Again in realist terms, its more that they (for understandable realist reasons) care far more about the outcome than we do. Which is precisely why we must relearn matching our overly expansive rhetoric (which ends up making us look weak and stupid) to our actual interests. As Teddy Roosevelt would have it, 'speak softly and carry a big stick,' and not the reverse
Hi Simon, of course; yes, once you see things in general from a realist lens: a) the world makes a lot more sense b) you immediately see how red pilled we are by the Wilsonian blob about so many things (October 7 and Ukraine being great examples). Glad to have helped! Great, hope to see you at the election party! Onwards and all best, John
Yes, from what I've heard I'm inclined toe live it is entirely likely. As you say Simon, it doesn't really matter if they are on the front line or not. The point is the Russia has staying power, and Ukraine's allies are fitful at best
Jokes aside, with Harris in the White House, Putin gets "4 more years" to crush Ukraine. Putin's interest is not in Kiev (ungovernable by anyone), but in access to the Black Sea with an open door for exports to the Middle East, Africa and beyond, Asia. Trump may call the party sooner, and that might freeze the current front, a more favourable outcome.
Baltics is no different ultimately. A domain the size of Germany, with about 5 million people and dropping precipitously (even including the Russian speaking nationals in Estonia and elsewhere in that) - Germany is over 80 million for the same square miles. Only economic interest for the Baltics is to serve as logistics and industrial base for Russian capital and companies just at the backdoor (add White Russia with 10 million people, sharing the same interest). No amount of € subsidising can put economic viability into the Baltics, Russia is its future. The map that von der Leyen, Rutte, Biden and Putin look at it today, is the same map Roosevelt, Hitler and Stalin looked at then. I don't believe that the NATO/EU cover will ultimately work (although it will suppress an outright "hot" war thank god).
Hi John - just to say that I have become a full realist on Ukraine the last few weeks or so, so a quick thanks from me for getting me there (it's the same feeling I had after becoming politically red-pilled post October 7th last year - once one flips one can't believe they ever thought otherwise!).
My analysis considered the stalemate position further, asking "is the west prepared to bet WW3 or a nuclear exchange that it can *definitely* beat Putin"?
And if the answer is no - which it should be for all the reasons you gave (adding in Russia's famed ability to suffer - what a depressing character trait that is - and Putin's total dominance of the media and the all the ability to propagandise that that entails) then shut it down.
Will try to tune in tomorrow night for the election - god help us all if the utterly inane Harris wins - but if not, then good luck with the election party!
I don't believe a word of the "North Koreans" in Ukraine. It is a western propaganda story.
North Koreans, not speaking Russian and not being thoroughly trained in Russian weaponry and operational tactics, are of no use to Putin on the Ukrainian front.
See the problems with the independent "Wagner" cabal which did its own thing on the front, without coordinating with the regular Russian Army.
It is probably just a pseudo-justification for putting more NATO "observers" on Ukrainain territory.
They can serve a purpose somewhere, if not on the front line, and there's always translators around.
And I'm not sure why it would be a western propaganda line - surely it's another Putin signal that Russia won't be beaten?
It's got $'s, it's got troops (it's own and now potentially foreign ones) and it's got nukes - so good luck trying to knock him out with all that in tow.
Again in realist terms, its more that they (for understandable realist reasons) care far more about the outcome than we do. Which is precisely why we must relearn matching our overly expansive rhetoric (which ends up making us look weak and stupid) to our actual interests. As Teddy Roosevelt would have it, 'speak softly and carry a big stick,' and not the reverse
Hi Simon, of course; yes, once you see things in general from a realist lens: a) the world makes a lot more sense b) you immediately see how red pilled we are by the Wilsonian blob about so many things (October 7 and Ukraine being great examples). Glad to have helped! Great, hope to see you at the election party! Onwards and all best, John
Yes, from what I've heard I'm inclined toe live it is entirely likely. As you say Simon, it doesn't really matter if they are on the front line or not. The point is the Russia has staying power, and Ukraine's allies are fitful at best
Indeed ... the west has surely met its match on this one.
"We'll call it a draw": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmInkxbvlCs
Jokes aside, with Harris in the White House, Putin gets "4 more years" to crush Ukraine. Putin's interest is not in Kiev (ungovernable by anyone), but in access to the Black Sea with an open door for exports to the Middle East, Africa and beyond, Asia. Trump may call the party sooner, and that might freeze the current front, a more favourable outcome.
Baltics is no different ultimately. A domain the size of Germany, with about 5 million people and dropping precipitously (even including the Russian speaking nationals in Estonia and elsewhere in that) - Germany is over 80 million for the same square miles. Only economic interest for the Baltics is to serve as logistics and industrial base for Russian capital and companies just at the backdoor (add White Russia with 10 million people, sharing the same interest). No amount of € subsidising can put economic viability into the Baltics, Russia is its future. The map that von der Leyen, Rutte, Biden and Putin look at it today, is the same map Roosevelt, Hitler and Stalin looked at then. I don't believe that the NATO/EU cover will ultimately work (although it will suppress an outright "hot" war thank god).
Hi John - just to say that I have become a full realist on Ukraine the last few weeks or so, so a quick thanks from me for getting me there (it's the same feeling I had after becoming politically red-pilled post October 7th last year - once one flips one can't believe they ever thought otherwise!).
My analysis considered the stalemate position further, asking "is the west prepared to bet WW3 or a nuclear exchange that it can *definitely* beat Putin"?
And if the answer is no - which it should be for all the reasons you gave (adding in Russia's famed ability to suffer - what a depressing character trait that is - and Putin's total dominance of the media and the all the ability to propagandise that that entails) then shut it down.
Will try to tune in tomorrow night for the election - god help us all if the utterly inane Harris wins - but if not, then good luck with the election party!
I don't believe a word of the "North Koreans" in Ukraine. It is a western propaganda story.
North Koreans, not speaking Russian and not being thoroughly trained in Russian weaponry and operational tactics, are of no use to Putin on the Ukrainian front.
See the problems with the independent "Wagner" cabal which did its own thing on the front, without coordinating with the regular Russian Army.
It is probably just a pseudo-justification for putting more NATO "observers" on Ukrainain territory.
They can serve a purpose somewhere, if not on the front line, and there's always translators around.
And I'm not sure why it would be a western propaganda line - surely it's another Putin signal that Russia won't be beaten?
It's got $'s, it's got troops (it's own and now potentially foreign ones) and it's got nukes - so good luck trying to knock him out with all that in tow.