Questions for real socialists tm

Can you tell me about the military structure in your ideal society? For those who don't believe in any sort of comand structure, how would your military even functional? I know from experience how bad it can be WITH a command structure, I just can't see how it could even be done without one. For those who will have a more traditional arm forces, how will you evoid the pit falls the USSR had, what with ideology before logic, and how the higher ranking getting access to resources and items the general population couldn't get, and or not allowed to get?

Attached: 250px-Rkka.jpg (250x368, 28.13K)

Kill yourself

Anarchism and socialism are against illegitimate authority, meaning anyone in a leadership role has to justify it. Because of that, if having an effective military means appointing experienced leaders, that's A-OK

It's nice to have someone who'll actually engage the question for once. Thank you.

If you didn't make a new topic every day and stuck to the designated thread you might get more positive responses

Mate, I like looking forward and thinking new thoughts, and not being on the same old thing, cause that'll bore me.

That's nice, fam.
But what's preventing you from posting on the designed threads instead?

This faggot is xtra speshul and his threads are too important to go in the designated spots

put it in the qtddtot thread or in the containment thread and people will reply, you faggot
do you seriously not understand the reason everybody is so hostile is the fact that you waste a whole new thread for it everyday? jesus christ

What I would do is have a military purely for defensive purposes (after socialism is hypothetically established in my country). No conscription unless really needed.

Last time I asked a question in QTDDTT it didn't get answered.

I doubt that was because it was in the QTDDTOT. That thread is one of the more active ones, so maybe your question was just too stupid. For example I don't see what you expect people to answer to a question as retarded as "are you a sex positive communist?" Either way, by always posting them here you're just pissing people off more than anything else.
AN ALTERNATIVE:
Seeing as you said you have several questions "scheduled", why don't you just make one large post with 10-15 of your questions at a time? Lots of curious liberals, Zig Forumstards or other "visitors" just do that, they typically get a large amount of answers and are able to engage in discussion. It would at least be a lot better than having another one of these threads every single day, and be more efficient for your "research" as well. Just try it.

vietcong style criticism sessions, it worked for them

Please stop engaging in discussion. This guy wont go away if you do.

Because I want to focus on one thing at a time, and get to really thing about it before making any sort of reply. Having a ton at once would just be to much of a hassle and wouldn't give each question the attention or the thought they deserve. See

For every 3 Americans killed in the kong war 100 kongs died.

you're just baiting right? or do you have some kind of mental problem? I'm asking for real

If I had a mental problems, my job would kick me out, so no.

even if that's true you have to take into account the massive disparity between the two, plus they weren't just fighting against america

Yeah, because babe IEDs and attacks during holidays is something to really like about war, huh?

i thought you said you had military experience

face it, this is a fight between a guy with a gun and a guy with pocket sand.

Yes I do.

Communist casualties were higher but you'd only get that number if you're including civilian losses, and subtracting South Vietnamese military casualties. In other words: telling a half-truth (lying) to prove your false point.

There's waaaaay more to criticize about US leadership in the war than Vietnamese. US leadership had no coherent war-winning plan whatsoever and just relied on their superior industry & firepower to win without one. This nonsense lead to them almost never launching offensives and completely losing the strategic initiative for the entirety of the war.

yeah and the pocket sand guy won


then you should know how fucked up war is

I agree, they went in there without really thinking about it. This wasn't like japan in wwii where they could completely ignore unimportant territory because the natives being stuck on an island, wouldn't be able to do anything. The US shouldn't done 1 of two things, either pulled their punches, or invade it in the first place. I'm said to say, but if the US conducted the war like with japan, and deal such a traumatic blow then rebuilt it from the ground up, it wouldn't have been as bad. The kongs didn't do bad war wise, but I just don't agree with the idea of fighting or even using gorilla war to begin with, because of my ethics.
I assume you're joking about pocket sand guy.
I've never actually been in a war, but I know people who have.

Can't answer this eh?

Attached: 1426370085233.jpg (604x438, 14.68K)

See &

I’d like a two-tiered military. There would be a national armed force that answers to the central government, as well as local militias that answer to local governments. All able bodied individuals are conscripted for five years at age 18. They do two years in the national army followed by three years in the local militia. After that they are demobilized into a national reserve similar to the Swiss militia system, where they keep their kit at home and come in for training one weekend a month. They stay in the reserves until age 45. The central government has the authority to deploy the national army whenever and however they chose, but the militias can only be deployed with the consent of the local government, or if there is an immediate threat to national security (ie an invasion). Alternatively, the legislature can grant the central government the power to deploy militia troops regardless of the wishes of the local government, but this would require a two thirds majority and must be renewed every two years.

The idea behind this is to be a check on revisionism, and open up the possibility of a second revolution should the state stray away from the interests of the people.

So star ship troopers with national guard. I like it.