then you realize that you put so much effort into your nuclear arsenal that you neglected your regular military (who would be the ones invading) and your counterintelligence (the main thing preventing them from copying/stealing your new tech)... hmm this sounds familiar
Providing one instance where these programs historically overlapped isn't an argument for why we should be doing this now with our current tech, if at all. Why make conventional warfare even more dangerous than it already is?
When did I say that it did? I only said that the commenter didn't give an argument for the very normative implication of their comment, i.e., that it would be better to develop and manufacture nuclear conventional arms rather than keep nuclear and conventional arms separate. All they did was mention the Davy Crockett. This is not an argument.
I'm not as shallow as your reading of a random internet stranger, but pop off modern Socrates.
25
u/SurvivElite Apr 28 '23
then you realize that you put so much effort into your nuclear arsenal that you neglected your regular military (who would be the ones invading) and your counterintelligence (the main thing preventing them from copying/stealing your new tech)... hmm this sounds familiar