Setting up paramilitary Security Forces

[Matt W]

This is something that occurs in several campaigns and I think it would have been considered by the Morrow Project Planners.

So, for your consideration and comments, here are my initial thoughts on the "standard" thinking of the Project

BUILDING A PARAMILITARY SECURITY FORCE

What is needed?
Think creatively, in partnership with the community, about what is truly needed to defend them from their threats.

Who will make decisions about the Security Force?
What are the costs and how will they be paid?
A healthy community needs strong Economic and Political institutions if it is to direct and finance its own security. WARNING! Without these institutions, it is possible to set up a Security Force - but it would be the only effective organisation in the community. This is immensely dangerous. The Morrow Project is attempting to restore the United States, not set set up the conditions for a military dictatorship
[The Security Forces should not be created without the simultaneous rebuilding of something resembling a democratic system of government, an independent Judiciary and a Treasury Department. There are very good reasons for the inclusion of Economic and Political Specialists in most Morrow Teams. ]

Is the existing force corrupt?
An existing, but corrupt, Security Force can be worse than no security at . Disarm and demobilise corrupt units whenever possible. Individual members of these units might be allowed to join the new force - but only after extensive vetting.

How do you get the best recruits?
Make it a public process. Involve the community in the selection and assessment of potential recruits. The Morrow Project can guide this - but it is the community that has to "own" the recruitment process. The aim is to give the force credibility and a good initial reputation.


Does everyone understand that Security is more than "killing bad guys"?

While paramilitary skills are important, it's likely that recruits will be already competent in combat. It may be more useful to train them in skills such as "conflict resolution" and negotiation (or even literacy). It WILL be essential to imbue respect for the rule of law and human rights .

[Again, remember that the Project's aim is to rebuild the United States. Security Force training should emphasise national identity and the overcoming of ethnic/tribal/religious differences. ]

Does this Security Force frighten the neighbours?.
The last thing we want is an arms race with other communities. Don't build a Security Force that looks like it is intended for offensive purposes.

[cosmicfish]

This looks like one of those areas where you need to be careful not to ascribe prescience to the planners - remember that the planned deployment of the Project would occur in a time when there were going to be scattered remnants of the US military as well as a lot of veterans among the survivors. Much of the work and materials and expertise would already be available and the US would not generally have descended into mutual hostility. I think that restoring the military would be a high-level function, not one parsed to individual teams beyond a very basic, temporary level.

That having been said, some comments:

What is needed?

Considering that the Project is presumably planning on (a) dealing with immediate threats itself, (b) working to restore the United States Military under some new national government, and (c) notoriously worried about arming people against itself, I would say the Project would encourage only a small defensive force and only if it was unusually necessary.

Who will make decisions about the Security Force?
What are the costs and how will they be paid?

Presumably, the goal would be to leave any such force under the control of local civilian government, but leverage the influence and resources of the Project to steer it in an acceptable direction.

As to costs, I think it likely that the Project would be encouraging a commune-style economy at the local level, until large-scale security had been established and actual commerce made capitalism feasible again. So at first... no one. Because no one is getting paid, everyone is pitching in to survive. For that matter, it is unlikely that any but the largest communities will have any full-time soldiers, not when basic survival takes so much work.

Is the existing force corrupt?

If it is then you have a bigger problem to resolve before you can even start improving their forces!

How do you get the best recruits?

It is likely to be a "whoever can and will fight" scenario. Beggars can't be choosers.

Does everyone understand that Security is more than "killing bad guys"?

For a solid decade post-war, anything more than "killing bad guys" is going to be escalated either to Morrow units or to reconstituted units of the US military. For newbies, stick to the basics.

Does this Security Force frighten the neighbours?

Well, if the neighbors are hostile then it may be necessary regardless, and if they are not then the team should have engaged them long before starting any scale of military development that they would know about or even care about!

[Matt W]

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

This looks like one of those areas where you need to be careful not to ascribe prescience to the planners - remember that the planned deployment of the Project would occur in a time when there were going to be scattered remnants of the US military as well as a lot of veterans among the survivors. Much of the work and materials and expertise would already be available and the US would not generally have descended into mutual hostility.

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.

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

I think that restoring the military would be a high-level function, not one parsed to individual teams beyond a very basic, temporary level.

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?

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

Considering that the Project is presumably planning on (a) dealing with immediate threats itself, (b) working to restore the United States Military under some new national government, and (c) notoriously worried about arming people against itself, I would say the Project would encourage only a small defensive force and only if it was unusually necessary.

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?

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

As to costs, I think it likely that the Project would be encouraging a commune-style economy at the local level, until large-scale security had been established and actual commerce made capitalism feasible again. So at first... no one. Because no one is getting paid, everyone is pitching in to survive. For that matter, it is unlikely that any but the largest communities will have any full-time soldiers, not when basic survival takes so much work.

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

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

It is likely to be a "whoever can and will fight" scenario. Beggars can't be choosers.

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

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

For a solid decade post-war, anything more than "killing bad guys" is going to be escalated either to Morrow units or to reconstituted units of the US military. For newbies, stick to the basics.

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)

[mmartin798]

Just so I am clear in my own head, are we talking something akin to a small town with a posse to promote local security or something like Texas Rangers, to promote regional security?

[Matt W]

Originally Posted by mmartin798

Just so I am clear in my own head, are we talking something akin to a small town with a posse to promote local security or something like Texas Rangers, to promote regional security?

The Texas Rangers are indeed a "paramilitary security force" but what I'm describing would begin on a smaller scale. For example, a single county (which could be several villages and towns). It would be more permanent and professional than a "posse"

[bobcat]

to me it sounds essentially like establishing/rebuilding the local SWAT team. provide the community with a decent enough reaction force to protect itself and train them to be cops first and foremost.

[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.

[bobcat]

most police are paramilitary. even in the UK where most of them are unarmed they still qualify as paramilitary forces.(granted when they aren't armed we often refer to them by a different nomenclature "targets")

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by bobcat

most police are paramilitary. even in the UK where most of them are unarmed they still qualify as paramilitary forces.(granted when they aren't armed we often refer to them by a different nomenclature "targets")

Police become paramilitary when they are more like military (in equipment, organization, and habit) than like civilians. That is certainly true in the US for special units like SWAT teams, but is not true for most police.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Matt W

BUILDING A PARAMILITARY SECURITY FORCE

Originally Posted by Matt W

What is needed?

A way to something that channels fighters into areas where they are challenged and do more than just fight. First I would name them and give them a mission that emphasizes guarding or protecting. Next, I would restrict the training I give them to defensive measures and emphasize medical, sanitation, and recovery skills. I would only train them in rifle, and pistol, then limit the training ammunition to a semiannual qualification with a limited personal load.

Originally Posted by Matt W

Who will make decisions about the Security Force?

The people being secured ultimately, as the MP can really only suggest or facilitate. Trying to force is only going to bring resistance and the MP was not meant to govern anyway.

Originally Posted by Matt W

What are the costs and how will they be paid?

Initially the weapons and ammo….. even the basic equipment will probably come from TMP stocks. Likely Korean era surplus that is still serviceable. The shelter, food, fuel, will come from those being protected probably by bartering at first…… TMP gives the village a water filtration unit in exchange for a bunkhouse + food for a year, as an example. There is room in the TMP plan to barter emergency relief supplies as the impetus to steer cooperation.

Originally Posted by Matt W

Is the existing force corrupt?

If one is ….. the MP probably would hold back support and assist someone else. The TMP would probably set up near with a better lot and use persuasion, political subterfuge, and Maquis tactics to bring about a gentler regime change.

Originally Posted by Matt W

How do you get the best recruits?

Honor and Prestige…. Sense of Community, Respect……. This will draw in some…… Three hots and a cot is all some others need. Good equipment, a good reason, good food, along with good training will get you recruits and keep your people. You have to be able to gently turn away or repurpose volunteers that are not the best recruits so as not to create an antagonistic voting block.

Originally Posted by Matt W

Does everyone understand that Security is more than "killing bad guys"?

If you emphasize a mission of Search and Rescue, with some guarding the people, the ones that are looking to fight will gravitate out to something else or somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Matt W

Does this Security Force frighten the neighbours?.

Borrow from ancient capitals or the old soviet system….. Exchange soldiers….. Soldiers from village A guard village B, Village B soldiers guard village C, and Village C soldiers guard village A…… fosters respect, prevents one from becoming aggressive with their force, lowers the chances of revolt….. etc.

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

Police become paramilitary when they are more like military (in equipment, organization, and habit) than like civilians. That is certainly true in the US for special units like SWAT teams, but is not true for most police.

The Spanish border patrol is a paramilitary force.

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by .45cultist

The Spanish border patrol is a paramilitary force.

Perhaps (I am not familiar with it), but the issue I have is not that paramilitary forces cannot exist (they absolutely do!) but rather that the OP had not well defined the role of his desired organization and what he HAD defined did not seem to be paramilitary.

[Project_Sardonicus]

I was thinking would being the force of law and order be an issue for the teams? What happened when the bandits they were stopping harassing the poor farmers surrendered?

But then I suppose the last thing any government would do before sucumbing to armagedon would be to declare martial law.

The question then becomes do the teams have the courage to become; judge, jury and exectioner?

Or

Judge, Judy and Executioner?

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus

I was thinking would being the force of law and order be an issue for the teams? What happened when the bandits they were stopping harassing the poor farmers surrendered?

In the grand scope of things, there should be a (relatively small) number of teams dedicated to just these kinds of problems. The answer would seem to depend on the resources of the "poor farmers" and the relationship of the bandits to any external groups.

Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus

The question then becomes do the teams have the courage to become; judge, jury and exectioner?

Morrow Teams should not be setting themselves up in ANY of those roles. They should help the community to understand those roles and establish a system of justice, but the Project is not a part of the community and cannot act as if it is.

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Initially the weapons and ammo….. even the basic equipment will probably come from TMP stocks. Likely Korean era surplus that is still serviceable.

Not having read any 4ed, this would seem counter to what 3ed indicated for the Project - the only firearms or military equipment made available for distribution to locals was a non-military survival rifle. You cannot take away weapons they have, but you can risk a lot by arming the locals, and risk avoidance seems to be a Morrow catch phrase.

Plus you are talking about a lot of additional storage.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

If you emphasize a mission of Search and Rescue, with some guarding the people, the ones that are looking to fight will gravitate out to something else or somewhere else.

I don't think you will be able to sell a post-apocalyptic community on having a SAR organization that sometimes performs police or military functions - no one is going to buy that people getting lost is that big of a problem!

The issue of overly-homicidal candidates for police and military is a long understood (if never fully-solved) problem. If you create a "danger scale" for recruits, then you can place windows on that scale where you can have someone enter the police (which requires more independent action and restraint), enter the military (which can tolerate more dangerous recruits with appropriate controls), or be inappropriate for both (either by being too pacifistic or too homicidal!). Where those windows lie depends on what you need and what you have...

[bobcat]

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

Police become paramilitary when they are more like military (in equipment, organization, and habit) than like civilians. That is certainly true in the US for special units like SWAT teams, but is not true for most police.

ie every police department that actually functions.

Equipment: not actually required to be paramilitary but, they are uniformed, given commo and in most cases weapons, and i have yet to meet a cop that isn't wearing some armor.

Organization; they have a clearly defined chain of command with a specified line of succession so you don't interrupt the chiefs game of gulf unless you have to.

Habit: this is more difficult to point at but given that they are expected to be able to think on their feet in the field, they are expected to respect their superiors, they often even get the same haircuts(for many of the same reasons) and given that all of these habits stem from the same sources as their military mirrors. we can check this box as well.

so yes by your stated standards any Police department that can effectively function is a paramilitary force.

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by bobcat

Equipment: not actually required to be paramilitary but, they are uniformed, given commo and in most cases weapons, and i have yet to meet a cop that isn't wearing some armor.

Their duty uniforms are nothing like military duty uniforms (being designed to stand out and be reassuring), their commo and standard weapons are identical to civilian models (with the exception, in some areas, of magazine capacity), and you can buy the armor yourself. Bank security guards share all these characteristics as well, and no one would call them paramilitary. Standard CIA agents aren't even paramilitary. As long as I don't put on a badge (another non-military item), I can put on everything you just described and while someone might think me odd, they wouldn't think "that guy's a soldier!"

Originally Posted by bobcat

Organization; they have a clearly defined chain of command with a specified line of succession so you don't interrupt the chiefs game of gulf unless you have to.

So does every corporation. Heck, so does every ship that sails the seas. Also, their chain of command tends to be very flat in the field, in part because they do not anticipate losing significant numbers in all but the absolute worst scenario.

Originally Posted by bobcat

Habit: this is more difficult to point at but given that they are expected to be able to think on their feet in the field, they are expected to respect their superiors, they often even get the same haircuts(for many of the same reasons) and given that all of these habits stem from the same sources as their military mirrors. we can check this box as well.

Except for the hair cuts, I think you just described salesmen. The cops I know have varying haircuts - some are distinctly non-military.

If we are talking about habits, though, I do shoot with cops and we've had some interesting discussions about how they have to retrain ex-military to move and shoot like cops and not like soldiers. Different goals, different environments, different expectations.

Originally Posted by bobcat

so yes by your stated standards any Police department that can effectively function is a paramilitary force.

I wholeheartedly disagree. There are certainly exceptions (like SWAT, Border Patrol, and a few others), but standard police live in and are part of the civilian world, not the military.

Now we have certainly seen an increased militarization of the police in the US, but that generally only changes that small part of it designated as SWAT - they simply require too much training to justify for every cop, especially when they are not often required.