The European Union is girding for a long war against Russia that appears clearly contrary to European economic interests and social stability. A war that is apparently irrational – as many are – has deep emotional roots and claims ideological justification. Such wars are hard to end because they extend outside the range of rationality.
— https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/specter-germany-rising
There is so much disinformation about the Ukraine War, from both sides, that I need to look at the whole matter from a dispassionate, disinterested vantage point. Forget the war maps, the lying statistics and the propaganda broadcasts laced with martial music, and try to answer the following question:
“Which side in the conflict has the resources to win?”
For simplicity’s sake, let’s compare the combatants by GDP — seeing which combination of combatants, regardless of their level of participation or committment, are required for a hopeless stalemate. Counting Ukraine’s GDP as a wash, the first lineup is:
SIDE A: Russia, GDP = $1,829,050
SIDE B: Germany, GDP = $4,256,540
That’s over a 2:1 advantage for NATO (= SIDE B). Let’s even up the odds by bringing in PR China:
SIDE A: Russia, GDP = $1,829,050; PR China, GDP = $19,911,593; sub-total = $21,740,643.
That gives the Eurasians (= SIDE A) just under a 5:1 advantage.
China’s entry into the war would probably involve an attack of some sort on Taiwan, bringing the US into the conflict. Then we would have:
SIDE B: Germany, GDP = $4,256,540; USA, GDP = $25,346,805; sub-total = $29,603,345
That give NATO around a 3:2 advantage over Eurasia. while turning the conflict into a virtual world war with the potential for a full nuclear exchange.
How shall we return the advantage to Eurasia? Shall India join them?
SIDE A: Russia, GDP = $1,829,050; PR China, GDP = $19,911,593; india, GDP = $3,534,743; sub-total = $25,275,386
Ignoring, of course, the fact that India and China have been mortal foes for the past 60 years, this still doesn’t close the gap. Meanwhile, remembering that Japan has pledged to come to Taiwan’s defense if that island nation is attacked, let’s add them to the mix:
SIDE B: Germany, GDP = $4,256,540; USA, GDP = $25,346,805; Japan, GDP = $4,912,147; sub-total = $34,515,492
Things only get worse for Russia, by piling on additional players: First, let’s give the Eurasians Iran (a far more likely, but much less powerful, ally than India). That would hardly move the dial vs. the US, Germany and Japan; but by this point NATO would be fully engaged, including real powerhouses like the UK, France, Canada and Italy.
Now give the Russkie alliance Brazil and Mexico, and the Westerners get South Korea, Australia and Spain.
You can see where this is going: it isn’t to any “Pyrrhic Victory” on any side; it’s Verdun, Kursk, WWI, WWII and, allowed to run its course, mutual assured destruction.
Putin has been portrayed by some as a strategic genius; but unless this matter is ended quickly, he will turn out to be Russia’s Dr. Strangelove.
EDITOR
Ted Belman
tbelman3- at- gmail.com
Co-Editor
Peloni
peloni1986@yahoo.com
Customized SEARCH
ISRAPUNDIT DAILY DIGEST
Subscribe for Free
SUPPORT ISRAPUNDIT
If you are paying by credit card, when filling out the form, make sure you show the country at the top of the form as the country in which you live.
So delicately put:
There is so much disinformation about the Ukraine War, from both sides, that I need to look at the whole matter from a dispassionate, disinterested vantage point. Forget the war maps, the lying statistics and the propaganda broadcasts laced with martial music, and try to answer the following question:
“Which side in the conflict has the resources to win?”
For simplicity’s sake, let’s compare the combatants by GDP — seeing which combination of combatants, regardless of their level of participation or committment, are required for a hopeless stalemate. Counting Ukraine’s GDP as a wash, the first lineup is:
SIDE A: Russia, GDP = $1,829,050
SIDE B: Germany, GDP = $4,256,540
That’s over a 2:1 advantage for NATO (= SIDE B). Let’s even up the odds by bringing in PR China:
SIDE A: Russia, GDP = $1,829,050; PR China, GDP = $19,911,593; sub-total = $21,740,643.
That gives the Eurasians (= SIDE A) just under a 5:1 advantage.
China’s entry into the war would probably involve an attack of some sort on Taiwan, bringing the US into the conflict. Then we would have:
SIDE B: Germany, GDP = $4,256,540; USA, GDP = $25,346,805; sub-total = $29,603,345
That give NATO around a 3:2 advantage over Eurasia. while turning the conflict into a virtual world war with the potential for a full nuclear exchange.
How shall we return the advantage to Eurasia? Shall India join them?
SIDE A: Russia, GDP = $1,829,050; PR China, GDP = $19,911,593; india, GDP = $3,534,743; sub-total = $25,275,386
Ignoring, of course, the fact that India and China have been mortal foes for the past 60 years, this still doesn’t close the gap. Meanwhile, remembering that Japan has pledged to come to Taiwan’s defense if that island nation is attacked, let’s add them to the mix:
SIDE B: Germany, GDP = $4,256,540; USA, GDP = $25,346,805; Japan, GDP = $4,912,147; sub-total = $34,515,492
Things only get worse for Russia, by piling on additional players: First, let’s give the Eurasians Iran (a far more likely, but much less powerful, ally than India). That would hardly move the dial vs. the US, Germany and Japan; but by this point NATO would be fully engaged, including real powerhouses like the UK, France, Canada and Italy.
Now give the Russkie alliance Brazil and Mexico, and the Westerners get South Korea, Australia and Spain.
You can see where this is going: it isn’t to any “Pyrrhic Victory” on any side; it’s Verdun, Kursk, WWI, WWII and, allowed to run its course, mutual assured destruction.
Putin has been portrayed by some as a strategic genius; but unless this matter is ended quickly, he will turn out to be Russia’s Dr. Strangelove.