Vláda by mala zvýšiť alebo znížiť vojenské výdavky?
What threats does the United States face exactly that we are not already prepared to defend against…
Cyber warfare and terrorism are not bound by borders or geography. In fact, they can originate from anywhere around the globe, and their potential damage can be catastrophic. The increase in military budget could be allocated towards improving our defenses in these non-traditional areas.
Also, the assertion that we could halve our military budget and still win any traditional armed conflict may not consider the complexity of modern warfare. It's not just about brute force, but also about technology, intelligence, and strategic capabilities. Cutting the budget might affect these areas.
Moreover, while mutually assured destruction might have deterred nuclear conflicts, a well-equipped military still plays a crucial role in maintaining a balance of power, and hence, peace. It's not just about being able to retaliate, but also about deterrence.
Finally, about the grammar, thank you for pointing out the error. It's always good to learn and improve. But don't you think focusing on the content of the argument is more important than its form, especially in a discussion as crucial as this one? What do you think about the evolving nature of threats I mentioned above?
Odpovedzte na túto nezhoda ako prví.