[apeescape]

That's the thing. Trump's actions make no sense unless you view them through the lens that he's driving the agenda of Putin.

Then again, even if a global nuclear war broke out, some of his loyalists would still be convinced that Trump is playing some sort of 3D chess and that it's all going according to his masterful plan.

[Chance-Device]

I used to think this, but now I think something different - isn’t Russia a useful domestic and geopolitical tool? Perhaps the US does not want for Russia either to be too weak or too strong, perhaps they simply want them to be useful.

[apeescape]

But would Russia's friendship be more useful than Europe's? I can see the logic behind strengthening ties with Russia to keep them from aligning with China, but Russia has proven itself an unreliable partner in the past, so you have to assume that as soon as Russia sees more benefit in fraternizing with China than the US, they'll turn their coats. The EU has been a pretty loyal vassal, even when disgruntled. But I think we've gone over the tipping point now. The US has shown it can't be trusted upon.

[jjk166]

The problem is this theory has no predictive power. Everything can be a useful domestic and geopolitical tool, and everything might be a better tool if weaker or stronger, and everything might be disposed of in favor of some other tool which is better yet. Further, different leaders may place different values on various tools, or may favor different approaches to acquiring them.

There is literally no observation that could not be viewed as confirming this assumption by a sufficiently generous mind.

[michelb]

Maybe. I also think men like Bannon want to work towards a society not quite unlike The Handmaids Tale. I recently watched the Grab documentary, and seeing how much of the food production and water resources has been sold off to Saudis and China, and it's also has to be of the reasons Putin wants that specific part of Ukraine. It does explain to me why a lot of countries are starting to gear up.