The price of empire.
The New Atlas
Multi-Domain Operations: The US Wages Constant War and Across All Domains
Brian Berletic, American industrial designer living in Bangkok and former US Marine
Multi-Domain Operations: The US Wages Constant War and Across All Domains
Brian Berletic, American industrial designer living in Bangkok and former US Marine
https://youtu.be/LUNi5zKqKQQ
Once he started talking about Myanmar, I realized this guy is full of shit.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that the US leadership gives a shit about either freedom or democracy in the US, let alone in places like Myanmar or any of the other places the US intervenes to "spread freedom and democracy."
BB has it exactly right about multidomain operations being about hegemony (empire) on the principles of using all means to gain and maintain control, relying on commitment of the US military when all else fails to achieve the desired objective. So we have endless war in all domains including information to the degree that the whole narrative is fake news and the objective is gaslighting.
Do you think that the US leadership gives a shit about either freedom or democracy in the US, let alone in places like Myanmar or any of the other places the US intervenes to "spread freedom and democracy."
ReplyDeleteI don't. But spare us the BS about distancing the Myanmar people from their government. That country has seen insurgencies for decades, and for bloody good reason.
It would probably be more effective (and cost less) to buy off the Tatmadaw. That's basically what China has done.
Multi-domain won't help you against nuclear armed rivals. Being unable to destroy rival economies, means those economies will be able to strike more deals with nations around the world. China will eventually outbid US allies, beginning with the Global South.
ReplyDeleteNot a done deal at this point. It is uncertain which position is going to prevail, unipolarism or multipolarism — or neither, that is, nuclear winter. Zero-sum game.
ReplyDeleteThat country has seen insurgencies for decades, and for bloody good reason.
ReplyDeleteAnd no one would care enough to get involved other than by lip service if it were not a point of contention between the vying positions on the world stage. Myanmar is another pawn on the great chessboard of the global game for dominance that all are caught up, most not even realizing what is happening.
How can you argue that the world is unipolar when the US can no longer do as it pleases?
ReplyDeleteWashington had its chance to bring Russia into alliance with Europe, and they blew it for the sake of economic shock theory.
China was treated as a business opportunity. Right up until they realized it became a geopolitical rival.
Myanmar has resources and that is all the system cares about. They shall be sold to the highest bidder, and if the locals object, they will be suppressed.
ReplyDeleteThe expulsion of 600,000 Rohingya was enough to ruin their so-called democratic leader's reputation. When the generals decided to get rid of her, no one cared.
Well, the prevailing idea in some quarters is that the unipolar moment is over and is waning, while the multipolar moment is starting and is beginning to wax. (Beware: dialectic terminology)
ReplyDeleteIn other quarters the opposite position predominates.
The Western leadership clearly thinks that the unipolar moment is still going strong and has a long way to run.
In dialectical terms also, this is resulting in conflict as these positions contend on the field of history.
From the collapse of the USSR to around 2010, was the unipolar period.
ReplyDeleteWashington used that period to fritter away their strategic advantage.
Then you could say a new moon began, with a waxing phase that is in progress.
It is why where we are in Ukraine.
ReplyDeleteIt is not going to stop either and move around the chess board.
Why where we are in the Middle East.
The West cannot be shown to be weak after this conflict as the world is watching and wondering what side to choose.
Why the West keeps saying "we can't lose in Ukraine".
Well they can but spin it as a win and try to finish what they started in the Middle East.
You have to keep a very close eye on the Heritage foundation. MAGA and the Republicans are the Heritage Foundation.
This from October last year not 10 years ago.
https://www.heritage.org/military-strength/assessing-threats-us-vital-interests/iran
Conclusion
ReplyDeleteThe Heritage Foundations view....
"Iran represents by far the most significant security challenge to the United States, its allies, and its interests in the greater Middle East. Its open hostility to the United States and Israel, sponsorship of terrorist groups like Hezbollah, and history of threatening the commons underscore the problem. Today, Iran’s provocations are mostly a concern for the region and America’s allies, friends, and assets there. Iran relies heavily on irregular (to include political) warfare against others in the region and fields more ballistic missiles than any of its neighbors field. The development of its ballistic missiles and potential nuclear capability also mean that it poses a significant long-term threat to the security of the U.S. homeland."
Many think they are going to pivot to China after Ukraine.
There's a very high probability they will pivot to Iran.
So Much harder for Russia and China to defend Iran when the West can use Isreal the way they have used Ukraine.
So Much harder to keep the Russian and Chinese populations on side and worthy of defending.
Ukraine was the means to drive apart Europe and Russia. In that regard, mission accomplished.
ReplyDeleteWill NATO supply western Ukraine in order to maintain hostilities against the eastern portion?
It's possible. I wouldn't recommend it.
Going after Iran on top of the existing crisis in Europe?
Insane.