Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,218
Reactions
21 12,746
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
That's clearly not how it works, when the country is in an economic downturn, inequality keeps on rising, youth unemployment and inflation is the name of the game, the last thing you want (as a government) to is borrow money...to send it to other countries.

their government are busy spending money (that the U.S doesn't have) for foreign countries like Ukraine and Israel. Note that America borrows those $90B they've earmarked for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. Somebody will eventually pay for it and it ain't those 3 countries.

and I'm betting on a Russian victory in Ukraine to make that reality faster.


The author is a Harvard Professor


Some good notes here:

'Any great power that spends more on debt service than on defense will not stay great for very long,' he said in a piece he penned for Bloomberg, explaining a theory he calls Ferguson's Law.

'True of Habsburg Spain, true of ancien régime France, true of the Ottoman Empire, true of the British Empire. This law is about to be put to the test by the US beginning this very year.'

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated this week that another $1.9 trillion will be added to the national debt this year alone, taking it to an eye-watering $36 trillion.


That is equal to the total value of goods and services produced by the US in the course of a year.

The rising cost of medicare and the bank rate surging to a 23-year high are among the factors likely to push it up to $56 trillion within the next ten years, according to the CBO, taking it to a record 122 percent of GDP. And there seems little variation on this point between the two presidential contenders with both Joe Biden and Donald Trump having added $7 billion to the figure during their terms in office, according to the WSJ.

JH Cullum Clark, of the Bush Institute-Southern Methodist University Economic Growth Initiative, has studied the history of previous superpowers and sees unsettling parallels with America's current plight. He says the pattern was established as far back as the Roman Empire when overspending tempted third century emperors to start debasing the currency, sparking endemic inflation which eventually destroyed its power to defend itself.

The wealth flowing in from the New World blinded Spain to its reliance on foreign lending to maintain its empire abroad and ending its dominance in the 17th century.

Eventually it 'managed to default seven times in the 19th century alone, after having defaulted six times in the preceding three centuries,' economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff wrote in their book This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly.

It was France's turn 100 years later after a series of casual defaults, before Britain lost its place to the US in the 20th century, with debt rocketing during and immediately after the Second World War.

The British pound had been the international reserve currency between the wars, allowing it to finance its far-flung empire, but it decisively lost that status to the US dollar in the war's aftermath.

America's debt to GDP ratio fell during the prosperous 1990s, reaching a low of 32 percent in 2001.

But it has soared to 99 percent since then, powered upwards by the great recession of the 2010s and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.

'The largest contributor to the cumulative increase was the incorporation of recently enacted legislation which added $1.6 trillion to projected deficits,' the CBO wrote in its report.
'That legislation included emergency supplemental appropriations that provided $95 billion for aid to Ukraine, Israel, and countries in the Indo-Pacific region.'



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

America is spending money they don't have on its over-extended military. Some of their concern are legitimate (like Ukraine and Taiwan) while some are not (Israel). Funnily enough the biggest recipient of those money will be the israelis.

You know all empire is worth its money, the more sound money you have the healthier your empire is. Many empires in the past rises and fall based on the value of its currency.

America thinks they are special, and they will simply cheat the fate of last empires before them.



The war in Ukraine ain't ending up anytime soon, big wars in the Middle East will flare up every one or two years. And let's say while trying to control things a war erupt in the Pacific. And yes that will mean spending more money they don't have.


I am very excited for what's to come
 

Iskander

Well-known member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
327
Reactions
9 982
Age
63
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
We can only hope and dream that the day will come when this statement becomes true.

Unfortunatelly, no Western leader has declared this ambition, but if Putin continues his endless series of mistakes and poor decisions, this outcome is not unrealistic.

There are so many potential new states that could arise from the ashes of the Moscovite Empire.
The West does not even think about dismembering Russia.
Moreover, Moscow understands this very well, but they are deliberately frightening their population with Western aggression. They say the West is occupying Russia for its natural resources.
This is nonsense. The West is not crazy. For they know that this will open the doors of Hell wide open.
Even the collapse of Russia, like the USSR, would be a nightmare, including for the West.
It's all about powerful China.
Both the West and everyone around them want to see Russia as a non-aggressive, normal, civilized, attractive, and not a formidable and repulsive country. All the current hostility towards Russia in neighboring countries actually stems from fear of Russia. And nothing more. Because Russia threatens all its neighbors. The only exception is China. For a known reason.

30 years ago, many neighbors (with the exception of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova, where Moscow openly supported the separatists) had good relations with Russia. Everything changed after Putin came to power.
Even today, the West fears the collapse of Russia like fire. After all, it is clear that this will be beneficial primarily to China!
This is a global problem.
In the current situation, the greatest desire of the West, if it is completely impossible to appease Putin, is in some sense control over the government and its nuclear weapons. This is maximum.
But if Putin continues his military expansion, then the West will have only one option - occupation of the western part of Russia up to Moscow.
Of course, with the aim of replacing the current government. This is not fantasy, -
Russia is dangerously driving the West into a corner

By the way, I previously warned our dear friend Gary about this :)
 
Last edited:

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,218
Reactions
21 12,746
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
But if Putin continues his military expansion, then the West will have only one option - occupation of the western part of Russia up to Moscow.
Of course, with the aim of replacing the current government. This is not fantasy, -
Russia is dangerously driving the West into a corner

By the way, I previously warned our dear friend Gary about this :)

Putin will stop at Ukraine, if NATO is sincere about peace and long term security, they should have let Putin have Ukraine, because that's his share of the pie.
 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
399
Reactions
1 615
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
Even today, the West fears the collapse of Russia like fire. After all, it is clear that this will be beneficial primarily to China!
I think this is the West’s biggest mistake. Instead of taking on the opportunity while Russia is weak and put more pressure on it until it collapses, they are more preoccupied with keeping it functional, because they fear China will benefit from it.

For Europe, the collapse of Russia would be a blessing, as the biggest security threat will be gone. Also, a collapsed Russia means the top people in Russia, those with skills, money and education will want to emigrate to Europe, which will also benefit the recipient countries.

Also, a Russia broken up into smaller entities means more opportunities for the EU to expand Eastwards. I think it is the US that doesn’t want Russia to collapse, fearing the Chinese will benefit most from this, because for Europe, China is really not a threat, as it is very far away.

But if Putin continues his military expansion, then the West will have only one option - occupation of the western part of Russia up to Moscow.
Of course, with the aim of replacing the current government. This is not fantasy, -
Russia is dangerously driving the West into a corner

A direct military campaign into Russia would be a very dangerous task, considering their nuclear arsenal. I think the best strategic option for the West would be to help Ukraine until it defeats Russia, while exerting maximum economic pressure on Russia to force its economic collapse. At the same time, the West should encourage rebellions in Russian provinces where there are large ethnic minorities.

Also, a rebellion in Belarus that results in regime change would be a good thing, as it would reduce Russia’s influence towards the West.

And I really don’t get why Ukraine doesn’t get the green light to clean Transnistria once and for all, and why there is still no blockade on Kaliningrad. There is still too much division in Europe and no coherent policy on tackling Russia.

Putin will stop at Ukraine, if NATO is sincere about peace and long term security, they should have let Putin have Ukraine, because that's his share of the pie.

Putin will not have his share of the pie. He should actually be forced to give up some territory as punishment for his aggression. I think he needs to completly lose control over Transnistria and give up Kaliningrad as a payment for his aggression, at a minimum. But the best scenario would be the collapse of Russia, and breaking it up in smaller states. I actually think this is the more likely scenario as things progress, since the longer the war in Ukraine lasts, the harder it will be for the Russian economy to survive.

Putin set the stage for Russia’s collapse when he invaded Ukraine.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,333
Reactions
68 8,027
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,218
Reactions
21 12,746
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Putin will not have his share of the pie. He should actually be forced to give up some territory as punishment for his aggression. I think he needs to completly lose control over Transnistria and give up Kaliningrad as a payment for his aggression, at a minimum. But the best scenario would be the collapse of Russia, and breaking it up in smaller states. I actually think this is the more likely scenario as things progress, since the longer the war in Ukraine lasts, the harder it will be for the Russian economy to survive.

Putin set the stage for Russia’s collapse when he invaded Ukraine.

This is a pipe dream. If it led to such, nukes will fly and everybody losses.

Funnily enough, even if NATO somewhat invades Kaliningrad, Russia will still be larger with Putin at the helm. The addition to Russia (Crime, Donets, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, etc) will cover up for this hypothetical loss of Kaliningrad.

Another Putin W

From a devout Muslim like you such Advice is weird. You know in Islam such act for both who wanted it and who did it will be immensely sinful.
I'm not yet a 'devout'. I simply have a better understanding of the religion especially where it fits in politics and power (the actual mission of Islam), but devout? Maybe one day, pray for me.

Also yes, you're right suicide is forbidden. That post is simply my cynical mockery.
 

Spitfire9

Well-known member
Messages
366
Reactions
8 472
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
Putin will stop at Ukraine, if NATO is sincere about peace and long term security, they should have let Putin have Ukraine, because that's his share of the pie.
Whether a European country should continue to exist or not is not a question for NATO to contemplate.

Were Putin's forces to prevail in Ukraine, it would be confirmation to him that he could pursue his ambition of recreating the defunct USSR.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,218
Reactions
21 12,746
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Whether a European country should continue to exist or not is not a question for NATO to contemplate.

Were Putin's forces to prevail in Ukraine, it would be confirmation to him that he could pursue his ambition of recreating the defunct USSR.
What's wrong with that? I don't even think he wants to recreate the USSR. He just wants some buffer.
 

Spitfire9

Well-known member
Messages
366
Reactions
8 472
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
But the best scenario would be the collapse of Russia, and breaking it up in smaller states. I actually think this is the more likely scenario as things progress, since the longer the war in Ukraine lasts, the harder it will be for the Russian economy to survive.

Putin set the stage for Russia’s collapse when he invaded Ukraine.
Are there areas of Russia where a majority of people would prefer to be independent?

On your comment on the sustainability of the Russian economy long term, a sceptic might say that the US is deliberately withholding the weapons it could supply that would result in Russia being defeated in order to prolong the war.
 

Spitfire9

Well-known member
Messages
366
Reactions
8 472
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
What's wrong with that? I don't even think he wants to recreate the USSR. He just wants some buffer.
That might be your view. I have not heard anyone else express that view.

Ukraine was no threat to Russia. If Putin wanted it as a buffer state, he has failed and instead has probably turned it into a future NATO state. The people of Ukraine do not want to live in a totalitarian state. Their best way to avoid that now is to join NATO if/once Russia abandons its special military operation which, from just about day one, looked like a chaotic, very unspecial military operation and still does.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,218
Reactions
21 12,746
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
That might be your view. I have not heard anyone else express that view.

Ukraine was no threat to Russia. If Putin wanted it as a buffer state, he has failed and instead has probably turned it into a future NATO state. The people of Ukraine do not want to live in a totalitarian state. Their best way to avoid that now is to join NATO if/once Russia abandons its special military operation which, from just about day one, looked like a chaotic, very unspecial military operation and still does.

Ukraine was and is a threat to Russia. From Ukraine it would take NATO's jets just minutes to reach Moscow. A well trained, well equipped NATO forces could cross the Volgograd gap in mere days or weeks, cutting Russia from its oil in the Caspian sea area.

When Ukraine modify its Constitution and write it as a national goal to join NATO he basically declared war with Russia. Yes, Ukraine started this war.

Just give Putin his safe space and everything will be alright. Putin just want his piece of pie.
 

Iskander

Well-known member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
327
Reactions
9 982
Age
63
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
In Mariupol. Living the good life. Far from forced recruitment and senseless dying in trenches.

Oh, how beautiful Mariupol became after Russian bombing!
And the beach!
This is simply paradise!
But this idyll is spoiled by some Dagestan warriors.

Russian media report that 6 police officers were killed and another 12 were injured during the armed attack on Derbent and Makhachkala.
There is a battle going on.
Welcome to Dagestan!



21:20 - the number of killed (9) and wounded (25) increases
 
Last edited:

Packetlight

Active member
Messages
47
Reactions
1 78
Nation of residence
Nigeria
Nation of origin
Nigeria
Putin will stop at Ukraine, if NATO is sincere about peace and long term security, they should have let Putin have Ukraine, because that's his share of the pie.
You are saying it as if Ukraine is some pack of pizza that needs to be shared.

It a pity those in charge of Ukraine are prolly stupid by provoking the Bear, when they set their goals of joining NATO. Now innocent people has to suffer from the mistake of few.
 

Spitfire9

Well-known member
Messages
366
Reactions
8 472
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
Ukraine was and is a threat to Russia. From Ukraine it would take NATO's jets just minutes to reach Moscow. A well trained, well equipped NATO forces could cross the Volgograd gap in mere days or weeks, cutting Russia from its oil in the Caspian sea area.

When Ukraine modify its Constitution and write it as a national goal to join NATO he basically declared war with Russia. Yes, Ukraine started this war.

Just give Putin his safe space and everything will be alright. Putin just want his piece of pie.
Putin is not a well intentioned person. He is a corrupt, autocratic tyrant. Couple that with Russian ultranationalism and a massive Russian military capability and you have a very dangerous man who has turned the country he rules into a very dangerous country.

I don't think that such a leader's territorial ambitions should be accommodated or appeased. I think a better idea is to thwart those ambitions in a fashion so costly that Russia is severely weakened. If the choice is between appeasement or fighting Russia into resounding economic, financial and military defeat, I prefer the latter.

The longer this war lasts, the more damage Russia suffers financially, economically and militarily. Ukraine suffers similarly but is backed by countries having roughly 50% of the world's GDP and 50% of the world's military power. What Russia - supported by Iran and North Korea - can muster to prosecute this war is tiny in comparison. If the allies mentioned continue to support Ukraine, Russia should end up broken economically and financially.
 

Relic

Experienced member
Canada Correspondent
Messages
1,552
Reactions
12 2,555
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada

Relic

Experienced member
Canada Correspondent
Messages
1,552
Reactions
12 2,555
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Serbia 🇷🇸 has sold USA 🇺🇸, Spain 🇪🇸, and the Czech Republic 🇨🇿 $850 million usd worth of Soviet caliber 122mm and 152mm artillery shells. Contracts continue and the Serbs continue to produce said ammo.

When asked about the sale of artillery shells to Ukraine, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said the following:

"Yes, we do export our ammunition,” Vučić told the FT. “We cannot export to Ukraine or to Russia.. but we have had many contracts with Americans, Spaniards, Czechs, others. What they do with that in the end is their job.” He added, “Even if I know [where the ammunition ends up], that’s not my job. My job is to secure the fact that we deal legally with our ammunition, that we sell it.”

Serbia 🇷🇸 is obviously one of the countries that quietly sold artillery shells to the Czech 🇨🇿 led initiative. Others that we're confident about include Bulgaria 🇧🇬, South Korea 🇰🇷 and possibly Turkey 🇹🇷. All these countries have good reason to sell shells to Ukraine through third parties, considering shells are currently selling for 4-5x their normal market value. These countries can empty put a lot of their old / expiring inventories and sign new contracts to procure shells domestically, while banking hundreds of millions of dollars in the process.


 

contricusc

Well-known member
Messages
399
Reactions
1 615
Nation of residence
Panama
Nation of origin
Romania
On your comment on the sustainability of the Russian economy long term, a sceptic might say that the US is deliberately withholding the weapons it could supply that would result in Russia being defeated in order to prolong the war.

I am one of those skeptics. From what I see, the US is drip feeding weapons in a way to make sure the war lasts for a long time, giving Putin the illusion that he can win the war, so that he is willing to sacrifice the Russian economy and prolong the war instead of just giving up and withdrawing.

By extending the war, the US achieves two things simultaneously:

1) Europe is ramping up its military industry, so it won’t be dependent on US aid in the future. This way, the US can free its resources from Europe and dedicate them to containing China in the Pacific.

2) Russia is exhausting its stockpiles of weapons and ammunition from the Cold War era, while also ruining its economy. This makes Russia less of a threat in the future, which together with Europe getting military stronger will allow the US to focus easier on China.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom