Russia as superpower status

The US is not a very good neighbour to Mexico... but then look at Chinese business deals in Africa where they give the locals gifts like paved modern roads after deals are done... that sort of thing puts western companies to shame in most cases (there are western companies that do that sort of thing but they are a minority).

Better relations with Russia and indeed other countries around the world including China will either make the US more belligerent and dangerous to mexico and the countries with better relations with mexico, or miracle of miracles the US might look at its own actions and how they really don't map with their rhetoric and sermons and they might change their behaviour... my expectations would be sanctions and belligerence.

call me ignorant but if thats the case lets say mexico sought a better relationship with russia , i agree the us wouldn't sit by and let that happen so if itreached the point were they decided to attack mexico what support could russia give hypothetically

No, talk about being a superpower while half the budget is at the mercy of OPEC is hilarious indeed.

TR1 wrote:No, talk about being a superpower while half the budget is at the mercy of OPEC is hilarious indeed.

Agree to an extent. Superpower status is stupid. Regional power is more in line of being right.

As for budget, it was stupid for them to set budget at unreasonable oil price levels. And yes, having half the state budget per year to be dictated by oil and gas is silly imo. They need to reduce that to at least 10 - 15%. Even if it means state budget becomes less, any surplus revenue can go into the sectors that need money. With military budget at 4%, means they can still easily fund it. The beurocracy and social structure is heavily bloated causing an issue to the budget. Needs revision without causing a mess.

so no support ?

sepheronx wrote:

TR1 wrote:No, talk about being a superpower while half the budget is at the mercy of OPEC is hilarious indeed.

Agree to an extent. Superpower status is stupid. Regional power is more in line of being right.

As for budget, it was stupid for them to set budget at unreasonable oil price levels. And yes, having half the state budget per year to be dictated by oil and gas is silly imo. They need to reduce that to at least 10 - 15%. Even if it means state budget becomes less, any surplus revenue can go into the sectors that need money. With military budget at 4%, means they can still easily fund it. The beurocracy and social structure is heavily bloated causing an issue to the budget. Needs revision without causing a mess.

How can they easily fund military with a budget short fall of 2+ trillion rubles for 2015?
Sure, oil will probably go up by the end of 2015, but next year will be tight to put it mildly.

Mil spending may only be 4% or so of GDP, but it is a huge portion of the budget.

The US spends a similarly small % of its GDP on the military, but as a % of budget it is well over 20%.

so no support ?

The best support Russia can offer small countries like Mexico and Venezuela is armaments and the ability to use them to defend themselves.

the situation is too much like the georgian invasion of south ossetia in 8 8 8.

Despite being a superpower the US could do little in the end to help their puppet state except verbal support.

With the roles reversed Russia could do rather less in the case of the US deciding to attack mexico.

Of course I really don't think the US would actually attack mexico... it would more likely impose sanctions and do everything it could to hurt the mexican people to make them vote their government out. The CIA would of course assassinate a few key figures and bribe others and pretty soon a new government will rise up in a popular uprising to save the day.

It would be interesting to see what effect a blatant US invasion of Mexico would do regarding the large mexican population in the US... internment camps anyone?

TR1 wrote:No, talk about being a superpower while half the budget is at the mercy of OPEC is hilarious indeed.

Superpower status is an over inflated and overused word. First the British Empire, then the USSR, and recently now the U.S. and NATO's combined effort failed to tame tribal goat herders in Afghanistan, each empire left in defeat. What about the Roman Empire? They were even beyond a superpower, they were a hyperpower, so much so that they were able to declare 'Pax Romana', and they were eventually smashed by a rag-tag group of barbarians, and the great Rome was raped and sacked. The reality is neither America, nor Russia, or China has the ability to defeat each other without annihilating themselves in the process. So throw out all notions of 'military supremacy', tactical nukes would easily wipe out even the most powerful conventional military's within hours, and the 3 big military powers have thousands of tactical nukes each.

Paul Craig Roberts' outlook for the New Year.




http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/12/29/outlook-new-year-paul-craig-roberts-2/

What is a federation really?

My quiz.

A riecher citizen. True or false?

I like Euroasia more than SuperPower of Russia. Plus no new era of Soviet Union. If Euroasia taken land in Azerbadjan, Georgia and Tjetjenien plus maybe Ukraine. They can build new Soviet Union.

They can build new Soviet Union.

And if Brazil and Peru and Argentina and Chile and Belize get together and form a republic they can call themselves the United States of America...

They are South American EU last 10 years.

And what if they decide to stop being the European Union and become NATO...

The idea of creating a buffer state with Novorossiya.

NATO expansion and Russian national security

There is simply no way Russia can become leading country in the world. Not in the future and not in this multipolar world. Bricks becoming world leaders is very possible, but I doubt there will be any top leader in the world like it was in last 20 years ago.

Regular wrote:There is simply no way Russia can become leading country in the world. Not in the future and not in this multipolar world. Bricks becoming world leaders is very  possible, but I doubt there will be any top leader in the world like it was in last 20 years ago.

I really think Russia could do it.. replace US as world business leader.. offer more attractive business than the american ones. not in the near future..but a decade or two Russia can. The
problem is its leadership.. does not have the leaders with vision to lead Russia into the next level.. Is an ignorance problem... Russia will continue to give priority to expending into a world war 3 scenario with the west.. Soviets committed the same mistake.. Somewhere i read Soviets
managed to build like 600 submarines.. on its peak times.. all of them have to be now on junk yards or melted ,so much waste of money and they invested ZERO in trying to turn Russia into a more attractive modern nation than the west for society to live.

For starting Russia needs a new safe Internet that americans can't control, with their own Microsoft ,Intel Apple competition, a solid entertainment industry ,a Holywood alternative and music industry..solid gaming industry. etc.. Instead Russia goes and spend every year $80 billions !!! in their defense industry..for creating a Large Navy, while at the same time cut funding for their space program.. that was like 5% of defense spending, and very moderate sum of millions in the IT industry and Semiconductor.. I really think Russia either alone or in technology alliance China and India,could 100% replace every single technology produced in the west and create a real industrial revolution.

No. Without Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan there is no way for Russia to regain it's superpower status.

Karl Haushofer wrote:No. Without Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan there is no way for Russia to regain it's superpower status.

And it is for the better. The Russian people did not benefit much from the superpower status of the USSR, but it cost them a lot.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:No. Without Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan there is no way for Russia to regain it's superpower status.

And it is for the better. The Russian people did not benefit much from the superpower status of the USSR, but it cost them a lot.

It is true but mostly because of communism. Imperial Russia could have developed into a wealthy state and a superpower had the WWI and Red Revolution never happened.

Karl Haushofer wrote:

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:No. Without Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan there is no way for Russia to regain it's superpower status.

And it is for the better. The Russian people did not benefit much from the superpower status of the USSR, but it cost them a lot.

It is true but mostly because of communism. Imperial Russia could have developed into a wealthy state and a superpower had the WWI and Red Revolution never happened.

Imperial Russia did also waste Russian blood and prosperity for the sake of a failed ideology (known as pan-slavism).

Constantly embroiled in foreign wars
Ideological propaganda in society
Half the world hates you
A political elite bent on overthrowing governments and twisting the arms of allies

Yeah I think Russia should give this superpower stuff a miss this time around.

flamming_python wrote:Constantly embroiled in foreign wars
Ideological propaganda in society
Half the world hates you
A political elite bent on overthrowing governments and twisting the arms of allies

Yeah I think Russia should give this superpower stuff a miss this time around.

Half the world already hates Russia so.....

Give it few years and everyone will forgive