5 ms·

Off course China has been a global superpower for at least 4~5 years now, doesn't mean the US isn't a global super power anymore. The US is still the biggest su

Off course China has been a global superpower for at least 4~5 years now, doesn't mean the US isn't a global super power anymore. The US is still the biggest super power in culture and science. But its not relative big enough anymore in military compared to say Russia and China's size that it can dictate the world what will and what wont happen.

NicoJuicy 2y ago
Perhaps China, but Russia is entirely dependent on them. Russia isn't the USSR anymore for a long time, where it's GDP was the same as the US.
- jajko 2y ago
  GDPs were never the same, soviet union had between 1/3 to 2/3 of US one. It waged absolutely destructive WWII on its land compared to US, and that had massive consequences in economy and demographics for decades. Only their richness in natural resources kept them above, although it became typical undeveloped country resource curse over time with dictators taking all power and terrorizing population, a tradition well preserved to this day.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    Having to fight the Germans on their own land wasn't the only thing that had massive negative consequences: their own actions after the war (such as Stalin's purges) probably had bigger consequences.
    - rightbyte 2y ago
      Wasn't the purges before the war mostly?
      - keiferski 2y ago
        Yes, and this had an effect on the war itself.
_joel 2y ago
Russia are definitely not the military super power the west thought they were. Ukraine's "3 day long" special military operation that's now 800+ days of brutal war has shown that. The tatics they use consist of human meat waves, hardly scalable to a world context.
- baybal2 2y ago
  [dead]
- greenavocado 2y ago
  Media outlets like the New York Post, Business Insider, and CNN, along with experts, consistently describe Russian advances using terms like "meatwave" and "human wave" tactics. Despite the prevalence of combat footage, there is a noticeable lack of video evidence showing these so-called "meatwave" assaults. The term "human wave attack" has been used historically, particularly during the Korean War and Iran-Iraq War, often as propaganda rather than accurate military descriptions. Russian tactics, including their use of mechanized units and night assaults, do not fit the traditional definition of human wave attacks, which involve unprotected, concentrated infantry assaults. The term "human wave" is more of a propaganda tool to depict the enemy as unsophisticated and inferior. Footage and descriptions of Ukrainian forces using similar tactics are not labeled as "human waves," indicating a bias in reporting. The term "human wave attack" is misapplied to Russian tactics in Ukraine, serving more as a derogatory label than an accurate military term.
  - _joel 2y ago
    They are inferior. No training, no ammunition, no morale, drafting in mercinaries or violent criminals with even less experience or preparation. The only reason there have been advances have been down to this attrition. Do you know how many were russians were lost in taking Avdiivka? All for Putin to have something to celebrate on the run up to his sham election.
    - greenavocado 2y ago
      "...there have been advances..." Despite the group's supposed severe deficiencies, they have still made advances. This implies some level of effectiveness or success, which contradicts the earlier claim of their complete inadequacy. Attrition usually leads to depletion and loss, not advances. Claiming that advances have been due to attrition is contradictory because attrition implies weakening rather than successful forward movement. Recruiting individuals who are described as having even less experience and preparation than an already inferior force would logically not lead to any improvement in capability or effectiveness. The claim that they have contributed to advances contradicts the assessment of their capabilities. It is not clear how an inferior and ill-prepared force would cause significant attrition to a presumably stronger adversary.

NicoJuicy 2y ago

Perhaps China, but Russia is entirely dependent on them. Russia isn't the USSR anymore for a long time, where it's GDP was the same as the US.

jajko 2y ago
GDPs were never the same, soviet union had between 1/3 to 2/3 of US one. It waged absolutely destructive WWII on its land compared to US, and that had massive consequences in economy and demographics for decades. Only their richness in natural resources kept them above, although it became typical undeveloped country resource curse over time with dictators taking all power and terrorizing population, a tradition well preserved to this day.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  Having to fight the Germans on their own land wasn't the only thing that had massive negative consequences: their own actions after the war (such as Stalin's purges) probably had bigger consequences.
  - rightbyte 2y ago
    Wasn't the purges before the war mostly?
    - keiferski 2y ago
      Yes, and this had an effect on the war itself.

_joel 2y ago

Russia are definitely not the military super power the west thought they were. Ukraine's "3 day long" special military operation that's now 800+ days of brutal war has shown that. The tatics they use consist of human meat waves, hardly scalable to a world context.

baybal2 2y ago
[dead]
greenavocado 2y ago
Media outlets like the New York Post, Business Insider, and CNN, along with experts, consistently describe Russian advances using terms like "meatwave" and "human wave" tactics. Despite the prevalence of combat footage, there is a noticeable lack of video evidence showing these so-called "meatwave" assaults. The term "human wave attack" has been used historically, particularly during the Korean War and Iran-Iraq War, often as propaganda rather than accurate military descriptions. Russian tactics, including their use of mechanized units and night assaults, do not fit the traditional definition of human wave attacks, which involve unprotected, concentrated infantry assaults. The term "human wave" is more of a propaganda tool to depict the enemy as unsophisticated and inferior. Footage and descriptions of Ukrainian forces using similar tactics are not labeled as "human waves," indicating a bias in reporting. The term "human wave attack" is misapplied to Russian tactics in Ukraine, serving more as a derogatory label than an accurate military term.
- _joel 2y ago
  They are inferior. No training, no ammunition, no morale, drafting in mercinaries or violent criminals with even less experience or preparation. The only reason there have been advances have been down to this attrition. Do you know how many were russians were lost in taking Avdiivka? All for Putin to have something to celebrate on the run up to his sham election.
  - greenavocado 2y ago
    "...there have been advances..." Despite the group's supposed severe deficiencies, they have still made advances. This implies some level of effectiveness or success, which contradicts the earlier claim of their complete inadequacy. Attrition usually leads to depletion and loss, not advances. Claiming that advances have been due to attrition is contradictory because attrition implies weakening rather than successful forward movement. Recruiting individuals who are described as having even less experience and preparation than an already inferior force would logically not lead to any improvement in capability or effectiveness. The claim that they have contributed to advances contradicts the assessment of their capabilities. It is not clear how an inferior and ill-prepared force would cause significant attrition to a presumably stronger adversary.