47 ms·

>The strategy of economic integration as a way to reduce military tension has worked very well in many other instances. It mostly worked within in the EU becau

>The strategy of economic integration as a way to reduce military tension has worked very well in many other instances. It mostly worked within in the EU because you needed meaningfully adopt certain standards to join the market. Russia didn't have to do any of that and by the time more people started to understand the problem developing they already had leverage.

treflop 3y ago
Russia is a gigantic country with vast resources that isn’t bordered by Europe, and more than once it was a superpower and it was a superpower against another gigantic country. On the other hand, Europe consists of small countries trying to fit in with their neighbors. It’s like thinking the scooter kids are gonna be hanging with the skater kids. It’s not that they are inherently that different, but they have such different mindsets that it means they see their positions in the world differently.
- ivan_gammel 3y ago
  >Russia is a gigantic country with vast resources that isn’t bordered by Europe Maybe you should look at the map before writing such nonsense. 1. Russia does have borders both with EU and NATO. Norway, Finland, Baltic states, Poland. 2. Russia is geographically in Europe too. Most of its population and the capital are in Europe. Among European countries it does have the largest territory, population and nuclear arsenal, but it is not even the biggest economy. Ex-superpower is not a now-superpower. Mindset-wise it has a lot in common with other EU members.
  - treflop 3y ago
    Obviously Russia borders Europe. How do you do a land invasion of Europe without bordering Europe? But Russia isn’t Germany whose borders are completely dominated by Europe. Putin obviously thinks Russia should still be a superpower. People get that mentality when they see the past and think they deserve it again. Holy shit people love the “glory days.” There are conflicts that have been going on for millennia like in the Middle East and they fight today because their ancestors fought. People have a hard on for the past. You’ll teach someone command line Git starting out and they love it and they will never bother with a GUI because they value their experience more than practicality.
    - tim333 3y ago
      Russia is a still a superpower in many ways, certainly in nukes. It's a shame though they feel the need to grab territory which seems a bit nineteenth century. I put it down to Putin reading too many old history books instead of Pinker and Gladwell. The US manages to be a superpower without feeling the need to invade Canada because they have a similar culture and try to have democracy there rather than being ruled from Washington.
      - lenkite 3y ago
        The US just carries out its wars overseas - not on its next-door neighbors. Whenever the stock price of the Big-3 War Companies drop, the senators and congressmen are encouraged to find an excuse for bombings.
        benterix 3y ago
        This is what Putin is always trying to convince the world about, but when you look closer, it is no longer true - but it was once. Now the USA is not only not starting any wars, but is also getting out of old conflicts, such as Iraq and Afghanistan. They realized these were stupid wars, in the case of Iraq started on false premises, impossible to win, even without a feasible strategy for wining and a definition of victory. These two wars should have never happened and most people in the West were against them. It is mostly Bush and Blair to blame for them and for their consequences, including the atrocities of ISIS. Apart for these, which Bush considered a retaliation for 9/11, the USA is very careful not to start any conflicts and not to get involved - see Syria for example.
        JackeJR 3y ago
        For the case of Syria, it is damned if you do and damned if you don't. Red lines were crossed (chemical weapons) and it was only when ISIS emerged that there were boots on the ground.
        mikrotikker 3y ago
  - Sammi 3y ago
    You misread that sentence.
ethanbond 3y ago
The EU is at least as much a consequence of economic integration as it is a driver of it. The Marshall Plan wasn't just handshake deals to play nicely from now on.
roenxi 3y ago
It mostly worked because in recent history the Germans were an occupied state [0] followed up by a very polite situation that wasn't an occupation but looked a lot like one by the numbers [1]. The US has a number of troops in Germany comparable to the German army. Note from the article that up to 2006 the US had more troops in Germany than the Germans did. Economic integration wasn't what kept the peace, it was probably the military integration. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-occupied_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-occupied_Germany [1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-military-presence-around-the-world-interactive https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-mili...
- baybal2 3y ago
  [dead]

treflop 3y ago

Russia is a gigantic country with vast resources that isn’t bordered by Europe, and more than once it was a superpower and it was a superpower against another gigantic country. On the other hand, Europe consists of small countries trying to fit in with their neighbors. It’s like thinking the scooter kids are gonna be hanging with the skater kids. It’s not that they are inherently that different, but they have such different mindsets that it means they see their positions in the world differently.

ivan_gammel 3y ago
>Russia is a gigantic country with vast resources that isn’t bordered by Europe Maybe you should look at the map before writing such nonsense. 1. Russia does have borders both with EU and NATO. Norway, Finland, Baltic states, Poland. 2. Russia is geographically in Europe too. Most of its population and the capital are in Europe. Among European countries it does have the largest territory, population and nuclear arsenal, but it is not even the biggest economy. Ex-superpower is not a now-superpower. Mindset-wise it has a lot in common with other EU members.
- treflop 3y ago
  Obviously Russia borders Europe. How do you do a land invasion of Europe without bordering Europe? But Russia isn’t Germany whose borders are completely dominated by Europe. Putin obviously thinks Russia should still be a superpower. People get that mentality when they see the past and think they deserve it again. Holy shit people love the “glory days.” There are conflicts that have been going on for millennia like in the Middle East and they fight today because their ancestors fought. People have a hard on for the past. You’ll teach someone command line Git starting out and they love it and they will never bother with a GUI because they value their experience more than practicality.
  - tim333 3y ago
    Russia is a still a superpower in many ways, certainly in nukes. It's a shame though they feel the need to grab territory which seems a bit nineteenth century. I put it down to Putin reading too many old history books instead of Pinker and Gladwell. The US manages to be a superpower without feeling the need to invade Canada because they have a similar culture and try to have democracy there rather than being ruled from Washington.
    - lenkite 3y ago
      The US just carries out its wars overseas - not on its next-door neighbors. Whenever the stock price of the Big-3 War Companies drop, the senators and congressmen are encouraged to find an excuse for bombings.
      - benterix 3y ago
        This is what Putin is always trying to convince the world about, but when you look closer, it is no longer true - but it was once. Now the USA is not only not starting any wars, but is also getting out of old conflicts, such as Iraq and Afghanistan. They realized these were stupid wars, in the case of Iraq started on false premises, impossible to win, even without a feasible strategy for wining and a definition of victory. These two wars should have never happened and most people in the West were against them. It is mostly Bush and Blair to blame for them and for their consequences, including the atrocities of ISIS. Apart for these, which Bush considered a retaliation for 9/11, the USA is very careful not to start any conflicts and not to get involved - see Syria for example.
        JackeJR 3y ago
        For the case of Syria, it is damned if you do and damned if you don't. Red lines were crossed (chemical weapons) and it was only when ISIS emerged that there were boots on the ground.
        mikrotikker 3y ago
- Sammi 3y ago
  You misread that sentence.

ethanbond 3y ago

The EU is at least as much a consequence of economic integration as it is a driver of it. The Marshall Plan wasn't just handshake deals to play nicely from now on.

roenxi 3y ago

It mostly worked because in recent history the Germans were an occupied state [0] followed up by a very polite situation that wasn't an occupation but looked a lot like one by the numbers [1]. The US has a number of troops in Germany comparable to the German army. Note from the article that up to 2006 the US had more troops in Germany than the Germans did. Economic integration wasn't what kept the peace, it was probably the military integration. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-occupied_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-occupied_Germany [1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-military-presence-around-the-world-interactive https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-mili...

baybal2 3y ago
[dead]