Hacker News Reader

0.1% defense in terms of actions, but not in terms of capabilities. It's just that attacks on the US are very rare, because it's so capable of defense.

US military dominance is an ever present defense for nations around the world who would otherwise be harrassed or attacked by aggressive neighbors. US military involvement in the Middle East doesn't change that.

Of course you can argue we shouldn't be involved in the Middle East, and there are some reasons to think we shouldn't be, but we can agree on that point and still believe the US should have the world's dominant military.

The UK is being harassed by Ireland, the Faroe Islands, the Netherlands, Belgium, and France?

> but we can agree [that] the US should have the world's dominant military.

Who is "we"? It's not me.

> and occupation of other sovereign nations.

Not that I disagree with the sentiment, but if you're (successfully) occupying a nation, it is by definition not sovereign anymore.