An important debate going on and I’m going to sidestep the core question as it is multi-faceted and complex. However, there is another perspective to consider here which is that workers (well, at least tech knowledge workers) have shown there is now another ability to express their views meaningfully in the debate. They can now substantively communicate (and protest) their views on the military and that of their employer. This “public intellectual” debate has been too limited (in the US at least) since WWII (noted that there have been protest voices with every military action but not quite like this).

In April 2018, a group of over 3,100 Google employees wrote a letter to the company’s CEO in protest of its work on Project Maven, a military AI project that would help drone warfare tools become more accurate.
The letter explained, “We believe that Google should not be in the business of war. Therefore we ask that Project Maven be cancelled, and that Google draft, publicize and enforce a clear policy stating that neither Google nor its contractors will ever build warfare technology… This plan will irreparably damage Google’s brand and its ability to compete for talent.”

Former Google Cloud CEO Diane Greene responded to workers’ concerns by announcing in June 2018 that the company would fulfill the requirements of its existing Department of Defense contract for Project Maven, but that it would decline to pursue follow-on contracts or similar projects in the future.

https://www.cbinsights.com/research/tech-military-government-partnerships-quotes/

BTW, totally agree with Mark Benioff about the need for exec level ethics in tech advisors. Mark, I’m available…

[Salesforce employees] ask me questions I don’t have the answer to and I don’t have the authority or understanding to be able to opine on… I said I need a team that I can pivot to to say, “What is the right thing to do here?” And I’m like, it’s crazy that we don’t have a team like this. And it’s crazy that no company does.

Mark Benioff