Cuba already trades with Spain, and even trades with the US on specific things.
Geopolitics
- Thread starter Mciahel Goodman
- Start date
Cuba already trades with Spain, and even trades with the US on specific things.
I know. and?
UK cedes Chagos Island sovereignty to Mauritius, retains Diego Garcia airbase
https://www.reuters.com/world/brita...d-sovereignty-deal-with-mauritius-2024-10-03/
Hope Argentinians don't see that
https://news.usni.org/2024/10/09/na...ach-under-current-budget-outlook-says-admiral
I swear, if anyone cries about US defense budgets being too high again, I'll weep.
The West is sleepwalking to oblivion, and the people are happy to cheer their own demise.
Lowest potential navy budget since 1920's, jesus christ.
I swear, if anyone cries about US defense budgets being too high again, I'll weep.
The West is sleepwalking to oblivion, and the people are happy to cheer their own demise.
Lowest potential navy budget since 1920's, jesus christ.
I dont know if my math are wrong (really, im bad at it and might miss ) but if the US GDP grew 2.9% last year and the navy decreassed their budget 2% of the gdp. Doesnt mean that is 0.9% higher than last year?
I have absolutely no idea how you reached that conclusion. How do you know how much the US navy budget changed if you don’t know what the current value is as a percent of gdp?
Also given inflation is at 2.4%, any material increase is immediately offset.
Maybe i misread it then. But yeah. The navy can be relatively lower than ever. Still a crazy amount but i guess not enough if you keep playing world police
How?
You've mentioned an existential threat on here a few times and said ordinary people are going to need to choose which ideology to follow, but you haven't elaborated when questioned on it.
Nonsensical fake news.
Most of the stuff US is providing isn't even used by the DoD branches.
Maybe preparing the terrain of an excuse to drop Ukraine if trump gets elected (like he needs any though)
My predictions for the Trump 2025-2029 presidency
- Ukraine is toast. Cedes territory and Russia eying Moldova and maybe some baltic countries is Trump pulls out from OTAN
- Israel and EEUU goes to war with Iran. As Iran has no capabilities, it applies scorched earth in middle east burning oil fields causing a global recession
- China decides to go for Taiwan around 2028 whichever method hey decide to go for. US doesn't intervene. If it is military conflict, semiconductors problems which depens or causes a recession
I am a positive guy, I swear
- Ukraine is toast. Cedes territory and Russia eying Moldova and maybe some baltic countries is Trump pulls out from OTAN
- Israel and EEUU goes to war with Iran. As Iran has no capabilities, it applies scorched earth in middle east burning oil fields causing a global recession
- China decides to go for Taiwan around 2028 whichever method hey decide to go for. US doesn't intervene. If it is military conflict, semiconductors problems which depens or causes a recession
I am a positive guy, I swear
Predictions are notoriously tricky but I disagree with all three.
Ukraine will not get, imo, any of the land it has lost along the Crimean corridor (all to the east of Crimea through the original separatist areas). It can, however, depending on how smart/savvy and competent the US is, maybe get that which is to the west.
Israel will not be going to war with Iran and the EU is never joining that action if ever it were to be an Israeli attack. The distance between the two countries is about a thousand miles. Seeing as all they do is launch missiles in exchange (tit-for-tat) after exchange at each other, how can any advancing army be safe over a one thousand mile contiguous distance? This isn't the US, which will absolutely avoid Israeli attempts to go to war with Iran, which could do such a thing (though it would end up worse than Vietnam once they actually got there). It is Israel. Moreover, the EU has no incentive whatsoever to go to war with Iran. Russia also has an agreement which does two things: one, it means the Iranian nuclear facilities are now Russian investments (it will be viewed as a strike against Russian interests, strategical and essential, if Israel or anyone else is to bomb these areas); two, Russia has taken on a de facto responsibility to ensure Iran does not get a nuclear weapon. It will be blamed, unilaterally, now, if Iran does.
On China. They have been waiting nearly one hundred years to be in the position they are in. They have a great reputation (mostly and in contrast to other nations which have been recently colonial in external senses) around the world because they have not gone to war and are seen as Wilsonian moderates sans the American intervention in WW1. If Taiwan does go back to China, as One China policy come to fruition, it will not be through war (and if, in the unlikely case that such is true, it will not be in that timespan). They have simply come to far to throw so much away. The only scenario here is if the US places significant military installments into Taiwan in which case the Chinese will respond but most likely with other means than naval invasion.
Also, as per Taiwan, the US started moving its logistics regarding semi-conductors and chips back to the US under Trump and ramped that up massively (CHIPS act and more) under Biden - noting the Chinese/Taiwainese issue and also general insecurity in global supply chains. Moreover, as part of an even broader "thing" whereby raw (minerals) to refined (distribution of products and sale) as productive process is much more stable as panacea to de-industrialization. Biden ran on this massively in similar terms and other terms that were basically "dumbed down" or "simplified" but which meant the same thing in 2020.
On Taiwan, I have read stuff wondering if TMSC moving chip production to the US makes war more rather than less likely, because the US is less likely to defend the island if they have chip production on their own territory.
(I don't think the primary goal for the US would be to defend TMSCs fabs BTW, I thought it was an interesting idea).
(I don't think the primary goal for the US would be to defend TMSCs fabs BTW, I thought it was an interesting idea).
You summarized perfectly all my lousy predictions. Don't anything happening in Taiwan, but with Trump I see it from impossible to extremely unliklely.
Iran conflict, and I am not talking of invasion but bombing the shit out of submission accounting that the population is very unhappy with the regime, I would place it from very unlikely to unlikley with Trump. Basically Israel is with the rolling pin in the region and Trump had a very aggressive rhetoric in his first term. Both things combined could make it happen if things goes out of hand. But again, unlikely
Ukraine seems bleak and I don't see how Donald will support at all Ukraine, quite the contrary
How exactly is a small country like Nicaguara an extensive threat to the USA?
Why is it always the Latin America socialists which are the threats yet brutal dictators like Pinochet, Trujillo, Debayle and Videla were all supported for much of their rein.
Unfortunately I wonder if this is them setting the scene to impose economic sanctions and try to cause destabilisation. I doubt Trump will be reversing it.
Nicaragua is already incredibly unstable, made worse by the actions of Ortega to basically imprison/kill anyone who opposes him.
Since 2018 this was passed and nothing has changed to rectify the situation.
Having another violent, "Revolutionary" state next to the USA is not good. USA will tolerate socialist or left leaning politicians provided they don't go down the crazy route of declaring decades long revolutions years after taking power and then going around gunning people down.
Case in point, US still maintains cordiality with Bolivia despite their ever increasing rhetoric and authoritarianism because it's still a functional country.
I don't see how they pose a national security threat to the USA though? I'm pretty sure USA hasn't been invaded for over 2 centuries and I doubt one of the poorest countries in Central America is going to change that either.
In terms of it being a supposed violent nation, I'm pretty sure USA has a greater homicide rate than Nicagura so is it really that violent?
If you interfere by imposing sanctions and supporting rebels and oppositions then that can create the conditions for instability and violence.
It's a chicken and an egg situation but given the history of supporting right wing capitalist regimes and overthrowing left wing regimes. Cynically I can't help but feel the biggest crime here is being left wing. And just like us discussing, and agreeing on Russia using sanctions for political interference. I feel the same may happen here to try and force a regime change which would be more open to foreign privatisation and investment.
Nicaragua has a 2x Homocide rate than the USA.
The problem isn't shit like gang violence and petty crime - USA is okay with outrageous crime rates in the Carribbean islands for example. What isn't okay is when the homocide is state sponsored. This creates problems.
When is a national security threat "invasion?" You're mixing things up.
I mean, Nicaragua isn't unique in this list:
Yes, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are considered threats to US security because despite being somewhat allies/puppets in a way, they are hotbeds for extremism.
Terror attacks are also a matter of national security.
https://www.twz.com/news-features/n...to-air-missiles-it-fired-during-red-sea-fight
Hate using TWZ as a source but:
Seems like USN Magazine depth is larger than first thought.
If the 5th Fleet can afford using 120 SM-2's, and 80 SM-6's shooting down shitty Houthi drones and missiles, rather than going for the riskier but much cheaper QuadPacked ESSM's, magazine depth must be pretty high.
I did some digging found some interesting stuff.
SM-2 production during the 80's and early to mid-90's was mental -
In 1990 and 91 - almost 1000 SM-2's were being acquired year on year. Total production for SM-2 (Ignoring RIm-66A, B and E given they are SM-1's), as of 2018 was 16,358. Adding in low-rate procurement since the turn of 2020, taking away some of the C's that are being upgraded or pending upgrades, and given the 40 year lifespan of an SM-2, We're looking at around atleast 12-14000 functional SM-2's in storage.
This explains a lot actually.
All the think-tanks and media were screaming that the USN missile interceptor inventory was completely inadequate and the USN basically ignored them for the past 5 years and kept SM-2's on low rate production and purchase. Well, this makes sense now. 14k naval interceptors is incredible.
SM-6 numbers worry me slightly. We're still looking at 150 buys by the USN per year. This will rise to 400-500 by 2030, but given procurement numbers since 2018, we're probably looking at 1500-2000 SM-6's in inventory. Which is enough for the first salvo of a pacific war, but the depth isn't strong enough.
If you remember my post from a few months ago with a photo taken of an SM-6 aboard an F-18 being big news - that will help a lot. With dual USN and USAF procurement, production numbers will skyrocket.
Hate using TWZ as a source but:
Seems like USN Magazine depth is larger than first thought.
If the 5th Fleet can afford using 120 SM-2's, and 80 SM-6's shooting down shitty Houthi drones and missiles, rather than going for the riskier but much cheaper QuadPacked ESSM's, magazine depth must be pretty high.
I did some digging found some interesting stuff.
SM-2 production during the 80's and early to mid-90's was mental -
In 1990 and 91 - almost 1000 SM-2's were being acquired year on year. Total production for SM-2 (Ignoring RIm-66A, B and E given they are SM-1's), as of 2018 was 16,358. Adding in low-rate procurement since the turn of 2020, taking away some of the C's that are being upgraded or pending upgrades, and given the 40 year lifespan of an SM-2, We're looking at around atleast 12-14000 functional SM-2's in storage.
This explains a lot actually.
All the think-tanks and media were screaming that the USN missile interceptor inventory was completely inadequate and the USN basically ignored them for the past 5 years and kept SM-2's on low rate production and purchase. Well, this makes sense now. 14k naval interceptors is incredible.
SM-6 numbers worry me slightly. We're still looking at 150 buys by the USN per year. This will rise to 400-500 by 2030, but given procurement numbers since 2018, we're probably looking at 1500-2000 SM-6's in inventory. Which is enough for the first salvo of a pacific war, but the depth isn't strong enough.
If you remember my post from a few months ago with a photo taken of an SM-6 aboard an F-18 being big news - that will help a lot. With dual USN and USAF procurement, production numbers will skyrocket.
Thank god for US for taking care of this situations lile in the 70-80-90s in latam. Such a giid country
Really good interview with the Director of US Air Force Force structure
https://www.hudson.org/events/adapt...ce-design-integration-dan-patt-timothy-walton
Some really interesting and downright terrifying things to be honest, but not that it wasn't unknown already. 30 years of institutional decay and budget cuts does that to a force:
The bit about asymmetric air superiority is really really interesting and scary. He's basically admitting that the USAF cannot gain air superiority (on the pacific theatre) anymore with its sheer conventional air power and frames and needs to rely on cost-effective/balanced asymmetric solutions.
This might be a case of underselling for more funding but it's following the trend of what observers and watchers have noticed for a decade now.
https://www.hudson.org/events/adapt...ce-design-integration-dan-patt-timothy-walton
Some really interesting and downright terrifying things to be honest, but not that it wasn't unknown already. 30 years of institutional decay and budget cuts does that to a force:
The bit about asymmetric air superiority is really really interesting and scary. He's basically admitting that the USAF cannot gain air superiority (on the pacific theatre) anymore with its sheer conventional air power and frames and needs to rely on cost-effective/balanced asymmetric solutions.
This might be a case of underselling for more funding but it's following the trend of what observers and watchers have noticed for a decade now.