|
The Oldest Man posted:Eventually China will fix this Lmao the U.S. has lost WW3 Eventually China will fix this. the plan is not for U.S. domination in the middle east to fix it. China will.
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
Yeah maybe. I always take it with a big grain of salt though when an exporter’s defense of its design is “we intentionally made this machine lovely when we sold it, and we only sold it to people who were bad at using it, too. But it’s actually good!”
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:15
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Those are by far the most lucrative. By comparison, the stuff stripped for parts before was small potatoes. I feel like now's a good time to get on my platform about how TRPF explains the majority of human history since the 1800s. Other explanations are downstream effects from that. Including this. Back in the Cold War era the US could afford to eschew immediate profitability concerns for the sake of empire maintenance. That all changed with the profitability crisis of the 70s and the subsequent rise of neoliberalism. Capitalism really does destroy itself in the long run, I wonder if anyone's written about this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:19
|
|
overriding the capitalist imperative and true-believer free market bullshit, to open these up, but it's been gone since 1991.
|
I don't think the Soviets tricked their buyers; I think they knew the version they were getting, and the Soviets really didn't have that much control over the training of their pilots either. I guess you could say the Soviets shouldn't have given them anything, but they were also the only game in town other than the West, and they also needed hard currency. The Mig-23 was generally good at what it designed for (BVR fights) and some other tasks, but it was far from a real multirole in a contemporary sense and could be often be beaten in a dogfight. Arguably, the Soviets didn't really have a jet that suited the role that a lot of Middle East countries and other friendly countries needed, which was something more like the F-5, at least until the Mig-29 arrived. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 15:24 on Jan 23, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:21
|
|
|
VoicesCanBe posted:There is a systemic and terminal lack of competence at all levels of US government. this but I assume it’s also happened to the nukes
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 17:55
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I don't think the Soviets tricked their buyers; I think they knew the version they were getting, and the Soviets really didn't have that much control over the training of their pilots either. I guess you could say the Soviets shouldn't have given them anything, but they were also the only game in town other than the West, and they also needed hard currency. The thing is, selling the BVR fighter without the radar and missiles that accompany it, understandably because they would immediately be captured, or sold, to the Israelis and Americans to study, obviously hampered their effectiveness. If the Arabs were flying point interception tightly controlled by ground stations, the MiG-21 would have the better choice, even as the Soviets replaced that aircraft in their own inventory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:The thing is, selling the BVR fighter without the radar and missiles that accompany it, understandably because they would immediately be captured, or sold, to the Israelis and Americans to study, obviously hampered their effectiveness. There were MiG 21s but they were fairly obsolete when Arab nations started to purchase MiG 23s in the early/mid 1970s. They had much weaker radars that took even longer to lock on with even shorter range.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
Palladium posted:what do you mean they could just sail past by asking the yemenis nicely could? Is this Chinese soft power? I'm waiting for the US to blockade all traffic through the strait citing security reasons. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Yeah maybe. I always take it with a big grain of salt though when an exporter’s defense of its design is “we intentionally made this machine lovely when we sold it, and we only sold it to people who were bad at using it, too. But it’s actually good!” that was the excuse for Saudi Abrams exploding, and also the excuse for Turkish Leopard 2's exploding. Seems like a fine excuse for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:22
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:could? Is this Chinese soft power? I'm waiting for the US to blockade all traffic through the strait citing security reasons. I wouldn't be surprised, then again it will directly impact the cost of business and living in Europe the most. So they probably will do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:33
|
|
|
VoicesCanBe posted:Capitalism really does destroy itself in the long run, I wonder if anyone's written about this. Excluding the main religions, most societies, nations, etc. have either destroyed themselves or been destroyed. This thread hates on capitalism and the western MIC from a perspective that it will fail - aka US will lose ww3. But I think something worse to me is it keeps "working". Profits continue from bombings and offensive wars. The US continues to be the top, but flawed, military force. Lots of suffering and death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:34
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:There were MiG 21s but they were fairly obsolete when Arab nations started to purchase MiG 23s in the early/mid 1970s. They had much weaker radars that took even longer to lock on with even shorter range. If every part of the flight is tightly controlled anyway, which has proven to be successful in other forces at other times, my reasoning is: If the Arabs wanted essentially a F-102/106 why not just supply what they are asking for and might use competently? What's easier? Reforming the entire service culture of Arab militaries OR giving them interceptors when they are going to use fighters as interceptors anyway? BillsPhoenix posted:Excluding the main religions, most societies, nations, etc. have either destroyed themselves or been destroyed. I understand the sentiment you're expressing here, but the tendency of the rate of profit to fall means that it cannot keep working. What I mean is, as other have said, the falling rate of industrial capitalism led to Neoliberalism, deindustrialization, globalization etc. The failure of those to remain profitable was clear even before the Dot Com Bubble, but has been obvious since at least 2008. QE, tech speculation, and financialization, as well as looting any capital previously invested in the state and industry, first at home, then abroad, has still not reversed this trend. That's without getting into covid, climate etc etc. It has not kept working. Nothing works as well as it did in 1970. Realistically, in many cases, things do not function as well as in 1870. The profits from the wars, or from QE, or from any of these other things, further destabilize the system, which eventually leads to profits declining somewhere else, and you can't bail yourself out by looting existing capital twice. So, to use your example of other nations destroying themselves or being destroyed, when Rome faced a series of crises, many of which were caused by their own policies of border management, as well as the knock-on effect of things outside their control and beyond the frontiers, a cycle quickly emerged. The existing Roman political structure was not equipped to handle the crisis, in fact it's qualities had often caused it. So, quick fixes were found, use foreign troops, and eventually foreign generals to combat incursions at the border. Only, those soldiers returned to their own society, and their training, experience and wealth made future incursions even more dangerous. Actually, as an aside, we see the development of Feudalism in the Germanic and Arab societies contracted by the Romans through this effect. The Romans gave them the means to create more organized, centralized and capable societies, in lieu of Rome countering the interests of the ruling class to remain organized, centralized and capable. That meant of course, that these states eventually became competitors to Rome, and for the people living in the border regions, preferable to Rome. In Syria, for example, both the Persian and Arab invasions were accompanied by widespread defection of peasants and townsmen alike to their cause. Why? Because in their view, the Greek-speaking Roman elite in the Province of Syria caused more devastation to them in peacetime than the invaders did in war. Not only were their elite not able to protect them from external threats, they made internal conditions intolerable. A competent invader can be better for the common man than an incompetent aristocracy. Because the Arabs and Persians were invaders and wanted to minimize resistance, they went out of their way to generally present policies that were agreeable, and, shows of force the accompany any conquest notwithstanding, generally we see a dramatic improvement in wealth across society as the wealth concentrated in the great estates was broken up. We even see a dramatic return of land ownership. The Persians and Arabs had aristocrats, but they did not feel the security to live atop a mountain of intolerable human misery when surrounded by foreigners the way the Romans did with their own countrymen. The other dimension to this is that every attempt to fix the situation without addressing the substantive underlying causes made it worse. Repeated military defeats led to usurpation by frontier generals (the Roman senatorial elite no longer joined the military). These "Barrack Emperors" were originally from peripheral areas of the Roman Empire, like the Balkans, but at the end of the period, were Barbarians. In fact, the only competent military leaders, except for Aetius, were barbarians. Belisarius, Stilicho, Odoacer, Alaric, were all Barbarians in Roman employ. The "last Roman Emperor", Romulus Augustulus, was placed on the throne by his barbarian father Orestes. Because any military defeat would lead to hiring barbarian military leaders, and because those leaders turned around to march on the capital if there were defeats elsewhere, even Roman successes were paradoxically destabilizing because they strengthened the political, social and military competitors to their own system. Again, here are the origins of feudalism, and here you can see why a peasant would prefer to live under a local Duke (Latin Dux, military leader) to an absentee senatorial landlord. The Church was in a similar position, and you can see the origins of Medieval Christianity here as well. Roman aristocrats stopped public building and maintenance, and stopped paying taxes, essentially because they could. The Church, often in tandem with the Dux of a nearby military unit, began doing these things instead. The Church provided social services, and engaged in building projects, the army often maintained roads and helped to bring the harvest in. In Merida, Spain, the Barbarian Dux and Christian Bishop repaired the walls and bridges of the city. Now, did these projects help or hinder the Roman elite and perpetuate the system? On the one hand, they were able to "get away with" not paying taxes or serving in the military because the Church and Barbarians picked up the slack. On the other hand, this assured that in the end, their power, and a society organized around them being at the top of the hierarchy, would collapse, and they had created the people and institutions who would do it. Placing your trust in the institutions that are working for you instead of the aristocrats who are actively working against you is the reasonable thing to do. Marx said that Capitalism created the revolutionary class and mechanism for revolution through their own use of industrial labour. I realize Maoists disagree, but bearing with me, let's say this is the case. The capitalist liberal western democracies have actively destabilized the mechanisms that kept that class either loyal to the existing system, or at least assured they had total dominance over them. They are in the process of selling off both of those advantages, and cannot do otherwise, because the seeds of the system's decline were present at its inception. The declining rate of profit is a function of capitalism, and so cannot be resolved through capitalism. Every and every effort to do so causes the system to weaken somewhere else. Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 19:12 on Jan 23, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 18:34
|
|
|
The problem was probably more the available tech than doctrine. The US and it’s allies were moving on to BVR fights and even if their doctrine worked to the contrary, they did need some BVR fighter. Export MiG-23s were the best they could get. A lot of them did still fly MiG 21s but they needed more than just it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 19:23
|
|
|
fishbed ftw
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:Excluding the main religions, most societies, nations, etc. have either destroyed themselves or been destroyed. Our Empire phase is going to be so very much worse than this current "fall of the Republic" phase.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 19:33
|
|
|
It was always an empire dude
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 19:38
|
|
|
rome analogy is silly when we are clearly the delian league 2, complete with wars of choice completely backfiring
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 19:55
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:Our Empire phase is going to be so very much worse than this current "fall of the Republic" phase. Are you saying the orange turd is going to "cross the rubicon" and declare himself god emperor?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 19:59
|
|
|
truth social is just the modern analog to the commentarii
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 20:00
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:rome analogy is silly when we are clearly the delian league 2, complete with wars of choice completely backfiring I was always weak on the Greek world and anything before 200, so I'll take your word for it. I don't think we could invade Sicily even if we wanted to at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 20:27
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Yeah maybe. I always take it with a big grain of salt though when an exporter’s defense of its design is “we intentionally made this machine lovely when we sold it, and we only sold it to people who were bad at using it, too. But it’s actually good!” maybe the us simply wrecked its own navy artillery and nuclear missiles to show other nations it could wreck theirs too, if it wished too makes u think
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 20:30
|
|
|
hamas ftw posted:maybe the us simply wrecked its own navy artillery and nuclear missiles to show other nations it could wreck theirs too, if it wished too Joe Biden is PS3 Venom Snake confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 20:36
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I was always weak on the Greek world and anything before 200, so I'll take your word for it. i think we have a base there already called sigonella
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 20:42
|
|
|
Rome basically always comes up when talking about the demise of America, but there's tens of thousands of cultures and countries that no longer exist. And, this is a really hot take, what if Marx is wrong about the inevitable collapse of capitalism. As an example- bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is one of the most clever safeguards added to capitalism. It largely prevents work stoppage while analysts and lawyers argue about number. It also importantly allows numbers to go down, while letting the elite reallocate/fight for control among themselves, reseting number to go back up again. I have only see Marx write about bankruptcy as an inevitable death/failure, not a reset or transition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 21:25
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:Rome basically always comes up when talking about the demise of America, but there's tens of thousands of cultures and countries that no longer exist. https://i.imgur.com/BtgZ6Ce.mp4
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 21:32
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:If... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 21:59
|
|
|
Trpf is what marxs proposed, yes. If he's right we know the end is a collapse. Bankruptcy, technology, keyenesian spending are a few major counter arguments to the theory, because he might not be right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 22:05
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:Trpf is what marxs proposed, yes. If he's right we know the end is a collapse. the unwillingness of capital to entertain the debt jubilee is one of the defining aspects of the neoliberal era of history. idk what about the current moment makes you think marx might have been wrong when every warning light is flashing and opportunity after opportunity for reform is missed…
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 22:10
|
|
|
Capital would have to have internal reflection as to what their long term chances are, and, well, lol on that front. It's about as likely as any other civilisation witnessing overshoot and not connecting the dots to avoid collapse. "I know, let's invest in giant stone heads!" Frosted Flake, I have some incredible news for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 22:15
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I don't think we could invade Sicily even if we wanted to at this point. I always like to ponder what-if the Annex Sicily movement had really kicked off. quote:The party emblem featured a globe with the American flag and Italian flag and the words "Peace and work" and "United States of the World". According to the three men, the government of the United States should annex all free and democratic nations worldwide, thereby transforming itself into a world government, and allowing Washington, D.C. to maintain Earth in a perpetual condition of peace. Paladino stated, "With a federation of the United States, Italy and some other nations, and a lot of atomic bombs, there would be no wars. This would solve all of Italy's problems."
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 22:18
|
|
|
You don't need to make a generally accurate prediction about the collapse of capitalism due to internal contradictions to make a specifically accurate prediction that the US will lose ww3 because its defense industry is totally hollowed out, its professional bureaucracy is a rotted shell, its political leaders are sun-downed geriatrics, and it has fallen behind its global rival on all the major material indicators like ship building, raw steel production, etc. that in large part determine who wins wars. Doomsday econ thread is thataway --> also marx was right
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 22:29
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:Trpf is what marxs proposed, yes. If he's right we know the end is a collapse. It's not proposed, it's an observed thing but confirmation basically requires some society to commit to ultimate capitalist maximalism -- which is why economic "scientific discourse" leads to economics being called the dismal science and will never overcome the fact that it is not physics and cannot work as such. The tendency of the profit rate to fall is the core of capitalist self-contradiction. This lies at the heart of what has caused neoliberalism, the dominance of financial capital over the rest, the industrial flight and everything else -- how can capital can keep reproducing more of itself and maintain profitability, in short. Technology, like you mentioned, serves as an argument in favor; productivity has increased absurd amounts since the 50s, but there have been no significant major gains of general income from that productivity increase in almost all significant economies. That theft of value from productivity was a major trick from neoliberalism to keep profitability afloat:   And the structural scale of things only become really evident when you look at supercycles, not in short term business cycles: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 22:33
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:Rome basically always comes up when talking about the demise of America, but there's tens of thousands of cultures and countries that no longer exist. Lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
oh bankruptcy, you mean where a company sheds its assets to be devoured by larger capitalists as a form of... consolidation??? yeah marx definitely never wrote about that
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:20
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:oh bankruptcy, you mean where a company sheds its assets to be devoured by larger capitalists as a form of... consolidation??? yeah marx definitely never wrote about that marx didnt understand [checking notes] BillsPhoenix posted:technology
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:22
|
|
|
this one weird trick marx hates
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:23
|
|
|
Marx was a pretty basic bitch when you think but never read about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:25
|
|
|
everyone should capital as it is genuinely revelatory
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:30
|
|
|
Capital is like the bible in that most people who claim to be on its side never read a loving word in it. If any of you fuckers reading this feel seen, start reading now: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:everyone should capital as it is genuinely revelatory and people say cursed knwoeldge isnt real
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 23:31
|
|