Short Taiwan?

[Pelagic]

His twitter was linked earlier, but the database being built of destroyed, damaged, and abandoned equipment on both sides is very impressive. This is the site, every single vehicle listed has a picture of it to accompany it.

 

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

 

Comparing this to the US invasion of Iraq is absurd, Coalition troops weren't losing dozens of tanks in a week. On the list above, 6 T-90s have been photographed destroyed or abandoned for example, that's the most modern tank Russia possesses, they're not Soviet era junk that's been sitting around for decades and it stands to reason their crews are better trained than the average Russian soldier. Today for instance, why were 4 Tunguska air defense vehicles just abandoned for locals to burn?

 

The scale of Russian losses is what is surprising everyone. Even compared to other Russian operations in say Afghanistan or Chechnya, Russian losses in Ukraine in one week are outpacing months of fighting there. Who knows how things will turn out, there's still a strong likelihood Russia can brute force its way into occupying major Ukranian cities through a combination of non-stop artillery and an almost limitless supply of armor. But that just gets them to where everyone thought they'd be on day one, combating a well armed and funded Ukranian insurgency.

 

The Javelin anti-tank system that's being provided to Ukraine has a listed range of 2,200 meters, with US operators in 2003 using it successfully at almost double that range. Russian forces confined to the roads due to muddy conditions have to secure a 2km wide swath in either direction to protect their resupply lines. Asking Russian conscripts who have no desire to be there and are already abandoning their equipment to perform sweeps against well trained and highly motivated Ukranian Javelin teams is a non-start. Providing that kind of security would require an Iraq War surge type commitment to vastly increase the ratio of Russian to Ukranian troops and the training to perform effective counterinsurgency.

 

 

[Climacus]

thats an interesting perspective "Russia is catalyzing the Transformation Age"

 

https://integrallife.com/russia-is-catalyzing-the-transformation-age/?utm_source=Integral+Life+Newsletter&utm_campaign=af6b5246f8-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_03_01_08_15_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_de2cfb3770-af6b5246f8-50498209&mc_cid=af6b5246f8&mc_eid=0e1bbe52e6

 

Robb Smith believes the most likely outcome is a Russian failed state (less likely: a) atomic destruction, b) coup). 

The thing Putin most underestimated in his view was the massive unitary reaction of the West against Putin. While the West is very fragmented and decadent, he reacts very sensitive towards oppression. Thats the strength of the "green" civilizing stage (in the Integral model he represents), which started to expand from the 60s on. 

 

Interestingly he believes China must have approved the Russian invasion but will cut losses and step back from it in the coming months facing that hughe resistance. As one result Taiwan seems to be off the table. 

 

"I expect they will begin to distance themselves from Russia in subtle ways over the coming months (and not without them putting up a hell of a narrative fight while doing so). If nothing else, Taiwan has to look like it’s off the table now. There is only so far an isolated China could go into direct, great power economic competition. If Russia is the world’s gas station, China is the world’s factory, and factories need customers. It’s not in China’s interests to get into a direct economic fight with a majority of its customers."

 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Climacus

[Spekulatius]

@Pelagic thanks for sharing a perspective on how the war goes. It looks like. It jut the Russian economy , but also the Russian military will get wrecked. this will be tough to rebuild too with shortages everywhere.

 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Spekulatius

[CorpRaider]

yeah they're getting wrecked.  They lost more troops in the first week than we did in a decade+ in afghanistan.  They still don't even have air dominance.  China would get the same or worse with Taiwan I speculate.  Taiwan has been preparing since WW2.  This is already a disaster for China.  

Edited March 4, 2022 by CorpRaider

[Peregrine]

19 minutes ago, CorpRaider said:

yeah they're getting wrecked.  They lost more troops in the first week than we did in a decade+ in afghanistan.  They still don't even have air dominance.  China would get the same or worse with Taiwan I speculate.  Taiwan has been preparing since WW2.  This is already a disaster for China.  

 

A bit stunning that so many think that war/invasion is inevitable. Russia is dealing from a position of economic weakness. China isn't. Even Putin doesn't think that China needs to use force.

 

 

[Gregmal]

China will seize this opportunity to come out smelling like roses, IMO. They'll clean up on the economic front but also not take sides and then when convenient play a little bit of a peacemaker role. They are ultra savvy and opportunistic and very easily can take this situation and make both the US and EU look like idiots and Russia look like the bad guys. Its part of why I think theres a window on Chinese stocks starting to emerge. The market is saying "theyre Russia" but its more rational they utilize this to say "no, we are not". But they'll wait til Putin has tired himself out first. 

[CorpRaider]

I think/hope Xi gets dealt at their next plenary or whatever.  Japan and South Korean end up nuking up and that's seems like a wholly unmitigated disaster for his foreign policy push.  Also they are destroying a jewel in Hong Kong, I don't see why they are so intent on doing the same or worse to Taiwan.

Edited March 4, 2022 by CorpRaider

[wabuffo]

Russia is dealing from a position of economic weakness. China isn't.

 

I wonder what the poor performance of the Russian military says about the PLA's capabilities.  They rely on Russian military technology and like the Russians, rely on conscript armed forces that have not been involved in a military conflict since 1979 (much like the Russians whose last real military invasion was in the late 70s in Afghanistan).

 

Meanwhile the US military has been honing its lethal fighting skills almost continuously since the 1991 Gulf War.  It's easy to project a myth of invincibility until you actually have to use it and it turns out that its a Potemkin village in the face of a superior American force.

 

As for China.  More than any other country, China depends on the US's stewardship of the global trading system where the US Navy keeps all of the shipping routes around the world safe and clear for merchant shipping.  Is it an accident that China's rise has coincided with the Pax Americana that pushed all of China's historic rivals to the sidelines militarily (Japan, Russia, etc)?  I don't think so.

 

China has large demographic and geographic problems that limit it's potential.  It's aging (and male-skewed) population will rapidly decline by 30-40% over the next few decades (we can't be sure since China fudges its numbers - my guess is their population is smaller than they claim).  It needs to import energy and food because its agricultural lands are limited and flood-prone.   It is bordered by potentially hostile countries on all sides that force it to spend enormous sums on its military just to defend its borders & sea lanes.

 

The US on the other hand still has favorable demographics and will also benefit from immigration. It's population is slated to continue growing well into this century.  It is self-sufficient in energy and food production thanks to the world's largest agricultural breadbasket located in its Midwestern states.  It is bordered by two oceans and two friendly countries on either side of its two land borders.  Not needing to defend its borders, it can forward project all of its military force globally.

 

Choose your fighter. 

 

My bet - the United States will continue to be the pre-eminent global hegemon well into the next century as its rivals (Russia, China) decline due to poor governance systems, demographics and geography. 

 

It's an accident of history that the best governance system the world has ever seen (a free market-oriented constitutional republic) landed on Plymouth Rock and took over the world's best geography (the continental United States) but a fortunate one for the world.

 

Bill

 

p.s. - I sincerely hope that the world comes to its senses & goes back to the Pax Americana where everyone can trade freely and co-exist peacefully.

 

[CorpRaider]

Yeah I wouldn't want to test it, but I would bet we could defeat both at the same time without a ton of difficulty IF it was a harmonious/just battle....not some "police action" where the locals haven't been through the enlightenment/don't want to fight for their freedom.  We still spend tons more every year (after doing so for decades and decades) and there's got to be a lot less grift and corruption and more truth to power.   Based on the state of their conventional arms you have to wonder how many ICBMs would just blow up part of their country if they tried to use them. 

 

These idiots are now probably going to have to deal with rearmed Germany and Japan.  Lots of luck with that.

Edited March 4, 2022 by CorpRaider

[wabuffo]

Japan and South Korean end up nuking up and that's seems like a wholly unmitigated disaster for his foreign policy push. 

 

Speaking of nuking up.... Ex Japanese PM Abe has really been making headlines in the last few days.

 

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/02/27/national/politics-diplomacy/shinzo-abe-japan-nuclear-weapons-taiwan/ 

"' 'Japan should consider hosting U.S. nuclear weapons,' Abe says"

 

Japan is taking the growing Chinese threat seriously and the world is quickly moving to contain China next.  Japan is also pushing the US to end its policy of strategic ambiguity over Taiwan's defense & are pledging to come to Taiwan's defense.  (Japan sees a PLA invasion of Taiwan as an existential threat to their homeland.)

 

Russia has really scrambled the world in just a week.

 

Bill

Edited March 4, 2022 by wabuffo

[CorpRaider]

Their current PM and other elected officials also raised the issue if I'm not mistaken.  Even if they don't go nuclear, it seems Germany and Japan are going to muscle up.  Hell even the vikings are sending arms to Ukraine. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by CorpRaider

[cubsfan]

^ You have to expect rearmament if you let dictators run wild. IF you are Japan, Philippines, etc - and the US

and allies can't be counted on to deter the bad guys - it's time to get your own nukes unfortunately.

 

 

[CorpRaider]

To be fair, as I understand it, Japan is considering asking us to post nukes there.    

 

So everyone needs arms and energy?  Whelp there goes the US trade deficit. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by CorpRaider

[cubsfan]

^ Imagine being the Saudis right now with the prospect of a nuclear Iran. Their best friends will be Israel.

[wabuffo]

Japan's 2020 Self Defense Force report.  Peaceful pink image of Mount Fuji with cherry blossoms in the foreground.

 

Japan's 2021 Self Defense Force report.  A stark charcoal image of a Samurai on a charging stallion.

Not too subtle... FWIW.

 

 

It's becoming a scarier world unfortunately.

 

Bill

 

Edited March 4, 2022 by wabuffo

[Peregrine]

21 minutes ago, wabuffo said:

Russia is dealing from a position of economic weakness. China isn't.

 

I wonder what the poor performance of the Russian military says about the PLA's capabilities.  They rely on Russian military technology and like the Russians, rely on conscript armed forces that have not been involved in a military conflict since 1979 (much like the Russians whose last real military invasion was in the late 70s in Afghanistan).

 

Meanwhile the US military has been honing its lethal fighting skills almost continuously since the 1991 Gulf War.  It's easy to project a myth of invincibility until you actually have to use it and it turns out that its a Potemkin village in the face of a superior American force.

 

As for China.  More than any other country, China depends on the US's stewardship of the global trading system where the US Navy keeps all of the shipping routes around the world safe and clear for merchant shipping.  Is it an accident that China's rise has coincided with the Pax Americana that pushed all of China's historic rivals to the sidelines militarily (Japan, Russia, etc)?  I don't think so.

 

China has large demographic and geographic problems that limit it's potential.  It's aging (and male-skewed) population will rapidly decline by 30-40% over the next few decades (we can't be sure since China fudges its numbers - my guess is their population is smaller than they claim).  It needs to import energy and food because its agricultural lands are limited and flood-prone.   It is bordered by potentially hostile countries on all sides that force it to spend enormous sums on its military just to defend its borders & sea lanes.

 

The US on the other hand still has favorable demographics and will also benefit from immigration. It's population is slated to continue growing well into this century.  It is self-sufficient in energy and food production thanks to the world's largest agricultural breadbasket located in its Midwestern states.  It is bordered by two oceans and two friendly countries on either side of its two land borders.  Not needing to defend its borders, it can forward project all of its military force globally.

 

Choose your fighter. 

 

My bet - the United States will continue to be the pre-eminent global hegemon well into the next century as its rivals (Russia, China) decline due to poor governance systems, demographics and geography. 

 

It's an accident of history that the best governance system the world has ever seen (a free market-oriented constitutional republic) landed on Plymouth Rock and took over the world's best geography (the continental United States) but a fortunate one for the world.

 

Bill

 

p.s. - I sincerely hope that the world comes to its senses & goes back to the Pax Americana where everyone can trade freely and co-exist peacefully.

 

 

China is the second largest economy by US-denominated GDP and the largest by purchasing power parity and got there from subsistence agriculture in less than 50 years, so I wouldn't be so quick to write them off. In any case, it is inextricably tied to the global economy and will become even more so as its economy grows. But agreed that they have a lot of issues.

 

On your broader point about picking and choosing sides: if the world goes back to the hegemonic ways of the Cold War it will ensure economic devastation. This is not something that I think we should be inviting.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Peregrine

[wabuffo]

China is the second largest economy by US-denominated GDP and the largest by purchasing power parity, so I wouldn't be so quick to write them off.

 

I'm not - I just don't get why they are biting the hand that feeds them.  If they get their wish and the US becomes isolationist and withdraws, their economy would get crushed in the ensuing chaos while the US would do just fine.  They are huge beneficiaries of the current world order but they are arrogantly trying to subvert it.  Good luck with that.

 

We are already seeing a glimpse into what the world looks like when the US appears weak cosmetically (but not in reality) just in the past week.  Russia invades Ukraine, Germany re-arms, Japan builds (or installs US) nukes.   You really think China prospers under that scenario?

 

My point isn't to be anti-China or to "invite war".  Quite the opposite, I really am hopeful that everyone comes to their senses and doesn't miscalculate.  It's also to hope that the US resumes its strong global leadership rather than "leading from behind".  It's getting quite scary, actually.

 

"Peace through strength"
Ronald Reagan

 

Bill

Edited March 4, 2022 by wabuffo

[cubsfan]

^^ There is no doubt about that - it's not at all inviting. That's the purpose of strong alliances and deterrence.

Something Obama and Biden failed to understand. You embolden your enemies by displaying your weakness,

when you indeed, possess the strongest military in the world. You show them magnanimity and they spit 

in your face. But you do get a Nobel Prize and the Party of Davos just loves you.

[Peregrine]

53 minutes ago, wabuffo said:

China is the second largest economy by US-denominated GDP and the largest by purchasing power parity, so I wouldn't be so quick to write them off.

 

I'm not - I just don't get why they are biting the hand that feeds them.  If they get their wish and the US becomes isolationist and withdraws, their economy would get crushed in the ensuing chaos while the US would do just fine.  They are huge beneficiaries of the current world order but they are arrogantly trying to subvert it.  Good luck with that.

 

We are already seeing a glimpse into what the world looks like when the US appears weak cosmetically (but not in reality) just in the past week.  Russia invades Ukraine, Germany re-arms, Japan builds (or installs US) nukes.   You really think China prospers under that scenario?

 

My point isn't to be anti-China or to "invite war".  Quite the opposite, I really am hopeful that everyone comes to their senses and doesn't miscalculate.  It's also to hope that the US resumes its strong global leadership rather than "leading from behind".  It's getting quite scary, actually.

 

"Peace through strength"
Ronald Reagan

 

Bill

 

1 hour ago, wabuffo said:

China is the second largest economy by US-denominated GDP and the largest by purchasing power parity, so I wouldn't be so quick to write them off.

 

I'm not - I just don't get why they are biting the hand that feeds them.  If they get their wish and the US becomes isolationist and withdraws, their economy would get crushed in the ensuing chaos while the US would do just fine.  They are huge beneficiaries of the current world order but they are arrogantly trying to subvert it.  Good luck with that.

 

We are already seeing a glimpse into what the world looks like when the US appears weak cosmetically (but not in reality) just in the past week.  Russia invades Ukraine, Germany re-arms, Japan builds (or installs US) nukes.   You really think China prospers under that scenario?

 

My point isn't to be anti-China or to "invite war".  Quite the opposite, I really am hopeful that everyone comes to their senses and doesn't miscalculate.  It's also to hope that the US resumes its strong global leadership rather than "leading from behind".  It's getting quite scary, actually.

 

"Peace through strength"
Ronald Reagan

 

Bill

 

Re: "biting the hands that feed them"

 

It can be argued that the US has become a lot more antagonist toward China on trade than vice versa with the anti-trade rhetoric, barriers, tariffs and what not.

 

Re: "US would do just fine"

 

I'm not sure you understand just how integrated China is with the world economy right now.

 

Re: would China prosper if everyone arms up?

 

Hell no. And neither would anyone else.

 

Re: US as the police dog of the world

 

That's precisely the reason why many are against the US.

 

 

[cubsfan]

^^^ The US does not want to be the police dog of the world. The US would vastly prefer strong alliances that keep

other countries safe. It's an ugly world full of bad actors and despots. If you are South Korea, Taiwan, Phillipines,

Japan, Australia, etc - you're likely pretty happy to have someone you MIGHT be able to rely on.

 

If you don't - you're an idiot not to nuke up.

 

What you are missing: The USA is NOT an expansionist power - China, Russia and Iran are.

Edited March 4, 2022 by cubsfan

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

What you are missing: The USA is NOT an expansionist power - China, Russia and Iran are.

 

Ok lets take a step back here - two of those on your list of three (Russia, Iran).....are not on any expansionist trail, they dont have capacity to be truly expansionist in any real sense of the word even if they wanted to be.....China YES but not yet.........Russia/iran maybe bits of land or here there but come on.....quite the opposite everything they do is in regard to basic survival of the regime and their borders as currently constructed.....The Ukraine invasion at a base level is about a petro-dollar economy, in the age of decarbonization, that is strategically weak already but for sure to be weaker still in decades.......... re-asserting a buffer zone (Ukraine & Belarus) that was laid down after the fall of the USSR, implicitly blessed by the USA and the West as being strategically important for Russian security in the age of the EU/NATO.......I say these things not to condone what Putin is doing, he's a monster and pig........but he is currently acting rationally for someone who's alternative to be being in the office, is being dead......and was watching over the years the EU/NATO/USA moving further & further West into the agreed "NATO/Russia buffer zone" of Ukraine with overtures around them joining NATO etc. etc.

 

Nobody likes to say it - but Ukraine's role in life & in European peace and security (& indeed global peace & security) is/was to straddle the East & West while making the strategically weaker partner feel safe that they had some kind of buffer zone...Ukraine is/was a pawn in the balance of powers equilibrium game (ala Kissinger) that has kept Europe peaceful now for 75+ years until now.... The mistake was to encourage Ukraine to divert itself so completely towards pleasing or 'joining' the West & giving them some false sense that we would ACTUALLY support them in a conflict against Russia.....which in turn hardened their political stance in regard to Ukranian-Russian relations & negotitions in regards to Western Ukraine....this pivot to the West encouraged by the EU/USA was wrong IMO.

 

The end game for Vladmir IMO is to completely WRECK Ukraine over the next few weeks and months and then leave......such that whatever is left wont be joining ANYTHING anytime soon that might threaten Russian security........and Putin in 20 years time will die in the Kremlin Palace surrounded by friends, families and ass kissers with Russia's borders exactly as they were when he assumed power. Its all a tyrant dictator in a strategically weak and weakening position could wish for and he's going to see to it that it happens and this is play.

Edited March 4, 2022 by changegonnacome

[Peregrine]

22 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Ok lets take a step back here - two of those on your list of three (Russia, Iran).....are not on any expansionist trail, they dont have capacity to be truly expansionist in any real sense of the word even if they wanted to be.....China YES but not yet.........Russia/iran maybe bits of land or here there but come on.....quite the opposite everything they do is in regard to basic survival of the regime and their borders as currently constructed.....the Ukraine invasion at a base level is about a petro-dollar economy, in the age of decarbonization, that is strategically weak already but for sure to be weaker still in decades.......... re-asserting a buffer zone (Ukraine & Belarus) that was laid down after the fall of the USSR, implicitly blessed by the USA and the West as being strategically important for Russian security in the age of the EU/NATO.......I say these things not to condone what Putin is doing, he's a monster and pig........but he is currently acting rationally for someone who's alternative to be being in the office, is being dead......and was watching over the years the EU/NATO/USA moving further & further West into the agreed "NATO/Russia buffer zone" of Ukraine with overtures around them joining NATO etc. etc.

 

Nobody likes to say it - but Ukraine's role in life & in European peace and security (& indeed global peace & security) is/was to straddle the East & West while making the strategically weaker partner feel safe that they had some kind of buffer zone...Ukraine is/was a pawn in the balance of powers equilibrium game (ala Kissinger) that has kept Europe peaceful now for 75+ years until now.... The mistake was to encourage Ukraine to divert itself so completely towards pleasing or 'joining' the West & giving them some false sense that we would ACTUALLY support them in a conflict against Russia.....which in turn hardened their political stance in regard to Ukranian-Russian relations & negotitions in regards to Western Ukraine....this pivot to the West encouraged by the EU/USA was wrong IMO.

 

The end game for Vladmir IMO is to completely WRECK Ukraine over the next few weeks and months and then leave......such that whatever is left wont be joining ANYTHING anytime soon that might threaten Russian security........and Putin in 20 years time will die in the Kremlin Palace surrounded by friends, families and ass kissers with Russia's border exactly as they were when he took office. Its all a tyrant dictator in a strategically weak and weakening position could wish for and he's going to see to it that it happens and this is play.

 

Agreed with much of what you say here. Putin is dealing from a position of weakness and was perhaps desperate.

 

Not sure if Putin is doing this from a standpoint of self-preservation - I think the chances of a coup has gone up a lot since this act. And I wonder if he's no longer rational thinking. Did he need to resort to a frickin' invasion to ensure that Ukraine doesn't side with the West?

[changegonnacome]

45 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

I think the chances of a coup has gone up a lot since this act.

 

Perhaps but from a very very very very low base

 

All Kremlinologists (who were spectacularly wrong before as basically none of them foresaw the USSR implode).....point to Putin having an almost perfect strangle hold on all the institutions & levers of power that matter in Russia

[cubsfan]

^ Huh - Iran not expansionist?? Tell that to Lebanon and Iraq. Iran's playbook for years is to control their neighbors.

 

Russia obliterates Chechnya, then Crimea, now Ukraine - yeah - sure they're not expansionist...

 

 

[boilermaker75]

1 hour ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Perhaps but from a very very very very low base

 

All Kremlinologists (who were spectacularly wrong before as basically none of them foresaw the USSR implode).....point to Putin having an almost perfect strangle hold on all the institutions & levers of power that matter in Russia

 

You don't think there are a lot of ruthless people around Putin who he is causing much angst?