• SirDerpy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The US can by practical means drive Russia out of whatever Ukrainian territory they wish, anytime they wish, and covertly if they wish.

    The US goal isn’t to win quickly. They’ll drag out the war to drain the resources of the enemy. It’s Afghanistan again, except:

    1. power disparity is greater and more transparent
    2. backlash similar to Afghanistan is likely avoided with NATO membership
    • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      As long as it hurts russia, I’m in. But I’d also rather not have so many of our people dead, soldiers or civilians

      • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Inadequate.

        Military-Industrial Complex

        The US allocates a lot of money to defense. The spending boosts the economy. Capitalism requires increase in consumption to support mandate of economic growth. The weapons must be consumed such that more can be produced.

        A proxy war allows the consumption of weapons without the publicly-objectionable consumption of American lives. A proxy war can be artificially extended for an economic boost.

        Afghanistan

        However, the people of the nation fighting with US weapons will eventually figure out the scam. They’ll get really fucking righteously angry and have no viable means to communicate. They send a message by running airplanes into skyscrapers. So, we consume more weapons.

        Ukraine

        The US will avoid the consequences of a proxy war by recruiting the victims into NATO.

        Winners

        The only people winning are the stockholders of US defense corporations.

        • NoiseColor @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s only partly true. Its half of what America wants, but you completely ignore that there are other actors and factors in the situation.

          No matter how much weapons Ukraine gets, it’s still better for them to get a few than none.

          • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            That’s only partly true. Its half of what America wants, but you completely ignore that there are other actors and factors in the situation.

            If I provide a synopsis you’ll simply expand the scope once again. Good faith would’ve been listing those factors and why they’re important.

            No matter how much weapons Ukraine gets, it’s still better for them to get a few than none.

            I provided reason for my position. You’ve a thesis statement.

            • NoiseColor @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I hoped I don’t need to list other actors and factors as they are pretty obvious.

              You provided reason? Lol. What are you, a comic book character? Relax. You wrote down a classic America-centric far leftist opinion that has been around for 30+ years. Nothing worth repeating.