I’ve been under the impression that the game plan was to use Ukraine as a quagmire to tie up Russia, test new technologies, force the EU into an even more subservient, buffer state role, and use Ukraine as a martyr to rally Russophobic Western sentiments and manufacture consent for new “security” measures in the West that would further silence opposition. I feel the ultimate goal was really China - using the martyred Ukraine as a call to arms to “save Taiwan”, as it were (the news painting Russia as villainous made a big deal of effort trying to tie China to everything Russia did in the war, and comparing the situation in Ukraine to the situation with Taiwan).
It’s the only thing I could think of that made any kind of sense. The only alternative is that they genuinely believed Ukraine could have beaten Russia with only military aid. I don’t doubt some people in positions of power could be convinced of that, but at the highest levels I have to believe this was just another attempt by the US to keep Russia off-balance enough that the US could try and cut China down.
Disagree. While they did achieved lot of points especially with EU, they really hoped for Russia to collapse or at least plunge into crisis which will force it to retreat, regime change and comply with US imperialism (that’s why Ukraine was never planned to militarily win, they just had to stand for a time and that’s why the initial loss of much territory was irrelevant to US).
It’s not the 4D chess, US really fucked it big time with consequences mounting, and it’s not really surprising considering their plan makers isn’t what they used to be during cold war.
I feel the ultimate goal was really China - using the martyred Ukraine as a call to arms to “save Taiwan”, as it were (the news painting Russia as villainous made a big deal of effort trying to tie China to everything Russia did in the war, and comparing the situation in Ukraine to the situation with Taiwan).
Yes, the ultimate target was China, but not like this. More directly, the most dangerous thing for US is either EU-Russia or Russia-China scenario. Neutralising Russia would do away with both, put US in much stronger position against China and ensure continuation of US hegemony for forseeable future. So while they succeeded in breaking up the EU-Russia closing and severly delayed EU-China, they pushed Russia closest to China they were since the Sino-Soviet split.
I agree, and in addition, they wanted to sell off all their old stockpiled weapons to make way for new ones. Part of it was literally just a fire sale to lush out old product.
always important to remember that the military is a for profit enterprise. You can’t separate the military from the people making the military’s stuff. There is a collection of extremely powerful corporations that are constantly banging the war drums.
I’ve been under the impression that the game plan was to use Ukraine as a quagmire to tie up Russia, test new technologies, force the EU into an even more subservient, buffer state role, and use Ukraine as a martyr to rally Russophobic Western sentiments and manufacture consent for new “security” measures in the West that would further silence opposition. I feel the ultimate goal was really China - using the martyred Ukraine as a call to arms to “save Taiwan”, as it were (the news painting Russia as villainous made a big deal of effort trying to tie China to everything Russia did in the war, and comparing the situation in Ukraine to the situation with Taiwan).
It’s the only thing I could think of that made any kind of sense. The only alternative is that they genuinely believed Ukraine could have beaten Russia with only military aid. I don’t doubt some people in positions of power could be convinced of that, but at the highest levels I have to believe this was just another attempt by the US to keep Russia off-balance enough that the US could try and cut China down.
Disagree. While they did achieved lot of points especially with EU, they really hoped for Russia to collapse or at least plunge into crisis which will force it to retreat, regime change and comply with US imperialism (that’s why Ukraine was never planned to militarily win, they just had to stand for a time and that’s why the initial loss of much territory was irrelevant to US).
It’s not the 4D chess, US really fucked it big time with consequences mounting, and it’s not really surprising considering their plan makers isn’t what they used to be during cold war.
Yes, the ultimate target was China, but not like this. More directly, the most dangerous thing for US is either EU-Russia or Russia-China scenario. Neutralising Russia would do away with both, put US in much stronger position against China and ensure continuation of US hegemony for forseeable future. So while they succeeded in breaking up the EU-Russia closing and severly delayed EU-China, they pushed Russia closest to China they were since the Sino-Soviet split.
Yours is absolutely correct. Bidens , UK, Germans are a big time dumb people.
I agree, and in addition, they wanted to sell off all their old stockpiled weapons to make way for new ones. Part of it was literally just a fire sale to lush out old product.
always important to remember that the military is a for profit enterprise. You can’t separate the military from the people making the military’s stuff. There is a collection of extremely powerful corporations that are constantly banging the war drums.