5 ms·

He said since the beginning of the primaries that he believe in "Peace through Strength", and repeated it many times. If you believe he wants to invade the worl

by DaUR 10y ago

He said since the beginning of the primaries that he believe in "Peace through Strength", and repeated it many times. If you believe he wants to invade the world, you may be a low-information voter, with all due respect. (note: I don't like military spending).

davidgay 10y ago
The idea that the US is weak and needs to increase its military budget to achieve "Peace through Strength" is laughable. The US's military budget is already nearly 3x higher than the next highest country (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_...).
- DaUR 10y ago
  > The idea that the US is weak and needs to increase its military budget to achieve "Peace through Strength" is laughable. Who are you arguing with? You haven't read my comment, clearly.
nkozyra 10y ago
Ad hominem, strawman and passive aggressiveness in a single sentence. Impressive. We have - by any objective measure but ground troops and total warheads - the largest on the planet. "Peace through Strength" is nothing but a platitude. If it means anything, it's "Biggest Military." We didn't need Donald Trump for that. The notion that we must "rebuild" what is already a gigantic military is perplexing. Our military challenges are not coming to us from nations who are emboldened that our massive military is not 10% more massive. I'm not going to call you a low-information voter, but I'm going to ask that you be a little more critical and analytical if this is as deep as you're going at present.
- DaUR 10y ago
  Where did I argue we have to rebuild the military? Are you even replying to the right comment? Is your first sentence projection?
  - nkozyra 10y ago
    I think you perhaps should read my post again, I made no claim about you making that argument.
    - DaUR 10y ago
      Then what is your post replying to? A poster above said that Trump's military spending shows he's a warmonger, and I said it's well known to anyone who even remotely followed the election that he believes in "peace through strength", so his military spending doesn't prove he's a warmonger. The only strawman was yours.
      - nkozyra 10y ago
        I didn't reply to the warmonger post. I'm not responsible for contextually connecting every one of my posts to every other in a thread. Although I see that by not doing so it gives you the opportunity to reply with this sort of non reply.
        DaUR 10y ago
        > to every other in a thread You're misrepresenting. You: If he cuts back on foreign intervention, this extraordinary emphasis on "rebuilding" our military (whatever that means given the relative size of our military) makes even less sense. Me: Yes it does, "Peace through Strength" Followed by your hyper-aggressive, completely off-topic comment right here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13789479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13789479 Why did I need to write the above up?
        nkozyra 10y ago
        Though I'm not sure you're arguing in good faith ... Peace through strength is not something that requires additional military resources. I'm not sure why you're being obtuse about this. He promised during the campaign to cut the debt; his proposed budget would do the opposite. "Peace Through Strength" is, again, a platitude, but even if we take it at face value we have strength at 4x+ and other nation.

by DaUR 10y ago

davidgay 10y ago

The idea that the US is weak and needs to increase its military budget to achieve "Peace through Strength" is laughable. The US's military budget is already nearly 3x higher than the next highest country (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_...).

DaUR 10y ago
> The idea that the US is weak and needs to increase its military budget to achieve "Peace through Strength" is laughable. Who are you arguing with? You haven't read my comment, clearly.

nkozyra 10y ago

Ad hominem, strawman and passive aggressiveness in a single sentence. Impressive. We have - by any objective measure but ground troops and total warheads - the largest on the planet. "Peace through Strength" is nothing but a platitude. If it means anything, it's "Biggest Military." We didn't need Donald Trump for that. The notion that we must "rebuild" what is already a gigantic military is perplexing. Our military challenges are not coming to us from nations who are emboldened that our massive military is not 10% more massive. I'm not going to call you a low-information voter, but I'm going to ask that you be a little more critical and analytical if this is as deep as you're going at present.

DaUR 10y ago
Where did I argue we have to rebuild the military? Are you even replying to the right comment? Is your first sentence projection?
- nkozyra 10y ago
  I think you perhaps should read my post again, I made no claim about you making that argument.
  - DaUR 10y ago
    Then what is your post replying to? A poster above said that Trump's military spending shows he's a warmonger, and I said it's well known to anyone who even remotely followed the election that he believes in "peace through strength", so his military spending doesn't prove he's a warmonger. The only strawman was yours.
    - nkozyra 10y ago
      I didn't reply to the warmonger post. I'm not responsible for contextually connecting every one of my posts to every other in a thread. Although I see that by not doing so it gives you the opportunity to reply with this sort of non reply.
      - DaUR 10y ago
        > to every other in a thread You're misrepresenting. You: If he cuts back on foreign intervention, this extraordinary emphasis on "rebuilding" our military (whatever that means given the relative size of our military) makes even less sense. Me: Yes it does, "Peace through Strength" Followed by your hyper-aggressive, completely off-topic comment right here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13789479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13789479 Why did I need to write the above up?
        nkozyra 10y ago
        Though I'm not sure you're arguing in good faith ... Peace through strength is not something that requires additional military resources. I'm not sure why you're being obtuse about this. He promised during the campaign to cut the debt; his proposed budget would do the opposite. "Peace Through Strength" is, again, a platitude, but even if we take it at face value we have strength at 4x+ and other nation.