Yeah, but that was the Soviets. These are capitalists. Capitalists suck at war economics and I'm not even sure it's plausible under modern finance capitalism. I agree they're not likely to run out of troops any time soon, but I don't think we're likely to see economic gains like WWII.
I also don't think we're going to see industrial development on par with WWII. My point is that during WWII:
The USSR suffered something like 25 million deaths, orders of magnitude above even the wildest propaganda about current Russian losses
They still had the labor power to not only run their industrial base, but to build much of it from scratch
It's a country of around 143 million, and I saw an (undoubtedly cautious) estimates of 11 million+ military age men. They had something like 1.2 million military personnel before the war.
Just a basic understanding of demographics and even one historical example should tell anyone that "they are so short on people they can't even run their industry" is absurd.
The funniest part of this comment is the idea that Russia will get so desperate for troops that they'll be unable to operate mines
Soviet industrial capacity greatly increased over the course of WWII
Yeah, but that was the Soviets. These are capitalists. Capitalists suck at war economics and I'm not even sure it's plausible under modern finance capitalism. I agree they're not likely to run out of troops any time soon, but I don't think we're likely to see economic gains like WWII.
I also don't think we're going to see industrial development on par with WWII. My point is that during WWII:
It's a country of around 143 million, and I saw an (undoubtedly cautious) estimates of 11 million+ military age men. They had something like 1.2 million military personnel before the war.
Just a basic understanding of demographics and even one historical example should tell anyone that "they are so short on people they can't even run their industry" is absurd.