War in Ukraine

#87,902
#87,902
BeardedVol said:
You really should Google "confirmation bias"...


Glenn Diesen, John Mearsheimer, and Alexander Mercouris, lol.
Click to expand...
Your cartoon-like propaganda website is pathetic. Where do you even find these places?

Mearsheimer is a legitimate expert and scholar. Your attempted smear job looks like more criminal “pretend dossier” type hogwash.

You really don’t know this field of study at all, do you? You simply amplify propaganda like a bot.

Mearsheimer's books include Conventional Deterrence (1983), which won the Edgar S. Furniss Jr. Book Award; Nuclear Deterrence: Ethics and Strategy (co-editor, 1985); Liddell Hart and the Weight of History (1988); The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (2001), which won the Lepgold Book Prize; The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy(2007); and Why Leaders Lie: The Truth About Lying in International Politics (2011). His articles have appeared in academic journals like International Security and popular magazines like the London Review of Books. He has written op-ed pieces for The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Chicago Tribune.

Mearsheimer has won several teaching awards. He received the Clark Award for Distinguished Teaching when he was a graduate student at Cornell in 1977, and he won the Quantrell Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching at the University of Chicago in 1985. In addition, he was selected as a Phi Beta Kappa Visiting Scholar for the 1993–1994 academic year. In that capacity, he gave a series of talks at eight colleges and universities. During the 1998–1999 academic year, he was the Whitney H. Shepardson Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City. In 2003, he was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He is the recipient of the American Political Science Association's 2020 James Madison Award, which is presented every three years to an American political scientist who has made distinguished scholarly contributions. The Award Committee noted that Mearsheimer is "one of the most cited International Relations scholars in the discipline, but his works are read well beyond the academy as well." A 2017 survey of US international relations faculty ranks him third among "scholars whose work has had the greatest influence on the field of International Relations in the past 20 years."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#87,903
#87,903
MontyPython said:
Ukraine can win the war by itself… IF they’re given the right weapons and intelligence access.

But… cutting off Russia from a decent chunk of oil revenue would definitely help.
Click to expand...
I understand what you’re getting at, but to be clear: “IF they’re given the right weapons and intelligence access” is in no way for Ukraine to “win the war by itself.”

It’s a U.S. proxy war. They’re basically a sock puppet and have been.
 
Last edited:
#87,904
#87,904
Orange. said:
I understand what you’re getting at, but to be clear: “IF they’re given the right weapons and intelligence access” is in no way for Ukraine to “win the war by itself.”

It’s a U.S. proxy war. They’re basically a sock puppet and have been.
Click to expand...
True, I think we're wordsmithing here, but I consider the death of thousands of Ukrainians - not our boys - the clearest yardstick of fighting a war 'alone'.
 
#87,905
#87,905
dalton_vol said:
Did you even listen to? No, you didn't
Click to expand...

Lol I first read Mearsheimer before you'd even learned to read. He's not said anything new since 1991, and his theories have been proven wrong by history numerous times in the last 40 years alone.

Glenn Diesen and Alexander Mercouris, quite literally, repeat the same Russian-Telegram opinions that guys like Benny Johnson and Tim Poole were paid millions by Russia through Tenant Media to promote, and George Galloway does for free; those two and their opinions are a dime a dozen on twitter.
 
#87,907
#87,907
Orange. said:
Your cartoon-like propaganda website is pathetic. Where do you even find these places?

Mearsheimer is a legitimate expert and scholar. Your attempted smear job looks like more criminal “pretend dossier” type hogwash.

You really don’t know this field of study at all, do you? You simply amplify propaganda like a bot.
Click to expand...
Mearsheimer is (was) a legitimate researcher in the field of 'realism' as a political theory, but the vast bulk of his research and theories were founded during the Cold War. His questionable even-at-the-time "offensive realism" concept, didn't survive the 1990s, as under Mearsheimer's theories, the Cold War could not end in the unilateral collapse of the Soveit Union withoug western military intervention.

He's spent the last 20+ years, regurgitating the same talking points on 'expert panels' for an ever-decreasing slate of news organizations that will host him.

He's utterly in capable of reevaluating his own work, and is going to die trying to prove he was right in the face of historical events that continue to prove him wrong.
 
Last edited:
#87,908
#87,908
Orange. said:
I understand what you’re getting at, but to be clear: “IF they’re given the right weapons and intelligence access” is in no way for Ukraine to “win the war by itself.”

It’s a U.S. proxy war. They’re basically a sock puppet and have been.
Click to expand...

The Ukraine is nothing but is just a place for the world to take a piss in, once the bowl is filled they'll move onto the next one and forget about this one.
 
#87,910
#87,910
Orange. said:
Your cartoon-like propaganda website is pathetic. Where do you even find these places?

Mearsheimer is a legitimate expert and scholar. Your attempted smear job looks like more criminal “pretend dossier” type hogwash.

You really don’t know this field of study at all, do you? You simply amplify propaganda like a bot.
Click to expand...
The Kiev independent newspaper even said that they doubt they will make it back to one of the Cities in Ukraine because Russia will take it over. That newspaper is a very Pro Ukraine newspaper too. The honest reality is that Ukraine is not going to defeat Russia unless Europe and America put soldiers over there. If Russia defeats ukraine, it is not going to be the end of the West
 
#87,911
#87,911
LSU-SIU said:
The Ukraine is nothing but is just a place for the world to take a piss in, once the bowl is filled they'll move onto the next one and forget about this one.
Click to expand...
I don't think Russia is going to continue going after countries after Ukraine. Russia feels threatened because Ukraine wants to join NATO. This is why they invaded Ukraine
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange.
#87,913
#87,913
dalton_vol said:
The Kiev independent newspaper even said that they doubt they will make it back to one of the Cities in Ukraine because Russia will take it over. That newspaper is a very Pro Ukraine newspaper too. The honest reality is that Ukraine is not going to defeat Russia unless Europe and America put soldiers over there. If Russia defeats ukraine, it is not going to be the end of the West
Click to expand...
That “Kiev” “newspaper” is a propaganda organ long supported by CIA and NGO money. And we know most U.S. media have been and are active propaganda organs, pushing massive lies.

And yes, the imbecile lie or parodic propaganda idea that if Russia is “allowed” to retain Crimea, for example, they will be emboldened and overrun all of Europe (!) is surpassingly stupid. It’s staggering that so many Americans and other Westerners are so brainwashed that believe that domino theory. If “we” don’t stop them here they’ll be having tea in London in no time!
 
#87,914
#87,914
BeardedVol said:
Mearsheimer is (was) a legitimate researcher in the field of 'realism' as a political theory, but the vast bulk of his research and theories were founded during the Cold War. His questionable even-at-the-time "offensive realism" concept, didn't survive the 1990s, as under Mearsheimer's theories, the Cold War could not end in the unilateral collapse of the Soveit Union withoug western military intervention.

He's spent the last 20+ years, regurgitating the same talking points on 'expert panels' for an ever-decreasing slate of news organizations that will host him.

He's utterly in capable of reevaluating his own work, and is going to die trying to prove he was write in the face of historical events that continue to prove him wrong.
Click to expand...
You are still fighting The Cold War, bruh. You won’t let it end.
 
#87,916
#87,916
BeardedVol said:
Lol, now there's the response of a person who is completely ignorant of the work of John Mearsheimer, but is still complaining about me not taking him seriously; classic.
Click to expand...
No, you got caught trying to say that Mearsheimer is not a serious and knowledgeable voice. So you trucked out a claim that you have not defended, trying to change the subject.

You’re making a logical error: granting, purely for the sake of argument, that his theory of international relations (offensive realism) is incorrect or inadequate in some respect, that does not entail that his particular observations about this war are incorrect.

Second, you haven’t shown that his theory is defective. You’ve merely claimed without an argument that “under Mearsheimer's theories, the Cold War could not end in the unilateral collapse of the Soviet Union without western military intervention.” Where does he say that? I never endorsed his theory, btw, but I now suspect you are a proponent of a theory. Which one?

Third, you’ve proceeded all along on the (false imo) basis that Russia is a continuation of the Soviet government. You act as if the Cold War never ended, so it’s disingenuous to base your claim on the Cold War having ended.

Fourth, you have this really bad habit of just snarking off and declaring victory. You should admit that I was correct that Mearsheimer is an expert in the field. I’m not going to gloat. And then explain your point about the Cold War.

My view is that he is a person worth listening to. Not a propagandist like most U.S. media have been proven to be. It seems like you’ve never accepted the truth about that. “RussiaGate” and other associated lies have been a significant contributing factor toward the U.S. role this war and a major impediment to its resolution. The media ran another WMD type op on you.
 
Last edited:
#87,917
#87,917
You don’t have to be antagonistic about your questioning offensive realism. When you tell me where to look, I’ll look. No big deal to me. No hurry.

Note: To save you the trouble, @BeardedVol, I don’t really think much of that sort of theorizing, anyway. Although he at least attempts to be realistic.
 
Last edited:
#87,918
#87,918
What we all have to come to grips with now is that blaming everything on Russian propaganda was a lie and an op. Moreover, we now are compelled — if we are being honest — to allege at most that it may be some Russian version of despicable and widespread American propaganda. It is difficult to see any honest way to say that whatever the Russians may be saying is worse than the lies of the U.S. government and media. We have to be open to the possibility that the Russians may have proven to less dishonest.

The propaganda card is dead.
 
Last edited:
#87,919
#87,919
#87,920
#87,920
www.firstpost.com

Ukrainian drone strikes force Kremlin to scale down Navy Day celebrations

Russia dramatically scaled back its Navy Day festivities on Sunday due to mounting security concerns amid a surge in Ukrainian drone attacks. The Kremlin cancelled traditional warship parades in major port cities including St. Petersburg, with officials citing the need to prioritise public safety.
www.firstpost.com www.firstpost.com
 
#87,921
#87,921
I just finished James M. Goldgeier’s “Not Whether But When: The U.S. Decision To Enlarge NATO” as an alternate view to (a portion of) Horton’s “Provoked.” It’s a first-hand account of the decision to add Poland, The Czech Republic, and Hungary by a participant and supporter during the Clinton administration. It’s a good read. Some of you may like it.
 
#87,924
#87,924
Orange. said:
No, you got caught trying to say that Mearsheimer is not a serious and knowledgeable voice. So you trucked out a claim that you have not defended, trying to change the subject.

You’re making a logical error: granting, purely for the sake of argument, that his theory of international relations (offensive realism) is incorrect or inadequate in some respect, that does not entail that his particular observations about this war are incorrect.

Second, you haven’t shown that his theory is defective. You’ve merely claimed without an argument that “under Mearsheimer's theories, the Cold War could not end in the unilateral collapse of the Soviet Union without western military intervention.” Where does he say that? I never endorsed his theory, btw, but I now suspect you are a proponent of a theory. Which one?

Third, you’ve proceeded all along on the (false imo) basis that Russia is a continuation of the Soviet government. You act as if the Cold War never ended, so it’s disingenuous to base your claim on the Cold War having ended.

Fourth, you have this really bad habit of just snarking off and declaring victory. You should admit that I was correct that Mearsheimer is an expert in the field. I’m not going to gloat. And then explain your point about the Cold War.

My view is that he is a person worth listening to. Not a propagandist like most U.S. media have been proven to be. It seems like you’ve never accepted the truth about that. “RussiaGate” and other associated lies have been a significant contributing factor toward the U.S. role this war and a major impediment to its resolution. The media ran another WMD type op on you.
Click to expand...

It's good that you were finally motivated enough to read his Wikipedia page. Now take that same enthusiasm and Google "Mearsheimer criticism" and read through some of the myriad of academic critiques of his philosophy, and you'll soon understand why he's relegated to doing YouTube videos with the likes of Glenn Diesen and Alexander Mercouris.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top