General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

buddermonger2000
CaspianReport
comments

Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "CaspianReport" channel.

In that point it did make some sense since everyone around them was a world power as well so the only way to survive was to also become a world power. In its current position it's also a world power as it drives the entirety of the EU along with the French. So really right now it achieved that goal.
37
@Internetbutthurt The biggest thing is the threat more than the actual effect. Forcing pilots to take evasive action disrupts the sorties. The TB2s have seen continual usage throughout the conflict and are still being seen. Static AA emplacements have still been seen active in many areas of the country. The idea that all of the S-300s were in one location seems a bit weak and even then the Ukrainians still have a lot of AA systems such as Tor and Strelas. The reason we see so much footage of infantry is that it's easiest to follow by civilians and it's why they're often recording the aftermath of battles. Following tanks on foot just isn't really possible and following in a truck is a death wish. It's also the fact that most of what's seen is in cities and not in the countryside where there is still substantial fighting because that's where the people are. Civilians are logging this not military. The idea that Ukraine is out of the fight is ludicrous by any metric even if the odds of actual victory slim. However it's very clear that on both sides total victory is not being pursued as peace negotiations were started within days of the invasion by the Russians and are still ongoing. Frankly the question of Ukraine winning shouldn't really be the question anyway. The question should be "How many concessions can Ukraine avoid?" or even "Can Ukraine get back the previously annexed regions from a weakened Russia?"
15
@GeoScorpion Getting dates sometimes wrong is the BEST way to be wrong. Because those were never set in stone anyway. They're a rough estimate. And for large timescales, that's basically within margin of error
14
@theodoroseidler7072 I think the only other thing I'll mention here is that the Spanish actually sent their population over in many capacities and thus share that heritage in many ways with the homeland. But you do have a pretty good argument there
5
Because it is. Russia is absolutely in its death throes with this situation which is why it's important for them to get a handle on their borders now so they can at least ATTEMPT to survive. Most nations just don't come back from this deep of a hole though however if there is any one which can it would be the RUS. I do say the Rus because that includes Belarus and Ukraine who are realistically about as different from Russia as Canada and Australia are from Britain but with time spent under different rulers more often. And to that extent Ukraine probably could come back and become the new elite to lead Russia once again if Russia itself does not. Russia resisted the Mongols, the other Steppe nomads, Central Asian Muslims, Germans, Swedes, and the French. Russia has pulled so many Hail Marys that it basically exists via complete refusal to die. If anyone can pick themselves back up and form a coherent nation again it would be this one.
5
@theodoroseidler7072 Actually your paragraph sentence is wrong. They were all Spanish colonies and thus part of the Spanish empire.
4
@farzana6676 There have been some attempts at it and they've realistically all failed. Hell Japan is currently still trying it and still getting nowhere. The biggest thing is that the ideology which has taken much of the west is that of pure comfort. Child making does not translate to that. Military strength does not translate to that. The only thing which does translate is welfare spending. Think of all of the people who are unwilling to have children if not for climate change reasons then reasons like "I don't want to bring someone into this terrible world" or "It's just too hard and uncomfortable I don't want that" with a lot of focus on abortion if things go wrong. The West just doesn't want to and incentivizing it only convinces those who really don't care either way which with child making just isn't a large portion of the populace. Isreal doesn't really incentive fertility via government but more so via culture in that they're very religious and very devoted to their religion. Their government is a reflection of this and so rewards it. They're also de-facto expansionist with their pushing into Palestinian controlled areas. These are all factors of a growing population and a people who believe in themselves. The west largely does not.
4
Only option to annex middle east and reform ottoman empire?
3
CANZUK would basically need to rapidly become a naval power that can rival the US's own and even surpass it if it wants to be separated from the US. However, the US itself is part of the anglosphere even if it doesn't like to admit it. And so honestly what this would amount to is the ally that the US is sorely needing. The USA is facing a world where it will be overextended unless it can get allies but most of the Allies it does have seem to have fallen into decline and unwilling to put in any effort meaning that it is largely on its own. The only real ally it would be able to count on is this CANZUK union which would probably by in part subsidized by the USA and also able to help in at least some fronts that it doesn't have otherwise. By being able to at least form a confederation even if not a real federation the CANZUK super state would be able to actually hold its own in some capacity, strengthen its leverage over the areas of importance by drawing upon the other member states, and get at least more bargaining power with the US even if it'll immediately be an ally. Honestly despite the member states taking a similar path to Europe in some regards, Britain has always been on a more independent path to Europe than the mainland and all member states are closer in ties to the US than Europe. So I honestly see them following the path closer to the US than that of the rest of Europe being kind of brought along as the total greater anglosphere. Edit: There's also a few things which I wanted to add here. First off that even with the very different trade realities of each member state, the British empire historically used its empire as a system of preferential trade to rival the US and Germany economically since it couldn't on its own. The states would also be free to pursue their own trade realities but also be able to bolster the economy of each other by better exchanging their resources with each other. It's also worth noting that the UK is the second biggest NATO spender (though the US does still subsidize the whole thing) and Canada still spends about as much as Italy despite literally being the northern US border and so practically not really having to spend at all which means that as a united power they likely would be willing to spend enough to be a decent military power unlike the current EU and rest of NATO. It's Also that the CANZUK union is largely a state of one people spread across 3 continents in a way that almost no other union could boast. They share also incredibly similar culture so splits like the India-Pakistan split wouldn't realistically happen. It'd arguably be much more like the Han Chinese level of cultural unity than any other group of countries.
3
Realistically this is true due to their location. They're on the Steppe. It's flat in that direction too. Before now they were conquered from there and constantly sold into slavery in Central Asia until they controlled the region. They're also the cap on China. If Russia dies what happens is that it becomes a rump state in the middle of the continent vunerable on all sides completely unable to defend itself. Before now Russia's greatest strength was its birth rate and large population relative to who it was fighting. This is no longer the case and it's approaching a point where it will simply be unable to compete and just die. Unless it somehow starts having families of 7 kids per woman again it'll realistically just die with other peoples populating where it is on the continent.
3
Germany proved that twice lol
3
@krasavchik8714 This is incredibly unlikely. People REALLY overestimate the strength of these oppressive governments. Oppressive governments are never and have never been able to order its population this way. Any and all loyalty is bought and as soon as they're forced too much they either revolt or get conquered by an outside power as people refuse to defend it. People don't like being oppressed and once oppression reaches too much of the populace the frustration builds too much and they're replaced. The core of what lets these states survive is that they're built on oppressing only those who don't comply at first with reasonable and then increasingly unreasonable demands to continue to comply. Once that tips over a certain point, you start to get revolts and rebellion because people genuinely can't take it anymore. There's a reason that Qin China (the dynasty we get its name from and that united China) died within 20 years. Loyalty has to be maintained by something other than by buying it. There has to be some genuine goodwill or love for the institutions. Tzarist Russia maintained control via the church, military, and national pride. The military was an institution which people were able to have immense pride in and one of the key triggers of the animosity towards the Tzars were Russian military failures. Their repression also ended up fairly local and the repression generally took a trajectory of being less repressive. It was only after that started to reverse that we got the seeds of the Russian revolution.
3
@rhalfik Their fertility rate is under replacement rate and their population pyramid is growing smaller at the bottom. It doesn't matter now it matters in future.
3
@rhalfik I believe it may have been mentioned or simply not have crossed their mind mainly because this type of thing doesn't really like to get talked about. It's really convenient to kind of ignore. But yeah the point is that the population pyramid should be a pyramid going up for growth or stability. Even a rectangle is stable. What is not, is an upside down one on the demographic chart. The birth rate is what determines demographics are okay because those matter in future. It doesn't matter if you have a growing population right now, if in 50 years people are too old then in 50 years you're going to have a population decline (which is what a lot of Europe and East Asia are facing). And at that point it can't be fixed. You're done and you're in for a demographic crunch.
3
4 months later is an oof
2
That's basically why they're investing in Africa. The definition of a superpower is power is global power projection, but if it can integrate Africa into the Franco-Sphere then what happens is that France is effectively only one state out of like 20 it can pull from
2
@deadrose007 That's honestly a topic still debated to this day in many respects. Realistically by the time the lend-lease had kicked in the German tide had already been stemmed and Russian industry was starting to activate again from beyond the Urals so whether or not it was completely decisive is still pretty inconclusive.
2
@dmitriyparfenov I'm not sure about it but I think Germany simply wants to fool itself into thinking there is peace as in most of the west when war is just across the horizon unless they do something about it. I don't think it'll do anything to actively curb Poland but if you've got anything which shows that they've Been snubbing Poland consistently I'll admit they are. Also the US isn't attempting to make the EU more dependent on it. It is simply attempting to keep it independent from Russia itself by making sure things like energy reserves aren't tied to Russia. The EU has no will to do anything besides fund its own decadence. It has been nearly completely pacified with the exception of France and the Eastern region. France is still a colonial empire and the East is worrying about Russia. But the rest have been pacified and resolved to simply pay for decadence. The USA is on this path as well but it's a much slower process which is being pushed back.
2
@mn5499 the joke is the US is an empire lol
2
Seems like Poland needs to grab the Balkans, Baltic, and Romania if it wants a proper power center.
2
To be fair... no more superpowers will ever come again. Simply a descent into great powers Again.
2
@jaidengabriel1675 While Europe as a whole is kind of a proxy to the US, France is the least dependent on the US in part because it's still a colonial power. The US is the de-facto leader of the anglosphere and so basically has the UK and commonwealth as the most integrated allies.
2
@farzana6676 Actually yes with the exception of Africa barring the EAF, maybe Ethiopia, and if west Africa continues to be led by the French. The rest of Africa is just too poorly integrated into the global economy, their borders make no sense, and on top of that largely rely on capital from Europe and Asia. The Middle East will rise once again likely under the Turks since they're already industrialized and can follow their track or their lead. There's also a lot of Muslim nationalism which transcends the political and even ethnic borders which could make an empire. India is also basically the place of Russia during the first world War with a massive young population and actively and rapidly industrializing. This will likely pull all of south Asia into its economic and cultural orbit. Europe and East Asia will face a crisis in the coming demographic crunch and after the recovery probably be go back to the world of the 16th century with strong politically split civilizations which sometimes work together for broader and smaller goals.
2
@farzana6676 Well honestly the US replacement rate has only JUST started to dip and part of that has been because we've entered some hard times which historically pushes down the birth rate. Also the creeping of an anti-natal ideology that everyone is growing to hate and will likely eradicate within a decade as things get too hard to sustain such an ideology so the birth rate will likely climb back up afterward.
2
@markmuller7962 I think you're the one who is really uneducated on this. Demographies around the world are incredibly unequal such as the rapid birth rate in the middle east and throughout much of the Muslim world compared to the incredible collapse in East Asia and Europe. This has applied very heavily to Russia and to ignore what have historically been the strengths of Russia (large population and birth rate which allowed them to grow to their current borders in the first place) and how those strengths are no longer around and overall showcased better in countries such as China in regards to population and central Asia and other ethnic minorities in birthrate. This also paired with the very poor geography that comes from an incredibly flat terrain with few natural borders means that the only way to survive is by military strength. You seem to lack understanding of the mindset of the historical Russian state and its goal above all else: secure the borders of the Russian heartland. This has dictated the actions of Russia since its unification under the rise of Novgorod and has largely dictated its foreign policy since. It's also idealistic to view the modern world as a status that will continue onward and specifically this commitment to peace from all of Europe which is not followed by much of the world outside of it. People want to be represented in their governments and often identify with their own groups so Want their groups as part of the government. In many instances they also want their own land and this is the start of the nation-state model: a core desire for your people to have a state. Empires have largely dominated this by being a larger state which can defend all of the territory but the groups within either united and part of the larger identity or subjugated and maybe sometimes represented if that empire cares to. Now within all of that context there needs to be something here to address in my statement: Russia is either a world power or a rump state. The reason is because the only defensible borders that it has are found THOUSANDS of miles apart. It has the Pacific in the East, some mountains north of Manchuria and Mongolia, used to have mountains south and east of Kazakhstan, the Caucuses in the south, used to have the north pole in the northwest (now it's just Finland), used to have the Carpathians (now Moldova), used to have the black sea (now Ukraine, and used to have the Baltic sea. These all pushed into mountains and uncrossable water to the North, East, and South, and pushed far into the north European plain in the west. This prevented any force from pushing in once it got its military in order but Russia had to be powerful enough to control all of this land and also had to have the population which populated it to be truly Russian to maintain control. This was lost when Russia weakened. If Russia doesn't grow back it loses Siberia to China as climate change makes the region more temperate and loses the region just East of the Urals to people who out populate Russia in that area as the Russian heartland is in Eastern Europe and if Russia becomes weak enough to lose the area past the Urals to other groups it'll never have the ability to keep itself protected at its Western border. This leaves Russia completely indefensible as the only areas around it are flat grassland perfect for invading from. Btw world powers do not have to be exclusively from military ability and most often wield very strong cultural and economic influence over many regions.
2
@markmuller7962 I'm sorry... WHAT? Did you just accuse me of in ANY way defending Russia? I'm sorry but I in no way defended Russia however to not understand demographics is to not understand their situation. Central Asia is not the developed world and has a fertility rate of 2.75 births per woman and a population of 74.3 million people. The excess people can literally move north and out populate the Russians in the region of Siberia. They simply have more people in the region and if they want to migrate and settle the region then Russia can't stop them. If Russia is too weak to keep it then they lose that territory. China has an incredible demographic problem which will halve their population yes. However their population is still MASSIVE and by the end of the century will still be 7x that of Russia. And all of that Russian population is in Eastern Europe and not in the far East which means once again that they can just move in and take territory by settling the region. This is because in the local area Russia is out populated not because of its pure population. Once that demographic crunch kicks in both Russia and China will be weakened but Russia much more heavily than China. And thus Russia would lose out in any contest over territory. Will any of this happen? Not necessarily. Can it happen? Yes. The key thing to understand is that either Russia is strong enough to hold its territory or it becomes so weak that it can lose it. Which is why it's important for the sake of Russia to be a world power. And World powers involve things other than military might.
2
@markmuller7962 To be a superpower you have to fundamentally be able to project power far beyond your borders and make it so that no-one will touch you. To that end military power makes it so that no-one will touch you. It also allows you to stave off issues like migrations if you have successful control of people so they either don't enter or if they do you have the means to keep them from either seceding or causing issues in your government. But your question misses something and if you've watched this channel long enough you'd realize: these wars aren't random. Not by a long shot. These wars are for one very specific goal: a return to the defensible borders of the Soviet Union. The least defensible border of pure plains needs to be reduced as much as possible so they're trying to push into the Carpathian mountains and the Baltic sea. The wars in Chechnya and I want to say Georgia were to push to the Caucasus mountains. And Russia currently holds de-facto control over Kazakhstan which allows it to push to the mountains on the west of Xinjiang in China (the heavenly mountains), and the mountains in the south of Kazakhstan. This is literally just Russia trying to secure its borders. However the issue is that no-one really wants to be in Russia's sphere of informer and it lacks the institutions to be liked and actually good at its economy (mostly thanks to the length of communist rule) for much of those states. So it goes to hard power and invades. The point here of why Russia needs to be a world power is that it needs to be strong enough to hold all of this land and keep others from coming in so it can be secured on as many sides as possible.
2
@JudeMalachi The US largely doesn't face a demographic problem. Unlike other countries who are decades into this the US only dipped VERY recently into this in a way other countries just haven't.
2
@rhalfik Nah France will probably be okay as realistically it controls west Africa and is rooting out Islamic extremists in the region. The French identity is also somewhat malleable as you don't have to actually have a certain look. Just be French by being as French as any other Frenchman which means that much like a religion, you can convert to being French, it just takes a lot more effort than like becoming American or anglophone. However that buts up against Islam which is very much NOT a part of French identity and as a different and ingrained culture means Muslims integrate poorly overall.
2
For Russia it's an attempt at future survival. For much of Eastern Europe it is the same. Sometimes one's survival comes at the expense of another.
1
That's not so easy though. Although it's very nice to try to get them to be allies realistically there are a lot more cultural differences between Russia and the rest of Central and Western Europe which make that integration very difficult. Also would prevent them from obtaining defensible borders in Central Asia and leaves them vunerable to a backstab from the west. Also with so much animosity toward them from the rest of Europe it wouldn't be very easy at all.
1
Tbh a lot of people have gotten tired of hearing about "wealth disparities" so I can see why they're getting stupid about it. They're still being stupid about it but that's just why. Overly talked about in modern political circles.
1
@tooeasyy5287 Will be again soon. And in that environment fucking Turkie will likely end up being the one who does it.
1
@ja1111112 2020 it only spent 2.1% of GDP on military expenditures. For comparison the US spends roughly 3.5% of its GDP on its military (one with global commitments especially in its navy). The UK with only really NATO commitments and a few global trainings (supporting the Americans) is at 2.2%. Isreal with its requirement to have a military for the sake of existing is at 3.3%. Realistically Poland only spends a lot on its military in relation to countries which really don't need one. However with the likely joining of Belarus with the Russians, Poland will once again be on the forefront of being threatened with invasion from the East and thus likely needs to reach around 3% to go ahead and start being competitive again and able to actually meet the demands that will soon be on it.
1
@Anurag-xe2jp UK spends more than France but France sees regular military action in Africa while the UK has switched to just supporting the Americans.
1
Lmao Jannisary memories?
1
That would be the imperial federation yes
1
@OnlyGrafting Well as much as it is an economic and not much of a political union, the movement of peoples seems to be very free and he referenced the Aussie deal with NZ as a good framework for what could happen where they're basically already are treated as common citizens. However the issue with such agreements is that in order for it to work on a scale it really does need to integrate into something more at the least into a point where it can defend its own trade and requires common military integration to keep up the maritime trade. Which requires near federal level integration.
1
when are you going to reform the commonwealth?
1
@yglnvbrs Well they got to keep what was stolen from the Russians. Before the Mongols the Russian princedoms were fairly free and advanced arguably more so than western Europe at least socially in things like legal court and parliaments. Russia went down that road to survive and push back against the Mongols. Ukraine was however ruled by Poland who were much less oppressive being not the Mongols. So Russia basically turned into as militarized a state as possible to Keep from anything like the Mongols ever happening again.
1
From the American perspective containing Russia is plenty a reason to help. We don't really want a strong Russia which can challenge us and so keeping it contained is already plenty beneficial. We also have a history of political will favoring independent sovereignty with much of the less savory actions happening under the table. We also as a whole don't care too much what other weaker countries do under our care. We allowed China to rise just because we wanted more people to sell shit to and overall just care so little as to make it so that it's a benefactor which simply allows almost complete free reign. Geopolitics is a game for America because there's no real repercussions for not doing it well. Worst that happens is maybe we end up with higher prices. Because of this we have a very idealistic view of it and so the understanding of Geopolitics being only interests doesn't really apply to the US as much. And we can afford to be because no-one can really hurt us (across the water with weak neighbors). Hell most of NATO won't even fulfill the requirements of the treaty yet we haven't done anything to them. Overall the US is the best benefactor of any country which is neither Marxist nor headed by a dictator. It's not the most difficult list to fulfill and so means they can give a lot and will give a lot. I think the biggest question that has to be answered is this: who gains from these states being weak and who gains from them being strong?
1
@LancesArmorStriking I think what will prevent Eastern Europe from looking like Latin America is the proximity to Russia and the west which allows it lots of trade and the reality that they can simply die unless they are careful and can find help. Latin America is just shielded from the rest of the world and if they just had some true investment without pushback from the populace and its elites it could actually be prosperous.
1
Tell that to the USA
1
@Carno_Yujia I think that's the point as it helps with clicks and isn't inaccurate.
1
This is reflected in most of the world that the affluent focus on their single child. However, it is also reflected in values of either valuing children or valuing personal economic growth more. And of course those who pursue the growth will focus on it more than those who pursue the children. This is why Europe and Japan are in a demographic decline even though they had no formal policy. I'm interested in how this goes forward especially in my home country of the US which seems to value both in equal measure owing to its strong continued ties to religion
1
@ThePandafriend Frankly the biggest thing that will decide this is if Russia stays away from a total war (which I'm unsure it can engage in) and if it's willing to just destroy all of Ukraine. The goal was for a quick and decisive victory which would keep the population mostly not feeling the effects of the war and thus mostly able to accept Russian rule (easier to accept a change in regime when the fundamental change is just a governmental one instead of a physical one) and would break any spirit of resistance. So the conditions for victory are to hold back the Russian advance and wait for Russia to collapse. Which is about all that can be done unless Ukraine suddenly turns into Prussia. If Ukraine does suddenly turn into the Prussia of the steppe and does something like unifying with Belarus (which doesn't seem completely impossible considering the Belarusians seeing themeselves as kin to the Ukrainians) to then take Russia proper, you could see Ukraine March on Moscow. The rule of the Russisn regime doesn't seem strong and so a change in government in that fashion seems possibly something that could be accepted. Well anyway that's my favorite future alt-history scenario. Realistically it's just defend until Russia collapses. However there's something important here: Ukraine is holding on because it's doing everything RIGHT while Russia is doing everything WRONG. So if Russia starts doing everything right, then suddenly this war would likely turn in a heartbeat.
1
Can't wait until you Finally tackle the USA and China as a whole
1
@nicholaslutsch5036 Well see the issue is that those places have to be explained to many but for those in the know it's easy shorthand
1
@zenshulighting8887 The thing is that the superpower was the age of the hyperpower where they were greater than the great powers: powers which could exert significant soft and hard power across the globe and those which could challenge them. Superpowers were the age of powers so strong they were able to exert influence in all countries but those of another superpower. As more powers rise these abilities will erode and powers will have their own spheres of influence once again with a multi-polar world. Superpowers made sense as a concept when the only powers were 2 and 1 powers who could take on anyone. As that becomes no longer the case it doesn't make sense anymore as a concept. I said "descent" as in even the world superpower will become simply a great power. One at or near the top, but simply a great power nonetheless.
1
12:21 Sounds more accurate given that they used to be part of the same empire for about a millennium
1
@Fischdosepremium While not explicitly vassals, Europe largely is dependant on the USA for its trade and protection. In fact the world is dependent on its navy for protection of trade. Which means that one country currently carries the weight of the world trade system on its shoulders and makes it the de facto hegemon by being the base of the modern economic system. It is so much so that the trade language of the world is English. While yes this is in part due to the British empire and the amount of states which speak the language, it's more from the amount of businesses that the US operated around the world and being the heart of trade meaning that it would be stupid to not learn it.
1
@josecipriano3048 If it can industrialize them what happens is that they get a huge base of industry and preferential trade. The goal will clearly be to integrate them to France and be an overall larger power.
1
Well part of being a superpower is if you can leverage global power projection and if France can compete with the US navy in any capacity in the future then it will be a superpower. I see the US being basically being the China of the west: periods of integration with the global economy and periods of isolation. When the US integrates it is dominant during that period, much like China. China will not be a conquered power again any time in the foreseeable future and the US will similarly fit that capacity. Both have regional holds and I'm curious to see if the US will invest more in Latin America. In this context like you said I think France has the chance to really bloom in this sphere. The US is happy to let a friendly power rise and as long as the French properly integrate in Africa economically and militarily (I imagine a large expansion of the French foreign legion if they can create political allegiance which can be carried as long as the French military is the guard of these countries) then France can easily become the guardian of the eastern Mediterranean and half of Africa. I see the west Mediterranean being taken by Turkey and what's left being taken by Iran. Both are stable powers in an unstable area which have a way to unite the region and industrialize to power their dominance. So it'll be interesting to see how that develops.
1
The economic and technological prowess are simply things which augment the geopolitical. Geopolitics is the source. If the US suddenly pulled out militarily and economically from the world system but still managed to be the largest economy with the most technological development then it wouldn't be a superpower anymore just an isolated state who no-one wants to mess with but also has no point in bothering. Similarly if Luxembourg suddenly managed to be the largest economy on earth and the most technologically advanced, since literally everyone around it would be able to just roll in and take it, it'd be a shrimp with no influence. Geopolitics is world power. Geopolitics is defense of your population and world order. That is what guarantees whether or not you get conquered and reduced to a region in someone else's state.
1
Did anyone think Germany would intervene in Ukraine? Honestly though it'd be funny if they did and thus start world War 3.
1
aa K0stic What do you think is the Russian position?
1
@markmuller7962 Let me sum it up easier then: The area east of the Urals is so empty that it takes such a small amount of people to move in and simply outpopulate the native Russians and then do something like split off. Would Russians be replaced at all in their heartland? No. They would simply lose territory. But on flat grassland of the Steppe that territory is their defense and without it there are no defensible borders for the Russian heartland.
1
Did he just end on the meme?
1
Old ideas have a way of coming back in New capacities.
1
To be fair, he's also said it's not because they'll be improving but because everyone else will be on their level
1
@mark9099 If you're referring to Russia most of that rate is being grown by non-russians and the reason it's not aging faster is because their men drink themselves to death which is killing the older population.
1
@hstad100 To be fair the reason it's having a difficult time is that it isn't allowed to mobilize its population and it isn't at war. It's not treating this as a war and conscripts are only allowed in defense of the homeland. Due to also weak communication and coordination it can't pull off what the US did in the middle east. But yeah realistically Russia either exists as a world power and somehow gets back on its feat to stop its demographic collapse or it becomes a rump state in the middle of the Steppe vulnerable on all sides. Russia defended itself by growing big and either it can secure its borders by re-establishing the old borders of the Soviet Union, or it loses everything East to ethnic minorities from central Asia and China leaving its Heartland even more vunerable.
1
@rhalfik Honestly the only country which seems to genuinely admit it is Japan which realistically can't try to bury it due to reality hitting it too hard to ignore. Many other countries are trying to turn to immigration but their political and social systems don't really allow for very good integration and the sources of immigration are really not conducive to that such as trying to integrate Muslims into countries which have very rigid national identities and have had national churches for a very large part of their history. This is compared to countries like the United States trying to integrate Hispanics who's differences largely come from language or sect of Christianity and have had a long history of many sources of immigration and a malleable national identity.
1