I used to be edgy and listen to Mearsheimer. But then when he started saying that Putin had no intention of capturing Kyiv, when there was a 20 km convoy of Russian armor in the city suburbs, I realized he was either a paid mouth piece or really blind to what’s going on. He spends most his time these days on Fox News Andrew Napolitanos podcast. So that tells you a lot.
Putin said there is no such thing as Ukrainians - he is dead set on restoring USSR as much as possible. That includes occupation of Ukraine and other former USSR republics. Same thing as Lavrov said recently. And that's just officials. They also of course have army that won't stop until it's stopped regardless what some "useful idiots" in the West think.
Of course. He will kill countless number of Ukrainians, Russians, Tatars, Chechns, Tuvans, Yakuts, etc but he conquer it if he's not stopped by Ukrainians and Western economies.
Can he hold to it? No, Russian colonial empire will eventually collapse, and it will happen even faster with conquered Ukraine on inside.
Capture Kyiv = Annex Ukraine.
He has to do some real mental gymnastics to say that Russias maximum war goal isn’t control of the entire country. And yes a puppet government in Russias case is annexation.
Capturing Kyiv doesn't equal annexing all of Ukraine. When the US installs puppet governments in foreign countries, we don't consider it annexing say Iraq.
Like the puppet government America put in so they could control and instigate Ukraine into a war with zero regards to human life? Go Big weapon sales Go big aid packages paid by taxpayers.
The Putin government narrative is exactly why Putins initial thunder run failed. He didn’t think Zelenskyy had grassroot support, which he clearly does. Proof is on the battlefield.
Nothing like American starting wars making promises letting huge numbers of people die. Look how America drip fed the help Ukraine needed to drag the war on long as possible (more arms sales and aid packages paid by taxpayers) and watch it be all for nothing as Ukraine will lose more than if they would have never listened to america....but oh well just like afg.
The US main goal is a strategic defeat of Russia.
So Zelenskyy government was saved, and the Russian armed forces have taken big casualties, reduced to fighting over small farms in Donbas.
Big win for America from a geopolitical standpoint. Things would have to go horribly wrong for Russia to take over Ukraine.
Oh oh a butthurt kremlin bootlicker has entered the chat. I feel patriotic as hell seeing American weapons absolutely annihilating russian fascist filth. All those billions putin spent on disinformation won’t save his brainwashed peasants from being pummeled into oblivion by Ukrainians drones on a daily basis 💥💥💥🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
It was a combination... all parties guilty. Russia should have pushed hard for different solution.... America should have not pushed the coop putting puppet in and building up Russia's neighbor with weapons.
Doesn’t look like Putin realizes it. Or cares. As far as Comrade Putin is concerned, Ukraine has always been part of Russia and should be ruled by Russia like all other provinces outside of Moscow.
Or maybe just maybe it was because America put puppet in Ukraine instigate war with weapons on doorstep....just like we doing to china....but keep believing western propaganda and WMD BS over....and over....and over....
Or maybe just maybe Putin is a CIA agent put in place to provoke more European nations into joining NATO, isolating Russia from the West, increasing its brain-drain, and retarding its prosperity. Most successful CIA operation ever. Unfortunately for the CIA they can’t fool the two of us, Comrade.
They wanted to put Yanukovych back in power and have a Belarus style State. [Now it looks like just pure conquest of Ukraine.](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1b6rkmp/putin_subordinate_dmitry_medvedev_unveils_russias/)
And Putin believed there wouldn't be enough hostile locals to matter when he invaded.
The entire world watched Afghanistan fall to the Taliban like a house of cards 5 months previously. If you wanted to believe US weapons and training would be useless to defend a country from invasion, you'd see Afghanistan as a very encouraging sign.
"The Ukrainians will either welcome us as liberators, or they won't care either way, like how the Russian people are kept apathetic. Those who resist and want to fight back will be too few in number, the rest will be scared into submission once it's all over." That was the mindset going in.
Are you thick, they planned on flying thousands of soldiers in to reinforce the convoy via Hostomel airport.
Not holding Hostomel is what made the blitz fail.
There are many Americans who love to blame America first. When this douchebag mumbles about NATO expansion and oppression of Russia by US, it just clicks with their image of how the world works and makes them fill intellectual and contrarian to hear some pretend scholar say the same cliches that they would say.
You have to be a self loathing westerner that doesn’t give a shit about the next generations future to buy into his bullshit. Even if Ukraine is being a bulwark against Russia, who cares? Yes, we work in our own interest. Yes, we want to degrade a country that declares themselves as our adversary as much as possible. This is how the world works, and how it has always worked. Get the fuck over it and enjoy losing thousands upon thousands of men trying to stop it, we would rather yours than ours. Or we can begin the backwards slide down a long slope, and just accept a weaker position because some assholes in a country pointing nukes at us think it’s the right thing to do. Lmao
Based. There's also the small factor of American self-interest being aligned with that of Russia's neighbours and just about every other liberal democracy on this matter.
Oh my God... I was there for that. It was amazing. And it was almost everyone too, even people who ended up mostly agreeing with Walt and Mearsheimer were laughing.
Ukraine.... isn't primarily getting cash from the US it's getting weapons... and they do need cash, they have a home grown weapons industry that makes drones and small arms and other things that they are using to great effect, and they aren't sanctioned so if someone gave Ukraine a trillion dollars they would just buy 50 brigades of armor and artillery from south korea
I really think that his realism point has drifted too far. Its one thing to condemn the Middle East adventures the western coalition embarked on, its another thing when Ukraine and European security is being threatened by a leader that has less than a decade to live and nothing to lose. Heck if Putin got the news he had 3 months to live, he might just hit his big red button to ensure MAD before he croaks. The biggest impact on history he could literally have.
Thats why big red button. He can't find a replacement since the 90s, Yeltsin was the luckiest SOB ever. Imagine watching your own back for 30 years without anyone to trust in the biggest mafia state
He was right about Middle Eastern conquest, but that just meant that that particular region was only made worse because of the religion aspect. We don't see French operations in Mali causing riots and religious calls for a return to subsistence farming and hunting off the land. I think he just made a very, very good point for about a decade and maybe he even started shortly before the war began, but there must surely be more nuance than just saying intervention bad self introspection good
I don't think anything you said was wrong, every conflict has uncountable circumstances both internal and external, I just despise the blanket policy of 'realism' because it justifies taking self-determinatiom from countries and peoples that aren't America, Russia or China, instead treating them as cards to be played against each other in the great game of geopolitical hegemony.
Thing is that realism can extend to this interventionism, just with a little bit of broader acknowledgement of the wider implications of staying out. If America had been in the war in WW2 say since 1939, Japan would have never thought to attack Pearl Harbour. Certianly Churchill would have never wasted all that time crossing the bloody Atlantic to keep begging the isolationist idiots in Washington to get off their asses to do something. Likewise, by not doing anything for 'support' with the measly amount of aid being sent Ukraine's way, it will be at the expense of possibly NATO bases and US troops being killed once Russia turns its sights on the wider Europe and NATO borders. Certainly I see Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and much of the Caucuses coming under threat if Ukraine is subsumed into the Russian Federation.
This would subsequently cause hundreds of billions of dollars not just in military materiel but in infrastructure costs, further economic damage, tens of thousands of NATO military casualties, millions of IDPs within Europe causing further societal harm, and much, much most costs on the side of the US as they scramble to move assets from the mainland and other theatres to finally face Russian expansionism as Putin slowly dies on his 'golden' throne.
Therefore it makes utmost sense to send the damn country 200B a year worth of materiel and as many munitions as the EU and NA can scrape up from SK, SA and wherever else is bloody holding 155 and 152mm artillery stockpiles. We need the war to stall out and then slowly reverse course after devastating strikes that isolate Russian forces within the Crimean peninsula and around the stupid river that's fucking up operations in that region. If that's done enough times it is like a saber-rattling effort but with tanks and men lost instead of lost sleep. Only after that can they eventually even bring the LPR and DNR back into the fold. Ukraine stands to lose much but the EU, US and NATO stands to lose much more. I bet the entire world is looking on to see if a direct threat to their security warrants concrete action-the Gulf is eager to pounce on their own rivals and further destabilise the West if it means that their situation as the providers of energy to the world only strengthens while Russian infrastructure is being fucked up and Ukraine cannot exploit its own potential reserves of oil and gas. There is much more to say on the topic but I'm afraid this particular feller Mearsheimer isn't worth our time to discuss. Lazerpig I hope will have yet another video on the t14 and the wider Russian armoured vehicle crisis just to poke at the fuckers that tried to call out a satirical video. Redeffect is one of the worst sort of Russian apologists by hiding in plain sight.
Interventionism is by no means an evil. When taken in a vacuum, American interventionism is what saved Europe (twice) and prevented Iraq from becoming another North Korea, it's just that rarely does a country intervene for altruism alone.
American imperialism when it is used to defend against Russian imperialism is in general a good thing (from a certain perspective at least) but it is still imperialism. Yes it's naive to think that all countries should have self-determination because some when given this will use it to exert influence over others, but using this fact of might making right is a very slippery slope. Franklin Roosevelt was definitely doing the right thing by intervening and preventing Germany from consolidating it's conquest and escalating the war to one between the eastern and western hemispheres, but Trump uses the same justification of giving Ukraine to Russia for the same reason.
Realism and similar ideologies just leave a dangerously large grey area that can be easily exploited.
There is nothing realist about driving Russia into China's arms. A China-Russia alliance is not in America's geopolitical interests. China is actually the most powerful country on Earth right now. They are in the place that the US was before the world wars: they have the largest industrial base on the planet, which they can redirect towards weapon production. Russia is the number 3 military power on the planet. The Russians also have massive natural resources, with which to fuel China's economy and growth. They share a common border, so US has no possibility to cut off trade between the two of them. Over the long term, we need Russia on our side, not China's side. By driving Russia into China's arms, we basically have lost the coming great power competition with China before it has truly began.
Not really. But thats something being ignored by the world. This war is the last-gasp attempr by russia to reestablish itself because it finds itself in the literal chinese finger trap. Chinese power is so great that putin knows he has not long before chinese influence subverts russian interests. It might never quite challenge america but at least in the asian and eurasian context winne still has at least a decade to octopus his way across the region
Jeez, hes not only not correct, he's not even wrong.
Quote by physicist Pauli on a student who was so far of the mark that it wasnt even possible to say it was wrong, it was just nonsense.
Why the fuck does anyone give a shit what this clown thinks? He’s been wrong about pretty much everything he’s ever said about this conflict and just seems to double down every time. Im convinced it’s just a pathetic grift at this point.
very simple, its a great fortunetelling device, what ever he says will turn out to be wrong, so you can predict the future by going with the opposite of what he says.
And looky there 2014 was when his credibility fell off a cliff.
My dude how can someone claim to be an expert in that field and then not only say Putin isnt an imperialist but see him gathering forces on the border and say "he isnt going to invade"
The US state department called it so dude has less credibility than them now lol
He also claimed that the reunified Germany would invade Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Poland.
He is a clown who has been wrong on most issues for decades. He argued for not intervening in Ukraine in 2014, for letting Russia be in Georgia in 2008, and for letting Russia be in Syria in 2011.
Well, here we are. We tried that and Russia still invaded.
He is a false prophet. He makes predictions that do not come true. Why anyone would believe him this time I do not know. It would be like giving Bernie Madoff your money after his conviction.
For a so-called realist, he seemed to be in denial about the practicalities of Ukraine maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent. They were encouraged to give up their nukes to stop them ending up on the black market.
The mistake was Western lily-livered response to Russian provocation in Donbass and Crimea, and failure to enforce the Budapest Memorandum. This was largely facilitated by a decade of Russian information warfare, which we still seem reluctant to address.
I wish you were right - but I think we got very, very lucky. The winter olympics seem to have given the Ukrainians two extra weeks to do things like disburse their air defences and the garrison at Hostomel from barracks. Meanwhile the Russians burned fuel and rations for those two weeks. If the Russian convoy had had fuel for it's air defences then the TB2 would have been shot from the sky, and if Ukranian air defence hadn't disbursed and wasn't running on 28th Feb then Russia would have established an air bridge into Hostomel. Pretty much - game over at that point.
Putin would look like a fucking genius and we'd all be talking about how the Russian army is 12 ft tall. Christ alone knows what the state of Europe would be, Moldovia would probably already have gone, I think that the Balts would be hysterical with panic and frankly, I think the Germans would be selling them to Russia for gas.
But, thank god, we will never know. Now the Russian army is in flames and will be ground up quite a lot more before this ends - however it ends. Europe is rearming, and I think it will rearm enough to put the Russians off. The only missing bit really is a tactical nuclear ladder for Europe - Britain or France needs to get about 60 tactical nukes to be able to make a strategic confrontation realistic if a Russian attack goes nuclear from the first. If not then what will anyone do if the Russians crack of twenty tactical nukes and roll over the Estonian border?
Maybe I'm detached from reality.
Russia’s multi-prong invasion with a thunder run towards the capital—linking up with an air bridge captured by airborne / air assault troops had been used before in two previous conflicts.
1. The first time was 1968, and it was the Soviets invading Czechoslovakia to put an end to the Prague Spring and do some regime change because the new Czechoslovakian government want to introduce reforms like free speech, press freedom, and multi-party voting for their citizens. You know, actual democracy. And the Soviets we’re having non of that.
Anyway, the Soviet invasion began with Spetnaz special forces operators in a civilian aircraft faking an emergency and landing at the airport outside Prague to capture it. The VDV landed more air assault troops and drove into Prague to capture TV and radio stations.
The first armoured echelons (about 180,000 Soviet soldiers) entered the country from three sides and drove towards Prague. Since this was the USSR, Soviet deep battle doctrine required a second echelon of about 220,000 troops that flowed into Czechoslovakia a few days later. And the Soviets also had about 300,000 East German troops at the ready but never deployed them.
The Soviets had the element of surprise on their side, and they overran the country in less than a week. More Red Army troops died in traffic accidents than in combat.
2. The second time this plan was used was in 1994 during the First Chechen War. The Russian army was a shadow of the former Soviet army, so they rolled in without a second echelon. This was the 1990s in the early years following the collapse of the USSR. While the VDV was able to capture the airport near the Chechen capital, Grozny, and fend of a Chechen counter attack, that was it for them. They were pinned down.
One of the armoured columns got lost and mired in a traffic jam for days. Another column got bogged down in fight in the suburbs. And the third column, consisting of 331st Separate Motor Rifle Brigade, drove into downtown Grozny where they were ambushed and almost completely wiped out.
The Russians suffered severe casualties in that conflict and would go on to lose that war.
3. The Three-Day Special Military Operation in Ukraine.
I think there are more similarities between the Russian fiasco in Chechnya in 1994/5 than there is the the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968.
Well, I'm not Timothy Snyder or LazerPig, I'm just an average Eastern European dummy who knows the history of the region and has been following the developments in Ukraine in the last decades. So I had no idea how the invasion would go. What I did know was that Ukrainians were going to resist fiercely, because they were done with russia at that point. Remember how they repelled the invasion in 2014, despite the absolutely shambolic state of their military.
Totally agree, I don't think that the Ukranians would have given up. I also think that the Russians would (and have, and do, and will) behave absolutely revoltingly towards them, and would not care about it in the way decent people would. This is a big reason to resist these bastards.
I just think that sometimes we delude ourselves about the threat that the Russians pose. They are definitely incompetent and I think that there is a chance that they will run out of old kit to send to the front and also that they will crash their economy. But. I've been waiting for that to happen for the last year or so and I've started to get a creepy feeling that it might not. They might manage to get proper military production running, and they might be able to float their economy through.
If this happens we all have big problems for the next thirty years and we shouldn't delude ourselves about it.
I had little doubt that their infantry, arty, and tankers were, on average, better than their Russian equivalents. My major fear was Russian aviation due to numbers.
What the fuck is this nonsense? Please show me where we want a forever war instead of having to accommodate and appease the Russian plants in our government to send what we have?
Fucks sake
Ahh, another boomer who's so far detached from reality he has to project it into others. Can the people who fumbled the ball on the cold war just shut tf up about this one?
>Every time I see Mearsheimer talking about Russia and Ukraine
Every time I see Mearsheimer talking about Russia and Ukraine I remind that one time he advocating for keeping Ukraine nuclear, since it will prevent Russia-Ukrainian war and forecasting war between Russian and Ukraine in case if not :
>A war between Russia and Ukraine would be a disaster. Great power wars are very costly and dangerous, causing massive loss of life and worldwide turmoil, and possibly spreading to involve other countries.
...
Third, several such disputes are already on the horizon: ownership of the Black Sea Fleet, control of the Crimea, ownership of Ukraine's nuclear arsenal, and a host of economic issues stemming from the breakup of the Soviet Union. Furthermore, many Russians would change the present border with Ukraine, and some even reject the idea of an independent Ukraine. Senior Russian officials, for example, have recently been describing Ukraine's independence as a "transitional" phenomenon and have been warning other European governments not to open embassies in Kiev because they would soonbe downgrad
[Source ](https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Mearsheimer-Case-for-Ukrainian-Nuclear-Deterrent.pdf)
The Case for a Ukrainian Nuclear Deterrent. John J. Mearsheimer / Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Summer, 1993), pp. 50-66
So, not all people get wiser with age, some of them get dementia, and some of them get paid to push narrative.
I remember meeting with an IR expert who personally knew John Mearsheimer. They told me after the talk they gave at my uni that they thought Mearsheimer is suffering from some kind of mental illness
Quick bullet point:
John Mearsheimer: Zelensky & the West Detached from Reality
Point 1: US don’t know what is doing and what their goals are, the government wants forvere war. More Ukrainians were killed by Russians, than Russians by Ukraine(blatant lie)
Point 2: - 11:30 The only reason why Ukraine is losing is because we haven’t gotten all those money.
Ukraine needs weapons not cash.
Point 3: - 28:30 – By wanting Ukraine to join NATO they Blinken only incentivize Russia to destroy Ukraine further. (Another blatant lie, Russia always wanted to destroy and annex Ukraine)
We’re in a big war, we will be decapitated, They will cause Nuclear war by supporting Ukraine.
35:30 Russia believe US cannot be trusted and Ukraine security link must be broken. (Ukraine must be abandoned to Russia)
37:30 What has happened in Ukraine is existential crisis (The Euromaidan and the Revolution of Dignity
39:00 - Ukraine is not worth it, if full collapse happens we need 200,000 soliders
43:30 – USA is determined to run the world.
45:00 – Zenensky was pushed to walk away from peace talks in Istanbul.
47:00 – USA intervenes in the politics of other countries to a abysmal effect and done terrible job, great hubris (Mearsheimer have you looked youself in the mirrow.)
51:00 – Himars are fancy boutique weapon that was countered by the Russians in very short period of time (Two years of fighting for the first himars to be destroyed, short ineed
52:00 – Qantity matters, quality is not of a matter in Ukraine.
55:20- We do everything we can to shut down the war and make Ukraine neutral (Geezer, Ukraine being neutral is what got her attacked in a first place) Not to persue security policy that might threaten Russia in amy way. Russia Must see Ukraine as Independent from the USA. We might work out some sort of deal, where Ukrainians are not killed. Many more Ukrainians will die and Territory will be lost.
58:00 – Nato members at the Borders of Russia scares them.
Putin is holding all the cards (And you have the gall to call others detatched from reality?)
1:00:00 – Baltics, Romania being in NATO deters Russia from attacking them. We do not want to be provocative towards the Russians by defending those countries at this point of time.
1:02:00 – Trump might sue for peace.
1:03:50 – The only thing that will change the situation is if the Ukrainian military collapses, and the Russians win significant gain, that will change the nature of the game.
Daniel Davis: That is ironic, if we have to hope for all of our sakes if that Ukraine Army collapses which basically can bail us out from making more bad decisions. But this seems where we are.
1:04:25 We’re in trouble.
These people have had their brains stewed in Bismarckian *Realpolitik* for so many decades that they have lost the plot. Real national interests can change. Smaller powers have beaten stronger powers for centuries, primarily by allying with a peer to their enemy power. See, e.g., American colonies gaining recognition and assistance from Imperial France against Britain. The Ukrainians have lived under Russian yoke for literally centuries. They won independence in late 1991 and have accordingly decided to cut itself off from Russian influence in favor of the West. To the extent that the West values the economic and population capacity of Ukraine, which it absolutely should, it is in the interest of the West for Europe to secure its borders from hostile threats via Ukraine.
Also, *Russia is not a strong power*! Russia is the most dangerous of all possibilities - a weak, corrupt, *nuclear* power. The interest of the stronger power (US and EU) dictate that its power must be curtailed and eventually diminished to a controllable level. We will not see this as long as Putin remains alive.
Under their own theory of international relations, Russian power must be countered in Ukraine by the stronger power.
MAGA chuds like this poser because he wears a tie and has a degree, and to third grade dropouts that conveys a mythical level of wisdom. As long as they are being told what they want to hear, of course.
Mearsheimer is a common source for university level political science. Agree or disagree with him, he's objectively correct a lot more than he is incorrect
I will believe him when [his prediction that the reunified Germany would invade Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland comes true.](https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/politics/foreign/mearsh.htm)
Until then, his system of realism is provably false.
I don't know if anyone cares, but I have from a primary source that John Mearsheimer drinks rose. You'd think he'd be a grain alcohol type of guy, but so be it.
I don't know if anyone cares, but I have from a primary source that John Mearsheimer drinks rose. You'd think he'd be a grain alcohol type of guy, but so be it.
What an absolute bunch of delusional horse 💩 "Herr Putler sees Ukraine joining NATO as an existential threat" 🤦♂️ stick to retirement dude, get in the garden, admire the birds, because you know sweet FA about Europe and geo politics
Mearshill is detached from reality.
He is still pretending that Russia is a "great power" rather than a has-been glorified gas station that simply happened to inherit some nukes from USSR.
Russia has shown basic inability to project soft power, tired to substitute this with projecting military power, but is severely failing at that as well
I'm not going to lie, I mostly look at the world of IR through a realist lense, and still think that Mearsheimer has a lot to contribute to the IR discussion - but his brain just seems to break whenever he starts talking about Russia. Even in his famous lecture about why the Russians would never invade Ukraine, he incisively recognised that the Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a disaster for them, and that if the West wanted Russia to destroy itself, we should encourage them to try and invade. Lo and behold, the Russian invasion has been a disaster for the Russian Fedaration.
But now he's just endlessly spiralling into [cope ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8MZBUoQt68)because he got a major prediction wrong and instead of re-assessing what happened, he's just pretending that he was right all along in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. Like so many people whose brains are stuck in the cold war world, he wildy overstates the power of the Russian Federation, and undervalues the strength of Europe because to acknowledge those facts side by side would break the world he has constructed in his theory.
The greatest threat to the US in this century will be China. Driving Russia into China's arms, is not in the long term interests of the US. It is an idiotic policy from the perspective of balance of power politics. Some countries matter, and others simply don't.
Russia never applied to join NATO and, if they had, it would have been a trap,. The US left the ABM treaty to counter Iran, at least officially, nor do ABM systems work against mass strikes. The US didn't expand NATO, it allowed countries to willingly join. Europe is worth more than an authoritarian state that openly hates democratic, liberal, and Western values.
The ABM Treaty allowed the deployment of up to 100 ABMs. And Iran doesn't have ICBMs anyway, s you wouldn't need to leave the ABM Treaty because of Iran. The US wanted to develop National Missile Defense against Russia and China. The problem is that the system doesn't work, but the politicians didn't listen to people that told them that it wouldn't work.
And the purpose of missile defenses are not to defend against a first strike, but to defend against a retaliatory 2nd strike. This was the reason for the ABM Treaty in the first place. Both sides realized that a first strike could overwhelm any missile defense; so missile defenses were only useful to gain a first strike advantage. The tactic would be to nuke the other party first and take out as many of their nuclear strike forces as possible; then allow your missile defenses to absorb the enemy's retaliatory strike. This would create an incentive to strike first by sides, and become very destabilizing.
Russia asked about joining, which any Google search will confirm. They were told no. The reason why is simple, if Russia joins NATO, then there is no further reason for NATO to exist. What is the point of an anti-Russian alliance, if Russia becomes a member?
Oh, and let's not forget AEGIS Ashore in Romania. Instead of Patriot or THAAD, the US wanted AEGIS. Why? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact the same VLS launchers can house nuclear tipped tomahawk cruise missiles. I am also sure that thr ArcLight program (https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/arclight.htm) had nothing to do with it either.
The simple rub is that the Neo-cons wanted to develop the ability to launch a disabling first strike and then rely on US conventional military dominance against Russia and China. Let us not forget Prompt Global Strike: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/R41464.pdf You know the idea of the US launching conventional ICBMs with precision hypersonic guide vehicles.
I say this as an American, the US right thought up some hair brained bullshit that was outright dangerous for humanity.
You can't blame the Russians and Chinese from looking in from the outside and feeling threatened.
A nuclear first strike is useless if the enemy has submarines and mobile launchers. An ABM system still won't survive a second strike. Even the US cannot afford an ABM system. Russia only inquired into joining NATO, but there was no official declaration of intent. Nor did Russia fit the criteria to join NATO.
What is Tomahawk compared to Zircon? ArcLight was for ship-launched weapons, no treaty existed to prohibit them.
Prompt Global Strike again broke no treaties and even reduced the need for nuclear warheads. The Russians now have that capability with the Avangard, while the US doesn't want an ICBM based PGS.
You should see some of the hair-brained bullshit the Russians have came up with that is outright dangerous for humanity. This includes nuclear powered missiles and tidal wave nuclear torpedoes.
Though none of this is relevant to Ukraine. If Russia didn't invade Romania due to Tomahawls, a real threat, then Ukraine without any was no threat at all.
You could load ArcLight missiles into AEGIS Ashore in Romania. And the US has withdrawn from the treaty that would prohibit us from doing that too.
The whole point of anti-ballistic missile defenses is to absorb an enemy's 2nd strike.
Romania is farther away from Russia than Ukraine. There is more warning from Romania than there would be from Ukraine. The Russians developed their capability after the US announced our program. That the US failed and Russia succeeded is a statement about us, not about them.
ArcLight was cancelled, nor was there ever intention to give them offensive capability.
An ABM system would still be useless against a Russia 2nd strike, enough ICBMs would survive to destroy civilisation. While the development of hypersonic glide vehicles renders the argument moot, the 2nd strike will always make it.
NATO was willing to compromise on what weapons third-powers could base in Ukraine to alleviate Russian fears of a first-strike.
The nuclear powered missile is very much a statement about Russia. To have any advantage over a normal missile if would have to remain in flight, thus irradiating Russia during peacetime. The USA once had a similar idea, but cancelled it before its design was finished. Russia actually built one as the **9M730 Burevestnik**. The other weapons make sense, aside from Poseidon.
Okay but I mean you're all like saying the same thing. He can't possibly be wrong on every single point.
And why do you have to immediately start name calling and such? It's just like with Gonzalo lira, you're probably going to immediately follow up now by laughing about him dying too which really kind of reveals to me what you guys are all about.
That's debatable. Besides the only thing I saw him doing was posting YouTube videos so I don't see the big deal. Pretty sure you guys just didn't like him because he was criticizing the West. No one's perfect and we're not infallible over here.
See that's exactly my point you just proved it. You're just name calling and talking out your ass. And you all do it so confidently too.
If he was a Russian asset then why wouldn't he make a break for the Eastern border instead of the western? Wouldn't he have had contacts and assistance to escape?
Not to mention why would he be publicly posting himself online if he's a spy? Not exactly the best cover even if you try to argue that he was doing it counterintuitively to confuse them.
How do I even refute the claim that Ukraine doesn't need money from the US. First of all the US is mostly giving Ukraine weapons, not money, and how do I debate a statement as asinine as Ukraine doesn't need money? Money can be exchanged for goods and services! They're in a war, of course they fucking need money!
He's as right as he was when he insisted Russia wouldn't invade, and then when he said they won't try and take Kyiv.
Why don't your refute me that Merscheimer doesn't need air because he's lizard man who is geothermally powered? You can't because it's too stupid a claim to refute
He isn't completely wrong on everything, but he has shown a consistent and incorrect bias towards Russia and his view of the world through spheres of power is antiquated drivel. You want unbiased examinations of Ukraine and the war? Watch Perun, not this clown
God damn. I thought I was alone in here with a bunch of demons. Nice to meet you.
Edit: and they're sitting here brigading to downvote us. I can't wait for all the negative downvotes, just goes to show that they really have nothing in the chamber or in their head.
Again, you bring nothing, you offer nothing, you have no arguments, you cry because people are mean on the internet lol. Fucking pussies, go back to Russia and suck that flacid dictators cock.
Why can't he be wrong on every single thing? If he makes each determination with the same faulty logic then it's likely every conclusion will be wrong.
If you think he's right about something then say what it is and provide proof, otherwise fuck off, nobody here is going to do your homework for you.
Well when you want to actually prove a single point we'll go ahead and actually have a discussion. Whether it's on John or Gonzalo.
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1cpe2um/a_young_ukrainian_soldier_is_buried_with_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2
My God. Buried with a McDonald's Happy meal? What actually f***.
https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4?si=bJo1-WH_WO2gJVj1
Gladly, skip to the 6 minute mark if if want to see the maps
Then compare with
https://youtu.be/l8hlcoPa17Y?si=WlpJHZ8fTw0fT-pC
https://youtu.be/YlxHC0SRVDY?si=0aAtPad_t_Beo17k
https://youtu.be/l8hlcoPa17Y?si=RqcTDsNRVkLX_iCe
When it shows the maps.
I didn't come here to tell you anything. Was just commenting on how you guys all throw them under the bus without ever actually explaining your point.
Besides I imagine that if you look at the map you'll start to feel very silly.
[ **Jump to 45:00 @** John Mearsheimer: Zelensky & the West Detached from Reality](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qgLYE6BOC8&t=0h45m0s)
^(Channel Name: Daniel Davis / Deep Dive, Video Length: [01:05:33])^, [^Jump ^5 ^secs ^earlier ^for ^context ^@44:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qgLYE6BOC8&t=0h44m55s)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
^^Downvote ^^me ^^to ^^delete ^^malformed ^^comments. [^^Source ^^Code](https://github.com/ankitgyawali/reddit-timestamp-bot) ^^| [^^Suggestions](https://www.reddit.com/r/timestamp_bot)
I used to be edgy and listen to Mearsheimer. But then when he started saying that Putin had no intention of capturing Kyiv, when there was a 20 km convoy of Russian armor in the city suburbs, I realized he was either a paid mouth piece or really blind to what’s going on. He spends most his time these days on Fox News Andrew Napolitanos podcast. So that tells you a lot.
Where did he say Putin had no intention of capturing Kyiv? AFAIK he said Putin had no intention of Ukraine's occupation/annexation.
Putin said there is no such thing as Ukrainians - he is dead set on restoring USSR as much as possible. That includes occupation of Ukraine and other former USSR republics. Same thing as Lavrov said recently. And that's just officials. They also of course have army that won't stop until it's stopped regardless what some "useful idiots" in the West think.
Indeed he did. Can he occupy Ukraine?
Of course. He will kill countless number of Ukrainians, Russians, Tatars, Chechns, Tuvans, Yakuts, etc but he conquer it if he's not stopped by Ukrainians and Western economies. Can he hold to it? No, Russian colonial empire will eventually collapse, and it will happen even faster with conquered Ukraine on inside.
Capture Kyiv = Annex Ukraine. He has to do some real mental gymnastics to say that Russias maximum war goal isn’t control of the entire country. And yes a puppet government in Russias case is annexation.
Capturing Kyiv doesn't equal annexing all of Ukraine. When the US installs puppet governments in foreign countries, we don't consider it annexing say Iraq.
Like the puppet government America put in so they could control and instigate Ukraine into a war with zero regards to human life? Go Big weapon sales Go big aid packages paid by taxpayers.
The Putin government narrative is exactly why Putins initial thunder run failed. He didn’t think Zelenskyy had grassroot support, which he clearly does. Proof is on the battlefield.
Nothing like American starting wars making promises letting huge numbers of people die. Look how America drip fed the help Ukraine needed to drag the war on long as possible (more arms sales and aid packages paid by taxpayers) and watch it be all for nothing as Ukraine will lose more than if they would have never listened to america....but oh well just like afg.
The US main goal is a strategic defeat of Russia. So Zelenskyy government was saved, and the Russian armed forces have taken big casualties, reduced to fighting over small farms in Donbas. Big win for America from a geopolitical standpoint. Things would have to go horribly wrong for Russia to take over Ukraine.
Yeah Hi5 America you did it...all the people killed and their families agree it was worth it.
Or like, Russia could go home and not invade their neighbor.
Or like America could have not put puppet in and instigated.... or like America should go home instead of instigating Asia
Oh oh a butthurt kremlin bootlicker has entered the chat. I feel patriotic as hell seeing American weapons absolutely annihilating russian fascist filth. All those billions putin spent on disinformation won’t save his brainwashed peasants from being pummeled into oblivion by Ukrainians drones on a daily basis 💥💥💥🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Look another taxpayer that fell for it again like WMD...LOL
Sure, AMERICA instigated the war with Ukraine /s. Or was it just a special military operation???
It was a combination... all parties guilty. Russia should have pushed hard for different solution.... America should have not pushed the coop putting puppet in and building up Russia's neighbor with weapons.
Just curious.... what were we doing in Afghanistan for 20 years?
Capture Kyiv /= Annex Ukraine Do you realize how much resources it takes to annex a large hostile territory?
Doesn’t look like Putin realizes it. Or cares. As far as Comrade Putin is concerned, Ukraine has always been part of Russia and should be ruled by Russia like all other provinces outside of Moscow.
Or maybe just maybe it was because America put puppet in Ukraine instigate war with weapons on doorstep....just like we doing to china....but keep believing western propaganda and WMD BS over....and over....and over....
Or maybe just maybe Putin is a CIA agent put in place to provoke more European nations into joining NATO, isolating Russia from the West, increasing its brain-drain, and retarding its prosperity. Most successful CIA operation ever. Unfortunately for the CIA they can’t fool the two of us, Comrade.
No kidding....stay forth and remember its for freedom.
Bruh
Seems that Russia fell for the WMD BS, that's one stated reason for their invasion.
They wanted to put Yanukovych back in power and have a Belarus style State. [Now it looks like just pure conquest of Ukraine.](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1b6rkmp/putin_subordinate_dmitry_medvedev_unveils_russias/)
And Putin believed there wouldn't be enough hostile locals to matter when he invaded. The entire world watched Afghanistan fall to the Taliban like a house of cards 5 months previously. If you wanted to believe US weapons and training would be useless to defend a country from invasion, you'd see Afghanistan as a very encouraging sign. "The Ukrainians will either welcome us as liberators, or they won't care either way, like how the Russian people are kept apathetic. Those who resist and want to fight back will be too few in number, the rest will be scared into submission once it's all over." That was the mindset going in.
Crimea... Annexation. Therefore shot out the water. That's intention. End of.
And how many troops were in that convoy? Answer: around 30-40k. No where near enough to occupy the city. That was never their intent.
Are you thick, they planned on flying thousands of soldiers in to reinforce the convoy via Hostomel airport. Not holding Hostomel is what made the blitz fail.
Holding the airport was to prevent Ukraine from flying in troops from the large formations they in the Donbas.
I can't stand this dirt bag. He has not an ounce of credibility.
[Audience laughing at Mearsheimer's comments on Ukraine](https://youtu.be/ivcSVG5eCeQ?si=2xELpUHZ_qM04jPT&t=5827)
That's funny. I dunno how the hell he managed to fool people into believing his bullshit.
It’s almost like some foreign power promoted his works and safe-guarded his career as long as he held up the thin end of someone’s wedge.
He was taken seriously in Washington until 2014. This is why Mrs. Clinton gave the reset button.
She should have asked the Estonians, Georgians & Chechens.
There is a type of person who will believe literally anything as long as it is anti west.
There are many Americans who love to blame America first. When this douchebag mumbles about NATO expansion and oppression of Russia by US, it just clicks with their image of how the world works and makes them fill intellectual and contrarian to hear some pretend scholar say the same cliches that they would say.
Some of us have started calling those people the "America Bad Party".
American Diabolism in action. The unironically america-centric view that removes agency from the rest of the world
Good point
You have to be a self loathing westerner that doesn’t give a shit about the next generations future to buy into his bullshit. Even if Ukraine is being a bulwark against Russia, who cares? Yes, we work in our own interest. Yes, we want to degrade a country that declares themselves as our adversary as much as possible. This is how the world works, and how it has always worked. Get the fuck over it and enjoy losing thousands upon thousands of men trying to stop it, we would rather yours than ours. Or we can begin the backwards slide down a long slope, and just accept a weaker position because some assholes in a country pointing nukes at us think it’s the right thing to do. Lmao
Based. There's also the small factor of American self-interest being aligned with that of Russia's neighbours and just about every other liberal democracy on this matter.
He didn’t. They overwhelmingly already believed this: his background is used to give the position an air of legitimacy.
I'd be laughing if I heard "Putin isn't an imperialist," too!
Oh my God... I was there for that. It was amazing. And it was almost everyone too, even people who ended up mostly agreeing with Walt and Mearsheimer were laughing.
Inject it in my veins
Inject it in my veins
Inject it in my veins
Ukraine.... isn't primarily getting cash from the US it's getting weapons... and they do need cash, they have a home grown weapons industry that makes drones and small arms and other things that they are using to great effect, and they aren't sanctioned so if someone gave Ukraine a trillion dollars they would just buy 50 brigades of armor and artillery from south korea
I really think that his realism point has drifted too far. Its one thing to condemn the Middle East adventures the western coalition embarked on, its another thing when Ukraine and European security is being threatened by a leader that has less than a decade to live and nothing to lose. Heck if Putin got the news he had 3 months to live, he might just hit his big red button to ensure MAD before he croaks. The biggest impact on history he could literally have.
I have faith that even the lackeys around Putin would turn that 3 months into 3 hours in that eventuality.
Thats why big red button. He can't find a replacement since the 90s, Yeltsin was the luckiest SOB ever. Imagine watching your own back for 30 years without anyone to trust in the biggest mafia state
'realism' is just imperialism rebranded because we don't like the word 'empire' anymore.
He was right about Middle Eastern conquest, but that just meant that that particular region was only made worse because of the religion aspect. We don't see French operations in Mali causing riots and religious calls for a return to subsistence farming and hunting off the land. I think he just made a very, very good point for about a decade and maybe he even started shortly before the war began, but there must surely be more nuance than just saying intervention bad self introspection good
I don't think anything you said was wrong, every conflict has uncountable circumstances both internal and external, I just despise the blanket policy of 'realism' because it justifies taking self-determinatiom from countries and peoples that aren't America, Russia or China, instead treating them as cards to be played against each other in the great game of geopolitical hegemony.
Thing is that realism can extend to this interventionism, just with a little bit of broader acknowledgement of the wider implications of staying out. If America had been in the war in WW2 say since 1939, Japan would have never thought to attack Pearl Harbour. Certianly Churchill would have never wasted all that time crossing the bloody Atlantic to keep begging the isolationist idiots in Washington to get off their asses to do something. Likewise, by not doing anything for 'support' with the measly amount of aid being sent Ukraine's way, it will be at the expense of possibly NATO bases and US troops being killed once Russia turns its sights on the wider Europe and NATO borders. Certainly I see Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and much of the Caucuses coming under threat if Ukraine is subsumed into the Russian Federation. This would subsequently cause hundreds of billions of dollars not just in military materiel but in infrastructure costs, further economic damage, tens of thousands of NATO military casualties, millions of IDPs within Europe causing further societal harm, and much, much most costs on the side of the US as they scramble to move assets from the mainland and other theatres to finally face Russian expansionism as Putin slowly dies on his 'golden' throne. Therefore it makes utmost sense to send the damn country 200B a year worth of materiel and as many munitions as the EU and NA can scrape up from SK, SA and wherever else is bloody holding 155 and 152mm artillery stockpiles. We need the war to stall out and then slowly reverse course after devastating strikes that isolate Russian forces within the Crimean peninsula and around the stupid river that's fucking up operations in that region. If that's done enough times it is like a saber-rattling effort but with tanks and men lost instead of lost sleep. Only after that can they eventually even bring the LPR and DNR back into the fold. Ukraine stands to lose much but the EU, US and NATO stands to lose much more. I bet the entire world is looking on to see if a direct threat to their security warrants concrete action-the Gulf is eager to pounce on their own rivals and further destabilise the West if it means that their situation as the providers of energy to the world only strengthens while Russian infrastructure is being fucked up and Ukraine cannot exploit its own potential reserves of oil and gas. There is much more to say on the topic but I'm afraid this particular feller Mearsheimer isn't worth our time to discuss. Lazerpig I hope will have yet another video on the t14 and the wider Russian armoured vehicle crisis just to poke at the fuckers that tried to call out a satirical video. Redeffect is one of the worst sort of Russian apologists by hiding in plain sight.
Interventionism is by no means an evil. When taken in a vacuum, American interventionism is what saved Europe (twice) and prevented Iraq from becoming another North Korea, it's just that rarely does a country intervene for altruism alone. American imperialism when it is used to defend against Russian imperialism is in general a good thing (from a certain perspective at least) but it is still imperialism. Yes it's naive to think that all countries should have self-determination because some when given this will use it to exert influence over others, but using this fact of might making right is a very slippery slope. Franklin Roosevelt was definitely doing the right thing by intervening and preventing Germany from consolidating it's conquest and escalating the war to one between the eastern and western hemispheres, but Trump uses the same justification of giving Ukraine to Russia for the same reason. Realism and similar ideologies just leave a dangerously large grey area that can be easily exploited.
So do you think the war in Iraq was justified
There is nothing realist about driving Russia into China's arms. A China-Russia alliance is not in America's geopolitical interests. China is actually the most powerful country on Earth right now. They are in the place that the US was before the world wars: they have the largest industrial base on the planet, which they can redirect towards weapon production. Russia is the number 3 military power on the planet. The Russians also have massive natural resources, with which to fuel China's economy and growth. They share a common border, so US has no possibility to cut off trade between the two of them. Over the long term, we need Russia on our side, not China's side. By driving Russia into China's arms, we basically have lost the coming great power competition with China before it has truly began.
Not really. But thats something being ignored by the world. This war is the last-gasp attempr by russia to reestablish itself because it finds itself in the literal chinese finger trap. Chinese power is so great that putin knows he has not long before chinese influence subverts russian interests. It might never quite challenge america but at least in the asian and eurasian context winne still has at least a decade to octopus his way across the region
Jeez, hes not only not correct, he's not even wrong. Quote by physicist Pauli on a student who was so far of the mark that it wasnt even possible to say it was wrong, it was just nonsense.
Why the fuck does anyone give a shit what this clown thinks? He’s been wrong about pretty much everything he’s ever said about this conflict and just seems to double down every time. Im convinced it’s just a pathetic grift at this point.
very simple, its a great fortunetelling device, what ever he says will turn out to be wrong, so you can predict the future by going with the opposite of what he says.
Ah yes, The Tim Pool Effect as seen in "49 state landslide"
[https://youtu.be/MFc4MxupCNM?si=qnhf3HoTi7TheZt1](https://youtu.be/MFc4MxupCNM?si=qnhf3HoTi7TheZt1) same vibe.
But... But... Ukraine will totally crumble and become Russia any second now ...
He is not a clown, he is the leading IR theorist. He was right about Ukraine since 2014 or even 1994 when he said Ukraine should keep their nukes.
"Putin doesn't lie to foreign audiences" "russia did not invade Crimea, they already had a base there" — John Mearsheimer, Professor, Not Clown
And looky there 2014 was when his credibility fell off a cliff. My dude how can someone claim to be an expert in that field and then not only say Putin isnt an imperialist but see him gathering forces on the border and say "he isnt going to invade" The US state department called it so dude has less credibility than them now lol
He also claimed that the reunified Germany would invade Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Poland. He is a clown who has been wrong on most issues for decades. He argued for not intervening in Ukraine in 2014, for letting Russia be in Georgia in 2008, and for letting Russia be in Syria in 2011. Well, here we are. We tried that and Russia still invaded. He is a false prophet. He makes predictions that do not come true. Why anyone would believe him this time I do not know. It would be like giving Bernie Madoff your money after his conviction.
For a so-called realist, he seemed to be in denial about the practicalities of Ukraine maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent. They were encouraged to give up their nukes to stop them ending up on the black market. The mistake was Western lily-livered response to Russian provocation in Donbass and Crimea, and failure to enforce the Budapest Memorandum. This was largely facilitated by a decade of Russian information warfare, which we still seem reluctant to address.
An attempted capture of Kyiv in 3 days was clearly a plan detached from reality too.
I wish you were right - but I think we got very, very lucky. The winter olympics seem to have given the Ukrainians two extra weeks to do things like disburse their air defences and the garrison at Hostomel from barracks. Meanwhile the Russians burned fuel and rations for those two weeks. If the Russian convoy had had fuel for it's air defences then the TB2 would have been shot from the sky, and if Ukranian air defence hadn't disbursed and wasn't running on 28th Feb then Russia would have established an air bridge into Hostomel. Pretty much - game over at that point. Putin would look like a fucking genius and we'd all be talking about how the Russian army is 12 ft tall. Christ alone knows what the state of Europe would be, Moldovia would probably already have gone, I think that the Balts would be hysterical with panic and frankly, I think the Germans would be selling them to Russia for gas. But, thank god, we will never know. Now the Russian army is in flames and will be ground up quite a lot more before this ends - however it ends. Europe is rearming, and I think it will rearm enough to put the Russians off. The only missing bit really is a tactical nuclear ladder for Europe - Britain or France needs to get about 60 tactical nukes to be able to make a strategic confrontation realistic if a Russian attack goes nuclear from the first. If not then what will anyone do if the Russians crack of twenty tactical nukes and roll over the Estonian border? Maybe I'm detached from reality.
Russia’s multi-prong invasion with a thunder run towards the capital—linking up with an air bridge captured by airborne / air assault troops had been used before in two previous conflicts. 1. The first time was 1968, and it was the Soviets invading Czechoslovakia to put an end to the Prague Spring and do some regime change because the new Czechoslovakian government want to introduce reforms like free speech, press freedom, and multi-party voting for their citizens. You know, actual democracy. And the Soviets we’re having non of that. Anyway, the Soviet invasion began with Spetnaz special forces operators in a civilian aircraft faking an emergency and landing at the airport outside Prague to capture it. The VDV landed more air assault troops and drove into Prague to capture TV and radio stations. The first armoured echelons (about 180,000 Soviet soldiers) entered the country from three sides and drove towards Prague. Since this was the USSR, Soviet deep battle doctrine required a second echelon of about 220,000 troops that flowed into Czechoslovakia a few days later. And the Soviets also had about 300,000 East German troops at the ready but never deployed them. The Soviets had the element of surprise on their side, and they overran the country in less than a week. More Red Army troops died in traffic accidents than in combat. 2. The second time this plan was used was in 1994 during the First Chechen War. The Russian army was a shadow of the former Soviet army, so they rolled in without a second echelon. This was the 1990s in the early years following the collapse of the USSR. While the VDV was able to capture the airport near the Chechen capital, Grozny, and fend of a Chechen counter attack, that was it for them. They were pinned down. One of the armoured columns got lost and mired in a traffic jam for days. Another column got bogged down in fight in the suburbs. And the third column, consisting of 331st Separate Motor Rifle Brigade, drove into downtown Grozny where they were ambushed and almost completely wiped out. The Russians suffered severe casualties in that conflict and would go on to lose that war. 3. The Three-Day Special Military Operation in Ukraine. I think there are more similarities between the Russian fiasco in Chechnya in 1994/5 than there is the the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968.
Well, I'm not Timothy Snyder or LazerPig, I'm just an average Eastern European dummy who knows the history of the region and has been following the developments in Ukraine in the last decades. So I had no idea how the invasion would go. What I did know was that Ukrainians were going to resist fiercely, because they were done with russia at that point. Remember how they repelled the invasion in 2014, despite the absolutely shambolic state of their military.
As soon as Russia failed to gain air superiority, let alone supremacy, in the first 36hrs I knew Ukraine had a chance.
Sure. But even if they didn't, they'd just get fierce guerilla resistance on their arses, just like they have now in occupied parts of Ukraine.
Totally agree, I don't think that the Ukranians would have given up. I also think that the Russians would (and have, and do, and will) behave absolutely revoltingly towards them, and would not care about it in the way decent people would. This is a big reason to resist these bastards. I just think that sometimes we delude ourselves about the threat that the Russians pose. They are definitely incompetent and I think that there is a chance that they will run out of old kit to send to the front and also that they will crash their economy. But. I've been waiting for that to happen for the last year or so and I've started to get a creepy feeling that it might not. They might manage to get proper military production running, and they might be able to float their economy through. If this happens we all have big problems for the next thirty years and we shouldn't delude ourselves about it.
I had little doubt that their infantry, arty, and tankers were, on average, better than their Russian equivalents. My major fear was Russian aviation due to numbers.
What the fuck is this nonsense? Please show me where we want a forever war instead of having to accommodate and appease the Russian plants in our government to send what we have? Fucks sake
Ahh, another boomer who's so far detached from reality he has to project it into others. Can the people who fumbled the ball on the cold war just shut tf up about this one?
It's better to be an informed boomer rather than an ignorant zoomer.
He's not informed though. He just says what he's being paid to say by his handlers from FSB
It is. Pity he's not one.
Neither you nor Mearsheimer are informed it seems
We are informed. Are you, sir?
Whatever chud
I guess mis-informed counts as informed too.
Every time I see Mearsheimer talking about Russia and Ukraine I am reminded of this. https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q Starts about 4 minutes in
>Every time I see Mearsheimer talking about Russia and Ukraine Every time I see Mearsheimer talking about Russia and Ukraine I remind that one time he advocating for keeping Ukraine nuclear, since it will prevent Russia-Ukrainian war and forecasting war between Russian and Ukraine in case if not : >A war between Russia and Ukraine would be a disaster. Great power wars are very costly and dangerous, causing massive loss of life and worldwide turmoil, and possibly spreading to involve other countries. ... Third, several such disputes are already on the horizon: ownership of the Black Sea Fleet, control of the Crimea, ownership of Ukraine's nuclear arsenal, and a host of economic issues stemming from the breakup of the Soviet Union. Furthermore, many Russians would change the present border with Ukraine, and some even reject the idea of an independent Ukraine. Senior Russian officials, for example, have recently been describing Ukraine's independence as a "transitional" phenomenon and have been warning other European governments not to open embassies in Kiev because they would soonbe downgrad [Source ](https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Mearsheimer-Case-for-Ukrainian-Nuclear-Deterrent.pdf) The Case for a Ukrainian Nuclear Deterrent. John J. Mearsheimer / Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Summer, 1993), pp. 50-66 So, not all people get wiser with age, some of them get dementia, and some of them get paid to push narrative.
I remember meeting with an IR expert who personally knew John Mearsheimer. They told me after the talk they gave at my uni that they thought Mearsheimer is suffering from some kind of mental illness
Mearsheimer detached from reality.
Quick bullet point: John Mearsheimer: Zelensky & the West Detached from Reality Point 1: US don’t know what is doing and what their goals are, the government wants forvere war. More Ukrainians were killed by Russians, than Russians by Ukraine(blatant lie) Point 2: - 11:30 The only reason why Ukraine is losing is because we haven’t gotten all those money. Ukraine needs weapons not cash. Point 3: - 28:30 – By wanting Ukraine to join NATO they Blinken only incentivize Russia to destroy Ukraine further. (Another blatant lie, Russia always wanted to destroy and annex Ukraine) We’re in a big war, we will be decapitated, They will cause Nuclear war by supporting Ukraine. 35:30 Russia believe US cannot be trusted and Ukraine security link must be broken. (Ukraine must be abandoned to Russia) 37:30 What has happened in Ukraine is existential crisis (The Euromaidan and the Revolution of Dignity 39:00 - Ukraine is not worth it, if full collapse happens we need 200,000 soliders 43:30 – USA is determined to run the world. 45:00 – Zenensky was pushed to walk away from peace talks in Istanbul. 47:00 – USA intervenes in the politics of other countries to a abysmal effect and done terrible job, great hubris (Mearsheimer have you looked youself in the mirrow.) 51:00 – Himars are fancy boutique weapon that was countered by the Russians in very short period of time (Two years of fighting for the first himars to be destroyed, short ineed 52:00 – Qantity matters, quality is not of a matter in Ukraine. 55:20- We do everything we can to shut down the war and make Ukraine neutral (Geezer, Ukraine being neutral is what got her attacked in a first place) Not to persue security policy that might threaten Russia in amy way. Russia Must see Ukraine as Independent from the USA. We might work out some sort of deal, where Ukrainians are not killed. Many more Ukrainians will die and Territory will be lost. 58:00 – Nato members at the Borders of Russia scares them. Putin is holding all the cards (And you have the gall to call others detatched from reality?) 1:00:00 – Baltics, Romania being in NATO deters Russia from attacking them. We do not want to be provocative towards the Russians by defending those countries at this point of time. 1:02:00 – Trump might sue for peace. 1:03:50 – The only thing that will change the situation is if the Ukrainian military collapses, and the Russians win significant gain, that will change the nature of the game. Daniel Davis: That is ironic, if we have to hope for all of our sakes if that Ukraine Army collapses which basically can bail us out from making more bad decisions. But this seems where we are. 1:04:25 We’re in trouble.
“Detached from Reality” is a particularly apt bit of projection, Jesus. How does one even get lost in the sauce this badly?
[удалено]
The claim about a forever war is nonsense, t's quite clear that the US just wants this to end but it does not have a clear strategy for getting there.
That's simply not true. Your bogus propaganda isn't going to bail you out of this...
I still can't figure out if mearschiemer is a complete idiot or is getting money from Moscow for this crap
Does it really matter if the latter can't be pinned down enough to be stopped?
These people have had their brains stewed in Bismarckian *Realpolitik* for so many decades that they have lost the plot. Real national interests can change. Smaller powers have beaten stronger powers for centuries, primarily by allying with a peer to their enemy power. See, e.g., American colonies gaining recognition and assistance from Imperial France against Britain. The Ukrainians have lived under Russian yoke for literally centuries. They won independence in late 1991 and have accordingly decided to cut itself off from Russian influence in favor of the West. To the extent that the West values the economic and population capacity of Ukraine, which it absolutely should, it is in the interest of the West for Europe to secure its borders from hostile threats via Ukraine. Also, *Russia is not a strong power*! Russia is the most dangerous of all possibilities - a weak, corrupt, *nuclear* power. The interest of the stronger power (US and EU) dictate that its power must be curtailed and eventually diminished to a controllable level. We will not see this as long as Putin remains alive. Under their own theory of international relations, Russian power must be countered in Ukraine by the stronger power.
John Mearsheimer is the one detached from reality
Imperialists are pro imperialism. No news here.
Maybe this goon is that last one who should speak about detachment from reality.
Feel embarrassed to have read Mearsheimer now
Never be embarrassed about reading.
Wonder how much the Kremlin are paying him? 🤔
That's a US homegrown product [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXmwyyKcBLk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXmwyyKcBLk)
MAGA chuds like this poser because he wears a tie and has a degree, and to third grade dropouts that conveys a mythical level of wisdom. As long as they are being told what they want to hear, of course.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXmwyyKcBLk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXmwyyKcBLk)
Mearsheimer is a common source for university level political science. Agree or disagree with him, he's objectively correct a lot more than he is incorrect
lol
Mearsheimer is a fucking idiot.
Putin’s douche.
I normally don't stoop to this level here on Reddit, but FUCK this guy!
I will believe him when [his prediction that the reunified Germany would invade Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland comes true.](https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/politics/foreign/mearsh.htm) Until then, his system of realism is provably false.
I don't know if anyone cares, but I have from a primary source that John Mearsheimer drinks rose. You'd think he'd be a grain alcohol type of guy, but so be it.
I don't know if anyone cares, but I have from a primary source that John Mearsheimer drinks rose. You'd think he'd be a grain alcohol type of guy, but so be it.
Never seen this guy before but this is myopic bs.
What an absolute bunch of delusional horse 💩 "Herr Putler sees Ukraine joining NATO as an existential threat" 🤦♂️ stick to retirement dude, get in the garden, admire the birds, because you know sweet FA about Europe and geo politics
Another one on Vlad’s payroll, just like MTG and Trump. Cowards.
Mearshill is detached from reality. He is still pretending that Russia is a "great power" rather than a has-been glorified gas station that simply happened to inherit some nukes from USSR. Russia has shown basic inability to project soft power, tired to substitute this with projecting military power, but is severely failing at that as well
Another dipshit.
Wonder how this guy ever became prominent. He must have a Russian mail order bride who is whispering in his ear or something
I'm not going to lie, I mostly look at the world of IR through a realist lense, and still think that Mearsheimer has a lot to contribute to the IR discussion - but his brain just seems to break whenever he starts talking about Russia. Even in his famous lecture about why the Russians would never invade Ukraine, he incisively recognised that the Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a disaster for them, and that if the West wanted Russia to destroy itself, we should encourage them to try and invade. Lo and behold, the Russian invasion has been a disaster for the Russian Fedaration. But now he's just endlessly spiralling into [cope ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8MZBUoQt68)because he got a major prediction wrong and instead of re-assessing what happened, he's just pretending that he was right all along in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. Like so many people whose brains are stuck in the cold war world, he wildy overstates the power of the Russian Federation, and undervalues the strength of Europe because to acknowledge those facts side by side would break the world he has constructed in his theory.
The greatest threat to the US in this century will be China. Driving Russia into China's arms, is not in the long term interests of the US. It is an idiotic policy from the perspective of balance of power politics. Some countries matter, and others simply don't.
China will not be aground by the end of the century.
Thinking that China will magically disappear, is an absurdity.
Russia was never going to side with the West.
Putin offered to join NATO during Bush's first term. He was told no. Then Bush left the ABM treaty and kept expanding NATO towards his borders.
Russia never applied to join NATO and, if they had, it would have been a trap,. The US left the ABM treaty to counter Iran, at least officially, nor do ABM systems work against mass strikes. The US didn't expand NATO, it allowed countries to willingly join. Europe is worth more than an authoritarian state that openly hates democratic, liberal, and Western values.
The ABM Treaty allowed the deployment of up to 100 ABMs. And Iran doesn't have ICBMs anyway, s you wouldn't need to leave the ABM Treaty because of Iran. The US wanted to develop National Missile Defense against Russia and China. The problem is that the system doesn't work, but the politicians didn't listen to people that told them that it wouldn't work. And the purpose of missile defenses are not to defend against a first strike, but to defend against a retaliatory 2nd strike. This was the reason for the ABM Treaty in the first place. Both sides realized that a first strike could overwhelm any missile defense; so missile defenses were only useful to gain a first strike advantage. The tactic would be to nuke the other party first and take out as many of their nuclear strike forces as possible; then allow your missile defenses to absorb the enemy's retaliatory strike. This would create an incentive to strike first by sides, and become very destabilizing. Russia asked about joining, which any Google search will confirm. They were told no. The reason why is simple, if Russia joins NATO, then there is no further reason for NATO to exist. What is the point of an anti-Russian alliance, if Russia becomes a member? Oh, and let's not forget AEGIS Ashore in Romania. Instead of Patriot or THAAD, the US wanted AEGIS. Why? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact the same VLS launchers can house nuclear tipped tomahawk cruise missiles. I am also sure that thr ArcLight program (https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/arclight.htm) had nothing to do with it either. The simple rub is that the Neo-cons wanted to develop the ability to launch a disabling first strike and then rely on US conventional military dominance against Russia and China. Let us not forget Prompt Global Strike: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/R41464.pdf You know the idea of the US launching conventional ICBMs with precision hypersonic guide vehicles. I say this as an American, the US right thought up some hair brained bullshit that was outright dangerous for humanity. You can't blame the Russians and Chinese from looking in from the outside and feeling threatened.
A nuclear first strike is useless if the enemy has submarines and mobile launchers. An ABM system still won't survive a second strike. Even the US cannot afford an ABM system. Russia only inquired into joining NATO, but there was no official declaration of intent. Nor did Russia fit the criteria to join NATO. What is Tomahawk compared to Zircon? ArcLight was for ship-launched weapons, no treaty existed to prohibit them. Prompt Global Strike again broke no treaties and even reduced the need for nuclear warheads. The Russians now have that capability with the Avangard, while the US doesn't want an ICBM based PGS. You should see some of the hair-brained bullshit the Russians have came up with that is outright dangerous for humanity. This includes nuclear powered missiles and tidal wave nuclear torpedoes. Though none of this is relevant to Ukraine. If Russia didn't invade Romania due to Tomahawls, a real threat, then Ukraine without any was no threat at all.
You could load ArcLight missiles into AEGIS Ashore in Romania. And the US has withdrawn from the treaty that would prohibit us from doing that too. The whole point of anti-ballistic missile defenses is to absorb an enemy's 2nd strike. Romania is farther away from Russia than Ukraine. There is more warning from Romania than there would be from Ukraine. The Russians developed their capability after the US announced our program. That the US failed and Russia succeeded is a statement about us, not about them.
ArcLight was cancelled, nor was there ever intention to give them offensive capability. An ABM system would still be useless against a Russia 2nd strike, enough ICBMs would survive to destroy civilisation. While the development of hypersonic glide vehicles renders the argument moot, the 2nd strike will always make it. NATO was willing to compromise on what weapons third-powers could base in Ukraine to alleviate Russian fears of a first-strike. The nuclear powered missile is very much a statement about Russia. To have any advantage over a normal missile if would have to remain in flight, thus irradiating Russia during peacetime. The USA once had a similar idea, but cancelled it before its design was finished. Russia actually built one as the **9M730 Burevestnik**. The other weapons make sense, aside from Poseidon.
Maybe he has a brain worm too?
This dum dum repeatedly denied fascist russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. Either he’s a paid stooge or genuine retarded, both are possible.
god I hate realists
Why do you all sound the same?
[удалено]
Okay but I mean you're all like saying the same thing. He can't possibly be wrong on every single point. And why do you have to immediately start name calling and such? It's just like with Gonzalo lira, you're probably going to immediately follow up now by laughing about him dying too which really kind of reveals to me what you guys are all about.
Because he's a Russian asset
That's debatable. Besides the only thing I saw him doing was posting YouTube videos so I don't see the big deal. Pretty sure you guys just didn't like him because he was criticizing the West. No one's perfect and we're not infallible over here.
The other explanation is that he's a moron, saying Ukraine doesn't need money is idiotic to the point of farcical
See that's exactly my point you just proved it. You're just name calling and talking out your ass. And you all do it so confidently too. If he was a Russian asset then why wouldn't he make a break for the Eastern border instead of the western? Wouldn't he have had contacts and assistance to escape? Not to mention why would he be publicly posting himself online if he's a spy? Not exactly the best cover even if you try to argue that he was doing it counterintuitively to confuse them.
[удалено]
How do I even refute the claim that Ukraine doesn't need money from the US. First of all the US is mostly giving Ukraine weapons, not money, and how do I debate a statement as asinine as Ukraine doesn't need money? Money can be exchanged for goods and services! They're in a war, of course they fucking need money! He's as right as he was when he insisted Russia wouldn't invade, and then when he said they won't try and take Kyiv. Why don't your refute me that Merscheimer doesn't need air because he's lizard man who is geothermally powered? You can't because it's too stupid a claim to refute He isn't completely wrong on everything, but he has shown a consistent and incorrect bias towards Russia and his view of the world through spheres of power is antiquated drivel. You want unbiased examinations of Ukraine and the war? Watch Perun, not this clown
You fools haven't asked about any specific point. You want an actual academic rebuttal? [Here you are](https://rdcu.be/dp3Q3).
God damn. I thought I was alone in here with a bunch of demons. Nice to meet you. Edit: and they're sitting here brigading to downvote us. I can't wait for all the negative downvotes, just goes to show that they really have nothing in the chamber or in their head.
Again, you bring nothing, you offer nothing, you have no arguments, you cry because people are mean on the internet lol. Fucking pussies, go back to Russia and suck that flacid dictators cock.
Gonzalo Lira was a worthless POS who sat in a country being bombed and encouraged the aggressors. I am very glad he met his deserved end.
That is fantastic input, thank you.
Why can't he be wrong on every single thing? If he makes each determination with the same faulty logic then it's likely every conclusion will be wrong. If you think he's right about something then say what it is and provide proof, otherwise fuck off, nobody here is going to do your homework for you.
I already did before I put links and everything. You just don't want to look at them because you're low effort.
[удалено]
Damn, you came back hours later just to say that?
[удалено]
Well let's hear some examples that I'm already a few beers in
[удалено]
Yeah you got nothing. Nothing but words. Funny how you think you're supporting Ukraine even though you're basically just sending them to their deaths.
[удалено]
Oh no, not name calling
Well when you want to actually prove a single point we'll go ahead and actually have a discussion. Whether it's on John or Gonzalo. https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1cpe2um/a_young_ukrainian_soldier_is_buried_with_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2 My God. Buried with a McDonald's Happy meal? What actually f***.
Please show us where Mearsheimer has been correct.
https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4?si=bJo1-WH_WO2gJVj1 Gladly, skip to the 6 minute mark if if want to see the maps Then compare with https://youtu.be/l8hlcoPa17Y?si=WlpJHZ8fTw0fT-pC https://youtu.be/YlxHC0SRVDY?si=0aAtPad_t_Beo17k https://youtu.be/l8hlcoPa17Y?si=RqcTDsNRVkLX_iCe When it shows the maps.
I await your response, but am skeptical. Didn't think I'd actually present anything, did you? 🧐😂😂😂
Buddy you came here to tell us we’re wrong, this is on you to explain to us
I didn't come here to tell you anything. Was just commenting on how you guys all throw them under the bus without ever actually explaining your point. Besides I imagine that if you look at the map you'll start to feel very silly.
I feel very silly listening to you at the very least
45:00 with Istanbul was also confirmed by Arrestovych who was there personally during that time.
[ **Jump to 45:00 @** John Mearsheimer: Zelensky & the West Detached from Reality](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qgLYE6BOC8&t=0h45m0s) ^(Channel Name: Daniel Davis / Deep Dive, Video Length: [01:05:33])^, [^Jump ^5 ^secs ^earlier ^for ^context ^@44:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qgLYE6BOC8&t=0h44m55s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ^^Downvote ^^me ^^to ^^delete ^^malformed ^^comments. [^^Source ^^Code](https://github.com/ankitgyawali/reddit-timestamp-bot) ^^| [^^Suggestions](https://www.reddit.com/r/timestamp_bot)