlein’s book is perfect. Either you win, or they win, but it will be one way or the other. There is no stalemate.

1 comment:

  1. Hello there Sean! (I missed you this weekend by the way) But I really like this part you said here...

    The human thirst for power is too great.

    In my blog I also drew the parallel to Communism. I like how you placed realistic views over idealistic views in your analysis of Heinlein's ideas.

    ReplyDelete