Global Security

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to: navigation, search

2023

Possible deep solutions:

Problem Statement

Ukraine showed us that global institutions for peace have failed. Russia is an urchin, but still, such an entity should be neutralized readily in a global peace strategy. Nukes make this complex, but the Doctrine of MAD has never failed yet.

Entities such as NATO can be part - but what is the next step to NATO does it work?

Here we formulate a military strategy, known as a peace strategy. Building on the work of John Robb and others, what is the platform for security that is needed?

What we do know - it must be collaborative and inclusive, with banishment of those who do not follow generally accepted principles of freedom, nonviolence, and prosperity.

A quick thought from 2022 is that the solution has:

  1. Collaboratively developed military hardware, until it is phased out with hardware of Mutually Assured Abundance. The intent here is to prevent hundreds or thousands of repetitive developments by many agents, and instead replacing the competitive waste with hardware at about 1/100 the cost. This means 100x less burden on other aspects of society, such as education.
  2. Participants are in voluntarily, can defect at any time. It is an open ecosystem.
  3. It is pay for service, like any contractor.
  4. Governance algorithm follows training on principles that are widely accepted as true and proven. That is - who do we defend? Who do we reform? Who do we punish? Who decides?

Issues

Cost of military? Why not spend the money on constructive ends. Some may argue that money is better spent elsewhere, others say (Thomas Theiner) that military money is well spent.

Open Hardware Investment as a Route to Security

  • Joshua Pearce - [2]

Far Out

Regenerative justice, a global corrective force that takes individuals, groups, and nations to accountability for their actions. It could be a mercenary force backed by incentives for transparency and justice. B21 proposed stealth is 700M, B2 is $2B a pop. Not tenable. New arms race is in supersonic missiles (us - china - Russia). Nongo, either.

Defensive systems must be a part of it. Just plain defense, like Star Wars to knock out nukes - and anything else except perhaps ballistic projectiles, which we assume can fly faster than rockets. So here are first principle calculations for Star Wars feasibility, and let's see if that matches the Washington Consensus.

Supersonic weapons - mach 5-10 appears to exist. Anti missile missiles only do 4.1, such as the Patriot. Supersonic missiles may take out naval warship groups. 150kW laser weapons are on the table. This really does get into Star Wars territory. Note that spaceships get up to 24000 mph to leave earth. Reusable rockets may help here.

The ultimate solution is simple - refocusingilitary energy to personal growth. A transition from nukes to self-help is the counterintuitive solution. This is what OSE does. Here we may be able to open letter Lockheed Martin to substantial funding of personal growth and education as the deepest form of military strategy - though that would run them out of business in their traditional product line of weaponry. If they transition, that would be a success. We can ask the same from China and Russia. To that end, well-researched open letter position statements/pitches can be drawn up - to inspire and inform the public, while providing an opportunity to the brokers of death. With love and integrity.