3 ms·
> standing armies that are "doing nothing" Armies have to practice. Smart generals don't let their armies do nothing; to be any good at warfighting, they have
by denton-scratch 5y ago
> standing armies that are "doing nothing"
Armies have to practice. Smart generals don't let their armies do nothing; to be any good at warfighting, they have to fight wars. Effective standing armies have to constantly be finding new wars to fight.
- keymone 5y agoNice to see you rationalizing expenditure that goes towards murdering people. Are you the people talking down to bitcoiners about being wasteful and not caring about future of humanity? Give me a break.
- codyb 5y agoHow many people aren’t murdered because of armies though? Humans have been grouping and fighting each other for thousands of years now. You’re under the impression everyone should just… what… pretend it doesn’t happen? When attacking a neighbor state costs more (because your neighbors have arms too), it’s less likely to happen. The cold war had plenty of awful hot action with proxies and third parties but the entirely hot version obviously would have been far more calamitous. I suggest reading Herodotus’ Histories, or you can read up on Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Hitler, Alexander, the Crusades, or the myriad other conquerors and conflicts that have occurred.
- keymone 5y agoBut when conflict is resolved by energy expenditure, it involves even less suffering.
- denton-scratch 5y agoI was presenting a case against large standing armies!