Hacker News Reader

Comment by barrkel | Hacker News Reader

> I believe the only reason American civilians like us have been able to enjoy peace is because we dropped a ton of bombs to blast tiny countries out of the sky

This is completely ludicrous. There is no military threat to the US beyond nukes. Nuclear weapons have obsoleted wars between great powers. Tiny countries are zero threat to the USA. They cannot invade; they can do almost nothing. At best, they can kill a few hundred individuals at a time by sponsoring terrorism, far fewer people than are killed by vehicles in an average June.

The reason the USA starts wars in far away countries is to maintain a sphere of influence and protect a philosophy of government and running economies that keeps the USA affluent via trade. It is not, in no way, about defense of the USA; if you really think that, you've been deeply hoodwinked by some military warrior code bullshit. The USA's military program is foreign policy for, ultimately, economic reasons.

View on HN

Thank you for putting this into words. It's sad to see how effective the US propaganda efforts have been in convincing otherwise intelligent people that the military is "defending our freedom".

I'd love to see how many millions (billions?) the federal government has pumped into this myth.

Hell, the entire America's Army initiative was literally a recruitment tool for kids who played video games. It's depressing to think about the number of kids who eventually paid a blood tax because a state-sponsored video game convinced them to join.

It's beyond naive to think that conflict doesn't exist or that tiny fluctuations cant kick-start global warfare. It is very easy to take it for granted when you have never experienced conflict yourself. Perhaps try talking to the families of those who paid in blood to give you the freedom to post these thoughts, and see exactly how many places like the US actually exist in the world.

I'd love to learn more about the history of American military and foreign policy if you have any recommendations.

You think war between major powers is obsolete? That's naive at best and completely ignores how volatile the world is. Tiny countries do not exist in a vacuum, there are layers of resources and allies and other political ties that can move entire regions into conflict. Also yes, small countries are developing nukes themselves and I fail to see why you just brush over that threat? Are nukes not real or somehow guaranteed to never be used?

AI, which is the topic here, changes that dynamic completely, and with drones and cyber warfare there is no need for world-ending firepower when you can just shutdown leadership and modern society instead.

And yes, I want the country that I'm a citizen of to stay both free, powerful and wealthy. The point is that we are on a path to building wartime capabilities that will put one country far ahead of everyone else, and I absolute want that to be my country. I would think you would want that for yours as well.

Almost completely true, bioweapons would actually be something certain tiny countries are really good at.

But many have actually signed treaties not to use them (I believe even to not develop certain kinds).

Actually the more advanced our technologies get the bigger the threads.

Any country found to have used bioweapons against the US would be in a similar position to one that used nuclear weapons.

I'd love to learn more about the history of American military and foreign policy if you have any recommendations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com