[Reubend]

"Only superior military technology can credibly deter war."

No. Various other factors including large alliances, trade risks, etc can deter war. And by far the biggest "deterrent" among our military technologies is nuclear weaponry, which relies on 1940s technology, thus undermining the essay's thesis that we need to innovate more in defense to prevent war.

With that said, many of the essay's suggestions are sound recommendations for improving the USA's ailing defense industry. I think that the consolidation of companies into a small number of conglomerates is particularly damaging.

[camgunz]

Yeah came here to say this. The central argument Anduril makes here is preposterous, to the point where it feels like the whole enterprise is entirely unserious. Let's ask a basic logic question here: if the supposition is that one side has to have superior military technology lest the other side declare war on it, why isn't China at war with the US right now? Why isn't Russia at war with the US right now, or India, or Japan, or Pakistan, or Brazil, or Mexico, or Canada? Could it perhaps be there are other variables involved?

This deck feels like it was unearthed from a time capsule buried in 2010. "The Pentagon operated like a startup." Woof. "Move fast and break things" is maybe not the ideal motto when lives are at stake.

---

Overall, a new arms race is not the answer. No serious person thinks arms races are good ideas. They are highly dangerous, especially at this level of technology. What works is diplomacy and a common cause against scarcity.