Ukrainian War Developments

Corona said:

Russian paratroopers with a BMD-2 vehicle resupplying at a gas station :

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1505845269560180736

Russian military ship is SHOT DOWN...!!!!!
So it is confirmed that they got Aerodynes ?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1505806931071488003

Click to expand...

Mirabo said:

The irony of the tragic proliferation of liberal internationalism and democratic peace theory is that the key scholars behind neoliberalism were under no pretense regarding the structure of the international system. Core thinkers of the neoliberal school like Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye extensively borrowed the fundamentals of realist theory. In fact, the rise of neoliberalist thought in the 70s was very much a response to the emergence of neorealism and shared many realpolitik assumptions.

What we see today isn't a failure of neoliberalism, liberal instututionalism, or liberal democracy. Rather, since the end of the Cold War, what appeared to be the success of democratic thought became the dominant force for policymakers in the West. The resounding victory of the First World over the Second was attributed to political ideology, rather than political reality. And since the end of the Cold War, foreign policymakers (better known as the Blob) in the West have let that poisonous illusion cloud their judgement.

Make no mistake, it is highly possible the war in Ukraine today is the outcome that American policymakers wanted. Mearsheimer suggested that, if NATO continued to lead Ukraine down the primrose path, Ukraine would be ruined. But why should the Americans care? It's a good thing. They will fight Russia to the last Ukrainian. Mearsheimer's style of offensive realism won the Cold War for the Americans and they will continue ripping pages out of the playbook. War, not peace, is in America's interests.

Unfortunately for the Europeans, they are not nearly as cunning or deceptive as the Americans. If European leaders really did care about European interests, they would have done their best to avoid the war, knowing that Europe and Russia has long enjoyed a mutually-beneficial economic relationship. So you hit the nail on the head: The EU, being strong and blind believers in liberal democracy (the political ideology) sleepwalked into disaster by completely forgetting the fundamentals of international relations.

The only way for Europe to have an economic future is to first expel the toxic, ideology-driven policy inspired by American neoconservatives, and reverting back to the optimistic, rational, and mutually beneficial neoliberal ideas proposed in the 80s. And with that, Europe will hopefully remember the value of complex interdependence, the strength of pragmatic unity. And hopefully they might soon realise the stupidity and self-destructiveness of allowing Atlaticist ideology to infect their own decision-making.

Neorealism won the Cold War for the Americans, but liberal institutionalism won it for the Europeans. And if they want to survive into the 21st century, Europeans must never forget what it was that made them independent and successful, both politically and economically.

Click to expand...

PhSt said:

Russia needs to make a strong statement that any attempts to further enlarge NATO, which includes bringing in Sweden and Finland will leave Russia with no other choice but to increase its number of active nuke warheads to 1990 level and continuously build up its arsenal to reach a minimum of 100,000 active warheads. Essentially just turn the entire world into a powder keg and periodically blackmail NATzO with nuclear annihilation. Also, add a clause in the Russian constitution that a USSR like breakup will require the Russian military to launch all their nukes on NATzO targets. Problem solved.

Click to expand...

Mirabo said:

The irony of the tragic proliferation of liberal internationalism and democratic peace theory is that the key scholars behind neoliberalism were under no pretense regarding the structure of the international system. Core thinkers of the neoliberal school like Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye extensively borrowed the fundamentals of realist theory. In fact, the rise of neoliberalist thought in the 70s was very much a response to the emergence of neorealism and shared many realpolitik assumptions.

What we see today isn't a failure of neoliberalism, liberal instututionalism, or liberal democracy. Rather, since the end of the Cold War, what appeared to be the success of democratic thought became the dominant force for policymakers in the West. The resounding victory of the First World over the Second was attributed to political ideology, rather than political reality. And since the end of the Cold War, foreign policymakers (better known as the Blob) in the West have let that poisonous illusion cloud their judgement.

Make no mistake, it is highly possible the war in Ukraine today is the outcome that American policymakers wanted. Mearsheimer suggested that, if NATO continued to lead Ukraine down the primrose path, Ukraine would be ruined. But why should the Americans care? It's a good thing. They will fight Russia to the last Ukrainian. Mearsheimer's style of offensive realism won the Cold War for the Americans and they will continue ripping pages out of the playbook. War, not peace, is in America's interests.

Unfortunately for the Europeans, they are not nearly as cunning or deceptive as the Americans. If European leaders really did care about European interests, they would have done their best to avoid the war, knowing that Europe and Russia has long enjoyed a mutually-beneficial economic relationship. So you hit the nail on the head: The EU, being strong and blind believers in liberal democracy (the political ideology) sleepwalked into disaster by completely forgetting the fundamentals of international relations.

The only way for Europe to have an economic future is to first expel the toxic, ideology-driven policy inspired by American neoconservatives, and reverting back to the optimistic, rational, and mutually beneficial neoliberal ideas proposed in the 80s. And with that, Europe will hopefully remember the value of complex interdependence, the strength of pragmatic unity. And hopefully they might soon realise the stupidity and self-destructiveness of allowing Atlaticist ideology to infect their own decision-making.

Neorealism won the Cold War for the Americans, but liberal institutionalism won it for the Europeans. And if they want to survive into the 21st century, Europeans must never forget what it was that made them independent and successful, both politically and economically.

Click to expand...

KYli said:

I thought EU is tough. Why not sanctioning both oil and gas.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Mirabo said:

Make no mistake, it is highly possible the war in Ukraine today is the outcome that American policymakers wanted. Mearsheimer suggested that, if NATO continued to lead Ukraine down the primrose path, Ukraine would be ruined. But why should the Americans care? It's a good thing. They will fight Russia to the last Ukrainian. Mearsheimer's style of offensive realism won the Cold War for the Americans and they will continue ripping pages out of the playbook. War, not peace, is in America's interests.

Click to expand...

“You know, I never gave George W Bush enough credit for what he’s done in the Middle East. I failed to appreciate at the time that he was a strategic genius far beyond Bismarck. He ignited a religious war between Shi’ites and Sunnis that will occupy the region for the next 1,000 years. It was a pure stroke of brilliance!”

Click to expand...

SimaQian said:

Nah. That wont solve the problem. Remember the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, the closest nuke exchange between the Soviets and Nato. The start was US put ballistic nukes to Turkey and Italy. The Soviets thought to make it fair put nukes also in Cuba after the failed American invasion to Cuba. The resolution was Americans removed nukes in Turkey in exchange of removal of nukes in Cuba. There was a strategic balance in the 60s and 70s. The Soviets can match and check American moves.

The number of nukes did increase from then on, the strategic balance was still there until the dissolution of USSR. Nato still expanded from 60s to 80s.

Fast forward to 2020s, that strategic balance is already long lost. Nukes are everywhere in Europe and Russia is almost cornered.

The best outcome of this war Russia is hoping at least Nato to get back to pre 1997 alliance. That was an acceptable strategic balance to them.

Putin was very clear of his threat from the beginning of the Russia Ukraine conflict. Outsiders who will interfere will face consequence they never face in their history.

Probably they have a terminal decision point that enough to trigger to drop a nuke to a Nato member to see if Nato really wants to escalate. Particulary those Nato countries sending weapons to Ukraine. If Nato wont respond by nukes, Nato countries will quickly abandon that military alliance. Do Americans really really wanted to exchange destruction of their cities to say example nuking Poland or a Baltic state?

Europe will be lucky if nobody will get nuked at the end of this conflict.

Click to expand...

Deino said:

Was this already posted?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1505980549298593833

Click to expand...