3 ms·

Do we really achieve more security through excessive military spending though? Arguably, the world's less safe than it was 15 years ago in spite of massively i

Do we really achieve more security through excessive military spending though? Arguably, the world's less safe than it was 15 years ago in spite of massively increased defence and security spendings during that time. Now the usual counter-argument to that of course is that it'd be even a lot worse if we hadn't spent so much on defence. However, for instance both the war in Iraq and many of the new airport security measures in recent years were quite counterproductive in that they not only failed to make the world a safer place but achieved the exact opposite (the war in Iraq in particular, which gave us ISIS).

Mz 10y ago
That is a totally valid point and one worthy of meaty discussion. It is also unrelated to dismissing military spending wholecloth as nothing but a waste of resources.
- BjoernKW 10y ago
  > It is also unrelated to dismissing military spending wholecloth as nothing but a waste of resources. I'm not sure this was the OP's intention. I see this more as thought experiment in terms of "Mankind doesn't actually lack financial resources.". Ideas and measures that'd improve the quality of life often are bluntly shot down with the argument that we don't have the financial resources for implementing them. We do have those resources. We just need to use them purposefully.
  - Mz 10y ago
    It may not have been their conscious intent, but it is the implicit assumption behind the question. Otherwise, the question could have been framed differently, such as: "I think that is excessive and we could readily cut it by 10%, leaving 16 billion (or whatever -- not checking my math here) to put towards other causes. What good could governments do with that amount?" "We spend X amount on (presumed frivolous expense, such as gold jewelry, haute couture or backyard swimming pools). What might be a better use of those funds if we could convince people to spend it differently?"

Mz 10y ago

That is a totally valid point and one worthy of meaty discussion. It is also unrelated to dismissing military spending wholecloth as nothing but a waste of resources.

BjoernKW 10y ago
> It is also unrelated to dismissing military spending wholecloth as nothing but a waste of resources. I'm not sure this was the OP's intention. I see this more as thought experiment in terms of "Mankind doesn't actually lack financial resources.". Ideas and measures that'd improve the quality of life often are bluntly shot down with the argument that we don't have the financial resources for implementing them. We do have those resources. We just need to use them purposefully.
- Mz 10y ago
  It may not have been their conscious intent, but it is the implicit assumption behind the question. Otherwise, the question could have been framed differently, such as: "I think that is excessive and we could readily cut it by 10%, leaving 16 billion (or whatever -- not checking my math here) to put towards other causes. What good could governments do with that amount?" "We spend X amount on (presumed frivolous expense, such as gold jewelry, haute couture or backyard swimming pools). What might be a better use of those funds if we could convince people to spend it differently?"