China is an untested superpower without real-world wartime experience with modern weapons, modern warfare, and modern intelligence.
Russia is the only real threat to the United States.
Russia never wanted to be that. The US rejected their desire to join NATO, sabotaged Putin's relationships with Chirac and Shroeder. In fact it was probably the joint veto of the US iraq war (Russia + France + Germany) in the UN security council that made the US dead-set on isolating Russia from Western Europe. People always mention NATO expansion, but there was a lot of other moves the West pulled, such as withdrawing from the ABM treaty, putting Aegis defense systems in Poland and Romania (to defend against Iran? bullshit), etc, of course most recently the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline. The US sabotaged Russia's desire to be friends with Europe countless times and forced Russia into the only move it had left - to build itself up militarily, in as much isolation as America could create for it. But it wasn't supposed to succeed god damnit! The Americans fucking *HATE* that Russia actually economically grew so much and militarily developed so god damn much over such short time. And they *hate* that their sactions didn't work, that they can't just make the world dance at their whim anymore. The Americans reliably play their hand like absolute dicks, and I'm glad their gambits fail. Fuck the Americans (I'm talking about those in power, not you guys. I love you guys).
Replies (56)
It appears the barbarians have found a sympathizer in
@npub1acg6...p35c , presumably also a barbarian.
Russia is a great forever-enemy to have if you wish to arm the threatened neighbors.
What better situation could a ruling cabal dream of?
Géopolitiquement et specifiquement vôtre cette grille de lecture que je ne partage point.. C'est fort dommage que certaines notes ne puissent être des points d'analyses de groupes.. Elles peuvent être très très sujettes à être une réalité pour certains de ce fait biaiser les dessous de cartes géographiques et stratégiques beaucoup plus complexes qu'on le pense.. Bonjour et bonne nuit chez vous
It seems to me you overestimate Russia's military and economic potential.
Proudly serving as the west's boogie-man since at least the bolshevik coup
I don't think Russia needed help from the US to behave as it has. Over the last 100 years, it's been a threat to its own population, and its neighboring countries. No matter the hand played by the US, I think it would have kept behaving the same way.
You tell us Russia wanted to join the Nato and the US rejected that? That's a steep claim, any sources for this?
The main reason for NATO's existence (at least in my side of the worls -- Eastern Europe) is to keep Russia's expansionist tendencies in check. Of course NATO rejected Russia's request!
I've heard this argument in Tucker Carlson's interview by Lex Friedman: _"Russia requested NATO membership, therefore NATO is no longer needed"_, and was struck by sheer stupidity of its consequences.
Exactly. Both are fake.
I agree, Russia has a really strong folklore about being a "glorious nation", "Russia has no borders" and this kinda crap, on top of that they've never seen anything close to democracy, basically just hoping from one tyrannical regime to another ever since the country came to be. They will be violent and expansionist no matter what.
It's a common mistake to confuse possession of nuclear weapons with being a superpower. Nuclear technologies are becoming more and more commoditized, and proliferation efforts seem to be struggling with this fact. Humanity may soon end up with 2x countries with nuclear weapons. However, this would not mean that there would be 2x superpowers, or even just powers. Look at the DPRK or Pakistan, how powerful are they?
North Korea has performed quite well in the war against the UN.
Has it?
Yes, and if this keeps up, the DPRK will outlive the UN.
Care to elaborate what is 'this' and how they are going to outlive it?
No it hasn't, it ended up as a shithole that survives on foreign aid, all their militaristic chestbeating is just to get some aid in exchange for calming down, it's literally like a child in the mall screaming to get a lollipop
The entire UN is literally bought by the US and satellites, if this continues to escalate to the level of a circus, the organization will simply collapse. That way the DPRK will outlive the UN.
> Russia actually economically grew so much
are you sure?
Russia produces more artillery in 4 days than France produces all year.
Russia has hypersonic missiles that work. The US doesn't have that. Russia has status-6 sub weapon that can take out an entire carrier fleet (some say a coastal city with nuke but I don't think that was the purpose). Russia is far more advanced in operating in the polar region.
I'm not talking about nukes. I'm talking about rate of production of artillery, hypersonic missiles, submarine weapons, anti-satellite technology, etc. Russia has been on a war footing for longer while the West just fed their old weaponry to Ukraine not feeling an immediate pressure to ramp up production in preparation for a world war.
Ok neocon
Ok neocon
Didn't they lose a third of their black sea naval fleet? How's the polar region going to help with that?
I don’t think they hate that the Russians have developed so quickly. It provides them with the perfect “enemy” to justify their expansion of nato, the sales of weapons of warfare, and justifications for the expansion of the state. It’s actually probably exactly what they want.
Very interesting thread! I always learn something new when I'm on #nostr
I mean sure the Russian army may well be in the Top 10, and the Russian economy is stronger than we all thought, but none of that is even close to the US. This is a fighter of a completely different weight class and it is simply impossible to seriously consider Russia as a threat to the US.
So this view I've presented is essentially the view of Vladimir Brovkin, a Russian-born American historian who has worked at Princeton and Harvard Universities. I wrote this post after watching this video of his. I never knew of this person before this video, it was just a recommendation by YouTube.
You are right of course. Compared to America, Russia isn't even close.
Oh no, you are right, they absolutely are losing in the Black Sea. There is no defense against drones on the surface of the water, during chop, at night, coming in packs. I don't think any country has a defense against that yet. It's a very interesting time from a war-technical point of view.
That's a reasonable view.
You westerns overestimate russian industrial complex and its pity state. The reality is that it's kind of a walking dead. The real issue is nukes, that is the only thing that prevents Russia from being fucked really hard.
It is better to overestimate your enemy than to underestimate
It's Gazprom that American hates , Ukraine was about Gazprom and who supply s energy to eorope that's basically it
Somehow I don't like this whole line of reasoning - russia wanted to be good guys but bad bad americans force them to be bad guys. Strange. If you are good guy its actually in definition that no one can change you.
To join NATO a candidate country has to officially apply for that and all the members - not only the US - have to agree. That never happened and such the US never rejected that. See also the process when Sweden applied for membership and Turkey first signaled to disagree.
The above thing is just a story that Putin tells.
Perhaps. But I haven't heard Clinton repudiate the now publicly known story.
😄
you're ignorant or delusional if you think China is untested
China hasn't been in a war since 1979, and their military operations other than war have seen very little battlefield action.
bro
the u.s also has not been in a war
what do you think india is
what do you think has been happening in africa
that's because you're still looking at it from the u.s point of view lol
they would never say they're forced to become the bad guys
china is probably tops in modern intelligence
stay coherent man are you overestimating or underestimating?
and how are you supporting these claims ? any objective economic metrics?
this is a propaganda-fed oversimplified childish view of the situation
sadly it's not far from what most us politicians think
Then what is the "real" situation?
That'll be because Russia is currently under wartime economy and France is not, that's not a very useful comparison.
That would depend on what you consider working, several of them were shot down by the patriot system in Ukraine and the patriots there aren't even the latest version of the system, I'm by no means claiming that those missiles are useless or something, but they are not the wunderwaffe the Russians claim it is
Assessing economic developments in North Korea is extremely difficult. The country has not published any regular national account statistics since the 1960s or any budget information since the early 1980s. Almost all the Korean, English, French, and German literature on the matter is extremely anti DPRK biased (for obvious reasons). I'd send you a Chinese paper but you can't read Chinese. Here is one of the less biased, recent, English pieces as a starting point. In it you'll find a more vibrant economy than you want to believe:
here's a start:
https://one.oecd.org/document/ECO/WKP%282020%2915/En/pdfI think it is useful.
Economies can not just switch into wartime economies on a dime. It takes a lot of time and a hell of a lot of changes to occur before a spike in demand flows back into a spike in production. And any spike in demand in Western Europe will be noticed by Russia and met with a spike in demand by Russia. It might be very hard to catch up.
Now I think US production of weapons is pretty high, and the US is making moves to increase and distribute wartime production. They just brought Japan onboard to make jet fighters.
Well, presumably their welfare is at the level of Cambodia.
Various rating systems cannot objectively reflect reality, but, of course, the Russian army is one of the best. Another thing is that in the case of Ukraine it shows itself very strangely, for example, it was obvious to everyone that it was necessary to destroy communications and the energy system of Ukraine, but the fact that the Russian army does it badly suggests some political games behind the screen of a military conflict.
Or, alternatively, with a good army, the Russian command is terribly incompetent.
Even both can be true at the same time.
