Interesting article that talks about the similarities between now and 1938, and the sort of lessons we can learn from history.

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    The problem with learning from history is that everyone has their own idea about what those lessons are that we should be learning.

  • Cobrachicken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    “he almost mocked the inability of the west’s $40tn economy to organise a battlefield defeat of Russia’s $2tn economy.” <- this really bothers me. There is no will here for Ukraine to succeed.

    Very interesting link, thank you.

    • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      There is no will here for Ukraine to succeed.

      Yep. The vast majority of liberal and conservative politicians are doing the absolute minimum to support Ukraine, if they’re doing anything at all in the first place. I can understand conservatives wanting Russia to win because they idolize Russia, but how everyone else seems to also be fine with the idea is just mystifying.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s unbelievably frustrating, because most people at the outset of the conflict were horrified and strongly against just letting Russia do what they wanted.

        Instead of capitalizing on that fairly universal public outrage and doing the right thing, the ossified thought processes of pretty much everyone in charge of anything in the west made them hem and haw and delay and prevaricate and play right into Putin’s hand.

        It’s pretty clear that Putin’s geopolitical tactics, while completely malevolent and fairly transparent to a HUGE number of people, clearly work incredibly well on our political leaders - in fact, that’s ultimately the only audience he’s ever been playing for.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s unbelievably frustrating, because most people at the outset of the conflict were horrified and strongly against just letting Russia do what they wanted.

          FYI, the outset of the conflict was in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and sent special forces into Donbas. “Most people” did fuck-all from 2014 to 2022, when Russia escalated to try to take the whole country.

          • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Oh, yeah, I 100% agree. That was the time to step in if anyone actually gave a shit about nuclear non-proliferation.

            I consider the complete lack of meaningful response to the 2014 invasion to be both Obama and Merkel’s single most egregious foreign policy failure. Merkel also rapidly thawed relations with Russia after that, and continued to aggressively push for closer ties with Russia, and this is the result. She continues to insist that her approach at the time was correct; she’s going to be remembered alongside the likes of Neville Chamberlain because of it.

      • Habahnow@sh.itjust.worksOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Idk If you’re talking about the US, but liberals/the left have to deal with Republicans having enough power to block any additional funding. The left does want to do more, it’s just difficult when one side wants to do things that help Russia

        That being said, I do ultimately agree with your sentiment, the West is not doing enough quickly.

  • BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve played that hoi4 scenario as Czechcoslovakia and the only reason it’s winnable is because it’s a game and the ai makes huge mistakes.

    I’ve been comparing this invasion of ukraine to Czechcoslovakia since almost the start, but there are differences. Not really between the justification or the foreign policy that the Russian government is using. Between the relative strength of Czechcoslovakia v nazi Germany and ukraine v russia. Also between ukraine’s negotiated treaties. Ukraine appears stronger than Czechcoslovakia but never obtained a defensive pact with a single other country. The Czechoslovaks had a defensive pact, but it was quickly abandoned. I still see letting them fall as akin to appeasement, some vying for leadership positions have suggested that abandoning defense pacts is justified sometimes. If it’s justified sometimes you may try to find a hole to make it justified all the time. All ukraine had been promised was weapons and we may be in a position where we tell ourselves we did our part even if we didn’t do enough.

  • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    He argued: “There is one actor that has reorganised its strategic engagement to fight a war and the other has not. One side is not participating in the battle. You have hosted conferences supporting Ukraine and then do nothing more. But when it comes to action, Russia 2.0 is grinding forward.

    “It tells countries like us that if something like this were to happen in the Indo-Pacific, you have no chance against China. If you cannot defeat a $2tn nation, don’t think you are deterring China. China is taking hope from your abysmal and dismal performance against a much smaller adversary.”

    This, in a nutshell, is where the world is headed … unless the self-proclaimed defender of democracy (USA) and the EU pull up their britches and start taking Russian aggression seriously.

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just out of curiosity, can anyone name one war the US has been involved in since WWII where a high ranking government official did not compare it to WWII to drum up support?

    • HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Well for one if you read the article the persons comparing it are the Estonian prime minister and her favorite history professor

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The reason I specified is that random people may make random comparisons all the time, so if I just said “where people did not compare it” it wouldn’t really mean anything. Estonia doesn’t tend to have as many wars they need to drum up support for so they don’t do it as often, but it’s still a greatly overused analogy in general. People said it about Korea. They said it about Vietnam. They said it about Iraq. All of those comparisons were ridiculous in hindsight but worked well enough at the time. It’s basically just a go-to thing you can say and people will just knee-jerk get on board with whatever military endeavor you’re doing at a given time, regardless of what it is.

  • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Maybe starting a land war with Russia and a trade war with China at the same time was a bad idea