• Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    As well he should. Backing out of our agreements makes us weak and unreliable. Maybe if we stopped going about things with a military first approach spending an absurd amount on maintaining a military that out spends the next several countries combined it wouldn’t look like we’re shouldering such an outsized measure of the costs.

    We spend enough on some single piece of hardware that we could house the population of a small city and complain that others don’t do the same. Protecting the population means more than funneling money into the pockets of contractors.

    • BaroqueInMind@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Protecting the population means more than funneling money into the pockets of contractors.

      I think every country should enforce a mandatory conscription and include universal healthcare with that. This would solve many problems

      • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        We do pretty well with universal healthcare and no mandatory conscription thanks. If you want to do that in the US be my guest but no kid should be sent to die by a bunch of old people that have nothing to lose and all to gain from useless wars. Look at Russia right now, is that what we really want in the 21st century?

    • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      We don’t even need to spend that much money to have the military we have. So much military spending just goes through a daisy chain of unnecessary middlemen. Scrape away all that extra corruption residue and we would be spending a fraction of what we are now.