I was thinking about that point that people bring up about military spending with the US and Im getting suspicious that the actual money spent on the US military is a mirage suggesting a capability that far far surpasses the capabilities of the next 10 near peers of the USA.

Something just doesnt add up.

The US has spent trillions on its military yet NATO and the US is having a tough time making the fight against Russia trivial.

If the money spent is any indication of capability; then it follows that besting Russia in Ukraine should be trivial. But that is not the case.

You see… I can understand designing weapons in order to kill and win wars which Im sure that is the principles of Russian and Chinese philosophy in warfare.

But what if the US is doing that… But also allowing the profit motive to have a say? Im starting to think that the USA is blowing money on overvalued systems that are AT BEST, MAYBE a tiny bit more effective than the oppositions’ weapons.

It aint like Ukraine was short of capable fighters with covert NATO training and backing.

For all the trillions spent on NATO; Ukraine should have settled this conflict months ago. Ukraine should have defeated the Donbas rebellion before it could even find its footing.

For real though. What the fuck? Is the west genuinely a paper tiger in the most real sense?

Consider also colonial projects like Isntreal. With all their backing from the US; they havent managed to just bulldoze Palestine into the phantom realm. They STILL have to put in effort.

It’s just very strange… The realities don’t match up with the money or the talk.

The only way it makes sense is if the west develops weapons for profit first and foremost, which doesnt always mean the highest quality.

  • @KommandoGZD
    link
    152 years ago

    Great point and definitely needs to be pointed out much more. People are still so confused how the US couldn’t ‘win’ in Afghanistan in 20 years, despite the trillions spent. It isn’t despite the trillions, it fought because of those trillions spent. In that sense it did ‘win’. Additionally Keeping the domestic population shocked and distracted in a permanent state of war makes neoliberal reforms there easier too.

    But what does it mean to ‘win’ a modern war?

    Weirdly imo in Ukraine US’ goals are much more clear than in previous wars and also clearer than Russia’s. For the US I can make out a win condition, for Russia I really can’t.