[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by Matt W

No "mutual hostility"? Then why does the project need all those guns? The 4th edition specifically references "Mad Max" in a training/explanatory vignette. The Morrow Project is expecting to find a failed or failing state.

First, a note: I don't have 4ed.

Second: TMP should reasonably have been predicting a dangerous atmosphere where the Michigan Militia and the Crips are creating pocket nations through looting and raping and the like, but there is no reason to expect that war + 5 years would be nearly as antagonistic to the Project as war + 150 years.

Originally Posted by Matt W

Perhaps I was unclear. This is not about "restoring the military". This is about a paramilitary security force. Perhaps it would be better if I called it a Constabulary Force or a Gendarmerie?

It would be better if you spelled out what you expected them to do. Police and military are two different roles, and trying to use one organization to accomplish both can be tricky. Based on your initial post, I was thinking of something more like a militia.

Originally Posted by Matt W

a) The Project isn't a security force, its aim is Reconstruction. It's really not efficient to have the Project do all the fighting.
b) This isn't about a new US Army, it's barely a gendarmerie
c) Notoriously worried? Where do you get this from?

a) Reconstruction is the aim, but "establishing a safe space in which to reconstruct" has to be one of the first steps. That's why there are MARS teams in the first place. They certainly aren't going to hang around manning the city walls, but if there is a genuine enemy that threatens security TMP is going to need to deal with it.

b) Scale and job requirements are important here.

c) There is surprisingly little 3ed text that isn't just rules, but from pg 13 of TMP 3ed: "It is the possession of such good equipment that causes all Morrow teams to be the object of such greedy consideration by every selfish survivor in the area. This is the reason that all Morrow personnel are given adequate means to defend themselves."

And from the Starnaman Incident, pg 31, discussing the M6: "Neither round will penetrate Project coveralls. This was a factor in the selection of this weapon for issue to locals."

That first quote tells us that the planners were worried about the populace (perhaps not all of it, but a good chunk) turning violent, and the second quote showed that protecting the Project from the population was judged a higher priority than making the population militarily effective on their own.

Originally Posted by Matt W

I disagree about the Project's economic/political objectives, but agree that "large-scale" security is necessary to achieve any national objectives. This is about how that "large-scale security" is going to be initially established. IT'S NOT ABOUT SOLDIERS

Then I think you need to define who is opposing the large-scale security. If it is an external threat, then it IS about soldiers even if you don't want to call them that. Remember that "paramilitary" just means "unofficial military" - they are still a military and they still have soldiers!

Originally Posted by Matt W

That's just asking for trouble. Crazy/stupid/ignorant people might be willing to fight - but they might also be happy to kill the local Jews, Blacks, Hispanics and Gays. My point, again, is that this is a paramilitary Security Force. Not an army

Welcome to the nightmare that is the United States Army Special Forces! I highly recommend reading Chosen Soldier by Dick Couch to look at the challenges in arming a population that does not necessarily share your values.

A population that agrees 100% with Morrow ideals is a unicorn, not to be found in reality. The Project must decide which people to help, and how, and how much, but realistically they are going to need to provide security for a heck of a lot of people that have at least one big red flag. Perhaps they consider women property and have a culture of rape. Perhaps they insist on using child soldiers. Perhaps they simply don't think that the Project should have the authority to pick who protects them and nominate people the Project knows to be Bad News. When you consider how much of the populace are physically and psychologically able to fight, passing over all the "bad ones" is likely to mean that the security force is thoroughly undermanned.

Originally Posted by Matt W

No... It's the other way round . " Killing Bad Guys" is the task that should be escalated to the Army. On a local level, you need people that can improve local security and have the skills to de-escalate local tensions and negotiate a way out of violent conflict. To me, this would seem useful (not to mention much more civilised and helpful in rebuilding the USA)

You are looking then for diplomats and police forces, not paramilitary. These are all separate roles.