this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
219 points (94.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35673 readers
1745 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Absolutely not.

Yes Ukraine is an example of a good use for a defense industry but US history is littered with tragedies, massacres and massive amounts of suffering from all the other bad things having a defense industry does.

[–] TheSpermWhale@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

This is something I wrestle with sometimes as an engineering student and I think it does vary from country to country. You’ve got to ask yourself how the world would be different without those companies - whether other less friendly countries would come to prominence and whether the removal of the such a deterrence would make wars more common. But on the other hand, you should think about how those weapons are used and whether it’s ‘right’ like the defence of Ukraine, or more objectionable like some of the more polarising conflicts around the world. It’s a very difficult question but personally I don’t think I would work for a weapons company coz I don’t know how I’d feel about making something that is designed to kill people

[–] profdc9@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Some military devices help prevent conflict and minimize its harm. A lot of modern warfare is increasing situational awareness. For example, radar, night vision, surveillance, reconnaissance, electronic warfare, tactical communications, and signals intelligence. Of course, these technologies can be used in a way that harms as well. But the alternative is a blind slugfest that probably harms a lot more civilians and friendly fire.

[–] abracaDavid@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Ah yes. Bigger, better, more deadly weapons will definitely help reduce deaths.

It's all just lining the pockets of weapons manufacturers.

[–] InternetUser2012@midwest.social 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you're worried about ethics, it's going to be very difficult finding a job that will make you a living that is ethical.

[–] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

I mean... you can upstream everything. I work for a place that sells outdoor sports gear. Pretty benign unless you do a deep dive into supply chains and the like.

For the record, I did work at a place the built parts for cruise missiles. It sucked. I quit

[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 4 points 8 months ago (5 children)

No - it's not ethical.

Very little evil is actually a direct result of evil people doing evil things. The vast majority of it comes to be through ordinary people doing banal things - things that, like building weapons, are questionable at best, but that they excuse because it's "out of my control."

The thing is that it's not out of their control. Yes - if one individual makes the decision to not take part, that's not going to have much of an effect, but if every person who feels the same way makes that same choice, that absolutely WILL have an effect.

And there's only one way to make it so that every person who feels the same way makes that choice, and that's for each one of them, individually, to look past that "it's out of my control" bullshit excuse and go ahead and do it.

Everything on any significant scale is out of individual control. Individuals just possess a very limited amount of control over affairs on a national, much less global, scale. But that's really entirely beside the point. The point is how you choose to exercise the small amount of control you have. Will you use it for good, or for evil?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] blindbunny@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)
[–] FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org 3 points 8 months ago

Collectively, no. Personally, yes. People deserve to make a living.

[–] Scrof@sopuli.xyz 3 points 8 months ago

As a Buddhist no it's absolutely not, as trading in weapons is specifically prohibited by the Right Livelihood part of the Noble Eightfold Path. Otherwise I see no problem.

[–] angrynomad@infosec.pub 3 points 8 months ago

Was the reason I quit my last job.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

no and ive always refused to do it but actually im fucked now so maybe i would

[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's ethical, the parts will be made whether you work that job or not, and you're only responsible for the actions of the military to the extent that you're able to change them.

Since none of your reasonable options will make an impact on the production or use of those items, it's not a ethical issue for you to work there.

What matters much more is your ability to provide for yourself and those around you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago

Depends on the country.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

It depends on whether the military you’re selling it to behave ethically.

Weapons aren’t inherently bad. Every organism has weapons. It’s all about how you use them.

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Yes. I don't want my effort to be dedicated to death and destruction. Imagine you're the guy who designed the iconic Tomahawk cruise missile. You can't mistake that profile. Every time you see or hear about one of those things being launched you know there's a good chance many people are going to die. Who wants that on their conscience?

[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago

There's a difference, in my opinion, between designing a weapon and just being a generic worker at the company.

As a generic worker, the end result isn't any different whether it was you or someone else. For example, I don't think a guy who works at a Tesla factory could be considered responsible if the self driving malfunctions and kills someone. He might have directly contributed to the car that got built, but if he didn't work that job the car would have still been made and the tragedy would still have happened.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] reagansrottencorpse@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago
[–] Trabic@lemmy.one 2 points 8 months ago
[–] Hello_there@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

If it was to like the Japanese self defense force? Sure.
If it's to the US and going towards bombing civilians all across the world? Hell no.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›