Comments by "Tim Trewyn" (@timtrewyn453) on "Джон Миршаймер: Израиль-Палестина, Россия-Украина, Китай, НАТО и война | Лекс Фридман Подкаст #401" video.

What does NATO expansion into Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland result in? The sovereignty and territorial integrity of those nations. NATO has not invaded Russia from those nations. Kaliningrad could be seen as a great irritation to these nations, but it remains a part of Russia, though surrounded by NATO. Mearsheimer stops with NATO as the cause of the war in Ukraine. But NATO membership does not translate into an invasion of Russia. NATO prevents invasion by Russia. That's what appears to have been unacceptable to Putin. Putin might very well understand that the SMO was not going to take all of Ukraine, but it was certainly designed to consolidate the invasion of Crimea. The war map makes that quite clear. Another part of the mission of the 190,000 was to take Kyiv, displace European influence, and restore Russian influence over the Ukrainian government. Western Ukraine could come later. Another part of the mission was to take Odessa and link to Transnistria. All these missions are supported by the current deployment of Russian forces. It's a deflection to harp on Putin not intending to take all of Ukraine. Mearsheimer is right that there is a ruthless aspect to the American government. Lloyd Austin made it quite clear that the United States was ready to use Ukrainian fighting spirit to weaken Russia and thereby undermine Russia's ability to support a Chinese invasion of Taiwan down the line. And things have so far lined up closer to that trajectory. NATO countries are increasing defense budgets, Finland and Sweden are closer to NATO than ever, American weapons continue to be demonstrated as superior to Russian, and Russia has been reduced in the European oil and gas market to the benefit of American oil companies. Mearsheimer cuts off the causes too early and tilts them onto the West too easily. The war in Ukraine puts the Ukrainians between two large powers seeking to gain superior influence over Ukraine, consistent with Mearsheimer's view of power. I don't get why he tilts this against the West instead of seeing the conflict as a fight over a nation that was standing on its own (vainly) rather than joining one alliance or the other. This is a fight over which empire gains Ukraine as an ally. If one understands the sentiments of most Ukrainian people, one would see they prefer the West to Russia. What Putin should rightly fear is that Ukraine would become the kind of model that West Germany was to Eastern Europe, contributing to the demise of the Soviet Union by setting an example of the benefits of the Western system. Mearsheimer discounts Putin's nuclear arsenal deters an outright NATO military invasion.
3
@avimiller2586 Yes. Vlad Vexler describes John Mearsheimer as someone who "looks at the world from 40,000 feet".
3
Good point. This is why subsidiarity, leaving the exercise of power to the most local possible group or individual, needs a comeback.
2
@bigiron1990 The adjective "passionate" can describe hate or love or a person. That might be what user-mv's unexplained view of the "same coin" rests on. They might say "passion" could be inherent, a matter of temperament. After 37 years of marriage, I will say love can be, among other things, hard work. But that work, that engagement with another can build a very resilient trust and joyful, often humorous, unique camaraderie. Conscience, self-control, and commitment matter. Sometimes wide differences in perspective indicate there is not much conscience in someone. Sometimes that doesn't get spotted until a relationship is far down the road. A few can adjust. Many cannot. I don't think hate lasts very long in those of conscience and experience. It distills into an effort to understand, but with caution, testing another's ability to reciprocate sincerely. The psychopaths are out there.
2
I remember some Egyptians protesting, "No more blood for the Palestinians." The Palestinians have had to turn to the Persians. The Persians didn't want the Saudis normalizing relations with Israel. The Saudi's have to mind their stewardship of the Islamic faith while managing a contest with Iran. However difficult it may be, Israel is probably stuck administrating Gaza for some time.
2
It is disappointing when a speaker on foreign relations entertains his own mortality as a possible boundary on his policy views.
2
The impending normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Hamas can't have that.
2
It's about which empire gets the profitable deals with the small, boutique, ethnic nation.
1
Good point. I think Putin is going to punt that issue to the next Russian dictator.
1
@sirjaymacthegreat Somehow occupied Guantanamo doesn't compare with Russian occupied Ukraine.
1
@SegzWithTedCruz So what are one or two specific differences between Mearsheimer and say, Rex Tillerson or Anthony Blinken or Pompeo? How would he reduce untimely death?
1
Technology trade. Israel's precarious position stimulates a lot of innovation they are willing to sell.
1
@t.seank.529 This risk is getting mitigated by the construction of new plants in other locations. Yes, it will take time. For the long run, the US, South Korea, and Japan don't care to have the Taiwan Straits turned into a Chinese tollway. It's the near permanent geography and trade routes that drive the interest in maintaining a Taiwan that doesn't charge tolls. The nice, vague term is "freedom of seas."
1
True or false, there have been up to 9 million foreign workers in Saudi Arabia? I am not saying Palestinians do not have a case for a secure homeland. In 2020 dollars, the United States purchased Alaska from Russia for about $120 million with an "m". Since 1948, the United States has provided Egypt and Israel with over $130 billion with a "b" in aid. It follows that continued US aid, or some portion of it, could be predicated on the purchase of land in both Egypt and Israel for a Palestinian State. Not that this would change Hamas policy toward Israel in any way.
1
Who are the Uighurs?
1
Leadership systems which involve killing domestic rivals have to be mindful of vengeance against them. This puts instability at the foundation of a psychopathic dictatorship. These dictatorships are not about optimizing the welfare of the people. They are about maximizing the power and wealth of the leadership. This necessitates the dissolution of any civic association that might organize effective opposition, even peaceful political opposition, or just mutual emotional support. This does not create a productive society. I see no geographic or resource reason why Russia should not have a population on the order of 400 to 500 million people. Yet it hovers now at about 145 million, a million having recently left and tens of thousands dying in battle. The "necessary protective action" had nothing to do with the welfare of the Russian people and everything to do with the power and pleasure of the Russian leadership. They had no other plan for their life other than staying in power until they died.
1
Yes. But some American employers like the illegal part. It gives them more leverage. But not directly. They hire a legal subcontractor that is bi-lingual, and the subcontractor hires the illegals.
1
First generation migrants are going to retain their language and culture. The second generation goes to school and gets acclimated to the culture of that school. It becomes bi-lingual and somewhat diplomatic. The third generation only hears some stories about the old country. They again are cultured by their school. A few get back to the old country for a short visit, but it's not home. I'm fifth generation. America is home. Military veteran. Visited the old country, but it is not home.
1
Yes. Russia thinks in terms of being bigger than Ukraine and they will prevail because they can wear down Ukraine. This gives the West, which is bigger than Russia, an opportunity to wear down Russia while Russia fetishizes on Ukraine. Russian leadership is stuck. It's a Soviet trajectory all over again. Good for the West. Very hard for Ukraine.
1
It leads one to ponder if Mearsheimer has a deeper guiding principle.
1
Could it be duping delight?
1
Why? 4 to 7 percent of the human population has no conscience. They like victory after victory. They are in every culture. If a culture does not manage them well, things go badly.
1
If the US and NATO can do that, I would think Russia, China, India, and Brazil could be doing the same business. It's easy to beat the US on price.
1
China rose economically because Western companies wanted its cheap labor. While China has a domestic economy, its growth is very much tied to nations willing to engage in trade with it. Aggressive behavior can lead to a loss of trade and therefore less economic growth. The world wants the Taiwan Strait free for shipping. That doesn't change much down the road. China would naturally want to turn it into a tollway in exchange for safe passage. The Taiwan semi-conductor manufacturing risk issue will eventually be diversified by the completion of facilities located elsewhere. The Taiwan Strait issue remains. What might be the case for China is that the population is just too big for a Chinese version of the Russian Siloviki to maintain control over. But Xi's conversion to that kind of system seems to be coming to pass. The consequence is the stagnation that such oppressive systems bring about.
1
@summersnow7296 I agree the world is nuanced. There are spectrums of behavior such as high empathy to low empathy, high education to low education, etc. What dimensions do you think of?
1
I thought both numbers were about the same. Something about the UN accounting for around 10,000 civilian deaths in Ukraine. Numbers out of Gaza rely on the Gazans, but that one is around 12,000 now? Is that way higher?
1
What are the metrics of rationality? Billionaires? The US leads the world in billionaires. Russia comes in 5th. You can look it up. Are billionaires rational? Pushing people together does not always result in a better relationship. It might open old wounds. Are adverbs like "deeply", "entirely", and "certainly" rational without supporting premises? SECDEF Lloyd Austin hinted that some American interests outside of the American government had made it very clear that US policy regarding Ukraine must absolutely avoid nuclear war. He was acting like a guy who had just met with the genuine powers that be. You know, the billionaires whose personal security teams are full of the best ex-special forces people. Putin and his people brandish their nuclear weapons. Is that rational behavior in your book?
1
Switzerland enjoys special geographical advantages in its mountains and tunnels.
1
@lancehilt7536 My view is affected by Tim Marshall's book "Prisoners of Geography". The thesis is geography does matter, and the book explores the premises that support that thesis. That is not to discount that a nation that chooses to develop its diplomatic skills and practice to a high art can benefit from that investment. Qatar might be a new example.
1
@lancehilt7536 I grant your point regarding Switzerland.
1
Ethnocentrism is real and potent, but there is also acquaintance with others, and a history of generally successful interaction can temper initial apprehension with the stranger. Somehow I got to age 66 in a mixed society.
1
I have a crazy idea. Have the Taiwanese and Cubans swap islands.
1