4 ms·

Don't forget to automate defence (yah that one, military), and how to prevent any interested party in controlling that automated defence system.

TaylorAlexander 4y ago
I think Americans over estimate how much investment in defense is needed. Massive defense spending is needed when you’re abusing the rest of the world. Less so if you’re not.
- modriano 4y ago
  About 3% of the global human population (or 70 to 85 million people) died in WWII. Following WWII, NATO was developed to make every military leader in the world grok that attacking a NATO country meant certain annihilation, and as a consequence, every NATO country has known only peace at home since WWII. Last year, I would have responded to your position with this quote from Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, "t]hrowing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet." and reminded you why you're dry. But this year, with the umbrella being on full display and not only stopping rain, but also stopping a genocide by the murderous LGBT-hating Siloviki class ruling Russia, I'm just kind of confused about how you could argue that we've got way too much umbrella.
- capitalsigma 4y ago
  Ukraine seems to be happy with the military aid the US is supplying
  - TaylorAlexander 4y ago
    I guess I should note that I never said anything about abolishing the existing state. But for us regular people I think there are better models for an economy. And we can form cooperatives and do things however we want. I just happen to believe it would be better for pretty much everyone to abandon things like patents and private wealth accumulation in favor of cooperative economic models.
- tharne 4y ago
  > I think Americans over estimate how much investment in defense is needed. I don't think you understand the concept of risk, particularly as it pertains to things like war and armed conflict. Defense spending always looks excessive and unnecessary until you need it. Saying a country overestimates how much defense spending they need is like saying you don't need car insurance because you've never been in an accident. Wars are similar to car accidents. We're really bad at predicting when we're going to get into one and it can be a whole lot worse than we ever could have imagined. Additionally for most western countries, the U.S. military acts as a fail-safe of sorts. If Belgium, for instance, underestimates their defense needs they know at some point the U.S. will jump in to help them if need be, which is largely what's happening in Ukraine right now. By contrast, if the U.S. underestimates its defense needs and suddenly finds itself under attack, say by the Chinese, who exactly would come and save them?
  - TaylorAlexander 4y ago
    I understand that the USA has chosen a strategy of global imperialism as a plan for maintaining control of world affairs. Our military occupies or encircles nearly every country on Earth. This is obviously an extremely expensive strategy, and one that no other country has ever chosen. But all this talk of military spending is orthogonal to my original comment. I am saying we would be better off if washing machines were open source, and the workers at the washing machine factory would be better off if the organization was cooperatively owned and managed. I never suggested abolishing the state. The comment mentioning the military was in error if they thought I was talking about making my own country. You can do what I propose inside the USA, and the government can keep taxing exchanges to fund the largest military the world has ever seen. I have opinions on that, but those opinions don't relate to the idea that non-military technology should be open source. Obviously militaries prefer secrets. I will say, it is interesting that you say I don't understand risk. The USA does not have the largest army humanity has ever seen in order to manage risk. The USA has this army to maintain power over other countries. Belgium as you mention relies on the USA for some extra defense protection. But this also means that Belgium cannot oppose us. We have covered the globe in US military bases so that we can maintain control. This strategy goes far beyond managing risk. If we merely wanted to manage risk, we could have avoided treating every country south of our border like shit, fostered healthy relationships with them, and after decades of healthy relationships formed a military alliance with them. Then that organization would defend the Americas against foreign invaders, not the USA.

TaylorAlexander 4y ago

I think Americans over estimate how much investment in defense is needed. Massive defense spending is needed when you’re abusing the rest of the world. Less so if you’re not.

modriano 4y ago
About 3% of the global human population (or 70 to 85 million people) died in WWII. Following WWII, NATO was developed to make every military leader in the world grok that attacking a NATO country meant certain annihilation, and as a consequence, every NATO country has known only peace at home since WWII. Last year, I would have responded to your position with this quote from Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, "t]hrowing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet." and reminded you why you're dry. But this year, with the umbrella being on full display and not only stopping rain, but also stopping a genocide by the murderous LGBT-hating Siloviki class ruling Russia, I'm just kind of confused about how you could argue that we've got way too much umbrella.
capitalsigma 4y ago
Ukraine seems to be happy with the military aid the US is supplying
- TaylorAlexander 4y ago
  I guess I should note that I never said anything about abolishing the existing state. But for us regular people I think there are better models for an economy. And we can form cooperatives and do things however we want. I just happen to believe it would be better for pretty much everyone to abandon things like patents and private wealth accumulation in favor of cooperative economic models.
tharne 4y ago
> I think Americans over estimate how much investment in defense is needed. I don't think you understand the concept of risk, particularly as it pertains to things like war and armed conflict. Defense spending always looks excessive and unnecessary until you need it. Saying a country overestimates how much defense spending they need is like saying you don't need car insurance because you've never been in an accident. Wars are similar to car accidents. We're really bad at predicting when we're going to get into one and it can be a whole lot worse than we ever could have imagined. Additionally for most western countries, the U.S. military acts as a fail-safe of sorts. If Belgium, for instance, underestimates their defense needs they know at some point the U.S. will jump in to help them if need be, which is largely what's happening in Ukraine right now. By contrast, if the U.S. underestimates its defense needs and suddenly finds itself under attack, say by the Chinese, who exactly would come and save them?
- TaylorAlexander 4y ago
  I understand that the USA has chosen a strategy of global imperialism as a plan for maintaining control of world affairs. Our military occupies or encircles nearly every country on Earth. This is obviously an extremely expensive strategy, and one that no other country has ever chosen. But all this talk of military spending is orthogonal to my original comment. I am saying we would be better off if washing machines were open source, and the workers at the washing machine factory would be better off if the organization was cooperatively owned and managed. I never suggested abolishing the state. The comment mentioning the military was in error if they thought I was talking about making my own country. You can do what I propose inside the USA, and the government can keep taxing exchanges to fund the largest military the world has ever seen. I have opinions on that, but those opinions don't relate to the idea that non-military technology should be open source. Obviously militaries prefer secrets. I will say, it is interesting that you say I don't understand risk. The USA does not have the largest army humanity has ever seen in order to manage risk. The USA has this army to maintain power over other countries. Belgium as you mention relies on the USA for some extra defense protection. But this also means that Belgium cannot oppose us. We have covered the globe in US military bases so that we can maintain control. This strategy goes far beyond managing risk. If we merely wanted to manage risk, we could have avoided treating every country south of our border like shit, fostered healthy relationships with them, and after decades of healthy relationships formed a military alliance with them. Then that organization would defend the Americas against foreign invaders, not the USA.