What feels "different" today is not necessarily risk, but visibility.
We now see every war, cyber incident, threat, and speech in real time. I have to imagine the Cuban Missile Crisis (for example) was a much more serious existential risk, we were just largely in the dark while it was happening.
Not to minimize the current crises, I just wonder if this isn't what has always happened, we're just more informed now.
What you’re saying applied as far back as Vietnam, mainstream television allowed us to watch the war on video in mostly realtime, and we saw widespread protest
I don’t think access or visibility of the information is what’s changed, but how that information is being delivered today vs back then
People were extremely aware of the Cuban Missile Crisis. My father mentioned at school they were doing active under desk drills in the event it escalated to nuclear war.
It is easy to underrate the past. The 20th century had mass communication, high literacy and an active and well funded press corps with committed newspaper readers and news watchers.
> There is Ukraine of course, where the UN says 14,000 civilians have died.
Point of order, the UN says they have documented that number, and certainly dont count it as anything representing the actual death toll for civilians. The count doesn't cover most of the areas where civilians are dying at high rates. Sure, the UN stayed in Gaza to see what happened and delivered, but occupied Russian territory is too dangerous for the UN and they don't even try to monitor the death and atrocities happening in the occupied areas.
Russia has spent four years in this, fighting a country a fraction of its size, getting set back by homemade drones, and will now seemingly only win by a slow, expensive attrition and get only a concession. Why is anybody supposed to be scared of them?
Firstly why wouldn't one be scared of an opponent that can just steadily press against me, winning a war by attrition?
Secondly, this is a naive mischaracterization of Ukraine, Russia, and the war itself.
Ukraine is a serious modern military power. One that very few countries could successfully invade. One with major support from other countries. Stormshadows, HIMARS, Javelins, NLAWs, Patriot systems are not home made drones.
That said, if Russia had managed to establish air superiority over Ukraine it would have probably won the war as fast as they intended to. But they didn't, and couldn't, because Ukraine isn't a guerilla outfit with home-made drones. They spent more than a decade preparing for this conflict.
It is also Ukraine, with defenders advantage, defending against a % of the Russian offense with their entire defensive capacity. Nearly 30% of Ukraine's GDP goes to defense currently. Russia's is somewhere closer to 7%.
Russia would probably like to do what they did to Chechnya when they got rolled out of there. Just sit back and shell the place. But because Ukraine's drones and long range artillery are a match or better than the Russians, they have to find other means.
If they conquer Ukraine, they then have Ukraine's resources, technical capabilities, and a fresh group of young people to conscript into service.
We shouldn't be scared of Russia, per se, they would be easy to defeat if we bothered to try rather than if we tried to drag out this war as long as possible to try to weaken Russia. But if we let Russia win, they will rebuild far stronger and take over the next country, and grow stronger. And again, and again.
The only two armies skilled at modern drone warfare are Russia and Ukraine. An army without drone experience could get ripped to shreds facing either one.
Contrary to typical narratives my understanding is that the Russians are somewhat ahead on drones. They pioneered fibre optic drones and have more ability to mass produce them with Chinese support.
Ukraine has fought incredibly well and my hope is at some point Russia can't sustain its offensives due to domestic issues. Russia is very definitely straining.
But they shouldn't be underrated. In Ukraine they face a battled tested, fortified frontline and a society mobilized for war. Russia in turn has set itself for ongoing war. Europe is still in peacetime mode.
Don't underestimate them just because they couldn't defeat Ukraine.
They have no regard for the lives of their own soldiers and will send wave after wave of meat towards the front, which is very hard to defend against. This is backed up by an incredible knowledge of drone warfare and most countries in the world would be unable to defend against them.
Their attrition might be slow, but it's not that expensive. What is expensive are the aircraft/ships/missiles that Europe has too few of that they hope to stop a Russian invasion with if it came to it.
Remember that Russia is never as strong or as weak as they appear, and if they ally closely with China while Europe and the US is divided, it may mot be a good time for us in the West.
It still seems wild to me that almost 5 years into this war, Europe is still relying on America to help them with Ukraine. Should be pretty obvious by now that Americans have no real interest in this war one way or the other.
The US stopped all aid this year, except for intelligence sharing.
It's wild that people in the US think this war is not their war. They promised to defend Ukraine's territory decades ago, and barely followed through for three years, then as soon as Trump took office they completely broke their promise.
By breaking their promise, the US is encouraging nuclear proliferation throughout the world. It's extremely shortsighted and stupid to not be providing the miniscule amount of current military budget that could stop this war permanently. The US and Europe have been too timid and stupid from the start, causing massive bloodshed. But Europe is getting smarter and stronger as the US gets stupider and weaker.
> His henchmen make bloodcurdling threats about wiping the UK and other European countries off the map with Russia's vaunted new weapons, but he's usually much more restrained himself.
Is it a good personal shield, for him to have the next of succession look even more undesirable to his adversaries?
It has more to do with Mafia traditions. Attack dogs like Medvedev and Rogozin[1] threaten to burn everything down if you don't pay up, and Putin plays the more dignified philosopher who sits on a high chair in a mansion and speaks in vague terms about the importance of fire safety. It would be unbecoming for the big boss to openly and directly demand money and obedience. The top dog asks nothing from anyone; he wills things into being.
[1] The same who decades ago suggested Musk build a trampoline if he wanted to reach space.
This article makes me think of The Great Filter. If the threats are indeed real, and humans are unable to use their bigger brains to bypass tribal instincts, then maybe we are doomed.
The correct time to stop Putin's war of aggression was the day he sent troops over the border. He should have been met with ferocious force from the entire western world. But he observed the weakness in the West for decades and knew he could get away with it. Obama's failed "red line" was the end of any nation on earth taking the western world seriously. The end of western liberalism is nigh.
This all just feels like typical sabre rattling to me. Except this time, the US is also rattling it at basically everyone, and Russia may take that as a good sign.
Make no mistake, Russia does not have the ability to fight a world war with Europe, so would requires allies. Basically, China. And that would be enough to set the US off.
Trump talks a lot, too much, trying to use bullying and threats to effect changes he wants to see. But at any hint of war with Europe, we'd be right there with them.
I don't worry about any of this now personally, because Putin is more calculating than that. And even if he's gone completely bonkers, Jinping is way too careful to be openly associated with them at this point.
>...World War Three ... more likely to be a collection of diplomatic and military manoeuvres, which will see autocracy flourish
I think we may be getting wise to that though. I'm sure Trump would be like to be ruler for life but the US voters seem to be getting fed up. Also probably Putin would like the Russian world to extend to Berlin but the costs of the war, sanctions and recently Ukraine hitting his shadow fleet are causing Russia to run out of money.
Russia seems to have a bit of a habit of overdoing the wars and collapsing. After WW1 and defeat by Japan the Tzars got overthrown, After Afghanistan the USSR collapsed. Maybe this time the Putin government will collapse and we'll get something more democratic? They only got saved in WW2 because after starting as allies of Hitler, he turned on them so they ended up on the winning side against by accident.
US voters also have the memory of a goldfish. The next cult of personality to come along will tell enough of what they want to hear, and people will gobble it up.
News reporters sometimes consume their own sensationalist content, which was strictly meant for customers only. This actually causes wars at larger scale, which would have been small local conflicts, if starved of visibility they never deserved.
A lot of people won't bother arguing or fighting if there are no observers.
For rural populations in those countries l, it hardly matters who is the ruler at the capital. The response of the West is largely influenced by media, disguised as public opinion, of the Wesst, but not opinion of the populations of the subject countries.
mvkel|2 months ago
We now see every war, cyber incident, threat, and speech in real time. I have to imagine the Cuban Missile Crisis (for example) was a much more serious existential risk, we were just largely in the dark while it was happening.
Not to minimize the current crises, I just wonder if this isn't what has always happened, we're just more informed now.
repeekad|2 months ago
I don’t think access or visibility of the information is what’s changed, but how that information is being delivered today vs back then
“The medium is the message”
graeme|2 months ago
It is easy to underrate the past. The 20th century had mass communication, high literacy and an active and well funded press corps with committed newspaper readers and news watchers.
epistasis|2 months ago
Point of order, the UN says they have documented that number, and certainly dont count it as anything representing the actual death toll for civilians. The count doesn't cover most of the areas where civilians are dying at high rates. Sure, the UN stayed in Gaza to see what happened and delivered, but occupied Russian territory is too dangerous for the UN and they don't even try to monitor the death and atrocities happening in the occupied areas.
lawn|2 months ago
beepbooptheory|2 months ago
ycombinete|2 months ago
Secondly, this is a naive mischaracterization of Ukraine, Russia, and the war itself.
Ukraine is a serious modern military power. One that very few countries could successfully invade. One with major support from other countries. Stormshadows, HIMARS, Javelins, NLAWs, Patriot systems are not home made drones.
That said, if Russia had managed to establish air superiority over Ukraine it would have probably won the war as fast as they intended to. But they didn't, and couldn't, because Ukraine isn't a guerilla outfit with home-made drones. They spent more than a decade preparing for this conflict.
It is also Ukraine, with defenders advantage, defending against a % of the Russian offense with their entire defensive capacity. Nearly 30% of Ukraine's GDP goes to defense currently. Russia's is somewhere closer to 7%.
Russia would probably like to do what they did to Chechnya when they got rolled out of there. Just sit back and shell the place. But because Ukraine's drones and long range artillery are a match or better than the Russians, they have to find other means.
epistasis|2 months ago
We shouldn't be scared of Russia, per se, they would be easy to defeat if we bothered to try rather than if we tried to drag out this war as long as possible to try to weaken Russia. But if we let Russia win, they will rebuild far stronger and take over the next country, and grow stronger. And again, and again.
graeme|2 months ago
Contrary to typical narratives my understanding is that the Russians are somewhat ahead on drones. They pioneered fibre optic drones and have more ability to mass produce them with Chinese support.
Ukraine has fought incredibly well and my hope is at some point Russia can't sustain its offensives due to domestic issues. Russia is very definitely straining.
But they shouldn't be underrated. In Ukraine they face a battled tested, fortified frontline and a society mobilized for war. Russia in turn has set itself for ongoing war. Europe is still in peacetime mode.
lawn|2 months ago
Don't underestimate them just because they couldn't defeat Ukraine.
They have no regard for the lives of their own soldiers and will send wave after wave of meat towards the front, which is very hard to defend against. This is backed up by an incredible knowledge of drone warfare and most countries in the world would be unable to defend against them.
jemmyw|2 months ago
DetectDefect|2 months ago
seventytwo|2 months ago
hvb2|2 months ago
They did pick a non NATO country though, that's still a difference. Most of the other countries in eastern Europe are part of NATO.
SanjayMehta|2 months ago
Orlando Figes books are worth reading.
tencentshill|2 months ago
usrnm|2 months ago
mvdtnz|2 months ago
tim333|2 months ago
OGEnthusiast|2 months ago
epistasis|2 months ago
It's wild that people in the US think this war is not their war. They promised to defend Ukraine's territory decades ago, and barely followed through for three years, then as soon as Trump took office they completely broke their promise.
By breaking their promise, the US is encouraging nuclear proliferation throughout the world. It's extremely shortsighted and stupid to not be providing the miniscule amount of current military budget that could stop this war permanently. The US and Europe have been too timid and stupid from the start, causing massive bloodshed. But Europe is getting smarter and stronger as the US gets stupider and weaker.
neilv|2 months ago
Is it a good personal shield, for him to have the next of succession look even more undesirable to his adversaries?
mopsi|2 months ago
[1] The same who decades ago suggested Musk build a trampoline if he wanted to reach space.
number6|2 months ago
iampotatoman92|2 months ago
mkaoa5|2 months ago
Whether current preparations lead to peace or lead to war, is left as an exercise to the reader.
mvdtnz|2 months ago
wakawaka28|2 months ago
[deleted]
moralestapia|2 months ago
AndrewStephens|2 months ago
myvoiceismypass|2 months ago
DustinEchoes|2 months ago
tim333|2 months ago
In the meantime the rest of the free world are going to have to step up.
silisili|2 months ago
Make no mistake, Russia does not have the ability to fight a world war with Europe, so would requires allies. Basically, China. And that would be enough to set the US off.
Trump talks a lot, too much, trying to use bullying and threats to effect changes he wants to see. But at any hint of war with Europe, we'd be right there with them.
I don't worry about any of this now personally, because Putin is more calculating than that. And even if he's gone completely bonkers, Jinping is way too careful to be openly associated with them at this point.
justkys|2 months ago
[deleted]
lawn|2 months ago
tim333|2 months ago
myvoiceismypass|2 months ago
elbci|2 months ago
tim333|2 months ago
I think we may be getting wise to that though. I'm sure Trump would be like to be ruler for life but the US voters seem to be getting fed up. Also probably Putin would like the Russian world to extend to Berlin but the costs of the war, sanctions and recently Ukraine hitting his shadow fleet are causing Russia to run out of money.
Russia seems to have a bit of a habit of overdoing the wars and collapsing. After WW1 and defeat by Japan the Tzars got overthrown, After Afghanistan the USSR collapsed. Maybe this time the Putin government will collapse and we'll get something more democratic? They only got saved in WW2 because after starting as allies of Hitler, he turned on them so they ended up on the winning side against by accident.
myvoiceismypass|2 months ago
US voters also have the memory of a goldfish. The next cult of personality to come along will tell enough of what they want to hear, and people will gobble it up.
medv|2 months ago
[deleted]
fithisux|2 months ago
[deleted]
Daviey|2 months ago
One mainly, although not always, harms individual wellbeing, whilst the other causes mass death and lines on the map to change.
Hopefully you can work out which is which.
chomp|2 months ago
tehjoker|2 months ago
[deleted]
seventytwo|2 months ago
Sit down.
zkmon|2 months ago
A lot of people won't bother arguing or fighting if there are no observers.
For rural populations in those countries l, it hardly matters who is the ruler at the capital. The response of the West is largely influenced by media, disguised as public opinion, of the Wesst, but not opinion of the populations of the subject countries.
hnlmorg|2 months ago
And to rural communities in China that have been decimated because they don’t follow the official Chinese religion.
Or in Gaza where in May 2025 it was reported that 95% of agricultural land was now unusable.
And living in rural Britain, I’m also noticing the financial burden that global tensions are costing us.
Yizahi|2 months ago
tomhow|2 months ago
beej71|2 months ago
tim333|2 months ago