Putin in Russia (II): Spicy Island Liberation Front

[Andalusian girls]

you and Gred have said or implied this a number of times now and it overstates Russian strength to an almost comical degree. they are not even a top 10 nation by GDP and the idea Russia could act as a global hegemon is about as feasible as Canada or South Korea (both sporting more economic might) doing likewise.

Russia is willing to kill, can play petro politics, can forestall U.N. sanctions with a Security Council veto, and that is about it. they are closer to a juiced-up Saddam Hussein Iraq-esque rogue state than a great power, eager to prey on weaker neighbors and commit war crimes to further their hard strength, but in no reality functioning as a geopolitical locus. even in these kinds of bid for regional hegemony Russia has proven a middling force, going 1-1 in Chechnya, successfully bopping Georgia, and now apparently unsuccessfully bopping Ukraine. a .500 record against what is not exactly a murderer's row, and portends what would happen if Russia ever tangled with one its moderately powerful neighbors like Japan or Turkey or Germany, nonetheless China or the United States.

to that end it is insulting to China to lump them in with Russia. China's economy is around 10 times the size of Russia's. they are a great power now, and poised to ascend to superpower status to affect a bipolar world in the coming decades. Russia is only on the margins of the top 10 at this moment because of their nukes and their propensity for violence, and when ascending states like India, Indonesia, and Brazil continue to rise it won't even maintain that mid position.

[kuronosan]

I think the quickest way to summarize it is Russia is a competent North Korea with a lucky seat at the table.

[Andalusian girls]

competent is generous

[Spicyryan]

I just said that about Russia back on page 53. Even compared them to the GDP of South Korea too, AG. So I don't think I am overstating them as the alternative to US hegemony like Gred has. I have stated they are part of the more multipolar world order that has emerged over the last decade though.

[thetruepandagod]

I just said that about Russia back on page 53. Even compared them to the GDP of South Korea too, AG. So I don't think I am overstating them as the alternative to US hegemony like Gred has. I have stated they are part of the more multipolar world order that has emerged over the last decade though.

[kuronosan]

competent is generous

I've been known to be generous

[Gredival]

you and Gred have said or implied this a number of times now and it overstates Russian strength to an almost comical degree. they are not even a top 10 nation by GDP and the idea Russia could act as a global hegemon is about as feasible as Canada or South Korea (both sporting more economic might) doing likewise.

Russia is willing to kill, can play petro politics, and can forestall U.N. sanctions with a Security Council veto, and that is about it. they are closer to a juiced-up Saddam Hussein Iraq-esque rogue state than a great power, eager to prey on weaker neighbors and commit war crimes to further their hard strength, but in no reality functioning as a geopolitical locus. even in these kinds of bid for regional hegemony Russia has proven a middling force, going 1-1 in Chechnya, successfully bopping Georgia, and now apparently unsuccessfully bopping Ukraine. a .500 record against what is not exactly a murderer's row, and portends what would happen if Russia ever tangled with one its moderately powerful neighbors like Japan or Turkey or Germany, nonetheless China or the United States.

to that end it is insulting to China to lump them in with Russia. China's economy is around 10 times the size of Russia's. they are a great power now, and poised to ascend to superpower status to affect a bipolar world in the coming decades. Russia is only on the margins of the top 10 at this moment because of their nukes and their propensity for violence, and when ascending states like India, Indonesia, and Brazil continue to rise it won't even maintain that mid position.

I think you underestimate the value of nukes in this discussion, though I may be vastly overestimating the potency of their arsenal due to disarray and disrepair.

I don't see any of the ascending states you list as being challengers to the U.S. within the order. India is the only nuclear state of those three, and they are a competitor with China. They aren't revisionist insofar as they want to upend the LIO; the only country that they really wants to turn into a parking lot is Pakistan.

Like maybe when they are further up the chain we'll see them adopt offensive revisionism ala nuclear Gandhi, but right now Russia's desire (as unrealistic as it is) and their committal to that desire (including the use of nukes) keeps them near the top of the rivalry list.

[Gredival]

I've already pointed out why even a transition to a multiplex world led by several Western democratic states could be disastrous. A multi-polar world in which Russia and China were granted equal stakes of leadership as the West is non-sense.

[Andalusian girls]

what in the sam hill alabama betty crocker gred u nut i wasn't positing any of those powers would become revisionist but rather claimed they would further displace an already middling Russian further down the power rankings.

the point was i agree that the Russians are rivals (and cunts), but they are minor, declining ones, incapable of meaningful geopolitical revision. and it is silly indeed to pretend they belong in a great power/superpower bracket with China. they belong in the Iran bracket. they're the Harlem Globetrotters not the Celtics.

insofar as nukes are concerned their primary impact on international relations is to forestall any/all foreign attack by state actors. otherwise they inhibit rather than increase the capacity to project military force, siphoning away finite defense resources to non-productive weaponry. unbeatable re a defensive posture, of little to no utility on the attack.

[Zealot]

Your view of Russian power is in context of the rest of the civilized world, which is fair, but without U.S. or greater western influence, Russia would never have lost control of any of its satellite USSR nations. Even in its current state it exercises undue influence over weaker eastern European nations and Syria because no one was there to stop them. Absent western authority they would be a global force squarely on amount of overland and sea lanes controlled. Throw in nukes and there's almost a certainty Russia establishes a Eurasian sphere of control without much opposition.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Andalusian girls]

the dissolution of the USSR was writ in the internal contradictions of communism and its imperial overextension more than anything else, but i digress.

you guys are having difficulty parsing my point. i am not stating US hegemony does not keep bad actors in check, and one of the worst actors is Russia. i was making that argument 10 years ago while you guys were still more critical of US power projection than anything else and laughing about Romney warning the country of Russia. Gred hadn't even gone hege yet.

the point is Russia is not a great power. even if the US collapsed tomorrow it would not become one. there is no future world where Russian dominion holds sway, no chance Russia becomes a Eurasian hegemony. it cannot beat Ukraine in a 1v1, what do you believe its odds would be against NATO without the United States? and as France and the UK have enough nukes to destroy Russia as a state, as Germany and Japan could go nuclear in about six minutes, Russia would have to be nearly as careful about deploying them in this speculative tomorrow as they are today.

moreover one could argue what Russian-Chinese alignment of interests is extant is based around their mutual antagonism towards the United States. remove that unifying variable and how truly aligned are their national self-interests? one strongly suspects a preeminent China would not suffer this little middling state rocking 9% of their GDP to project power into Asia. constrained on one side by a European-only NATO vastly more powerful than itself, on the other by a China vastly more powerful than itself, Russia would probably behave as it currently does but worse. more brutalization of small neighboring states, the Georgias and Chechnyas of the world, while failing in the Ukraines of the world. it is not capable of anything greater.

[Krandor]

We're not that far removed from the USSR being a thing, and Putin has long made it clear that he wants all the former countries making up the USSR back under Russian control.

[Andalusian girls]

how's that going for him

[kuronosan]

We all know that. But it's pretty obvious Putin was projecting force rather than possessing it. If it wasn't for their nukes their influence would be minimal.

He knows that, which is why he's saying shit like "oh Ukraine attacking the Crimea bridge is terrorism and an act of war".

It's their fucking land. He's gaslighting everyone by doing that, and saying things anywhere close to "lol but US isn't any better" is why his propaganda is so effective. Nobody said the United States is perfect, but let's stop pretending the current Russian Federation has any legitimate influence. They're not afraid to murder. That's the only reason they have any effect at all.

[Andalusian girls]

turns out murder goes a long way (at least until people start killing you back)

i made the point once before that while Russia's intervention was decisive in Syria France could have replicated it. they have a single aircraft carrier, as does Russia, and Dassault Rafales are far better jet fighters than the Sukhoi Su-33's which turned the war around for Assad. the difference is France is not governed by a sociopath.

[Spicyryan]

We're not that far removed from the USSR being a thing, and Putin has long made it clear that he wants all the former countries making up the USSR back under Russian control.

Whoever does not miss the Soviet Union has no heart. Whoever wants it back has no brain.

Let's stop repeating the Western media trope of "Putin wants to rebuild the USSR." It is sensationalism, and not journalism.
Same with the "Putin is insane/a mad man" silliness.

[Cail]

lmao

[Drai]

Let's stop repeating the Western media trope of "Putin wants to rebuild the USSR." It is sensationalism, and not journalism.
Same with the "Putin is insane/a mad man" silliness.

The whole "Mouth says one thing while the hands do another" seems to apply here though, his actions and words don't align with reality.

[NynJa]

Putin is an honorable man who would never lie, unlike that shitlord Biden who conned his way with lies and deceit and stole the 2020 election.

[Kaslo]

Let's stop repeating the Western media trope of "Putin wants to rebuild the USSR." It is sensationalism, and not journalism.
Same with the "Putin is insane/a mad man" silliness.

Sorry but Spicy is right here. The "rebuild the USSR" is a dumb take.