4 ms·

> But to my pride I do forget more history every day than most people will learn in their lifetime and can't think of similar example of a superpower happily ac

> But to my pride I do forget more history every day than most people will learn in their lifetime and can't think of similar example of a superpower happily accepting adversaries at their border. Not to burst your bubble, but the USSR accepted Turkey with nukes on their border, and before them, Japan. China accepts being essentially surrounded by hostile powers, many of whom are part of NATO.

avgcorrection 5y ago
The Black Sea separates Russia and Turkey while an invasion staged from Ukraine could cut Russia off from the Black Sea in a few days. Very different security concerns. (Of course “Turkiye” becoming a member of Nato in these times would have been a joke considering Erdoğan. But maybe I’m just showing my naivete.)
- treis 5y ago
  They said USSR and they did share a small land border.
  - avgcorrection 5y ago
    Fair. I guess Georgia? Crossing the Caucasus Mountains is harder than crossing the European Plains.
treis 5y ago
China is in the midst of a decades long effort to not be surrounded by hostile powers. They went to war over Korea & would have over Vietnam if the US had invaded the north.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  China started a war with Vietnam almost immediately after USA surrendered. (Not contradicting you; if anything supporting the point...)
  - pasabagi 5y ago
    As a sort of redux, I guess my feeling is that obviously, every state would prefer to be surrounded by allies, or better still, by seas. However, the idea that all superpowers inevitably go to war to preserve this state is just wrong. If you consider superpowers starting from antiquity to today, the only state that has achieved this situation (at any point?) is the USA. Every other has had at least one significant land border with an adversary. (PS: Probably the biggest one is, of course, between the USSR and China, which was a very hot border since the sino-soviet split).
    - jessaustin 5y ago
      In general, I think you are correct. Neighboring states will learn to coexist or at least one of them will cease to exist as a state. Some Americans imagine that "exceptionalism" exempts us from this dynamic, but most of us are wiser. PS: it was nice while it lasted... https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/russia-and-china-unveil-a-pact-against-america-and-the-west https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/russia-and-chin...
buran77 5y ago
I don't like bubbles anyway :). All those countries have consistently acted exactly with the same methods you see now. Trying to avoid direct war but with no issues interfering with each other's conflicts and "buffer countries". Georgia, Syria, Libya, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan are all places Russia and Turkey banged heads one way or another. Just like Russia is taunting NATO to bang heads in Ukraine. China, US, India, Pakistan, Israel, Russia, Turkey are other powerful countries constantly putting out a fire and starting another one. The single larger difference being that the sphere of influence of most of those countries expands far less than US' so their conflicts are generally closer to their actual geographic border rather than on the other side of the world. Otherwise they're all fighting to maintain that buffer in all possible ways. And at a completely different scale, people in rich neighborhoods rarely accept inconvenient buildings or neighbors right next to them as long as they can do something about it. It's not an indictment on either the people or the countries named above. Just the state of things. Perhaps the only place with nukes and no sabre rattling today is Western Europe. Then again they have the US to do the rattling for them and pay for the service. The picture will be a lot clearer when this too becomes history.

avgcorrection 5y ago

The Black Sea separates Russia and Turkey while an invasion staged from Ukraine could cut Russia off from the Black Sea in a few days. Very different security concerns. (Of course “Turkiye” becoming a member of Nato in these times would have been a joke considering Erdoğan. But maybe I’m just showing my naivete.)

treis 5y ago
They said USSR and they did share a small land border.
- avgcorrection 5y ago
  Fair. I guess Georgia? Crossing the Caucasus Mountains is harder than crossing the European Plains.

treis 5y ago

China is in the midst of a decades long effort to not be surrounded by hostile powers. They went to war over Korea & would have over Vietnam if the US had invaded the north.

jessaustin 5y ago
China started a war with Vietnam almost immediately after USA surrendered. (Not contradicting you; if anything supporting the point...)
- pasabagi 5y ago
  As a sort of redux, I guess my feeling is that obviously, every state would prefer to be surrounded by allies, or better still, by seas. However, the idea that all superpowers inevitably go to war to preserve this state is just wrong. If you consider superpowers starting from antiquity to today, the only state that has achieved this situation (at any point?) is the USA. Every other has had at least one significant land border with an adversary. (PS: Probably the biggest one is, of course, between the USSR and China, which was a very hot border since the sino-soviet split).
  - jessaustin 5y ago
    In general, I think you are correct. Neighboring states will learn to coexist or at least one of them will cease to exist as a state. Some Americans imagine that "exceptionalism" exempts us from this dynamic, but most of us are wiser. PS: it was nice while it lasted... https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/russia-and-china-unveil-a-pact-against-america-and-the-west https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/russia-and-chin...

buran77 5y ago

I don't like bubbles anyway :). All those countries have consistently acted exactly with the same methods you see now. Trying to avoid direct war but with no issues interfering with each other's conflicts and "buffer countries". Georgia, Syria, Libya, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan are all places Russia and Turkey banged heads one way or another. Just like Russia is taunting NATO to bang heads in Ukraine. China, US, India, Pakistan, Israel, Russia, Turkey are other powerful countries constantly putting out a fire and starting another one. The single larger difference being that the sphere of influence of most of those countries expands far less than US' so their conflicts are generally closer to their actual geographic border rather than on the other side of the world. Otherwise they're all fighting to maintain that buffer in all possible ways. And at a completely different scale, people in rich neighborhoods rarely accept inconvenient buildings or neighbors right next to them as long as they can do something about it. It's not an indictment on either the people or the countries named above. Just the state of things. Perhaps the only place with nukes and no sabre rattling today is Western Europe. Then again they have the US to do the rattling for them and pay for the service. The picture will be a lot clearer when this too becomes history.