3 ms·
> If you do not believe that people should profit from increasing the lethality of the military, then you do not believe in the utility of having a military. A
by Ilverin 8y ago
> If you do not believe that people should profit from increasing the lethality of the military, then you do not believe in the utility of having a military.
Alternative: You can believe that circumstances dictate if the military is doing good or bad things. If the military is doing bad things, it is a reasonable argument to oppose them. Clearest example is Yemen.
A less clear and debateable example is: the excessive size of the US military may cause other countries like Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran to build up their own militaries to defend themselves when they would otherwise reduce their military spending. In some cases, mutual disarmament can work, however, it hasn't been tried sufficiently hard (e.g. USA hasn't ever proposed reducing its number of aircraft carriers by treaty, so carriers require asymmetrical warfare capability in order to deter aggression from USA).
- mercutio2 8y agoHorrible things are happening in Yemen, but I’m not sure why you say it’s a clear example of something the [implicitily, US?] military is doing that is clearly bad. I say this as someone who has ranged from medium to full-throated opposed to essentially every adventure undertaken by the US military and CIA in the past 50 years or so. The militants on both sides seem really bad in Yemen.
- Ilverin 8y agoIf both sides are bad, then helping either side accomplishes nothing good unless it ends the war sooner. If the side you support is enforcing a blockade and causing harm to civilians, that is a bad thing while it lasts. In reality, the Saudis have no realistic plan to win in Yemen, so helping them will not end the war anytime soon. In the meantime, Yemen has the worst famine in the last 100 years.