What you have to say is so obvious it’s crazy. And if it were just crazy it might be acceptable but the net effect of not following your advice has been the loss of thousands of lives. Thousands of people maimed for life. And therefore not following your advice on all of the issues you’ve weighed in on amounts what should be considered to be a cardinal sin.
All makes perfect sense, especially the Russia & Ukraine conflict. Now I know why we’ve been bashing Russia for so long. There’s always a long-term state-planned narrative preceding wars we plan to execute. While living in Europe I was insulted by the negative talk about America’s foreign meddling. How naive we all were about our country’s true intentions. I was such a proud patriot. Now I’m a patriot who is suspicious of every government action foreign & domestic.
The Ukraine supporters in the US don't care about winning or losing the war. They care about prolonging it. That's why Congress is "future-proofing" financial support for Ukraine and why Biden is about to sign a ten year security agreement with Ukraine. It's pretty obvious they have no intention of leaving Ukraine irrespective of who objects, even if it's the American public—even in an election year.
Always appreciate Mearsheimers knowledge of these issues. Thankful to the few voices of reason like his. Austin is “in charge” because neoliberalism presents itself as tolerant on issues of race and identity but serves corporate power and militarism; as with colonization black faces in high places look very humanistic for the empire. Neoliberalism is also a mindless frightening ideology that venerates the military and values of violence & force.
For there to be peace between the US and Russia, both sides need to have an understanding (or agreed upon misunderstanding), and respect for, the relative strengths of the other side. This war has knocked the previous understanding out of whack. Drones, artillery, glide bombs, industrial production or lack thereof, hypersonic missiles, AI, a weak US dollar, lacklustre military recruitment, US political chaos, and probably most of all abysmal US leadership all mean that neither country can be sure they are in the stronger or weaker position. In other words, it's not completely clear who is the daddy in the borstal. The first Gulf war and our dominance of Iraq showed the Russians for sure that we were the daddy. Now, it's not so clear. We might still be dominant, but we can't be sure that they are sure. We can't fight with the Russians to see who is tougher because that means nuclear war. So I predict we find some other third country to beat so badly that the Russians say, ok, you're the daddy. Iran? But maybe this time we get beat, and someone else is the daddy for awhile. But if that's the case, we'll rise up a second time (like Germany) because we'll call the first one a fluke. OR, we could just choose peace and find a way to get along with everyone. I just doubt that that will happen.
If you think the U.S. could not destroy Russia in a head to head, all out war, you are very poorly informed. While we might not be able to field the massive artillery and ground forces to overwhelm the, our air superiority is total over Russian air space. It would not be a cake walk, reducing their air defenses will take some time and maybe some lost aircraft but it can and would be done. And with air superiority, their ground forces are useless. Nukes are a standoff, MAD makes both sides hesitate.
Russia isn't miscalculating - we are. We didn't understand how Russia saw Ukraine, or better said, we chose to ignore what they said over and over for 8 years. Fyi, we are at 'peace' with Russia, so your entire comment is just odd.
It seems to me I remember a little war we had recently against guys with flip flops and Kalashnikovs over which we had not just air superiority but everything superiority. But hey, I'm poorly informed. A guy studying international affairs at a big University told me that if Putin invaded Ukraine, there would be Abrams' tanks in Moscow. Turns out he was right, they just had some there for Putin's inauguration as war trophies. Not long ago, I carried around the same assumption you still have. I don't carry that around anymore. If you think we are at peace with Russia, why is there an Abrams tank in Moscow as a war trophy?
Truly juvenile thinking. Not sure why I engaged you. I thought you were serious. My comment was based on the actual array of forces the U.S. possesses, not Ukraine. We are arguing over supplying Ukraine F16s - the U.S. has F22 and F35, in addition to thousands of F15s, F16s, F18s and our bomber fleet. Ukraine has none of this. As I said, our ground forces might have a hard time of it head to head with the Russians over time (not initially). But given our air power and their air defenses, it's no contest. Perhaps you aren't aware that whenever an F22 or F35 took off in Syrian airspace, the Russians and everyone else flying anything simply landed. You may have heard that the S400 or S500 can defend against them, nope. We have doctrine to destroy all Russian SAM defenses. It will take some time and may costs some aircraft. But once you establish air superiority, ground force mean nothing as they can be slaughtered at will.
Well, I hope you're right. It's true I'm no military man, and don't have any inside knowledge about equipment. I graze cattle and sheep for a living. But I also know that people supposedly educated in these matters were making similar claims that you are making here about the equipment we have already sent to Ukraine as being "game changers," and after a little while, they either go very quiet or seem to forget their earlier claims. If I made mistakes like that in what I do, I'd go out of business and would have to do something else. Like I said, I hope you're right. I don't want the Russians to take over Ukraine. I want them to live in a normal country. I have heard that the S400 and S500 anti aircraft systems are effective. I hope our diplomats can come up with some kind of solution that we don't have to find out. Don't worry about hurting my feelings or wasting your time anymore replying to this comment.
We can defeat S400 and S500 and already have. It's not to say that defeating them wouldn't be challenging, it might take 2-3 weeks to eliminate most Russian SAMs and other anti-aircraft defense. And they have mobile launchers that will always be a spot problem. But at the end of the day, we can establish air superiority over both without any doubt. If you are interested, here's a nice technical breakdown of how the U.S. defeats S400. https://youtu.be/McJAYZfhapo?si=c_06X3HOU1XwzTkm I think it will help debunk any argument of 'invincibility' of air defenses for you. All these systems have vulnerabilities and when up against the sophistication of U.S. doctrine, our technological prowess and platforms, there is literally nobody who can stop us for long wrt air power and establishing control over an airspace. And it's not all tech, it's also about our brilliant tactics and pilots who are trained to defeat these systems. No other air force on earth approaches our doctrine or pilots, fyi. That's not bragging, it's just true. Look at war games between air forces (nations do this kind of thing), it's embarrassing how much better our pilots are to most other nations.
And in todays combined arms warfare, that's decisive in almost any battle. It won't eliminate insurgents though, so invading and trying to hold territory is an entirely different question. But be clear, we could wipe Russia off the Ukrainian battlefield in short order were we to deploy the full force of U.S. air power. And contrary to the commenter upthread, we can sustain such distant expeditionary deployments at scale for long periods.
You may be correct concerning training, etc. but how do you get enough airpower close enough to make a difference? How many ships with various supplies, etc., get sunk on the way over? What is the readiness level of the various aircraft? What is the readiness level of the European armed forces? Is there enough to make a stand? Can we handle the logistics? It took more than 6 months to prepare for Desert Storm with Iraq not able to harm the build-up. Russia is much more capable to hitting large concentrations and the Patriot does not seem to be meeting expectations for effectiveness.
Ok. I'll check it out. It's reassuring, as I live within artillery range of the Russian border and it's been a concern for many years. The war in Ukraine has made me pretty wary of claims of our technical superiority, and the war in Afghanistan made me wary of claims of our fortitude and superior generalship and doctrine. Thanks for taking the trouble.
Who cares about air superiority, once full scale war between USA and Russia begins? Europe won't have a single functioning landing strip by the end of first week, if not first day. Hitting a giant aircraft carriers is simply trivial with modern technology, just look what speedboat drones in Black Sea are doing.
How do you figure we're at peace with Russia? They sure as sh*t don't believe we are at peace, and our officials seem to never even gotten the notice that USSR doesn't exist and the Cold War was over.
Giggling, stop talking about things you don't understand, Korol. If you think the Russians can project their combined arms forces into Europe the way they have in Ukraine, you are an idiot. They will lose control of the skies quickly and their armor and troops will be slaughtered on the ground. The only lever the Russians have is tactical nukes, which we have too and that escalation by Russia triggers the U.S. counter-strike. And we are not at war with Russia, they are an adversary.
I'll not engage you further are you aren't connected to reality.
Unfortunately not many Americans understand that it is exponentially more difficult to project power the further that you are trying to project. Yes, we have the world's best trained and equipped military that is also very large, but that doesnt translate into winning a full scale proxy-war in Russia's backyard.
See my comment above. In fact, we are the only nation that can project force in that way. Neither of you are engaged in actual thinking here, it's sad. Nobody who understands military affairs would claim we cannot smash Russia in an all out war. Nobody. We can establish air superiority any time we choose over Russian forces. Inside of Russia or out.
The two of you deserve each other, basking in ignorance.
Before you call me a dumbass, reread my comment. I don't think you took away what I intended to get across. That other guy is saying something completely different from what I'm saying so calm down.
Yes, I agree that we would defeat Russia in a conventional ground war that we were directly involved in, mostly due to our overwhelming air power. But that fact isn't particularly relevant to the war in Ukraine. When I talk about "projecting power", I'm not just talking about the logistical nightmare that is fielding a large army on a foreign continent, I'm talking about our broader geopolitical ability to commit forces to proxy conflicts around the world. Yes, we could escalate this conflict by introducing more of our forces, but if and when we started pushing the Russian army out of Ukraine (let alone into Russia proper), they will begin deploying tactical nuclear weapons to rescue the situation. Now we're circling the nuclear escalation toilet bowl with Russia for the sake of Ukraine, which frankly is not terribly important to us. That's the real difficulty with projecting power to the backyards of distant great power; Ukraine is terribly important to the Russians, and not terribly important to us. It makes no strategic sense for us to risk nuclear exchange over Ukraine, but it makes sense for Russia to do so. The balance of resolve favors Russia, and this mostly has to do with Ukraine's geographic location relative to Russia and the United States.
Then don't make stupid comments. Not my problem. And your clarification only reveals what an amateur you are. We are not 'circling the nuclear escalation toilet with Russia', that's another moronic throwaway line. What Russia has stated is it's long standing nuclear policy, which isn't that different from ours. The nuclear memes in the media are designed to scare ignorant people into demonizing Russia.
Here's a thought. Why don't you stop typing here and go read some books or documents that discuss actual military strategy, orders of battle, force levels, doctrine etc.? You might then actually have some views that are valid and not based on nonsense and hyperbole. But at this point, your commentary is still laughably ignorant. And you were the one dismissive of "Americans" as though you possess better knowledge, so don't tone police me. But you don't, you are just a BSing poseur.
You are again missing my point. This isn't a question of military practicality, it is of grand strategic practicality. You don't need to get into military minutia (while that is fun) in order to understand that the sum cost (military, political, and economic) of risking open war with Russia far outweighs any benefits. I'm handwaving doctrine and orbat because its not relevant, and bringing it up would be pedantic.
Because you appear to have some knowledge about how a war works, but don't understand why they are fought.
Even if we pretend like your unlikely, to put it mildly, scenario is achieved, then what? Have you ever seen a world map?
Are you and I don't know... every single fit for military service male US citizen very keen on having to spend the rest of their lives in Russia, guarding hundreds of millions of pissed off Russians?
Well thank God you weighed in, lmfao. Have an actual argument or anything of substance to say? Or is a weak insult and a pose sufficient for you? Is asking you to make a point to much of an ask from you?
You seem to be frothing at the mouth to any contrarian opinion to yours, calling people " Stupid " etc...Why is that if you are so confident in the capabilities of the team you are batting for?
You seem to be frothing at the mouth to any contrarian opinion to yours, calling people " Stupid " etc...Why is that if you are so confident in the capabilities of the team you are batting for?
I get it, you are unused to seeing BS like this dismissed and corrected. It can be shocking at first. And the team I'm fighting for is classical liberalism and the limited govt our constitution guarantees us. Perhaps those running their mouths here, emitting hyperbole and nonsense should reconsider doing so? Just a thought. And ya, I'm pointed about it cuz it's so tiresome to hear all the memes and soundbites and posing pass for analysis or actually serious engagement with reality. I've had it with that crap, which is far too common on this site, as it seems to be 'MidWit Central'. So, here I am. Note you haven't refuted anything I've actually said, you are just tone policing, which I suppose is fun for you. But to me, it's just more piffle.
Bummer, I was so excited to get a message from Professor Mearsheimer, but it just looks like some bastard got ahold of his password or something. All the best to you, Professor, I hope you get your account back soon.
Couldn't make it past the first six seconds of video it was so far off-base. "Detached from reality." Anyone looking at things in such black and white terms is rarely worth listening to although I'm sure Professor Mearsheimer made some good arguments as to why many countries have chosen bad policies.
Princess Ileana of Romania recommended the Americans in 1958 to be more realistic in their view about the world. She moved to America and became a nun known as Mother Alexandra.
The whishful thinking in my opinion is everywhere and it is caused by indoctrination.
Indeed. Just like Obama, they do foreign policy for domestic consumption and to satisfy their radical Left constituency. It has almost nothing to do with reality or our interests. They will start a real war that the Americans won't have to watch just on TV if they keep it up. The world hates us, we have lost so much standing and prestige due our interventionism, ideological nonsense and nonstop political bullying.
The Swamp no longer sees reality, it only sees money and blood.
Great quote I will 100% be stealing this. Thanks mate.
Professor Mearsheimer is the voice of sanity in an ocean of madness.
What you have to say is so obvious it’s crazy. And if it were just crazy it might be acceptable but the net effect of not following your advice has been the loss of thousands of lives. Thousands of people maimed for life. And therefore not following your advice on all of the issues you’ve weighed in on amounts what should be considered to be a cardinal sin.
All makes perfect sense, especially the Russia & Ukraine conflict. Now I know why we’ve been bashing Russia for so long. There’s always a long-term state-planned narrative preceding wars we plan to execute. While living in Europe I was insulted by the negative talk about America’s foreign meddling. How naive we all were about our country’s true intentions. I was such a proud patriot. Now I’m a patriot who is suspicious of every government action foreign & domestic.
The Ukraine supporters in the US don't care about winning or losing the war. They care about prolonging it. That's why Congress is "future-proofing" financial support for Ukraine and why Biden is about to sign a ten year security agreement with Ukraine. It's pretty obvious they have no intention of leaving Ukraine irrespective of who objects, even if it's the American public—even in an election year.
Always appreciate Mearsheimers knowledge of these issues. Thankful to the few voices of reason like his. Austin is “in charge” because neoliberalism presents itself as tolerant on issues of race and identity but serves corporate power and militarism; as with colonization black faces in high places look very humanistic for the empire. Neoliberalism is also a mindless frightening ideology that venerates the military and values of violence & force.
Great interview.
For there to be peace between the US and Russia, both sides need to have an understanding (or agreed upon misunderstanding), and respect for, the relative strengths of the other side. This war has knocked the previous understanding out of whack. Drones, artillery, glide bombs, industrial production or lack thereof, hypersonic missiles, AI, a weak US dollar, lacklustre military recruitment, US political chaos, and probably most of all abysmal US leadership all mean that neither country can be sure they are in the stronger or weaker position. In other words, it's not completely clear who is the daddy in the borstal. The first Gulf war and our dominance of Iraq showed the Russians for sure that we were the daddy. Now, it's not so clear. We might still be dominant, but we can't be sure that they are sure. We can't fight with the Russians to see who is tougher because that means nuclear war. So I predict we find some other third country to beat so badly that the Russians say, ok, you're the daddy. Iran? But maybe this time we get beat, and someone else is the daddy for awhile. But if that's the case, we'll rise up a second time (like Germany) because we'll call the first one a fluke. OR, we could just choose peace and find a way to get along with everyone. I just doubt that that will happen.
If you think the U.S. could not destroy Russia in a head to head, all out war, you are very poorly informed. While we might not be able to field the massive artillery and ground forces to overwhelm the, our air superiority is total over Russian air space. It would not be a cake walk, reducing their air defenses will take some time and maybe some lost aircraft but it can and would be done. And with air superiority, their ground forces are useless. Nukes are a standoff, MAD makes both sides hesitate.
Russia isn't miscalculating - we are. We didn't understand how Russia saw Ukraine, or better said, we chose to ignore what they said over and over for 8 years. Fyi, we are at 'peace' with Russia, so your entire comment is just odd.
It seems to me I remember a little war we had recently against guys with flip flops and Kalashnikovs over which we had not just air superiority but everything superiority. But hey, I'm poorly informed. A guy studying international affairs at a big University told me that if Putin invaded Ukraine, there would be Abrams' tanks in Moscow. Turns out he was right, they just had some there for Putin's inauguration as war trophies. Not long ago, I carried around the same assumption you still have. I don't carry that around anymore. If you think we are at peace with Russia, why is there an Abrams tank in Moscow as a war trophy?
Truly juvenile thinking. Not sure why I engaged you. I thought you were serious. My comment was based on the actual array of forces the U.S. possesses, not Ukraine. We are arguing over supplying Ukraine F16s - the U.S. has F22 and F35, in addition to thousands of F15s, F16s, F18s and our bomber fleet. Ukraine has none of this. As I said, our ground forces might have a hard time of it head to head with the Russians over time (not initially). But given our air power and their air defenses, it's no contest. Perhaps you aren't aware that whenever an F22 or F35 took off in Syrian airspace, the Russians and everyone else flying anything simply landed. You may have heard that the S400 or S500 can defend against them, nope. We have doctrine to destroy all Russian SAM defenses. It will take some time and may costs some aircraft. But once you establish air superiority, ground force mean nothing as they can be slaughtered at will.
Well, I hope you're right. It's true I'm no military man, and don't have any inside knowledge about equipment. I graze cattle and sheep for a living. But I also know that people supposedly educated in these matters were making similar claims that you are making here about the equipment we have already sent to Ukraine as being "game changers," and after a little while, they either go very quiet or seem to forget their earlier claims. If I made mistakes like that in what I do, I'd go out of business and would have to do something else. Like I said, I hope you're right. I don't want the Russians to take over Ukraine. I want them to live in a normal country. I have heard that the S400 and S500 anti aircraft systems are effective. I hope our diplomats can come up with some kind of solution that we don't have to find out. Don't worry about hurting my feelings or wasting your time anymore replying to this comment.
We can defeat S400 and S500 and already have. It's not to say that defeating them wouldn't be challenging, it might take 2-3 weeks to eliminate most Russian SAMs and other anti-aircraft defense. And they have mobile launchers that will always be a spot problem. But at the end of the day, we can establish air superiority over both without any doubt. If you are interested, here's a nice technical breakdown of how the U.S. defeats S400. https://youtu.be/McJAYZfhapo?si=c_06X3HOU1XwzTkm I think it will help debunk any argument of 'invincibility' of air defenses for you. All these systems have vulnerabilities and when up against the sophistication of U.S. doctrine, our technological prowess and platforms, there is literally nobody who can stop us for long wrt air power and establishing control over an airspace. And it's not all tech, it's also about our brilliant tactics and pilots who are trained to defeat these systems. No other air force on earth approaches our doctrine or pilots, fyi. That's not bragging, it's just true. Look at war games between air forces (nations do this kind of thing), it's embarrassing how much better our pilots are to most other nations.
And in todays combined arms warfare, that's decisive in almost any battle. It won't eliminate insurgents though, so invading and trying to hold territory is an entirely different question. But be clear, we could wipe Russia off the Ukrainian battlefield in short order were we to deploy the full force of U.S. air power. And contrary to the commenter upthread, we can sustain such distant expeditionary deployments at scale for long periods.
You may be correct concerning training, etc. but how do you get enough airpower close enough to make a difference? How many ships with various supplies, etc., get sunk on the way over? What is the readiness level of the various aircraft? What is the readiness level of the European armed forces? Is there enough to make a stand? Can we handle the logistics? It took more than 6 months to prepare for Desert Storm with Iraq not able to harm the build-up. Russia is much more capable to hitting large concentrations and the Patriot does not seem to be meeting expectations for effectiveness.
Ok. I'll check it out. It's reassuring, as I live within artillery range of the Russian border and it's been a concern for many years. The war in Ukraine has made me pretty wary of claims of our technical superiority, and the war in Afghanistan made me wary of claims of our fortitude and superior generalship and doctrine. Thanks for taking the trouble.
Who cares about air superiority, once full scale war between USA and Russia begins? Europe won't have a single functioning landing strip by the end of first week, if not first day. Hitting a giant aircraft carriers is simply trivial with modern technology, just look what speedboat drones in Black Sea are doing.
8 years? It's been a bit longer than 8 years.
https://youtu.be/3wB9uL2lKaw?si=oY6R-UUj0Jpkbvfz
How do you figure we're at peace with Russia? They sure as sh*t don't believe we are at peace, and our officials seem to never even gotten the notice that USSR doesn't exist and the Cold War was over.
You're the odd one here, friend.
Giggling, stop talking about things you don't understand, Korol. If you think the Russians can project their combined arms forces into Europe the way they have in Ukraine, you are an idiot. They will lose control of the skies quickly and their armor and troops will be slaughtered on the ground. The only lever the Russians have is tactical nukes, which we have too and that escalation by Russia triggers the U.S. counter-strike. And we are not at war with Russia, they are an adversary.
I'll not engage you further are you aren't connected to reality.
Unfortunately not many Americans understand that it is exponentially more difficult to project power the further that you are trying to project. Yes, we have the world's best trained and equipped military that is also very large, but that doesnt translate into winning a full scale proxy-war in Russia's backyard.
See my comment above. In fact, we are the only nation that can project force in that way. Neither of you are engaged in actual thinking here, it's sad. Nobody who understands military affairs would claim we cannot smash Russia in an all out war. Nobody. We can establish air superiority any time we choose over Russian forces. Inside of Russia or out.
The two of you deserve each other, basking in ignorance.
Before you call me a dumbass, reread my comment. I don't think you took away what I intended to get across. That other guy is saying something completely different from what I'm saying so calm down.
Yes, I agree that we would defeat Russia in a conventional ground war that we were directly involved in, mostly due to our overwhelming air power. But that fact isn't particularly relevant to the war in Ukraine. When I talk about "projecting power", I'm not just talking about the logistical nightmare that is fielding a large army on a foreign continent, I'm talking about our broader geopolitical ability to commit forces to proxy conflicts around the world. Yes, we could escalate this conflict by introducing more of our forces, but if and when we started pushing the Russian army out of Ukraine (let alone into Russia proper), they will begin deploying tactical nuclear weapons to rescue the situation. Now we're circling the nuclear escalation toilet bowl with Russia for the sake of Ukraine, which frankly is not terribly important to us. That's the real difficulty with projecting power to the backyards of distant great power; Ukraine is terribly important to the Russians, and not terribly important to us. It makes no strategic sense for us to risk nuclear exchange over Ukraine, but it makes sense for Russia to do so. The balance of resolve favors Russia, and this mostly has to do with Ukraine's geographic location relative to Russia and the United States.
Then don't make stupid comments. Not my problem. And your clarification only reveals what an amateur you are. We are not 'circling the nuclear escalation toilet with Russia', that's another moronic throwaway line. What Russia has stated is it's long standing nuclear policy, which isn't that different from ours. The nuclear memes in the media are designed to scare ignorant people into demonizing Russia.
Here's a thought. Why don't you stop typing here and go read some books or documents that discuss actual military strategy, orders of battle, force levels, doctrine etc.? You might then actually have some views that are valid and not based on nonsense and hyperbole. But at this point, your commentary is still laughably ignorant. And you were the one dismissive of "Americans" as though you possess better knowledge, so don't tone police me. But you don't, you are just a BSing poseur.
Have a nice day.
You are again missing my point. This isn't a question of military practicality, it is of grand strategic practicality. You don't need to get into military minutia (while that is fun) in order to understand that the sum cost (military, political, and economic) of risking open war with Russia far outweighs any benefits. I'm handwaving doctrine and orbat because its not relevant, and bringing it up would be pedantic.
Explain to me why I'm wrong please.
Because you appear to have some knowledge about how a war works, but don't understand why they are fought.
Even if we pretend like your unlikely, to put it mildly, scenario is achieved, then what? Have you ever seen a world map?
Are you and I don't know... every single fit for military service male US citizen very keen on having to spend the rest of their lives in Russia, guarding hundreds of millions of pissed off Russians?
You sir, are a fool.
Well thank God you weighed in, lmfao. Have an actual argument or anything of substance to say? Or is a weak insult and a pose sufficient for you? Is asking you to make a point to much of an ask from you?
You seem to be frothing at the mouth to any contrarian opinion to yours, calling people " Stupid " etc...Why is that if you are so confident in the capabilities of the team you are batting for?
You seem to be frothing at the mouth to any contrarian opinion to yours, calling people " Stupid " etc...Why is that if you are so confident in the capabilities of the team you are batting for?
I get it, you are unused to seeing BS like this dismissed and corrected. It can be shocking at first. And the team I'm fighting for is classical liberalism and the limited govt our constitution guarantees us. Perhaps those running their mouths here, emitting hyperbole and nonsense should reconsider doing so? Just a thought. And ya, I'm pointed about it cuz it's so tiresome to hear all the memes and soundbites and posing pass for analysis or actually serious engagement with reality. I've had it with that crap, which is far too common on this site, as it seems to be 'MidWit Central'. So, here I am. Note you haven't refuted anything I've actually said, you are just tone policing, which I suppose is fun for you. But to me, it's just more piffle.
Fair enough. It's just you are mudding the same points you want to put across with the %^&*expletives.
I wonder to what extent it's simply based on shoveling money at the military industrial complex.
LLM-derived breakdowns and summaries of that discussion:
https://open.substack.com/pub/complexiathesinker/p/llm-over-john-mearsheimer-zelensky
Bummer, I was so excited to get a message from Professor Mearsheimer, but it just looks like some bastard got ahold of his password or something. All the best to you, Professor, I hope you get your account back soon.
Couldn't make it past the first six seconds of video it was so far off-base. "Detached from reality." Anyone looking at things in such black and white terms is rarely worth listening to although I'm sure Professor Mearsheimer made some good arguments as to why many countries have chosen bad policies.
So important to share your reason and senseable views on Ukraine’s war. If only…there is madness about in the world. Disheartening
to listen to the video of Biden proudly expounding his limited grasp, truly someone who will not listen to other viewpoints.
when i hear the israel-first crowd
braying brazenly in their lying
they are sick for being so proud
of the the genocide they're trying
.
i wonder if their defenders
so very deceitful and shrill
are defending the offenders
because jew donors pay their bills
.
The Worlds Most Dangerous Poet
Princess Ileana of Romania recommended the Americans in 1958 to be more realistic in their view about the world. She moved to America and became a nun known as Mother Alexandra.
The whishful thinking in my opinion is everywhere and it is caused by indoctrination.
https://youtu.be/byn_gO4EXZ0?si=KGMexmCjU54cktQP
Indeed. Just like Obama, they do foreign policy for domestic consumption and to satisfy their radical Left constituency. It has almost nothing to do with reality or our interests. They will start a real war that the Americans won't have to watch just on TV if they keep it up. The world hates us, we have lost so much standing and prestige due our interventionism, ideological nonsense and nonstop political bullying.