301–310 of 608 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only if the lower echelons of leadership are on board with sabotaging the orders. If they're not that's when you end up taking the "enemy fire" that back authorizes the use of force for the war crime.
Dude, they are illegal and are risking torture and jail of they will be caught. It is underground opposition doing those things.
These are all valid points everything you said resonates with me. I was in the US Navy myself and have been out for 11 years during which time I've finished a Bachelors (thanks GI Bill), will be finishing a Masters here shortly (also in CS), and have been in tech the entire time. While the pay is great and intellectually fulfilling, a part of me certainly misses having contact with a broader cross-section of society…
A nation with a GDP smaller than California and a lot of wound licking to do from their most recent foray just to keep things in perspective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> bad wars All wars are bad, but if you meant unsuccessful then until the Taliban again starts harboring terrorist intent on attacking the United States its a bit early to label it a 'bad war'. Similarly, Iraq is no longer a threat in the region and is instead a sink hole into which Iran must expend blood and treasure to maintain influence. Perhaps in time one or both can be clearly viewed as unsuccessful, but its no…
You can literally always justify a war lol. The "stability" argument is so insane considering the iraq war plunged the region into it's most unstable period of the past century but okay. You also dont consider the enormous collateral damage and loss of life that it caused. At that point you might as well believe what russia is doing is okay because in the very long run it's probably going to mean it will lead to less…
Geopolitics is a fluid system. Stability is always in play.
> the iraq war plunged the region into it's most unstable period
Really depends on whose instability we're talking about. Its been 'good' for some and 'bad' for others; all depends on what side of the thousand year conflict you find yourself on.
> If we ignore the destruction and death caused by the russian invasion
If you think Russia invaded Ukraine all on its own without being coaxed into doing so after years of US/UK intervention in Ukraine then you're poorly informed. Russia's arrogance, inhumanity and long-standing fears were used against it to great effect. If the risk of escalation can be managed Europe (and Ukraine) may eventually be free of Russia's stranglehold on energy.
> If we ignore the destruction and death
Strategic narcissism to think our generation can be free of war, have bloodless wars or find ourselves substantially more evolved than prior generations. Until we figure out how to prevent sociopaths from becoming leaders we are doomed to repeat history many times over.
The DoD could certainly use some technical help, and the leadership from ex (or current reserve/national guard aka "R/NG") officers and NCOs in tech jobs benefits the tech industry. The issue is this - the American military Reserve/NG is not very truthful, in my experience, with the time commitments. The marketing slogan is "a weekend a month, two weeks a summer" of time commitment, or something to that effect. In re…
Just a small aside, Huntsville, AL seems to make perfect sense to me to build a new facility. It has a huge built in base as it supposedly already has one of the highest concentration of STEM majors in the USA and the cost of living is 55% lower than SF ( https://www.nerdwallet.com/cost-of-living-calculator/compare... ). If you are going to make government wages your dollar will go a lot farther there.
Issue is recruiting people outside the govt network. The exceptions prove the rule, but it is a very hard sell to get people from Big Tech who aren't Eric Schmidt or the newest CS grads from MIT to move to these places. Tell me the 23 year old who all things equal to include a comparable salary will choose rural AL over SF?
As a result, it perpetrates the issue of insular govt technical hires that heavily orient around weapon systems and similar, and are out of step with the new practices, which means less talent comes in and then dicy implementations like PlatformOne are the result.
If you want govt tech to be continually dictated by the clowncar of govt contracting and general DoD grift, then Huntsville makes perfect sense as you say. Space Force is HQ'd in rural AL for similar reasons.
There is a reason why Kessel Run (USAF) is in Boston, Army Futures is in Austin, and smaller elite units have outposts in SV.
Edit - and fwiw, the fact that the defense tech startups out of SV can hire those 23 y/o or ex-Google types without a lot of issue is a good indicator to track.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a positive. It is a tragedy that these services (education, healthcare) are difficult to obtain without military service in a supposedly developed country.
> "difficult to obtain without military service" This is factually incorrect - you literally can get $400k in education of your choosing at the tender age of 18, which is why we frequently discus articles revolving around student debt for degrees that don't pay anything. There isn't anything even remotely equivalent when it comes to money access of this sort (try getting a $400k mortgage with zero income and zero ass…
But at least you guys get some semi-decent medical insurance to live like a human being. For which we also don't need to pay (or very little bulk sum with hard ceiling). Something about basic human rights, future of our race and all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there is some incorrect information in this post. I know people who have completed their Bachelors and Masters completely funded by the GI Bill, including living expenses. In the experience of the people I know, the VA goes out of their way to give benefits as needed. One case, in particular, they were granted 100% disability for life with a packet submission and one phone call.
The details matter. A lot of people sign up for a two-year active duty contract (it's an eight-year contract in all though, you're in the reserves afterwards). That only gives 70-80% of the benefit (which only runs for a max of 36 months, not a full four years). You're also restricted to in-state public schools, no private (Ivy League etc.) or out-of-home-state schools. Most of the military people I talked to at my l…
You also get 100% of the benefit if you served for 36 months. That is a far cry from what you described.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>None of that is true. All of that is true about my Army experience lol. If I could go back and do it again, I'd definitely choose Air Force. I agree that the military can be a positive experience and it's a good idea for some people, but the caveat with my endorsement is that you gotta carefully choose the branch and the job. I almost chose linguistics, but for some silly reason chose mechanic and paratrooper, and w…
Everyone wants to get into the Air Force, so if you are applying to say subsidize your medical education, you’ll find that there aren’t many openings; so most people tend to opt for the Navy. The Army is the last choice for most people.
The most important thing to realize about military service is that you sign away all your citizenship rights (free speech, etc.) when you sign up for the service. Hopefully you won't be used in ridiculous debacles like the 2003 Iraq Invasion, based on lies about WMDs pushed by Washington (and see British role as well), but you'll have no say in the matter. The other thing to realize is that, at least in the USA, they…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's as contentious as the russian invasion of ukraine is. Meaning, not at all unless you fall for the obvious war justifying rhetoric. I dont know why but it seems like there's been such a weird push for rehabilitating what the US and it's allies did to the middle east since the start of the russian war of aggression against ukraine.
The situation in Iraq is tough but no, I don’t think it’s obvious to me it would be better off still under Saddam Hussein, or maybe by now one of his sons. If you wonder what a dynastic succession like that can look like, check out Syria, and the young Assad is a pusseycat compared to Uday or Qusay.
If anything, the iraqi war was the reason the syrian civil war was so bloody. The al qaida elements in iraq overtook the grass root rebellion in syria, and ISIS would literally have not existed if Saddam was still in power. Same for the sectarian violence that will plague iraq for decades to come.
Saddam absolutely deserved the rope, but that does not mean the US had any right to intervene because of that. Plus, the reason the US invaded had officially nothing to do with regime change. The "saving iraq from it's dictator" narrative only came after the WMD lies became evident.