5 ms·
It's in the military's interest to limit the freedom and empowerment of the public as much as possible. I would take their opinions with a grain of salt. With
by brenden2 6y ago
It's in the military's interest to limit the freedom and empowerment of the public as much as possible. I would take their opinions with a grain of salt.
With that said, this seems like something that can be easily solved with technology improvements.
- souterrain 6y agoExcepting in this case where the military operates a critical, life-safety infrastructure used by civilians. I'm frankly more concerned with the FCC acting as a taxpayer-funded telecoms industry cheerleader. Dear FCC: You're regulators. You're supposed to be regulating. This is what you get for being public servants.
- brenden2 6y agoMeh, the military engages in far more life terminating than life saving.
- kube-system 6y agoDeterrence is hard to measure, but US military superiority correlates with a period of relatively low global conflict.
- brenden2 6y agoMaybe so, but the evidence is weak at best. Some wars (like Iraq, Korea, Vietnam) were a sham. I'd feel more comfortable knowing nobody had nuclear weapons.
- kube-system 6y agoYou'd feel more comfortable, but is that the same as actually being safer?
- CNJ7654 6y ago>I'd feel more comfortable knowing nobody had nuclear weapons I think we all would, they're terrifying devices. However, that ship has sailed. People know how to create nuclear weapons, and that information can never be removed from the world. The fact that these weapons CAN exist at all provides all the incentive a nation needs to create their own. The best we can do now is keep eachother in a perpetual Mexican standoff
- Rebelgecko 6y agoHow many lives has GPS saved? Even if all it did was prevent one KAL007 type event a decade, that's already thousands edit: Korean Air 007 was an airliner that was shot down by the USSR after straying into their airspace. It had a huge influence on the decision to make GPS available for civilian use.
- tehjoker 6y agoUsually I'd agree with you, but this is a case of DoD wanting to preserve infrastructure for targeting drones vs corporations seeing $$$ in robotic deployment and automation so they can eliminate jobs. Who knows who will win. The drones thing is hyperbole because (so far) they drop the bombs overseas, but my point is that they have an interest in preserving GPS domestically.
- HenryKissinger 6y ago> It's in the military's interest to limit the freedom and empowerment of the public as much as possible. This is an unfair view. The National Defense Strategy states: > Without sustained and predictable investment to restore readiness and modernize our military to make it fit for our time, we will rapidly lose our military advantage, resulting in a Joint Force that has legacy systems irrelevant to the defense of our people. And > Another change to the strategic environment is a resilient, but weakening, post-WWII international order. In the decades after fascism’s defeat in World War II, the United States and its allies and partners constructed a free and open international order to better safeguard their liberty and people from aggression and coercion.
- brenden2 6y agoThat's what they want you to believe. If you think the US is immune from having a military take over like Nazi Germany, you're deluded.
- vajrabum 6y agoOK, but Nazi Germany if you'll read some history was not ever a military takeover.
- brenden2 6y agoThe transition was "democratic" yes, but it became a fascist state operated by the military.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Ididntdothis 6y agoThe military didn’t take over nazi Germany.
- brenden2 6y ago