The US no longer uses its army for defense. Nobody in their immediate region dares attack them, they're too powerful ("Godzilla", in the words of John Mearsheimer). All the wars that the US has fought since WWII are nothing to do with defense. Just look at the Wikipedia article on "power projection":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_projection

The leader image is ... a US aircraft carrier (the USS Nimitz). That's what the US uses its military power for, to influence events in lands far, far away from its territory.

But, now, tell me which one of the many wars that the US has fought in after WWII did not end in disaster. Afghanistan? Iraq? Korea?

There was a meme doing the rounds the other day: "Name a character who can defeat Captain America". The answer being "Captain Vietnam". The US has faced humiliating defeat after humiliating defeat while bringing death and destruction and immeasurable misery to millions around the world.

That is what HN users seem to have an "anti" sentiment for. If you watch the news you'll be able to tell that this goes far beyond HN. The whole of US society seems to be extremely tired with those "forever wars", those senseless excursions to faraway lands, that not only do not secure US interests but turn world opinion more and more against the US. Even the US' closest allies now fear the US: vide Greenland. Anyone with more than a video game or comic book understanding of how the real world works would do well to be concerned.

Edit: also from EU, btw. Greek but living in the UK.

To be fair, it was bright Chinese minds at ByteDance which worked on getting US teenagers addicted to TikTok videos.

I prefer having those minds focused on optimizing ad serving than on optimizing school bombings.

If you have an innovative idea, it's fairly easy to sell to the public, and extremely difficult to sell to the Pentagon.

People are just making the obvious choice most of the time. Why risk your business success unnecessarily?

> You couldve seen anti militsry industry sentiment on HN for years, which apparently worked for US adversaries, who knows who was behind that propaganda

Me.

This has definitely nothing to do with the subject at hand.

US Forces and Defence Complex have most of the talent they need.

Even with prevailing capabilities in many areas, it's not possible to do most things. Armies are not 'magic' - we're lulled into a false sense of understanding of capabilities by focusing to much on 'special forces' and other kinds of operations.

What makes you think what the US, most probably at the behest of occupiers of Palestine, is going to do wonders for sentiment of the general public towards the US military industry? The anti-military sentiment is justified and will probably grow as more people wake up to the terrorising and dual faced nature of the US.

The brightest minds were systematically bullied out of position, called DEI hires or accused of random crimes.

They might not have been the best, but lets not pretend we're sending our brightest minds herw.

What are you talking about? Better missiles dont stop Iran from closing a tiny waterway in their border.

US weapons are pretty damn good for the most part. But trade protection is just not something fancy advanced weapons can solve.

Military planners have known this for a long time.

If anything, if you were serious you would say that the US didnt pay enough tradesmen and technician to build enough of the needed weapons.

Would those "brightest minds" want to work for the current US government? Even if they did out of patriotism to the country, the Trump administration would have pushed them out by now and replaced with yes-men.

> im from eu

Yeah, the ultimate place of military preparedness.