Latest Ukraine/Russia Thread

[zazen]

Ukraine's drone operation seems more of a stunt than a strategy. It a high risk gamble because it wasn't simply that military aircraft were taken out but strategic aircraft which make up Russia's nuclear triad - to establish nuclear deterrence with great rival powers such as the US. That puts Russia at existential risk - because if your deterrence breaks down it leaves you open for a pre-emptive strike. The US would rather not have another rival power with nuclear than have one to contend with - especially as they team up with China to tilt the balance of power.

These bombers aren't meant to be used or operational, they simply exist as visible deterrence - with some flights taken here and there. Similar to how US naval ships and aircraft  patrol the skies and seas - not to be used but to maintain deterrence. 

Ukraine may view this as a tactical win or morale boost, but its playing chicken with a nuclear power. Maybe their strategy is to invite a disproportionate response which would drag the West in - which is no strategy at all if it results in WW3. Russia hasn't even gone into full war mode as yet, they haven't used their most lethal missiles or established air dominance with round the clock air strikes.

[zazen]

News from today:

 

[zazen]

On 01/03/2025 at 11:26 AM, zazen said:

It’s not just a money issue though bro. We can’t buy an industrial base or print one. There’s not enough production capacity to turn that money into tangible weapons at scale, in a short enough timeframe, to win the current war - whatever winning even means.

Re-industrialization won’t happen fast enough to change the outcome of this war - it’s only about future proofing the West for the next war, with whoever and wherever it is.

Hitler was defeated by an industrial juggernaut. The US isn’t that today. It’s a financialized empire, designed not for attritional warfare but for power projection and short term shock and awe campaigns using expensive, high tech weapons against weaker nations. Even then, it still can’t neutralize the Houthis in the Red Sea.

Attrition is about quantity - mass production of expendable weapons for trench warfare. The West isn’t built for that. The military-industrial complex prioritizes high tech, high profit qualitative weapon sales, not mass production of cheap, effective war materials. To change that means the state controlling capital, rather than the other way around - in other words, not being a corporatocracy. That means flipping the political dynamic the West currently exists in.

The real issue is profit maximization vs. state directed production. Corporations will resist any shift that takes power away from the market and redirects it toward less profitable but more strategic war production.

A financialized neoliberal economy will struggle to make this pivot because it would mean sacrificing their god: capital. The West will need a political revolution before it can even have an industrial one - the kind needed to win.

The question isn’t just whether the West can rebuild its industrial base fast enough, but whether it can even structurally pivot to an existence where it’s possible in the first place. And even then, would there be the political and public will to sustain it.

Even the Wests high tech weapons are being neutralized. Russias air defenses counter NATO missiles and stealth aircraft. Their hypersonics - the West has no defence against, as Iran demonstrated in Israel. The Houthis are proving that asymmetric warfare can disrupt trillion-dollar military investments.

Russia is outproducing the entire West in artillery, shells, and tanks. Ukraines manpower is collapsing. The West has no public buy in to shift to a full scale war economy. Americans want out. They want America First, cheaper goods, and a better life, not another endless war. Europes multi-ethnic population isn’t going to mobilize for their former colonial masters. Theres no mass movement of people willing to fight and die for Ukraine.

TDLR

The West doesn’t just lack an industrial base but lacks the system to create one.

Its military industrial complex isn’t designed for attrition but for profit.

It would need a political revolution before it could have an industrial one.

Even if it could rebuild, there’s no public will to sustain it.

 

 

 

On 28/02/2025 at 10:52 PM, zazen said:

Imagine that energy reserved for Netenyahu.

 

All of a sudden security concerns matter, but they didn’t when Russia warned way back when, for NATO not to inch up to its doorstep. Zelenskyy wants the kind of security guarantees that set this war in motion in the first place. He’s effectively asking for article 5/NATO level privileges, without being part of NATO.

This is the US realising the Wests position in this and doing its best to repackage the situation as a win. Trying to maintain an image of strength on the world stage as it loses its status. The US will be a superpower, but it can no longer be a supreme one reigning supreme upon the globe.

The reality is:

- Russia produces 3 million shells annually, x3 more than US/Europe combined.

- They are on par in number of tanks with NATO (including US) except that half of NATO’s tanks are in the US and the rest are scattered far away from Ukraine in other EU countries. Russia is also refurbishing and churning out 1’500 tanks annually now.

- They’ve taken 20% of Ukraine, most of the ethnically Russian speaking regions which they can now sit tight on and have much easier holding power vs going further into Ukraine where they’d continuously face insurgencies and native Ukraine resistance (rightly so).

- They’ve achieved enough territorial depth to secure the Russian heartland and core (Moscow). 

- They don’t need to do anything except wait it out in a war of attrition from here on out. The West simply doesn’t have the industrial capacity or cheap energy to play the long game. Even EU hikes in defence spending aren’t going to change the result of this war. Re-industrialisation takes years, if at all possible. Any such thinking that their should be no negotiating with Putin and we should fight fight fight, is delusion.

- In a war of attrition, you need things to attrit. The lack of things to attrit is the result of neoliberal policies that prioritized financial gains over industrial strength, hollowing out the middle class while enriching the elites. Financialization transformed economies into casinos, where betting on asset bubbles and speculation became more profitable than producing real goods, building factories, or maintaining self-sufficiency.

- The defence spending hikes will only be for future proofing the continent. And it won’t do so conventionally ie cheap labour and fossil fuels. It can’t outproduce Russia / China, it needs to out-innovate.

- Breakthroughs in green tech / nuclear to get cheap energy + breakthroughs in automation / AI robotics to replace high labor costs for industrialisation + raw material access from Latin America / Africa where China / Russia already secured supplies from or just have breakthrough in material sciences.

The issue as you can see is that the West is getting behind, if not already is behind in some critical areas. Even in ships China has a x200 greater building capacity than the US. AI, drones, hypersonics - ditto. China isn’t even competing with the US, just itself at this point.

 

Like I said earlier - you can’t print industrial capacity.

This is why WW3 fears are overblown. This is also why the US just shit bombed a mountain in Iran and claimed victory - to maintain an image of primacy in a world their actually losing their position of primacy in.

Hegseth even acknowledged in an interview that the US lost against China in simulated war games. The US empire may be arrogant but it isn’t suicidal.

They definitely don’t want to find out what China’s capable of first hand:

“China’s development of a fractional orbital bombardment system (FOBS) paired with a hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) represents a major leap in military capability, as it allows a missile to be launched into low Earth orbit, travel partially around the globe, and then release a maneuverable warhead that reenters the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds—making it nearly impossible for current U.S. missile defense systems to detect, track, or intercept. This means China could theoretically strike any point on Earth from any direction, including over the South Pole, bypassing America’s northern-focused early warning systems. The system’s unpredictability, global reach, and speed mark a significant challenge to U.S. strategic deterrence, signaling that China may be ahead in certain advanced weapons technologies. It’s developments like this that likely fuel proposals such as Trump’s rumored “Golden Dome”—an ambitious, costly plan to create a next-generation missile defense shield to protect the entire U.S. from threats like this.”

Edited July 2 by zazen

[_Archangel_]

I  don't know if this was posted before, but nevertheless: Intresting interpretation of Putin's motives, touching Hegelian Filosophy, consumerism, war economy and more. This guy is blowing up recently due to his analysis of the Iran - USA/Israel conflict.

 

Edited July 2 by _Archangel_

[PurpleTree]

22 hours ago, _Archangel_ said:

I  don't know if this was posted before, but nevertheless: Intresting interpretation of Putin's motives, touching Hegelian Filosophy, consumerism, war economy and more. This guy is blowing up recently due to his analysis of the Iran - USA/Israel conflict.

 

It’s not bad. I‘ve listened to worse stuff.

[BlueOak]

I don't know. My gut says all countries will test Russia's control if they feel suppressed, and that Russia is weak enough now, but war seems a misstep from Azerbaijan that I do not believe they would make. 

Though the analysis that both Israel and Turkey would support them for different geopolitical reasons makes me consider it. Further as Iran considers them more of a threat these days, and they too are allied with Russia.

Finally, the geographic trade centralisation, like Turkey, gives it more power and prominence either way.

Edited July 7 by BlueOak

[PurpleTree]

4 hours ago, BlueOak said:

I don't know. My gut says all countries will test Russia's control if they feel suppressed, and that Russia is weak enough now, but war seems a misstep from Azerbaijan that I do not believe they would make. 

Though the analysis that both Israel and Turkey would support them for different geopolitical reasons makes me consider it. Further as Iran considers them more of a threat these days, and they too are allied with Russia.

Finally, the geographic trade centralisation, like Turkey, gives it more power and prominence either way.

 

[BlueOak]

@PurpleTree
Interesting, its touching on cutting finances too, or financial and military aid.  He's already accepted losses of influence in the Caucasus, but I think Putin's ego won't allow territory to be lost, so he'd give up Ukrainian pushes or even gains to stop losses elsewhere; that's my calculation. He's an imperialist, or at least that's what his hardcore supporters have been led to believe and support; loss of territory would be like losing an arm.

Finally, Putin has to break one of his lies about Russia's economy being strong. Ignore the hyperbolic headline of 47 days, its talking about him admitting part of his financial situation, which has been true for several years, nobodies economy grows in wartime, beyond things like the war industry, which is spending money out of the economy in things like missiles, not putting it back in. (or selling it to someone else).

 

I do agree with your video that Chinese influence is replacing Russia. That's been true inside Russian industries too. As I said at the start, Putin's regional Russian Empire is being replaced by China's actual superpower status, and this has been accelerated. No matter the public outward look, that's what's going on practically.

Edited July 8 by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

It all reminds me of Brexit. The older generation of Russia messing with Russia's legacy, just like happened in England, its this resurgent extreme oldschool nationalism in a modern world. And in part, I still blame the misguided need for masculinity to be expressed outwardly instead of being based on internal order and discipline. A generational lack of fathering. People must 'reclaim' their identity from the world, rather than just build it up internally. 

Down with Europe
Down with the US
Down with China
Down with Russia

etc etc etc.

Just like the men that need to reclaim something from women, or focus on them to get it back, complete waste of their time.

Edited July 8 by BlueOak

[Wilhelm44]

 

[PurpleTree]

Trump starting WW3 to distract from Epstein?

 

 

 

jk

[BlueOak]

Brewing conflict with Russia and Azerbaijan.