You must log in or # to comment.
I would recommend reading the whole article. I’m familiar with the vast majority of the historical parallels they lay out, and I agree. If you’re less of a history nerd than I am, it’s an excellent brief on the high-level geopolitical and economic lead-in to WW2, and how disturbingly similar it is to what’s going on since 2022 (or really, since 2014) Ukraine.
There may be parallels but there are also such huge differences that I cant really buy into that comparison. Most of all before WW2 no one had nuclear weapons. It’s a difference that can’t be underestimated. You may think that Putin is a lunatic but you can be sure that above all he cares about his own survival. So why should he do anything that could provoke a 3rd world war? The moment that there’s an open war with NATO… He knows that he’s a dead man.
Moreover, Russia is in no position to fight against let alone occupy any NATO country. They couldn’t even occupy half of Ukraine so far and they’ve lost so many troops. Yes they’re trying to build a war economy but Russia has no population that’s expendable. They’re already in a deep demographic crisis and this war will only cripple their economic outlook for a long time to come.
I really don’t see how Russia is supposed to pull of the Hitler playbook. Putin would risk everything without a prospect of success. They’ll keep fighting in Ukraine and continue their hybrid FUD war but that’s all there is.
I don’t think Russia will militarily invade NATO (at least at first). All he needs to do is install enough puppets like Hungary and Belarus to weaken the alliance, and an axis of dictatorships (Russia, China, and Iran) could then overtake the west.
Why would he be dead? As with the Prigozhin mutiny, he’ll just fly somewhere away from Moscow and hide in a bunker, which could be in central Russia or near China.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The proximate causes of the current conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, the South China Sea and even Armenia might be different, but the bigger picture showed an interconnected battlefield in which post-cold war certainties had given way to “great-power competition” in which authoritarian leaders were testing the boundaries of their empires.
In a sign of the times, Michael Roth, the SPD chair of the Bundestag foreign affairs committee and a supporter of arming Ukraine, is quitting politics, saying he found it was like stepping into a refrigerator to hold the views he did inside his own party.
Critics say this fatalistic narrative – dovetailing with Russia’s main objective, which is to convince the US that further aid is futile – also makes little attempt to identify the lessons of the past two years about the failure to organise a war economy in Europe.
Liberal market economies are inherently likely to be slower to adapt to war than their authoritarian counterparts, but one of the lessons of the 1930s, and those locust years, is that organising for rearmament entails planning and not just false reassurances, which were the stock in trade of Chamberlain and his predecessor Stanley Baldwin.
Incredibly, the adviser to the Polish chief of staff, Krzysztof Król, admitted to a conference last month that after two years “we have not yet created proper conditions for a Ukrainian victory with our plans because political leaders had not yet told them the objective”.
It will take two meetings, one involving the G7 leaders in Italy next week and then the 75th anniversary Nato summit in Washington in July, to reveal whether the west wishes not to contain Putin, but to defeat him – with all the risk that carries, including for China.
The original article contains 3,179 words, the summary contains 292 words. Saved 91%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
To me it feels more like post-1939 phony war, but undeclared this time. And unlike 1939, the invasion went wrong and the aggressors are burning up a whole lot of blood and treasure to get not a whole lot of territory.
Eh, Putin is primarily interested in taking over old USSR territory and restoring Russia to their former power. Even he isn’t dumb enough to intentionally fire a bullet at a NATO member, as it would not go well in his favor. Sure, they have nukes, but a lot has changed in the last ~40 years. It isn’t even certain his nukes could hit many of their critical targets before being shot down or have their guidance systems meddled with. I’m not sure he could even really rely on China backing him up, as they wouldn’t see much value in going head to head with NATO. They’re much more inclined towards the long term strategy that’s been working quite well for them so far.
With that being said, I hope I’m not proven wrong. War is horrific and I truly wish for me and my offspring to never see the day another world war breaks out.
Old parts of the USSR are now part of NATO.
Even he isn’t dumb enough to intentionally fire a bullet at a NATO member, as it would not go well in his favor.
Yet. That’s the problem with his behaviour and the reason why we need to see this as a lead up. He’s pushing boundaries, testing our resolve, finding cracks and stoking divisions. He’s not going to attack a NATO member yet, but sooner or later he will find the right time, the right member, to strike and expose our weakness.
Putler can’t even keep his logistics together 150km from his own border
His professional army is gone, it’s all conscripts and poorly trained mercs from Africa and the Indian subcontinant
His modern armour is gone, Russia is fielding T-55s to cover losses
He has been denied air superiority over the combat theatre by 40 year old soon-to-be-retired weaponry
A third of the black sea fleet is at the bottom of the black sea and was put there by a country with no navy…
He wont do shit, he cant do shit…
All this and NATO havent even turned up yet
It’s not wise to underestimate the enemy. We need to stop this them as soon as possible. Time only helps them. Even with their ratshit military they can still hurt a lot of innocent people.
NATO havent even turned up yet
Maybe that’s that problem.
Yeah, no. Has Russia taken a lot of fatalities? Yeah. But they’re also a huge country and a lot of what they’ve “lost” has to some extent areas where they’d consider the population expendable.
The thing is, while NATO etc bicker about supplying Ukraine - while fighting against internal sabotage by Russia’s unspoken allies - they’ve been actively working on a functional war-economy and production, as well as arrangements with regimes such as Iran etc.
The West has this far been in the “send some older hardware but only for defence” mode, which is just recently, slowly turning around. Committing actual troops to war is not so much, and the militaries of many members have been grossly neglected for decades. Russia continues to push the line of “you don’t want nuclear war, do you?” while also actively preparing for a larger scale conflict and pushing boundaries They, and China, Iran etc have also been increasingly active in technological/cyber attacks. Eventually, I fully expect them to go for broke. This probably won’t actually start at another invasion but rather as increasing/coordinated infrastructure attacks on infrastructure and technology.