7 ms·

All true, however this is not specific to Russia only. It seems most large powers exhibit bullying behaviour. USA is only a little better (making up WMD to go

All true, however this is not specific to Russia only. It seems most large powers exhibit bullying behaviour. USA is only a little better (making up WMD to go to war with Iraq, meddling with elections and democratic process in other countries, spying on allies, etc). Then we have China which is probably yet another category of international bully. Sadly this is quite expected for global super powers...

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
DickingAround 6y ago
Been thinking about that phrase "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is perhaps better as "power corrupts, absolute power writes the history books".
- NicoJuicy 6y ago
  What about, power corrupts. But in a democracy it's hard to do it in the open ... For long :)
NicoJuicy 6y ago
Perhaps you're forgetting that Russia is not a super power. They can extract cheap oil and try to sell their military equipment. We'll see how that pans out in the future, while Europe is slowly moving to green energy. It's just nuts that they are throwing away the opportunity to correctly invest oil/gas money, before it's over.
- sakopov 6y ago
  Certainly not a superpower by these metrics. However, Russia does possess a vast number of WMDs which still puts it superpower category.
  - NicoJuicy 6y ago
    The thing about WMD's is that you only need one. There's no use-case for it in the modern world, except the threat of using it.
    - lubonay 6y ago
      Well what if your single one is taken offline? You need at least two, for redundancy :P
      - NicoJuicy 6y ago
        1 that is actually working then :p
        mcny 6y ago
        I believe the grandparent is talking about second strike capability. The idea is to have enough that the enemy can't destroy it all before you have a chance to react. It is possible that one is enough or it maybe that ten is far from adequate. It depends on your threat model. Not that any of this matters if our threat model includes an enemy who doesn't care if they get annihilated in the reprisal. Disclaimer: I don't know about any of these things and they are just guesses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_strike
    - glennvtx 6y ago
      Perhaps that is how you, and other rational people might feel about it, but the psychopaths in charge might very well feel differently, and probably do, if history is any indicator.
  - woodandsteel 6y ago
    WMD's are wonderful for keeping other countries from attacking (but who wants to invade Russia?), but of little use for offensive purposes.
- virtue3 6y ago
  In terms of military tech, Russia is #2. Period. (fast approaching Chinese tho). Their submarines and missiles are beyond our tech in the US in some aspects (hypersonic missles, Supercavitation torpedos). I view them like the 3rd opponent in a starcraft 1v1v1 that got smashed early. They can't win the match, but they can decide the winner.
  - noir_lord 6y ago
    You have to be able to detect a submarine to fire on it and the US is a long way ahead of Russia when it comes to both quiet submarines and passive towed arrays. In fact the original argument for the super-cavitating torpedo was one based on the premise of killing a submarine that already fired on you that you hadn't detected until it fired on you. Russia has some showy tech (as you mentioned) but they lack in areas the US was ahead of them in decades ago. In terms of technology there are other countries with more sophisticated defence capabilties where I am from is one (the UK) is one, much of the technology the Russians export is things they did under the USSR (which definitely was #2 in terms of military tech at that point). When you get down to it though modern war is force projection and logistics and there no one touches the Americans.
    - toyg 6y ago
      > modern war is force projection The Russians seem to have projected pretty effectively in Crimea and Syria. They’re not back to their peak but they’re trending up.
      - noir_lord 6y ago
        Crimea was on their doorstep and Assad already had strong ties to the Russians. The US Navy and marines are the 2nd largest Air Force in the world, the first been the US airforce. Russia is clearly a regional power but it is not a superpower except in nuclear weapons but it would cease to exist shortly after using those. I’ve no dog in the fight, I’m British but the US military is vast, it’s so mind bogglingly big that it’s just taken for granted at this point. In tonnage of combatants the US navy is larger than the next 8 combined, 6 of who are allies. It’s crazy how over gunned they are tbh and they spend less as a share of GDP than the Russians do.
- jjk166 6y ago
  Russia is on the verge of a demographic collapse as the generation born after the fall of the soviet union comes of age. Their military which relies on huge manpower reserves will have a much smaller pool to draw upon, domestic consumption of consumer goods will shrink, and the costs of public welfare for the elderly is going to grow significantly relative to tax revenues. This demographic shift has already started, and its full effects will be felt this decade. Russia needs to make a lot of unreasonably bold plays right now while it still can if it is to secure its position in the coming years. Oil sales and advanced military technologies are not going to be super useful in the long run, but they reduce Russia's reliance on its large population which is the more imminent threat. It's generally unsafe to assume counter-intuitive moves are irrational.
adventured 6y ago
> however this is not specific to Russia only. It seems most large powers exhibit bullying behaviour. Interesting premise you're floating. As a discussion device, it's usually worth considering positive contributions as well, rather than only displaying one side of the scale. Let's try taking the positive approach too. Would you mind listing many of the positive things Russia / USSR have done for the world, or contributed to the world, over the last century? For example, if Russia shielded and nurtured numerous prominent liberal democracies with its immense military power for decades, you could list those outcomes. Or if Russia gave the world a vast trove of technology that pushed the world forward dramatically, you could list all of those contributions. Or if Russia spent the last century feeding the world, saving tens of millions of lives in the process, you could list that. Or if Russia built an inclusive space program that allowed much of the world to participate in space, you could list that.
- surewhynat 6y ago
  Sure, a quick google search will get you some results. Fought the nazis at the expense of 27,000,000 lives. (1941-1945) Discovery of Graphene, 2004, nobel prize for it in 2010 .rar format, 1993, nginx, 2004 First space station to orbit earth Baikonur Cosmodrome, a launch site for the international space station, technically in Kazakhstan, but the area is leased to Russia Supply Europe with natural gas ... There's a long list .. you don't need to be a racist Rusophobe, just google it yourself.
- NicoJuicy 6y ago
  Positive things? Their attempt to attack Japan with their naval fleet failed tremendous. The space program ( a partnership fyi) would be a positive, but they also raised prices 372% in 10 years for sending an astronaut to space, so they didn't do it for free. And they did try to mock Elon a lot, so that didn't leave a positive impression. They also never shielded a democracy. They tried to hide athletes doped with steroids in the Olympics. They are now denied entry. And every country is doing agriculture, so not sure what you mean with that.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
mcv 6y ago
That's the thing. And Putin wants Russia to be seen as a world power, so it bullies like one. Russia could be a great country if they were more democratic, open to criticism, were safer to both foreign and domestic investors and entrepreneurs, etc. They've got tons of resources, tons of opportunities, but I strongly believe their tradition of oppressive regimes (since the Mongols, really) is holding them back.
gremlinsinc 6y ago
We also do fine w/ meddling w/ our own elections (Voter suppression) take for instance the fiasco that was the Louisville single precinct during a primary w/ 600k people coming out to vote in just two polling locations in the state. Then we have our own leaders bullying us into believing masks are for 'wimps', which almost appears like they're trying to weaken Americans (literally make them sick and die) so Russia or China can just walk in and make us fascist and give them a good place in the new hierarchy. Doesn't hurt that most of American's act like whiny brats and children who just learned the word No, and they do not like it.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

DickingAround 6y ago

Been thinking about that phrase "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is perhaps better as "power corrupts, absolute power writes the history books".

NicoJuicy 6y ago
What about, power corrupts. But in a democracy it's hard to do it in the open ... For long :)

NicoJuicy 6y ago

Perhaps you're forgetting that Russia is not a super power. They can extract cheap oil and try to sell their military equipment. We'll see how that pans out in the future, while Europe is slowly moving to green energy. It's just nuts that they are throwing away the opportunity to correctly invest oil/gas money, before it's over.

sakopov 6y ago
Certainly not a superpower by these metrics. However, Russia does possess a vast number of WMDs which still puts it superpower category.
- NicoJuicy 6y ago
  The thing about WMD's is that you only need one. There's no use-case for it in the modern world, except the threat of using it.
  - lubonay 6y ago
    Well what if your single one is taken offline? You need at least two, for redundancy :P
    - NicoJuicy 6y ago
      1 that is actually working then :p
      - mcny 6y ago
        I believe the grandparent is talking about second strike capability. The idea is to have enough that the enemy can't destroy it all before you have a chance to react. It is possible that one is enough or it maybe that ten is far from adequate. It depends on your threat model. Not that any of this matters if our threat model includes an enemy who doesn't care if they get annihilated in the reprisal. Disclaimer: I don't know about any of these things and they are just guesses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_strike
  - glennvtx 6y ago
    Perhaps that is how you, and other rational people might feel about it, but the psychopaths in charge might very well feel differently, and probably do, if history is any indicator.
- woodandsteel 6y ago
  WMD's are wonderful for keeping other countries from attacking (but who wants to invade Russia?), but of little use for offensive purposes.
virtue3 6y ago
In terms of military tech, Russia is #2. Period. (fast approaching Chinese tho). Their submarines and missiles are beyond our tech in the US in some aspects (hypersonic missles, Supercavitation torpedos). I view them like the 3rd opponent in a starcraft 1v1v1 that got smashed early. They can't win the match, but they can decide the winner.
- noir_lord 6y ago
  You have to be able to detect a submarine to fire on it and the US is a long way ahead of Russia when it comes to both quiet submarines and passive towed arrays. In fact the original argument for the super-cavitating torpedo was one based on the premise of killing a submarine that already fired on you that you hadn't detected until it fired on you. Russia has some showy tech (as you mentioned) but they lack in areas the US was ahead of them in decades ago. In terms of technology there are other countries with more sophisticated defence capabilties where I am from is one (the UK) is one, much of the technology the Russians export is things they did under the USSR (which definitely was #2 in terms of military tech at that point). When you get down to it though modern war is force projection and logistics and there no one touches the Americans.
  - toyg 6y ago
    > modern war is force projection The Russians seem to have projected pretty effectively in Crimea and Syria. They’re not back to their peak but they’re trending up.
    - noir_lord 6y ago
      Crimea was on their doorstep and Assad already had strong ties to the Russians. The US Navy and marines are the 2nd largest Air Force in the world, the first been the US airforce. Russia is clearly a regional power but it is not a superpower except in nuclear weapons but it would cease to exist shortly after using those. I’ve no dog in the fight, I’m British but the US military is vast, it’s so mind bogglingly big that it’s just taken for granted at this point. In tonnage of combatants the US navy is larger than the next 8 combined, 6 of who are allies. It’s crazy how over gunned they are tbh and they spend less as a share of GDP than the Russians do.
jjk166 6y ago
Russia is on the verge of a demographic collapse as the generation born after the fall of the soviet union comes of age. Their military which relies on huge manpower reserves will have a much smaller pool to draw upon, domestic consumption of consumer goods will shrink, and the costs of public welfare for the elderly is going to grow significantly relative to tax revenues. This demographic shift has already started, and its full effects will be felt this decade. Russia needs to make a lot of unreasonably bold plays right now while it still can if it is to secure its position in the coming years. Oil sales and advanced military technologies are not going to be super useful in the long run, but they reduce Russia's reliance on its large population which is the more imminent threat. It's generally unsafe to assume counter-intuitive moves are irrational.

adventured 6y ago

> however this is not specific to Russia only. It seems most large powers exhibit bullying behaviour. Interesting premise you're floating. As a discussion device, it's usually worth considering positive contributions as well, rather than only displaying one side of the scale. Let's try taking the positive approach too. Would you mind listing many of the positive things Russia / USSR have done for the world, or contributed to the world, over the last century? For example, if Russia shielded and nurtured numerous prominent liberal democracies with its immense military power for decades, you could list those outcomes. Or if Russia gave the world a vast trove of technology that pushed the world forward dramatically, you could list all of those contributions. Or if Russia spent the last century feeding the world, saving tens of millions of lives in the process, you could list that. Or if Russia built an inclusive space program that allowed much of the world to participate in space, you could list that.

surewhynat 6y ago
Sure, a quick google search will get you some results. Fought the nazis at the expense of 27,000,000 lives. (1941-1945) Discovery of Graphene, 2004, nobel prize for it in 2010 .rar format, 1993, nginx, 2004 First space station to orbit earth Baikonur Cosmodrome, a launch site for the international space station, technically in Kazakhstan, but the area is leased to Russia Supply Europe with natural gas ... There's a long list .. you don't need to be a racist Rusophobe, just google it yourself.
NicoJuicy 6y ago
Positive things? Their attempt to attack Japan with their naval fleet failed tremendous. The space program ( a partnership fyi) would be a positive, but they also raised prices 372% in 10 years for sending an astronaut to space, so they didn't do it for free. And they did try to mock Elon a lot, so that didn't leave a positive impression. They also never shielded a democracy. They tried to hide athletes doped with steroids in the Olympics. They are now denied entry. And every country is doing agriculture, so not sure what you mean with that.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

mcv 6y ago

That's the thing. And Putin wants Russia to be seen as a world power, so it bullies like one. Russia could be a great country if they were more democratic, open to criticism, were safer to both foreign and domestic investors and entrepreneurs, etc. They've got tons of resources, tons of opportunities, but I strongly believe their tradition of oppressive regimes (since the Mongols, really) is holding them back.

gremlinsinc 6y ago

We also do fine w/ meddling w/ our own elections (Voter suppression) take for instance the fiasco that was the Louisville single precinct during a primary w/ 600k people coming out to vote in just two polling locations in the state. Then we have our own leaders bullying us into believing masks are for 'wimps', which almost appears like they're trying to weaken Americans (literally make them sick and die) so Russia or China can just walk in and make us fascist and give them a good place in the new hierarchy. Doesn't hurt that most of American's act like whiny brats and children who just learned the word No, and they do not like it.