I was thinking about that point that people bring up about military spending with the US and Im getting suspicious that the actual money spent on the US military is a mirage suggesting a capability that far far surpasses the capabilities of the next 10 near peers of the USA.
Something just doesnt add up.
The US has spent trillions on its military yet NATO and the US is having a tough time making the fight against Russia trivial.
If the money spent is any indication of capability; then it follows that besting Russia in Ukraine should be trivial. But that is not the case.
You see… I can understand designing weapons in order to kill and win wars which Im sure that is the principles of Russian and Chinese philosophy in warfare.
But what if the US is doing that… But also allowing the profit motive to have a say? Im starting to think that the USA is blowing money on overvalued systems that are AT BEST, MAYBE a tiny bit more effective than the oppositions’ weapons.
It aint like Ukraine was short of capable fighters with covert NATO training and backing.
For all the trillions spent on NATO; Ukraine should have settled this conflict months ago. Ukraine should have defeated the Donbas rebellion before it could even find its footing.
For real though. What the fuck? Is the west genuinely a paper tiger in the most real sense?
Consider also colonial projects like Isntreal. With all their backing from the US; they havent managed to just bulldoze Palestine into the phantom realm. They STILL have to put in effort.
It’s just very strange… The realities don’t match up with the money or the talk.
The only way it makes sense is if the west develops weapons for profit first and foremost, which doesnt always mean the highest quality.
Since the 90s NATO’s doctrine has become increasingly focused on counter-insurgency, favouring decentralization of military leadership, weapons and technologies that favour attacking cells rather than fronts, etc.
This explains NATO’s complete failure to get a win in Ukraine.
NATO is in the process of retooling to better meet the challenge of Russia and China, this is most evident in the US and the UK. And of those two, it’s far more evident in the former. If Russia had waited just another year or two the war in Ukraine would be going differently.
Though we also have to mention, prolonged states of war are highly profitable to the military-industrial complex. 20 years of Afghanistan made a small handful of people billions of dollars, they like when conflicts get drawn out. The longer a military needs to be supplied, the longer the warmongers get paid. If all of NATO’s conflicts ended today, the entire military industry would collapse under its own weight.
The genocide of Palestine can’t and won’t end until the MIC is dismantled, the same is/was true of the genocide in the Donbas and of the war on terror.
Military spending being so high isn’t for the production of weapons, it’s so oligarchs can get paid.