He predicted what exactly? Here's a John Mearsheimer quote from two weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine:
Source: Mearsheimer interview
Last edited:
Has the US awakened the sleeping giant?
- Thread starter Rams
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss three 1-1 draws.
The first got us knocked out of the FA Cup, the next puts us in a good position in our Round of 16 Europa League game, and the latest was an actual decent performance against Arsenal at Old Trafford.
All hopes for the season now rest on the Europa League - does Amorim have the squad to win it?
Good post. Agreed on call counts.
I need a date (citation) to the above.
The chronology is the point really. Just prediction plus the predictive variable (NATO epansionism is the only variable I've found, really, so far).
Account for the prediction. And then tell me why you depart. Chomsky predicted it for years. Wouldn't stop talking about it. There are others. And the others have nothing in common, either. Honestly, if it sounds nasty, that's my fault, but some people choose not to read.
Or maybe it's I have no time for pathos. I think it fallacy and that is the level you often see here. I always appreciate the posters who buck the trend even when/if they disagree with everything you say.
The reason of disagreement is crucial. Sorry to pick it out but "boils my piss" -- what does? "DONT BLAME UKRAINE" - I never have. Read. And some just stir the pot, of course. Why? I rarely even mention it and when I do I qualify the feck out of it. Even though in a few a years (certainly in ten) it will be orthodoxy in whatever order. True story.
The chronology is the point really. Just prediction plus the predictive variable (NATO epansionism is the only variable I've found, really, so far).
Account for the prediction. And then tell me why you depart. Chomsky predicted it for years. Wouldn't stop talking about it. There are others. And the others have nothing in common, either. Honestly, if it sounds nasty, that's my fault, but some people choose not to read.
Or maybe it's I have no time for pathos. I think it fallacy and that is the level you often see here. I always appreciate the posters who buck the trend even when/if they disagree with everything you say.
The reason of disagreement is crucial. Sorry to pick it out but "boils my piss" -- what does? "DONT BLAME UKRAINE" - I never have. Read. And some just stir the pot, of course. Why? I rarely even mention it and when I do I qualify the feck out of it. Even though in a few a years (certainly in ten) it will be orthodoxy in whatever order. True story.
Or Chomsky being largely right about anything.
About that, he was right. About the rise of a Trump figure. And about language, too, even though those who, no offense, aren't qualified, disagree. I.e., either a linguist of some kind or someone who has studied it personally for enough time to know what they are talking about even generally. Otherwise "so and so said otherwise" and the "discipline went a different way".
Not really the case. His position is the truthful one re poverty of stimulus (and the only scientifically explanatory one). Also there's the social study "manufacturing consent" (genius).
Right about a lot.To be right about one of these things of such magnitude (especially the books) would be a career by itself.
Lesser achievements get nobel prizes. Of course, the nobel is political and cheap as Sarte knew.
I have no idea what the first sentence is referring to.
The rest of the post I’m not really sure how to respond to to be honest. As far as I’m aware, China has literally never invaded any European country, in either modern history or antiquity. Russia is currently invading a European country. Its predecessor invaded multiple other European countries within living memory and its current leadership has threatened to bomb other non Ukraine countries. If we’re talking about Ukraine not being European, we may as well go the full hog and ask why on earth a peninsula of Asia is considered a continent at all.
Can you point to any equivalents from China?
This is honestly such a strange conversation.
I was summarizing the tone of your post.
Nobody knows for sure but if Putin takes Ukraine, or manages to install a puppet government, then Moldova might easily be next, to 'save Transnistria'. And if Trump does abandon Nato then the Baltics too. I doubt EU conventional forces could stop Russia there, and would anyone believe a nuclear bluff over it, would France or the UK even have the nerve to try such a bluff on behalf of 'little countries far away'?
I can't take seriously anyone who claims to know for certain what will happen. They don''t.
I can't take seriously anyone who claims to know for certain what will happen. They don''t.
The consequences of a Russian invasion of Europe are certain. Death (ww3).
What % do you put a pointless invasion of Europe by Russia at? Knowing the outcome.
If there was no money incentive to all this I'd really like to see the discourse. There always is but I wish there weren't.
I cannot take credibly people who are certain of Putin's army's strength and weakness simultaneously. It's something George Orwell wisely said is mental and to be avoided (an old ruling class strategy).
I see. In which case, 100% yes. You’d get a lot less blowback and a lot less ‘gotcha posts’.
And on a personal level, I personally find it difficult to be so sure about literally anything in life, let alone something as complex and with as many moving pieces as geopolitics, especially if id recently been off the mark with it.
And this is coming from someone btw who’s been pushing back against the ‘oh no, Russia is definitely coming for Poland or whoever else next’ narrative.
Nah, If I said Slava Ukraine and never made a peep no one would give a shit. Or was "Russia is terrible" by group-speak command. I do neither.
That's more honest.
It also does not bother me. Me pointing it out is not me being bothered. I used to laugh at the people who did it (only a few) and then it was sad to me so I just ingored it whenever it happened (where I am now tbh). I find it weird but I understand it enough to not care. Too many of these people are wrong about everything for me to actually care. And that's as personal (without a name) as I ever really go.
So you’re arguing with geography now so you can be right?
The fact is, Europe will never forgive or forget what Russia has done to Ukraine over the last 3 years (of course it started long before that, I am aware). I dont see any thawing or repairing of relationships between Russia and Europe at this point - the damage is done, the point of no return has been reached. To a lesser extent the same is now true with the US - they have proven themselves to be an unreliable ally. Sure, Europe and the US very well may see eye to eye on various issues, but when push comes to shove the US just wont be trusted anymore in the same way as previously. And that is the thing with trust - like a piece of paper that you scrunch up, you can flatten it back out again but its never quite the same (I remember having this discussion about 15 years ago when my ex cheated on me).
Back to Russia, as stated, there is no way back, which begs the question of what is the way forward. It simply isnt going to be tenable in the long term for Europe to have an even more aggressive, reckless and emboldened (thanks to Trump) Russia on its doorstep, conducting constant cyber attacks, grey warfare and general thuggery. What was already a strained relationship is now completely open hostility, and I can only see it ending one of three ways;
1) Massive revolution in Russia followed by a total pivot to the West (unlikely)
2) Russian subversion picks up enough traction in Europe that enough countries pivot to pro-Russia governments a-la Trump (unlikely)
3) Somehow, somewhere, sometime, it ends in a hot conflict (who knows?)
We have entered what could be quite a pivotal period of history. They may look back at the next few years as the beginning of the end, the start of WW3, the fall of the West or something else. What happens in the US over this period is key in this of course. What is no longer in doubt however, is that Europe is beginning to wake up and rearm - and that the current situation with Russia is going to have to end up being resolved some way or other, for better or worse,
Back to Russia, as stated, there is no way back, which begs the question of what is the way forward. It simply isnt going to be tenable in the long term for Europe to have an even more aggressive, reckless and emboldened (thanks to Trump) Russia on its doorstep, conducting constant cyber attacks, grey warfare and general thuggery. What was already a strained relationship is now completely open hostility, and I can only see it ending one of three ways;
1) Massive revolution in Russia followed by a total pivot to the West (unlikely)
2) Russian subversion picks up enough traction in Europe that enough countries pivot to pro-Russia governments a-la Trump (unlikely)
3) Somehow, somewhere, sometime, it ends in a hot conflict (who knows?)
We have entered what could be quite a pivotal period of history. They may look back at the next few years as the beginning of the end, the start of WW3, the fall of the West or something else. What happens in the US over this period is key in this of course. What is no longer in doubt however, is that Europe is beginning to wake up and rearm - and that the current situation with Russia is going to have to end up being resolved some way or other, for better or worse,
Yes. It’s in European Russia. This is a very common nomenclature.
First part is true.
Second part again more relevant to those who might do gotcha posting. That was never my posting though and frankly your responses to me are always referencing that group in one way or another so think we’ve exhausted this particular conversation in that case.
I don't mean you or everyone. Just some people and I'd rather not name them (not even everyone who does the gotcha thing tbf bc some of them are good posters: we just disagree).
And it is exhausted tbf.
But when did this count as Europe "Europe"? EU ,Europe.
There is a distinction there and Ukraine was never really in that group even if (it may well) it ends up there in the long run. Nor was Moscow.
Call it snobbery but most Western EU nations, in my experience, had their own categorizations of what counted as European and what didn't. And it wasn't a geo thing. They brought Ukraine in with open arms and then all those articles which were semi-racist about the russians (some memorable if they can be found -- one was like "Russians aren't really Europeans but some kind of barbarous hoard"). Just war prop 101 stuff but maybe also what many believed too.
This. Great analogy. And for the police (America, the West) to pretend that the criminal's (Russia's) protests at being called a criminal are valid, is what's so fecked about Trump
That is a very poor commitment. It Russia invades a EU member there is a fair chance that you will be dead so ban you or throwing in your face would be useless
My conviction that the EU is just a market for the big boys instead of a real union is once again confirmed by this.
All the talk is about money, manufacturers, big contracts. I'm sure the major countries who produce all these weapons are really happy.
Political discussion about precise goals, specific needs for each country, popular support for these moves... nah that's not important.
I'm looking forward to portugal spending hundreds of millions in french and british armament that will rust away in some base in the middle of nowhere.
All the talk is about money, manufacturers, big contracts. I'm sure the major countries who produce all these weapons are really happy.
Political discussion about precise goals, specific needs for each country, popular support for these moves... nah that's not important.
I'm looking forward to portugal spending hundreds of millions in french and british armament that will rust away in some base in the middle of nowhere.
Of course Ukraine is in Europe. Russia is also largely a European state. This isn't just geographically speaking either. Historically no discussion of Europe could be considered even remotely complete without intimately discussing each of these places. It's daft to pretend otherwise.
Of course I'm not going to take you up on your wager. It's a silly bet. My argument is that it is a distinct possibility which meekly doing nothing exacerbates; not that it is a betting favourite within a limited time span.
The books I read about European history tend to do so. And so do I. And basically everyone I have ever talked to about stuff like that.
You do it on purpose tbf it's just not worth it.
There's a sequence to the dialogue where everything is explained but what is the point in responding to this. Either it's intentional or you missed everything else. Dunno. Weird.
So Russia is a European nation?
Just asking. Categorically, not geographically (for it goes through Asia but then again Turkey is similar and could be in the EU).
Wouldn't the nuanced reply say "sort of". The propaganda at the start basically said "no" and some seemed to agree.
As one little cultural example (and since this is a football forum after all), the Soviet Union played in the first ever UEFA European Championships in 1960 and won. In that regard Russia has been accepted as part of Europe pretty much without question for 60+ years. Most of the landmass might be Asia, but most of the people are in Europe.
For most parts it is. Their political and population centres are all in Europe and they have been a steady player within European politics for hundreds of years. They consistently influenced and were influenced by the rest of Europe, built themselves a sphere of influence within the rest of Europe, try to maintain this sphere of influence to this day and are therefore quite clearly European. Especially from a German perspective it would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Not just because of the 20th century, but also due to many cultural, religious and philosophical connections between the countries. Especially the ascent of Marxist ideology and philosophy is a great example for this.
And it’s not like I don’t get the point you’re trying to make. There are obviously cultural divides and Russia is of course also part of Asia. But that doesn’t make it any less true that it’s part of Europe. And Ukraine even more so, while we’re at it.
I mean the Romanov‘s even spoke French. That’s as European as it gets.
At least you get what I'm trying to say.
There has always been an attitude within Europe (and people maybe never encountered it or whatever but I have personally) where certain nations were absolutely "European" and others (not for geo reasons) just "weren't". Snobbery? History? A mix. I don't know. Less now than it was anyway.
Russia itself, though, cannot constitute itself as such because of how many "tribal" (wrong word?) overlaps there are. I don't know what it is within Russia but having listened and watched I do know that there are groups who they have to represent which do not consider themselves European. They hold them all together. A bit like Tito? Only example I can think of. Where many different religions and ethnicity and then large country (Turkey and Russia are much larger too). Kind of in and out status.
Of course, there has been a strong divide culturally and economically between Western Europe and the former Eastern Bloc countries. But when it comes to the likes of Ukraine it has always been considered Europe in my view. A lot of the time it might be called "Eastern Europe", but it's still Europe. And what else would it be really? You can't really assign it to any other continent either.
Same here,.
Sure, it's just whatever hostility there was (the most corrupt, after Russia - forget the topics, it's just the quality of the discourse) against Ukraine disappeared. It was expected because hostility to Russia was much worse and always has been I think with or without the invasion. But there was a weird status to certain nations and Ukraine was one of them but obviously it is in the continent, that wasn't the point -- it was the acceptance of it as a "pure EU" nation if you like (wasn't just Ukraine, some other states, eastern or whatever, suffered same bias).
I think what you’re describing is mostly anti-Slavic sentiment.
Could be.
Mearsheimer is a giant in international relations theory, but the problem with his theory is that he simplifies the dynamics of international relations too much. By focusing almost exclusively on state interests, power, and security, his views are many times not nuanced enough to explain the full spectrum of international behavior. The wishes and desires of the individual and populations are rarely taken into account unless it is in the framework of broader strategic interests of the state.
That's what pisses me off about the realist school of IR. "A great power like Russia has a right to it's sphere of influence". No, damn no, if the people of Lithuania, Moldova and Ukraine wish to live their lives without Russian intromission into it, then they should be able to as long as they don't threaten Russia itself.
Do they say they have a ‘right’ to a sphere of influence or are they saying that that is just the reality of the world as it is now?
Those are two incredibly different statements. And I feel like people who say the latter often get their words twisted to make it out they’re saying the former.