Azal

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

US Here, I'd like to but not having the skill sets right now makes for difficult to move to another country.

Which leads to another problem, if I do I leave my entire social network behind to a culture that I don't know and trying to live there. While I'm not against that, I realize that can be VERY isolating so not sure where the place I'd want to go right now.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean 2 parts. 1: Ukraine is fighting off a bigger countries tanks with Molotovs.

2: Logistics, supplies, etc is a HELL of a fight in two directions and the US has a hell of a home field advantage. If someone (I'm going to say from the Asian continent for this argument) any supplies they want has to cross the ocean. Then right now unless we do something to massively piss them off, we've got allies to the north and south so no country is giving a foothold next door (This is why South Korea and Japan being allies is important to the US, and why China really likes North Korea being there. So far the only foothold the biggest enemies to the US can get is Cuba... which right now involves circling the globe the even longer way).

But now our hypothetical military force has beaten back the US navy which is filling the oceans with all sorts of attacks, they get to the shores where they contend with the US Coast Guard, the US's second navy. That gets beaten back, and now the land war has started. Lets say they take LA and that's where the invasion is starting.

"Defeating" the US Military is truly a defeat of the US because now it's a home front war. You'll have the US military fighting on US soil, which I think the last time that happened was the civil war (correct me if I'm wrong), the Reserves are getting called in. Then even before you get to the "random guys with guns" the actual US militia gets mobilized where the National Guards of each state is called in. And you better believe they'll definitely take their gun nutty neighbors in this because the national guard works day to day in civilian world.

So now we've gotten to logistics. The US likes to beat its chest when it comes to military, but the true might of the US in history has been logistics of "We need x here today" and we can ship troops to the other side of the globe faster than Amazon can deliver a package to a doorstep in country. The US has a robust interstate system, designed after the autobahn of Germany for the same purpose, moving hardware. So whatever military is fighting now has to contend with whatever front line is existing getting supplied by the factories in the middle of the country with semis running supplies daily as well as military hardware from the side of the country not getting attacked at the moment (I live near multiple military bases that's as far from any border as one can logically get, where there's tank divisions just waiting).

But we're calling a defeat scenario for the US, so the hypothetical beats back the US military, who's probably tearing apart the infrastructure as it backs up if it's smart and plays like the Russians do. Granted the US doesn't have a Russian Winter, but if you're coming from the West you have the Rockies, coming from the East you have the Appalachians. Mountain ranges that makes mobilization difficult if the infrastructure is fucked, but the infrastructure is fine on the other side.

I legit cannot imagine a country, even the US, with the infrastructure to break through that wall scenario delivering hardware across the world.

But hey, we don't have to talk a complete invasion of the US. Just some area. Remember, many US states are as big as countries, especially the western ones. So an invasion happens, now you're dealing with large swaths of territory. Russia had trouble with the Finns in the Winter War, with Russia being right next door because the Finns didn't just up and fight the major people. No they'd let tank battalions pass, then when the logistics crew following the battalions showed up they'd get sniped. Or the US tried to fight in Vietnam and were beaten back by civilians. Or occupied Afghanistan and ultimately the Taliban managed to regain control. Occupation is REALLY hard because even for a small territory you have to have a large soldier to civilian ratio for those "military grade" weapons and tactics to beat civilians (the difference between a "military grade" AR-15 and a civilian one is the ability to turn it to fully automatic. That is something that modifications exist to do.) And if an invasion is coming I guarantee you every Scheels, Bass Pro, Cabelas, Academy Sports, and every mom and pop gun store will be having a fire sale on ammunition.

TLDR: It would be a logistical hurdle to even shut down US military bases before reaching one of the mountain ranges, while the US would be sitting in its logistics hub. Invading forces only really truly succeed historically long term when the civilians are on the side of the invaders because occupying long term is really hard, and I think you're underestimating the military logistics of a country that has ammunition vending machines.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And while the Navy is brought up, lets not forget the Coast Guard.

While the Coast Guard is joked about as dollar store Navy, it's a legit military service that has been actively at war against drug smugglers past few years, but gets sent over in previous wars to fight in riverways. This gives the US navy the entire pacific to fight against Russia, and when they do get to the US, there's a second home based one under a completely different administration to fight at the shores.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

the right’s attacks on her are likely to be a lot more openly bigoted

They're already dusting off the ole Obama birther playbook and asking if she's qualified to be President due to citizenship.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago

From the US and I pay a lot of attention to politics.

Her past is she was a bulldog in the courtroom, absolutely a firebrand and ready to take on anyone. By making her VP, her job was mostly to not make the administration look bad, which is a tough job for a firebrand so for years it felt like she was put in the back and kept quiet.

Roe v Wade decision happened, making the abortion argument on the side of the Republicans getting what they wanted, Biden is a Catholic and male so completely uncomfortable using the fact that abortion is the winning ticket item for the Dems so Harris has been beating that drum hard and getting out. GRANTED the media has been focusing on "Biden too old!" (Legit had to learn a Biden policy from BBC because American news isn't going to talk about that) so she's still feeling a relative unknown to the country at large.

There are people calling for wanting the DNC to do a vote, but we're past that marker, there's people disappointed, and then there's a lot of people excited. Right now this election is going to shape up to be more "interesting" than Bush v Gore or Trump v Hillary.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have one for those that worked at Disney World. "What time is the 3 o'clock parade?"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Huh. High point days is a 5, otherwise baseline about 6 through 8.5 (have a list of plans, research, modalities, but haven't made any steps)

Kinda nice to have a chart that I can point at and go "Yup, I'm here."

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pretty much post Roe v Wade she's been out at the very forefront on the abortion debate because Biden being a catholic and male was about the worst possible person to put on this, vs Harris's main job was to show the White House's position on it.

Oh, not been in the news... right. Same news that'll talk Biden's age all day, not Trump's age or his lies.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Left leaning here, dunno about you, but run channels with other left leaning progressives. I'm on a border between two states, I make it a point that my state when state/local stuff comes up, I get the news out, I get the word out, I try to drum up voting. Anyone in the other state, a massive collective 'meh'. Same comes with the local votes.

"But Bernie" is the cry.

Voting isn't just about the damn presidency. It's a shit slog from the lowest levels all the way up and all the crowd I know in the left leaning can't be faffed to show up for anything local so of course it's going to be centrist on the top. The reason the right wing has so much power is they've made it a point since the Reagan era that anyone without an (R) after their name WILL NOT run uncontested even it if it's a superintendent to a school.

Yes, the Democrats are run by centrists because that's who shows up to all the elections no matter how small or petty, but the lefts show up at Presidential elections and whinge about how nothing changes.

I hope I'm preaching to the choir when it comes to voting on the small elections, but unless you're in a very different place than I am, if you did you'd pretty quickly notice you're the rare leftist there.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Hillary in her campaign was focused on removing Citizens United.

After she lost, hasn't been brought back up again.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I believe the response is in the territory of just because it's bad now doesn't mean it won't get so much worse.

I mean, I'm amazed we're not 1st in incarceration... and Project 2025 thinks that's losers numbers.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I mean... worse is different.

ACLU didn't say we're going from a shining world to bad... they're saying "OH BOY IF YOU THINK THINGS ARE BAD NOW!"

view more: ‹ prev next ›