Max

Conscription is a questionable gambit considering recent austerity movements—if euro’s bourgeoisie arm their unwilling working class with military weapons and teach them to fight, they can’t also put the screws to them at home. Well, not without inciting revolution anyway.

Blaming the proxy when it doesn’t work out, and claiming the issue is cost is just cope to make NATO countries feel confident it’s the dum dum Slavs fault and not the reality that NATO has little to no tech or strategic advantage over anyone who is actually a rival military. NATO doctrine during the ‘war on terror’ involved using as many munitions as possible in “shock and awe” attacks but maybe NATO wasn’t willing to extend the use of that tactic to a lowly proxy. Or maybe NATO doctrine only applies to farmers with 1950s weaponry defending their homes

I’m inclined to agree. This seems like the first time (at least in my memory) where no one with significant influence in US gov’t fundamentally understands what has been US foreign policy since Monroe. All the idiot business guys who think the US sends money to forcibly underdeveloped countries out of the kindness of their hearts—folks simply intellectually unequipped to continue the post-Soviet international order—are the only ones at the reigns. On top of that, they got some weirdo Canadian-South African billionaire with no understanding of US consumer culture (and the US citizens’ complete aversion to any inconvenience) to come impose harsh anarcho-capitalist austerity measures at home. “There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen” seems especially apt right now.