Escalation is not only valid in conflict situations or wars and massacres of innocent mostly good people like you and me and our families ! All good people deserve something better, unlike the Bee-Itch imagine the Genocide !
Escalation can be a beneficial move or something that helps the Humanity !
Those good guys or Noble men, Chris Hedges and John Mearsheimer can only Escalate something good, good ideas with good motivation !
That is how I tried to twist the Escalation - two too good people can only Escalate something good unlike Bidendevan and Kamaladevi pair can only lead the Americans and the Jews / Zionist over the edge of Abyss and into the Hell of Destruction of Humanity to Replace with the Evil Monsters !
Let us hope and Pray for the Rightful People to go on living in their own Land !
Mearsheimer’s repeated assertion that US does not want a war with Iran warrants much closer examination and analysis focusing on the geopolitical hubris that is currently afflicting US/Western elites in their increasingly all or nothing response to all challengers of the “the Rules based system of International Order ordained and controlled by the West”.
Good to hear that religious differences take a backseat to combating evil. The ICJ ruled illegal oppressors prefer the sectarian divisions of xenophobia but the screams of their victims from the horrible crimes to enshrine apartheid across the century has reached the ears of some humans.
I have long wondered why the Israelis did not pivot to making peace--and prosperity--with its neighbors through these roughly three-quarters of a century. The inception or, perhaps better described, insertion of the modern state of Israel into the Middle East was eventually, although understandably with reluctance and peaks of resistance, accepted for the most part as a fait accompli. Those would have been opportunities for the Israelis to make nice incrementally with their neighbors. I am not enough of a student of geopolitical/economic matters to speculate authoritatively, but maybe at least in some ways Dubai could be a reference for what might have been if Israel had acted in increasing collaboration in its region. Traditionally, when creators and owners sought life-style/proprietary business---entrepreneurial ventures eventually converted to business cultures of managing for longevity and stability. To the degree that political systems can be analogized, Israel did not make such a transition from its turbulent beginning to where it is now. Possibly the unique nature of the Balfour intrigue and modern Israel's violent embryonic state cannot be analogized to even an aggressively competitive business. Violence of this particular type may set any entity on a path that is, apparently, unable to act with flexibility, adaptation and ideological development. In this sense, it may be that violence is not merely an limited instrument of state--as in Clausewitzian terms and as it is for most states--but rather it is a defining characteristic of such a state like Israel, particularly in regard to its own understanding of what it considers to be its eschatological role and divine promises. Additionally, Israel's economic system may not be versatile enough in order to permit it to spend freely in ventures of peace which would allow it to enter into arrangements of mutual, goodwill economics in the neighborhood. Instead, Israel has, if you forgive my biological analogy, a placental economy with the United States (and NATO subsidiaries of the U.S.) in which money arterially flows to Israel and venously back to American kleptocrat politicians and private sector helpers, operations and cultural institutions who enforce an ideological perspective that Israel imagines to be critical for its existence. Thus, that circulation of funds does not lend itself to Israel (no pun intended, but it is a good one) strategically investing in building up mutually beneficial investments with surrounding nations. Those funds are earmarked to come back the United States. When Mr. Netanyahu speaks of the United States and Israel being "tied at the hip," the true understanding of this is a raw, matter of dependent funding--not even an economic one--and much less a geopolitical or ideological one. It will be interesting to see if the younger generation of Jews in America and elsewhere can chart a different course for understanding Jewishness, the state of Israel and their relationship to Christians, Muslims and secular citizens as they themselves come of age in realms of power. This can be imagined to be--should they choose to shuck the self-defeating group paranoia and accept the intellectual and civilizational challenge--a brighter and more secure course reliant upon conversation instead of the things it has been trying without genuine success and--so far--measured mostly in death counts, military objectives and patterns of cultural capture. To add, and continuing the biological analogy, perhaps an upcoming generation of Jews inside and outside of Israel can carefully complete the necessary severance of the placental economy of Israel, and permit the birth of this--in historical terms--new infant, a healthy new baby, and a nation among nations.
Isn’t it amazing that when it comes to things like making the trains run on time we don’t have much trouble but when it comes to things which seem much simpler, like avoiding horrifically nasty wars, we have much more trouble.
So if one were interested in decreasing that which causes so much pain, suffering, death and destruction it seems as though the logical thing to do would be to ask the simple question as to why we keep engaging in this kind of counterproductive activity. We should be asking - What is the cause of all of this unnecessary and avoidable trouble? What’s at the root of this trouble?
Please allow me to give you a hint at the answer to that question.
The three panelists seem to be relatively smart, logical and reasonable individuals. If any one of these three individuals was in a position of ultimate power, does it seem like they would opt for entering into a nasty conflict that will get a lot of innocent people killed?
The answer is no.
So what gives? (That’s a way of saying what is the reason for this?).
The reason is largely because of the fact that we allow self selected narcissists to run the show.
So in the same way that it takes a lot of time, energy, effort and FORCEFULNESS to dupe people into going to war, it takes an even greater amount of forcefulness to avoid war and strive for that which is “nice”.
You might think that’s naive, but it’s not.
That is what is at the root of all of these problems.
And just as John Mearsheimer’s developed a “theory of offensive realism” in order to be able to make sense of a complicated geopolitical world, one would postulate that a theory of what it would take to avoid conflict also requires a simple theory.
This is not exactly correct. The reason is as follows..
Since the question as to what it would take to avoid conflict involves a host of factors, that all tie together, rather than the answer being in the form of a simple theory, the answer has to be in the form of a “course”.
And if this “course” is good it will answer the question as to what drives us as a species to engage in conflict. And if the “course” is really good it will also point toward ways in which we could avoid things like conflict.
And furthermore, the same exercise of determining the answers to those questions lends itself to providing answers to a whole host of problems that are all avoidable that we’re currently facing. A set of problems that we’re hurtling toward at an alarmingly accelerated rate.
So with that said, is anyone interested in taking my “course”?
BTW perhaps Mearsheimer is the peddling such scenarios to Israelis this pipe dream that Russia will do nothing.
But most US citizens should resoundingly avowedly pledge to do nothing if Netanyahu is that stupid. But of course, the US government would declare war, indifferent to US citizen opinion.
Two months ago, Netanyahu agreed to a ceasefire that would have allowed Sinwar safe passage out of Gaza in exchange for Hamas surrendering, releasing the hostages, and beginning reconstruction. Sinwar refused. There was also, of course, a ceasefire on October 6, 2023, which was shattered in the most horrific way when Hamas carried out mass slaughter, rape, and kidnapping of innocent civilians.
Netanyahu was faced with an impossible choice, one that no leader should have to make: ensuring the safety of his people while working to bring home 250 hostages. This isn’t just about de-escalation—it’s about preventing a repeat of these atrocities. Strong-arming Israel into a premature ceasefire with a terrorist organization that refuses to negotiate is simply wrong.
As for the tragedy of innocent children dying, of course, in any war that is heartbreaking. But in this case, the responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of Hamas and other terrorists who use civilians as shields. John Spencer, the expert on urban warfare from West Point, along with others who have analyzed conflicts over the past 30 years, has reported that Israel is doing a remarkable job of limiting civilian deaths compared to any other situation.
What’s turning the tide for Israel is the decisive action in Gaza and Lebanon. If the United States provides the military support needed to dismantle Iran’s military-industrial complex, we can finally create a real chance for peace in one of the world’s most dangerous regions.
Israel's position on and treatment of Gaza is indefensible: Gaza and the West Bank are occupied territories and Israel is in breach of human, local and International laws.
When Hamas makes an armed incursion into Israel to capture a couple hundred Israelis, it's called: October 7th, 2023.
When Israel makes an armed incursion into the West Bank to capture a couple hundred Palestinians, it's called: Tuesday.
Let it go, Moishe, the jig is up. You don't have a moral leg to stand on and you know it. Might as well give up the pretense and admit that what you want is to kill, kill, kill and see the world burn. Just like when your minister called for dropping atomic bombs on Gaza (bombs which you're not supposed to have, remember? You even forget to stick to the narrative out of sheer bloodlust).
All of that suffering and death and destruction... all of that just because you don't know how to make friends. So tragic. Much sob.
Never mentioned Russia having not only equipped Iran with defense missiles but also actively manned them with Russian personnel inside Iran. Russia has already avowed that Russia will not stand by if Iran is attacked.
I’m beginning to believe that Mearsheimer isn’t the go to guy but something else entirely. That insinuating that somehow Israel could attack Iran and Russia would do nothing, that is the real pipe dream.
I like the Good Escalation of Ideas !
ha ha. I love your sarcasm.
Not Karen's comment. It's her significant other. :)
Anyway, it was not a Sarcasm !
Escalation is not only valid in conflict situations or wars and massacres of innocent mostly good people like you and me and our families ! All good people deserve something better, unlike the Bee-Itch imagine the Genocide !
Escalation can be a beneficial move or something that helps the Humanity !
Those good guys or Noble men, Chris Hedges and John Mearsheimer can only Escalate something good, good ideas with good motivation !
That is how I tried to twist the Escalation - two too good people can only Escalate something good unlike Bidendevan and Kamaladevi pair can only lead the Americans and the Jews / Zionist over the edge of Abyss and into the Hell of Destruction of Humanity to Replace with the Evil Monsters !
Let us hope and Pray for the Rightful People to go on living in their own Land !
🙏 Please in the Lives of the Rightful Owners
of Palestine !
This was an outstanding interview.
Mearsheimer’s repeated assertion that US does not want a war with Iran warrants much closer examination and analysis focusing on the geopolitical hubris that is currently afflicting US/Western elites in their increasingly all or nothing response to all challengers of the “the Rules based system of International Order ordained and controlled by the West”.
Good to hear that religious differences take a backseat to combating evil. The ICJ ruled illegal oppressors prefer the sectarian divisions of xenophobia but the screams of their victims from the horrible crimes to enshrine apartheid across the century has reached the ears of some humans.
I have long wondered why the Israelis did not pivot to making peace--and prosperity--with its neighbors through these roughly three-quarters of a century. The inception or, perhaps better described, insertion of the modern state of Israel into the Middle East was eventually, although understandably with reluctance and peaks of resistance, accepted for the most part as a fait accompli. Those would have been opportunities for the Israelis to make nice incrementally with their neighbors. I am not enough of a student of geopolitical/economic matters to speculate authoritatively, but maybe at least in some ways Dubai could be a reference for what might have been if Israel had acted in increasing collaboration in its region. Traditionally, when creators and owners sought life-style/proprietary business---entrepreneurial ventures eventually converted to business cultures of managing for longevity and stability. To the degree that political systems can be analogized, Israel did not make such a transition from its turbulent beginning to where it is now. Possibly the unique nature of the Balfour intrigue and modern Israel's violent embryonic state cannot be analogized to even an aggressively competitive business. Violence of this particular type may set any entity on a path that is, apparently, unable to act with flexibility, adaptation and ideological development. In this sense, it may be that violence is not merely an limited instrument of state--as in Clausewitzian terms and as it is for most states--but rather it is a defining characteristic of such a state like Israel, particularly in regard to its own understanding of what it considers to be its eschatological role and divine promises. Additionally, Israel's economic system may not be versatile enough in order to permit it to spend freely in ventures of peace which would allow it to enter into arrangements of mutual, goodwill economics in the neighborhood. Instead, Israel has, if you forgive my biological analogy, a placental economy with the United States (and NATO subsidiaries of the U.S.) in which money arterially flows to Israel and venously back to American kleptocrat politicians and private sector helpers, operations and cultural institutions who enforce an ideological perspective that Israel imagines to be critical for its existence. Thus, that circulation of funds does not lend itself to Israel (no pun intended, but it is a good one) strategically investing in building up mutually beneficial investments with surrounding nations. Those funds are earmarked to come back the United States. When Mr. Netanyahu speaks of the United States and Israel being "tied at the hip," the true understanding of this is a raw, matter of dependent funding--not even an economic one--and much less a geopolitical or ideological one. It will be interesting to see if the younger generation of Jews in America and elsewhere can chart a different course for understanding Jewishness, the state of Israel and their relationship to Christians, Muslims and secular citizens as they themselves come of age in realms of power. This can be imagined to be--should they choose to shuck the self-defeating group paranoia and accept the intellectual and civilizational challenge--a brighter and more secure course reliant upon conversation instead of the things it has been trying without genuine success and--so far--measured mostly in death counts, military objectives and patterns of cultural capture. To add, and continuing the biological analogy, perhaps an upcoming generation of Jews inside and outside of Israel can carefully complete the necessary severance of the placental economy of Israel, and permit the birth of this--in historical terms--new infant, a healthy new baby, and a nation among nations.
Isn’t it amazing that when it comes to things like making the trains run on time we don’t have much trouble but when it comes to things which seem much simpler, like avoiding horrifically nasty wars, we have much more trouble.
So if one were interested in decreasing that which causes so much pain, suffering, death and destruction it seems as though the logical thing to do would be to ask the simple question as to why we keep engaging in this kind of counterproductive activity. We should be asking - What is the cause of all of this unnecessary and avoidable trouble? What’s at the root of this trouble?
Please allow me to give you a hint at the answer to that question.
The three panelists seem to be relatively smart, logical and reasonable individuals. If any one of these three individuals was in a position of ultimate power, does it seem like they would opt for entering into a nasty conflict that will get a lot of innocent people killed?
The answer is no.
So what gives? (That’s a way of saying what is the reason for this?).
The reason is largely because of the fact that we allow self selected narcissists to run the show.
So in the same way that it takes a lot of time, energy, effort and FORCEFULNESS to dupe people into going to war, it takes an even greater amount of forcefulness to avoid war and strive for that which is “nice”.
You might think that’s naive, but it’s not.
That is what is at the root of all of these problems.
And just as John Mearsheimer’s developed a “theory of offensive realism” in order to be able to make sense of a complicated geopolitical world, one would postulate that a theory of what it would take to avoid conflict also requires a simple theory.
This is not exactly correct. The reason is as follows..
Since the question as to what it would take to avoid conflict involves a host of factors, that all tie together, rather than the answer being in the form of a simple theory, the answer has to be in the form of a “course”.
And if this “course” is good it will answer the question as to what drives us as a species to engage in conflict. And if the “course” is really good it will also point toward ways in which we could avoid things like conflict.
And furthermore, the same exercise of determining the answers to those questions lends itself to providing answers to a whole host of problems that are all avoidable that we’re currently facing. A set of problems that we’re hurtling toward at an alarmingly accelerated rate.
So with that said, is anyone interested in taking my “course”?
kevincflynn1@gmail.com
Given the choice between engaging
BTW perhaps Mearsheimer is the peddling such scenarios to Israelis this pipe dream that Russia will do nothing.
But most US citizens should resoundingly avowedly pledge to do nothing if Netanyahu is that stupid. But of course, the US government would declare war, indifferent to US citizen opinion.
Two months ago, Netanyahu agreed to a ceasefire that would have allowed Sinwar safe passage out of Gaza in exchange for Hamas surrendering, releasing the hostages, and beginning reconstruction. Sinwar refused. There was also, of course, a ceasefire on October 6, 2023, which was shattered in the most horrific way when Hamas carried out mass slaughter, rape, and kidnapping of innocent civilians.
Netanyahu was faced with an impossible choice, one that no leader should have to make: ensuring the safety of his people while working to bring home 250 hostages. This isn’t just about de-escalation—it’s about preventing a repeat of these atrocities. Strong-arming Israel into a premature ceasefire with a terrorist organization that refuses to negotiate is simply wrong.
As for the tragedy of innocent children dying, of course, in any war that is heartbreaking. But in this case, the responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of Hamas and other terrorists who use civilians as shields. John Spencer, the expert on urban warfare from West Point, along with others who have analyzed conflicts over the past 30 years, has reported that Israel is doing a remarkable job of limiting civilian deaths compared to any other situation.
What’s turning the tide for Israel is the decisive action in Gaza and Lebanon. If the United States provides the military support needed to dismantle Iran’s military-industrial complex, we can finally create a real chance for peace in one of the world’s most dangerous regions.
Israel's position on and treatment of Gaza is indefensible: Gaza and the West Bank are occupied territories and Israel is in breach of human, local and International laws.
When Hamas makes an armed incursion into Israel to capture a couple hundred Israelis, it's called: October 7th, 2023.
When Israel makes an armed incursion into the West Bank to capture a couple hundred Palestinians, it's called: Tuesday.
Let it go, Moishe, the jig is up. You don't have a moral leg to stand on and you know it. Might as well give up the pretense and admit that what you want is to kill, kill, kill and see the world burn. Just like when your minister called for dropping atomic bombs on Gaza (bombs which you're not supposed to have, remember? You even forget to stick to the narrative out of sheer bloodlust).
All of that suffering and death and destruction... all of that just because you don't know how to make friends. So tragic. Much sob.
Great Article!
We've shared the link on our report.
A Skeptic War Reports
https://askeptic.substack.com/
Never mentioned Russia having not only equipped Iran with defense missiles but also actively manned them with Russian personnel inside Iran. Russia has already avowed that Russia will not stand by if Iran is attacked.
I’m beginning to believe that Mearsheimer isn’t the go to guy but something else entirely. That insinuating that somehow Israel could attack Iran and Russia would do nothing, that is the real pipe dream.
Yup. Same old, same old…
Same words of wisdom from John Mearsheimer…
The funny thing about words of wisdom is they’re timeless…
They’re always timely…
They never get old…
A good one on John's take on the great White Man's Burden..
You have to go back to school, John. Ignorance and innocence are crimes against humanity too. Try Black Agenda Report
https://www.blackagendareport.com/john-mearsheimers-folly-how-whites-agree-misinterpret-world-fulfill-their-racial-contract