Search results

Not forgotten; I just don't think I need to add that brick to the pile to make my argument. Russia would lose all maritime trade through its Baltic Sea and Black Sea ports irrespective of NATO's naval strength. European NATO maritime trade would also be at risk, depending on how long Russia's...

Invading across oceans is hard. It takes a surprisingly large number of ships to mount and sustain a multi-divisional cross-ocean invasion, and usually requires near air supremacy, which is difficult to attain without land-based air cover. GDP matters when the effort is paramount, which Russia...

Yes. Russia could establish one or more lodgements in Canada, but not stay to any effect. It's irrelevant to what we're discussing though, which is a Russia war against NATO in Europe, presumably based primarily on an invasion of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. GDP matters a lot more. The...

Yes. Combined GDP of just Germany, UK, France, Italy, and Canada is somewhere above $13T. Russia a bit over $2T. A NATO-Russia war wouldn't be decided by drone swarms in 6 weeks. Russia caught Ukraine off balance and couldn't even manage that. If assuming the US might stay completely out of...

NATO vs Russia wouldn't be decided by drones. NATO vs Russia would be decided by geography and economics. Russia is fighting Ukraine along the eastern border of Ukraine from, roughly, Belarus to the Sea of Azov. If Russia picks a fight with NATO, the front line on land alone would extend...

We learn, and the war goes on. Find a Churchill to put some spine into people who go around counseling fears and safety concerns, at least until the crisis is passed.

By nominal GDP, either of Germany, UK, France, or Italy outranks Russia. Theoretically, any of them could do it alone.

US GDP growth is dramatically outpacing Russia GDP growth. US GDP growth is outpacing China GDP growth. (China peaked in 2021 with about 78% of US GDP and has since slid to about 64%.) Canada is lagging too. The more time elapses, the further pretty much everyone else is falling behind the...

The short route is through BC - maybe it's "longer" because of the terrain, but I'm inclined to doubt that; no-one would be re-experiencing building the CPR with 1880s tech - and there are big markets in Asia. The tolerance so far for how badly ideologues have screwed up land management in BC...

Because the "largest potential threat" is unrealistic to absurdity, and there are practical gains to be realized from aiding others.

"Anti-capitalists". Sounds like a rhetorical cover for people who just want to take someone else's stuff.

I'll be darned.

Hypothesis 1: the critics here have a remarkable ability to pinpoint strategic weaknesses that cannot be overcome by the Pentagon. Hypothesis 2: the Pentagon has competent planners that can find new ways of doing old business.

That's been obvious to anyone paying attention since Bush the Elder's Gulf War. It doesn't make Ramstein sine qua non for US operations across a large chunk of the globe. Sure thing. "Me doing me" is doubting the existence of sine qua non fuel for concern trolling.

I do say so. The US professional service members are not incompetent. If you want to take the other position here, go ahead.

I noticed. Whatever the US might do to mitigate Iranian responses would be useful information to the Iranians, if it were leaked by Europeans made privy to the information.

Not sure what that has to do with "concern" that service members are going to die. I reiterate, the US military is capable of planning its medical support without Ramstein.

The weakest enterprises tend to fail first under financial stress. Spirit was inevitable; it's weakness was obvious from all the merger attempts. Most of the jobs might still be there if DoJ hadn't blocked the merger the company finally approved.

"Concern" noted, but probably none. The US is somewhat capable of planning military operations.

Right. So if everyone knew, the Europeans knew. What was it they had to know in addition to that?