Which they are entitled to — but effectively their alternative here would be retaliating against half the world. Which in a non-military way is effectively what the world wants, as it will hurt Russia just a bit more than everyone else on their own. And if they wage war on half the world, good luck to them.
That's half the world? Asia alone is almost entirely either anti or apathetic towards NATO and Western sanctimonious BS, and that's 60% of the world's population.
Baffling you'd assume Africans, who unilaterally despise American and Western colonialism and primarily align with China, would also be on your side.
The fact Americans continue to assume this some great battle between Good vs. Evil is absurd. Russia is fighting for what America took from them - and winning.
NATO invaded multiple Middle Eastern countries for nearly 2 decades for oil. Americans thinking they're the good guys in any way is a joke.
> Asia alone is almost entirely either anti or apathetic towards NATO and Western sanctimonious BS, and that's 60% of the world's population.
There's more to Asia than China, Russia, and North Korea. Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan are not "apathetic toward NATO and Western sanctimonious BS". If they were, they wouldn't allow US military installations in their sovereign territory. Taiwan and South Korea count on "NATO and Western sanctimonious BS" to continue existing (well, South Korea might theoretically be able to defeat North Korea on its own if it were a one-on-one conflict, but in reality it's mostly about US support).
> Russia is fighting for what America took from them - and winning.
America didn't "take" Ukraine from Russia. No Americans were seated at the Belovezh Accords: the Soviets decided to break up themselves. Ukraine has the right as a sovereign nation to make its own decisions.
> NATO invaded multiple Middle Eastern countries for nearly 2 decades for oil.
No, it wasn't for oil, and no, it wasn't "NATO" that invaded Iraq--it was called the "coalition of the willing" specifically to distinguish it from NATO. The Iraq War was a bad idea, but not because NATO wanted oil.
> Baffling you'd assume Africans, who unilaterally despise American and Western colonialism and primarily align with China, would also be on your side.
Yes, but this doesn't mean that they'd therefore side with Russia attempting to reinstate a colonialist empire. That really, really doesn't make sense (and indeed, everything coming from Africa has been condemnation of Russia's invasion).
And keep in mind that China seems to not really be a fan of Russia's aggression here, while they really dislike NATO, they seem to be signaling that they didn't expect an invasion of the scale that happened, and would have preferred less. I mean China is participating, to a limited extent, in sanctions against Russia.
Leaving aside how likely it is that Russia will be #6 at this rate (not particularly likely), the US, Germany, and the UK are all undeniably part of the West. Brazil and Japan are allies of the US [1]. The US has friendly relations with India, Indonesia, and Mexico. So this claim seems untrue.
These numbers are PPP. With PPP, you already have China in number 1. PPP is very incorrect in comparing raw output. In my opinion, we are going to learn (the hard way) in the next few years that GDP is utter crap when comparing countries' power.
By GDP, a populous country can have a very large GDP because it has too many people doing too much around. But all they can be doing is making coffee and painting roofs. They have no technology and no important military installations. These countries cannot negotiate well, especially if they are tourism-driven (ie: Indonesia) and thus are very vulnerable to sanctions.
The only country that seems it can break off is China. All other countries will remain dependent on the West. Even more so when their economies grow larger. They are highly dependent and vulnerable.
1. Russia's economic growth has mirrored Germany, UK and has surpassed Brazil for nearly 2 decades despite a constant barrage of sanctions. But sure, Russia is the one who will flop
2. Brazil and Japan being allies do not make them Western states, much less NATO states. Saudi Arabia is technically an ally as well. India, our "ally", isn't denouncing Russia and has extreme anti-liberal Hindu nationalist political forces running the country.
You think Brazil will go to war against China supporting the US? That's delusional.
3. Even according to this particular report, the US is the only Western/NATO country in the top 9
The fact you think this comment somehow disputed me is a joke. Western Europe/America's dominance over the last several hundred years has come to an end. The balance of power in the world has shifted back to the East. People on this comment thread are like Brits in the 30s - not the slightest clue the world they grew up in doesn't exist anymore.
Americans aren't ready for a world which China (and subsequently, it's allies, like Russia, Iran, etc.) dominates.
In any event, this is a case of moving the goalposts. The claim that the US is predicted to be the only Western state in the top 10 economies is still untrue. Here's another list, with Germany, France, and the UK all projected to be in the top 10 in 2050: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-global-economic-fore... Tellingly, this one sees Russia drop out of the top 10 entirely.
And even if it did, SWIFT access is in large part a quick way to impose a lot of sanctions. It essentially limits imports/exports which could be done in other ways (and have been, E.g. Nordstream 2) but which would take a lot of time to do effectively.
But from the point of veiw of the russian leadership they have less to loose now.
That said i think we should cut them off and give all the aid to Ukrain we can, the west is doing it a disservice after they voluntarily gave up their nuclear weapons on the condition that we protect them.
> But from the point of veiw of the russian leadership they have less to loose now.
They are paying a hefty price with every single day this situation goes on. The goal is to reach the point of "too painful to continue" as quickly as possible.
Russia doesn't have the resources for it. Their soldiers in Ukraine have resorted to dressing as civilians to scrounge up food and trying to steal fuel for their tank from Ukrainian gas stations.
Their soldiers aren't even properly trained, experienced soldiers: they're just 18-19-year-old conscripts fresh out of basic training. There are videos of Russian soldiers breaking down and crying in the middle of the street when Ukrainians make it clear they're not wanted here. There are reports that Russia had to resort to beatings and even deception to even get them to go to Ukraine; supposedly a few of them were put on a plane and told they were going to a training field for mock battle.
I don't expect Russia to be able to be able to sustain a war on a second front against countries with even larger militaries and economies.
> Their soldiers in Ukraine have resorted to dressing as civilians to scrounge up food and trying to steal fuel for their tank from Ukrainian gas stations.
Hahaha this is the most out of touch thing I read since the start of the war.
It can consider whatever it wants, but it's not exactly in a position to wage a second one.
It seems that the outcome of this week is a full reprise of the Cold War, with the first and second world economies operating in a largely disjoint manner. The USSR didn't have access to SWIFT either, so it sounds like it'll have to suck it up.
Russia is not self-sufficient. They require Germany, Finland, and China to keep sending them resources. It is a matter of time before they are simply incapable of continuing the war. Simply from a resource depletion point of view.
Unfortunately, this desperation will not open up diplomacy, it will likely be at the cost of the people. They are not in a situation to take on such a large military force if they attack EU or NATO.
The point of these damaging sanctions is to not need war ever again in the future. If Russia, a nuclear power, cannot take Ukraine and cannot weather the sanctions toward success. It will tell the entire world that war is not needed anymore. That is a thing of the past for humanity.
But were routed so quickly? The probability that normal Ukrainian troops could do this is quite low.
The probability that many other countries have their special forces operating in Ukraine is 100%. Obviously nobody will admit to this. The Russians probably don't realize this and is suffering these massive casualties because of it.
The speculation is that the CIA has stealth drones that are hitting key Russian targets at night. There is also incredible intel filtering down to Ukrainian command and control. Ukrainian special forces now behind enemy lines are likely doing severe damage to supply lines, guided with excellent instructions.
Supposed video of one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM1PlldjfHs
The CIA dronestrikes sounds made-up, but a US combat surveillance aircraft had its transponder on and was publicly announcing its flight path as it patrolled south of Crimea.
Not stealing any credit - this should embolden the Ukrainians, if they are indeed getting this level of support from the USA. As I wrote, speculation as this stuff would be top secret. Don't you think we have stealth (to radar) drones if we have F-22s and F-35s?
I was wondering about this. The US said they won't be sending troops to the Ukraine, which I believe. But the technological gap between Russia and the West is now large. Look at the phones behind Putin here: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-says-ukraine-attack... He is is trying to project am image of strength, yet us sitting in front of technology so old your average western teenager would struggle to recognise it.
What I don't know is if the technology matters in a war. But it does seem possible. The US has been fighting a proxy war with various Islamic militia for over a decade now, with the US "combatants" sitting in the USA piloting drones taking out one target after another. And it looks like after a decade they were largely successful. So perhaps technology does matter. A similar thing happened to Russia in Afghanistan. They were holding their own until the west put SAM's in the hands of an rebels. Then Russia did the same thing to the US.
If it is happening, I'm not sure we or Putin would know. These smart weapons are launched from km's away so no one knows who pulled the trigger, and Ukraine would have some anyway. Earlier it was looking like the Western leaders wouldn't have the collective will do to it, but the financial markets have shown otherwise. Maybe that dilly dallying they put on was just for show, as it isn't in the Western leaders interests for Putin to think they are attacking him directly. But I'm guessing the nuclear threat means Putin already suspects.
If technology does make a big difference, it's likely to be a blind spot for entire Russian military. They are so far behind technology wise they have no experience with it. It would likely be as much of a surprise to them as it is to me, and they would have reported the odds of winning as though it didn't exist.
Youtube has a (more or less reliable depending on the cases) automatic translation. Turn on subtitles/close captions, then use the subtitles settings to auto-translate it.
likely but it's an open secret at this point that nato is non-reciprocally sharing intel with ukraine, this is completely unprecendted. look at intelligence aircraft signalling their presence on ads-b, including forte11/12 drones in the black sea - ukrainians are getting data from them, no other explanation for their effectiveness - they seem to be aware of every move of russian forces, every inbound airstrike, etc.
>likely but it's an open secret at this point that nato is non-reciprocally sharing intel with ukraine, this is completely unprecendted. look at intelligence aircraft signalling their presence on ads-b, including forte11/12 drones in the black sea - ukrainians are getting data from them, no other explanation for their effectiveness - they seem to be aware of every move of russian forces, every inbound airstrike, etc.
Oh for sure. so many awacs and global hawks in the air. This 'ghost of kyiv' ace without question had downlink or at least specific real time intel to know exactly how to put himself on their 6.
Ironically, the russian media denies the ghost of kyiv exists. says the footage is all DCS. Frankly it's impossible given so many different points of view. The best argument they can really say is that its more than 1 pilot. But the first reality of nato intel is far more plausible.
Nope. Just the kit has become easier and easier to use.
As a 12 year old I was quite surprised I could handle a MILAN missile simulator and just hit almost all slow moving targets. The instructor was less surprised.
I can only imagine the current software has gotten so good that most monkey could down most Tupolevs...
I don’t find the level of resistance to be unusual. Ukraine have been at war since 2014, many people know how to fight and ready to fight. They have good reason to fight as well. On top of that they have good equipment provided by USA/NATO. They are opposing an enemy making frontal attacks with tanks, with little support from the air and who does not use precise weapons. This is exactly the target that Ukrainian army can hit really hard.
What is much more fascinating is how weak Russia is. I long suspected that corrupt state like Russia cannot produce modern weapons at scale. Instead it produces a few items and tons and tons of propaganda. Ukraine has outdated aircrafts, Russia on paper has last gen aircrafts. Yet Russia didn’t get air superiority, the likely reason it simply does not have enough precise missiles to destroy Ukraine air defense and does not have enough modern aircrafts either.
I would not be surprised to find out that today’s Russia tactics is the same as it was in Afghanistan almost 40 years ago. It is severely outdated but Russia has no other choice because it cannot produce modern weapons.
> Additionally, there's some very unusual resistance to Russian troops.
One or the reasons the Blitzkrieg worked so well for Nazi Germany was because many of their soldiers were experienced combat veterans from the international brigades during the Civil war in Spain.
Ukrainian soldiers have been in active combat since 2014, and they are fighting to defend their own country.
That being said, I don’t think any of us really have much of a clue as to what is going on, I just hope the best for Ukraine.
[0]: https://russiabusinesstoday.com/economy/russia-would-conside...