[KorematsuFredt]

This is not a forum of geopolitics experts but I think this wars is the biggest threat we currently have for tech progress. If Russia takes over Ukraine next step would be proxy wars in Europe, breaking down EU/NATO coupled with US domestic politics turning nativist which will burn our future. This war must end one way or another sooner.

[rightbyte]

Threat to tech progress? How is that a priority? If the US and Russia gets into a war with each other, we die. Dunno how many nines of the HN userbase but I guess atleast two?

People talk about this in no way like it was reasoned about in the 90s and ... it is a bit concerning.

[JumpCrisscross]

> if the US and Russia gets into a war with each other, we die

America and Russia aren't going to war. Leadership may be nuts, but contrary to popular reporting Putin's war in Ukraine was--at least at its outset--popular among Russia's elite. Those elite are not suicidal.

Putin is issuing China's final warnings [1]. Letting American weapons fired by the Ukrainian army hit Russian military targets inside Russia simply isn't a material escalation in proxy war terms. Even the U.S. Navy helping Ukraine with its air defence in respect of missiles and drones wouldn't be a true escalation; the history of proxy wars during the Cold War with the Russian state's predecessor showed that quite clearly.

The escalation would be American missiles fired by Americans hitting anything in Russia. That's a hard line we didn't cross in the Cold War. It's a line both sides are excruciatingly respecting today.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China's_final_warning

[avmich]

> contrary to popular reporting Putin's war in Ukraine was--at least at its outset--popular among Russia's elite

You don't really know this.

[JumpCrisscross]

> You don't really know this

We sort of do, at least indirectly. No man rules alone. Moscow's elite have been enriched and empowered by the war. And it isn't their sons being sent to the frontline. To the extent there have been consequences, they've been in terms of lifestyle more than material wealth or influence.

[avmich]

We also seen and heard things like Naryshkin's astonishment and Joseph Prigozhin's phone discussion, and other things since then, which may suggest that elites don't really see a good short-term alternative to what they keep doing.

No man rules alone, but Joseph Stalin kept updating the closest circle for decades, and recent changes in federal government show that some thought previously unassailable can suddenly move with noticeable reductions of abilities.

[pylua]

Is this really true? I hope the U.S. would not die. I do guess the fallout could not be contained. However I hope we have planned for and train for these scenarios.

[taskforcegemini]

>However I hope we have planned for and train for these scenarios.

if you have enough money you could build a big enough bunker. I don't think there is a plan for the general population? there are many abandoned military bunkers around the world, maybe they become fashionable again.

[rightbyte]

> However I hope we have planned for and train for these scenarios.

The instruction is to hide under a table. YMMW.

[belter]

You can have a few hours warning, if you tag and track Peter Thiel private jet...if you see it heading to New Zealand...

[dragonwriter]

Not for long:

https://gizmodo.com/congress-just-made-it-way-harder-to-trac...

[belter]

Depending who will win the next US presidential elections, the scenarios you highlight can come sooner one would even imagine.

In Europe at the moment, there is only one real military power and that is France plus with a little help from the Nordics. The rest is almost non existent, and I am including the current German army. It's calculated they might currently be able to provide ammunition for maybe 15 days...

"The state of the Bundeswehr is more dismal than ever" - https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/01/26/the-state-of-the...

A US president hostile to NATO or compromised, would make for very concerning scenario's within months....

On other side, you have a country of 200 million, with a GDP that is almost 20% fully invested on weapons and ammunition production, currently fully on a path of war. Putin could get 2 million soldiers in 3 months in case of a general mobilization.

[avmich]

> On other side, you have a country of 200 million

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen...

Which country are you talking about?

[belter]

Ok 146 million...I was off a little bit...

[xenospn]

3 million useless untrained unmotivated soldiers who are not good for much more than dying in droves.

[belter]

Unfortunately the current stalemate has transformed the war into something similar to World War I, and for this type of war those are the type cannon fodder you need to send in waves...

"White House Worries Russia’s Momentum Is Changing Trajectory of Ukraine War" - https://archive.is/DchiK

[avmich]

> This is not a forum of geopolitics experts

In democracies the ultimate power belongs to people, so it's at least good to know the opinion of them. For this particular war it looks like there's an overwhelming support of Ukraine in the world, including significant portion of people in Russia, especially if corrected for propaganda bias.

In case of Ukraine losing - which frankly seems rather theoretical - it's doubtful Russia will have enough resources to immediately continue to other European territories. However, this bad case should be avoided with all seriousness, as it brings only negative results to everybody involved, including Russian people.

[beardyw]

> This war must end one way or another sooner

Sorry, but this is detached from reality. If your country were invaded, would you give up just to make other people's lives a bit more comfortable?

[avmich]

The war could end in mere months if the West would provide adequate supplies to Ukraine.

[racional]

This is unfortunately by no means assured.

[avmich]

It looks at least very reasonable. It's rarely argued that Russia has a severe disadvantage in conventional armaments compared to the West, or even USA alone; even Russian sources periodically admit that openly. It's also rather clear at this point that the war is the war of attrition, so supplies basically determine the results. West doesn't even need to have particular political will - the robust supplies with armaments will do the trick without anything else. No particular sets of sanctions, no diplomatic masterpieces, no boots on the ground are needed - just enough of supplies to Ukrainian army.

This may be more problematic, though, than a combination of approaches. Which we see today. The combination, though, doesn't provide results particularly fast - it still is good, though, but not enough for reducing the war in time to some relatively short periods starting from now. Well, we're in the real world. It's not perfect.

[XajniN]

> It looks at least very reasonable.

Only if you don’t know much about Russia.

The outcome of the war depends almost solely on Russian willingness to fight. We are already two years into the two-week supply of Russian rockets.

Edit: formatting

[avmich]

I'm not sure it can be well argued I don't know much about Russia, so I'm staying the opinion. The Russian willingness to fight isn't that great and certainly way worse that the Ukrainians.

I also never heard of two-week supply of Russian rockets, though I heard economic collapse predictions which didn't materialize. But I also heard about Kiyev in three days plans.

Really, Russian military potential is greatly oversold.

[theGnuMe]

If Trump wins NATO is sol.