Northern Socialist Council Republics wrote:Mercov wrote:[...] Germany was barely defeated on the battlefield. The 100 day's offensive barely moved the Front line forward. The German army was destroyed by the collapse of the German economy and government, not by the French.
Stab-in-the-back is DNVP propaganda, not reality.Paddy O Fernature wrote:Let's not forget that the overwhelming majority of everything we have given them is old stock as well that was either slated for replacement or destruction anyway.
Nato is hopelessly divided, but also Russia is fighting the whole of Nato in Ukraine.
This is the sort of rhetorical consistency we have come to expect from pro-Russian speakers.The Two Jerseys wrote:The "we're fighting NATO" bullshit almost makes me want an actual shooting war to start, because that's clearly the only way the Russia simps are going to learn this lesson...
"See, you know you can't start a fire because you're knee-deep in petrol. That makes you a coward and a loser, afraid of every little spark. Nevermind that I'm up to my neck in the same pool of petrol, that's not important."Infected Mushroom wrote:On paper NATO is stronger than Russia, but politically (due to the weaknesses built into modern democratic systems which are vulnerable to self-interested protests and can’t stomach high casualties) sending limited weapons, intelligence, and economic resources to the front is the practical limit of what the alliance CAN do in this situation.
Remind me, who won the Great War again?
Oh, right, yes, it was the democratic west, while all the authoritarian monarchies of Europe collapsed under the strain of war.
It turns out that the sort of vibrant, dynamic economics and societies that liberal-democratic governments create are really good at this whole war thing, actually.
This was before the media embraced social liberalism in the West (in WWI they acted as pro-war propaganda machines, even demonizing Germans and others as ethnic others). Since Vietnam, the western media will align with protestors, dissidents, and other disloyal elements should the casualty levels on a major war exceed what is considered acceptable.
Hence structurally, as currently structured, western democracies cannot institutionally support a large scale war or even a limited intervention against a peer adversary like Russia.
The combination of sacrificing soldiers in a proxy state (backed by Western arms and money) is the near-maximalist iteration of current NATO military power. They literally don’t have the political tools to prosecute anything larger. Their own citizens would march against their own capitals (and once body bags return, the media would side with the dissent).
















