What we have are two separate ideologies:
One throws bodies at the problem, until they win or there are no bodies left (Soviets).
The other throws money st the problem, until they win or there is no money left (U.S.) -- nevermind that the money appropriated is really part of some elaborate money laundering scheme.
We fought in Afghanistan for 2 decades, and during that time, lost just under 2,000 to hostile action. At the rate the Soviets are losing troops in Ukraine, that's just a slow week. Don't worry, they'll send more.
Also during this same time, the U.S. spent over $2 TRILLION in Afghanistan. That's more than the Soviets nominal GDP! Don't worry, we'll send more.
I don't disagree at all about the different ideology.
I just prefer to look at things through my shit tinted glasses when it comes to trying to understand why we do the things we do.
Then again, the different ideology is my whole point - the ideologies may
seem different on the surface, but it is my humble opinion that the results are the same. In both cases, a super power is throwing their nations resources down the drain at a contrived problem set, regardless (or even in spite of) the end result.
The Russians paint their losses as noble - for the mother land. When needed, they just throw out the evils of capitalism or the threat of Nazi fascism as some lame cover story to justify their land grabs.
American politicians paint their global embezzlement strategy as part of some moral responsibility that ALL Americans must support -
for the children - or whatever other "
make the world America" bullshit excuse we use to justify the multi-billion dollar money laundering scams that our politicians use to fund other peoples disagreements.
The Russians throw people (blood) - we throw money (treasure) - and
Blood and Treasure are certainly part of the same cliché that we all use to describe situations such as these when ego maniacal selected leaders squander their nations blood
and treasure in exchange for sound bytes on the nightly news..
The Russians do not think the same as "we" do. They absolutely cultivate their 'Russian Bear' image.
"
I will crush you for mother Russia"
...and then they go out and do that shit. If it costs Babushka a few of her sons - so be it - it was a noble sacrifice to stem the tide of fascism and capitalism into the mother land.
America just waves the banner of "
save the poor children of /insert country name here/" and away we go.
Once upon a time used communism as our 'go-to' bogeyman - then it was terrorism...
-We had to get rid of the terrorism bogeyman because it offended too many people.
-Communism is trending in and around permanent DC, so we can't use THAT as a bogeyman any more.
-So now we just use the bogeyman of "save the children" to strum everyone's heart strings.
...or climate change - we use the FUCK out of climate change.
So, I ask - did we really spend $2 TRILLION in Afghanistan or did we just transfer that money into the bank accounts of organizations like Fluor, Leidos, DynCorp, Aegis, Lockheed, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics...
...lions and tigers and Russian Bears
OH.MY.
Whether the Ukraine is losing or not, it is their job to kill as many Russians and equipment as possible. Sure, we all know Pootie-Poo isn't ending the war any time soon, if ever, but what would you do in the same situation? (Insert some nation here) holds 20% of the US and our defeat is a given, so we just give up? Fight on, make them bleed, and maybe it shifts in our favor. Surrender and the French use us as a punchline.
Fight in the fields and the streets, fight in the hills, fight on the beaches...
I agree 100%
My rhetoric doesn't always get to the point - because what fun would that be - but I do agree - 100% - invade my home and we will fight until I cannot fight any more - and if I am forced into it, I will set my home ablaze before I am finally driven into a retreat.
But THAT isn't what bugs me. What bugs me is that "we the people" were in a position to apply deterrent options that would have saved countless lives on BOTH sides of this conflict. "we the people" were in a position to apply deterrent options that could have saved hundreds of billions of dollars that could have been spent -
for the children - and we delibaretly opted out of that.
Instead, the Resident of the United States all but invited Russia to do as they pleased...
“It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion..." said the American chief executive.
Nuance matters - and no matter how hard they tried to walk that comment back a few days later, with one breath of air, Joe Biden took away our deterrence options and forced us into dusting off our response options.
Which, I might add, have a MUCH higher profit margin for those that are heavily invested in the defense industry.
My grief is how willingly, joyfully, and openly our selected leaders lie to the American people about what is going on around the world and how our government is profiting from...
.
..how willingly, joyfully, and openly our selected leaders lie to the American people about what is going on around the world and how our government is addressing America's best interest at home and abroad.
To this point, there wasn't even supposed to be much of a fight and this thing was going to.be over in a matter of days. Here we are a couple years and a shit-ton of losses later.
Isn't that ALWAYS how war works?
Sun Tzu may have wrote, "
There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare." - but then again, he never owned stock in Lockheed Martin.
