this post was submitted on 02 May 2026
13 points (93.3% liked)
Geopolitics : News and discussion
403 readers
12 users here now
Rules:
- Be polite and do not spam.
- Domestic news items without any geopolitics are spam.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Which is funny
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History
Germany gave up its solar industries. It only makes sense as a concession to America.
Without a Trump impeachment I assume that the West still has strategies to come out on top against China in collaboration with the USA.
I don't see how the west can come out on top against China myself. The west is entirely dependent on manufacturing in China and many industries that China has an effective monopoly on. There's no path towards replicating that in the foreseeable future. On top of that, it's not like China is standing still. They caught up and are now surpassing the west precisely because the rate of development there is much faster. Otherwise catching up would not have been possible in the first place.
That makes we wonder why Iraq received the democracy treatment and not China. They must still believe that they can contain China. Why else would they show the world their war crimes, ecological destruction and corruption instead of presenting themselves as reliable partners?
The only way to win would be nuclear war but then why wait any longer? Do they hope that they can take out Russia? Do they still bet on robots and AI? I have no idea what the exit strategy could be but they behave as if they have one.
I mean they tried to do a color revolution in China in 1989 and failed. Also, it's kind of weird to compare Iraq to China given that they have nothing in common.
The reason that the US is showing the world their true face now is because they don't have anything to offer now. Back in the day, the US used to be a manufacturing powerhouse, it lead in science and technology, and it was a key part of the global economic system. Today, China is the biggest trading partner for most countries, the US financial system is no longer central to world trade, and the US has lost its technological edge. So, all it can do now is squeeze as much blood as it can out of its remaining vassals and cannibalize them. Which is precisely what's happening.
Meanwhile, a nuclear war would be a loss for absolutely everyone. Even the oligarchs in the US understand that they'd be living the rest of their lives like rats in a bunker in that scenario. They're much rather rule over diminished empire than do that.
I don't think the US expects to take out Russia anymore, but they do want to burn Europe down before they retrench. The worst possible scenario from American perspective would be for Europe to get economically integrated with the East. And then deal with a big Eurasian bloc as a competitor. And since they have nothing to offer Europe, they're just bleeding both Europe and Russia out while poaching what they can from Europe in the process.
The goal is likely to break up the EU and then negotiate with individual European countries from the position of absolute power. Wars in Ukraine and Iran act as a vehicle towards this end, making Europe entirely dependent on the US for energy and ensuring relations with Russia continue to be hostile.
The main focus for the US will likely be in their own hemisphere going forward. So, it's going to be a bad time for Canada and Latin America.
Iraq was about to abandon the petrodollar. If they care about upholding their reign, why not also wage the war against China then, when the technological lead was bigger. They have let it pass because they had other options and they still must have them now.
Europe could have rejected Ukrainian Nato membership and could have prevented the escalation and the squeeze. For some reason they agreed.
Nuclear winter and hunger is worse than the radiation. The elite will have enough food though. Moderna and others will take care of cancer for the masses. AI preserves the knowledge.
The elite could have transferred enough of their resources into a multipolar world to have a good life. Instead they fight. That doesn't look like they try to avoid the bunkers. They want the power.
That requires South America and Europe to voluntarily stay with them. With a technological lead, China could support one country after the other to break free. This would be a reverse cold war and the US are burning all goodwill in advance.
Bleeding Europe dry would seed even more resentments. This is a fragile strategy. It could create the divergence between elite and electorate. So I think resources will be available, just not enough to become independent and the EU will stay together for maximum weapon production.
The problem for the US is that China is not genocidal Germany. The rest of the world will not unite against it. Unlike Russia China won't conquer Taiwan. At best the US can hope to transfer the anger against Russia onto China if China gets involved in the war there. But if China doesn't get officially involved they still need a plan to contain China. Selfisolation won't work and would only be hilarious, given the Chinese history.
When exactly do you think there was a window to wage a war on China which is a nuclear power? There's a reason the US won't even dare to attack DPRK let alone China. They let it pass because they had no options and China outplayed them. The US isn't the main character. Other sovereign countries make plans and have agency of their own. China's planning and policy proved to be more successful than that of the US. Americans banked on doing political capture in China, and expected that integration with the western capitalist system would eventually displace the power of the government and then large capitalists would betray the country. That never happened, and that's the reason the relations are increasingly hostile.
However, as we saw during the tariff war, China has the US by the balls. All they have to do is stop the export of stuff like rare earths, and the entire US economy grinds to a halt. The US can't even produce weapons without these exports.
It couldn't because Europe is not independent. It is a vassal of the empire and it does what the US tells Europe to do. Same applies to south Korea, Japan, Canada, and Australia. These are not sovereign countries with independent policy.
Do you remember the pandemic when people started going stir crazy after a few months of the lockdowns? Now imagine the most narcissistic people on this planet having to live in a bunker for years. They would go nuts after a few weeks tops. Of course, they have indeed been talking about such plans, and it's kind of hilarious. One big problem is that they would need staff, and once the society collapses there's no reason for the staff not to turn on them. https://archive.ph/eK4Dp
Again, what possible benefit would there be for the rich to live like that over ruling over half the world? It's a nonsensical proposition. They want power, but not at the cost of their own comfort. The current level of conflict doesn't affect them directly in any way. It's like a game of risk for them where they move pieces around on the board. A nuclear war would have direct and sever consequences. If they didn't care about these consequences then they would've started one with USSR during the Cold War.
We already see how this strategy is working in both South America and Europe. China is not all powerful, and it's very far from South America. It can do little to challenge the US there in practical terms, especially when the US navy starts doing active piracy on the high seas. Europe on the other hand, could work with China, but the leadership in Europe continues to dance to American tune.
We see precisely this happening right now, but look at what's happening in the Middle East. That's American plan for Europe too. The EU will collapse, individual states will be thrown into chaos, and there could be a long period of infighting, terrorism, and insurgencies. This will make the whole region volatile which works to American advantage. It's basically a scorched earth policy. If the US can't dominate Eurasia, then they will do everything to throw it into chaos. That's the strategy that's already been used in many other regions. Just look at Latin America or Africa as an example where the US regularly conducts coups and installs dictatorships. Europe is next on the menu.
Yes, global perception of China is a big problem for the US. And we already see Asia largely gravitating towards China. But the US still has India, South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines to create tensions in the region. The question is the one of resources. It's becoming clear that the US is very strained now, and they may have no choice but to retrench. Empires don't last forever, and as much as Americans see themselves as being exceptional, they're not going to be any different in the end.
Always. The consequences of nuclear fallouts weren't worth it but that changes if there is no other opportunity left.
America needs Europe against China. What would they do if Europe says no? Nuclear war against Europe?
As there is now. Let the guards have family in other bunkers. Offer access to medical specialists elsewhere. But why live in a bunker if being on a ship in the Pacific is enough after some days?
Then why is the conflict not resolved?
For now. At one point China has the better technology and will put an end to it. The US would be opened like China was opened. The US can't isolate for eternity.
Who does the research for them instead? It would accelerate the Chinese technology takeover
I think it's deception. Europe is still an ally. It's good cop, bad cop. We are at the beginning of the Iran war, not at the end. The US was prepared to fight two major wars at the same time. Like Syria, they will take their time to arrange the opposition.
Again, there's zero rational advantage to nuclear winter over simply having hegemony over the western hemisphere. I'm really glad that even the oligarchs aren't this psychopathic.
America does not need Europe. What they need to make sure is that Europe doesn't become independent and economically integrated with China and Russia. So, the solution is to burn Europe down. This is very clearly what the US is doing right now. If the US actually needed Europe then they wouldn't be pursuing a destructive strategy against Europe. They'd be doing what they did during the Cold War when they poured a ton of resources into propping Europe up.
And how long before one of the guards decides they don't need the rich baby anymore and they can just run the show themselves?
Because the conflict has no direct impact on them. I literally just explained this in my last reply. The current conflict is just a game for these people. There are zero personal consequences. They already have more wealth and power than they know what to do with. They will be comfortable no matter what happens, unless there is a nuclear holocaust. That's literally the only negative scenario for them that they would want to avoid.
I think the most likely scenario is that the US implodes, but China also hasn't been an expansionist power historically. I don't see any reason to expect China to do what the US is doing going forward.
Creating instability is what the US does to slow down China. If Europe is thrown into chaos that will slow down Eurasian integration significantly. The same way the wars and terrorism did in West Asia. Europe isn't indispensable in any way. Also, if you look at research spending, you can see that Europe is a drop in a bucket compared to the US even now.
We'll find out soon enough. I don't see any deception here myself. The US is very much strained economically, the numbers don't lie. The US lacks industrial base and isn't able to produce a lot of the things it needs. Europe is a burden for the US right now. It has never been an ally either. It's just been a convenient pawn to use against USSR during the Cold War. Now that USSR no longer exists, Europe has little value. If you think that the US would fight for Europe then prepare to be very surprised going forward.