(May 17, 2022 at 10:12 am)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(May 17, 2022 at 9:45 am)Angrboda Wrote: Antarctica!

Bit chilly.

But it makes a great UFO base.

(May 21, 2022 at 5:58 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: How significant is Russia’s invasion? It has made the Swiss - the Swiss - re-visit their policy of neutrality. Not to the extent of joining NATO, but they’re considering working more closely with the alliance, even to the extent of backfilling munitions sent to Ukraine by NATO members.

That Switzerland is even considering this is an indication of how badly Putin read the room.

Boru

This is definitely the biggest blunder of his career. It's mystifying how someone raised on spycraft should have such poor insight.

Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, predicted Thursday that Russian President Vladimir Putin will no longer be the leader of his country by 2023 due to health issues.

https://www.newsweek.com/putin-will-gone...ef-1708926

(May 21, 2022 at 10:04 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(May 21, 2022 at 5:58 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: How significant is Russia’s invasion? It has made the Swiss - the Swiss - re-visit their policy of neutrality. Not to the extent of joining NATO, but they’re considering working more closely with the alliance, even to the extent of backfilling munitions sent to Ukraine by NATO members.

That Switzerland is even considering this is an indication of how badly Putin read the room.

Boru

This is definitely the biggest blunder of his career. It's mystifying how someone raised on spycraft should have such poor insight.

I don’t really think so.  the only question regarding his judgement is whether there was a better way or opportunity for russia to attempt to reestablish hegemony over ukraine.   The fact that establishing this hegemony is of far greater and more durable import to russia than what the west can do to Russia short of nuclear war is beyond doubt.    Even if russia is defeated in ukraine, the long term consequences to russia, say in 25+ years, be no worse than if russia didn’t try, and if russia succeeds in making ukraine non-viable as state able to chose its own alignment, then russia would be in immeasurably stronger position in 25 years, all the blow back from the effort not withstanding.

So if Russia can succeed in making ukraine economically demographically non-viable as a state with ability to chose its own economic and geopolitical alignment, then finland and sweden joining NATO is a trivial price to pay.   if russia fails, then in 25 years russia will be a marginal player more or less irrelevant to europe and it would makes no difference to russia whether Sweden or Finland is part of NATO or not.

That is without considering the fact that given shift in centers of economic abs geopolitical gravity in Eurasia to the Asia Pacific, the transient euphoria of short term unity not withstanding, NATO remains an anachronism and will likely fade into irrelevance anyway in 25 years.

‘If’.

Boru

(May 23, 2022 at 11:15 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: I don’t really think so.  If Russia can succeed in making ukraine economically demographically non-viable as a state with ability to chose its own economic and geopolitical alignment, then finland and sweden joining NATO is a trivial price to pay.

Big "if" there.

ETA: You're going to need more than one edit to repair this flawed hypothesis.

(May 23, 2022 at 11:15 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Making Ukraine beholden to Russia is foundational to Russia’s status as a great Euroasia power.  taking the long view, say 100 years, of durable foundations of Russia’s position in the world, keeping sway over ukraine is hugely more important to Russia than the blow back in the form of sanctions and temporary diplomatic alienation from a west that is beholden to a hegemon whose priority had been on dismantling the foundations of russia geopolitical power.

lol, you've got to try to look 100 years into the future to find a way to rescue this idiotic decision.

As for America wanting to "dismantle" the foundations of Russia, well, that's bullshit, but you keep telling yourself otherwise.

(May 23, 2022 at 11:15 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: given rapid changes in world alignment and shifting balance between centers of economic and military power, short term euphoria not withstanding,  NATO is a anachronism.  In 10-15 years it will recede into irrelevance as major powers makes adjustments to new reality that center of contest is shifting to the pacific, and the real economic and political self interests of classic NATO members is sharply different from those of new eastern european additions to NATO.  so if Russia gets hold of Ukrainian black sea coast, Russian influence over ukraine will almost certainly be far more durable than the coalition momentarily assembled in reflexive fury over its hull in making the effort.

Putin needs to survive this growing disaster first. Sezing the Black Sea coast would certainly be a disaster for Ukraine, but Russia looks like it's got its hands full in the Donets Basin.

Russia's star has been on the wane for a couple of decades now, and this is Putin raging against history. Problem is, he picked a porcupine to kick, and as a result the damage to his country is largely self-inflicted ... and will certainly be long-lasting, your overly optimistic hopes aside.

As for NATO's irrelevance, your boy Putin's idiocy has given it another 20-30 years of relevance. What a fool.

(May 23, 2022 at 11:58 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ‘If’.

Boru

yes, IF.   


the key, however, is even if NOT, russia would not really pay a heavier long term geopolitical price than she would pay if she didn’t try in the first place.

So when seen in the long run, measured against the goal of securing long term foundation of russia’s position as a central euroasia power, Putin’s gamble is a natural one.

The expression of geopolitical amateurism lies in the failure to see russia was being backed into a position where this gamble becomes natural.

(May 23, 2022 at 12:01 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(May 23, 2022 at 11:15 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: I don’t really think so.  If Russia can succeed in making ukraine economically demographically non-viable as a state with ability to chose its own economic and geopolitical alignment, then finland and sweden joining NATO is a trivial price to pay.

Big "if" there.

ETA: You're going to need more than one edit to repair this flawed hypothesis.

(May 23, 2022 at 11:15 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Making Ukraine beholden to Russia is foundational to Russia’s status as a great Euroasia power.  taking the long view, say 100 years, of durable foundations of Russia’s position in the world, keeping sway over ukraine is hugely more important to Russia than the blow back in the form of sanctions and temporary diplomatic alienation from a west that is beholden to a hegemon whose priority had been on dismantling the foundations of russia geopolitical power.

lol, you've got to try to look 100 years into the future to find a way to rescue this idiotic decision.

fuck off..

(May 23, 2022 at 12:07 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: fuck off..

Probably the most thoughtful thing you've written in a week or two.

You're letting your emotions guide your judgement.

(May 23, 2022 at 12:23 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(May 23, 2022 at 12:07 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: fuck off..

Probably the most thoughtful thing you've written in a week or two.

You're letting your emotions guide your judgement.

I have something even less emotional and more coolly thoughtful still for you:

Go fuck yourself.