7 ms·

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are c

by mapmap 7y ago

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people... This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron. -Dwight D. Eisenhower

dataking 7y ago
Except that scientists working on DARPA programs have also produced some technologies that have proven phenomenally useful to civilians such as the internet, computer mice, GPS, Siri, etc.
- HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
  Still a relevant quote that makes you think about the costs of war, especially when you think about the fact that the person who said it being one of the planners for- and also talked to the soldiers who would participate in- D-Day.
- sneak 7y ago
  NASA put people on the moon and brought them back. They could have designed, launched, and operated GPS like they do Hubble and other satellites. It’s well within their expertise. We don’t need to accept massive DoD funding of violent undertakings that end up killing millions simply for the meager benefits we get as a side effect sometimes.
  - microcolonel 7y ago
    They could develop GPS, but they didn't and wouldn't. The U.S. military commissioned and deployed GPS to configure the clocks and weapons systems required to hold off the hostile and ignorant powers of the world.
    - adamsea 7y ago
      Well until we create a more peaceful world we will not have the opportunity to find out. Also I don’t think Russia, China, Iran, etc, are any less ignorant than the US. Differently ignorant, maybe ;). Which is not to give those countries a pass.
      - sneak 7y ago
        The way you create a more peaceful world is by not providing funds to those who will use them to perform violence; i.e. the DoD.
        microcolonel 7y ago
        You're assuming here that the U.S. military is the genesis of human violence, but the era of American military hegemony has been the most peaceful in human history. America has used the promise of force to uphold a status quo that most people can get on board with, one which doesn't really warrant revolt. The CCP probably will not accomplish anything like that, if we are ever so damned that they become the hegemon; in that case we might as well have just surrendered to the Nazis.
crisdux 7y ago
I always have a problem with this quote because I personally acknowledge a bit of the keynesian argument regarding military spending, that much of it is returned back into the economy and is put to the productive uses listed in that quote.(I'm not saying that's a good reason to raise it) Also, if you are going to mention the opportunity cost of defense spending, then I think we should also carefully assess the opportunity cost of not securing the world with american power and returning to a world without a dominant unipolar power, as a multipolar world seems much more prone to conflict.
- adamsea 7y ago
  There is a broader point to the quote which I think your comment does not touch upon. Put simply, war is never good, it damages even the victors, and, the necessity of being prepared for it should not blind us to its costs. We all come from the same family, at the end of the day. Albeit a particularly contentious one ;).
  - humanrebar 7y ago
    > We all come from the same family, at the end of the day. Of course, but I'll be damned if I let my brother sock my mother in the nose just because he's family. Not that I'm walking around looking for a fight. On the contrary. And if it were my specific responsibility to protect people, it would be foolish for me to become out of shape, unequipped, sloppy, and inattentive. Staying prepared has "costs", of course. That doesn't mean every minute of cardio, training session, or watchful minute is a waste. It would be if someone else already fulfilled that responsibility or if I were egregiously overpreparing or mispreparing somehow.
- AndrewKemendo 7y ago
  This is the broken glass fallacy perfectly described.
  - humanrebar 7y ago
    Of course it isn't. Replacing a broken window with a new window is almost entirely a waste, perhaps other than making sure the window industry remains marginally more viable. Much military spending has direct value as surplus goods, scientific advancement, humanitarian support, and patronage for domestic skilled industry. Maybe those benefits, and others, do not justify the expenditures in all cases, but it's far from a "perfect" waste of economic output.
badrabbit 7y ago
Hate to be a debbie downer and disagree with Ike but the money spent on arms and warfare would not neccesarily be spent on noble things if that spending didn't happen. In a democracy, the money would instead go to whatever cause swing voters and the influential king-maker class think is important. In the US these items tend to be causes of the middle class,not causes of the poor. The middle class,with their very basic needs met tends to focus on their fears and trendy boogy-man of the times instead of the plight of their poor neighbors.
- teh_infallible 7y ago
  I don’t think Eisenhower was saying the money would necessarily go to those things. He was saying they could have, and that each of these weapons purchases represents a lost opportunity, a choice not made.
  - badrabbit 7y ago
    Fair enough.
- Nullabillity 7y ago
  "More noble than murder" is not a high bar to pass.
  - badrabbit 7y ago
    The most noble class in the US right now is "our tropps". Most people don't consider combat soldiers to be murderers. War is what happens when two or more groups of people find no other way to resolve a conflict other than by killong the other party's people and destroying their belongings until they give in. Murder is intentional killing of a person outside of acceptable and legal contexts (such as self defense).

by mapmap 7y ago

dataking 7y ago

Except that scientists working on DARPA programs have also produced some technologies that have proven phenomenally useful to civilians such as the internet, computer mice, GPS, Siri, etc.

HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
Still a relevant quote that makes you think about the costs of war, especially when you think about the fact that the person who said it being one of the planners for- and also talked to the soldiers who would participate in- D-Day.
sneak 7y ago
NASA put people on the moon and brought them back. They could have designed, launched, and operated GPS like they do Hubble and other satellites. It’s well within their expertise. We don’t need to accept massive DoD funding of violent undertakings that end up killing millions simply for the meager benefits we get as a side effect sometimes.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  They could develop GPS, but they didn't and wouldn't. The U.S. military commissioned and deployed GPS to configure the clocks and weapons systems required to hold off the hostile and ignorant powers of the world.
  - adamsea 7y ago
    Well until we create a more peaceful world we will not have the opportunity to find out. Also I don’t think Russia, China, Iran, etc, are any less ignorant than the US. Differently ignorant, maybe ;). Which is not to give those countries a pass.
    - sneak 7y ago
      The way you create a more peaceful world is by not providing funds to those who will use them to perform violence; i.e. the DoD.
      - microcolonel 7y ago
        You're assuming here that the U.S. military is the genesis of human violence, but the era of American military hegemony has been the most peaceful in human history. America has used the promise of force to uphold a status quo that most people can get on board with, one which doesn't really warrant revolt. The CCP probably will not accomplish anything like that, if we are ever so damned that they become the hegemon; in that case we might as well have just surrendered to the Nazis.

crisdux 7y ago

I always have a problem with this quote because I personally acknowledge a bit of the keynesian argument regarding military spending, that much of it is returned back into the economy and is put to the productive uses listed in that quote.(I'm not saying that's a good reason to raise it) Also, if you are going to mention the opportunity cost of defense spending, then I think we should also carefully assess the opportunity cost of not securing the world with american power and returning to a world without a dominant unipolar power, as a multipolar world seems much more prone to conflict.

adamsea 7y ago
There is a broader point to the quote which I think your comment does not touch upon. Put simply, war is never good, it damages even the victors, and, the necessity of being prepared for it should not blind us to its costs. We all come from the same family, at the end of the day. Albeit a particularly contentious one ;).
- humanrebar 7y ago
  > We all come from the same family, at the end of the day. Of course, but I'll be damned if I let my brother sock my mother in the nose just because he's family. Not that I'm walking around looking for a fight. On the contrary. And if it were my specific responsibility to protect people, it would be foolish for me to become out of shape, unequipped, sloppy, and inattentive. Staying prepared has "costs", of course. That doesn't mean every minute of cardio, training session, or watchful minute is a waste. It would be if someone else already fulfilled that responsibility or if I were egregiously overpreparing or mispreparing somehow.
AndrewKemendo 7y ago
This is the broken glass fallacy perfectly described.
- humanrebar 7y ago
  Of course it isn't. Replacing a broken window with a new window is almost entirely a waste, perhaps other than making sure the window industry remains marginally more viable. Much military spending has direct value as surplus goods, scientific advancement, humanitarian support, and patronage for domestic skilled industry. Maybe those benefits, and others, do not justify the expenditures in all cases, but it's far from a "perfect" waste of economic output.

badrabbit 7y ago

Hate to be a debbie downer and disagree with Ike but the money spent on arms and warfare would not neccesarily be spent on noble things if that spending didn't happen. In a democracy, the money would instead go to whatever cause swing voters and the influential king-maker class think is important. In the US these items tend to be causes of the middle class,not causes of the poor. The middle class,with their very basic needs met tends to focus on their fears and trendy boogy-man of the times instead of the plight of their poor neighbors.

teh_infallible 7y ago
I don’t think Eisenhower was saying the money would necessarily go to those things. He was saying they could have, and that each of these weapons purchases represents a lost opportunity, a choice not made.
- badrabbit 7y ago
  Fair enough.
Nullabillity 7y ago
"More noble than murder" is not a high bar to pass.
- badrabbit 7y ago
  The most noble class in the US right now is "our tropps". Most people don't consider combat soldiers to be murderers. War is what happens when two or more groups of people find no other way to resolve a conflict other than by killong the other party's people and destroying their belongings until they give in. Murder is intentional killing of a person outside of acceptable and legal contexts (such as self defense).