h a l f b a k e r yThis ain't rocket surgery.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Currently, tragic political upheavals or natural disasters kill many innocent people in poor countries (ex. Tsunami, Hotel Rwanda). Worse, corrupt governments often prevent aid from reaching the starving people who need it, instead stealing aid supplies to feed their army. Estimates say that only half
of charitable gifts actually reach those who need it; the other half is stolen by unjust armies and rich dictators.
Large world governments do nothing because they don't care about people with no money.
The Red Cross (and similar organizations) cares, but is powerless against soldiers with guns.
Proposed solution: A service organization whose members travel well-armed and armored. Members would have to have served as infantry in a large country's military, to ensure they had the needed skills. Careful oversight (maybe a webcam on all soldiers at all times) would ensure the volunteer soldiers do only good. Soldiers would wear full-body armor, making them invulnerable to small-arms fire. Thus, a small group of soldiers could travel unimpeded through a war-torn country, delivering aid to those who desperately need it.
(is this in the right category?)
[link]
|
| |
[sninctown], I think the category is pretty accurate. Welcome to the HB. |
|
| |
That being said, as soon as the Red Cross gets weapons, they become combatants, and are really screwed. |
|
| |
I have a fairly positive opinion about humans in general, but sometimes it is good to be realistic. |
|
| |
Aid supplies often don't get to where they were intended to go. But with this idea the guns and bullits might go to the wrong persons. People will find a way to take this opportunity to get guns, it makes the problem worse. |
|
| |
Um, NATO and the UN? They have guns. |
|
| |
I think UN peacekeepers can't do what I suggest because the UN's constituent countries don't want to commit the troops needed. |
|
| |
A service organization will do what's right, not what helps the UN General Assembly. |
|
| |
If they run out of medical supplies, they could just shoot the unfortunate where they sit. (That's a [-], by the way). |
|
| |
Horrible images of telitubbies and care bears with guns! Attacking people and then asking "Are you okay?" in with voices that seem that they really dont know! <shudder> |
|
| |
1. They could be robots! Or cyborgs. The webcams could be at the level of their virtual belt buckles, to better show children. Unless they were the rolling sphere type of robot; those dont have belts. |
|
| |
2. If army soldiers get training, it stands to reason that caring and trucking should help as well. |
|
| |
3. In wartorn countries, perhaps some compound W? |
|
| |
Yay! FRIENDLY people with guns that can do good! Like a cross between the T-2 from Terminator and Iron Man. Sign me up! <BANG!>. |
|
| |
Sorry, Mr Osama, I think you may be dead. Are you okay? Have some candy! (tosses candy and medical supplies on the corpse, then skips away.) |
|
| |
//Soldiers would wear full-body armor, making them invulnerable to small-arms fire. Thus, a small group of soldiers could travel unimpeded// |
|
| |
Famous last words. I don't know of any personnel armour that makes you invulnerable to small arms fire. Anyhoo, most tinpot armies have huge stores of ex-soviet RPG-7's which are good for >150mm rolled steel plate. If it can take out an M1- Abrams, I think your ubersoldier is stuffed. |
|
| |
If armour like that was possible, don't you think well-funded western armies would be packing it? |
|
| |
What [unabubba] said. The UN and many countries would say their forces are simply providing aid. [-] |
|
| |
An enormous caring army takes to the
road around here every afternoon at
about 415. |
|
| |
Really, they could use some more
training. |
|
| |