• saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    They may have had the potential to be a superpower, but it’s apparent that they never had the leadership to conduct as one. Those inside the Kremlin bought into their own bullshit and thought of themselves as a superpower, not realising the machine within is operating on unlubricated, old, broken, and missing parts.

    This seems to be a common theme with countries that feed a superiority narrative to their people and other nations.

    • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      1 month ago

      Oh, they were a superpower as the USSR. Propping up friendly governments, supplying coups, ratfucking around where more blatant impositions wouldn’t be tolerated. It was just built on a house of cards and when it imploded it imploded big.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      1 month ago

      This seems to be a common theme with countries that feed a superiority narrative to their people and other nations.

      begins sweating profusely

      • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 month ago

        Oh, we have the military superpower. We’re constantly putting it on display. We’re basically a giant weapons and war factory. When we go down, it won’t come from the outside (except in the form of cyber attacks and misinformation campaigns).

        Though I could see it in a few decades. Russia was a powerful body full of rot. We’re a powerful body with an infection. If the authoritarians win, they’ll replace competent people in key positions with unqualified party-loyal yes men, and that will start the rot.

    • atempuser23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      1 month ago

      It seems to me that people keep begging on Ukraine. How about Russia was all of that and a bag of chips but Ukraine was developed for decades of Soviet rule to be a troop sponge where wave after wave of nato troops die and die and die keeping Russia safe.

      Ukraine was made to be a rock on which superior armies dash themselves on until they break apart.

      After seeing how NATO advised the Ukrainian counter attack to go I’m certain Russia would be in Poland by now if NATO was on the ground.

      • nuke@sh.itjust.worksOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        NATO losing to Russia in a direct conflict? Truly non credible, my brain worm friend.

        • atempuser23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          On paper it isn’t even close.

          NATO is not even willing to let someone else fight and win but magically when the casualties are theirs they’re totally gonna own the Russians?

          It’s the same kind of numerical thinking that lead most of the world to think Russia was going to win in the opening weeks of the attack on Kiev . More money and better weapons will equal a quick and decisive win.

          Russia has absorbed many hundreds of thousand of casualties. Ukraine has no choice but to fight .

          Reasonable chance that NATO has trouble sustaining support for the kind of troop losses needed for a war.

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Your mindset is based on the shallowness of an acute modern opinion that disregards history as much as it does immediate reality and humanism.

        Or, to put it simply; you have as much growing up to do as you do learning the basics—at least to contribute in this forum.

        You’re new to this. Your opinion matters, but isn’t valuable. It seems valuable to you now, but isn’t to others. That’s your first step forward to knowledge.

          • saltesc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            There is too much to cover here.

            As I said earlier, you clearly have minimal alignment of the primary understandings most others have. For starters, it’s clear you don’t even understand the premise of NATO.

            This is like me projecting opinions about cars when I think they’re made of wood and drawn by horses.

            You’re either a troll or you’re peaking on the Dunning-Kruger graph based on some obscure and narrow-scoped details you may have garnered. It’s so small picture and fundamentally flawed or entirely untrue.