Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

I agree with Mearsheimer that's there's no evidence that Russia wanted to reconstitute the USSR. It didn't work out well the first time. The US and Western diplomatic corps have been much less effective than the military in changing the world into a liberal paradise. They're at least a big part of all the trouble we're in and cannot be absolved of blame. Hating Russia is a relic of the Cold War and the inability to properly pivot for the new Cold War has led us into giving our manufacturing and just everything else to build our future enemy.
You'd think that being at such a height of technology and social progress would help us rebuild quickly. Unfortunately there won't be a benevolent power leftover who escapes unscathed and I agree with Navigator, the realm of man will descend into chaos and anarchy the likes of which have been seen every time a civilization reaches a great height and gets overextended. A rapid rebuild would take a generation and during that time we'd need excellent conditions of cooperation and collective self sacrifice. Many bemoan these as lost traits. We shouldn't overlook the fact that a total war will result in fighting "dirty" and there's many ways that it could eliminate vast swaths of population quickly other than nukes, which will be used at the beginning for military purposes simply because they're the best and sometimes only effective choice.

Clarkmod wrote: Sun Jun 30, 2024 12:40 pm Moderation and forum administration issues can be posted in this thread that John created:
https://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 092#p72092
That way the GD World View News thread can continue on with the more recent news related discussion uninterrupted.

Some posts having to do with the above have been moved to the Moderately Speaking thread.

FullMoon wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2024 11:49 am I agree with Mearsheimer that's there's no evidence that Russia wanted to reconstitute the USSR. It didn't work out well the first time. The US and Western diplomatic corps have been much less effective than the military in changing the world into a liberal paradise. They're at least a big part of all the trouble we're in and cannot be absolved of blame. Hating Russia is a relic of the Cold War and the inability to properly pivot for the new Cold War has led us into giving our manufacturing and just everything else to build our future enemy.
You'd think that being at such a height of technology and social progress would help us rebuild quickly. Unfortunately there won't be a benevolent power leftover who escapes unscathed and I agree with Navigator, the realm of man will descend into chaos and anarchy the likes of which have been seen every time a civilization reaches a great height and gets overextended. A rapid rebuild would take a generation and during that time we'd need excellent conditions of cooperation and collective self sacrifice. Many bemoan these as lost traits. We shouldn't overlook the fact that a total war will result in fighting "dirty" and there's many ways that it could eliminate vast swaths of population quickly other than nukes, which will be used at the beginning for military purposes simply because they're the best and sometimes only effective choice.

I am going off of quotes from Putin and his top cronies. Like Putin saying that "Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century". Russia (Putin) wants roughly the same geographic control the USSR did, and Putin is trying to "reclaim" the lost territory. Putin is a product of the KGB and has effectively put the KGB (now the FSB) in control of Russia. Putin is Russia's dictator, and he should be hated. His actions have shown his true colors. He never left the Cold War, and we need to finally recognize that.

Hatred of Russia is a relic of a bygone era. It's this hatred between China and Japan, a residual hatred that can't be given up, which fuels resentments and perpetual war. I don't hate Putin because he's not actively plotting the destruction of my country and threatening the lives of my family. But I do sometimes feel hatred for the CCP and their dictator because they are doing these very things. We don't even need to speculate about their intentions, it's all out in the open with their words and deeds. I support reducing all entanglements and focusing on the existential threats to our nation and the families that we have to protect.

FullMoon wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2024 11:33 am Hatred of Russia is a relic of a bygone era. It's this hatred between China and Japan, a residual hatred that can't be given up, which fuels resentments and perpetual war. I don't hate Putin because he's not actively plotting the destruction of my country and threatening the lives of my family. But I do sometimes feel hatred for the CCP and their dictator because they are doing these very things. We don't even need to speculate about their intentions, it's all out in the open with their words and deeds. I support reducing all entanglements and focusing on the existential threats to our nation and the families that we have to protect.

It's not about hating Russia. It is about recognizing who are actual enemies are (and will be) in the coming war. Although Russia is significantly weakened from their Cold War position, we are going to end up fighting them along with their allies the Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians and more.

The Chinese are the dominant/controlling power at this point, but they are going to use their vassals (Russia, North Korea) in the upcoming conflict. China is currently calling the shots, and has kept Russia from escalating things, but once China makes their moves, they will allow the Russians to do so.

Putin's on the path he wants to be on, as I've said here and elsewhere many times; he's burned every possible exit ramp behind him. He has no choice but to go forward. Unless he can score a major victory, he's likely to exit his office feet first, so as long as there's a single breath in his body, he'll continue this war. That around 120-150,000 Russians have died with twice as many crippled is of no experience. We lost around 7,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan over 20 years.

Even without the United States, NATO is far stronger than Russia. The issue is that the rest of NATO has shown a remarkable inability to work together without us, neglecting their defense budgets. Whether it's a financial crisis, immigrant crisis, or Ukraine, they've been "everyone for themselves", which has led to substantia resentment in the United States. Trump was particularly obnoxious, but he's not the first President to criticize Europe's lack of defense spending and cohesiveness.

Given the recent results of Europe's elections, Putin has reason to be optimistic. The French National Party has gained steam and Marie Le Pen is someone I'd characterize as pro-Putin; I don't use this term lightly. Germany still hasn't managed much progress rebuilding their armed forces. Italy and Spain have done nothing, and while Poland, Finland, the Baltics, and UK are committed to continuing aid, for many others, it's at least questionable. By 2025-2026, Russia's likely to be fully mobilized and if Europe doesn't prepare, it'll get ugly.

What I'm not as sure about is what Trump will do. His base is a lot more skeptical of aiding Ukraine, but there's no guarantee he'll just cut them off. In 1916, Woodrow Wilson campaigned on keeping the U.S. out of war, but a month after his second term began, declared war on Germany. He's also far more supportive of Israel than Biden, which leads to my next topic.
XXXXXXXXXX
In the Middle East, there's a lot of talk about Israel expanding the offensive into Southern Lebanon. From what I'm reading in the Israeli press, any sympathy the Palestinians might have had is gone. Many of the people Hamas butchered were sympathetic to their plight, giving them job opportunities, aid, and they were repaid with rape, torture, and murder. Worse, people around the world celebrated this, calling it de-colonization. It's clear this is pure anti-semitism, not mere criticism of their policies or Netanyahu. You've had mobs roaming the streets looking for jews to beat up, calling for a global Infitada, even praising Hitler. Since most of this has been from the left, the media says little about it.

I'm old enough to remember September 11th, and even your bleeding-heart liberals were ready to turn Afghanistan into a graveyard. The israelis are witnessing this, and are out for blood. Hezbollah's been relatively restrained, but I'm not sure that's going to matter much. Biden's attempted to restrain them, but certain members of his base want the U.S. to cut all aid, all diplomatic ties, impose sanctions, declare they're committing a genocide. Thing is, we remain mostly supportive of Israel and certainly conservatives are. Trump's blasted Biden for not providing more aid.

I'm not sure if Israel is experiencing a regeneracy movement- I'd like to hear John's imput on this-but it wouldn't surprise me.

At this point, I'm quite certain Trump is going to be our next President. Biden was facing miserable odds, an approval rating in the 30s, even before the debate. Liberal people I know couldn't believe what they witnessed, having been reassured any talk of his mental condition was a Fox News lie. Had he managed to muddle through, the polls likely wouldn't change, but his base could at least claim victory. What we saw... Biden's done.

However, every indication is that he's refusing to stand down and his staff is covering their own asses. If he refuses, the Democrats will have a difficult time forcing him.
XXXXXXXXXX
One way or another, the end result is likely to be the same. The only question is how long the path takes.

In Ukraine Putin's terms remain tantamount to surrender: taking four provinces, possibly more, the complete demilitarization of Ukraine, and excluding them from NATO membership. Even if this somehow happened, everyone cutting them off, and the Ukrainians agreed to this surrender, which I don't expect, it wouldn't matter. Putin would spend the next few years rebuilding his military, then march his troops into a now-disarmed Ukraine.

Worse, this sends a message to China that the West and the United States is weak. A war over Taiwan would be much more brutal, and we wouldn't have the option of being on the sidelines. Neither would South Korea, Japan, probably the Philippines and Vietnam as well.
XXXXXXXXXX
The second scenario is we continue with the status quo. This is what I consider most likely. Russia's paying a massive price for tiny gains, losing 100 tanks a month that can be independently verified. In this scenario, we continue giving aid to Ukraine, preparing our militaries to a minor degree, going between one extreme that Ukraine's doomed and the other that Russia will be fleeing in mere weeks.

Ukraine's done far better than anyone imagined, given most expected it to be a Russian Desert Storm at the beginning. On paper, that's exactly what should have happened. However, Russia is a lot bigger than Ukraine and has far more lives to throw away. They still have enough Russians in poverty willing to take the risk and a couple hundred thousand North Korean soldier that can function as cannon fodder. They're poorly equipped and trained, but not much more so than Russian soldiers, so they can still provide a boost.

They would pay a horrifying price, but slowly, gradually, Russia would grind Ukraine down. It'd be a pyrrhic victory, and since we're talking 2026 or even beyond, you could easily be talking a couple million Russian casualties, including half a million dead. But it would be a victory. Ukraine has its share of men unwilling to serve, fleeing to neighboring countries, and even a total mobilization may not prevent this scenario. Afterward, Putin or whoever succeeds him would be emboldened, and further acts would come, although perhaps not right away.
XXXXXXXXXX
The third scenario is sending NATO troops in Ukraine. They'd start out as advisors, freeing Ukrainians for the front lines, but mission creep means at some point, we'd be facing the Russians in combat. Something similar played out in Korea and Vietnam, but this time, it'd be on the Russian border, not in some backwater.

However, I don't see this playing out unless the front lines collapse, the Russians make a massive breakthrough, Ukrainian soldiers abandoning the battlefield en masse, throwing down their guns, etc. This could indeed propel Europe to start rebuilding their military. In the Second World War, we had no interest in getting involved, but after witnessing France fall in six weeks, attitudes shifted. At least in 2024, however, I don't foresee any imminent collapse.
XXXXXXXXXX
Regardless of which scenario happens, or combination thereof, we've passed the point where this could be contained to a local conflict.

Trevor wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2024 7:43 pm Even without the United States, NATO is far stronger than Russia. The issue is that the rest of NATO has shown a remarkable inability to work together without us, neglecting their defense budgets. Whether it's a financial crisis, immigrant crisis, or Ukraine, they've been "everyone for themselves", which has led to substantia resentment in the United States. Trump was particularly obnoxious, but he's not the first President to criticize Europe's lack of defense spending and cohesiveness.

Given the recent results of Europe's elections, Putin has reason to be optimistic. The French National Party has gained steam and Marie Le Pen is someone I'd characterize as pro-Putin; I don't use this term lightly. Germany still hasn't managed much progress rebuilding their armed forces. Italy and Spain have done nothing, and while Poland, Finland, the Baltics, and UK are committed to continuing aid, for many others, it's at least questionable. By 2025-2026, Russia's likely to be fully mobilized and if Europe doesn't prepare, it'll get ugly.

What I'm not as sure about is what Trump will do. His base is a lot more skeptical of aiding Ukraine, but there's no guarantee he'll just cut them off.

Right now I would agree that NATO is in a relatively good position vs Russia alone.

Here is a good article from the Hudson Institute on the current situation:
https://www.hudson.org/security-allianc ... -kasapoglu

BUT, as you mentioned, the Europeans have a pretty good track record of discord when it comes to collective defense.

In the scenario I think is likely, the following happens:

Economic and Political turmoil in US/Europe cause major internal issues and dissention.

China finally makes a major move on Taiwan - this becomes the US focus.

The invasion of Taiwan doesn't go exactly as China wants it to, and it takes much longer than anticipated.

Meanwhile, China sends reinforcements to Russia to knock out Ukraine. This is to allow Russia to present a credible threat to Europe, hopefully to put additional pressure on US.

The war widens in Asia as China looks to use its available land forces to create additional pressure on the US and its allies. South Korea, Japan, Philippines and Australia are now involved.

At the start of the war, major infrastructure sabotage is conducted against US and Allied countries by large groups now imbedded in those countries. Attacks are against power grid, water supplies, critical transportation bottlenecks (like bridges over major rivers), defense industries, defense installations (primarily airfields as these are the most critical to Western defenses).

Tactical nukes are used at sea, potentially in Ukraine, potentially against major US bases (such as Guam and Okinawa). EMP weapons and anti-satellite weapons are used to greatly mitigate Western defense capabilities.

NATO (even before naked Chinese aggression) has major internal problems – France backs out of the military structure.

As war widens, and Ukraine is out (either due to Chinese intervention and/or Russian use of tac nukes), European NATO fractures – Turkey decides to go after Greece; Hungary and Slovakia align with Russia. Germany, Italy and Spain declare neutrality (as do Netherlands and Belgium), France’s withdraw from military structure has already effectively made them “neutral”.

Russia is now faced with Poland, the Baltics, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and UK, plus whatever US and Canada want to put in (however the North Americans are focused on China).

Turkey and Serbia create a true mess in the Balkans.

Russia takes advantage of former NATO member neutrality and takes on countries one by one in central Europe as it sees fit.

Russia has a new “Ukraine” in Scandinavia, but the Finns/Swedes/Poles are quickly running out of supplies.

The War in Asia continues to widen as Pakistan/China move against India, and China/Cambodia move on Vietnam.

Chinese cronies in Africa and South America also create problems.

Iran moves against Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States.

Asiatic formerly USSR countries align with Russia/China (the -stan countries).

Israel deals with the Hamas/Hezbollah problem and relocates Gazans and West Bank Arabs to Lebanon. Iran/Turkey have other primary objectives in mind and have difficulty with force projection across Syria/Iraq to get at Israeli forces.

Fronts become relatively static as initial gains due to surprise and lack of supplies (for US and Allies) are realized but cannot be further exploited.
Most of the world is now involved in a major multifront war with international trade in shambles.

The war takes years to play out, but eventually the Chinese/Russians succumb to greater internal weaknesses, as starvation and losses result in the ultimate revolt of their citizenry.

The war takes years to play out, but eventually the Chinese/Russians succumb to greater internal weaknesses, as starvation and losses result in the ultimate revolt of their citizenry.

The Chicoms are counting on these factors to cause the US to give up the fight whilst their own population suffers disproportionately. They and the Russians are known for their suffering power and dogged determination. It would be difficult to formulate a good argument about the US having anything similar.
The fall in living standards will be felt much higher. Domestic attrition will be much higher than anticipated. Imagine if they had all of the biological, nuclear and god knows what else during WW1. Because we're going to use up all those nasties just as John has said. Nobody is going to lose without using dirty tricks first. Strangely, people think that it's going to be a "civilized" war. It will be nothing of the sort.
There will be no winners. Losers all around. Pyrrhic victory will be the best anyone can hope for. But after the destruction of life and national ruin, few will be happy with the results.

In the Ukraine, the Russians appear to be making steady, albeit slow progress from the former Ukrainian stronghold of Avdiivka.

Here is a good map showing Russian / Ukrainian front on a daily basis (and you can go back in time to see the changes over time with the map's animation feature).

https://deepstatemap.live/en#11/48.2665123/37.5464630