3 ms·
Because the US is no longer the dominant economic force, nor the dominant military force (perhaps larger but spread too thin). We watched the USSR waste itself
by lowbloodsugar 5y ago
Because the US is no longer the dominant economic force, nor the dominant military force (perhaps larger but spread too thin).
We watched the USSR waste itself in Afghanistan, and then the US did the same thing. And just as public opinion was the lowest on the war, after a botched exit, Putin attacks Europe.
The US should not have been in Afghanistan or Iraq, but oil companies said yes. It should be on the ground in Ukraine, but it can't because it is spent.
On the subject of military power, Arther C Clarke's Superiority [1] is a great short story. "It shows the side which is more technologically advanced being defeated, despite its apparent superiority, because of its willingness to discard old technology without having fully perfected the new. Meanwhile, the enemy steadily built up a far larger arsenal of weapons that while more primitive were also more reliable." Ironically, the "advanced" technology isn't advanced anymore: the weapons are out of date. But they still manage to be expensive.
The US knows this, and they can do nothing. All the screaming and howling in the media is just propaganda. They have already agreed to cede Ukraine.
Putin already won the war electronically. The US is hopelessly divided. The nation that once put a man on the moon, that dominated science, now has radicalized citizens call in bomb threats to hospitals because they wont treat a patient with ivermectin. 50% of the population believe that the election was rigged. No surprise that Trump supports Putin. The US can't agree on whether covid is real, how can it keep promises it made to Ukraine?
The US is a failed power. It is like the UK after it lost its empire: delusional.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superiority_(short_story) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superiority_(short_story)
- pettusftw 5y ago> It should be on the ground in Ukraine, but it can't because it is spent. Should it? That's not a foregone conclusion. Your justification for why it "can't" is also quite debatable. > Meanwhile, the enemy steadily built up a far larger arsenal of weapons that while more primitive were also more reliable." Ironically, the "advanced" technology isn't advanced anymore: the weapons are out of date. How so, can you expand on justification for this line of thinking? > 50% of the population believe that the election was rigged. Not true, but I agree with your overall idea about the extreme levels of division. > how can it keep promises it made to Ukraine? What promises? If you're referencing denuclearization in the Budapest Memorandum, my understanding that it was not an assurance of protection from third parties, only an assurance of non-aggression from each signatory. Meaning the US made no guarantee to protect Ukraine from Russia if Russia broke the pact, which they have. Do you have any reason for disagreeing with that assessment?