Possible. World have been strained for a while due to US reckless behavior.
I think you're underestimating how much "rejiggering" it would require, as well as how long it takes to get things going in energy sector.Also, some of us grew up when the USSR was still a "thing"; the world does not "need" Russia in any respect whatsoever. The "crisis" would just require some rejiggering of energy production. Sure, it would cost some money, but that's all we're talking about. And the Western world isn't hurting that bad for money.
Decades at least.
All while Russia will happily sell that same oil to China at inflated prices.
Trying to start such war? Where exactly?We've entered a global state where warfare isn't fought with violence, it's largely fought with economics and information. What you're describing is Russia trying to start such a war, and that the rest of the Western world has to decide whether to fight back in the same manner, or capitulate. And suggesting we won't fight, because it's hard.
Oh, you mean information war? While US does economic war?
Why exactly do you think Russia should not respond in such war, given that there is no benefit in surrendering at all?
Look, it's simple. If you actually succeed, there will be hot war. No two ways about it.That's an argument that's basically never worked out.
If you're ready to do hot war if that's what it takes to keep Russia down, then sure, go ahead.
Don't assume you'll manage to get Russia down before it plays out though.
Why are you linking PPP per capita if in actual inter-country weight comparison GDP PPP is a lot more relevant, and there Russia is right behind Germany?Especially when modern Russia is far weaker than the USSR was. The USSR was a superpower, able to go toe-to-toe with the USA. Russia is not. It's economy is struggling (GDP per capita sitting right around that of Greece, whose economy famously crashed). Russia desperately does not want an economic war, because it cannot afford to lose one.
Do you think Germany is irrelevant today?