this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2022
16 points (78.6% liked)
World News
32316 readers
884 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's important to keep in mind that USSR never had a chance to develop peacefully. It got invaded in 1918, then it was plunged into WW2 a couple of decades later, and after that the Cold War. USSR was completely devastated during the war, while US emerged unscathed with a huge booming economy. The combined west had much greater resources, and this allowed the west to drag USSR into an arms race that was a huge drain on its resources.
If USSR could've devoted all the effort that was put into keeping up with the west militarily into domestic development, amazing things could've been achieved.
This isn't about assigning blame, not for me. Yes, they did get a shit deal. Hobbled at first by the sort of royalty/nobility like out of some fucked up fairy tale right until and even into the 20th century, then almost nonstop warfare. For all the lack of fighting, even the cold war was nearly as bad.
Though I am not generally sympathetic to communism, I wince to think what might have happen if they had no developed nuclear weapons. But that cost dearly.
They had a shit hand.
Possibly. Or they could have squandered it. Even if a person accepts that communism and marxism is a legitimate political ideology and in the right circumstances can flourish, it can also fail... and fail without any deliberate sabotage or harsh misfortune.
The funny thought is that, had they succeeded peacefully, that might have been most threatening of all.
Thing is that even with all the external pressures, USSR managed to provide a good standard of living for the the people. Personally, I remember my time growing up in USSR very fondly and I think I had a far better childhood than most kids growing up today. Everybody had housing, food, healthcare and education. Everyone had a job guarantee without any grind and with over 20 days vacation. Nobody worried about losing their job and ending or on the street or not being able to retire in dignity. Life wasn't opulent, but it wasn't bad either, and after 30 years of capitalism it got significantly worse for the vast majority of the population in former USSR republics.
I think that the threat of a good example is precisely why capitalist nations are so hostile to any socialist experiments. Not a single socialist country has ever been allowed to develop free from threat of invasion, coups, or economic warfare.
If they hadn't been saddled with a monster like Stalin. Also, if they'd followed their own path. Rather than trying to force a moon landing, when they lacked the computers to coordinate many small rockets, as SpaceX can do today. Or dropping all their plans to copy the Space Shuttle with Buran, which they didn't even use anyway. The USSR was always too occupied with image over substance and you can see a direct line of that in Putin today.
More ignorant drivel. Your comment regarding Buran is a perfect allegory for your superficital level of understanding of the subject. Your knowledge is skin deep. https://www.buran.su/buranvssts-comparison.php
From Wikipedea: "Buran completed one uncrewed spaceflight in 1988, and was destroyed in the 2002 collapse of its storage hangar."
Reminds me of the fate of the Admiral Kuznetsov. A pattern of neglect.
The program was abandoned because Russia went through hell in the 90s that was engineered by the west. Hateful westerners like you are precisely what gave rise to Putin. Now you get to reap what you sowed. Enjoy.
Well, maybe for once, Russia could not fall for it? Nope, tricked by NATO into humiliation against Ukraine.
I really can't wait to see what you'll have to say in a few months.
War is an economic activity and Russia's war chest is frozen. You won't have to wait that long.
Russia's what is frozen?
Putin was counting on Russia's foreign currency reserves to bankroll the invasion. But surprise, the Canadian Deputy Minister of Finance had been waiting all her life to pull this trigger. Surprise, fuckers.
You realize Russia doesn't rely on foreign currency reserves to fund anything right? Freeland pulled the trigger with the gun pointing at herself. The only fuckers who are surprised so far are western bankers who weren't consulted about this idiocy and the western public whose basic necessities are becoming unaffordable.
The only reason you talk shit here is because you're not personally affected yet, and you don't understand what's coming. We'll see what tune you're singing once the recession hits full force.
You apparently don't realize that Putin admitted those funds were intended to bank roll the invasion through the sanctions. He was clearly surprised at the masterstroke the Canadian Deputy Minister of Finance has been waiting decades to unleash. "Oh no! We're holding all this cash now! Whatever will we do!" Probably force Russia to use them as restitution in Ukraine, now.
You apparently don't realize that Putin never said anything of the sort and that Russia's been preparing their economy for this for years. So far, the "masterstroke" is driving western countries deeper into recession and getting China and India to accelerate dedollarization.
This is going to be the end of the western financial system running the global economy. The only time you can legally freeze assets of a central bank are when UN invokes article 7 or when there is a declaration of war. Neither of these things happened last I checked. Therefore, freezing Russia's central bank is literal robbery in legal terms that completely delegitimizes western financial system. This is precisely why every western financial institution was categorically against this "masterstroke". These financial experts actually understand the implications of what was done. Yet, they weren't even consulted. Instead, they consulted Freeland who is an ideologue like you and completely out of her depth.
Meanwhile, west is still buying energy, commodities, food, and fertilizer from Russia to a tune of over 700 million a day. So, these idiots quickly realized that they can't even meaningfully enforce the sanctions they themselves created.
He'd spent years preparing for the lukewarm sanctions and half-hearted resistance of his first invasion. He clearly did a "uh oh":
https://www.allsides.com/news/2022-03-18-0548/his-invasion-ukraine-bogs-down-putin-admits-western-sanctions-are-killing-his
I find that crying about the legality of freezing the central bank reserves is ironic given it's hampering an illegal invasion. You want to go rogue? Enjoy living outside the community of nations. Meanwhile, the invasion is stalling out for lack of computer chips to resupply guided missiles. But I thought you said, Russia was self-sufficient? It's pure delusion to believe that, in this day and age.
Nobody is crying about the legality of freezing the central bank reserves. What you're being told is that western financial experts think this was a bad idea because they understand that doing so undermines western financial system.
Meanwhile, Russia has been producing its own chips for all its military equipment since 2014. Something you would know if you actually had a clue regarding the subject you keep yammering about.
Also, waiting to see actual evidence of the invasion stalling. Last I checked, all the Ukrainian forces are encircled in Donbass, and once they run out of food and fuel the Ukrainian army will collapse.
I guess being a westerner you can't understand why Russia isn't bombing the shit out of civilians as first order of business and levelling the cities in Ukraine the way NATO would've done.
I still don't see why you feel the need to flaunt your ignorance so extensively here instead of waiting a few months to see what actually happens. Why are you so desperate to document in writing how much of an ignoramus you are?
The war started not with air domination, but with cruise missile salvos. Those have petered off, too. Both of these indicate that even if Russia could produce chips, they can't replace them fast enough to risk their few modern jets or restock the smart missiles they had left over from bombing Syrian hospitals.
On the one had, you say the world will collapse without Russia, but on the other you say Russia will not collapse without the world. Despite all evidence to the contrary. A table with three legs will still stand, but a table with one... not so much.
It's the 3rd week of the invasion and you're waiting to see evidence of the invasion stalling? Ha ha! The plan was to take Kyiv within days. Russia's main issue now is that without air support, their supply convoys are vulnerable to drone and shoulder-launched strikes. Recall that the plan was not to sit around stranded tanks for weeks, so it's an open question of who will starve first, the besieged, or the besiegers?
Your BS about bombing civilians is straight up lies. Putin has been targeting civilians with bombs since he took power (Russians that time). Go find a Ukrainian maternity ward to hide in, if you trust him so much.
You sound like a real military expert there with great insight into Russian military strategy. The obvious alternative explanation is that Russia destroyed objectives like the supply depos early on, and now they're mopping up the forces they surrounded in Donbass that can't get resupplies. Which is what actually happening right now.
This is western egoism at its finest. The west is not the world bud, and the sooner westerns learn to internalize this fact the sooner the world can move on. The evidence is that the world continues to trade with Russia, and the two biggest countries in the world are backing Russia both politically and economically.
LMFAO when US invaded Iraq with ten times the troops, which is half the size of Ukraine and completely isolated, it took them a month to get to Baghdad. US also had no problems with bombing civilians and levelling cities in Iraq. That seems like a good base line to measure against.
Wow, you know Russian military plans, you must be well connected indeed! Seems like the evidence points to the fact that the actual plan was to draw Ukrainian military into cauldrons in the east where they ended up surrounded. Once the military breaks then Ukraine will have no choice but to negotiate a surrender with Russia. I'm not sure where you got the notion that the cities are what's relevant here.
Ok there ghost of Kiev.
edit: here's what an actual US colonel thinks about the situation, but I'm sure you know better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Iw0m-Pc08Q
Looting grocery stores because your expired rations ran out does not speak to an effective supply chain.
You are the one that sees reality as "The West" and the rest. It's an interconnected global economy, which makes your claims of Russia being able to be cut off from the society of nations hilarious. Even the US would struggle with that, today.
The US had air superiority in the first day or two of that war. So if it took a month to mop up the ground after that, what does this imply in the current context? Russia's aging and ill-supplied military is going to progress even slower against more modern weapons and better intelligence. While having their economy ground down, something the US didn't have to deal with then. When you paint it like that, this is looking like Putin's Waterloo.
Making stuff up is not a convncing form of argument.
Can you explain what Russia has actually been cut off from again?
Russia had air superiority in the first day of the war. Why do you think Ukraine keeps asking NATO for a no fly zone again?
You understand that Russia is one of the top military manufacturers in the world that sells weapons across the globe yes? Given that, how do you come to the insane conclusion that Russia is running out of supplies for its own military?
Yeah they did ignoramus https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic/economy
When you're completely divorced from reality then sure.
Russia supplies the world with a flood of simple to maintain rifles, sure. Older Soviet gear is always on sale, too, just like anything that wasn't nailed down from that era. But night vision gear on Russian tanks is French. Russia just isn't the high tech wonderland you imagine. You're being thick headed insisting that any single country is self-sufficient.
Also, you what happened to the great Soviet stockpiles of nuclear weapons? They were sold to the American nuclear energy industry to power homes and televisions. The ultimate triumph of capitalism.
I love how I literally linked you an article showing what Russia actually supplies, and you continue to spread misinformation in the reply. It's just phenomenal to see to be honest.
I also love how you imagine that Russia isn't able to continue innovating and manufacturing things after USSR. All the same scientists, engineers, workers, and factories are still there, but somehow magically they stopped being able to make new things.
Why don't we take a look at what people who actually know what they're talking about have to say about this https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/09/advanced-military-technology-russia
Russia produces all of its necessities domestically, that's a fact. Meanwhile, anything it can't produce it gets from China https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1569862/putin-xi-russia-china-partners-sanctions-ukraine-gas-usa
Russia has over 6,000 nukes, but whatever you say.
Seeing dilapidated the state of it's air force, navy, and military the claim of 6000 working nukes is absolutely preposterous. I cry bullshit.
When we substitute seeing for imagining and your comment starts to make sense.