4 ms·

Mearsheimer also is directly blaming Ukraine here in a way that hardly seems reasonable. "When you’re a country like Ukraine and you live next door to a great

Mearsheimer also is directly blaming Ukraine here in a way that hardly seems reasonable. "When you’re a country like Ukraine and you live next door to a great power like Russia, you have to pay careful attention to what the Russians think, because if you take a stick and you poke them in the eye, they’re going to retaliate. States in the Western hemisphere understand this full well with regard to the United States." This seems too forgiving of Russia and also the US re: Central and South America. "It's not our fault those countries poked us in the eye by being [democratic/socialistic/whatever]." Maybe Putin and American leaders both need to stop trying to ruling other countries. Putin has fucking nukes, is he seriously afraid of being invaded himself?

hutzlibu 5y ago
"Putin has fucking nukes, is he seriously afraid of being invaded himself?" He is afraid of insignificance. Once there was a great RUS empire, now there isn't. Many russians feel sad about that. I don't to be honest, because those great empires, whether from the tsar or sowjets, were mainly known for slave conditions for most people.
- thriftwy 5y ago
  After the arguable win in the Cold War, the winning party has failed to offer the better peace to Russia. Just compare the fate of Japan in 1944 vs. 1954 and Russia in 1989 vs. Russia in 1999. It has caused an enormous traumatic syndrome in the russian society.
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    This is true as well. The russian patriots would not need the nationalism substitute so much, if they had wealth in real life. A Ryszard Kapuściński quote from one of the sowjet people I remember: "We might be poor, but our empire is big" Now they are just poor, without the comfort of being part of a big empire.
  - postingawayonhn 5y ago
    Russia could be a great friend of the west if it wanted and would be very helpful in countering China's influence. Unfortunately the Russian leadership is more interested in enriching themselves and trying to revive the the USSR.
    - thriftwy 5y ago
      Russia did a lot of friendly steps towards the west but never got anything in return. Up to until 2005 (half of its existence) Russia were comliant in all its actions. Got nothing out of it.
mantas 5y ago
Putin feels invaded from the day USSR collapsed. By countries that were annexed or controlled by USSR regaining sovereignty.
- majormajor 5y ago
  That is still actually different from what Mearsheimer is claiming - that happened much earlier than NATO expansion and recent changes in Ukraine.
  - mantas 5y ago
    NATO expansion was a natural next step after USSR dissolution. Which, according to Putin, was the biggest catastrophy of 20th century.
empressplay 5y ago
I'm Canadian. As a Canadian I am fully aware that my country exists strictly at the whim of the US. If we were to decide to form a military alliance with Russia, hosting Russian troops on our soil, Canada would be invaded by the US in a New York minute. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. It sucks of course but it is what it is. That is all he is saying.
- majormajor 5y ago
  So if that happened... who would you blame? Russia?
  - erichocean 5y ago
    I'd blame Canada for putting the Russian military on American's doorstep. Who would you blame?
    - majormajor 5y ago
      Probably the US and then Canada. But what if the Russian military didn't even have any significant presence in Canada but the US invaded anyway? Then I'd absolutely blame the US primarily. I wouldn't blame Russia in that situation.
      - ComradePhil 5y ago
        What if Russia had their bases in most of the South American countries and had been openly discussing having their base in Mexico for 14 years. And then 5 years ago, if all of the Mexican leaders that America was maintaining relationship with were suddenly arrested for "corruption" and then Gabriel Iglesias was elected for the president... and you try to befrend the new leadership, but then they start speaking the Russian talking points. Who would you blame then?
        KptMarchewa 5y ago
        Who is democratic in this scenario?
boomboomsubban 5y ago
>This seems too forgiving of Russia and also the US re: Central and South America. He seems to be saying that Russia/the US reaction is probably morally wrong, but completely expected behavior. And the moral aspect isn't worth considering as history has shown that great powers usually act out of strategic interest not moral consideration. Yeah, it'd be great if great power politics ended. Ukraine trying to change to the US's side isn't going to end them.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > And the moral aspect isn't worth considering as history has shown that great powers usually act out of strategic interest not moral consideration If you are trying to decide how to exert influence on how your country should react, rather than being a passive observer, the moral aspect is worth considering. If you are merely a passive observer, you aren't worth considering.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- majormajor 5y ago
  "Blame"/"responsibility"/"at fault" all seem like questions with a certain natural moral slant to them. He's putting moral fault onto the US for failing to properly respect the likely immoral acts of Putin? That's ludicrous.
  - erichocean 5y ago
    "Many Ukrainians may die in order that NATO expands, but that's a cost we, the United States of America, are prepared to pay." /sarc
    - mcphage 5y ago
      I wonder if Ukraine should possibly get any say in the matter.
eric_b 5y ago
It's not that he's worried about being invaded tomorrow, it's that he doesn't want to let the slippery slope get started. I don't know how old you are, but when I was young and idealistic I felt the same way you seem to. Now I see a world of grey and I can, at least a little bit, empathize with (though not condone) the Russian position here. From their perspective the West is being intentionally belligerent, and we know it. Despite what the media and the talking heads say, the west poking the bear is not about democracy or western values. It's about power and control. And Putin is repaying us in kind. And the Ukrainians are left to pick up the pieces.
leobg 5y ago
I don’t think the word “blaming“ describes what it’s about. Blaming doesn’t help anybody. What it is about is agency. It’s an important distinction.
refurb 5y ago
The point Geopolitical Realism is that it’s Realism - how things are, not how they should be. Yes, in an ideal world countries can do whatever they want within their own borders and other countries respect that sovereignty. But we don’t live in an ideal world. Countries like Vietnam understand this - they cozy up to the Russians, to China, to the US. Never getting too close and never pissing anyone off too much. Always assert your sovereignty, but avoid war at all costs since you’ll never win except at Pyrrhic victory. They recognize that we don’t live in an ideal world and act according to how things are.
durovo 5y ago
I don't think he is making any moral judgements in his analysis. It is you who are imposing your moral judgement here. He is taking a realist position here.

hutzlibu 5y ago

"Putin has fucking nukes, is he seriously afraid of being invaded himself?" He is afraid of insignificance. Once there was a great RUS empire, now there isn't. Many russians feel sad about that. I don't to be honest, because those great empires, whether from the tsar or sowjets, were mainly known for slave conditions for most people.

thriftwy 5y ago
After the arguable win in the Cold War, the winning party has failed to offer the better peace to Russia. Just compare the fate of Japan in 1944 vs. 1954 and Russia in 1989 vs. Russia in 1999. It has caused an enormous traumatic syndrome in the russian society.
- hutzlibu 5y ago
  This is true as well. The russian patriots would not need the nationalism substitute so much, if they had wealth in real life. A Ryszard Kapuściński quote from one of the sowjet people I remember: "We might be poor, but our empire is big" Now they are just poor, without the comfort of being part of a big empire.
- postingawayonhn 5y ago
  Russia could be a great friend of the west if it wanted and would be very helpful in countering China's influence. Unfortunately the Russian leadership is more interested in enriching themselves and trying to revive the the USSR.
  - thriftwy 5y ago
    Russia did a lot of friendly steps towards the west but never got anything in return. Up to until 2005 (half of its existence) Russia were comliant in all its actions. Got nothing out of it.

mantas 5y ago

Putin feels invaded from the day USSR collapsed. By countries that were annexed or controlled by USSR regaining sovereignty.

majormajor 5y ago
That is still actually different from what Mearsheimer is claiming - that happened much earlier than NATO expansion and recent changes in Ukraine.
- mantas 5y ago
  NATO expansion was a natural next step after USSR dissolution. Which, according to Putin, was the biggest catastrophy of 20th century.

empressplay 5y ago

I'm Canadian. As a Canadian I am fully aware that my country exists strictly at the whim of the US. If we were to decide to form a military alliance with Russia, hosting Russian troops on our soil, Canada would be invaded by the US in a New York minute. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. It sucks of course but it is what it is. That is all he is saying.

majormajor 5y ago
So if that happened... who would you blame? Russia?
- erichocean 5y ago
  I'd blame Canada for putting the Russian military on American's doorstep. Who would you blame?
  - majormajor 5y ago
    Probably the US and then Canada. But what if the Russian military didn't even have any significant presence in Canada but the US invaded anyway? Then I'd absolutely blame the US primarily. I wouldn't blame Russia in that situation.
    - ComradePhil 5y ago
      What if Russia had their bases in most of the South American countries and had been openly discussing having their base in Mexico for 14 years. And then 5 years ago, if all of the Mexican leaders that America was maintaining relationship with were suddenly arrested for "corruption" and then Gabriel Iglesias was elected for the president... and you try to befrend the new leadership, but then they start speaking the Russian talking points. Who would you blame then?
      - KptMarchewa 5y ago
        Who is democratic in this scenario?

boomboomsubban 5y ago

>This seems too forgiving of Russia and also the US re: Central and South America. He seems to be saying that Russia/the US reaction is probably morally wrong, but completely expected behavior. And the moral aspect isn't worth considering as history has shown that great powers usually act out of strategic interest not moral consideration. Yeah, it'd be great if great power politics ended. Ukraine trying to change to the US's side isn't going to end them.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> And the moral aspect isn't worth considering as history has shown that great powers usually act out of strategic interest not moral consideration If you are trying to decide how to exert influence on how your country should react, rather than being a passive observer, the moral aspect is worth considering. If you are merely a passive observer, you aren't worth considering.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
majormajor 5y ago
"Blame"/"responsibility"/"at fault" all seem like questions with a certain natural moral slant to them. He's putting moral fault onto the US for failing to properly respect the likely immoral acts of Putin? That's ludicrous.
- erichocean 5y ago
  "Many Ukrainians may die in order that NATO expands, but that's a cost we, the United States of America, are prepared to pay." /sarc
  - mcphage 5y ago
    I wonder if Ukraine should possibly get any say in the matter.

eric_b 5y ago

It's not that he's worried about being invaded tomorrow, it's that he doesn't want to let the slippery slope get started. I don't know how old you are, but when I was young and idealistic I felt the same way you seem to. Now I see a world of grey and I can, at least a little bit, empathize with (though not condone) the Russian position here. From their perspective the West is being intentionally belligerent, and we know it. Despite what the media and the talking heads say, the west poking the bear is not about democracy or western values. It's about power and control. And Putin is repaying us in kind. And the Ukrainians are left to pick up the pieces.

leobg 5y ago

I don’t think the word “blaming“ describes what it’s about. Blaming doesn’t help anybody. What it is about is agency. It’s an important distinction.

refurb 5y ago

The point Geopolitical Realism is that it’s Realism - how things are, not how they should be. Yes, in an ideal world countries can do whatever they want within their own borders and other countries respect that sovereignty. But we don’t live in an ideal world. Countries like Vietnam understand this - they cozy up to the Russians, to China, to the US. Never getting too close and never pissing anyone off too much. Always assert your sovereignty, but avoid war at all costs since you’ll never win except at Pyrrhic victory. They recognize that we don’t live in an ideal world and act according to how things are.

durovo 5y ago

I don't think he is making any moral judgements in his analysis. It is you who are imposing your moral judgement here. He is taking a realist position here.