Honest, straightforward assessment. Prof. Meirshiemer is obviously more open because I suspect he is older and has less to lose compared to Prof. Steven, who comes across as somewhat guarded to challenge prevailing consensus. But both respectable voices of reason

A superb and cogent discussion - thanks for posting.

Thank you for a thorough analysis on Foreign policy.

gorgeous discussion between 3 smart guys.

Great podcast with these 2 experts. Nice to hear intelligent conversation amid all the chaotic superficial news coverage my the main stream media.

@hkusno99

Жыл бұрын

To me only Stephen make more senses, the Other Prof M, he Just having man love with Putin… 36:00 he keep saying about Putin seeking written guarantee ukr will not join NATO, and that USA should give that guarantee as if the other members of NATO has no say and implying back room deal to cut out everyone including ukr from determining the event. Also as if Ukraine cannot determine what they can do, they have to obey Russia and USA… he might be realist but he is a mafioso realist type professor with much love for Putin because Putin is his godfather

@catharinawestermark5792

Жыл бұрын

How come these two experts don´t mention Aleksandr Dugin, a philospher who greatly influenced Putin and the army in Russia to "make Russia great again" and Ukraine is first on the list of countries to conquer and include into the "greater Russia".

I ADMIRE Prof. John Mearsheimer. His rigorous logic. His lucid presentation

@Kamien882

Жыл бұрын

Especially if you want to be invaded by Russia. He is your guy!

@dr.strangelove824

Жыл бұрын

@@Kamien882 I fear no one🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲

@hkusno99

Жыл бұрын

Prof Mearsheimer is a Putin lackeys that keep pedaling argument blaming western world and NATO even after all that has happened. He now double down on his bad theory instead of correcting… self ego and hubris prevented him from seeing the light

@Paerigos

Жыл бұрын

He just constanly keeps ignoring how much virtually every non-russian person in central and eastern Europe loathes Russia after the 3 centuries of their attempts to dominate over us. virtually everyone from Finland to Georgia utterly hates Russian influnece in our countries. And we dont care for his "realism" or logic - being friendly with russia only ends with missery and poverty like Belarus. We dont care for that.

@dr.strangelove824

Жыл бұрын

@@hkusno99 and you're a nato lackey

Always great listening to this guys.

thank you for this opportunity to keep learning on how (or not) we could save our humanity

I learnt a lot from these political science professors. They nailed the roots of this INSANITY of the US and Europe.

@dougrobertson555

Жыл бұрын

With help from...me.

@geoeconomics5629

Жыл бұрын

Of the US and vassals

@guyfromthe80s92

Жыл бұрын

Russian invasion of Chechnya. Russian invasion of Dagestan. Ingushetia civil war. Russian invasion of Georgia. Annexation of Crimea. Incursions into Donetsk and Lugansk.

@geoeconomics5629

Жыл бұрын

@@guyfromthe80s92 USA invaded 72 countries Russia invaded 2

@guyfromthe80s92

Жыл бұрын

@@geoeconomics5629 what does that has to do with Ukraine? And no, Russia invaded far more than two countries. Russia has invaded about all its neighbours except for Norway. It’s called the Russian empire and Soviet Union. Learn rudimentary history.

As good as it gets - thanks for having these intelligent men on your program.

Great podcast! John Mearsheimer is the best❤, Measheimer speaks like a prophet. Stephen Walt a smart mind but his views are mostly Western-oriented. the world has evolved

@natbirchall1580

Жыл бұрын

Peter the Great

Cheers Mate. I do too agree with these two learned Gentleman.

Great podcast!

Superb analysis 😊🏴‍☠️

Great conversation. If only more people listened we might have a more ch safer

51:54 cavalier is the exact word. i take part in a few left leaning twichpol chats, and many of the people around my age group and younger (20-30) really genuinely believe that nuclear use is impossible, mainly quoting variations of the principle of mutually assured destruction, but failing at all to take into account how far nuclear warfare has evolved, the asymmetrical nature of conflict, the changing geopolitical scene, very specific hotspots such as Ukraine, Kashmir etc. it's a real problem for anyone born outside of or towards the end of the Cold War I think.

@theetiologist9539

Жыл бұрын

Eric Weinstein often says that he thinks that we need to go back to above ground nuclear testing, just one every few years, just to remind the world that these things still exist and that we aren't out of the woods yet. Dan Carlin has a great podcast called Destroyer of Worlds that goes over the Cuban Missile Crisis and his thesis is basically that the human race is in an experiment to see whether or not we can handle our weapons technology, and the only way the experiment ends is if we fail. I think it's very important for people of our age group to go read the history and see the pictures, understand what real war looks like. Speaking of asymmetrical, it's possible that the US really did finish a better version of the Star Wars program. I wouldn't be surprised if we have a defense system that is high tech enough to stop all nukes from hitting our cities. That itself has the potential to be the most globally destabilizing technology released since the nuke was invented.

Thank you for inviting monumental professors like Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer who remind me of my professor Jeffery Sachs another monumental genius visionary. Could you perhaps debate on the next imminent conflict ( for oil and gas ) between Israel and Lebanon while Israel is seizing the opportunity that everyone is busy with the Ukraine war to explore oil and gas off the coast of Lebanon. This could escalate into a regional war that could be devastating to many countries and people. The EU and Washington should step in and make sure this issue is addressed fairly. Many American Jews like myself hope for a real cooperative future based on respect and fairness toward the people of Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and the region since they all live on the same continent.

@svenkateswaran7516

Жыл бұрын

Well, directly contiguous borders in this case.

I came here for John Mearsheimer .

I am agree with profesor Jhon analysis,,, it's realistik

i got a dozen of ads for this 67 minutes .. they are killing me 😅

excellent

In the Korean conflict, neither side won reference John's comment, "one side has to win."

@mladendjukic1061

Жыл бұрын

Neither side won? US won, they got South Korea, as their puppet state, profiting ever since. They created new consumer driven capitalistic state that lost it's culture, religion, tradition. South Korea is now a high tech society , heavily brainwashed by western version of history and social politics, music, news, games. I've lived there for some time, had a job there, and I can tell you that US won that war and Korean people, both South and especially North lost the war and lost their identity.

Not correct that the US "did not have a confrontational policy towards Russia until the events of February 2022". I clearly remember the NATO (= US) stance, the multiple "sanctions" against Russia, starting from the Magnitsky Act, the freezing of trade and other relations because of Hrondokovski, not to mention accusations against Russia for Syria, and many other instances. NATO had declared Russia the number 1 enemy long before the military actions in Ukraine. (throwing the Russian delegation out of NATO H.Q. in Brussels was several months before the Ukraine invasion, also)

@angryyellowduck799

Жыл бұрын

I'm pretty sure he said " no confrontational attitude till 2014, after the crimean episode".

Divide et Impera !!

There is nothing like benevolent hegemony it is like good devil

this is good about causes, but since russians are clearly winning comprehensively (contrary to what all three seem to believe), most of this discussion is redundant. when westerners speak about war lasting for a long time and end in stalemate , they forget that ukraine does not have unlimited manpower, even if western arms will replace arms they lost ( which is also not the case ). and there is not much signs of a widespread insurgency or even unrest in areas under russian control.

@itssanti

Жыл бұрын

Exactly that's the reason why Ukraine is no Afghanistan.

@jbrown6367

Жыл бұрын

Russia does not have unlimited manpower either

@Big-guy1981

Жыл бұрын

Ukraine can rely on unlimited foreign manpower aka mercenaries.

@sitting_nut

Жыл бұрын

​@@jbrown6367 russians are using less than 200000 military is ukraine (of their regular military about 1.5 million ) and in reality there are about 100k + donbass miltia at any one time. and their strategy is aimed at minimizing their own casualties. that why for instance they are not attacking ukrainian entrenchments in donbass head on, but pounding them with artillery and encircling them. so russians have plenty to spare if needed but they wont be needed.

@sitting_nut

Жыл бұрын

@@Big-guy1981 hope you are being sarcastic given the relatively limited number ( about 6000 in total at thew highest ) , poor performance, and scale of desertions of mercenaries

The people you can't criticize have their fingerprints all over the US response to this ordeal.

@ningen7736

Жыл бұрын

International finance capitalists?

@bub6871

Жыл бұрын

Imperialists, bankers, and the military industrial complex.

@pantsmonsterv6

Жыл бұрын

Anti whites

@SSs-ch4ey

Жыл бұрын

@@ningen7736 oy vey

@joythought

Жыл бұрын

What? slow to get long range weapons to Ukraine which is wasting Ukrainian lives and territory? Yes too slow. Or let's get in there to help.

Terrific discussion. Thanks to all involved. This was, I understand, recorded May 10. A lot has changed since then. Not at all obvious Russia is losing as of June 11, at any rate.

@evolassunglasses4673

Жыл бұрын

Russia is only getting stronger, Ukraine was only winning on Tik Tok.

@maryhuckaby2239

Жыл бұрын

Why do you think that? All evidence I have access to says the opposite: Russia is winning.

@tinatang1

Жыл бұрын

Really? They have captured the Donbas and are focusing on Karkiv now.

Two great scholars,enjoyed their Israeli lobby book

@ibadinbanderos4264

Жыл бұрын

I love how those brilliant guys can simply explane very difficult things.

I can’t agree more with Mearsheimer’s remark that a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union must be avoided at all costs. But one thing that now strikes me as complete madness is that a possible nuclear war between the US and China does not seem to worry anyone, at least in the US. The US government thought, and still thinks, that Russian missiles installed in Cuba are intolerable but never thinks of China’s feelings while sending mobile nuclear missiles, carried on warships, to patrol the Taiwan Strait on a regular basis. A military confrontation between the US and China in the Taiwan Strait will more than likely beget a nuclear war because neither side will be willing to swallow a defeat in a conventional war. The US relies on the UN Law of the Sea to justify such patrols, being a non-signatory to this law and confident enough to veto any missiles in Cuba relying on no international law.

Much as I respect Mearsheimer's identifying the US provocations as the cause of the Russia - Ukraine war, I find his overall perspective hopelessly naive. How can you discus American war policy without ever making reference to the permanent war constituency within the US? After all what other country in world history has ever announced a "permanent war?" Now that that permanent war has supposedly been terminated, here comes Generals Milley and Stoltenburg announcing that the Ukraine may well stretch to the horizon. So, who does that suggest is pulling the strings of American war policy? Why does Mearsheimer never address the American military industrial complex as the driving force behind continuous war while the bellicose foreign policy think-tankers merely provide the window-dressing?

@besearchingforwisdom6267

Жыл бұрын

Never? I don't agree with that, even during this conversation they both talked about the motivation... isn't that what they were talking about at the 10-13 minute mark?

@TheCommono

Жыл бұрын

I don't understand - why should he "address the American military industrial complex as the driving force" when he has already something else, i.e. the enormous need for 'security' (which doesn't mean of course the total absence of war) for which your "military industrial complex" is merely a tool or mean? The US defends and needs to defend the 'business' it has with the rest of the world and which makes it wealthy. Wealthy people have a greater need for security...

@haroldbridges515

Жыл бұрын

@@TheCommono Very naive. There is a substantial war constituency in the US that profits enormously from the wars that the US engages in. So, a substantial motivation for these wars is profit, not security. Ukraine for example has no security implications for the US. But the economic implications are enormous. Most of the $6 to $8 trillions that the US spent in Afghanistan and Iraq ended up in the pockets of American weapons companies such as Boeing, but also Microsoft, etc. Philosophy and policy don't play the determinative role that Mearsheimer evidently believes. Self-interest does.

@Nowhere-from

Жыл бұрын

@@haroldbridges515 NATO was a lot about keeping the business pumping for the military complex as you said. But you still need to see the big picture the globalists wanted to impose in the world, the one described by Prof. Mearsheimer. It doesn't contradict self-interest at all. They go hand in hand. But today there's the addition Prof. Mearsheimer mentions, the federal American government has to keep face on a conflict that it actively sought for years, regardless of party affiliation or power branch. Politicians are always making promises, but this is one where they sure seem bent on keeping, annihilating Russia. The democrats in particular do hold deep resentments against Russia as an scapegoat after their idol candidate got humiliated by a jerky newbie. It's not only Prof. Mearsheimer who says so, others like journalist Glenn Greenwald think so too.

@haroldbridges515

Жыл бұрын

@@Nowhere-from Mearsheimer does make the claim that the US policy was driven by goal of exporting liberal democracy around the world. The data doesn't support that. The US knowing supported dictatorships and/or coups against democratically-elected governments in Viet Nam, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Iran, Venezuela, Grenada, the Phillippines, etc. Mearsheimer, as an academic policy expert, emphasizes political goals as the driver of US foreign policy without ever accounting for the economic interests of stakeholders. I have news for Prof. Mearsheimer: it is a material world.

From global politics to AIPAC & Israel, Professors Walt & Mearsheimer cover it all. They are brilliant and the tribe can't use the "anti you know what" to taint the information.

Is this new or just putting up something recorded a while ago ?

@agoodchow

Жыл бұрын

Ending part of this talk suggested this conservation took place about 2-3 weeks into the war ( Putin gave his first speech addressing the view tot Russia public ) , so sometime around early/mid March.

I can surely that had the Brush admiration taken the views of John and Stephen the realists in middle east and avoided the misadventure of Iraq the world would not have vengeful experience terrible of Islamic terrorists the middle class that was persuing an objective based political activities wiped out or marganlised the Arab Spring must be seriously analysed by western analysts your discussion is very much relevant.Both the gentlemen are realists.

Firstly, let me thank John Mearsheimer & Stephen Walt and Hidden Forces for interesting discussion. Let me make a quick notes about some statements. The US war equipment enforcement in Ukraine will extend this conflict in time and in damage for civilians. I wouldn't be so optimistic about this solving the conflict to the West victory over Russia. This is a big underestimating and misunderstanding of this conflict and Russian ability to fight for its interests. Western analysis of this conflict is concentrating on its perspective of the tension in this region. Many sensitive aspects of it stay in the gray vision zone. Ukraine is not only a strategic area for Russia's security but de facto is a divided nation with common historical, cultural, demographic and linguistic ties, which with Western intention became an "anti-Russian Russia". The violation of the rights of the Russian population, discrimination and direct physical threat towards Russian population in Ukraine is a major motive for Russian defense of Eastern part of Ukraine. This is why I wouldn't put hopes on the quick defeat of Russia by war equipment and economical sanctions because the logic of this conflict has a long external and internal history. This is by far is not a conquest of Ukraine by crazy Putin like it is shown in the West.

Mearsh is the man!!

1:06:00… Absolutely. Those who drive American politics don’t care what you or we think… we are hostages.

Best IR theorists in the West, by far.

How could two intelligent experts talk for over an hour on the reasons for this war, and not mention oil and gas!! the power politics of energy is one of the main reasons for the conflict.

@nerzenjaeger

Жыл бұрын

Do you still believe that the Iraq war was about oil, too?

@MsThePrettiest

Жыл бұрын

@@nerzenjaeger if not about oil than about what? Oh, currency. Saddam wanted to trade but not for $

@m3tamonk3y4

Жыл бұрын

It's a gaping hole in their positions on the conflict.

@dragonade85

Жыл бұрын

Simple. It doesn't fit Mearsheimer's theories.

@anthonyrossi2001

Жыл бұрын

@@nerzenjaeger YES!!

I'm ready for the apocalypse. I even canceled my dental appointment. And, believe me, those are hard to get [[Mearsh👑]]

@blessyou163

Жыл бұрын

=D

@patriziacasagrande3833

Жыл бұрын

Consider it money saved, however money is losing value fast.

@patriziacasagrande3833

Жыл бұрын

@@blessyou163 the force of the example the USA makes rather than military force. There is the obvious problem stated clearly . The USA has been a poor example of democratic leadership and government and society. Not too many what to emulate the USA today. Years ago , the USA had this positive image even though it did. ot deserve it. Trump and the Republicans have allowed the world a peak behind the curtain.

@patriziacasagrande3833

Жыл бұрын

If Russia is weak, and it is long known to be weak. It has a military a tenth the size, and technical strength of the USA, not to mention NATO, and an economy the size of Italy or California. So why the need to fortify Ukraine as a bulwark againstRussia.? . Clearky a waste of time and resources where as China is growing faster than the USA economically.

@sheilawade433

Жыл бұрын

@@patriziacasagrande3833 The majority of Americans are not Trump MAGA Republicans in name only. They are ruining the US good will abroad. The next generation should not carry the burdens of the past. Stop dragging them down. All dictators and detractors aside and you will see US and the world do much better.

The use of strategic nuclear weapons is regulated by procedures that prevent it from happening by accident. The public knows much less or almost nothing about the systems to ensure the same for smaller nuclear bombs and missiles. This also applies to me and I would like to know more, but the question is whether certain armies want this to become public information as well. However, there is an airplane that, by its very design, puts the pilot in a state of crisis. This design is not primarily focused on basic functionality, then on ergonomics and then on aesthetics, as should be the case with all technical devices handled by man, and which naturally applies to weapons. In this aircraft, the design itself is primary and designed to gradually affect the consciousness of the pilot. That plane can’t do much and at the same time is very advanced and expensive. Someone who does not understand the construction of aircraft has the impression that he does not have much maneuverability. Maybe his pilot knows they’re at a satisfactory level, but he probably can’t get rid of his instinctive first impression of him either. Americans have their own ‘code’ names for Russian weapons and vice versa. I don’t know if that applies to the MIG and F series aircraft as well. Probably not. I call that plane 'Itch', however. Because it seems to give the pilot an itch to use a long-range missile. Even that feeling can be carried over to the next incarnation or incarnations, until the pilot unexpectedly comes to a state beyond self-control. It means that he can then be not, for example, an American, but a member of any air force. At the time when this construction was first made, the two main constructors were the English, although they needed the help of those who knew something about aircraft constructions. In front of more than 39,000 incarnations, it happened that the former pilot of that F plane incarnated in Russia. His professors at the military academy were so impressed with his abilities, including motivation, that they reduced critical observation toward him compared to other students. In short, flying over Russia that ‘itch’ appeared and it was not possible to curb it. He knew he was going to launch a missile with a tactical nuclear charge, and he had two minutes of subjective balance to do so in the least dangerous way. He fired a long-range missile at a close target and no one was killed. Only a few thousand people had to be evacuated and the area remained uninhabitable for a long time. He immediately informed the base, speaking deliberately strangely but so that it was clear that it was a mental problem and that he was now able to control himself. However, he landed on the road as soon as possible and said he was waiting next to the plane. The psychologist who came to investigate the case first watched recordings of conversations with him from the recruitment and training phase, and then directly with him. The pilot stated that he cared not only to avoid human casualties, but that it was important that he failed to restrain himself and that he actually fired the rocket, because only then would he be taken seriously, which is important because the problem is really big. And it was important to warn that a similar case could happen under more dangerous circumstances or in a part of the world where it is by no means good to happen. It is interesting that the Russians considered him a hero because of that. Not only because they are Russians, but also because that is understandable. I saw then that he would be the first man in this time to fly around or nearly fly around planet Earth. And so the likelihood that we won’t forget that itchy design problem is even increased. And I wrote the song ‘Radio Gaga’ about that event. I said everything in the main and I would not analyze the details of what was said. Those two constructors are now Englishmen and archaeologists. I saw Gagarin, of course in Zagreb, incarnated. It can be said that although of British origin he probably became a Russian hero inadvertently. I guess he was a hero before. There are historians on the internet for whom the whole performance is designed to keep listeners away from the idea that the basics of world perception would be good to change, and especially not in a direction that would encompass the reality of reincarnation. Also, some historians and experts in the humanities do the same to a lesser extent and unintentionally. 27.6.2022.

The authors of the Israeli Lobby and the US Foreign Policy.

@mitchyoung93

Жыл бұрын

Brave men...after living thru the flak they took for that, taking a contrarian position on Ukraine is childs play.

I think way to many, most, Americans have a video game mentality when it comes to warfare

I don't think the US has considered human nature or human history very well

2 rock stars of ir

An interesting discussion between the two most renowned scholars of Realism in International Relations. One interesting takeaway is the response to the question of why the US was so hostile to Russia ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. As they point out, If the US foreign policy planners maintained a consistent realist logic they would have stopped the constant antagonising of Russia and worked to build closer co-operation with them to challenge China. Mearsheimer's answer is the US took the disastrous approach it did because of their disgust at Putin's homophobia and latent Russophobia of the American elite. But why would the American elite be Russophobic? Of course, someone like Mearsheimer can't answer this, but when you realise that elite is dominated by Jews with roots in Eastern Europe it makes more sense. The conclusion is the Judeo-American elite have pursued an irrational foreign policy contrary to American interests to satisfy their own ethnic emnity and opposition to Nationalism and social conservatism. This is a good example of why analysis of politics based on how people should behave have to be tempered with an observation of who elites are and what motivates them. Without understanding that the financial elites governing America care more about their ethnic and financial interests than they do for the preservation of the state they occupy, someone doing a Realist analysis of American foreign policy would be at a loss for how to explain America's policy toward Russia, as they would be to explain the Iraq war, the level of hostility to Iran, or the level of support for Israel. It is this kind of thinking that also provides bad analysis like the Iraq war being for oil (American oil companies opposed that war), or, as is also discussed here, the simplistic analysis popular in our own sphere that China must be controlled by the same interests as the West because of their massive investments there. As Mearsheimer and Walt point out, Western financiers did indeed believe that investing in China would bring about liberal democracy, but this was ultimately a miscalculation resulting from their liberal hubris and countered by the Chinese elites actual loyalty to the Chinese nation. Structural paradigms are useful for analysing state behaviour, but ultimately states are governed by people and groups that have their own interests, loyalties and ideology. Someone whose analysis discards these all too human motives and biases will never make sense of the past or the present. The guy who just assumes American foreign policy is dictated by whatever benefits the Zionists will have had far better predictive power over the last few decades than an IR scholar rigidly applying Realist logic to make sense of motives.

@mizan00007

Жыл бұрын

The conclusion is the Judeo-American elite have pursued an irrational foreign policy contrary to American interests to satisfy their own ethnic emnity and opposition to Nationalism and social conservatism. u r so right in my point of view...

@pantsmonsterv6

Жыл бұрын

@@mizan00007 👍 it’s from Keith Woods. You can find him still on KZread as of now.

@niccolomurtas3691

Жыл бұрын

fuck me I suspected this was a nazi channel when I heard the presentation somehow talking about "cultural wars" in what should have been an international relations discussion but really to go as far as your comment. Jesus.

true and scary.

Even though I agree on many points that prof. Mearsheimer makes, I do not think seeing the world like a giant racing field and label countries such as China and Russia as adversaries and competitors is a sound approach. Russian diplomats and delegates often address their international counterparts as colleagues and friends and there must be ways to resolve any disagreements between states other than by military means. The world is a house we must live in peacefully. We are all neighbors. U.S should stay out of Europe and let European work things out on their own. There are still enough people who have experienced horror of war in their countries not to go back to the terrible era.

What's the use and importance of large military US citizen lacks everything the citizens of other Developed Nations enjoys. Model transportation facilities, free educations, free Healthcare, affordable housing, model infrastructures and etc.

@hadrianh.9469

Жыл бұрын

1. Nothing is free. 2. If it's wasn't for the US Armed forces Russia would have invaded all of Eastern Europe, North Korea would have invaded South Korea, etc. and everyone in Europe would have received their schooling in German.

Take western hyperinflation and BRICS expansion into account, it is not hard to see who will be the ultimate winner.

My question is what if ukraine decide not to be a part of NATO, will then the war stop or not, will that be a loss for USA strategic paln?

Ironically alot of people that find John's views so compelling probably wouldn't like his politics much lol.

"Various ethnic groups with ties to Eastern Europe"

WHOA! HAROLD, MR. MEARSHEIMER'S PERSPECTIVE NAIVE? YOU MUST BE HUNTER'S JAM PARTNER! COME ON. Aum... 😎🙏🐒🐊🤣🤸‍♂️

The Israel lobby was an interesting read by Mearsheimer. Tired of US politicians serving Israels interests ahead of our own

It would end as Korean

Prof Mearsheimer has misjudged how East Asia feels about America's role in balancing China. He thinks East Asia wants America to show them the blueprint to deal with China. He may be an expert about Europe and US policy towards Russia but he lacks up to date information about Asia. The truth is most of Asia, especially ASEAN, are deeply engaged in trade with China, (even Japan and S Korea) which is their main trading partner in most cases, especially the ASEAN states. The only East Asian state that is really worried about China being hegemonic or imperialistic is Japan! Even India does not want a confrontational relationship with China. The ASEAN states have furthermore made it repeatedly clear that they do not want to be forced to take sides between China and the US. Yes there may be some border disputes with China but these border disputes: (1) must not interfere with their overall relationship with China (2) the border disputes are not bilateral with China but multilateral in nature (3) the disputes are being amicably settled and carefully managed by all the states involved. Besides, the Asian states have never been invaded/colonised by China. Instead all over them have been invaded, colonised and cruelly brutalised by Japan in WW2. They do not want Japan to become imperialistic again and do not welcome the US using Japan to threaten the stability in our region, which the US is doing by forming QUAD or using AUKUS to proliferate the use of nuclear weapons in the region. Lastly, China has been engaged in developing much needed infrastructure in Asia and most of Asia see Japan and Australia as becoming increasingly disruptive and destabilising in the region. We in Asia also see clearly what the US is doing in Taiwan as similar to what the US has been doing in Ukraine - arming Taiwan, using the current Taiwan government to threaten China and threatening China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. We see this as fearfully destabilising in our region. We had enjoyed peace, stabilty and growth after 1975 when the Vietnam war ended and the US was pivoting to the middle east. We may have feared the spread of communism from the 50s to the 70s but we do not fear communism anymore. We don't see Vietnam, Cambodia or China as intending to spread communism to our countries anymore. Thus, I think Prof Mearsheimer's understanding of Asia needs to be upgraded. Prof Mearsheimer will be a better foreign policy advisor to the US if he watches this video as a start to understanding China better: kzread.info/dash/bejne/jJdm3Ld6dLyroqg.html

@ozsharpener

Жыл бұрын

Even for Japan, they drastically increased direct investment in China in these 2 years. Mearsheimer is very delusional on this topic. He definitely has no idea what is going on in Asia and the global south. The reality is every country is trying their best to walk away from the rapidly inflating USD to avoid being drowned by the American sinking ship.

@wolfbirk8295

Жыл бұрын

USA trys to push India against China. Like the Britisch ruled the world 150 years ago. " Divide er impera". Hope the Leaders of this countries ( men or women) will recognize that. only together (!!) they can develop the Region and the Rest of the world...

米尔斯海默说的很有道理，但他这道嗑反反复复说了几十年了。自从有互联网开始，他那套话从来就没变过。

Those who control Eurasia control the World - J.H.Mackinder

The US erred in the 3 pronged effort Mearsheimer identified only on its emphasis of NATO membership for Ukraine. In fact, the formal, constitutional declaration of neutrality would have been a much better idea, signed in Geneva or (yesterday's) Helsinki for symbolic effect. The OTHER two prongs, however, are fundamental rights of self-determination and self-betterment due to the Ukranians. I would like to believe that if the US and EU formally backed permanent Ukranian neutrality, the 2nd two prongs could be achieved. But that is not certain. Russia would need to concede the right of Ukranians to manage their own economy and internal affairs in exchange for formal neutrality. Both sides would need to concede - no NATO on US side and no totalitarian meddling on Russia's side. With the right US leadership, the treaty mentioned above could be accomplished...it would involve mutually assured ballistic missile and airforce disarmament of Ukraine by Russia and US. This would then be followed by a major defense buildup of eastern Poland, but that would be a separate issue for later. Lastly, if Europe were to transform NATO into the European Defense Force, paid for and managed by the EU, that would change the balance of power for the good across the globe. I have long believed that this development will occur by 2100. One of the first clear signs to me of this tendency was the launch of the Galileo Geolocation satellite network. Mearsheimer famously underemphasizes coalitions...as the US spreads itself critically thin in Overextension as would-be global hegemon amid decades upon decades of gross underinvestment in human capital at home, Europe will exercise more influence as a distinct force within its international networks.

@jenniferlawrence2701

Жыл бұрын

I think color-revolutions are a bad idea, to be honest, and the US & other Western states should stop orchestrating them. Look how badly the Arab-Spring went, and look at the current tragedy in Ukraine. Color revolutions are sold as expressions of democracy, but in reality they are examples of foreign powers cynically undermining sovereignty and self-determination for their own ends. Russia's government sees the US & its allies doing social engineering & fomenting color-revolutions in neighboring countries and they rightly worry they will be next. So that's another one of the prongs that needs to go, in my opinion. For the final prong (EU membership), I agree, with the caveat that ideally Ukraine should be encouraged and allowed to have trade relationships with both the EU and Russia to avoid having to play favorites with either. For Ukraine, being in a tug-of-war between West & East is a disaster, as we can see, so strategic neutrality should be complimented with economic flexibility. Strategic & economic domains can never be truly separate.

@netizencapet

Жыл бұрын

@@jenniferlawrence2701 The only unacceptable outcome is that Ukraine be denied democracy for internal and economic affairs. I think formal neutrality and ballistic and airforce disarmament are a good compromise between Russia and US/NATO. I'm not ok with saying Ukraine should have to be limited futher especially in terms of economic relationships either with the EU or Russia. I believe the strategic tide has turned so that both sides are in a weak enough and strong enough position to make the neutrality and disarmament compromise possible. However, I think we KZreadrs have more sense in this regard than either the American or Russian leadership.

@jenniferlawrence2701

Жыл бұрын

@@netizencapet I don't doubt that Ukraine will try to join the EU. My argument is that if the EU really has Ukraine's best interest at heart, they shouldn't demand that Ukraine completely reject Russia economically as a condition of joining, because that is just going to get them in hot water with Russia again as it did in 2014. They should instead give Ukraine some wiggle-room to trade with both sides. But who knows, now that Russia has carved off the most resource-rich part of Ukraine (and most of their seas access) they might not care as much about Ukraine in the EU as they did in 2014. We'll see.

He may say US has no confrontation before 2014, I disagree. Ukraine is NATO outpost, with Nazi as a prison guard. NATO knew shit will hit the fan, but they do it anyway. What they not expect is for Russia to hit them back harder than they thought.

If these two told us the truth, they'd be living in a tent without healthcare.

Competition..bah...it is Collaboration..dude...be aware of the vibrations and consciousness of being.

Both speakers operate from the belief that the US is benevolent! Nothing can be further from the facts. John's comment that Russia wasn't considered an adversary seems incorrect. The installation of Aegis ashore in Poland and Romania is targeted at Russia, despite the disingenuous suggestion that they were aimed at Iran!

The USA foreign policy should be to promote economy benefits to its people. It is not necessary must be pro America, or pro socialist as long as it bring good development to its people is a good government. The Americans had no reason to bring down any government that does not support American foreign policy, if American can accept this simple logic than the world will have a happy living.

Most bizarre set of military conclusions given what’s happening on the ground.

@r64g

Жыл бұрын

Demetri clearly did not do his homework on the facts on the ground. He has been fooled by the main stream media on the battleground situation at Ukraine.

@jacobjorgenson9285

Жыл бұрын

The Duran Defence Politics Asia The New Atlas

@TheArdildo

Жыл бұрын

A Ukrainian adviser says two Russian bases in the occupied Kherson area have been smashed in a Ukrainian artillery attack. Alexei Arestovich said in his usual Friday interview that dozens of Russian soldiers, including two generals, were killed in the attack on Stara Zburivka, a village on the Dnipro River. He said that one general was a general in the FSB who is working on arranging a referendum in the region on joining Russia. Ukraine claims to have killed well over a dozen generals during the war, but only a few of the cases have been confirmed. Nor have the two in the latest attack been confirmed. Arestovich said at least 200 occupation soldiers, including several Arabs, probably from Syria, were killed in a similar attack on a Russian base in Chekhalove this week. He said it was the first time they had registered Arabs fighting the Russians in Ukraine.

@catocall7323

Жыл бұрын

@@TheArdildo meanwhile the Kiev government officially claims they are suffering 200 deaths a day and a major us general said clearly that there is no chance for a Ukraine victory.

@bub6871

Жыл бұрын

The Duran is one of the greatest independent news channels there is. No propaganda! They could be biased but it doesn't matter they read the news and tell it how it is.

The state department thinks that both nations and people are all interchangeable widgets that are the same. In fact there are profound both historical and DNA differences among both nations and people within nations. The values of the Europeans is not the same as the values of the Russians!

@KassandraFuria13

Жыл бұрын

Yes, Russians are reliable. I am German.

@mladendjukic1061

Жыл бұрын

Dumb and naive comment.

Both make an essential error, attributing their own scholar-background ideas to the decision-takers in the West. In fact do intelectuals offer justthe fig leaves for the reckless acting politicians, who think in totaly different categories. Just as a relatively harmless example being Clinton breaking for a first time with the assurances offered by the West to Russia for a little altruistic advantage in bringing the votes of the East-European minorities living in the USA. Any calculation based on such idealistic theories not inluding as a risk the wild card politicians always represent is doomed to fail.

The United States house of cards is about to fall.

Neither speaker appreciated the importance of the civil war in the ukraine these past eight years - Donbass is a word not mentioned

@raskolnikov1461

Жыл бұрын

Donbas has nothing to do with the USA. It is all RUSSIA!

@mohammedabdirrahmanrubblei9141

Жыл бұрын

The Theory of Realism is about the international system of states and its politics, not what happens in the internal politics of states. Hence why they are not talking about the scuffles of different competitors within Ukraine, orange v another colour or in the USA Republic v Democrats .

@rachedel-moctar4290

Жыл бұрын

John spoke about Ukraine following 2014.

disagree with professor mearsheimer that the confrontation between the us and russia began in feb 2014. it actually began in june 2013 when snowden appeared in moscow

@trumanhw

Жыл бұрын

No no, it was going on even longer than that ... look at the money the netherlands and State Dept was prepared to give "Ukraine" in 2013. Coups just take longer to prepare. We funded two TV STATIONS in winter 2013. You really think we work that fast? C'mon.

@anomanderrake3593

Жыл бұрын

Snowden was refused entry into any of the countries he wanted to go which is how he ended up in Russia. The conflict started with the first coup in 2004.

@danilodjurdjevic7436

Жыл бұрын

Not true.Confrontation began when U.S tried to do color revolution and western backed coup against Putin in 2011 during Moscow protests.

@jacobjorgenson9285

Жыл бұрын

Snowden had his US passport cancelled, while being in transit. Putin is a humanitarian

@dragonade85

Жыл бұрын

Russian far right groups have been calling for the annexation of Ukraine since the late 1990s.

too bad Leadership won't be listening to this podcast. Worse, too bad that Big Tech is making podcasts such as this illegal. Therefore we go happily towards Armegeddon.

@30:25. I doubt if Putin made any mistake about US capability or unwillingness to deploy US forces. What he did make a mistake was in judging Zelensky. But then the US too made the same mistake (hence the offer of a "ride"). Putin was also mistaken in thinking that an armored column headed towards Kiev would result in a total collapse of Ukrainian forces. And he was mistaken in believing in the competence of his army. Now that the Ukrainians are fighting with great resolution, the US, and the Europeans, have willingly - to use the speaker's phrase - "opened the sluice gates". In a dictatorship, more than in war, the truth is always a casualty. People will feed "bull" up the chain. Putin as an intelligence officer should have known that.

@kabeerharrythakur8288

Жыл бұрын

BS ..... the first casualty of war is the truth and MSM ensures that those in the West (incl your good self) bought the illogical narratives of conquering a nation the size of Ukraine within a month. What Putin did with his column of tanks heading for Kiyv was to tie down a huge amount military force from being deployed to the east and south of the country where the Russians made steady progress to date. The shock and awe sanction did NOT work at all and backfired onto Western's own economic system. The lists of Western false narratives have been unravelling and yet, here we are you still peddling the same.

@controversial1994

Жыл бұрын

The US gave nobody the opportunity to mistake its capabilities. It has fought a few wars in the past 20 years alone against adversaries without any advanced weapons whatsoever & lost every single one! Always amusing to watch instant 'Putin experts' giving 'Nopinions' about what Putin was thinking.

What happened to you john? Omg. How do u respond to peter zeihans views on the subject

mr. Walt is still reasoning on the basis of Russia losing the war.... and nelieving in the military superiority of the USA - so ridiculous

@0wninguplz

Жыл бұрын

Yup if they had such a powerful military they would have joined. But they realized Russia is the world's number 1 land power

@agoodchow

Жыл бұрын

Ending part of this talk suggested this conservation took place about 2-3 weeks into the war ( Putin gave his first speech addressing the view tot Russia public ) , so sometime around early/mid March.

@chubascomohd2688

Жыл бұрын

Western alliance propaganda is the best.

@markmcguffin873

Жыл бұрын

​@@0wninguplz No pal. If the US / NATO put boots on the ground in Ukraine, there would be open conflict with Russia - which would almost invariably lead to world war three - an outcome which would ideally be avoided.

@0wninguplz

Жыл бұрын

@@markmcguffin873 no shit sherlock

I don't understand how the war in Ukraine has shown how weak Russia is militarily. I think it's quite the opposite. The Ukraine military is/was a formidable adversary: large in numbers, equipped to high standards, trained by the US, UK, and others, it had large numbers of tanks and airplanes, anti-air systems, it is coordinated using the best inteligence provided by the US using satelites, it has large support from western countries who replenish to some extent the losses in equipment includind thousands of foreign fighters, etc..,etc... How long should it take Russia to defeat such army to be considered militarily strong? To what are we comparing this to? To the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan? The biggest threat to US and it's allies in Iraq and Afghanistan was the use of IED....that is...the enemy had to make it's own bombs....homemade bombs planted by part-time fighters...Is this to what we are comparing the Ukraine war to? It seems, despite all the media propaganda, that Russia is defeating the combined efforts of the "colective west" through one of their best proxies. If the side that is winning is weak it must mean that the side that it's losing (NATO) is even weaker.

@siamcharm7904

Жыл бұрын

yes, and russia has only deployed a small piece of their 2 million man army and only limited weapons.

@democracylives314

Жыл бұрын

No it just means that we don’t provide Ukraine with what it really needs just to get by!!

@inzhener2007

Жыл бұрын

The Z army was regarded as 2nd top army after the US, while Ukrainian army was regarded as "the most corrupt and incompetent army in Europe". The best intelligence US and UK generals had attested the Ukr army as "it would loose their capital Kyiv in 72-96 hours after the invasion" in December 2021 and January 2022. The weapons the US and UK had provided before the war were only for gorilla wars, not heavy weapons. The Ukraine army removed the Z army from the north of Ukraine (end of March 2022) before first heavy weapons came.

@bassgrinder

Жыл бұрын

@@inzhener2007 that only tells you how wrong the Intelligence was. It took several weeks to take baghdad on 2003 and the Iraqi army was much weaker that Ukraines. Also, you are assuming that taking Kiev was an objective.

@inzhener2007

Жыл бұрын

@@bassgrinder you said it was "the best intelligence". That best intelligence made three mistakes in a year: the Afgan army didn't resist Taliban for years, Ukraine didn't fall in weeks, Putin didn't want to take Kyiv then. What's the use of that best intelligence? It's been 16w since the invasion, has the 2 top army taken the Donbass? Not, instead, it lied and went on taking non-Donbass regions. Also, what's your evidence that it didn't want to take Kyiv? Is the Ukrianian army not the most corrupt army selling all the given arms on the black market and giving everything not destroyed over to the Z army?

Let EU fix their own problems

Japan was basically designed by the Americans as liberal democracy….but in 1980s when it came to challenge the American economic dominance,look what the Americans did To Japan …. And why Japan has the longest recessions? Rule based international order? In other words,that is American imperialism…….

@geoeconomics5629

Жыл бұрын

When you are No.1 You make the rules Where have you been ? This is why the USA does not want to lose the No.1 world power position

Realism needs to be taught in old schools instead of this nationalist claptrap about founding fathers and honest Abe

What makes you think that russia and usa's relationship detioriated? There is a war in Ukraine after all, and russia is leading it. Seems like these countries never had a problem with war when Russia invaded German or when Europeans were colonizing other countries?

What if the US wanted the Ukraine War to exhaust Russia.

@marion4549

Жыл бұрын

Good question!

@Giorginho

Жыл бұрын

Thats true

@superfreiheit1

Жыл бұрын

@@Giorginho Its just a hypothese. Be carefull with your wishfull thinking

I think the US needs to maintain a consistent foreign policy unaffected by election

@jenniferlawrence2701

Жыл бұрын

Don't worry, it has.

Does John understand what the EU is? And also hasn't it, which also includes the Catholic Church, always been a problem within the United States Government? Two questions for John.

@mladendjukic1061

Жыл бұрын

EU is created by US and was/is a US puppet. He understands that, do you? Catholic church a problem in US government? How? Their imperialistic policies are aligned. Many governments were catholic, many presidents. How many Universities and schools are catholic? How many government officials were and still are coming from secret societies, that are basicaly branches of Catholic church organized like the Jesuit order. Best example is when Bush, a member of the Skull and Bones, was completing against, John Kerry, also a member from the Skull and Bones. Stop being so naive.

@stevenwebbjr7639

Жыл бұрын

@@mladendjukic1061 lol, i know for sure that you dont know how or why the EU was created.

Putin would not use nuclear weapons in Western Ukraine. This is a preposterous thing to "worry about".

Dear Hidden Forces: Are you going to reassess your asumptions about Russia's goals, capabilities in light of new developments favoring Russia?

@theetiologist9539

Жыл бұрын

Probably not. They're running out of precision guided munitions and they're super low on infantry. Their current strategy is just a slight evolution of WW1 tactics. They feel the need to hold too much of their general capability in reserve to deal with possible NATO counter attacks, and they're running out of young men to send into the meat grinder. If NATO really did get involved you'd see more of their more advanced capabilities used, but they'd still have the same basic problems. Lots of bling but no basics. I don't think anyone is arguing that Russia doesn't have advanced weapons and capabilities, but they probably don't have an extensive stockpile of them and they have huge gaping holes in the core functionality that an army needs. Their logistics is a mess, super low in infantry and infantry morale, their drones are using civilian-grade parts, etc. At this point they're just mowing everything down with artillery. The US might have sent in some nice new self-propelled artillery, but the US itself has a total of like 4200 guns. Russia has 18,000 guns. Even if you say half of those are broken down, they still have more than twice what the US stockpiled, and we aren't giving all of those to Ukraine. And what we have given is already starting to get destroyed. So the Russians can't bleed infantrymen forever, but they can lose 10 artillery pieces to Ukraines' 1 and still maintain artillery superiority. Which is why their strategy is working in the eastern cauldron. But there's no way that they could stand up against more modern armies. Any NATO airpower in Ukraine would break the Russians in a few days, and they simply don't have enough skilled infantry to go toe to toe with any of the other major powers in urban fighting, which puts them significantly lower in capabilities than what everyone thought they could do for the last twenty years.

This Meshamehr receves his narratives from near the Red Square)))

@hadrianh.9469

Жыл бұрын

He's Putin's useful idiot. Same as the communist here in America in the 60's who thought the USSR was a paradise. The Soviets brought academics over and took them on propaganda tours all over the land. They ate it all.

United States became an accidental superpower! We didn’t intend to dominate the world? Until we got scared of the Soviet Union..

Finally....Mr. Walt somewhat reluctantly and so quickly that it's hard to notice, gives the MOST important reason for NATO expansion: The freely elected government's of Eastern Europe expressed the will or its respective electorates and APPLIED for membership! No matter how much the US might or might not have wanted new NATO members, it was, and remains incapable of forcing any country to join if it doesn't want to.

@TheCommono

Жыл бұрын

Who ever said that the US "forced" anybody to join Nato? Influence is of course a more nuanced thing than force...

@justgivemethetruth

Жыл бұрын

The US has had its CIA meddling finger on the scale for all those decisions you think are being done by whole countries ... it's BS.

@carolmorrow4095

Жыл бұрын

Did these Eastern European countries also "APPLY" to increasingly expand the world's largest military alliance against Russia's borders until Russia began to feel threatened by the encroachment of a supposedly "defensive" military pact that had bombed a European city, destroyed an African country, and sent its army across the world in endless pursuit of military dominance?

@cheeto8960

Жыл бұрын

NATO shouldn't exist as the cold war was over, NATO is only defending themselves from their own expansion

@michaelcorner3861

Жыл бұрын

@@carolmorrow4095 They applied because they had been subjected to unwanted Soviet/Russian occupation after WW2 and wanted to be protected from it happening again. Have you heard of Budapest 1956 and Prague 1968? Maybe you're a young person if you haven't heard of these, and Lord knows they don't teach them in school anymore, so I can't blame you if this subject matter is unfamiliar. Overall Eastern European history is fascinating....Poland and Russia have been at each others' throats non-stop more or less for the past 6 centuries, give or take. Just in the last 90 years, Russia has, TWICE, invaded Poland. Any wonder why the Poles wanted to join? Having said all that, once again the point is that nobody forced Poland, Hungary, Czechslovakia (as it was then known) Rumania, or the Baltic States to apply for NATO membership. The fact is they ALL had experienced unwanted Russian occupation. If any of them had felt safe with Russia as their immediate neighbor, they wouldn't have applied.

do you listen to the drunk at the bar, or respect them? 31:49 that we don't have much respect for you and we don't have to listen to your views or opinions on very many issues.

Just sarted listening and really did not know either author but checking some of their books out. I have a question or a view that goes to the ideals of in our Americans not running anything-maybe saying we have or are a fake democracy. Do people see our departure from Afghanistan only done because we knew there would be a new war we would be pouring billions of dollars into would be almost like, "We got your back. Yes we are pulling out of Afghanistann\-ever heard of The Ukraine? That is whre we will make iup for us leaving Afghanostan." That would be for our military/industrial yada yada. I hate this but going to throw it out there anyways. I thought I remember hearing about one of these trips to Europe-President Biden meeting with Putin and then all of a sudden stopped selling miitary hardware to Ukraine until Russia invaded them. Maybe I am a bit too cynical because of what Bush did to America afer 9/11.

USA has persecutory paranoia

Stephen is delusional. He believes the United States is still powerful. RUssia: Hold my vodka China: hold my baijiu

@davidfoust9767

Жыл бұрын

It is even more delusional to underestimate the US. It has economic and geographic advantages on its side. I wish Russia and China much success but they are going to face very difficult challenges over the next few decades.

@0wninguplz

Жыл бұрын

@@davidfoust9767 for sure, even though Russia and China's problem are the US, ironically the US's problem also happens to be the US.

Russia, America, Israel and China cry me a river.

there is no new era of big competition, the change was the fact that US mistakenly spent two decades running after farmers with AK-47 on the Bactrian fields instead of focusing on protecting Europe and Asia from the Sino-Russian alliance. As such, US and Europe failed to deter Russia from invading Ukraine. The issue is whether US will be able to deter China from invading Taiwan.

DIVIDED TO BE CONQUERED: "the nuclear roach motel: Industry takes a holyday. 😉🔭📡📱The triangle of peace CHINA /RUSSIA/ WASHINGTON/ Versailles best place for peace treaties .🤔🤔🌱🌱☘☘🍁🍁🍀🍀

Why didn’t these guys know Russia was/is winning?

Putin using nuclear weapon in Ukraine- nonsense.

@theetiologist9539

Жыл бұрын

To quote an ex-US General "If Putin uses nuclear or large scale chemical weapons in Ukraine...well, that's what the F35 was invented for. In three days every Russian asset in Ukraine would be destroyed."

Five minutes listening to Fiona Hill shows what a light weight John Mearsheimer is.

@jenniferlawrence2701

Жыл бұрын

Fiona Hill told G.W Bush point-blank at the 2008 NATO summit that announcing the desire to bring in Georgia & Ukraine would likely provoke Putin to launch preemptive wars to prevent their ascension. Angela Merkel told him the same. He ignored them and did it anyway. This supports Mearsheimer's argument.

@hadrianh.9469

Жыл бұрын

Add to that Stephen Kotkin and Julia Ioffe

Mearsheimer is prevaricating, at the very least, when he claims that it's "important to understand" that "the United Stated did not have a confrontational policy towards Russia until February 22, 2014 when the Ukraine crisis broke out".

@Giorginho

Жыл бұрын

I think he means it wasn't conscious but still

@JacekKlam

Жыл бұрын

You are right Stavros. Especially considering that Ukraine was virtually promised NATO membership already in 2007 and the Ukrainians agreed to turn the Russian Black Sea fleet base in Sevastopol into a NATO naval base.

@inzhener2007

Жыл бұрын

Both professors mislead listeners. First: Putin just recently said "Russia has no problem" with Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Also, Ukraine joining NATO had been hypothetical then and it is now very hypothetical. While Finland joining NATO this year is very much real. Meaning, it's not NATO. It's only Putin wish to take over Ukraine under his rule. Second: No evidence that Putin is an imperialist/expansionist? Putin recently talked comparing himself to Peter I the Great, saying we (Russians) are not conquering the lands, but getting the lands back. The Z army is occupying lands of Ukraine much farther than the Donbass -- Kherson is not Donbass - and now Russia at least since June 5, is instilling the Russian state laws, flag, language, admins, police and the Rouble in there, thus de-facto annexing the occupied Ukrainian lands. The USA made Putin to wage the war on Ukraine? Over the past hundred years, Russia waged 30 aggressive wars causing total deaths millions, recent instances: Afghanistan 1979-1989 (a mln of dead afghani), Chechnya in 1995-1996 and 2000-2009 (200k dead Chechens), Georgia 2008 (1.5-2k deaths), Ukraine (>100k on both sides). No, it was Putin team’s sole decision to attack and bomb all of Ukraine in 4 am in 24 Feb (just like the Germans did on 22 June 1941). Three: J.M. said, that Putin's ultimatums published on 17/12/2022 (two drafts: Russia - NATO, mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/rso/nato/1790803/. and Russia - USA, mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/rso/nato/1790818/) were about Ukraine. That's not true. Ukraine there has very small part in them. The demands were NATO (USA) should withdraw from all the countries joined NATO since 1997. In fact, in the Russia-USA draft has no single word "Ukraine". By the way. it's not a "Ukraine crisis", it's a Russian war on Ukraine. Also, he compares Russia to Putin. That's a lie, he knows that Putin has never been elected fairly and freely. Humiliation to Putin is a win for Russia and Russians, I know for I am a Russian citizen.

@JacekKlam

Жыл бұрын

@@inzhener2007 Is every Russian's dream to be called Peter the Great? ;) The fact that you are Russian does not make you right. In fact you seem to belong to the small minority of Russians who fell victim to the Western propaganda. If JM's arguments don't convince you I'm not sure what will. Maybe try to imagine the US reaction to Canada and Mexico joining Chinese Pacific Military Alliance and installing Chinese nuclear missile systems a few km off the US border. Then compare it to Putin's very restrained reaction. Putin is not an angel. Angels do not run empires. But relative to the USA, Russia is a very peaceful empire. Not a single war you mentioned took place thousands of miles away from Russian borders. Cannot say that about the USA. If you look at these two facts and put two and two together maybe you'll draw some intelligent conclusions. If you still cannot, read up on the US doctrines of containment and ask yourself for example on what grounds can a country strongly affirm that they will never allow another country, which happens to be five times larger in population, to overtake them in economic output? How would such doctrine be achieved and what would be its results?

@inzhener2007

Жыл бұрын

@@JacekKlam Did you read what’s written? 1. “imagine the US reaction to Canada and Mexico joining” - I repeat: Putin said publicly, “we don’t have problems” with Finland joining NATO. For how long the Baltics bordering Russia and being much closer to Moscow & St Petersburg than Ukraine, have been in NATO? Norway has the borders with Russia. Finland & Norway are 30-40 min away from the biggest base of Russia’s nuclear subs, Murmansk. Ukraine's NATO perspectives have been then and now all hypothetical. 2. “Not a single war you mentioned took place thousands of miles away” - Afghanistan was not bordering Russia; it bordered the USSR back then. The Russian air force reduced the city of Aleppo to ashes in 2015-2016, that’s Syria - how close is it to Russia? 3. “you seem to belong to the small minority” - seem? How about checking facts? No way to check for Russia’s been closing all such stats at least since 2014? Why would it close stats? Please no more “seem”.

A powerful military that couldn't beat the vietnamese or Afghans lool The American military is strong conventional, but is not as competent as most Americans think.