> If the government threw just as much money into civilian research, we'd likely get just as much good, without finding more efficient ways to kill each other.

> If the government threw just as much money into civilian research, we'd likely get just as much good, without finding more efficient ways to kill each other. Do I understand correctly, then, that if we continue throwing that money into military research, we not only gain the same civilian benefits, but also prevent the occurrence wherein someone else finds an efficient way to kill us before we find an efficient way to defend ourselves from it?