Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lord Shonus]

And countries that don't get overrun when war does get to their doorstep.
The Netherlands was neutral in WWI, and expected Hitler to respect their neutrality as well.
We were overrun and conquered in 3 days.

You missed an "I" - you're referring to WWII, not WWI. On a per capita basis, the Netherlands suffered more than any other Western European country occupied by the Germans - over 200,000 dead, almost 2.5% of the population.

In 19144, the country was an independent neutral that was left alone due to a strong military for their size and a willingness to fight. In 1940, with an extremely anemic and outdated military, the Netherlands were a road. There is a reason that si vis pacem, para bellum has been a persistent saying for over fifteen centuries at this point.

[martinuzz]

I didn't miss an I. The Netherlands was neutral in WWI and expected Hitler to respect their neutrality as well (in WWII)

[Lord Shonus]

Oh, I misread you as saying "we were neutral and still got conquered".

[Strongpoint]

I'm not exactly thrilled that this conflict requires a military buildup. Countries that do that generally find reasons to war.

WW3 (WW4 if you count the cold war as a world war) has already arrived. Radical part of the Muslim world + Russia are waging a war against "the West" and they won't stop unless stopped. China will also look for an opportunity to get stronger but unlike former two, they have no ideological dreams of destroying "the West". Their goals are pragmatic - solidifiying their power and profiting.

[wobbly]

Saying China doesn't have an ideological dream here I suspect is wrong, they definitely have a history with the old English empire dating back to the Opium wars, and a nationalistic agenda to restore the Chinese empire back to its former glory.

China took Tibet by force, pushes at its land border with India and pushes at its maritime borders in the South China Sea. It's not just sitting there.

China has a navy and a bunch of naval bases sitting on other countries naval territory it clearly has an ideology based on being an old fashion expanding empire.

[Strongpoint]

Yes. China wants to grab some of "their" land. They want to take control over Southeast Asian governments. They want higher status in the world. They want to colonize Africa. But they don't want to destroy the evil West.

[wobbly]

I happen to live in SE Asia whether it's an Asian country or not. (could not give a flying fuck, really)  Whatever their "reasons" I am completely not reassured. Having a super power in your backyard is never good. Just ask South America, or your own region.

Edit: never going to happen, but drop your own ideological BS and look at the situation through clean lenses.

[Il Palazzo]

(Excluding Trump ending US aid) Not really? Russia is taking ground, but the war effort is unsustainable on their end.
Not only is their economy overheating, but they are using far more materiel then they produce.

I'm reluctant to voice this, since painting the situation as a lost cause is what Russian bots like to do. But then I see these opposite world sentiments, and I'm popping a vein.
The past year and a half or so has been the West wallowing in complacency over their half-arsed help, convinced that Russia is going to implode, for realz, any time now - as exemplified in the quoted bit - while Ukraine is actually bleeding out. If you don't see this reflected on the battlefield, then I don't know what battlefield you're looking at. The Russians keep up their relentless pressure in all directions, and it's the defenders who are struggling to replace losses - let alone build new capacity.

The best hope I have right now is for Trump to throw a temper tantrum over something Putin says, and make the US go all in as soon as he gets the actual reins.

[Great Order]

I'm not exactly thrilled that this conflict requires a military buildup. Countries that do that generally find reasons to war.

WW3 (WW4 if you count the cold war as a world war) has already arrived. Radical part of the Muslim world + Russia are waging a war against "the West" and they won't stop unless stopped. China will also look for an opportunity to get stronger but unlike former two, they have no ideological dreams of destroying "the West". Their goals are pragmatic - solidifiying their power and profiting.

More, I think, solidifying their power and increasing it, but they seem more determined to do so via soft power than hard power, at least outside of the local area. If you're a local nation then all you need to do is look at the South China sea to see what they think about you and your position.

They also seem to hold the mentality that the concept of a Westphalian nation-state means they're allowed to intervene in your nation, you aren't allowed to intervene back. See them setting up police forces in other nations without their knowledge or consent, and the repeated violations of EEZs.

[anewaname]

Ultimately, Trump's "erratic behavior" is a social drama by a bully attempting to inspire fear for the purpose of gaining hierarchical dominance or profit. There is no case of Trump acting "erratically" for another purpose.

Trump is not going to war with anyone if he gets his payoff.

[Loud Whispers]

Ultimately, Trump's "erratic behavior" is a social drama by a bully attempting to inspire fear for the purpose of gaining hierarchical dominance or profit. There is no case of Trump acting "erratically" for another purpose.

Trump is not going to war with anyone if he gets his payoff.

There are three other occasions where he acts erratically

-Someone or something is putting pressure on him (you can see this even before he went into politics with his bankruptcy or divorce proceedings making him act erratic. There is a whole saga of him trying to keep this big rich gambler gambling at his casino instead of going home with his winnings because of the financial consequences)
-He's reacting to an insult (real or perceived). Both before and after his political career you can see Trump is someone who takes personal slights to an extreme - there was one golfer who was down on his stats, Trump let use his courses for free. The guy practices and ends up rising back up and becoming a winner again. Trump asks him to wear a Trump branded t-shirt next time he played, and the golfer tells Trump he'll run it by his agent first. Not even a no - just a "I'll run it by my agent first." That was enough for Trump to ban him from all of his course. You can see it today with Trump tightening the screws on people like Elon Musk or British ministers for little reason other than they offended him
-He senses an opportunity for gain by making a huge spectacle. The last 3 RNC leadership contest, his near assassination, his court trials, post Jan 6th, really going all the way back to his TV career as a "strong business guy / wrestling guy" has been all about doing things as brazenly and large as possible, like a big American cheeseburger. He knows how to exploit the American news media entertainment cycle for free content

[Duuvian]

I am no expert, but one thing to remember is that there has been a strong push towards hawkism on China in the US after the War on Terror began to be rolled up. I as an individual when trying to see it from the other direction do not agree with military pressure vs Taiwan, as I see it as a continuation, in my inexpertise, of the harmful effect on foreign policy that arose not least from Hong Kong. However I also realize that the US is slipping into a more confrontational stance and that it's leadership appears to be pushing the outside enemy strategy while beefing up (and leaving without effective oversight it would seem on many days of news article reading) it's internal security. I wonder if it would have been possible to have had a friendlier China without being seen as appeasement here, and if it may have been found today with closer collaboration with the West about Putin's War. As to ways to avoid a (re)armament race, t's unlikely disarmament treaties would be considered seriously as manufacturing interests are dominant influences in the ascendant party as well as the controlling factions of the ejected party. Moreover, this is not a good time for such discussions as world tension is quite high. In addition, the ejected party has not been very diplomatic. An example would be Pelosi's visit. As to whether a reset could happen under Trump: I think it obviously seems unlikely at this time but I think it depends, since it may be that it is in the interest of both in some ways.

One that has been interesting has been Myanmar...

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/23/asia/myanmar-rohingya-arson-buthidaung-intl-hnk/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/02/asia/myanmar-lashio-junta-resistance-intl-hnk/index.html

I thought I had saved more links but they must be in one of my many other bookmark folders.

It doesn't make the news often, and ISW doesn't cover it often so there isn't a solid source that I know of about it.

On a related matter, I noted that there was an information operation in the news at the Rohingya fleeing as well. I'm not saying it was towards them where I was reading, but instead made the journey seem really dangerous. It also was around the times that one militay intelligence group that trips on it's own feet wasn't temporarily banned from internet, though obviously I'm not accusing them because that's wild speculation. Here is the most extreme one I saw:

https://apnews.com/article/rohingya-migration-boat-refugees-indonesia-bangladesh-myanmar-1d2ad5595a5240ea4d2c35e26ddf9394

Later:

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/many-dozens-rohingya-including-children-killed-drone-attack-while-fleeing-2024-08-10/

[martinuzz]

I do wonder how China feels about NK entering a defensive alliance with Russia.

[MonkeyHead]

I do wonder how China feels about NK entering a defensive alliance with Russia.

I doubt very much NK was allowed to do anything without China giving permission.

[Loud Whispers]

I am no expert, but one thing to remember is that there has been a strong push towards hawkism on China in the US after the War on Terror began to be rolled up. I as an individual when trying to see it from the other direction do not agree with military pressure vs Taiwan, as I see it as a continuation, in my inexpertise, of the harmful effect on foreign policy that arose not least from Hong Kong. However I also realize that the US is slipping into a more confrontational stance and that it's leadership appears to be pushing the outside enemy strategy while beefing up (and leaving without effective oversight it would seem on many days of news article reading) it's internal security. I wonder if it would have been possible to have had a friendlier China without being seen as appeasement here, and if it may have been found today with closer collaboration with the West about Putin's War. As to ways to avoid a (re)armament race, t's unlikely disarmament treaties would be considered seriously as manufacturing interests are dominant influences in the ascendant party as well as the controlling factions of the ejected party. Moreover, this is not a good time for such discussions as world tension is quite high. In addition, the ejected party has not been very diplomatic. An example would be Pelosi's visit. As to whether a reset could happen under Trump: I think it obviously seems unlikely at this time but I think it depends, since it may be that it is in the interest of both in some ways.

Yeah and the American pivot to the pacific publicly started under Obama but had been slowly happening even before then. The thing that was probably the most puzzling to me, and really everyone in the last 2 decades, was the US Navy monitoring China turning the South China Sea coral reefs into air bases and each successive President just... Letting them

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/many-dozens-rohingya-including-children-killed-drone-attack-while-fleeing-2024-08-10/

Bloody hell. I wonder why it's so hard to verify whether the army or militia did the killings... Do both sides really have attack drones?

I do wonder how China feels about NK entering a defensive alliance with Russia.

Western analysts suggest it ruffles Xi's feathers but not enough to warrant doing anything yet