zlacker

>>anigbr+(OP)
As a US taxpayer I don’t particularly like this. We rely on being the world’s reserve currency, and many things get more expensive, e.g., serving government debt. In 2000-2001 we were able to effectively bully three countries that were talking about moving away from the US dollar, but I am not sure if that works now.

I have a lot of personal theories how my country can best cope with future geopolitical adjustments. If I were in charge, the first thing I would do would be to close most foreign military bases. We can have the strongest military in the world and have them largely based in the US. I think the US Navy continues to be a good investment, but I would cut back a small amount on intel and other military branches.

>>mark_l+R3
> If I were in charge, the first thing I would do would be to close most foreign military bases. We can have the strongest military in the world and have them largely based in the US.

The strategy behind the foreign military bases isn't just about having the strongest military in the world. They serve two purposes:

First, we want to preserve the credible threat of boots on the ground anywhere in the world within just a few hours of a conflict beginning. Think edge computing, but for military operations.

Second, we want to reassure our allies that they have more than just our word for it that we'll come to their aid in a crisis. Having US soldiers in your country 24/7 functions as a guarantee that if the country falls to an invader the US will have to respond, because our soldiers were captured or killed.

The concern is that without the bases, a hostile power (like, say, the one TFA is about) could invade an ally (like, say, the Baltic states) with overwhelming force and present NATO with a fait accompli before we have time to react. Pulling away from those bases would be correctly seen by many of our allied states as relaxing our commitment to them.

>>lolind+46
I don’t argue with your main points except to question if it is worth the money now. I was in the defense industry for 25 years, and my comments above are just my opinions on what is in the best interests of the US taxpayer today in 2024.

I am questioning the value of having 800 military bases in foreign countries in 2024. What was once a good idea may not be worth the money and resources now. What does the US give up not protecting the rest of the world? I think these topics are worthy of serious dialogue.

>>mark_l+d8
If you really were in the defense industry for 25 years and you're making takes like that, I can only imagine you never worked on anything of consequence. This is like saying you worked in tech for 25 years and don't get what the big deal is about version control or CI/CD.

Or at least that you have no idea how your business makes money or what your users want your code for. Explainable for a new hire, but for a 25-year vet, such a lack of understanding and perspective is really inexcusable.

>>psunav+oa
> can only imagine you never worked on anything of consequence

“Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals talk about logistics,” Robert Barrow, former Commandant of the Marine Corps, echoing Eisenhower, echoing Cæsar.

In all likelihood, the person you’re responding to had no strategic remit.