this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2024
454 points (95.0% liked)

World News

39364 readers
2154 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Russia’s ruble has plunged to its lowest level since March 2022 following new U.S. sanctions on Gazprombank, a key platform for energy payments.

The ruble’s slide, driven by sanctions, falling oil prices, and soaring defense spending, has intensified inflation and strained the war economy.

While the Kremlin benefits from a weaker ruble by converting foreign revenues into more domestic currency, experts warn of overheating risks and financial instability.

The Russian central bank is scrambling for solutions, but long-term economic pressures and declining oil revenues pose significant challenges.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well no, North Vietnam repelled the US with China's military force (mostly just manpower/cannon fodder). But regardless, saying that the war was economic doesn't mean that one side's economy must be superior to the other's in order to "win". The Vietnam war is actually a good example of an asymmetric situation, because North Vietnam's economic capacity really had no bearing on the outcome. The war was astronomically expensive for the US, which had spent US$168 billion by 1970. Adjusted to 2019 dollars this is US$843.63 billion, making it the 4th most expensive conflict in US history.

Vietnam didn't have to out-produce the US, they just had to drag the conflict out until it became too costly to sustain.

To put it another way, it's not a question of how much war you can afford, it's a question of how much war you can force the other guy to pay for, and what he can afford.