Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Pam Lake's avatar

The collapse of USA is eminent

Hans Boserup, Dr.jur. 🇩🇰's avatar

Fred

The core argument — that this is “the war nobody wanted” drifting toward collapse — captures a real sense of fatigue and strategic overreach. But it risks flattening something far more complex.

What we are seeing is not collapse in the classical sense. It is strain without resolution.

Three points matter:

1. This war was not “unwanted” — it was miscalculated.

Several actors believed escalation would be short, controlled, and decisive. That assumption has failed, but failure of expectations is not the same as absence of intent.

2. Systems are bending, not breaking.

States involved still retain coercive capacity, economic depth, and political control. Historically, true collapse requires loss of internal cohesion — we are not clearly there yet.

3. Narratives of collapse often appear before actual collapse.

We saw the same in Iraq, Afghanistan, even parts of the Cold War. Perception leads reality — sometimes by years.

What is real in the article is something more subtle:

→ Strategic exhaustion

→ Narrative fragmentation

→ Increasing reliance on signalling over substance

That combination is dangerous — not because collapse is imminent, but because misreading the situation can produce escalation instead of de-escalation.

So I would reframe it like this:

This is not yet “the collapse.”

It is the phase where systems become brittle — and therefore more unpredictable.

And historically, that phase is often the most dangerous one.

9 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?