There was a discussion about Ukraine, and then you switched to your favorite subject - Israel.

BTW, about Ukraine - apparently, Ukrainians had attacked Russian strategic early warning radar deep in Russia - some 2,000 kilometers from Ukraine. It's getting hotter by the minute.

Just like that fuel fire in Gaza. Initial reports - and everyone was screaming about it - were that Israel had attacked in the "designated safety zone". Now it was debunked. Had anyone apologized?

Now Israelis are saying the missiles they used could not have ignited that fuel tank. Potentially, it was caused by the ammunition that was in the targeted car. Whose fault was that?

Will the professor issue a "correction"? An apology?

Expand full comment

You can't just tell some stories and ask for an apology. According to the IDF they are still investigating the cause of the fuel tank fire. Here is the current conclusion that shrapnel caused the fire: https://www.timesofisrael.com/shrapnel-from-israeli-strike-may-have-ignited-fuel-tank-near-rafah-tents-report/

Expand full comment

"Shrapnel or something else".

And you should tell the professor not to rush with his sly remarks, as time and again Hamas reports some civilian casualties the world runs to condemn, and when the story is corrected, it is all, but forgotten.

Expand full comment

It looks like you are the one who is rushing to judgment with your insistence that it was a Hamas 'car with ammunition' that ignited the fuel tank. The investigation is not yet over, I personally would not trust either the Israelis or Hamas. I would prefer an independent investigation by the UN or some country like Sweden.

Expand full comment
May 31·edited May 31

It’s time to disband UNRWA, the dedicated agency to Palestinian “refugees”, that has become embedded with Hamas.

• Why do Palestinian “refugees”, less than 1% of the world’s refugees, have their own UN-funded agency?

• Why do Palestinians still retain refugee status 75 years after the 1948 war, passing it down generations?

• Why are Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank considered refugees if these areas are part of Palestine?

• Why are Palestinian citizens of other countries (i.e., Palestinian-Americans) considered refugees by their definition?

UNRWA’s continued operation and the unique treatment of Palestinians obstruct peace. The persistence of refugee status and the “right of return” to Israel conflicts with accepting a separate Palestinian state.


Learn more: https://tinyurl.com/ys8kjttw

Expand full comment

First Israel needs end its colonial settler occupation of all pre1967 Palestinian territories. Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank are considered refugees because it is Palestinian land occupied by Israel. Gaza is in fact an open-air prison just like the Warsaw Ghetto.

Expand full comment

The territories referred to (West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem) were not under Palestinian control before 1967. The West Bank was part of Jordan, and Gaza was under Egyptian administration. The term "pre-1967 Palestinian territories" is therefore misleading.

The Warsaw Ghetto was a Nazi-occupied area in World War II where Jews were confined, subjected to starvation, forced labor, and eventual deportation to extermination camps. Comparing it to Gaza is inaccurate and offensive. While Gaza faces significant humanitarian challenges and restrictions brought on by their subjugation by Hamas, the scale, nature, and intent behind these situations are completely different.

The term "colonial settler occupation" is heavily loaded and implies a direct parallel to European colonial practices and ignores the multiple peace efforts by Israel that the Palestinians have rejected. Peace involves mutual recognition, security concerns, political factions within both Israeli and Palestinian societies, and regional dynamics. When will the Palestinians say they accept Israel and are willing to live peacefully in their own country next to Israel?

Expand full comment

We don't care about who 'controlled' the land before 67. The land belongs to the people who have lived there for hundreds of years, not to some settlers from Russia, Poland, Czechoslovakia etc. Starvation, lack of water, fuel are exactly the conditions in Gaza - just like the Warsaw ghetto the only difference is that the deportation is not to gas chambers but to Egypt etc. Gaza is more like Indian reservations in the US, except the residents don't have rights as citizens of the country and are constantly humiliated, arrested and persecuted.

Expand full comment

Islam was founded in the early 7th century CE.

Meanwhile, Judaism in this land:

1. **2000-1500 BCE**: Early Jewish history traditionally begins with the patriarch Abraham, who is said to have migrated to Canaan, the region that roughly corresponds to modern-day Israel and Palestine.

2. **13th century BCE**: The Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, led by Moses, and their eventual settlement in Canaan. This period includes the era of the Judges, a time of tribal confederacy.

3. **1000-922 BCE**: The United Monarchy under Kings Saul, David, and Solomon, with Jerusalem as the capital. Solomon builds the First Temple.

4. **922-586 BCE**: The division into the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah. The Northern Kingdom falls to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, and the Southern Kingdom falls to the Babylonians in 586 BCE, leading to the destruction of the First Temple and the Babylonian Exile.

### Second Temple Period

5. **539 BCE**: The Persian Empire conquers Babylon, and Jews are allowed to return and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem (Second Temple).

6. **333 BCE**: Alexander the Great conquers the region. After his death, the area falls under the control of the Ptolemaic and then Seleucid empires.

7. **167-160 BCE**: The Maccabean Revolt against the Seleucid Empire, leading to the establishment of the Hasmonean Kingdom, an independent Jewish state.

8. **63 BCE**: The Roman Empire conquers the region, turning it into the Roman province of Judea.

9. **70 CE**: The Romans destroy the Second Temple following the Jewish Revolt (66-73 CE), leading to significant Jewish diaspora.

10. **132-135 CE**: The Bar Kokhba Revolt, the last major Jewish rebellion against Rome. After its suppression, Jews are banned from Jerusalem, and the region is renamed "Syria Palaestina."

### Byzantine, Islamic, and Crusader Periods

11. **313-636 CE**: Byzantine rule over the region. Jews face periods of persecution and restriction.

12. **636-1099**: Islamic Caliphates control the region. Jewish communities experience periods of relative tolerance and prosperity under various Islamic rulers.

13. **1099-1291**: Crusader rule during the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Jewish communities face massacres and persecution during the Crusades.

### Ottoman Period and British Mandate

14. **1517-1917**: Ottoman rule over Palestine. Jews live as a minority but have some degree of autonomy in local matters.

15. **1882-1903**: First Aliyah, a wave of Jewish immigration primarily from Eastern Europe, marking the beginning of modern Zionist settlement.

16. **1917-1948**: British Mandate of Palestine following World War I. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 expresses British support for a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine.

### Modern Period

17. **1947**: United Nations proposes a partition plan to create separate Jewish and Arab states. The plan is accepted by the Jewish community but rejected by the Arab community.

18. **1948**: The State of Israel is declared on May 14. Following the declaration, the Arab-Israeli War breaks out, resulting in the establishment of Israel and the displacement of many Palestinians.

19. **1967**: The Six-Day War results in Israel capturing the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula. Jerusalem is unified under Israeli control.

20. **1979**: Israel and Egypt sign a peace treaty, with Israel returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt.

21. **1993-1995**: Oslo Accords are signed, leading to the creation of the Palestinian Authority and limited self-rule for Palestinians in parts of the West Bank and Gaza.

22. **2000s**: Continued conflict and periodic negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, alongside internal political developments in both communities.

### Current Period

23. **Present**: Israel remains a significant center of Jewish life and culture, with ongoing political and social challenges related to its relationships with the Palestinian people and neighboring countries. The Jewish population in Israel is diverse, including Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi communities, among others.

Expand full comment

This has nothing to do with religion. I don't care about Islam or Judaism - both of which are pretty juvenile violent religions. I only care about people.

The land belongs to the people who have been living there for hundreds of years, not to some colonial settlers from Europe.

Expand full comment

Richard Jaffee does not know the word indigenous. LOL.

Expand full comment

No colonial settlers. People returning.

Expand full comment

The reason for the their suffering is do to people like Netanyahu, and those that preceded him, and the colonial, racist mindset that gave the land of a people, the Palestinians, to another. They suffer because Israel has maintained that prejudicial position through generations. The butchery on display now, although certainly seen on various levels in the past is not only due to people like Netanyahu and his Zionist cohorts, but too it's own citizenry, and to people like you who justify their carnage. You would even feel comfortable in disbanding UNRWA a UN agency who offers relief like food to Palestinians. You're sick!

Expand full comment

You're a fool. It's people like you who continue the suffering of the Palestinians. As long as you believe that rejecting Israel and living in a depraved state will eventually allow Palestinians to move to another country, you'll remain stuck. Throughout history, refugees from around the world have moved on and integrated into their new countries. Since 1947, Palestinians have been offered their own country alongside Israel multiple times — but always rejected. But go ahead, keep perpetuating their misery.

Expand full comment

“Palestinians have been offered their own country alongside Israel multiple times — but always rejected.”

You are the fool to believe this. Didn’t you get the memo from your Fuhrer Nethanyahu? He already admitted that’s a lie. He said, “he is proud to have prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state for decades.” Israel has never had any intention of giving the Palestinians their own state. Listen to your Fuhrer. LOL

The Oslo accords fell apart because Israel never wanted a deal. You only need a little bit of intelligence to know the real truth from a lie. Israel has nothing to gain by giving the Palestinian their own state and nothing to lose if they don’t. It’s really common sense. You don’t settle if you are already winning. Like if you are in a lawsuit, if you know you are absolutely sure you are going to win, you have no reason to settle.

Israel knows it can defeat the Palestinian, therefore it has no reason to give it anything.

Expand full comment

The proximity of the West Bank to major Israeli population centers raises significant concerns about effective border control. Lax oversight could lead to the smuggling of weapons and terrorists into Israel. Israeli security control is crucial for defense against potential invasions or large-scale attacks. Internal conflicts could lead to control by Hamas, potentially resulting in attacks similar to those on October 7.

Israel's narrowest point is only about nine miles wide from the Mediterranean Sea to the West Bank. The highlands of the West Bank overlook much of Israel's coastal plain, adding to security concerns. The proximity of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem to the West Bank means that hostile actions from the West Bank could quickly impact these vital areas.

The history of Palestinian terrorism from the West Bank reinforces Israeli wariness. The First Intifada (1987-1993) involved widespread violence and civil disobedience, including stone-throwing, firebombing, and shootings, resulting in significant Israeli casualties. The Second Intifada (2000-2005) saw a dramatic increase in violence, including numerous suicide bombings, shootings, and other attacks against Israeli civilians and military targets. Operations like the 2002 Operation Defensive Shield aimed to dismantle the infrastructure of Palestinian militant groups in response to escalating violence.

Importantly, the Palestinians have rejected every opportunity for a state of their own, insisting on all of Israel as their country. The 1947 UN Partition Plan proposed separate Jewish and Arab states, and subsequent negotiations following the 1948-1949 Arab-Israeli War, the 1967 Six-Day War, the 2000 Camp David Summit, the 2008 Annapolis Conference, and the 2014 Peace Talks, saw opportunities for Palestinian statehood not materialize, with Palestinian leaders rejecting various proposals. Their refusal to compromise on the issue of the right of return for millions of descendants of 1948 refugees to Israel demonstrates a reluctance to accept a two-state solution.

Expand full comment
May 31·edited May 31

Perhaps you don't understand this about yourself poor Richard, but you are just another abuser who hides their abusive, prejudicial hate under the guise of caring. You're not alone in this regard whether it's Israel or if you were excusing an abusive parent, or if you were the abusive parent trying to justify your own abusive behavior. Who do you think your kidding with your BS!

Expand full comment
May 31·edited May 31

So, in the 75 years that Israel has lived as a nation focusing on education and growth of their country, here is a sample of advances in technology, water, science, and medicine that Israel has contributed to the world:

### Technology

1. **USB Flash Drive**: Developed by Israeli company M-Systems, revolutionizing data storage and transfer.

2. **Waze**: A GPS-based geographical navigation application that provides turn-by-turn information and user-submitted travel times.

3. **Iron Dome**: An advanced air defense system designed to intercept and destroy short-range rockets and artillery shells.

4. **Mobileye**: A technology that provides advanced driver-assistance systems and is a pioneer in the development of autonomous driving technology.

5. **PillCam**: A capsule endoscopy developed by Given Imaging, allowing doctors to see inside a patient’s gastrointestinal tract.

### Water

1. **Drip Irrigation**: Invented by Simcha Blass, this irrigation method delivers water directly to the roots of plants, significantly improving water efficiency and crop yield.

2. **Desalination Technology**: Israel is a world leader in desalination, with the Sorek Desalination Plant being one of the largest and most advanced in the world.

3. **Watergen**: A technology that extracts clean drinking water from the air, providing a new solution for water-scarce regions.

### Scientific

1. **Weizmann Institute of Science**: Home to many groundbreaking research projects in physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics.

2. **ReWalk**: An exoskeleton for paraplegics that allows them to walk, sit, stand, and even climb stairs.

3. **First Fully Computerized Nuclear Reactor**: At the Negev Nuclear Research Center in Dimona, Israel developed the first fully computerized reactor.

### Medical

1. **Copaxone**: A leading multiple sclerosis treatment developed by Teva Pharmaceuticals.

2. **Azilect**: A drug used to treat Parkinson's disease, also developed by Teva Pharmaceuticals.

3. **Biofeedback and Neurofeedback**: Techniques developed and refined in Israel for treating various neurological conditions.

4. **Emergency Bandage**: Also known as the "Israeli bandage," widely used by military and emergency medical personnel for traumatic hemorrhagic injuries.

5. **TAZOXIN®**: A combination antibiotic developed for treating severe infections.

Meanwhile, in the 75 years that Palestinians have rejected peace and taught their children to hate and grow up to be martyrs to make their families proud, here are the contributions they have made to the world:

### Hijackings

1. **Airplane Hijackings**: Notable incidents include the hijacking of Air France Flight 139 in 1976 (Entebbe Raid) and multiple incidents during the 1970s and 1980s involving groups like the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).

### Bombings

1. **Suicide Bombings**: Especially during the Second Intifada, Palestinian groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad carried out numerous suicide bombings in Israeli cities.

2. **Car Bombings**: Use of explosive-laden vehicles to target civilians and military personnel.

3. **Bus Bombings**: Several attacks on public buses in Israel.

4. **Restaurant and Cafe Bombings**: Targeting crowded places to inflict maximum casualties.

5. **Nightclub Bombings**: Notable incident includes the 2001 bombing at the Dolphinarium discotheque in Tel Aviv.

### Shootings

1. **Mass Shootings**: Incidents such as the 2002 attack on the Yeshivat Otniel and the 2014 Har Nof synagogue massacre.

### Stabbings

1. **Knife Attacks**: Numerous stabbing incidents, particularly during the "stabbing intifada" that began in 2015, targeting civilians and soldiers.

### Rocket and Mortar Attacks

1. **Rocket Fire**: Frequent launching of rockets from Gaza into Israeli territory, often targeting civilian areas.

2. **Mortar Fire**: Similar to rocket attacks but using shorter-range weapons.

### Hostage Situations

1. **Kidnappings**: Incidents like the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre where Israeli athletes were taken hostage and killed by the Black September group.

### Other Attacks

1. **Vehicle Ramming**: Attacks where vehicles are driven into crowds, often in busy areas.

2. **Grenade Attacks**: Use of grenades in public places and markets.

You keep good company…

Expand full comment

Richard Israel won't be remembered for it's accomplishments, but for implementing a genocide, much like the Germans are remembered for their genocidal attacks against a number of people, Jews, Poles, Gypsies. If you really cared about Israel you wouldn't be pushing it's genocidal assault on the Palestinians and simply saying they should go elsewhere, and not acknowledging there is no elsewhere to boot.

Expand full comment

Also your pretense of caring about Palestinians is no more then an obvious scam, a ruse, blatantly made clear by your personal assault on them, and totally negating the horrors, the carnage the Israeli's have implemented on their lives. You're kidding no one Richard, accept yourself, and maybe that is to absolve Israel of the genocide they are implementing and the growing world wide condemnation of their actions. If it continues Israel will become a pariah state if it is not one already.

Expand full comment

Hello John,

I'm hoping that you can answer a question, either here or on the next Judging Freedom. You probably know that Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov warned that the US was close to making a "fatal mistake" and the response may be "asymmetrical" and "stronger than expected."


Would you be willing to hazard a guess as to what he means? I doubt that he is referring to tactical nukes or attacks on NATO territory, but I don't know what he is referring to. Any insight would be appreciated.


Expand full comment

He’s not worth listening to .

Expand full comment

Thanks for your excellent analysis of both the Ukraine war and the Gaza massacres. You totally correct about Gaza, however you are wrong about the current situation in Ukraine. While Russia gained some advantage while Ukraine was out of artillery rounds, the situation has stabilized since the aid package passed Congress. Russia is not winning right now, the war is at a stalemate. Russia would win if the war continued endlessly since it is a much bigger country, but it will pay a very heavy price. Maybe it will realize this soon and sue for a ceasefire.

Expand full comment

Professor Mearsheimer, I'm interested in whether your offensive realism hypothesis can be extended to explain what you sometimes have said is a counterexample: the USA-Israel relationship and the power of the "Israel Lobby". By way of incorporating Peter Turchin's work on elites and counter-elites?

Expand full comment

dual citizens are a crock

a concept i will duly mock

at age eighteen you pick a side

we'll pick one if you can't decide


dual citizens are traitors

at the least prevaricators

which side to choose if there's war on

dual state's an oxymoron


The Worlds Most Dangerous Poet

Expand full comment

Agreed, it's a crock. But what happens if you don't get the choice to renounce? Or, even if you do, and the nation is willing to honor your choice, you lack the 4-5 figure sums the nation charges you just to apply for renunciation?

Expand full comment

excuse my ignorance, but i was not aware 'renouncing' citizenship incurred some sort of fees... i knew some countries experiencing a large outflux were doing punitive fees of questionable legality, but was not aware that is a universal thing... of course, it is inhumane, but that surely doesn't stop anyone these days... as a practical matter, you have dual citizenship and 'renounce' one of them, you don't pay the BS fees, what is the rejected country going to do, other than put out a warrant for your arrest if you set foot back in that country ? ? ? seems unlikely the country you chose would honor extradition for such a 'crime'...

thanks for reply...

Expand full comment

If you look at the big picture as to what we need to do as a species in order to survive (and thrive) in the future international relations (IR) is a big part of that puzzle. But it isn’t the only piece of the puzzle that needs to be solved. In my opinion the puzzle analogy is a good one when looking at what it will take in order for us to survive. It’s my opinion that ideally all of the parts of the puzzle need to be determined, prioritized and put together, or solved, simultaneously in a relatively short period of time. However, getting most of the bigger, more fundamental parts of the puzzle figured out, solved and put together is much better than not even being able to identify and solve the more fundamental pieces. It’s my opinion that John Mearsheimer has figured out the international relations (IR) part of the puzzle. I could go on to explain the rest of what I have to say but it would be too lengthy for this format. With that in mind, suffice it to say that there are some things associated with Dr. Mearsheimer’s theory, however correct they might be, that will need to be overcome if we are going to avoid a great power war. I could explain what I mean but basically what it amounts to is the fact that we need to try to overcome a few of the things that Dr. Mearsheimer has observed and stated in a recent lecture - and that is that “politics is a contact sport” and that “war or the threat of war will never be taken off the table”. Suffice it to say that I think I’ve come up with a method to ameliorate both of these conditions along with all of the other problems we’re going to have to try to tackle in order to solve the puzzle that we’re faced with. - - If anyone is interested in what I have to say I’ll write an explanation in substack.

Expand full comment

Dr. Mearsheimer, You are to IR as I am to humanity. My theory and prescription is built in part upon your theory. - It’s my contention that you are to IR as I am to humanity. - Think of all of the death, destruction, pain and suffering we as a species would have avoided if we had only listened to your good advice over the past few decades. Incredibly up until relatively recently you didn’t have much of an audience. And what’s even more incredible, is that now that you do, it still hasn’t made much of an impact on our foreign policy. This is incredible. It’s been incredibly foolish to have not taken your good advice. For the same reasons, it’s incredible that no one is listening to me. It’s incredible that no one wants to listen to and heed my advice. - - I guess that given the fact that you haven’t gotten much traction it isn’t uprising that I haven’t gotten any. - - Basically what I’ve come up with has been to take your concept of a “theory” and apply it to the bigger picture beyond simply looking at IR and how it works. I’ve drilled down on the underpinnings as to who, what, when, where, why and how all things human, both big and small work. So what I’ve come up with is in essence a master class in world leadership and diplomacy. It’s both the destination, road map, and vehicle as to how to try to get to where we need to go as a species. It’s a playbook as to how we should try to conduct ourselves. And maybe most importantly, it’s both the governor and the sole ultimate objective as to what artifitial intelligence needs to continuously strive for in order that it is aligned with humanities’ long term interests so that it is used as a force for good for humans rather than for a force for anything other than good. If it’s used for anything other than for good, and doesn’t strictly adhere to my simple theory and prescription, it itself will result in the demise of the human race as a species. - - With regard to IR, my theory and prescription builds on the theory of offensive realism but it has a few things related to great power dynamics which will be required to be overcome in order for us to avoid the life ending tragedy of total, all out nuclear war between the great powers. My theory and prescription is made up of a “course” which consists of a series of YouTube videos and my three papers. When the elements of this “course” are taken together they provide the same type of “understanding” of the entire ball of wax as your theory of offensive realism lends itself to the “understanding” of the IR system. And this is why, just as it has been a cardinal sin to have not listened to your good advice, it will be the ultimate cardinal sin to have not listened to my good advice. That should serve as a wake up call. If anyone is interested I would be glad to elaborate and explain my theory and prescription by way of providing you with my course. Thank you for your time. Kevin C. Flynn. kevincflynn1@gmail.com

Expand full comment

In other words, we are risking a nuclear war to prevent Russia invading NATO countries, so, by determining Russia to obey a set of rules established to keep the world more peaceful. This is ... crazy 😧 Not to add the fact that what we see in Gaza has nothing to do with the international laws.

Expand full comment

The international laws were designed by the US for small countries to control and keep them in line. The international laws are not meant for them and other superpowers like Russia and China.

Expand full comment

What I am saying is that Ukraine cannot defeat Russia and that we are transforming a bad situation into a catastrophe buy militarizing Ukraine and now by transforming the conflict into a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. We are burning the world instead of choosing the right approach of improving things.

Expand full comment

The US said to Ukraine it can defeat Russia because the US and other NATO countries will supply it with weapons. The US is calling the shots. It says keep fighting.

Expand full comment

If you are saying that the international laws are the issue now, you are saying that Russia had the right to invade Ukraine. Russia didn't have any right to invade Ukraine.

Expand full comment

You are the one saying, “the war will end when Russia will obey the international laws.”

What I am saying is that Russia does not care about International laws. No superpowers, including the USA, care about International laws.

You’re saying that Russia does not have the “right” to invade Ukraine. Based on what? Moral right or legal right? If it’s legal right, what laws? International laws?

I already explained that Russia does not care about International law. To them they have their own laws and according to their laws, they have the right to invade Ukraine.

Expand full comment

Is there a country that has the right to invade another country? I think not.

But to solve the situation for Ukraine like this is wrong and very dangerous for Ukraine and Europe. What will be the positive outcome at the end?

Expand full comment

You keep saying “the right to and not the right to.” You assume everyone follows the same standard of what is right and wrong. In some states, people have the right to smoke marijuana, while in some states, they don’t have that right. You see what I mean?

Expand full comment

I remembered the name of an animated series fron Cartoon Network "2 Stupid Dogs" and until we will understand what is the reason for this solution applied to Ukraine we can only say that both Russia and NATO are like 2 stupid dogs.

Expand full comment

But is wrong to attack a country that has no intention to attack you. Had Ukraine any intention to attack Russia?

I am still trying to understand why the Ukrainians should die and why risking a world war/nuclear war.

Expand full comment

Reasonable people can disagree as to the level of risk to accept and what those levels are but some level of risk has to be accepted. Otherwise, we'd sit in our houses and starve to death.

Expand full comment
deletedMay 31
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
May 31·edited May 31

I don't know for sure where to draw the lines but in my view Russia is either overly paranoid or expansionist. Everyone makes mistakes but I'm inclined to follow the desires of our allies in Europe who almost universally support Ukraine. If Ukraine wants to quit, I'd be fine with that too but they've made their views pretty clear.

Now in 2014 I was pretty disgusted with Ukraine's response to the little Green Men from Russia and wondered if they really cared but since then I've had discussions with Ukrainians and found their explanations reasonable. They are fighting effectively and I will support helping them until they are ready to quit or win or my fellow citizens decide Ukraine isn't worth it. Right now, the cost is quite low for those of us in US but not for Ukrainians and the countries hosting their refugees.

Two things I am firm on, however. One has to be willing to fight for good causes and Western world (includes many countries in Asia) are the good guys. I'm not prepared to say Putin is evil, but he is closer to that edge of the spectrum than I like and if some people want to call him evil (or good), I'm quite o.k. with them holding that opinion.

Expand full comment

Putin is a dictator, but he also said what he wants. Our leaders pretend they don't understand what he wants, they invented this danger (of Russia attacking NATO countries) and they push this war towards a larger conflict instead of discussing about peace.

The only logical explanation was presented by professor Mearsheimer. And it is related to NATO expansion.

If the politicians want something it doesn't mean that the majority of people want the same thing (if they are well informed).

Expand full comment

True about politicians. I have a very high tolerance for lying by politicians as long as they are doing what they feel is best. FDR pushed Japan and Germany around while denying he wanted to be involved in war; it was the only way to get the American people to want to be involved.

I was opposed to NATO expansion too aside from Poland. I wanted the rest of the countries to do whatever it was that Finland was but I now think I was wrong. I'm wrong about a lot of things and I hope you are open to the possibility that you get things wrong too.

In the end, I've never had a disagreement with anyone I couldn't get over. I'm entirely too aware of my own failures and leaders have to pretend they know exactly what they are doing.

Expand full comment

Germany was in a conquering campaign. It was something different. Hitler was something new even for Germany.

Putin is a dictator, like all the Russian leaders before him.

But how can we hope for peace if our leaders are not listening to his demands. And this is another part of war propaganda. They say we should not listen to Putin because he is always lieing. They keep saying that Russia will attack NATO and because of this we should fight now with Russia because the Ukrainians will fight for us.

We are stuck in this war.

Expand full comment

Based on what Antony Blinken declared at NATO meeting today, the war will end when Russia will obey the international laws.

Expand full comment

Blinken was probably trying not to laugh because he knows the US never obeys international laws if they don’t want to.

Expand full comment

NATO has its war and its objectives. Who can believe that the NATO countries would risk a war with Russia just because has invaded Ukraine and because Zelensky asks.

Expand full comment

“Who can believe that the NATO countries would risk a war with Russia just because has invaded Ukraine and because Zelensky asks.”

Why are NATO countries supplying weapons to Ukraine to fight the Russians? Who can believe that supplying weapons to Ukraine does not risk a war with Russia?

Expand full comment

Now is not about supplying guns to Ukraine, it is about using guns positioned in Ukraine to hit targets inside Russia. And today Macron announced the fact that French soldiers are now deployed in Ukraine to help with coordination. This is direct war with Russia. So, can we believe that this is happening because Zelensky asked or because Russia invaded a country (Ukraine in this case)? Or there can be other reasons (objectives) behind this?

Expand full comment

This is all because the US wants to. NATO and Zelensky cannot tie their shoes without asking permission from the US.

Expand full comment

I support that position and if Russia wins, I'd support efforts to drive revolutions. Not merely moral support as has been the past practice in Eastern Europe.

Expand full comment
deletedMay 31
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
May 31·edited May 31

I never got upset about Russian efforts to influence the election in 2016 which were laughably bad but I do concede in a close election like 2016, it could make a difference in outcome. As for efforts to drive a revolution would be a miserable failure and people who say the US is on the edge of revolution did not live through the '60s.

One other thing. I do disagree with Professor Mearsheimer when he talks about color revolutions. The US has influence, but it is not really trying very hard while Russia is fighting all-out. If in such a situation, the people rebel and recognize the risks, I say "good for them." Russia doesn't want to put the Western world where they actually try but it is her decision to make. In the end though, I never ever want to see Civil War but if most of the people support freedom following Lukashenko's passing, I might. Worked out well for Romania and the rest of Eastern Europe but not for everyone. If you and citizens in your country succeed in changing things in the ballot box, I'd support that decision and US will withdraw from NATO.

Expand full comment

The discussion between the professor and Judge Napolitano suprised me in many ways. I sensed that Professor Mearsheimer feared a gradual military escalation that recalls the first twenty minutes or so of "The Day After," (1983, and available on Utube) the only US telefilm to be broadcast in the then USSR. It describes the nuclear destruction of the US after a war, even a proxy war, gets out hand. Nobody is now winning in the West: Macron is perceived as an idiot, Sunak has resigned(why so soon?) Scholz is a confused buffoon. Ursula fond of Lying is going to be replaced. The Italians, Hungarians, Slovaks have completely ruled out joining NATO in their merry games. Nobody can see how this will end. I am seriously wondering if we will all see the next christmas.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately your observation about people not being able to agree on first principals is correct. It would be nice if everyone were completely rational and reasonable in the way that a completely reasonable and rational person would define those terms. One might come to the conclusion that that is not something that can be achieved, but I think it can. It’s my opinion that one can arrive at that which should be considered to be completely rational and reasonable by using your technique of using a simple theory to try to explain a complicated world. However, as you point out, not everyone can agree on what’s rational and reasonable because they can’t come to an agreement on first principals. So the next best thing to being able to achieve consensus on that which is rational and reasonable is to either have leadership whose job it is to achieve that state of being for their followers or to have an omniscient artifitial intelligence determine that for us. It’s my opinion that the “course” that I’ve developed is the best way to try to achieve either one or both of those goals. - - For the same reasons that the US and the world should be listening to you when it comes to IR, humanity at large should be listening to me when it comes to how we might best try to avoid self destruction. - - In both instances it basically comes down to gaining an “understanding” of both how the world works and how best to try to navigate the reality of that world so as to have the best possible outcome for humanity.

Expand full comment