Posted by tangplay on 4/16/2020 2:35:00 PM (view original):
We actually agree on this:
the United States of America bails them out of military defeat and then pays for their defense, freeing up a whole bunch of money that they can then spend on idealism that they would NEVER be able to afford if left to their own exertions.
Where we disagree is that you assume an authoritarian regime will come and invade everyone the second the USA stops spending so much on our military. That I disagree with. I can (maybe) get behind the idea that we should spend more on our military than other countries, but the amount we spend now is exorbitant. Your entire argument hinges on the idea that Russia starts WW3 the second that we reduce our military spending slightly. I find that ridiculous.
I'm glad we agree on part of it.
Authoritarian regimes are always waiting for a moment of weakness to subjugate large numbers of people. The Assyrians, Egyptians, Chinese, Romans, Persians, Ottomans, British, etc. all did it.
Just as there was a Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and Soviet Union that was stopped through our direct intervention, there will be a Communist China or maybe a Russia (or maybe a theocracy, who knows) just praying for the end of American strength so that they can try their turn at dominance. It doesn't necessarily require WWIII or a physical invasion, just a power vacuum that will be filled, either militarily or economically, with the end result being the same. They will not be respecting the gentle societies of the utopian social democrats. They will destroy it and replace it with their own doctrine.
If you find that ridiculous, so be it. I do assume...and an assumption it is...but it is one backed up by the entirety of recorded history and by human nature.