4 ms·

The BS that I don't buy from the pacifists... "we spend 10x Russia!!" But yeah, Russia has a nuke deterrent and could use that to force a land war in Europe at

The BS that I don't buy from the pacifists... "we spend 10x Russia!!" But yeah, Russia has a nuke deterrent and could use that to force a land war in Europe at the same time that China launches an attack on Taiwan and North Korea launches an attack on South Korea and Iran attacks Saudi Arabia. How could the US military respond effectively to all of those at once? Each of those countries wants to carve out their sphere of influence. Once a short term victory is in the pocket for each of them, there is diplomatic negotiations to end fighting and then the new facts on the ground materialize and now 1/2+ the world is under autocrats again.

crocodiletears 6y ago
Europe could be… Europe's responsibility. South Korea is plenty rich and advanced enough to field a modern military, and outclass its neighbor. Beyond TSMC, why is Taiwan's defense America's responsibility? I'm fine with having a big military budget, but 'because how else is the US supposed to shovel its children on top multiple grenades simultanaeously for the good of every other developed nation' is a poor sales job.
- randomopining 6y ago
  I agree Europe and SK can field their own stuff. But if the US abdicates its role, China and Russia are going to carve out their own spheres and soon you’ll feel the effects of having to do business (or none at all) with autocratic states controlled by them.
CyanBird 6y ago
What a poor quality comment > How could the US military respond effectively to all of those at once? 1st, why does it have to be able to "respond" anywhere in the world, this is not a capability any other nation has, all nations armies are inherently defensive 2nd, Russia has a Gdp lower than Italy with an ever decreasing military age population. They are not the Red Army and jingoistic toybox wanna be Internet Generals ought stop concern trolling they are 3rd, Spheres of influence are the natural state of Geopolitics, tell me, why is the unipolar hegemonic power policing bilateral relations between overseas sovereign nation states? What legitimacy does it invoke to do this? Other than "might makes right" which International Relations has thanks to rationalism been moving away of for the last 300 years
- randomopining 6y ago
  1. Demonstrably false. All of those nations I listed have huge offensive capabilities as well as plans. 2. Russia’s military is much better equipped than Italy’s, so pure GDP numbers probably don’t matter 100%. 3. US generally enforces international law, and the world has never risen to this level of stability in the past few hundred years. Almost all parties have benefitted. China hugely. You’re just assuming that this stability can exist in a world of autocratic ethnostates that have no hard rules imposed? Your comment is clearly naive and unread.

crocodiletears 6y ago

Europe could be… Europe's responsibility. South Korea is plenty rich and advanced enough to field a modern military, and outclass its neighbor. Beyond TSMC, why is Taiwan's defense America's responsibility? I'm fine with having a big military budget, but 'because how else is the US supposed to shovel its children on top multiple grenades simultanaeously for the good of every other developed nation' is a poor sales job.

randomopining 6y ago
I agree Europe and SK can field their own stuff. But if the US abdicates its role, China and Russia are going to carve out their own spheres and soon you’ll feel the effects of having to do business (or none at all) with autocratic states controlled by them.

CyanBird 6y ago

What a poor quality comment > How could the US military respond effectively to all of those at once? 1st, why does it have to be able to "respond" anywhere in the world, this is not a capability any other nation has, all nations armies are inherently defensive 2nd, Russia has a Gdp lower than Italy with an ever decreasing military age population. They are not the Red Army and jingoistic toybox wanna be Internet Generals ought stop concern trolling they are 3rd, Spheres of influence are the natural state of Geopolitics, tell me, why is the unipolar hegemonic power policing bilateral relations between overseas sovereign nation states? What legitimacy does it invoke to do this? Other than "might makes right" which International Relations has thanks to rationalism been moving away of for the last 300 years

randomopining 6y ago
1. Demonstrably false. All of those nations I listed have huge offensive capabilities as well as plans. 2. Russia’s military is much better equipped than Italy’s, so pure GDP numbers probably don’t matter 100%. 3. US generally enforces international law, and the world has never risen to this level of stability in the past few hundred years. Almost all parties have benefitted. China hugely. You’re just assuming that this stability can exist in a world of autocratic ethnostates that have no hard rules imposed? Your comment is clearly naive and unread.