The real reason for maintaining armies is the same reason why some men buy expensive sports cars... overcompensating.
Seriously, think of armies as insurance. Even if it's small, amateurish, and under-funded, it's likely to give potential bullies a little pause. (Of course, a big country like Iraq can sweep up a little country like Kuwait in no time flat, as we all know).
Part of the answer is social/ economic/ political inertia. The military is part of the playground for the elite and privileged. (I use the word playground as in "fork over your lunch money, weakling.") Who wants to get rid of their army just to balance the budget? I sure haven´t seen "fire soldier-boys" on any IMF or World Bank wish lists
A lot of countries, fragile democracies, say, find armies to be an effective tool to use on internal "problems." In a pinch, a loyal military can keep your nation away from chaos. On the other hand, they work equally well to keep dictators in power.
<span>Many countries do get a lot more mileage out of their armies than Iceland or Costa Rica could possibly get. Obviously, a lot of African countries find them pretty handy.
</span>
Also, keep this quote in mind
<span>"It takes two countries to maintain peace and only one to make war"</span>
Answer:
They believed that if the federal government had control of the army and the militia it would be very dangerous, because the government would have a strong centralization of power.
Explanation:
For anti-federalists, allowing the government to have centralized control of the militia would give a lot of power to the head of federal control, that is, it would give a lot of power to the president. This could promote a strong abuse of power, as the country's armed forces would be controlled by a single person, who would be too powerful to be prevented from acting as he wished.
2. average temperature and rainfall is the correct answer
Answer: The above statement is False.
Explanation: The maintenance worker ignited the propane. 1. What statement supports that conclusion- This statement is based on assumption because the Maintenance worker would not ignite the propane and get himself injured at his workplace . 2. Another Assumption is that part of the staff may ignite the propane as a sabotage without the knowledge of the maintenance worker that it was on, so he just walked into the propane that got him injured.
