Watch & Learn: America Can Barely Supply a Proxy War

By

 Big revelation via The Duran:


So. Many. Questions!

  1. Why take the role of supplier if you can't maintain enough weapons to actually win the conflict?
  2. If the Biden Administration/US Military can't supply enough conventional ammunitions for a proxy war with Russia, what makes them think they could sustain an actual hot war with Russia?
  3. Also, what makes them believe that they could sustain any type of conflict with China?
  4. If NATO goes down, where does that leave the US?
  5. How does any of this truly benefit Europe?
  6. What's really guiding the US here: politics, money, military hubris or some combination?

On the last one, I see the convergence of American politics (as they said in the video, the desire to keep this conflict going through the 2024 election), military hubris (the belief that the US military can beat anyone hands down) and pure greed (trying to make a profit of this whole conflict/situation) in a way where one will have to give. True military personnel want to win wars but the weapons manufacturers  care more about profit; a prolonged conflict aids the latter but can slowly erode the moral of the former. And then you throw in the fact that there are people looking at this solely from the perspective of political gains and losses. There are ways to end the conflict that would help the politicians and military same some face, but that means less money for the war profiteers. But if this continues to escalate, even incrementally, odds are those on the side of the US and NATO will experience a public loss that can't be spun or sugarcoated, and there's a real fear that nuclear options will be on the table because our leaders are basically having a temper tantrum. 

This is just one more item to add to the list of bad military decisions the US are making.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Five Actresses Who Should Be Considered For A Wonder Woman Movie

By
Image
For being DC Comic's most recognizable female character, WW has been given the cinematic shaft for a long time. We've seen two incarnations of Lois Lane and countless Bat-groupies, but not one decent pitch for the Amazon in the big screen. And we're talking about a character who made armored underwear cool waaay before anyone heard of Princess Leia. So here's one humble man's suggestion for any future casting of the Wonder Woman movie. I really have three rules for casting: she has to be at least 5'10", under 45 and attractive enough to pass for a princess. Sandrine Holt - Age: 36, Height: 5'10", Relevant Movie/TV Roles: Resident Evil: Apocalypse & Mutant X Pros : She's played both a (doomed) reporter and a person with superpowers, so if she can play both, she's a shoe-in. Plus she's probably the least-known actress on this list, so they can two movies out of her cheap. Cons : While D.C. isn't as star-crazy as Marvel when it co...
Read more

5 Actresses Who Deserve a Bigger Break

By
Image
Being the avid movie watcher that I am, I've noticed that more than one talented actress has been passed over for other talent. And by "talent," I mean, "sex tapes that 'accidentally' made it to the Internet." Well, here's one man's humble attempt to rectify the situation. The following ladies are not only talented, but beautiful. Hollywood: get off your ass and give these women more roles. DANIELLE FISHEL Noticeable TV/Movie Appearances: Boy Meets World; both National Lampoon's Dorm Dazes The delightful Ms. Fishel has the distinction of having the weirdest named ever associated with a smart-yet-hot character (or maybe I'm the only one who has a problem saying "Topanga!" whilst in the throes of passion) as well as participating in the death of the National Lampoon Series (I personally thought it died with Chevy Chase's career; who knew?). If you were to use her IMBD page as a reference, the only real fault people seem to hav...
Read more