Deterrence

That earlier post about Russian military competence mentioned uncertainty about the usability of the former Soviet nuclear deterrence force. That came from the P.J. O'Rourke book Give War a Chance - published 1992:

Between mechanical incompetence and Soviet personnel attitude, it should be a real show if World War III ever does break out. There'll be missiles going all over the place. I pity the poor Eskimos when those CCCP MIRVs come over the pole. And Iceland will be a cinder.

Note that this is well over 20 years ago, from the epilogue for coverage of the 1988 Moscow summit. It's not as if nuclear deterrence has been a primary goal of the Russians since then, and there don't appear to be many improvements on the Soviet ICBMs either. However, there have been recent efforts by the Russians to make general improvements to their forces - often with limited interest in adherence to inherited treaty obligations. Perhaps there is something to worry about there...or perhaps crony capitalism will have similar effects to central planning when weapon systems are delivered. And perhaps a dependence on Ukrainian industry is related to everything that's happening here.

Does this have anything to do with generational theories of history? While this may have wandered far from the starting point, the fundamental claim (that a conflict with Russia is unlikely to escalate to by the Crisis war for the United States) depends on the assessment that Russia is in an Awakening. Afghanistan was called "Russia's Vietnam" - but not until it was nearly over, and without any significant domestic protest. (A CIA assessment from the late 1980s mentions 15 notable antiwar protests, one of which was "five to ten demonstrators on the 8th anniversary of the Soviet invasion." Not exactly the Moratorium to End the War.)  These much more minor incursions into Ukraine are already inspiring  protests - to the extent possible - suggesting that this will be the real Russian equivalent to Vietnam.