721–730 of 1001 posts
Zelensky's Ukraine stood and fought against Russia for 3 years. Trump's USA surrendered in 6 weeks.
[flagged]
If you want to play that card you have to be somewhat consistent. I don't think Trump can play the human rights card, and it's been a looong time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"arming Ukraine to the teeth" does not guarantee the victory but guarantees more casualties and suffering. To win you also need to have 3x more soldiers which is not the case. West cannot even pay a salary comparable to what Russia pays to its volunteer soldiers.
We can both agree that arming Ukraine with more missiles will guarantee more casualties and suffering... for the Russians. And in response, Russia will do what exactly? Send more golf cart brigades or more North Koreans? It's not like Russia has enormous military resources they've been keeping as a surprise. No, if Russia could do anything differently they would already be doing it to win the 'Special Military Operat…
The USA stands in miserable disgrace.
I'm not sure what to think. Ukraine can't militarily defeat russia or reclaim its lost territory, and as long as it continues to try to do so, there will be war and the world will be less stable. But if a line is not drawn against russia, I think we have every reason to believe putin will continue to conquer more land over time. Russia is the source of instability, but it can't be defeated or reasoned with. What to d…
Russia can be easily defeated; especially at this point. Their armies are demoralized, their equipment is terrible (they are using donkeys), and their budget is running out. The only reason they do not crumble is their sheer size against Ukraine. They would easily be wiped out by a more modern western military. Conservatives in the US now like Russia because they ban LGBT and Europe does not want to pay for a likely 2 year attack and show of force.
And don't talk to me about using nuclear weapons against the west. Russia won't use them. They haven't use them for 3 years despite threats to the west if they don't stop funding Ukraine. The second they use them against the west; the west uses them right back. All the money, power, and influence the elites have in Russia disappears. They won't let Putin launch them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't that just accelerate Europe's transition to EVs? They could even import Chinese EVs to make oil mostly irrelevant in a year or so.
Europe is far more dependent on oil for industry and manufacturing than for simply transport. The high energy prices are killing the German manufacturing sector, while cheap Chinese imports will crush the domestic auto industry. Terrible double blow that is enabling far right politics and populism.
If you take personal vehicle transport needs out, they still need oil yes, but a lot less. They also have plenty of resources (e.g. Norwegian Hydro, French Nuclear, even German coal) that they can bring to bear on energy pricing.
China is really smart for pushing themselves off of oil dependence. Yes, someone on the spectrum will mention that they still need some oil, but needing a lot less of it gives you so much more flexibility when it comes to geopolitics.
As for German car manufacturers...I already drive a German EV (made in Germany as well) so I'm not sure what the big deal is about.
while pausing the “aid” may save the US gov money; the money was mostly coming back to the US anyway in the form of weapons purchases. NYT: > The order takes effect immediately and affects more than $1 billion in arms and ammunition in the pipeline and on order. Mr. Trump’s directive also halts hundreds of millions of dollars in aid that Kyiv can use only to buy new military hardware directly from U.S. defense compan…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing's really stopping them from leaving Ukraine, is there? If you don't want to be targeted by kamikaze drones then don't volunteer to be part of an invading force. Back in the day I didn't really complain too much about being targeted when I was running around in Iraq as a civilian contractor. Well, other than the whole 'non-combatant' rules of war Geneva Convention thing but that was my choice as I knew they di…
In slight fairness, I don’t think most of the Russian soldiers are volunteers at this point.
They promise up to 4 million rubles sign-in and 220000+ monthly.
They are eager to go killing neighbors for $2500 monthly salary.
While I find the Russian invasion of Ukraine appalling, as a counterpoint to all the "Trump is destroying the US' reputation" mono-point that I've read so far (although I agree with that, too): John Maersheimer [1] gave a great explanation and prediction (~10 years prior) of why the whole thing happened. The US saw Russian weakness, decided to expand NATO to Ukraine, and the Russians said "no way will we let NATO be…
No. Countries with their own free choice asked to be part of NATO. The US did not push this on them. NATO expansion happened exactly because none of those countries trusted their neighbor Russia, who had previously invaded them and kept them under its thumb for 50 years. Russia is both to blame for the expansion of NATO and Russia's subsequent invasions of Georgia and Ukraine.
I've seen this stated frequently on HN. Here's a quote from President Clinton in February 1999[1]:That is why I have pushed hard for NATO's enlargement and why we must keep NATO's doors open to new democratic members...
NATO would add 12 nations in the decade after those remarks, with the first 3 formally joining 2 weeks later.
Also look at Clinton's remarks from October 1999[2]:NATO must also take in new members, including those from among its former adversaries. It must reach out to all the new democracies in Central Europe, the Baltics and the New Independent States of the former Soviet Union. At the first NATO summit I attended in January of 1994, I proposed that NATO should enlarge steadily, deliberately, openly.
>Russia is both to blame for the expansion of NATO and Russia's subsequent invasions of Georgia and Ukraine.
I used to have a link to a really good interview with a former US ambassador or special advisor to Sakashvilli. In it, he basically says that Sakashvilli is a risk-taker and gambler much like Putin, and in 2008 he gambled and lost. He basically laid the blame for what happened at the Georgian President's feet. Which is also the conclusion of the EU-backed investigation.[3]
[1] https://clintonwhitehouse5.archives.gov/WH/EOP/NSC/html/nsc-...
[2] https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/1996/s961022a.htm
[3] https://www.reuters.com/article/world/georgia-started-war-wi...
The USA stands in miserable disgrace.
I'm not sure what to think. Ukraine can't militarily defeat russia or reclaim its lost territory, and as long as it continues to try to do so, there will be war and the world will be less stable. But if a line is not drawn against russia, I think we have every reason to believe putin will continue to conquer more land over time. Russia is the source of instability, but it can't be defeated or reasoned with. What to d…
This is only true if we keep Ukraine in an undersupplied state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The idea that Russia's economy will collapse is highly unlikely. Yeah, no way it's collapsing when the central bank rate is at 21%.[0] Totally unrelated, but might I interest you in a lucrative land opportunity in Florida? [0] https://apnews.com/article/russia-interest-rates-0fa1d7385be...
Certainly Russia's economy has difficulties. It has inflation roughly 9-10% and (dangerously low) unemployment around 1%. Russia's Central Bank key rate needs to be extremely high to fight its inflation because it is not as primary a lender as the US Fed for example - there's way more private lending. The inflation is caused by raising labor costs (due to unemployment), supply chain disruptions from sanctions, and we…
A war economy is all fun and games while you have an ongoing war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Excellent! The Russia sanctions are causing collateral damage to much of the third world.
Feel free to provide any resources that support your take, otherwise I'll consider it to be bullshit