John Mearsheimer has been exactly correct with regard to everything he’s weighed in on. One of his observations is that might makes right and those countries with the most power make and/or break the rules as they see fit. One irony with this observation is that if during the unipolar moment the US had used its power to stay smart, stay as powerful as possible, lead by example and stay on the right side of history, we’d be in a much better position to influence what happens from here on out the world stage. Instead we were lead by foolish idiots who squandered that prime opportunity. Now we’re being lead by short sighted, foolish cowards who are more worried about staying in power than staying on the right side of history. As he points out, the US is so powerful and geographically isolated so as not to be affected by all of the mistakes we’ve made and are making. But for better or for worse that bound to change. Because of our short sighted foolishness our power is decreasing and what little moral high ground we might have enjoyed after world war 2 has been severely eroded. Despite the ideals we say we represent the majority of the world see the US as being extremely hypocritical. Now those who can are starting to push back in the form of things like the BRICS alliance. What’s truly a shame is that an idiot like me from Ohio could have told the fools running the show what the best course of action would have been at every turn and at every step along the way. This is also true of the big picture as to how we should be trying to conduct ourselves as a species - which in large part is an extension of the same type of actions it takes in order to have a sensible foreign policy. Allot of what it would take to right the ship is a combination of the understanding of power, a healthy appreciation for respect for others along with a fervent desire to try our best to stay on the right side of history.
Starting with Kevin's words "if during the unipolar moment the US had used its power to stay smart, stay as powerful as possible, lead by example and stay on the right side of history, we’d be in a much better position....." Stepping back to a little before the unipolar moment - 22nd/11/1963, up until that moment, we actually were "smart" enough. But we lost our head, so to speak. John Professor Mearsheimer
This is exactly correct and if you’ll notice that immediately after 11/22/63 is when we went from having someone with more of a sense for that which is being on the right side of history to someone who, because of their narcissism, continued to foolishly escalate and double down on a war that was not only not in our strategic interest it wasn’t in anyone’s interest. It caused a huge amount of pain, suffering, death and destruction.
Does that sound familiar?
As is the case with so many of the big picture things, the three things that are most critical in being a good leader for someone like the president of the United States is to be honest, logical and they have to try to do the right thing. They also need to be reasonable. This means that if they start to make a mistake they can change their opinion or belief and change their policy or behavior.
A truly great leader has the sense for doing what’s right and staying on the right side of history. They have the backbone to do what’s right even when it might not be politically popular or expedient.
It always amazes me as to how we as a species can do things like be able to make the trains run on time but when it comes to things that are seemingly much easier to achieve, like simply staying on the right side of history, we can’t seem to get it right.
And, in my opinion, this is why we as a species we should be asking the deeper and more fundamental question as to why that is. Given our current set of very bad foreign affairs policies and what’s currently going on it should be apparent that if one can’t answer that basic question one is condemned to perpetually playing three dimensional bad policy whack-a-mole.
(Answering that fundamental question is why a came up with my “course”)…
John often expresses bafflement at the logic of the State Dept in Ukraine, being the realist that he is. Could it be that there is more pragmatic U.S. self-interest being served than we give DOS credit for?
Let's keep in mind that this is the first big war where the internet "PR front" is just as important as the military front. John and his podcasts are part of the former "front". So not everything will be logical in strict military terms.
The "PR front" is particularly important for managing USA home front politically. Long wars of attrition in distant lands are not popular in the U.S., given our limited attention span and stinginess with foreign aid..
The great benefit of this war to NATO is that the meat grinder is entirely in Ukraine (with the recent exception of Kursk). Only Ukraine's and Russia's blood is being spilled. This suits NATO just fine. This means the key objective is to keep Ukraine motivated to stay in this war. The U.S. seems to prize any cost inflicted on Russia as worth whatever the cost (in blood and carnage) is incurred by Ukraine. Oddly, Ukraine doesn't seem to realize its is being played as a pawn that can be easily sacrificed in NATO's game, as it soon will be. They think they are fighting to win! Of course, Zelensky has his PR front as well. It's really the Ukrainian people who are being played.
This helps explain the Kursk invasion: it's a PR stunt to make Ukraine look stronger than it is, and Russia weaker than it is. It keeps the EU loans flowing and hopefully makes Ukraine look like it's still in the fight-- hopefully until November. Might another PR objective of the Kursk invasion to Ukraine (e.g. with capture of the Kursk nuclear power plant) have been to draw the U.S. further into the war (e.g. committing troops)?
The problem is that the military front in the Donbass may collapse sooner than that. That would be inconvenient, and would speed up the sacrifice of the pawn.
Quick question: is this the same Alexander Mercouris who was disbarred in the UK in 2012 after being found guilty on five counts for actions which brought the legal profession into disrepute?
Just imagine John as President of the United States. Again and again, only the wrong people lead our country. But to even stand a chance in the US election, you need support from the billionaires or lobbies. Just look at Jill Stein, no media is giving her airtime because she stands at the complete opposite side of the table on every single issue.
The 15th Brigade of Operational Assignment Kara-Dag destroying Russian equipment on the outskirts of Selydove. The passage under the train tracks was recently attacked by a tank of the brigade is visible. A Russian assault group was destroyed at this location.
Professor Mearsheimer understands Mideast turmoil is a direct result of political 1948 Israel not being in any way, shape or form related to Biblical Israel. It is well known throughout the Mideast that a bunch of Turk-o-mogolian Khazars masquerading as "Israel", doesn't make it so. Biblical Israel is today found predominantly within Christendom. Read your Bible with discernment... it's there if you will look.
The anti-zionist and anti semitic prejudice is evident in all his work. John Mearsheimer doesn't speak any of the languages of the countries he writes about [Arabic, Hebrew, Farsi, Russian or Ukrainian] nor has he lived in any of those countries to support his geopolitical "analysis". His theories and projections are deeply flawed.
A number of languages and first hand work in those countries. You can easily see some of my work on my website and all my social media links are on the "contact" link portal at the bottom of the page.https://jopattix.com
Could you point out one element of antisemitism in his work? Just one.
Also what does speaking a country’s language diminish in any form what we can learn about that country? All of a sudden, virtually all historians and geopolitical scientists are bogus?
Kind of surprised Professor Mearsheimer does not mention that one of the methods of dealing with a numerically superior force is hitting a smaller group. You then move on to the next smaller group and then the next with the goal of getting out of town (assuming you can) with lots of prisoners when the enemy is concentrated against you or dig in and let them attack. Leads to favorable casualty exchange ratio.
I cannot say that Zelensky is telling the truth but he has said the prisoner exchange pool has been replenished and I tend to believe him. Unfortunately, I cannot say what the cost to Ukraine has been but I know I would not be upset about the loss of tanks as they can be replaced a lot easier than fighting personnel.
That’s true but as the old saying in psychology goes “the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior”. I’m not sure that applies to states but I guess it does. And if that’s the case it’s never too late to make the changes that steer one in the right direction. (That is, it’s never too late until it is). And in the case of individuals that time is upon death. And for states that time is upon extinction due to things like nuclear holocaust. So to wrap it up like it’s a nice, neat present to humanity with a beautiful bow I’d say as John points out that individuals cannot agree upon first principles. What I say to that is that despite the fact that we cannot agree on first principals doesn’t mean that there isn’t a best way forward. And what we need most of all in our world today is leadership which can identify the best way forward and steer us in that direction. It isn’t complicated…. I would take John’s advice on the situation in Ukraine in order to shut the war down. I would try my plan to resolve the situation in Israel to see if it might work. As far as the tensions with China I would try to work out a set of deals with China and come to an understanding that is the best for everyone in the long run. Maybe all of that is easier said than done but I don’t think so. By not taking the best course forward you make bad situations worse…
Certainly much to be said for past behaviors but goals do change. There is more public support for withdrawing from the world than in my entire lifetime right now and that will impact actions.
I do disagree on their being a best method of resolving all issues. It depends on what one goals are and even then there it is impossible to know ultimate consequences. You just have to live with the tensions and manage it as best one can until accomodations (which can always fall apart) are possible. My first "exposure" to Palestinian terrorism was when I was 14 years old; I'm now 62 and it is still going on. I don't expect to see it end so the fighting must go on.
John Mearsheimer has been exactly correct with regard to everything he’s weighed in on. One of his observations is that might makes right and those countries with the most power make and/or break the rules as they see fit. One irony with this observation is that if during the unipolar moment the US had used its power to stay smart, stay as powerful as possible, lead by example and stay on the right side of history, we’d be in a much better position to influence what happens from here on out the world stage. Instead we were lead by foolish idiots who squandered that prime opportunity. Now we’re being lead by short sighted, foolish cowards who are more worried about staying in power than staying on the right side of history. As he points out, the US is so powerful and geographically isolated so as not to be affected by all of the mistakes we’ve made and are making. But for better or for worse that bound to change. Because of our short sighted foolishness our power is decreasing and what little moral high ground we might have enjoyed after world war 2 has been severely eroded. Despite the ideals we say we represent the majority of the world see the US as being extremely hypocritical. Now those who can are starting to push back in the form of things like the BRICS alliance. What’s truly a shame is that an idiot like me from Ohio could have told the fools running the show what the best course of action would have been at every turn and at every step along the way. This is also true of the big picture as to how we should be trying to conduct ourselves as a species - which in large part is an extension of the same type of actions it takes in order to have a sensible foreign policy. Allot of what it would take to right the ship is a combination of the understanding of power, a healthy appreciation for respect for others along with a fervent desire to try our best to stay on the right side of history.
Starting with Kevin's words "if during the unipolar moment the US had used its power to stay smart, stay as powerful as possible, lead by example and stay on the right side of history, we’d be in a much better position....." Stepping back to a little before the unipolar moment - 22nd/11/1963, up until that moment, we actually were "smart" enough. But we lost our head, so to speak. John Professor Mearsheimer
This is exactly correct and if you’ll notice that immediately after 11/22/63 is when we went from having someone with more of a sense for that which is being on the right side of history to someone who, because of their narcissism, continued to foolishly escalate and double down on a war that was not only not in our strategic interest it wasn’t in anyone’s interest. It caused a huge amount of pain, suffering, death and destruction.
Does that sound familiar?
As is the case with so many of the big picture things, the three things that are most critical in being a good leader for someone like the president of the United States is to be honest, logical and they have to try to do the right thing. They also need to be reasonable. This means that if they start to make a mistake they can change their opinion or belief and change their policy or behavior.
A truly great leader has the sense for doing what’s right and staying on the right side of history. They have the backbone to do what’s right even when it might not be politically popular or expedient.
It always amazes me as to how we as a species can do things like be able to make the trains run on time but when it comes to things that are seemingly much easier to achieve, like simply staying on the right side of history, we can’t seem to get it right.
And, in my opinion, this is why we as a species we should be asking the deeper and more fundamental question as to why that is. Given our current set of very bad foreign affairs policies and what’s currently going on it should be apparent that if one can’t answer that basic question one is condemned to perpetually playing three dimensional bad policy whack-a-mole.
(Answering that fundamental question is why a came up with my “course”)…
< : - )
John often expresses bafflement at the logic of the State Dept in Ukraine, being the realist that he is. Could it be that there is more pragmatic U.S. self-interest being served than we give DOS credit for?
Let's keep in mind that this is the first big war where the internet "PR front" is just as important as the military front. John and his podcasts are part of the former "front". So not everything will be logical in strict military terms.
The "PR front" is particularly important for managing USA home front politically. Long wars of attrition in distant lands are not popular in the U.S., given our limited attention span and stinginess with foreign aid..
The great benefit of this war to NATO is that the meat grinder is entirely in Ukraine (with the recent exception of Kursk). Only Ukraine's and Russia's blood is being spilled. This suits NATO just fine. This means the key objective is to keep Ukraine motivated to stay in this war. The U.S. seems to prize any cost inflicted on Russia as worth whatever the cost (in blood and carnage) is incurred by Ukraine. Oddly, Ukraine doesn't seem to realize its is being played as a pawn that can be easily sacrificed in NATO's game, as it soon will be. They think they are fighting to win! Of course, Zelensky has his PR front as well. It's really the Ukrainian people who are being played.
This helps explain the Kursk invasion: it's a PR stunt to make Ukraine look stronger than it is, and Russia weaker than it is. It keeps the EU loans flowing and hopefully makes Ukraine look like it's still in the fight-- hopefully until November. Might another PR objective of the Kursk invasion to Ukraine (e.g. with capture of the Kursk nuclear power plant) have been to draw the U.S. further into the war (e.g. committing troops)?
The problem is that the military front in the Donbass may collapse sooner than that. That would be inconvenient, and would speed up the sacrifice of the pawn.
Quick question: is this the same Alexander Mercouris who was disbarred in the UK in 2012 after being found guilty on five counts for actions which brought the legal profession into disrepute?
If only we’d listened to John.
Just imagine John as President of the United States. Again and again, only the wrong people lead our country. But to even stand a chance in the US election, you need support from the billionaires or lobbies. Just look at Jill Stein, no media is giving her airtime because she stands at the complete opposite side of the table on every single issue.
It’s depressing honestly.
Another attempt to attack by the Russians in Donbas last week.
Russian soldiers lost on the road in Kursk oblast.
No Russian soldiers dying in Kursk or Donbas?
Russia loses no soldiers in Donbas?
Another Russian meat wave in Donbas
Ukrainian Support Forces are using the 80mm MLRS SIVALKA VM-8 flamethrower system to target Russian forces in the Kursk region.
Ukrainian Support Forces are using the 80mm MLRS SIVALKA VM-8 flamethrower system to target Russian forces in the Kursk region.
The 15th Brigade of Operational Assignment Kara-Dag destroying Russian equipment on the outskirts of Selydove. The passage under the train tracks was recently attacked by a tank of the brigade is visible. A Russian assault group was destroyed at this location.
Another Russian meat wave in Donbas. Russians are slaughtered in Donbas.
Professor Mearsheimer understands Mideast turmoil is a direct result of political 1948 Israel not being in any way, shape or form related to Biblical Israel. It is well known throughout the Mideast that a bunch of Turk-o-mogolian Khazars masquerading as "Israel", doesn't make it so. Biblical Israel is today found predominantly within Christendom. Read your Bible with discernment... it's there if you will look.
The anti-zionist and anti semitic prejudice is evident in all his work. John Mearsheimer doesn't speak any of the languages of the countries he writes about [Arabic, Hebrew, Farsi, Russian or Ukrainian] nor has he lived in any of those countries to support his geopolitical "analysis". His theories and projections are deeply flawed.
Oh really? Just how many of those languages do you speak and could you provide links to your body of work?
A number of languages and first hand work in those countries. You can easily see some of my work on my website and all my social media links are on the "contact" link portal at the bottom of the page.https://jopattix.com
“Evident”
Could you point out one element of antisemitism in his work? Just one.
Also what does speaking a country’s language diminish in any form what we can learn about that country? All of a sudden, virtually all historians and geopolitical scientists are bogus?
not speaking*
Kind of surprised Professor Mearsheimer does not mention that one of the methods of dealing with a numerically superior force is hitting a smaller group. You then move on to the next smaller group and then the next with the goal of getting out of town (assuming you can) with lots of prisoners when the enemy is concentrated against you or dig in and let them attack. Leads to favorable casualty exchange ratio.
I cannot say that Zelensky is telling the truth but he has said the prisoner exchange pool has been replenished and I tend to believe him. Unfortunately, I cannot say what the cost to Ukraine has been but I know I would not be upset about the loss of tanks as they can be replaced a lot easier than fighting personnel.
But the point is is that this pointless war could have and should have been avoided in the first place.
Russia had no reason to attack Ukraine.
Perhaps; but it is water under the bridge.
That’s true but as the old saying in psychology goes “the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior”. I’m not sure that applies to states but I guess it does. And if that’s the case it’s never too late to make the changes that steer one in the right direction. (That is, it’s never too late until it is). And in the case of individuals that time is upon death. And for states that time is upon extinction due to things like nuclear holocaust. So to wrap it up like it’s a nice, neat present to humanity with a beautiful bow I’d say as John points out that individuals cannot agree upon first principles. What I say to that is that despite the fact that we cannot agree on first principals doesn’t mean that there isn’t a best way forward. And what we need most of all in our world today is leadership which can identify the best way forward and steer us in that direction. It isn’t complicated…. I would take John’s advice on the situation in Ukraine in order to shut the war down. I would try my plan to resolve the situation in Israel to see if it might work. As far as the tensions with China I would try to work out a set of deals with China and come to an understanding that is the best for everyone in the long run. Maybe all of that is easier said than done but I don’t think so. By not taking the best course forward you make bad situations worse…
Certainly much to be said for past behaviors but goals do change. There is more public support for withdrawing from the world than in my entire lifetime right now and that will impact actions.
I do disagree on their being a best method of resolving all issues. It depends on what one goals are and even then there it is impossible to know ultimate consequences. You just have to live with the tensions and manage it as best one can until accomodations (which can always fall apart) are possible. My first "exposure" to Palestinian terrorism was when I was 14 years old; I'm now 62 and it is still going on. I don't expect to see it end so the fighting must go on.