4 ms·

I'm struggling to understand your point. Is it that someone who a) believes the best path to peace and stability in the region is a Ukrainian defeat of Russia

by md_ 3y ago

I'm struggling to understand your point. Is it that someone who a) believes the best path to peace and stability in the region is a Ukrainian defeat of Russia and b) also opposes Donald Trump's, say, tax policy has a "dilemma" in whether to support military aid that goes to Anduril (and thus, ultimately, potentially to Trump's re-election)? If so, this seems like a pretty facile point. Like, life is full of pros and cons. I want to leave my umbrella at home so my bag is lighter, but I want to have it with me if it rains. WHICH WAY, WESTERN MAN!?! In a democracy, you sometimes have to do business with people with whom you disagree. You also might try to avoid doing business with them, all else being equal. WHICH WAY?! I dunno. I feel like you thought you had some sort of deep philosophical point, but I'm not getting it I guess?

dbmikus 3y ago
Not the OP, but I think the stated point is that some people are strictly against the development of products for the military and warfare, but then support situations when those products are used. I'm in kind of a similar boat, where personally I would not want to ever work on weapons, but at the same time admit their necessity. My hope over time is that conflict becomes less violent and more economic, but induced poverty also has deadly consequences...
- md_ 3y ago
  I suspect the number of people who believe in total unilateral disarmament and military aid to Ukraine--yes, I agree that's an internally inconsistent point of view--is vanishingly small, and not, as @yinser snarkily wrote, "a large block of US citizens." No doubt there are a far larger number who find weapons development distasteful or would not personally want to work on weapons, but nonetheless recognize it as an unfortunate but pragmatic necessity. I suppose, if one were given to inane Internet snark, one might say, "Haha, you refuse to become a proctologist, yet you go for your colonoscopy. WHICH WAY WESTERN MAN?" But, frankly, that would make you look stupid, just like @yinser does.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

by md_ 3y ago

dbmikus 3y ago

Not the OP, but I think the stated point is that some people are strictly against the development of products for the military and warfare, but then support situations when those products are used. I'm in kind of a similar boat, where personally I would not want to ever work on weapons, but at the same time admit their necessity. My hope over time is that conflict becomes less violent and more economic, but induced poverty also has deadly consequences...

md_ 3y ago
I suspect the number of people who believe in total unilateral disarmament and military aid to Ukraine--yes, I agree that's an internally inconsistent point of view--is vanishingly small, and not, as @yinser snarkily wrote, "a large block of US citizens." No doubt there are a far larger number who find weapons development distasteful or would not personally want to work on weapons, but nonetheless recognize it as an unfortunate but pragmatic necessity. I suppose, if one were given to inane Internet snark, one might say, "Haha, you refuse to become a proctologist, yet you go for your colonoscopy. WHICH WAY WESTERN MAN?" But, frankly, that would make you look stupid, just like @yinser does.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]