It's a WaPo article that's a 12 minute read - https://archive.ph/C6mna
as a German, can't wait to post in the weekly POC thread on hexbear
A country or coalition that mastered Eurasia would become a global menace, for it would possess the power to make even the most distant democracies insecure. So, aspiring conquerors would lunge for Eurasian hegemony, while offshore powers — and the vulnerable states situated along Eurasia’s edges — would fight to preserve their freedoms by keeping the supercontinent divided.
This passage is the crux of the article. Really telling what the intent of the author is with that last sentence. Yankees have always been nervous about the prospect of a united Asia/Europe, which is exactly what the "supercontinent" was heading towards before the Ukraine situation. Europe, Russia, India and China together posses industry, population and resources that absolutely dwarf what America possess.
They inherited that thing from the brits. Its Mackinder's Heartland/Pivot Area theory.
...the US should begin its response preparations
Always on the defense, of course - just preparing for our pre-emptive retaliation. We have to be ready to respond in an instant, even before our opponent moves!
World Wars Episode I: The Eurasian Menace
Episode II: Attack of the Drones
Episode III: Revenge of the BRICS
Episode IV: A New Cope
Episode V: The (American) Empire Strikes Back
Plot twist: USSR returns but not on Asian ("Eur"asia is Eurocentric nonsense; Europe is a peninsula) continental substrate
Show
Asia as a concept was created by the europeans though - it is was the greeks called anatolia or asia minor.
Ahaha they're doing heartland theory in Wapo? Interesting
These partnerships enabled democracy to thrive and the free-world economy to flourish, and they formed the foundation upon which the liberal world order was built. By the 1990s, the Western victory over the Soviet Union had inaugurated a post-Cold War era of great-power peace and democratic dominance.
Fuck I hate liberals so much. Indonesia? Vietnam? Iran? Lebanon? The Cold War wasn't won peacefully or democratically. 🙄
U.S. military spending is nearly as low, as a percentage of gross domestic product, as it has been at any time since World War II.
gfdi the US spends far more than any other country, fuck off fuck off fuck ooooofffff
U.S. military spending is nearly as low, as a percentage of gross domestic product, as it has been at any time since World War II.
I love content where country-by-country comparisons must exist (ideally in infographic form) but the US is only compared to the US.
yeah but they are spending less than when they were last at total war and also before the CIA was formed starting the practice of obfuscating how much money is being funneled into defense.
it rocks how you open the newspaper now and get transported 150 years back in time to some victorian ass racism
The United States has a post-Cold War military in a pre-world war world. It should be devoting about 5 percent of GDP to defense — significantly more than its current 3 percent.
Show
Everyone knows the best way to defend yourself against widespread global cooperation is not to participate in that cooperation or give the world reasons to cooperate with you. No actually the best way is to just spend all of your money on bombs and bomb the entire world!
Yes I am available as a government consultant. No I don't care what party.
Commander: Have we bombed anywhere? Have we shown 'em we got teeth?
Carpenter: Oh yes, sir. We've bombed a lot of places flat, sir.
Commander: Good. Good. We don't want anyone to think we're chicken.
Carpenter: Oh no! They don't think that, sir. Everyone's really scared of us, sir.
Commander: Of us?
Carpenter: Yes, sir.
Commander: (pleased) Of our power?
Carpenter: Oh yes, sir! They're really scared when they see those big planes come over.
Commander: Wow! I bet they are. I bet they are. I bet they're really scared.
Carpenter: Oh they are, sir.
Commander: Do we have any figures on how scared they are?
Carpenter: No ... no figures, sir. But they sure were scared.
Commander: Ah! But it's not working?
Carpenter: No, sir.
Of course they leave out any consideration for whether or not the US actually has the workers, soldiers or industry (it doesn't) to make use of a whole extra 2% of its GDP on war. Literally the pentagon can't even use all the money it already has (which is why money keeps disappearing and the pentagon keeps failing audits).
Finance capitalism says the more money the more better. Factories have a lower return than speculation on annual ammunition production
author is "Hal Brands":
Hal Brands (born 1983) is an American political scientist and scholar of U.S. foreign policy. He is the Henry A. Kissinger Distinguished Professor of Global Affairs at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
John Hopkins seems to like having their staff write opinion pieces.
They wanted to say "Judeo-Bolshevik, Asiatic hordes" but their editor realized this would out them as literal nazis.
They also demonstrated that the cycle of Eurasian conflict could be broken only by the United States.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
until Europeans aren't white anymore
![[Not the Onion] The looming Eurasian menace](https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/75a35862-f14e-448b-ad22-46b6388d4ec0.png){kind=link}