6 ms·

You're missing Kissinger's point (or perhaps I'm artificially seeing my point in Kissinger's argument). Let's continue to refuse to deny Russia at various worl

You're missing Kissinger's point (or perhaps I'm artificially seeing my point in Kissinger's argument). Let's continue to refuse to deny Russia at various world forums. And Russia just burns it's fossil fuels intensely. The damage from climate change is catestrophic and WE LOSE. Let's say we continue to shun Russia economically bringing it to it's knees. How does it make money if no one will buy it's goods on the open market? It sells what it can on the black market moving oil is hard. What about selling DPRK and Iran nuclear and ballistic missile secrets? WE LOSE. Let's say a nuclear attack is carried on on Russia and it's surrounded by a ballistic missile defense system. So it nuclears Siberia to oblivion with purposefully dirty nuclear weapons. WE LOSE. Let's say we enter conventional war with Russia and it just blasts ITS OWN satillites out of space directly above it staring Kessler cascade that wiped out all satillites and ends the prospect of space travel for hundreds of years. WE LOSE. How will we prevent all these things? They are all born of Russia considered themselves no longer part of the world community? TL;DR Kissinger knows NATO can trounce Russia ina war maybe even a nuclear one. But he realises the cost would be too great even from a complete victory with civilization ending potentials.

archagon 4y ago
I don’t see any options where WE WIN, either. Ukraine is not going to stop fighting, as is their right. Sometimes there are no good options.
jamincan 4y ago
I'm rejecting Kissinger's entire framework. This isn't a war between NATO (or the US) and Russia, so as much as we might want to end the war, we can't. The entire premise of his article presumes that the west can determine the outcome at all apart from tilting the scales one way or another.
- psychphysic 4y ago
  Are you suggesting NATO has not had any influence on this war? The US just agreed a further 2bn in military aid including a patriot system. Ukraine only fighting chance has been due to NATOs support. Eastern Europe has always been a buffer between NATO and Russia in a landwar it's obviously preferable for Russia to lose in Ukraine than in a NATO territory from NATOs perspective. What did you think was going on here it not a war between NATO and Russia?! No one cares about the other wars around the world with even worse humanitarian disasters. Here marks the real criticism people have of Kissinger, real politik is ugly and we don't like looking at it or those who talk about it.
  - jamincan 4y ago
    I think I clearly stated that the US and NATO has had influence, sufficient to tilt the war in either direction, but I also think it's unrealistic to believe that influence can be leveraged to end the war let alone set the terms for peace. The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for understanding global politics that only considers great powers is useful. Ukraine fought off the initial Russian attack without US and NATO, do you think they would stop fighting now if support were withdrawn? How exactly do you think the US and NATO could force Ukraine and Russia to the table? Do you think that eastern European countries would withdraw support from Ukraine even absent the US and NATO when Russian incursions on neighbouring territory represent very real threats to them? The entire premise that the US can end this war feels like a hopelessly naive relic of a different era. My own point of view is that the only way this will end peacefully is with the full withdraw of Russian forces from Ukrainian territory. The question of how this can be achieved without Russia becoming destabilized and fracturing, which I don't feel is desirable, is certainly a concern, although I fear that that may be the only thing that leads to their withdraw. (See Timothy Snyder's piece on the subject: How does the Russo-Ukrainian War end? [1]) 1. https://snyder.substack.com/p/how-does-the-russo-ukrainian-war https://snyder.substack.com/p/how-does-the-russo-ukrainian-w...
    - hackinthebochs 4y ago
      >The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for understanding global politics that only considers great powers is useful. What reason is there to think this is true? What I see is the appearance of a post-realpolitik world in the wake of an utterly dominant U.S. hegemony. Realpolitik is still in effect; it's just sufficiently hidden behind the stability of a U.S. centric world order and the ongoing Nash equilibrium of the current borders in most of Europe that some people can convince themselves the world has fundamentally changed. It's hard to distinguish between a post-realpolitik world and Nash equilibrium. On the surface they look identical.
darthrupert 4y ago
Do we really need to think of Russia as being a country of utter regressed animals who are capable of nothing but the worst ideas? Are they really comic book evil?
- psychphysic 4y ago
  No not at all. Russians are quite lovely. Americans aren't monsters despite their monstrous acts in Korea and Vietnam. Super powers gonna super power and mostly that means stomp all over unfortunate people.
  - darthrupert 4y ago
    In addition to being nice, Russians should grow a spine. The American people of 70s were massively better than current Russians: they stopped the Vietnam War by protesting against it. Where are the massive Russian peotests?
    - psychphysic 4y ago
      Vietnam war lasted 10 years. Let's see if Russians might turn things around before the Americans did! I don't expect so but it's in part because by shunning the Russia people we've weakened their ability to resist their government. It's ridiculous that the first response from social media was to block Russia's and now be a conduit for the average Russia to see the truth about the war.
    - neoromantique 4y ago
      The American people of 70s didn't face violence, torture, and over a decade of prison for protesting. It is not a fair comparison, the ship has long sailed for Russian protest movement, when rest of the world was turning the blind eye for the past decade.

archagon 4y ago

I don’t see any options where WE WIN, either. Ukraine is not going to stop fighting, as is their right. Sometimes there are no good options.

jamincan 4y ago

I'm rejecting Kissinger's entire framework. This isn't a war between NATO (or the US) and Russia, so as much as we might want to end the war, we can't. The entire premise of his article presumes that the west can determine the outcome at all apart from tilting the scales one way or another.

psychphysic 4y ago
Are you suggesting NATO has not had any influence on this war? The US just agreed a further 2bn in military aid including a patriot system. Ukraine only fighting chance has been due to NATOs support. Eastern Europe has always been a buffer between NATO and Russia in a landwar it's obviously preferable for Russia to lose in Ukraine than in a NATO territory from NATOs perspective. What did you think was going on here it not a war between NATO and Russia?! No one cares about the other wars around the world with even worse humanitarian disasters. Here marks the real criticism people have of Kissinger, real politik is ugly and we don't like looking at it or those who talk about it.
- jamincan 4y ago
  I think I clearly stated that the US and NATO has had influence, sufficient to tilt the war in either direction, but I also think it's unrealistic to believe that influence can be leveraged to end the war let alone set the terms for peace. The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for understanding global politics that only considers great powers is useful. Ukraine fought off the initial Russian attack without US and NATO, do you think they would stop fighting now if support were withdrawn? How exactly do you think the US and NATO could force Ukraine and Russia to the table? Do you think that eastern European countries would withdraw support from Ukraine even absent the US and NATO when Russian incursions on neighbouring territory represent very real threats to them? The entire premise that the US can end this war feels like a hopelessly naive relic of a different era. My own point of view is that the only way this will end peacefully is with the full withdraw of Russian forces from Ukrainian territory. The question of how this can be achieved without Russia becoming destabilized and fracturing, which I don't feel is desirable, is certainly a concern, although I fear that that may be the only thing that leads to their withdraw. (See Timothy Snyder's piece on the subject: How does the Russo-Ukrainian War end? [1]) 1. https://snyder.substack.com/p/how-does-the-russo-ukrainian-war https://snyder.substack.com/p/how-does-the-russo-ukrainian-w...
  - hackinthebochs 4y ago
    >The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for understanding global politics that only considers great powers is useful. What reason is there to think this is true? What I see is the appearance of a post-realpolitik world in the wake of an utterly dominant U.S. hegemony. Realpolitik is still in effect; it's just sufficiently hidden behind the stability of a U.S. centric world order and the ongoing Nash equilibrium of the current borders in most of Europe that some people can convince themselves the world has fundamentally changed. It's hard to distinguish between a post-realpolitik world and Nash equilibrium. On the surface they look identical.

darthrupert 4y ago

Do we really need to think of Russia as being a country of utter regressed animals who are capable of nothing but the worst ideas? Are they really comic book evil?

psychphysic 4y ago
No not at all. Russians are quite lovely. Americans aren't monsters despite their monstrous acts in Korea and Vietnam. Super powers gonna super power and mostly that means stomp all over unfortunate people.
- darthrupert 4y ago
  In addition to being nice, Russians should grow a spine. The American people of 70s were massively better than current Russians: they stopped the Vietnam War by protesting against it. Where are the massive Russian peotests?
  - psychphysic 4y ago
    Vietnam war lasted 10 years. Let's see if Russians might turn things around before the Americans did! I don't expect so but it's in part because by shunning the Russia people we've weakened their ability to resist their government. It's ridiculous that the first response from social media was to block Russia's and now be a conduit for the average Russia to see the truth about the war.
  - neoromantique 4y ago
    The American people of 70s didn't face violence, torture, and over a decade of prison for protesting. It is not a fair comparison, the ship has long sailed for Russian protest movement, when rest of the world was turning the blind eye for the past decade.