I agree with Simon Britnell's reasons for a standing army. Those reasons are
the same ones the founders of our republic understood completely.
The difficulty arises that they could not forsee what has occured in the
last fifty years of our presidents sending troops to fight in 5,6,or7
wars(depend
Simon Britnell wrote:
>
> In an earlier post, Alice opined:
> > I don't agree with a national army either, ...
> Standing armies (even small ones) are vitally important because they
> place a lower limit on the number of lunatics which have to get their
> heads together before they can forcibly
