John: Highlighting for you an irreverent read from Dmitry Orlov that was on Zerohedge that takes a different perspective with regards to the possibility of nuclear war. You might remember him from some very early and interesting books about collapse during post-Soviet times and as someone who has lived extensively in both Russia and the U.S.
TL;DR -> his view is that while the West may be accelerating towards *provoking* a nuclear war, it is an ineffectual gambit because Russia hasn't been materially weakened by the West, in contrast to the West (and Europe particularly) being substantially weakened by cutting off Russia. Hence, it has no use for nuclear weapons and need merely defend the territory is has won in the Ukraine, while waiting for the energy / food situation in the West to deteriorate further.
Would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this one. Thanks.
How does the swarm/network compete with the adage that "nation states always act with their own interests?" Is that the crux of what is changing here? That the swarm/network undermines this adage - resulting in chaos and unpredictable outcomes?
Completely agree. I worked the region for many years for the defense department, and produced much of the prominent analysis for the Pentagon post-Crimea. I've never seen such recklessness regarding Russia specifically or nuclear war in general. Now that I'm in the private sector, I get to express these things publicly. I recently described precisely how and why escalation could lead to nuclear war: https://deepdivewithleeslusher.substack.com/p/amateur-hour-armageddon
John: Highlighting for you an irreverent read from Dmitry Orlov that was on Zerohedge that takes a different perspective with regards to the possibility of nuclear war. You might remember him from some very early and interesting books about collapse during post-Soviet times and as someone who has lived extensively in both Russia and the U.S.
TL;DR -> his view is that while the West may be accelerating towards *provoking* a nuclear war, it is an ineffectual gambit because Russia hasn't been materially weakened by the West, in contrast to the West (and Europe particularly) being substantially weakened by cutting off Russia. Hence, it has no use for nuclear weapons and need merely defend the territory is has won in the Ukraine, while waiting for the energy / food situation in the West to deteriorate further.
Would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this one. Thanks.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/orlov-new-cuban-missile-crisis-isnt
How does the swarm/network compete with the adage that "nation states always act with their own interests?" Is that the crux of what is changing here? That the swarm/network undermines this adage - resulting in chaos and unpredictable outcomes?
Completely agree. I worked the region for many years for the defense department, and produced much of the prominent analysis for the Pentagon post-Crimea. I've never seen such recklessness regarding Russia specifically or nuclear war in general. Now that I'm in the private sector, I get to express these things publicly. I recently described precisely how and why escalation could lead to nuclear war: https://deepdivewithleeslusher.substack.com/p/amateur-hour-armageddon