>unlike US military tech

You realize that US Military Tech goes into killing innocent people literally all the time, right?

Improved US Military Tech (sensors, communications, precision) can translate into less collateral damage in operations. These ops have been conducted under every president and will continue happening under future presidents, unless we go full isolationist. The issue isn't black and white.

without us military tech you wouldnt even be able to post said nitpickings.

Such tech developed, isnt intended to kill innocents, just like the inevitable future deaths of self driving cars are not.

So US = good, China = bad? Too simplistic.

Democracy with personal freedoms = good

Repressive dictatorship that regularly jails political dissidents = bad

Democracy with personal freedom while invading foreign nations and killing innocent civilians in the process == good?

There are many things that the US does that are bad. I can't think of one thing the PRC government does that is good.

right, and i countering your first sentence. Not everything has to be binary. One can be bad and other can be worst.

Except good and bad are relative, not absolute. In your case you seem to be comparing to a personal notion of "good", but it's still relative.

You also state that "not everything has to be binary" and then say something can be "worst", which is the same absolute you seem to be arguing against

Improved military technology in the area of sensors, precision, and communications (what Google was working on) actually reduces collateral damage and civilian deaths in ops that are going to happen regardless of hand-wringing.

Imagine how much worse things would be if technical progress stopped 70 years ago and the military only had battleship cannon fire and napalm firebombing at its disposal.

Iraq invasion was initially welcomed by vast majority of iraqis and US were initially seen as the liberators. So "invading" is not the correct word to use because it was not seen as such by Iraqis.

> Iraq invasion was...

> So "invading" is not the correct word...

I think you are contradicting yourself?

We invaded on false pretense 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' if I recall - it was an invasion and ideally it should have been an effort driven by the UN instead of the Republican party of the USA.

And what is the state of Iraq right now? How many people have died just because some power hungry lunatic "was sure" that Iraq had WMD's?

What about Libya? What is the state of Libya? Let's not even get started on Afghanistan. Do you even know of Task force 47 in war of 1971 between India-Pakistan?

I'm not well versed in geo politics of Latin America but there have been cases over there as well where US would meddle in internal affairs of a country and overthrow a ruler.

So welcomed in fact they invited American troops to remain there for 10 years.

No, at wast wast majority never saw the US as liberators. Quite the opposite. Are you in a filter bubble or military?

I got that from this documentary

https://www.amazon.com/Thunder-Run-Baghdad-Not-Specified/dp/...

Its shot from the POV of bhagdadis

I imagine a direct implementation of "western style" democracy in China will cause a huge human right criss. There's no evidence democracy could ever scale to 1.4B people with a great portion of them in poverty still

India?

What are you referring to exactly?

Google employees were protesting the company's involvement in making drones for the Pentagon: https://gizmodo.com/thousands-of-google-employees-protest-co...

I think he/she is suggesting that project maven wasn't as bad as people made it out to be. It's unclear from the lack of context _why_ they think that.

There was a protest or something by some Google employees a few months ago about contracts with the Pentagon:

Google Employees Resign in Protest Against Pentagon Contract

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17064776