True Left

This video is how I am afraid the CCP (even post-Xi) will think and thus choose negotiation over invasion. But the great opportunity now is not merely to take back Russian-occupied territory that belongs to China, but to maximize Russian deaths (in particular young Russian deaths, thereby reducing reproductive potential) to the point where Russia cannot recover. Sure, China may lose people too, but China is currently far more able to take the loss than Russia is due to the initial population difference. This is why wars, despite being expensive (as the video accurately points out), made so much sense in ancient times. It is a chance to damage enemies demographically to a greater extent than is generally possible via negotiation.

To illustrate this, let's use an extreme example. Russia's total population is ~150 million. If in theory we could eliminate all 150 million Russians at the cost of also eliminating 150 million Chinese (ie. 1 to 1 trade), this would be a spectacular demographic victory because Russia would end up at 0 population whereas China (with its current population of ~1.4 billion) would still have 1.25 billion* remaining.

(* If China plays its cards well, it could even improve its gene pool qualitatively via this event!)

The problem begins when you look only at your own losses instead of comparing your losses to the enemy's losses. Then you (as the video recommends) tend to try to minimize your own losses and end up letting the enemy survive.

If Turkey (NATO member) could get Israel (non-NATO) to attack it, then NATO could be made to go to war against Israel by treaty obligation. Can Turkey be the one to shoot down Israeli aircraft entering Iraqi airspace as per your plan? (Of course it could do better and attack Israel directly.)

At least Turkey is broadly thinking about this topic:

Not to underestimate our enemies, but it seems like post WW2 Atlantic Westerners don't have the stomach for war, due to domestication by the counterculture::
https://x.com/hindookissinger/status/1852432304779743634?t=RPCX6dwXbvaFFSerKxhRUg&s=19

There's a huge difference in fighting when you've air superiority and your enemies are insurgents as opposed to fighting a nation state, and that too something like Russia that has tanks, artillery, missiles and planes in such numbers like a kid throwing candies on Halloween.

Quote

There was this account of a UK soldier who had served many years in Iraq and Afg who volunteered for Ukraine he couldn't take it after a month and returned. Said didn't have PTSD after years, but got it after Ukraine being under constant artillery barrage.

Agree. And as rightism gains hold in the U.S., there is also the growing danger of them joining Identitarians to attack "non Whites" instead of Russians.

But do you agree my theory applies to Identitarians in the Atlantic West as well?

We can dream:

If it is impossible to confront Duginism directly, I support this (given the rise of racism/machinism of "Whites" in the U.S. as well):

USA & Russia should go to war - full on.

nothing of value would be lost. there would be fewer whites/christians in the world.

that is ALWAYS a good thing.

@iamyesyouareno @AnnCoulter @MattWalshBlog @michaeljknowles @charliekirk11 @RichardBSpencer @JesseKellyDC

But, as the very next reply notes, the time at which this is least likely to happen is right now.

Unfortunately, that is impossible. This incident has cemented rus-u.s partnership for the next decade. This was always the plan. Putin gets ukraine, U.S gets access to the Arctic. Multipolarity 101.

Well at least now we know Britain and France are going to put boots on the ground in Ukraine. Russia will definitely not be deterred due to its massive nuclear arsenal, which means more attrition between EU and Russia. I hope this draws the U.S. in as well due to treaty obligation, as I would like to see "Whites" (including Jews), especially machinists, genocided.

Australia doesn't have nukes and is not in NATO.
In the new world order, I fail to see significant obstacles to China invading Australia to take its natural resources valued at $20 trillion, a bargain even if it costs China $2 trillion.
Australia's population is only 26 million.

The question is, why isn't China doing this?