5 ms·
Weakness Is Lethal: Why Putin Invaded Ukraine and How the War Must End
- yieldcrv 3y agoOnce we get semiconductor fabs stateside we dont have to bother with Ukraine-Russia, Israel-Palestine-neighbors, or China-China The same way 180+ other countries approach the situation People really think the US supports their causes and they got another thing coming with that assumption.
- notTooFarGone 3y agoAh so let's let Russia do its thing? Worst take I have seen, literally ever. Letting our allies to starve is a sure way to get invaded at some point
- appplication 3y agoAmerica is at no risk of being invaded. However, should it let its allies go unaided, it will loose its footholds in Europe and Asia from which it projects its power (militarily, culturally, economically, etc). Geopolitics is not so simple as to be zero sum, but when it comes to Russian and US interests, it may as well be.
- sam_goody 3y agoWas 9/11 a "invasion"? Iran has turned "Death to the Americans and Israelis" into a motto. If we stop projecting power, they will certainly attack again. Which may not justify Ukraine, but exiting world politics will just turn us into a target.
- yieldcrv 3y ago[flagged]
- yieldcrv 3y agoIran didn't attack us, so who is "they" we're a target because of our recent approaches of the last 70 years. there are other approaches that other superpowers have taken that have been even more beneficial for them and don't turn them into a target from anyone, or an amorphous "they" nobody is after "our way of life" as some of our leaders famously said, and if they are they already live in the US "death to America" is a reaction to American intervention, it isn't arbitrarily created because of our ... alliances or predominant religion or musings or freedoms or anything else. the same for 9/11 which can easily be seen as a double crossing by someone the US courted who became disillusioned with America. America's "national security" approach is its biggest threat to national security.
- pvaldes 3y ago> America is at no risk of being invaded ... the Capitol events suggest a different history
- dmitrygr 3y ago> a sure way to get invaded Tell me you do not understand logistics without saying you do not understand logistics. America cannot be invaded other than by mexico or canada. Do you have any idea what kind of effort it would take to support cross-ocean supply chains for a modern army? A modern army would run out of fuel in two days without constant resupply. And out of food in three.
- type0 3y agoMAGA chanting populists would argue that US is already being invaded by illegal immigrants. There's enough hostility between political groups in US to start a civil conflict if it can be fueled by money from a couple of state actors.
- yieldcrv 3y agothat perspective relies on being completely unaware of the conflicts that we don't get involved in at all (along with every other country) first step is awareness, the second step is looking at the difference and the only difference is if they're a well paying client for our defense contractors the entire rationale of getting into a conflict just so an adversary there doesn't feel emboldened, or a completely different adversary elsewhere doesn't feel emboldened, is completely undermined by all the conflicts of allies that we don't get involved in geopolitically this rationale disintegrates when a disruption in semiconductor production aren't the biggest threat to the US supply chain what people need to understand that US support isn't about their cause. People seem to have misinterpreted that and are surprised by the reactions of the US people when they expected affirmation of their cause.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lm28469 3y agoYou might want to open an history book or two if you think the US intervene in foreign countries for semiconductors
- yieldcrv 3y agocurrent support for US interventions is about not emboldening China to invade China and that's bolstered by reliance on semiconductors in the latter China. we'll find other rationale easily, our defense contractors and their warhawk friends will find other rationale. but right now, thats the resource we want to protect and it'll be clear when that has no legs to stand on.
- cellis 3y agoI disagree. Isolationism won’t work and we care about a A LOT more than just fans or even petrochemical region stability. We need to continue to “sue” (at the nation state level that means: maintain a military posture and cultural presence in the aforementioned regions) for freedom of trade in order to continue exporting our culture. The more our culture is exported the better off Americans tend to be.
- svilen_dobrev 3y ago> in order to continue exporting our culture. The more our culture is exported the better off Americans tend to be. ah. *deleted*
- vfclists 3y agoAmericans who want to support Ukrainians in the war should fund it out their pockets than for the government to do it.
- sorokod 3y agoThe US government considers supporting Ukraine as beneficial to US, why shouldn't they fund it?
- cheese_van 3y agoEisenhower noted in his account, Crusade in Europe, that (paraphrasing from memory) that "Few really understand the relationship between America's safety and prosperity and events far away in Europe." Is this something that has been forgotten?
- abletonlive 3y agoso would one get to opt out of funding social security and all of the other social services that the government spend money on too?
- mensetmanusman 3y agoWe elect the government to use the tax money wisely. Many find that, per dollar, nothing has been more effective in decades in strengthening nato allies, weakening a totalitarian state that routinely assassinates outside its borders, and stress testing a military supply chain.
- hirvi74 3y agoI'd be more than glad to send them tanks and other munitions if I had any.
- bsder 3y agoThe US spending money to fund Ukraine has got to be close to the best defense investment ever. The US got a direct proxy war that appears to be breaking Russia and didn't spend the life of a single US soldier. It collapsed Wagner which was a threat to all manner of developing nations. It fixed NATO unity practically overnight. And China got a glimpse of what would happen if they invaded Taiwan and probably set back the plans of Comrade Pooh by a decade or more. By contrast, the US blew how much in Afghanistan and got not a damn thing?
- hackandthink 3y ago"How the War Must End" This is wishful thinking. Talk is cheap and maybe well paid for Nataliya Bugayova, Kateryna Stepanenko, and Frederick W. Kagan. Dying is for the plebs.
- postsantum 3y agoDid you forget to switch accounts? Otherwise why are you critically commenting on an off-topic article you've posted yourself?
- credit_guy 3y agoGood catch. Most likely the OP remembered to hack, but forgot to think.
- hackandthink 3y agoThe article makes a clear argument and the points can be discussed. I think John Mearsheimer's analysis is more accurate overall, but there are certainly blind spots there too. And they are not mutually exclusive. Russia is imperial and Russia feels threatened. Fortunately, I'm only following this from afar, but it's not nice to watch the disaster take its course. I found Mearsheimer's gloomy forecast from 2015 convincing. I don't know the neocon milieu personally, but I really question their moral integrity. Always propagating escalations and wars that you lose afterwards.OK, if you get paid for it.