4 ms·

> the US certainly isn't 100% trustworthy. The US is the most wildly insane, two-faced and upside-down country in the world right now in terms of military. Th

> the US certainly isn't 100% trustworthy. The US is the most wildly insane, two-faced and upside-down country in the world right now in terms of military. The commander-in-chief routinely makes nuclear threats, actively hurts his own citizens in times of need, and seeks to decrease military stability by accelerating climate change and isolating his country from the world. The commander-in-chief lies about every single thing in his day-to-day life, as well as his political life; he is mentally unstable and not fit to serve. The US military is 100% untrustworthy as its direct leader has shown himself to be literally insane. > there's a real don't-rock-the-boat problem here The US is the one rocking the boat. It has already happened and it happens daily. > A world without a dominant US military is a world with fewer US-driven injustices. That doesn't seem like a good bet to be a "better world", though. I disagree. That seems like a very incredibly great bet, to me. The time of US military leadership is over. That happened the day our Military Commander In Chief stood on his inauguration day and lied about the number of people in front of him. Perhaps the US will return to a positive leading role one day, but it is not there now and it has not been for years. All this aside, I do not agree that Google is the right place to develop US Military technology. Edit: Additionally, the commander-in-chief of the US military also stated point blank that we may not have presidential elections any more in the future. This is not a time to champion US democracy, military might, etc.

irq 8y ago
Instead of downvoting cryptoz, I encourage people to counter what he said with their own replies. The majority of his statements in this post are verifiable facts. (I do not know this person, fwiw).
- Rexxar 8y ago
  I don't down vote him but I understand that some people want to keep political discussions out of this forum, especially when this is not directly related to the original submission.
- jds375 8y ago
  I agree. I’d guess that the downvoters are thinking along the lines of: - Sure it’s bad now, but the US military is made up of far more than just the president... many of which may be good, rational actors. - Just because it’s bad now doesn’t mean it won’t get better quickly (there has been a lot of pushback on the president’s agenda) - The US may still be comparatively better/benevolent than any other dominant superpower Note that these aren’t necessarily my views (I’d need more time to think and consider). But I think they point out some decent possible counter arguments to OP
  - ajross 8y ago
    > Sure it’s bad now, That's the thing though: it's not bad now!. Not by any historical standard, at least. For most of our history and prehistory, right up to the past 70 years, stupid warfare has been the rule. Petty tribal disputes, armed insurrections, ethnic cleansing and suppression and random gang violence were absolutely routine for almost everyone even as recently as our great grandparent's lifetimes. Virtually everyone saw violence like this at some point. Now, in most of the world (no, not all of it, but yes: most), pretty much no one does. And that's important. What we've been doing is working. Don't rock the boat.
    - jds375 8y ago
      I actually completely agree with you (Enlightenment Now by Pinker provides excellent data backing all of this up). Our collective pessimism is actually a major problem I think. But to clarify, when I said “sure it’s bad now” I meant that in the context of the current military leadership. Unfortunately I can’t really defend that argument much further given that I don’t necessarily agree with it (it was just speculation on potential counter-arguments).
- garmaine 8y ago
  There’s a lot of bad political rhetoric and scare mingering that is frankly not even worthy of my time to address. Like, for example, that Trump will eliminate presidential elections and by implication install himself as president for life, or that he even has the authority or capability to do so.
  - cryptoz 8y ago
    Of course he doesn't have the authority to do so. He still plans on doing it and that is clearly unstable and not a 'feature' of a solid military you want to have. I'm not the one fear mongering. It is the US government doing all the fear mongering. The "stable genuis" leading the country is the one doing the fear mongering.
- manfredo 8y ago
  The individual facts are verifiable, but the overall conclusion that "the US is the most wildly insane, two-faced and upside-down country in the world right now in terms of military" is a borderline troll comment - I sense a strong possibility that it is meant to elicit a reaction rather than engage in a dialogue. Not to the point that I'd advocate its removal, but enough for me to downvote and not respond. Seriously, the US is more insane than North Korea, a country that routinely launches ballistic missiles over countries that are essentially in a state of cold war with it? The United States' military position is more unstable than Venezuela, a county that is imprisoning it's own brass and experiencing large scale desertion[1] to the point that it's speculated that there may be a coup soon? I do not believe a reasonable person make either of these claims. [1] http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article204927784.html http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/...
  - cryptoz 8y ago
    I am not trolling. That's ridiculous. I'm merely speaking the truth. And yes I would make both of those claims. And I am a reasonable person. If you think that my statements above make me an "unreasonable person" just for my comments of fact and opinion, then you are the one trolling and attempting to invalidate my entire existence as a person. I stand by my points.
Const-me 8y ago
I live in Montenegro, which was a part of Yugoslavia. When Yugoslavia started to break apart the wars started. The wars lasted for almost 10 years, from 1991 to 1999. American military intervention is the main reason why the wars stopped. For the last 18 years it’s now peace. I’m an immigrant here so I did not participated in these wars. But I asked locals who did, “do you think the wars would stop unless Americans intervened?” The answer is usually “no, I think we would be still killing each other to this day.”
- cryptoz 8y ago
  The US military of the 1990s was a very different organization than it is today. Pretending we have the same solid military leadership right now as we did then is dangerous.
  - AndrewKemendo 8y ago
    James Mattis, the current Secretary of Defense, was an Military assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense during Kosovo. So literally the same person from the 90s is in a key leadership position now in the Military.
    - cryptoz 8y ago
      So we're just pretending that Trump doesn't exist? There's a big difference between then and today.
      - AndrewKemendo 8y ago
        Yea basically. Obviously the President is the final authority of the DoD, and the Chain of Command will obey legal orders, but as was made clear with the Transgender conflict between the SECDEF and POTUS it's not as clear cut as the POTUS saying "do as I say" and it just happening. The Department of Defense isn't an overtly political organization and has a deep philosophy of operating largely the same irrespective of who the CINC is. [1] https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/02/22/mattis-recommends-keeping-transgender-troops-military-report.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/02/22/mattis-recomm...

irq 8y ago

Instead of downvoting cryptoz, I encourage people to counter what he said with their own replies. The majority of his statements in this post are verifiable facts. (I do not know this person, fwiw).

Rexxar 8y ago
I don't down vote him but I understand that some people want to keep political discussions out of this forum, especially when this is not directly related to the original submission.
jds375 8y ago
I agree. I’d guess that the downvoters are thinking along the lines of: - Sure it’s bad now, but the US military is made up of far more than just the president... many of which may be good, rational actors. - Just because it’s bad now doesn’t mean it won’t get better quickly (there has been a lot of pushback on the president’s agenda) - The US may still be comparatively better/benevolent than any other dominant superpower Note that these aren’t necessarily my views (I’d need more time to think and consider). But I think they point out some decent possible counter arguments to OP
- ajross 8y ago
  > Sure it’s bad now, That's the thing though: it's not bad now!. Not by any historical standard, at least. For most of our history and prehistory, right up to the past 70 years, stupid warfare has been the rule. Petty tribal disputes, armed insurrections, ethnic cleansing and suppression and random gang violence were absolutely routine for almost everyone even as recently as our great grandparent's lifetimes. Virtually everyone saw violence like this at some point. Now, in most of the world (no, not all of it, but yes: most), pretty much no one does. And that's important. What we've been doing is working. Don't rock the boat.
  - jds375 8y ago
    I actually completely agree with you (Enlightenment Now by Pinker provides excellent data backing all of this up). Our collective pessimism is actually a major problem I think. But to clarify, when I said “sure it’s bad now” I meant that in the context of the current military leadership. Unfortunately I can’t really defend that argument much further given that I don’t necessarily agree with it (it was just speculation on potential counter-arguments).
garmaine 8y ago
There’s a lot of bad political rhetoric and scare mingering that is frankly not even worthy of my time to address. Like, for example, that Trump will eliminate presidential elections and by implication install himself as president for life, or that he even has the authority or capability to do so.
- cryptoz 8y ago
  Of course he doesn't have the authority to do so. He still plans on doing it and that is clearly unstable and not a 'feature' of a solid military you want to have. I'm not the one fear mongering. It is the US government doing all the fear mongering. The "stable genuis" leading the country is the one doing the fear mongering.
manfredo 8y ago
The individual facts are verifiable, but the overall conclusion that "the US is the most wildly insane, two-faced and upside-down country in the world right now in terms of military" is a borderline troll comment - I sense a strong possibility that it is meant to elicit a reaction rather than engage in a dialogue. Not to the point that I'd advocate its removal, but enough for me to downvote and not respond. Seriously, the US is more insane than North Korea, a country that routinely launches ballistic missiles over countries that are essentially in a state of cold war with it? The United States' military position is more unstable than Venezuela, a county that is imprisoning it's own brass and experiencing large scale desertion[1] to the point that it's speculated that there may be a coup soon? I do not believe a reasonable person make either of these claims. [1] http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article204927784.html http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/...
- cryptoz 8y ago
  I am not trolling. That's ridiculous. I'm merely speaking the truth. And yes I would make both of those claims. And I am a reasonable person. If you think that my statements above make me an "unreasonable person" just for my comments of fact and opinion, then you are the one trolling and attempting to invalidate my entire existence as a person. I stand by my points.

Const-me 8y ago

I live in Montenegro, which was a part of Yugoslavia. When Yugoslavia started to break apart the wars started. The wars lasted for almost 10 years, from 1991 to 1999. American military intervention is the main reason why the wars stopped. For the last 18 years it’s now peace. I’m an immigrant here so I did not participated in these wars. But I asked locals who did, “do you think the wars would stop unless Americans intervened?” The answer is usually “no, I think we would be still killing each other to this day.”

cryptoz 8y ago
The US military of the 1990s was a very different organization than it is today. Pretending we have the same solid military leadership right now as we did then is dangerous.
- AndrewKemendo 8y ago
  James Mattis, the current Secretary of Defense, was an Military assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense during Kosovo. So literally the same person from the 90s is in a key leadership position now in the Military.
  - cryptoz 8y ago
    So we're just pretending that Trump doesn't exist? There's a big difference between then and today.
    - AndrewKemendo 8y ago
      Yea basically. Obviously the President is the final authority of the DoD, and the Chain of Command will obey legal orders, but as was made clear with the Transgender conflict between the SECDEF and POTUS it's not as clear cut as the POTUS saying "do as I say" and it just happening. The Department of Defense isn't an overtly political organization and has a deep philosophy of operating largely the same irrespective of who the CINC is. [1] https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/02/22/mattis-recommends-keeping-transgender-troops-military-report.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/02/22/mattis-recomm...