As someone who has done DOD work (though not on anything "pointy") I've never felt the need to justify myself in this way. Throughout history, countries have lived and died by the strength of their military.[1] America's global supremacy would not be possible without its military domination, and our standard of living would not be possible if we had to worry about falling under some other power's thumb. Also, while we're at it, we subsidize defense for nearly all the liberal democracies in the world. I feel quite positively about my contributions to all these things.

[1] The study of history is, to a first approximation, the study of war. I am not conceited enough to believe that my generation is the first one that is living outside of history.

Exactly. I worked at a defense contractor for a long time, on language training software. I've never felt the need to defend myself despite having a strong antiwar stance.

We need a strong military - we just need to stop going to war at the drop of a hat.

> But the last thing you should do is cripple the tools you make for others to use in some sort of ignoble bid to be moral. That's not moral, it's unprofessional.

I could just stop making tools.

I don't think I'm okay with making wars a clean, professional thing. It should be brutal and bloody and messy at every stage, so we can't isolate ourselves from what we're doing.

If you're making weapon systems and going "Well, I'm not responsible, I just helped make a technology" and the guy firing them is saying "Well, I'm just following orders and pressing some buttons, I'm not really killing them" and the guy in charge is saying "I'm just implementing what the politicians/people want" (depending on how high up the command), who exactly is left actually carrying the price of it?

No, I think I should do everything I can to make sure that we are forced to viscerally feel the terribleness of war when we decide to wage it - not pretend it's a video game.

>It should be brutal and bloody and messy at every stage, so we can't isolate ourselves from what we're doing.

If you believe that carnality would put a stop to warfare, I think the last couple thousand years of it might disagree with you.

Granted, the sight of carnage can turn the tide of public opinion against a war... that's been the case since World War 1 put an end to the idea of war as a noble game where boys became men. But it's not going to stop wars from being waged, just make the politics of managing them more difficult, and make it more torturous for the soldiers doing the killing. The generals probably aren't going to lose a night of sleep even if people have to hack away at each other with machetes.

I disagree - I think making people more connected to it raises the cost of war for the people who tend to cause them, because of the political capital they have to expend on managing people who can see just how brutal it is, who have friends and relatives who are maimed or don't come home, etc.

My goal it's to End All Wars Forever! (TM), it's to raise the cost of waging wars for a society, so it's something we do less casually.

media also has a hand in sanitizing war. they censor the images so stacks of mangled corpses arent stuck in your head when they should be. unbelievably my fearless leader uses a WWI memorial that reads "never again" to promote new wars every year.

On the other hand, we have twitter, and youtube, and stories do tend to get around the media more often than, perhaps, they would have in Vietnam or even the first Iraq war.