:reddit-logo:
Buddy posts a lot in some christian sub, some depression sub and about 3D printing. It kind of reminds me of some scene in the chapo book where some out of the way older accountant kept a lot of war shit on and in his desk, as if it was some totem that let him feel like his life wasn't complete drek, who they only found out he was pro war after he died and someone was cleaning out a dead man's desk.
"We can escalate to deescalate" has that nice perfect ring to it that completely sums up the blood thirsty lib foreign policy wonky mind.
"I don't think the largest economy in the world has any allies."
:zizek-ok:
"why is every UN vote about China 80% of the world versus the 5 eyes? I guess we'll never know."
The MAD understander has logged on.
I guess it makes some kind of sick sense for capitalists to play chicken with the lives of billions on the line hoping that socialists will flinch first though.
"defend forward" is the most aneurysm-inducing "strategy" pushed by the US/Atlantic Counsil
if anything, it is time for the rest of the world to defend forward against this insanity
:xi-plz:
Tactical Asteroids, Tactical Gatling guns, Tactical Apocalypse
When your understanding of politics is about as complex as a game of Civilization, but you're not very smart so you play it on the second lowest difficulty but pretend you're a strategic genius
Smh these reddit nerds can't even explain the difference a specialist economy and a cottage economy.
"Escalate to Descalate" is literally something the US defence blob made up about Russia. They theorized that at the start of a NATO-Russia conflict, Russia would immediately launch a nuke at a NATO base or some sparsely populated area to show that they were serious, and NATO would back off becuase nothing was worth a general nuclear war. Even though everyone knows that if Russia did that, there's a very good chance the US would just launch all their missiles anyway.
The whole point of this moronic argument was to argue for the US to start building tactical nukes again so they could "respond in kind" and pretend this kind of nuclear exchange wouldn't escalate to all out nuclear war.
This is despite the fact that no other country except for the United States believes nukes can be used for warfighting, all other countries (including Russia) understand nuclear weapons can only be used as deterrents and this is reflected in their doctrine and arsenals. The US is the only one who wants to do what this stupid reddit post is saying, and they are always pushing the envelope on this shit from ABM to nuclear cruise missiles to stealth fighter delivery.
In the end its all just projection, although it is kind of funny when a Redditor of all people just goes mask off on US nuclear policy but thinks it's a fucking great thing. Also r/geopolitics is the pinnacle of dumb guys trying to sound smart.
lol, I got that impression of the sub. It basically sounded like r/credibledefense but for dumb guys.
I also shouldn't throw too much shade since I use to post on r/geopolitics regularly 7 or 8 years ago, when it just had 15k members and you could have somewhat coherent discussions about foreign policy. Specifically it was the only place to post about North Korea without getting bombarded by the same three reddit jokes. After it got more than 30k members the whole sub just devolved into "who would win" posts.
I even remember the post that put me off forever, it was something like "Could the US emerge victorious if the Muslim world declared war on them".
yeah, i used to be a MUN person but /r/geopolitics is just unbearably us-centric and lib brained. they always put their shitty fan fiction/conspiracy theories into whatever country the US is currently antagonizing, turning them into cartoon level villains.
Imagine if a bunch of American and British jingoists were tasked with trying to prove "academically" the idea that "my dad can beat up your dad".
"China/Russia won't be able to nuke us back and if they can then probably not too much" is a popular talking point among the Bappin crowd.
The PRC was the founder of, and the first to take the pledge of never being the first to use nuclear armaments against hostile powers.
That said, in a world where men hold the power to turn the surface of the earth into the surface of the sun, no sane person would dare use such destruction when faced with the same in retaliation.
no sane person would dare
How many sane people do we even have left?
I think our only chance would be an instant riot that results in the execution of the president all in the three minutes it takes to turn the keys and retaliate. Perhaps if they saw the people reject and remove the agressor president we may be spared.
Thats in the best case scenario of the US only launching a single "tactical" nuke, multiple strikes or a strike on a population center would be certain doom.
“We can escalate to deescalate” has that nice perfect ring to it that completely sums up the blood thirsty lib foreign policy wonky mind.
I mean, it worked so well in Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq. Why wouldn't it work here, ya know?
