[ryanx435]

military deaths are historically low because of how much better the american military is than our opponents.

the american military is better because of the technology we have.

The technology we have is because of DARPA spending over the last 80 years.

do you see the flaw in your logic?

[hobls]

There are lots of reasons to spend money on military technology, but absolute reduction in deaths by U.S. citizens is not a compelling one — there are just too many civilians who die in preventable ways as compared to military deaths.

I think it’s kind of a silly comparison, tbh. I’d like to see us spend more money on both civilian and military research. I suspect that the military spends plenty of money on shit that is less impactful in the long term than research, and military research also often advances civilian technology.

My point was meant to be quite narrow.

[ryanx435]

Would you rather we have wars were America doesn't have a significant advantage?

Maybe like the civil war, where both sides were equal and 750,000 Americans died?

Or WW2, fighting against an arguably better Nazi and Japanese military killed 400,000 Americans?

Or WW1, where the stalemate between both sides led to 120,000 american deaths?

You must be right because all those american deaths are preferable to only 2,000 americans who died in the wars in Afghanistan.

/s obviously