> Then just say no when the DoD asks you to work for them.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding with how DoD contracting works. Regardless this is too broad of a paintbrush to use.
> I certainly am. The safer "our" soldiers are the more people they can murder.
This is literally the exact opposite of how things work in the military. Regardless if you think killing is so horrible it's a bit shocking you would rather soldiers to be more likely to die and contribute to even more death.
if you think killing is so horrible it's a bit shocking you would rather soldiers to be more likely to die and contribute to even more death.
What a strange accusation for a person involved in the military to make. Are you saying that when the army makes an offensive operation with the goal of eliminating some enemies combatants, it's because they think killing is awesome?
Because it seems to me that the reason is much the same: we must kill these people to lower overall deaths, no?
> Are you saying that when the army makes an offensive operation with the goal of eliminating some enemies combatants, it's because they think killing is awesome?
I'm not sure how you could come to that assessment but I wouldn't come to that conclusion at all (even my previous comments echo the opposite). Regardless I wouldn't consider myself part of the military at all (especially since I've left the public contracting space 2 years ago and the army wasn't my last contract anyway).
This is a fundamental misunderstanding with how DoD contracting works. Regardless this is too broad of a paintbrush to use.
> I certainly am. The safer "our" soldiers are the more people they can murder.
This is literally the exact opposite of how things work in the military. Regardless if you think killing is so horrible it's a bit shocking you would rather soldiers to be more likely to die and contribute to even more death.