Will Russia Emerge As The Next Dominant Superpower

[goldkingcoiner]

I think while we are seeing the outer limits of what Vladimir Putin and his army are capable of, we still need to consider whether or not further provocations are even helpful or just add more death and chaos. Unless everything until now that we saw was just Russia throwing their unneeded arsenal, leftovers from the old age.

Either way, we need more diplomacy instead of more war. Americans prefer fighting to the last Ukrainian in order to weaken Russia.

[bakasabo]

If we look on the current world from finances point of view, Russia is now spending a lot on something that wont give any financial profit in future, while countries like China are getting more rich. More possibly China would become a next superpower than Russia. They have more money now, population is greater, they are better at trading and producing stuff, in case they dont have anything, they can buy it, take apart and make a copy.

[The Author]

Both the USSR and USA enjoyed the luxury of surviving World War II with their territories and economies largely intact. Profiting handsomely by loaning capital to other nations to rebuild. While the rest of the world toiled under debt and reconstruction efforts.
To avoid this, I think the united states would do well to keep its economy strong. As a hedge against russian encroachment. There isn't much alternative deterrent.

This point here rules out the fact that Russia can become the next dominant superpower in the world.
As we see that the USA is one country that tries as much to avoid wars and conflicts which they are well aware can lead to economic depreciation. While Russia on the other hand seems not to care what goes on and what doesn't in their economic status.

If global markets are devastated by a crisis, russia is (in my opinion) the number #1 prospect to emerge as the next dominant superpower.

This statement here can be backed by this as we see here that the opposing movement of the Russian rubble has caused alarm to the American Economists hence the post.

[Ozero]

After this war, which Russia unleashed in Ukraine, if the Russian Federation does not fall apart as a state, then it will definitely have to forget about the status of a superpower for a long time. Russia is now clearly playing the role of an aggressor that attacked a neighboring peaceful country, inventing and repeatedly changing the reasons for attacking it on the go. Therefore, almost the entire civilized world now supports Ukraine and provides it with military, financial and humanitarian assistance. The genocide of the Ukrainian people that the Russians perpetrated in Ukraine will cost them dearly. If, as planned, the frozen Russian assets are transferred to Ukraine as compensation for the damage caused to it, and international sanctions continue to apply, Russia will be set back in its development for many decades and will be a pariah country, like North Korea is now.

[Lubang Bawah]

Russia has a power that can be a super power replacing the USA, a thing that can prevent Russia from becoming a super power because the USA has allies scattered almost all over the world so it will be difficult to defeat the USA, a realistic thing to do is to be a counterweight for the world so that the world becomes safer.

[DrBeer]

Yes, Ukrainian servicemen participated, but
- after the end of the US military operation in Iraq
- in a peacekeeping mission.

The point is that the double standards you clearly pointed out in your comment are the reason why Ukraine is currently in this situation. Iraq and Ukraine as two sides of the same coin. Bloodthirsty aggressors are different* but the result is the same, innocent civilians are harmed in both cases.
The same world with the same double standards and same mechanisms and same useless organizations has led to this. Like useless United Nations that has had US vetoing every resolution against their actions and actions of the apartheid regimes they support is now being abused by Russia to veto the resolutions against their actions!

* Ukraine was part of it whether the propaganda you believe tells you or not. I don't have to read some propaganda piece you call "open sources" to know the crimes that were committed there, I have first hand information from people who lived through those days.

2. The story of Iraq is the price of a mistake. A very costly mistake. The stuffing of misinformation was done deliberately or not, or it was the personal interests of someone from the tops in the White House, I find it difficult to say. But I think the main reason - in terms of the quality of information, is unacceptable. It also seems to me that the way of isolating the government of Iraq (S. Hussein and his henchmen), sanctions and embargoes would be more acceptable. By the way, after this, I will say this word again, international dubious operation, the practice of monopoly supply of intelligence information from the CIA ceased in the United States. Now this structure includes, if I am not mistaken, about 10 unrelated and independent intelligence structures from which information is collected for the US administration. In a word, I have a negative attitude towards such a decision, as well as any one built on a lie.

You are wrong my friend, it was not a mistake it was a decade long plan.
For starters the project to invade Iraq didn't start in 2003, it started in 1990 when Saddam invaded Kuwait and the same double standards I talked about showed themselves as he was condemned by the same countries (that included your NATO) that were helping him in his invasion of Iran. And when I say help I'm talking about billions of dollars worth of weapons including chemical bombs made in US and Germany. He was an ally from 1980 to 1988 but as soon as he was defeated the tables turned and he suddenly became a dictator overnight and condemned when he invaded another country 2 years later.
Besides US attacked Iraq more than a hundred times prior to 2003 always targeting Iraq's defending capabilities alongside the project called "Iraq disarmament" orchestrated by UN between 1990 to 2003. You don't need access to some classified information to know what the plan was!!!

Conspiracy theories, ten-year plans, the fifth column... All this is very familiar to those who lived in a rotten scoop Instead of actually doing something and changing for the better, they only had the mind and strength to throw mud at those who are better and invent fantastic stories to justify their problems...
Go on, it's nice to read you as a comedian ... As I understand it - a glorious continuation, the Zadornov school? He also weaved the same from the stage

[og kush420]

Conspiracy theories, ten-year plans, the fifth column... All this is very familiar to those who lived in a rotten scoop Instead of actually doing something and changing for the better, they only had the mind and strength to throw mud at those who are better and invent fantastic stories to justify their problems...
Go on, it's nice to read you as a comedian ... As I understand it - a glorious continuation, the Zadornov school? He also weaved the same from the stage

I am not sure what are other people belief but to me Russia will emerge as next Dominant Superpower.
See how they have taken the stand against the whole world to have their wish fulfilled. They are absolutely not afraid of anything. They did what they wanted.
We will see many things unpredictable in coming days.

[dezoel]

Russia has a power that can be a super power replacing the USA, a thing that can prevent Russia from becoming a super power because the USA has allies scattered almost all over the world so it will be difficult to defeat the USA, a realistic thing to do is to be a counterweight for the world so that the world becomes safer.

Replacing USA is not just about money or resources. USA could have literally zero resources left, and they could print more money and buy those resources and still be the superpower. USA doesn't really provide that much to the world if you think about it, what are they really giving back to the world?

As an "item" most of them are tech stuff, what is it apple? tesla? amazon? These all can move in a single day, the wheat or oil or gas Russia has can't. Even with that, USA is still number one because everyone would love to get paid in dollars instead of ruble. That is the power of USA and that cannot be replaced, you need to convince every person in the world for that.

[sovie]

Russia has a power that can be a super power replacing the USA, a thing that can prevent Russia from becoming a super power because the USA has allies scattered almost all over the world so it will be difficult to defeat the USA, a realistic thing to do is to be a counterweight for the world so that the world becomes safer.

Replacing USA is not just about money or resources. USA could have literally zero resources left, and they could print more money and buy those resources and still be the superpower. USA doesn't really provide that much to the world if you think about it, what are they really giving back to the world?

As an "item" most of them are tech stuff, what is it apple? tesla? amazon? These all can move in a single day, the wheat or oil or gas Russia has can't. Even with that, USA is still number one because everyone would love to get paid in dollars instead of ruble. That is the power of USA and that cannot be replaced, you need to convince every person in the world for that.

But I assume - Russia has already taken a stand and stood an eye to eye to USA.
A part for Russia - Afghanistan also did not give up against USA. And they gave them tough time for almost 20 years. If USA believe they are super power then there is a dire to think what Russia and Afghanistan has done with USA.

[Wong Gendheng]

I'm sure this is not a good idea, the economic and military strength of the USA and Europe is still stronger than Russia, the best thing done by Russia is certainly looking for security and support from many countries before embargo to the USA, because without the support of other countries it is certainly very difficult for Russia to be the next superpower.

[og kush420]

I'm sure this is not a good idea, the economic and military strength of the USA and Europe is still stronger than Russia, the best thing done by Russia is certainly looking for security and support from many countries before embargo to the USA, because without the support of other countries it is certainly very difficult for Russia to be the next superpower.

Russia has oil and fuel and USA will never dare to attack Russia. Russia is not weak like Afghanistan. Even Afghanistan survived the war for 20 years and kicked USA out after 20 years. They were so determined that they did not give up and finally USA had to leave in hurry. USA should learn from their mistake but they are making the same mistake -they just want to rule the world.

[DrBeer]

I'm sure this is not a good idea, the economic and military strength of the USA and Europe is still stronger than Russia, the best thing done by Russia is certainly looking for security and support from many countries before embargo to the USA, because without the support of other countries it is certainly very difficult for Russia to be the next superpower.

Russia has oil and fuel and USA will never dare to attack Russia. Russia is not weak like Afghanistan. Even Afghanistan survived the war for 20 years and kicked USA out after 20 years. They were so determined that they did not give up and finally USA had to leave in hurry. USA should learn from their mistake but they are making the same mistake -they just want to rule the world.

Like you, I always ask ONE simple question - and on the basis of what arguments did you decide that the United States has a desire to attack Russia? Why do they need it? What are the goals of such an action, in your opinion?
I beg you - just do not say "seize our resources" - this is really very funny!
And so, please answer this extremely simple question - what is the main goal of the US attack on Russia?

[Hispo]

I believe Russia as a country has to face many obstacles before turning into a superpower, economically.
Granted, the Klemlin may suffer economically because the sanctions imposed upon them, however, in the long term Russia could adapt itselft and her economy to be more independient of USA and Europe, a small example of this is the way they have already replaced the old Macdonalds local with a new franchise, that may be welcomed by the Russian people.

Personally, a key part of the future of Russia is her allies and potential clients for the energy: China, North Korea, India...

For now, I'd say that Russia is not in the way to turn into a superpower, they must be trying to find ways to become less affected by the western politics against them.

[pooya87]

Like you, I always ask ONE simple question - and on the basis of what arguments did you decide that the United States has a desire to attack Russia? Why do they need it? What are the goals of such an action, in your opinion?
I beg you - just do not say "seize our resources" - this is really very funny!
And so, please answer this extremely simple question - what is the main goal of the US attack on Russia?

US is already attacking Russia but through a proxy called Ukraine. The reason is also pretty simple, competition. To put simply Russia was growing stronger while US was growing weaker so they needed to create an Afghanistan 2.0 for Russia so that they get caught for a long time like US did for 20 years and spent $7 trillion. Ukraine was a very good Afghanistan 2.0.

It's also to destabilize the region, increase the energy cost (US is also selling its very expensive-to-extract oil at a higher price), mess up Europe economy and force them to increase their military budget (something Trump couldn't do despite all his pressure), possibly move even further east (Finland and Sweden joining NATO), distract Russia from Syria so that US can revive ISIS again (which failed miserably), ...

[bakasabo]

If you say that the US is responsible for all that mess, that they use Ukraine as a proxy to weaken military and financial position of Russia, then why the US is also suffering from inflation, high prices on everything, and as I remember, they declined sending lots of weapons to support Ukraine, as well as allocate millions or billions of their budget on that war. Sort of a US attacking Russia and in the same make bad for themselves? That does not look logical to me.

[Rikafip]

US is already attacking Russia but through a proxy called Ukraine. The reason is also pretty simple, competition. To put simply Russia was growing stronger while US was growing weaker so they needed to create an Afghanistan 2.0 for Russia so that they get caught for a long time like US did for 20 years and spent $7 trillion. Ukraine was a very good Afghanistan 2.0.

Russia stopped being main US competition some time ago. And its not like Russia doesn't have a long history of invading neighbouring countries, from Poland and Finland to Hungary and Czechoslovakia. I like how people somehow think that Russia is not like all those other imperialist countries, while being the biggest country in the world. They obviously got all that area peacefully and not by conquering numerous small nations.

I don't say that United States are completely innocent in all his because they aren't, but in the end Putin was the one who decided to send the tanks to Ukraine because they don't know anything about soft power and instead extending their influence to other countries by culture and economy, all they can do is to send tanks, which is a shame.


To answer OP; no, Russia won't become the next dominant superpower and instead it will probably end like USSR if they continue like this.

[pooya87]

And its not like Russia doesn't have a long history of invading neighbouring countries, from Poland and Finland to Hungary and Czechoslovakia. I like how people somehow think that Russia is not like all those other imperialist countries, while being the biggest country in the world.

I don't think I've ever thought or said that
In fact whenever you guys think of Nazis when WWII is mentioned we do too but we mainly remember Soviets and Brits who invaded our neutral country and murdered 4 million people (more than entire German casualties during WWII!).
None of it means I don't see the real reasons for this conflict though.

I don't say that United States are completely innocent in all his because they aren't, but in the end Putin was the one who decided to send the tanks to Ukraine because they don't know anything about soft power and instead extending their influence to other countries by culture and economy, all they can do is to send tanks, which is a shame.

Basically US provided Russia with only 2 options:
1. To accept an ever increasing security threat at their western borders and in black sea while US kept building terrorist bases in Ukraine and manufactured WMDs there including biological ones
2. Invade Ukraine to neutralize the threat once and for all but be caught up there with their pants down like US did in Afghanistan for 20 years.
They chose option number 2 because they couldn't create an option number 3 for themselves.

[Pomogator]

Russia will not become a superpower until it begins to process its resources within its own country. While all resources go abroad in their raw form, the benefit goes only to officials in their pockets, so you first need to deal with this moment, and then think about world domination.

[Rikafip]

I don't think I've ever thought or said that

You didn't, but you still claim that it's all US fault and that Russia didn't have any other choice while I just wanted to show that its their standard practice. Eastern Europe and Baltic countries rushed into NATO for a good reason after fall of SSSR, knowing how it is to live under Russian boot, but were naive enough to give their nuclear weapons and now they are paying the price.

1. To accept an ever increasing security threat at their western borders and in black sea while US kept building terrorist bases in Ukraine and manufactured WMDs there including biological ones

Haha good one. Russian claims that Ukraine has US funded WMD labs is as believable as US claims that Saddam Hussein had WMD and that there was no other way other than invading Iraq.And we all know how that ended up.

[pooya87]

Haha good one. Russian claims that Ukraine has US funded WMD labs is as believable as US claims that Saddam Hussein had WMD and that there was no other way other than invading Iraq.And we all know how that ended up.

Obviously both sides are spreading a lot of propaganda so you would be right to say it is hard to decide who to believe but lets check the facts.
1. During first days of invasion we clearly saw footage of unknown personnel in front of a facility that Russia later seized and claimed was US bioweapons lab.
2. Different US diplomats including of State Department have expressed concerns that their intelligence from such labs and their weapons are now in the hands of Russians!!! What are they so concerned about if they didn't have anything there
3. US has many more of such labs in other countries that can operate well under the radar. Mostly in Africa but in others like the one in South Korea that their government has complained about the bioweapons lab posing a risk to their people many times. Or the one in our north western country Azerbaijan which is clearly a US terrorist base working on biological WMDs.
4. US also has a filthy record when it comes to such weapons, they have admitted to having them and even using them on many occasions including on their own soil https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-admits-bio-weapons-tests/

So this all leads me to have more confidence in such US terrorist bases existing in Ukraine.