US Geostrategic Weaknesses
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 чер 2024
- The United States benfits from ideal geographical conditions. However, the changing environment in the Arctic and the Carribean offers two main threat to the US security. On one hand the melting ice in the Arctic is making Russia's port more accessible during winter months, whilst this is still a potential threat, Cuba is a far more direct menace. The Carribean island is America's biggest strategic threat given its proximity to US mainland and as it creates two chokepoints into the Gulf of Mexico.
Many thanks to Jasper and Edward for their great help!
Narration by Jasper: Discord (Jasper'sVoice2734) and UA-cam channel ( / @dayfallva9303 )
Script editing by Edward King Grey
Music: Magnetic by CO.AG • Magnetic - Documen...
▀▀▀▀▀▀
If you liked this video, please consider subscribing and supporting the channel growth on Patreon! / kamome163
For inquiries: sekishouproduction@gmail.com
Check my previous videos:
Australia's Maritime Strategy: • Australia Maritime Str...
Strategic Importance of Afghanistan: • Why is Afghanistan so ...
The Malacca Dilemma: • China's weakness: the ...
▀▀▀▀▀
Bibliography
[1] www.census.gov/foreign-trade/...
[2] www.military.com/video/uss-ha...
[3] csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaw...
[4] www.businessinsider.com/us-wo...
[5]web.mit.edu/12.000/www/m2010/f...
[6]www.nps.gov/miss/riverfacts.htm
[7]www.cbsnews.com/news/miss-riv...
[8]www.trade.gov/maritime-servic...
00:00 US Geopolitical Power
01:45 US Reliance on Sea Trade
03:42 US first Geography weakness: Melting of Arctic Ice
05:45 Russia's Warm Water Ports in the Pacific
07:07 US Power in the Arctic
08:34 US biggest Geography Weakness: Cuba
09:52 The importance of the Mississippi River to US economy
10:40 The trade through the Gulf of Mexico
13:21 Cuba Role in US Strategic Weakness
Love these videos - you do a really great job and I always enjoy them a great deal. One correction, Cuban Missile Crisis was in October of 1962, not as stated in the video a couple of times in 1963. Looking forward to the next video.
David! Thank you so much for the comment and the correction! I totally oversaw that! See you at the next video!
@@Kamome163you should do a video on the untied kingdom.
@kamome Cuban missile crisis was also “one” of the incidents that almost brought humanity to nuclear annihilation. Russian navy declassified that they almost fired a nuclear torpedo on US naval ships after losing communication with Moscow.
@@thebigmoneyshow806 It’s on the Russians for being so jumpy
Okokoo oko
Worth remembering that the Mississippi river system is connected directly to the great lakes, so even if Cuba could creat an effective blockade of the gulf, there's still a long way around at least during the 9 months of the year the northern path is ice free
Don’t forget that teenagers in Colorado conducting a massive guerilla fighting campaign keeping them bogged down. WOLVERINES!!!!
Does Cuba even have a boat?
tanks in game vs tank in real life ua-cam.com/video/OXegVsd40K4/v-deo.html 💋
@@Crashed131963 don’t need boats if you have missiles.
Theoretically but trade follows the path of least resistance, and that won’t alleviate shortages for the nine plus months to go around in the interim.
As an American, I can certainly appreciate the more uncommon perspective this video brings. Most people don’t discuss (at all or in the level of detail you do) the geopolitical weaknesses that the US actually has, mainly focusing on internal weakness instead. Another great video!
To be real, those geopolitical "weaknesses" are quite manageable given the geopolitical strengths that the US enjoys. The US maintains a major military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and could fairly easily annex the country if it were serious about it. As to the POSSIBLITY of the ice in the Arctic melting to very significant degree, even that isn't a serious problem for the US and certainly still manageable overall.
tanks in game vs tank in real life ua-cam.com/video/OXegVsd40K4/v-deo.html 💋
@@Seastallion US main weakness is it's internal issues, external issues like these doesn't pose much threat.
@@darkvelvet1918
I agree.
> geopolitical weakness
What are you talking about? The US is still very secure, what country is gonna use cuba to choke off the US? And the arctic trade route is beneficial to Russia but isn’t threatening to US national security in the slightest. However, the US has been threatening other countries in their sphere of influence
Russia only has one aircraft carrier that's barely operational, and minimal functional submarines. Between that and the fact that they can't just cut off international shipping without a global geopolitical backlash means that the melting arctic really doesn't change anything except provide shorter routes to everyone.
As far as Cuba is concerned, without the ability to be a Soviet military base, they have absolutely no ability to cut off commerce. Acting like a military aggressor would only provide the US with an excuse to seize the island.
Id be careful with that addage. It wouldn't take much for a country to rise in the ranks quickly with little note if the US is preoccupied with certain domestic issues pertaining to it's elections or civil disorder.
@@Alaska-bi2nm Wrong, what do you think the CIA is doing? It's not worrying about the US elections or anything trivial like that.
You will never know dude. Have you seen the future? No now shut up
Cuba wouldn’t be cutting the US off, Russia and China would. For example, with hypersonic missiles, from subs, long-range bombers, from space, etc. Russia can send missiles in hours via the South Pole now.
@Kaioken well, the FBI deals with domestic issues. The CIA deals with foreign issues.
The Cuba angle would be plausible if it had a military capable of going up against the USA. Another country using Cuba as a base for such an operation? Yeah, 1963 answered that question.
that is about to change soon when China is heavily investing in Africa and south America
1:17 I'd argue that the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865) was the last major conflict that affected the US mainland itself. In terms of major conflicts to affect the North American continent, I should also mention the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) as well; as many as 2.7 million Mexicans died in that conflict, far more than enough to be considered a "major" conflict in my book. Both events were civil wars, rather than what we would consider to be "international" conflicts based on the accepted national boundaries of the time, although the Confederate States were _de facto_ their own country at the time.
Even with the inclusion of these two civil wars, Europe has still seen more recent major conflicts compared to North America. Western Europe has been free of direct conflict since the end of WW2, aside from indirect conflict and high tensions brought on during the Cold War period. Meanwhile, parts of Eastern Europe are currently a conflict zone (namely Donbas, AKA the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts that are internationally-recognized as parts of Ukraine).
I think by the last major war on the North American continent in his context he meant one that was fought over land and resources
This is exactly what I thought!
Agreed. Major oversight. An civil wars are also fought over land and resources, same as any other war
I think this was a very well made video, however I don't believe these challenges will be very difficult for the United States to overcome. If Cuba were to blockade the U.S. the U.S. military would annihilate Cuba like a pitbull in a kindergarten.
This is true, but if for instance, China or Russia create/rekindle relationships with Cuba we could see it spark into a much larger threat. China especially has been building Military bases all over the world. Recently they were caught building one in Dubai even though the UAE claimed no knowledge of it (sure buddy). I don't think it would be a stretch to see China offer Cuba new infrastructure or other benefits in return for building a base there.
@@micahknight116 If that scenario were actually developing, we would have many options to stop it. Firstly economically, China cannot support Cuba to a large degree because our Navy controls all it's access points. And this is also why i'm not worried about it from a military perspective. Cuba is simply too close to the U.S., all of our airbases in Florida and Texas could obliterate Cuba, and we could EASILY implement and sustain a naval blockade indefinitely, with our Coast Guard alone. Cuba isn't a serious threat to America. Now the Arctic and Russian ambitions there, on the other hand.....
@@micahknight116 building bases all over the world? 🤣 What kind of sources are you watching? To my knowledge they have bases within "their territory" in the SCS and in Djibouti, which houses military bases of many other countries as well. China doesn't have military bases "all over the world" likt the USs 700+ bases
@@rfranklin3000 First of all sovereign countries have full right to decide with which countries they want to cooperate be it economically or any other -ally. Of course for you Ukraine should have that right not Cuba.
And rest of your comment is the exact reason why Russia is also doing the same. Thanks for taking into consideration Russian concerns.
@@dxelson he is a propagandist so he has to justify u.s.' 900 military bases by comparing it to china's massive number of military bases at 1.
Another fantastic video. Interesting to mention climate change as a national security threat. I often find most commentaries on America are either “the US is unstoppable due to its economic and geographical strengths” or “prepare for America to be destroyed tomorrow due to demographic conflicts and and unstable domestic situation”. It is nice to see a clearheaded explanation of some challenges we will soon face. Please keep up the great work
Cameron! Thank you for the great comment! I agree with you, the discussion on the US is pretty much polarized on those two arguments. And a main assumption is US's security bubble, which by any means is there, but with some caveats. Thanks again bud!
@Anderson interesting perspective, thank you for sharing. It’s my understanding that until there a change in leadership of Russia it will be filled with Cold War era men who simply want revenge for the ills that 1991 brought to their empire
@Anderson well said, hope to see more of your insights on Kamome’s future videos
Agreed, Cameron, though the Pentagon and every insurance company in the classify the climate crisis as a current (Colorado River and California droughts, wildfires, food insecurity, etc.) threat. The 2022 fires have already started in CO and TX. The West, from Mexico and through Canada, is going to be on fire soon. No rain or snow this winter in much of it
@Anderson friends? I don’t see Russia being friends with the US anytime soon with this harebrained invasion of Ukraine!
11:39 - four of the top five ports by volume definitely aren’t in the Gulf of Mexico. These ports are Los Angeles, Newark, Long Beach, Savannah and Houston. Only one of those is in the Gulf of Mexico. One can debate whether Los Angeles and Long Beach are functionally the same port.
I believe that it’s based off of raw tonnage which does make the gulf ports the leaders. The west coast specializes in containerized cargo which gives them higher trade volume but less overall tonnage.
@@paulmyers7605 True. But even then, if the adjacent ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are combined, they’d be #2 on that list (leaving 3/5 in the Gulf of Mexico)- and for geo-strategic considerations, they are the same port.
Some ports stay dry while others feel the pain commie raaaaain
@@dewlittle1211 asdfjfjfjfj I didn’t realize who made this comment until you pointed it out lmao
Holy shit what brings you to geo-politics?
Very interesting video, you just took a topic that is almost ignored in mainstream geopolitics and have showed there are flaws in contemporary thinking. Awesome job!!!
Спасибо, что оценил это видео! Видео действительно качественное!
Thank you so much! It is mind-blowing that I couldn't find other videos on Cuba but also the Caribbean and Latin America in general strategic importance to the US!
@@Kamome163 that in my view is because of the preconceived notion that Latin America will always stay the way it is. No one thinks that anything will change in America's backyard hence why not that many talk about it on UA-cam. This could be considered an American perception but i think even people abroad don't expect anything to change either. Though as more money goes into Latin America from China and even other powers like Russia, I expect changes in the future relationship between Latin America and the US. Again this my perceived notion and my belief.
@James-of-Solaris you're definitely right for Mexico and Canada, I'm not worried about those countries. My statement was geared towards Central and South America. I've been to those regions on multiple occasion and the people talk about the Chinese investments into the economy and even some of the debt traps. For now the US provides more investment than any other country, and many people do like American culture in those regions, but I believe in the future the US will need to look at Chinese investment in LA to make sure they don't lose the region to Chinese influence. As well as look at other activities of Russia and China in the America cause money isn't the only way to gain influence. I'm don't want to make it seem like it will definitely happen, it's more of a fear I have.
@@Shadowgunner785
From a geographic perspective, no country in Central America will ever be a great world power, much less a real threat to the US. Their biggest "threats" are as sources of illegal immigration, that is people fleeing their homeland. This causes the US headaches, but is manageable when competent leadership is available. Most of South America is in the same boat, having been dealt a bad geographic hand. Argentina has by far the most potential, with a good navigable waterway and a nice chunk of arable land to work with. If they ever get their act together, they could do very well for themselves. However, even Argentina isn't likely to ever be a real credible threat to the US. They would just as or more likely end up being a close ally in keeping the Western Hemisphere secure.
As to my thoughts on the whole video itself, I think it's a slight exaggeration and largely speculation about an uncertain future. If predictions hold true, there is SOME validity for concerns, but to suggest that the US would do nothing about them is a stretch too far. Cuba for instance, could without too much difficulty be annexed. The US already controls a major military base in Cuba (Guantanamo Bay), and has other Caribbean possessions such as Puerto Rico already.
In truth, the only way the US could be defeated without M.A.D. is if the entire country split into smaller independant nations. It'd be easier for outside influences to leverage on the weaker territories through economic and political negotiations.
The US doesn’t feel unified. Politics get in the way of what we’re suppose to be doing. Our enemies are already winning. If the US were to split, then yes, what youre saying will come to fruition.
@@Sebastianator01 if you consider a contained russia and collapsing china , winning then you have another thing coming
@@Sebastianator01 I think you're over reacting. Our enemies are not winning, and the US is NOT going to split. Politics is nasty right now (not to mention F-ing Covid) but we will work it out. Everyone needs to relax a bit and stop talking like its inevitable and we should start creating the new territories.
For however messed up us politics is rn, I can guarentee you if ww3 ever broke out partisan differences will be put outside. Both parties aren't really fond of a world that is overruled by russia/china...
@@Sebastianator01 The US tends to wear its internal issues on its sleeve unlike a lot of other countries, which makes us seem in worse shape than we are. The US has a history of coming together during times of hardships.
You also have to imagine that if a land invasion did happen in the U.S. that you have puddle pirates, national guard, state police, county police, city police, then populous and the scariest of them all, ex combat vets that’ve been itching to kill people since Iraq.
To quote Admiral Yamamoto (allegedly), "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
ooRah!
Imagine if North America ended up like Europe, having tons of countries with competing interests and different cultures and languages.
Its a favorite concept of mine. Like what sort of kingdoms would come out of NA if they were somehow along the same line as Europe in terms of tech
@@jz0967 Atlanta would become wakanda and I’m not even kidding
it would quickly become a Cold War between Texas and some northern state/kingdom/whatever
or Cali
That could still happen. The US could break up in the future.
It's pretty much like that anyway every state has its own culture and accents some of which might as well as be its own languages
In short, US has not many geography weaknesses.
In the history of the United States of America, the most significant source of direct military challenge to the US Constitution from North America was the US Civil War, not the US-Mexico War or the Spanish American War. I find your videos very interesting and all-in-all, your perspective is worth evaluating. Note also that this video's comments on the Northern Passage are worth considering separately from US strategy, as the Artic Ocean itself should have an analysis.
US history includes the fact that Cuba, the Philippine Islands, American Samoa, and several other islands were or are former US territories.
After Canada and Mexico, you have appropriately noted that Cuba and Russia are the most significant near nations.
The marines have vacationed in Havana before 😂
He probably cited the Mexican-american war because it was an external conflict rather than internal like the civil war
@@SenorGuina I was thinking the same
@@SenorGuina they had the Yugoslav army and used it to slaughter civilians
Cuba was never a U.S territory, as a matter of Cuba was founded nearly 100 years before the U.S. Although Cuba will have been wayyyy better off as a common wealth like Puerto Rico, and actually Cuba 1st class founded with their wealth money for the US Revolutionary war and used its Navy against the British
We must fight back against the ever invasive Canadian pop music. It's a killer! Joking aside, your animations are the best!
I'm glad you liked that joke! Hahahahah, I had to include a threat from Canada and that was either the overly kind drivers on US highways or Justin Bieber's Believers.🤣... Thanks again for the great comment!❤️
@Kamome Dear Lord, Justin Bieber cults are the worst. Their numbers know no end.
@@iamaloafofbread8926 Hey! Ive been finding you in my kitchen and youre here?! 😂
Interestingly enough in regards to accessing the Gulf of Mexico. There is a project that was discontinued a few decades ago but started in the 1930s and has been talked about going back even to the 1600s. The cross Florida barge would have been a canal stretching from the east end of Florida to the west allowing ships to go through Florida instead of around it.
It would have been very environmentally destructive
Ship everything by rail to chicagos port calumet. Sail up the great lakes to the st lawrence seaway.
We would be fine.
Every video you upload is visually stunning. And your emphasis on educating about the importance of economics and geography in properly understanding these diplomatically complex issues is always so illuminating for me. Thank you.
Fails to mention US assets in the areas. We can rebuild and expand cold war bases as well.
A most beautiful, informative, illustrative, and knowledgable presentation - great job and worth it to watch several times over.
Great video Kamome. It was worth the wait. Your mapping tools have been very effective in your delivery on this subject.
It is crazy that the US did not incorporate Cuba and the Bahamas into the union being a potential threat as they are.
Im pretty sure a lot more people have died under Castro. Cuba is poorer than ever today and still extremely underdeveloped
@David Moore the only time Cuba was a real threat, was when the soviets sent nuclear missles over. In this day and age, that will be basically impossible without the U.S. finding out and sinking any ship that comes near Cuba.
Love the word "incorporate" over "annihilate the locals and annex".
@@tylerclayton6081 That's certainly not true. Cuba is actually one of the leading countries of Latin America in development according to the UNDP. Poverty rates in Cuba are of 20% of the population living in extreme poverty. That's a lot, but much better than Mexico's 40% for example.
@David Moore
Don't forget that the US maintains a major military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Annexation of Cuba wouldn't be too difficult if the US were serious about doing so. Heck, at this point Cubans might even welcome it given the state of their economy.
Excellent video, as graduate student in Global Security studies I find your videos very interesting and helpful. I would consider the increasing strength and frequency of hurricanes (also as a consequence of global warming) to be even more threatening to the United States’ strategic interests in the gulf of Mexico.
Keep up the great work. I can't believe the quality of your videos!
Thank you so much B B!!!
my question is what country can project its power all the way to cuba and holds its ground against the certain US air and naval resistance?
@@EggEnjoyer yes there is. Don't be ignorant and naive. Do some research on cyber warfare. Don't forget how unreliable the power grid can be too. For example Texas look what happened over there when it got too cold
@@EggEnjoyer The US military needs to spend more overseas, but the domestic police is different spending.
Loved the video Kamome! You did a fantastic job and i really like the shifting map and highlighting the geographic areas you’re discussing. I think a lot of people forget how close the US and Russia really are with just the ever thawing Arctic sea between them. Russia also building/expanding ports on the Arctic Ocean show that they’re going to be actively taking advantage of the Arctic as it increasingly thaws in the near future. I wonder where the nearest US port that could accommodate large naval vessels is located. I assume there must be one in Alaska but I don’t know.
When Russia invades Ukraine, the USA should leave the defense of Ukraine up to the regional powers. The USA can contribute to countering Russia by opening up a second front by seizing the Kurils, Sakhalin, Kamchatka, and the territory between Yakutia and the Bering Strait.
That's a good point! IMO that's also why Russia, which is surrounded by strategic competitors, in Europe by NATO and Asia by Japan and the US, won't invade Ukraine. Too many adversaries at its doorstep, and Russia is already stretching its resources.
if the US seizes what you want it to seize it may as well defend ukraine as well, as it will clearly be in a hot war with russia after all that.
It would be a fun flex to station a troop build up in Alaska, but ultimately it would not be the superior chess move to make..
@@BringbackgAmberleafns The point is to make Russia fight on two fronts while the US would only have to deal with one front. It also allows the US to keep its forces in the Pacific theater as a deterrent to Chinese aggression. The US electing to fight on two fronts negates those advantages.
The threat of an invasion of the Russian Far East might be a more potent deterrent to a Russian invasion of Ukraine than the current tepid threats of sanctions. On the US domestic front, maybe the US public would support an offensive war with potential direct economic gains more than they would support "fighting other countries' battles for them." Some Americans might also be attracted to the bragging rights to be had-- take enough territory and liberate Yakutia and some other areas into independent buffer countries, and the US can become the largest country in the world.
@@ClickBoom290 The main fight would be for Sakhalin and the Kurils. Seize those islands, and you sever the supply lines to the vast swathes of mostly empty continental territory. I'd think we could operate out of Japanese bases instead of Alaska. That's especially likely if part of the operation was to return the territory that Japan still claims that the Soviets seized at the end of WW2 in the days between the nuclear bombs being dropped and the Japanese surrender.
Geologically, isn't that territory part of the Alaskan geotechtonic plate? Like Alaska, there's a treasure trove of resources out there that the Russians have lacked the capital and know-how to tap.
Maybe most importantly, it would be very, very nice to kick Russia out of the Pacific.
There is a lot of upside to a bold move on the Russian Far East. What are the downsides that you think outweigh those benefits?
Great job man, the graphical content you use to showcase what you are speaking about is top notch.
The quality of the video was superb. Glad to be a subscriber!
I’ve seen similar videos posted on here, but yours is by far the most in-depth & unique in terms of creative design/etc. Thanks for the video🙏🏻
Thank you so much for the kind comment!😭
@@Kamome163 Just being honest lol
Good strategic analysis. Good stuff.
Thanks, Alan!
This was a great video - and you have a very calm voice - subscribed !
Beautifully made video, subscribed!
The Artic part is rather weak, but the Cuba part was brilliant, surely very few people know that so much trade starts in the Gulf of Mexico.
why is the Arctic part weak?
@@jk-gb4et Because the Artic is actually very far away from the US mainland, Alaska is vast and mountainous. Meaning that 55 mile gap he talks about might as well be a land bridge, it would be the same with Panama and South America, connected in theory but so far from each other because of wilderness.
As for the Russian navy, it's tiny with no real capability to project power except for world ending nuclear one, but that's not very useful.
That leaves the trade going between the West coast of the US to Europe and the East coast of the US with Asia. Which could be either barely anything or a small portion because the vast majority of trade will always go solely on the Pacific or Atlantic because you can just move you factory or expand a factory to the correct coast because the US is one country.
All this means that the Artic weakness of the US is barely a weakness at all, location wise the US isn't any more under threat because of the distances involved. And the trade will most likely only be a minor fraction of the total US trade. With most of the trade going through coming from China or Europe.
Meaning the Berings strait would be a boon for the geopolitical power of the US because they could block it just like Russia could.
Thank you, Tobias! IMO the Arctic part is still a potential weakness, as the ice is still there and the scientific community forecast, don't have the best reliability score. Anyway, potentially, this could be a weakness, not as strong as Cuba but a weakness nonetheless. In your answer down below, you mentioned Russia's navy tiny projection capability. For now, that's true. However, with warmer temperature (if that's ever going to happen and to what degree) we should expect a more active Russia in the Pacific. Also, but this is just a speculation, this could open to a closer cooperation between Russia's and the PRC'c navies in the northern Pacific.
@@tobiasL1991 I think the reasoning behind the Arctic part is just, like I think Kamome stated, it makes Russia simply more able to grow their navy which could become a threat to the US, although I agree with your point that Cuba might be a bigger weakness
Cuba is a joke. I’ve been to Cuba via Guantanamo. They have no military. None.
Another great content! Alaska will become significant in the next 2 decades as the Arctic will be busy with claims from many countries near and far. The future beyond us will be much more complicated with tight rope maneuver. Patreon link is missing!
Yeah when they aren’t on fire or underwater
First video I've seen from you. Very interesting
Great vid, very informative, well written and thanks for the sources
I think the best cases for studying US geopolitical weakness would come from the War of 1812 and the US Civil War.
@@zjohnson8773 the most the British really did was light our capital on fire, in American eye. The rest we didn't care about nearly as much. The problem with geographical arguments against/for the US is we have the manpower, military power, and will to overcome it all.
@@zjohnson8773 You can turn most disadvantages into advantages if you know how to adapt well enough, that's the point I'm trying to make here. Also, do you really think America's suddenly just gonna become Switzerland or Ireland? Extreme arguments never really work in debates.
It's right in front of you: North America isn't the biggest continent, and safe spaces don't matter in the nuclear age.
after watching this, I still see only superpowers in the geography of the U.S.
surrunded by ocean, friend, ocean, friend (who could turn an enemy, if it wanted to. it is too weak anyways)
and Cuba, who is not a friend AND completely insignifican. A small child vs a bouncer
Mexico would not turn on the u.s. our economy depends on the u.s.also we are way closer to the u.s. than any other country were good friends.
Love your voice man, put your video's on and my baby girl falls a sleep in seconds.
And I learn something in the "quite time".
Thanks man !
I like how you provide the receipts (proof) to what your saying. Labeling them by number and then providing links in the description. 👌
Thank you so much! I really appreaciate that there are people checking the
"receipts" (I like how it sounds) as I think it's important to be held accountable for what I say in the videos.
That was a really interesting presentation. Some very good points about Russia in the Arctic, and the potential for Russia/China to interfere with US shipping at the choke points around Cuba. The US should be careful about over-playing its hand in the South China Sea. Russia and China can gear up a lot of influence in Latin America if pushed hard enough.
SOme version of the Marshall plan for central america would go a lot further than imposing dictatorships that allow american companies to keep exploiting the local populace
The best way to undermine the US is internally. Going to war is difficult. The war method can end up lasting a very long time 5-10 years of major combat at WW1/2 levels before the US starts to run out of manpower. Which means you would also need lots of manpower as well. And also be exhausted by the time it ends. Internal undermining is the best method. Its slow but its better. The soviets were unable to do it because their model ultimately did not promise money. It only somewhat appealed to the lower classes. The upper class is money centric and while many are still patriotic americans there are plenty of billionaires who would jump ship if the paycheck was good enough. There's a reason the US has God on the dollar bill.
If we look at any war the USA has been in manpower is not a problem the worst war American has been in was the American civil war and it was only over half a million.
The USA also has a lot of allies that have fought in almost every war with them since ww1 and this trend is likely to stay put for generations to come.
@@brianlong2334 US allies will bail if losses become statistically noticeable. France might fight but she's not gonna fight Verdun again if it had to unless she was invaded. An expeditionary war at that level forget it. Same goes for Britain. Problem is most have forgotten what true wars of attrition are. Don't get me started on say Portuga or any number of small alliesl. US manpower has never been a problem because it never had to be. If the US fought a war at WW1 levels of attrition ie 0.5% of your population dead per year say a massive ground war in Asia by year 5 serious issues would pop up. Problem is the same would be valid for the other guy. No one wants to fight such a war but it may ultimately come down to it.
@@florinivan6907 No major power will fight a major war against another at lest not without nuclear weapons so a ww2 style war is extremely unlikely.
Russia and the USA both have to many nuclear weapons for either to fight a conventional war against each other, neither sized would risk it all because as the conflict grows the use becomes more and more realisti hence it wouldn't stay conventional, most nations that have nuclear weapons only have enough to destroy one nation the USA and Russia have enough for the world.
Eourpe is weak due to the bad memory of ww2 but the reality is that they won't be a push over for Russia, let's say they took back Ukraine there would be back lash but I highly doubt it will be a full scale war, however if they took Ukraine, Belorussia and the Baltic states things would return pretty fast to the cold war with a much more militarised Poland, Germany, France and UK, Russia would be on there door steps basically, at the moment most nations would let Russia take parts if not all of Ukraine, and the rest of the nations involved would make deals, of course there would still be a war but it would end up like Korea and or Vietnam, lot's of people in that nation would die but the cost of life for say American or France would be tiny, I mean American has the manpower of over 70million just men, I doubt the USA would even loses 1million in a conflict in Eourpe let alone Asia.
I personally think The UK would loses 400,000 men for the USA in a war, I'd argue that Canada and Australia would also, yes a large amount of civilian population mite be unhappy about the death toll but that's not exactly a big number in war.
Would France and or Germany, seeing as the USA keeps the sea open and basically police it every nation that trades today is in some way beneficial due to the USA terms after ww2, it has been updated but yhe turms are basically the same, that's also why it's navy is so big, yet nations like the UK don't have a navy as big as they should or want to keep the USA happy to put it blunt, in a world were the USA doesn't have the power of the ocean then the majority of the world's nations navys would dubble there size over night so to speak, Nation's like The UK and Japan would have to build navy at lest 80% to 90% the size of the USA modern navy, to mention a few.
I mean the USA navy is impressive but by ww2 standards it's small.
I understand your argument but I just don't think it holds any water.
@@brianlong2334 Throughout history whenever someone said 'ain't gonna happen' someone did just that precisely to dumbfound expectations.The only constant in warfare is that when large powers fight the body count is huge by the standards of the era. To assume that somehow we invented a type of great power war that doesn't end in body counts that are ruinous for decades to come is to assume a level of competence and restraint on all sides that is simply impossible. No if a major war breaks out the losses will be so high they will make all previous wars seem quaint. To assume otherwise is to give too much credit to people. You can't fight a major war on the cheap. Everyone wants that but it doesn't work like that. And no I don't believe Britain will sacrifice 400k for the US. That is optimistic. Outside of Britain facing all out defeat and surrender they're not gonna fight like that. At the very least they'd go bankrupt anyway and still lose. France bails even sooner. As for Germany they bail the moment an enemy has Berlin in sight. Loyalty is never at any cost. No one is gonna commit national suicide for America. They only allied to be protected not the other way around. Most allies in any alliance only care about themselves. If the alliance starts to be too costly they bail. Never assume that just because you had a drink with Joe Foreigner and he seemed friendly he's not gonna turn on you when he realises he's better off alone. Even democracy is negociable. Most countries even old democracies are willing to trade it for peace and quiet. Don't assume they're gonna die for idealistic principles if they realise its too costly and they're ruined anyway. You can still eat in a dictatorship. Lets be fair here. If war comes its gonna be catastrophic at a level that will shock everyone but the oldest.
@@florinivan6907 Most modern nations military are set up to fight like we did in ww2 yet we left that behind, that's why Germany did so good in ww2 the allies tactics were based more on ww1.
Secondly I'd argue that there were always people who said it would happen, it's just normal the louder voices were from the ones who said it couldn't, your assessment mite be right mine could be wrong, however I don't see how that would work in the world we live in in the 70 maybe even 80s I'd agree with you but as of the 90s and 2000s I just don't see your argument as realistic.
How many times people have cried wolf only for there hole foundations to collapse.
Your line of thinking from my understanding in the old guard and there the ones who always get it wrong, at a basic level it makes sense add in all the veritable and it just doesn't add up.
Look at the vegetation argument sounds great yet the reality is it's not true it wouldn't make us more green it would do the opposite, yet people are still screaming about it, pay gaps between men and woman idk what nation you live in but the English speaking country it was made illegal to pay woman less then men since what the 60s and 70s, it's only in a few jobs were it applies and you have to sign a contract, and or it's just the basic statistics vs the other no in-depth analysis of the information is what I'm getting at.
So I don't see how your argument translates over we moved forwards not back wards, after a nuclear war sure I'd agree with you but I just don't see it happening.
I dig your video format man I can see you getting big for sure, keep at it
Wow, Joshua, that means a lot! Thank you so much! I will!😎
Great video as always!!!
Nice work :)
Hi Mrspherical 👋
MrSpherical is every Where. I go......
When I go to the Kamome channel, I give it a thumbs up and then watch the video!
Thank you, Vladimir! You're the best❤️❤️
Great video man will definitely be back for more
Excellent, unbiased, informational piece. Quite enlightening
Love the vid. Melting of the North west passage is highly unreliable. Ice coverage waxes and wanes apparently oblivious to our future forecasts.
Mat! Thanks for the comment! That's true, it's still quite uncertain, IMO this should be seen as a potential threat though. But as you said, our forecast have been quite unreliable in the past years..
Not true. It might be unreliable from one year to next, but it is very reliably shrinking from one decade to the next. You're like that senator who brought a snowball into the capital building to show that global warming is false.
@@joshs.5937 a snowball in the house is undisputed evidence against global warming! 😀
@@matttcoburn there's a snowball in your head
This content is amazing! What software do you use to create it?
Thank you for the comment!❤️ I use Blender for the animations!
Excellent and very clear analysis, well illustrated.
Thank you so much, Philippe!!
Very cool video amigo!
I would have thought the ice melting would be a disaster to everyone's sea power, due to the a rising water level. Cuba and Russia can't do much if thier ports are under water... with the rest of Florida.
Russia built how many ice breakers over the past few years? 8 I think it is. Niw why would Russia spend all that money on nuclear ice breakers if the ice was melting. Common sense goes a long way
Makes one wonder what could have been if canals crossing Florida were ever completed.
Spencer, that's exactly it! That project was initiated with those two choke points in mind.
one of the highest quality content!
Amazing vid man.
Great video! I wish you would've expanded on how climate change will affect the internal waterway of the US. That 300 mil dollars per day would go up if we could transport in winter around the great lakes region and people would stop calling it the rust belt.
I gotta say as an American, I love how this guy just randomly created a how-to guide on taking down America.
I hate ecological and enviormental damage but nukes make a pretty good deterrent in case of a threat to the mainland US. There's no reason to have bad relations with Russia or China though, even though Russia is more comparable to a rogue state.
@@arcturus9366 Dont know much truth about CCPChina then. Well the dragon sleeps no more soon enough
making a how to guide on taking down america is like making a how to guide on becoming a billionaire in 1 year
These graphics are amazing I love the lines on a spherical globe wrapping around the globe
This is such a well-made video why does it only have 200,000 views I hope this blows up
Rich kids like to believe they are miserable just to fit in, geographically pleased countries like to believe they are vulnerable just to fit in
Great video! Just one question. What software did you use to animate these images (borders, arrows etc) on the world map?
I was thinking the same thing. Maybe the base layer was geolayers plug-in but the outline and neo-lights must be something different.
EXCELLLENT research!
Really nice video, high content very true information!
Thank you so much, Walidoo!
This really oversells New Orleans. There is a reason it's not a big city: the great lakes. In the 19th century the US build robust canal systems linking the Mississippi system to Chicago and New York (the Erie canal specifically) while these canals are now not used as much, they still are part of key transportation routes accross NY and into the port of Newark.
The Cuban military is also tiny, it does not posses, nor is it going to posses modern ASWs. The Monroe doctrine is still in full effect.
Thank you so much for the comment, Ace of Jax! Whereas it is true that New Orleans is not a big city, at least for US standards, its port is America's first by tonnage. Though, as you duly mentioned, the great lakes channel system and the Erie canal in particular are critical infrastructure, most wet and dry bulks are moved through the Mississippi River system down to the Gulf of Mexico.
I agree with you. The Monroe Doctrine is and will be a central pillar of America's FP. However out-tooled and outgunned Cuba might be, the potential threat is there because Cuba's geography at the entrance of the Gulf of Mexico is not going to change anywhere soon.
As a Venezuelan, I would love to see the US invading Cuba and liberating Cuban people, if Cuba is free my homeland Venezuela will be free. We don’t want Russian and Chinese intervention in our countries, we love US culture and people, we prefer to be US allies, period!
Love and respect to you and your country from a united states' citizen ❤️
I hope your country can get better leadership, you and other Venezuelans have suffered enough with your current one. Corruption always seems to be the #1 thing holding countries back. Tyrannies don't last forever though. Best wishes from an American 🇺🇸 ❤️ 🇻🇪
@@arcturus9366 thank you ❤️
@@arcturus9366 communists do it to every country they gain control of
@@jakesmall8875 There always seems to be a pattern with communism and previous ideological systems. Firstly, any aspects of the previous system is wiped out, voting, representation for people, laws that keep leadership in check. Next, anybody with dissenting opinions purged and sent to prison or killed. Once the communist/socialist leadership is established, they realize there is no one left to enforce how they should lead, the leadership becomes extremely corrupt, closed off to different ideas, and distrustful of their own population and will do anything to stay in power. A country that has gone communist/socialist will go downhill from the very start, because it doesn't factor in one thing, how people behave with different levels of power and/or wealth. Not everybody is the same, and thinking the guy at the top executing dissentients is like you and has the same hardships as you will have or already have is absurd.
Great video!
Very well done.
Russia geography weakness next?
Rompet! Yeah! That'll be on one of the coming videos!
Russian Geography Strength Compered to USA
With sea levels rising and arctic ice melting the only 2 winners in the game of geopolitics i see is Russia and Canada (but only if the arctic is pass irreversible levels) I recommend watching reallifelore's video on why global warming will make Russia a superpower more in depth stuff there also nice insight on Cuba made me realize why they're still sanctions against them
Good explanation
Great! Subscribed...
Has this been redacted for US audiences? At 13.12, the subtitles mention the US placed nukes in Turkey in breach of previous agreements between the 2 countries, which prompted the Russia to send nukes to Cuba. JFk backed down and agreed to withdraw his nukes, although the myth in the US is he stood up to them. In the audio though, you can hear a cut and this part is omitted. Seems they forgot to amend the subtitles as well.
Not exactly secret knowledge, the Turkey nukes were covered in school where I lived. He might have thought it was too tangential for the topic and only included it in the subtitles on purpose as extra info.
Every country has a weakness.
Some just have less.
@@Crashed131963 depending on who the enemy is.
It's mind boggling an amazing channel like this does not has at least 100k subs. This is some cool ass shit.
wtf dude, this was really well done.
But how is our position between the pacific and Atlantic an "Achilles heel?" You just gave a few reasons why our geopolitical position isn't perfect. Achilles heel is a bit much.
Hitting Achilles in the heel isn't a walk in the park either.
tanks in game vs tank in real life ua-cam.com/video/OXegVsd40K4/v-deo.html 💋
So basically if we wanna improve the US’s position, we just gotta do two things:
1. Conquer Canada
2. Conquer Cuba
I have no idea why the US hasn’t made attempts to make Cuba a Valuable ally in the past 50 years. If they made friends we could put bases = problem solved.
@@KFordmusic The US overran Iraq in two weeks , Cuba would be two days.
Cuba is a zero threat . The US has a base on Cuba, Quentomino Bay.
@@Crashed131963 I’m against conquering countries because the US just ruins them. But to cut it off from travel and to sanction it is a mistake I believe. It’ll never happen, but I think it’s dumb.
@@KFordmusic Cuba is not cut off from Travel . I been there 3 times and know many people who go every winter from Canada.
@@Crashed131963 yeah in Canada =, we dont really have a bad view of Cuba. Its a beautiful country. Id rather go to cuba or mexico, than florida for example, and many would too.
Hi and another awesome video
Thank you Charles!
Amazing video
Nice video, but I'm I'm sure that the US is very much aware of what's going on in their neighborhood. You can't convince me that a country who spends billions of dollars on their military budget to not know what the Russians and Chinese are doing. Military satellites in the sky etc. From a retired veteran that served for 26 years. I wasn't even prevy to top secret info. Nice video though but everything you mention I'm sure their are a lot of smart people who are observing what's going on in the Artic. And the Cuba scenario ummm no, not an issue for concern. Like the video.
good information
This was hella deep bro and it makes sense no wonder why in the pass I forgot his name who the one who focus on expanding US west ward including northern, because of this problem. That is why trump tried to buy Greenland as he knew and the other 2 people knew climate change will effected highly on us and the world. That is why we invaded Canada to expand our interest to the northern Sea of the Arctic. I never would thought cuba was actally a choke point to the US which is crazy and why ussr choose cuba. Very big brain, but the US is now starting to realized and possibly may buy green land in the future or buy more ports in Alaska. Also if Russia ever does invade Ukraine then Russia would suffer badly and their ecomany depends on trade.
Edited: great video too! I love these type of videos, it gives me more knoewledge about our world we live in specially military. Thanks bro and keep up the good work.
The two busiest and biggest ports in the US are LA/Long Beach and NY/NJ, neither of which are in the gulf. Between 60-70% of all US goods go through the ports of LA/Long Beach. The importance of the ports in the gulf is the amount of Petroleum that comes and goes through them. Which for the US is nearly all of it. But who knows what the US energy sector will look like 20-30 years from now when Chinese or Russia potentially have much stronger militaries.
I can see Russia from my house!
Where are you?!!
Either he s using google maps, or he is somewhere within sight of the russian border
🤣🤣 i caught the reference!
Informative video
Glad you think so!
Great vid.
I've been watching a lot of videos lately talking about how climate change is a seed for approaching economic dominance by Russia, and to a slightly lesser extent, China. More reasons than this, too. Russia is a monumentally huge land mass. Warmer temperatures means more occupiable and exploitable land. This really may be one of the final lynchpins in disintegrating America's global economic hegemony.
the US will just annex canada lmao (quebec will become an independent state though). and cuba is by and large a non-factor. the US will remain strong for at least the next 100 years. after that internal friction might make the union fall apart though i doubt that will happen just yet.
the US doesnt need to annex canada. just lock it in to its sphere even further with diplomacy and economics. perhaps a north american plus the carribean union similar to the EU
annex an autonomous territory? only quebec part is correct
Good video. Keep it up
This is very high quality. I'd be shocked if you didn't experience rapid subscriber growth.
This would be valid if it were true. 1st as you saw with covid the US still has a massive industrial base capable of moving quickly without external assistance so sea trade has been drastically exaggerated in this video.
2nd the melting ice caps won't allow Russia to take control of the arctic due to russias extreme poverty their GDP will not be sufficient to over take us in trade.
3rd the Russian navy even at its height in the cold war was never meant to directly challenge the US on open water as such they won't be able to operate outside of their missile umbrella limiting them to 500 miles to a maximum of 1000 miles.
4th the US stands on the throat of Cuba they are in no way shape or form a dagger to our heart when we could crush them on a simple whim.
5th the gulf of Mexico is the most heavily armed coastline in the world at any one time there are over 100,000 troops (on average around 160,000) our largest naval ports on the east coast are in the gulf and Florida good luck getting that close when you factor in the US airforce.
6th for the reason stated above the US trade would not be touched in the gulf actually it would be the opposite not only would Cuba not be able to conduct the trade it does now but it would cease to exist in a couple hours as the US would eviscerate the island with conventional and nuclear bombardment.
Bottom line: the US has already fixed these weaknesses maybe in a 100 years this will change but right now I challenge you to find a navy capable of even getting near the gulf let alone into it and this doesn't even consider next generation weaponry and tactics. Which the US is a leader in we never show our hand before a battle like we found out about stealth in desert storm we would find out about something equally game changing in a war were the US mainland is the target. You can imagine how we would would turn the yields on our nukes to max and go into full war time production and draft leaving America with an army of at least 10 million soldiers and a navy and nuclear arsenal that would dwarf anything we have now. I have a habit of being too blunt and direct so hopefully this is taken as the positive criticism its supposed to be.
1:26 Only 1836? What about the American-Mexican War when USA stole one third of Mexico's land?
Stole? You mean conquered right?
Come on man.
Stole? They *won* it in a war.
Also no mention of the civil war. That has to be the single most threatening one existentially.
That is kind of what happens when someone loses a war.
How did they steal it if the us also gave mexico that money for that land
excellent!
Helluva video man, got yourself a new subscriber. Videography is amazing
Makes sense why Cuba is hit by sanctions keep them down?
That pretty much was the reason, to keep it weak while under Castro's control. It was also an attempt to get the Cuban people to overthrow Castro (because that always works so well). Then it just became a matter of "that's how it's always been", and nobody cared enough to try something different until Obama. I'm most certainly not a fan of his, but changing the policy on Cuba was one of the things he did right, much like Trump trying to take a different approach with North Korea, because it should have been obvious to everyone that the existing policy wasn't doing anything. Didn't help with Korea, as they're still run by a family of lunatics (a monarchy in all but name), but with Cuba it does seem to have had an effect. This video points out only one of the ways the US would benefit from improving relations with Cuba.
Well, sanctions apply to the US but not other countries. But in general the US want to control Cuba via its economy too
Eh, these kind of feel like grasping at straws as far as strategic weaknesses go.
1) Russia's ballistic missile submarines have been their greatest threat to the US for decades. Their surface combatant ships don't present some new major advantage, so the arctic ice melting doesn't really change much. If anything, it stands to benefit the US more since it has a much larger navy and wouldn't have to be as reliant on ice-breakers. As for infrastructure in the arctic, the Russians may have more experience, but the US has the capital to rapidly expand in the area if necessary.
2) Cuba on its own would effectively be committing suicide trying to attack the US. It's navy is tiny and obsolete, consisting mostly of patrol boats, and it's arsenal of anti-ship missiles (if it has any) would be quite small. The US Navy would be able to secure the waters surrounding Cuba and institute a blockade in a weekend. The only scenario in which Cuba poses any sort of threat to the US and its trade routes is if it has a nuclear armed ally that it is willing to start a nuclear war over its invasion, such as the USSR was back in the 60's; neither modern-day Russia or China are anywhere near that committed to protecting Cuba. China might be interested in using Cuba as a counter-weight to the US's interest in defending Taiwan, but in a war, it wouldn't have the means of deploying military assets or troops within Cuba like the US and Japan could in Taiwan.
This channel will blow up and become a big thing among the geopolitics scene/subculture (lmao)
Love the vid, though the use of the Mississippi is really important the US also utilizes the Great Lakes and the stLawrence river to get goods out towards the Atlantic. While this makes it longer to access the pacific it gets rid of the issue of bottlenecking at Cuba
Thank you for debunking the myth of Americans geographical Invincibility