Palantir gets $10B contract from U.S. Army

Access and Context

• A paywalled article is shared via an archive link.
• Many comments assume readers already know Palantir’s history with government surveillance and military/intelligence contracts.

Political Power, ROI, and “Takeover” of Government

• Several see the $10B Army contract as evidence that political donations and influence buying have enormous returns.
• Some argue this reflects a long-standing partisan strategy: weaken public institutions, then outsource to wealthy private allies.
• Others say the deal just continues a decades‑old pattern of the US state aligning with “the worst rich people,” with little internal political opposition.

Palantir, Surveillance, and Civil Liberties

• Deep concern that the contract accelerates “glass citizen”–style total surveillance, worse than historic secret police.
• People worry about laundering surveillance of US citizens through private firms and foreign partners to evade constitutional limits.
• Some ask why the Army needs analytics on Americans; responses suggest preparation for domestic control or broader paramilitary/ICE-style uses.

Debate over Karp’s “Scare Them to Keep Peace” Doctrine

• Many find the CEO’s justification—that peace comes from terrifying adversaries—morally disturbing and reminiscent of extremist rhetoric.
• Defenders argue history shows peace is secured by superior force; pacifism without strength invites conquest.
• Critics say this mindset fuels arms races, justifies authoritarian surveillance, and mirrors rationalizations used by other repressive states.
• There is back‑and‑forth over whether Europe’s post‑WW2 peace is due primarily to deterrence and US power, or to integration and cooperation.

US as Terrorist / Foreign Policy Critiques

• Some call the US the world’s leading “terrorist” given its bombing campaigns; others broaden the term to all states with monopolies on violence.
• Disputes arise over Iraq, Vietnam, Cold War proxy wars, and whether “deposing dictators” can ever be cleanly executed.
• Several argue US militarism and tech dominance create enemies and terrorism rather than security.

Arms Races, Deterrence, and Moral Limits

• One side sees military supremacy as “suicidally necessary”; another warns it leads to nuclear overkill and global catastrophe.
• Mutual deterrence (e.g., Cold War) is cited both as peace‑preserving and as a source of immense suffering via proxy conflicts.
• Some stress that trust‑building and institutions matter more than fear; others insist global trust is impossible without enforced power.