4 ms·

I very much agree with the general sentiment here, but I want to make a separate point about tech's relationship to defense which is also portrait in these twee

I very much agree with the general sentiment here, but I want to make a separate point about tech's relationship to defense which is also portrait in these tweets. Much has been written about the DoD's funding of early Silicon Valley companies - but today, this relationship has been largely severed with giants like Google refusing to provide their tech for defense and military purposes. I THINK THIS IS A MASSIVE MISTAKE. War exists. It is as old as humankind. We could wish it wouldn't, but it does. And history has shown again and again that the way to avoid war is not in de-arming, appeasing or otherwise refusing to participate, but in obtaining a level of military and economic strength that makes it unattractive for others to attack you. Silicon Valley has the potential to generate this overwhelming strength, but it declines to do so. And the few companies that do, such as Palantir or Anduril are often shunned by their peers. I believe that Silicon Valley could play a unique role in ensuring a lasting global peace and is held back by shortsighted sentiments. Or, to put it into fancy Latin: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

rmetzler 3y ago
So your view is that the military power of the US brings peace to the rest of the world?
- wolframhempel 3y ago
  That is too absolute a statement. But generally, yes, I believe that a militarily strong US that has an interest in global trade makes war much less likely. Of course, one of the inherent problems of having a strong military is the temptation to use it - and the US has certainly done so multiple times in ill-advised fashion in Irak, Kuwait or Vietnam to name just a few. But having a military superpower like the US that's more interested in economic and cultural expansion than in direct land grabs is certainly an important counterweight to Russian or Chinese ambition. I believe a world with a militarily weak US would have seen much less "Pax Americana" and much more aggressive, expansionary wars since 1945.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  Absolutely, yes. A tiny fraction of western weapons allowed Ukraine to hold against Russian war machine and even have prospects of counter offensive. I can’t imagine the hell on earth if it kicked in full force and went to war against anyone.

rmetzler 3y ago

So your view is that the military power of the US brings peace to the rest of the world?

wolframhempel 3y ago
That is too absolute a statement. But generally, yes, I believe that a militarily strong US that has an interest in global trade makes war much less likely. Of course, one of the inherent problems of having a strong military is the temptation to use it - and the US has certainly done so multiple times in ill-advised fashion in Irak, Kuwait or Vietnam to name just a few. But having a military superpower like the US that's more interested in economic and cultural expansion than in direct land grabs is certainly an important counterweight to Russian or Chinese ambition. I believe a world with a militarily weak US would have seen much less "Pax Americana" and much more aggressive, expansionary wars since 1945.
wiseowise 3y ago
Absolutely, yes. A tiny fraction of western weapons allowed Ukraine to hold against Russian war machine and even have prospects of counter offensive. I can’t imagine the hell on earth if it kicked in full force and went to war against anyone.