I agree with all of this except the part about Russia. We can't neglect the 2014 CIA backed coup that overthrew Ukraine's democratically elected government or the breaking of the Minsk agreement.
Having said that, I think all western nations need to demilitarize, end austerity and invest in green technology and environmental restoration. And maybe even develop a friendly relationship with BRICS. It's not out to harm anyone.
Varoufakis is always a good read. Thank you both. Looking after one another and a Green New Deal sound a much better idea.
I am glad you make a connection with the energy resources that keep this makeshift if still growing industrial material world alive. As Prof Keen has put it, 'without energy the economy [labour, capital] is a corpse'. NB. Globally ~ 80% of the primary energy is fossil fuel, and that ratio has not changed in decades.
The real mistake will be to believe in his own propaganda, USA could not bend Huti rebels, Russia could not bend Ukraine* and no conquest war did end well in almost 75 years...
Going to war is a game that work only against your own populations, a negative sum game:
-the almost sure lost of the war is throwing away your military hardware (and production)
-war production shift wealth from population to elite, but with a net lost in total output (see Russia today)
-human lost count toward a diminishing consumer base
-eventual conversion back to civilian production is a net lost
Is important to have a good, credible, useful deterrent as a defence insurance but on the reasoning to make prospective conquer too COSTLY to undertake, this could be viable keeping a healty baseline of military industries (possibly state owned) and using the resources toward a reasoned structure. Italy did it during cold war and made a lot of unsophisticated hardware based on short range fast platforms to swarm possible invaders: long range platforms devote a lot of space and tonnage toward persistance, short range ones are more armed with same tonnage or maller and cheaper with same firepower, Italy choosed to produce small missile boats and fast short range interceptors and keep a strong emphasis on mountain compatible light hardware because is a montaneous country and fighting a force in his territory on mountains usually is a nighmare (see Afganistan).
Elite reason out of logic because are far away from reality as thei coul affoird to be, live in a dreamland where their "reasoning" is all that matter and their power shield them from consequences. The reasoning of the Bomber Command during WW2 is an exemple, Hitler's choices during the Operation Cittadel (siege Russia during winter..) and so on are good exemples, reality could not reach back to decision makers.
Better consider that we still argue about the "escalate to de escalate" as a real option today, no amount of common sense could have reached anyone if we consider that is a chicken game with nuclear bombs!
*Russia is still in the fighting phase with Ucraine, usually the worst part of a conquest is not "gain" but "keep". We could consider Iraq and Afganistan (Nato and URSS ones) as an exemple, the fall of the country was quick (destruction of organized, state owned, military force) but the occupation phase is the most demanding and draining one. Ucrainian war today is more akind to Vietnam War where USA could not get the country wole and the most devasting effects was feelt from the third lines and supply side: frontal war is a statlemate but lost are inflicted prevalently on the attacker rearlines to hi value assets and soldiers on rest.
the parusia can not come soon enough the earth4all team was always wrong what did they think that population would grow to 2050 sandrine dixson decleve and johan rockstöm still saying we can limit global warming to 1.5 degrees celsuis they are completly wrong according to leon simons and gaya herrington says that we are already collapsing so it is not elderly people dying of of old age or fertility we will all die off very soon i am glad no more fear mongering than for me the parusia may come tommorow i di not care no more !!!!
i do not believe that the green deal is over sandrine dixson decleve sit's on the advisary board of the european union and i follow her on linkedin she would already mentioned it if the green deal was over ?
I agree with all of this except the part about Russia. We can't neglect the 2014 CIA backed coup that overthrew Ukraine's democratically elected government or the breaking of the Minsk agreement.
Having said that, I think all western nations need to demilitarize, end austerity and invest in green technology and environmental restoration. And maybe even develop a friendly relationship with BRICS. It's not out to harm anyone.
You refer to Varoufakis discussion about Russia?
Yes.
Didn't mention the 2014 coup, but I think it was implicit in the way he approached the subject.
Varoufakis is always a good read. Thank you both. Looking after one another and a Green New Deal sound a much better idea.
I am glad you make a connection with the energy resources that keep this makeshift if still growing industrial material world alive. As Prof Keen has put it, 'without energy the economy [labour, capital] is a corpse'. NB. Globally ~ 80% of the primary energy is fossil fuel, and that ratio has not changed in decades.
When it comes to military investment and geopolitics, in a comment on a previous post of yours I mentioned hypersonic missiles. I learn however from the reasonably reliable Adam Tooze that I need to update my understanding of missiles, Scholz (EU), and the relationship with Israel. (btw UK and Germany appear already in action with US in ME/West Asia). https://open.substack.com/pub/adamtooze/p/chartbook-392-incoming-from-out-of?r=k9l10&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
The real mistake will be to believe in his own propaganda, USA could not bend Huti rebels, Russia could not bend Ukraine* and no conquest war did end well in almost 75 years...
Going to war is a game that work only against your own populations, a negative sum game:
-the almost sure lost of the war is throwing away your military hardware (and production)
-war production shift wealth from population to elite, but with a net lost in total output (see Russia today)
-human lost count toward a diminishing consumer base
-eventual conversion back to civilian production is a net lost
Is important to have a good, credible, useful deterrent as a defence insurance but on the reasoning to make prospective conquer too COSTLY to undertake, this could be viable keeping a healty baseline of military industries (possibly state owned) and using the resources toward a reasoned structure. Italy did it during cold war and made a lot of unsophisticated hardware based on short range fast platforms to swarm possible invaders: long range platforms devote a lot of space and tonnage toward persistance, short range ones are more armed with same tonnage or maller and cheaper with same firepower, Italy choosed to produce small missile boats and fast short range interceptors and keep a strong emphasis on mountain compatible light hardware because is a montaneous country and fighting a force in his territory on mountains usually is a nighmare (see Afganistan).
Elite reason out of logic because are far away from reality as thei coul affoird to be, live in a dreamland where their "reasoning" is all that matter and their power shield them from consequences. The reasoning of the Bomber Command during WW2 is an exemple, Hitler's choices during the Operation Cittadel (siege Russia during winter..) and so on are good exemples, reality could not reach back to decision makers.
Better consider that we still argue about the "escalate to de escalate" as a real option today, no amount of common sense could have reached anyone if we consider that is a chicken game with nuclear bombs!
https://thebulletin.org/2024/02/escalating-to-de-escalate-with-nuclear-weapons-research-shows-its-a-particularly-bad-idea/
*Russia is still in the fighting phase with Ucraine, usually the worst part of a conquest is not "gain" but "keep". We could consider Iraq and Afganistan (Nato and URSS ones) as an exemple, the fall of the country was quick (destruction of organized, state owned, military force) but the occupation phase is the most demanding and draining one. Ucrainian war today is more akind to Vietnam War where USA could not get the country wole and the most devasting effects was feelt from the third lines and supply side: frontal war is a statlemate but lost are inflicted prevalently on the attacker rearlines to hi value assets and soldiers on rest.
dear professor bardi do you mean a mass die of for eu citizen or european country's that will leave the european union ?
There will come the Parusia, like a thief in the night.
so ugo you are saying we will all by death very soon ?
the parusia can not come soon enough the earth4all team was always wrong what did they think that population would grow to 2050 sandrine dixson decleve and johan rockstöm still saying we can limit global warming to 1.5 degrees celsuis they are completly wrong according to leon simons and gaya herrington says that we are already collapsing so it is not elderly people dying of of old age or fertility we will all die off very soon i am glad no more fear mongering than for me the parusia may come tommorow i di not care no more !!!!
i do not believe that the green deal is over sandrine dixson decleve sit's on the advisary board of the european union and i follow her on linkedin she would already mentioned it if the green deal was over ?