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.

  • @folaht
    2•2 years ago

    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.

    You’re forgetting the location of the US. It’s an ocean apart. This means it needs to spend on it’s naval fleet first before it can even begin to counter Russia in Ukraine which is next door for Russia.
    On top of that, the US is trying to dominate every sea and ocean in the world, while Russia is trying to win a land war.
    On top of that we have an oil crisis and we’re in an energy transition going on that puts trains ahead of ships in terms of cost.

    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.

    No, it’s spending most of it’s money on the navy and air force.

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

    It’s short on equipment, because the US is spending most of it’s money on it’s navy and air force.

    Is the west geniunely a paper tiger in the most real sense?

    Same answer. The US is simply losing grip on the eurasian continent. The EU has little to no natural gas. Canada has the same problem as the US, which leaves Australia that has too few people.