It's easy to find examples of how to make this sort of argument civilly and substantively; you replied to one.
Deliberately belittling people who conscientiously object to having their labor used for the purpose of war making is dangerous. I'm very glad that Young Americans (at the time) protested the Vietnam War making it clear to the US Military that they couldn't willy-nilly start wars whenever they want to.
You cannot, and should not, be forcing people to do what they do not want. If you want to convince others of the benefits of having a superior armed forces, belittling them as spoiled children is not the way to do so.
As am I. I'm not criticizing war protest. I'm criticizing not contributing to military technology.
> You cannot, and should not, be forcing people to do what they do not want.
No one is forcing anyone to do anything. I'm criticizing them for making their choice. They remain free to make it.
Your point is that working with the military is good, because being ruled by China would be worse than the current situation. So the moral benefit you're proposing extends insofar as we prevent China from taking over the US. How much do you think Silicon Valley needs to cooperate with the military to prevent replacement by the Chinese?
A lot. Whether or not we like it, automation, AI and autonomous weapons are going to become a huge part of the modern battlefield. Silicon Valley needs to be a big part of that process. If you abdicate your role in technology like this, you don't just make it go away. All you do is cede control of it to someone who is willing to do it. Who doesn't share your sense of morality. How, exactly, is that better?