Something else, it would seem:
Yeah, of course I am antagonistic. Generally, if a guy I touted as a brilliant expert was more wrong about a major falsifiable prediction than Joe Fucking Biden was, that would cause me some serious introspection about whether that guy was worthy taking seriously, because I don’t take Joe Biden all that seriously. Not for you. You still think this guy is brilliant, despite being more wrong than Biden. That is weird, so I am curious if he actually has anything else going for him. So far, you have failed to articulate any reason to take him seriously except that he is cover for your extreme isolationism preference.
3 Likes
Havent we go a Ukrapto thread for this?
8 Likes
What if what Ukraine wanted and did was specifically ask other countries for help? Do you believe the US unilaterally helped on its own without asking Ukraine wanted they wanted.
Of course not.
I definitely don’t think that Mearsheimer was more wrong than Biden. Mearsheimer’s main thesis was that Ukraine being in Russia’s sphere of influence was extremely important to Russia, and they would wreck Ukraine as a functioning state rather than let Ukraine become aligned with the west. That matches up very well with what has happened.
1 Like
Dude it was OK to think Mearsheimer was smart before all his ideas got obliterated by the cold hard light of reality, but that you haven’t just cut bait and disavowed the guy by this point is kind of weird.
Can you admit that his ideas have been totally discredited by their real world performance so we can all move on from this conversation?
We’ve all had the experience of thinking someone is smart and then seeing them and the ideas successfully sold you get completely trounced lol. This is why it’s not a very good idea to be attached to any particular idea. They’re there for you to use, not to use you. The second they stop working you should trash them or maybe recycle the part that actually did work.
What ideas of Mearsheimer’s got obliterated? How have his ideas been discredited?
Let me guess, asking you that is “sea lioning” or something.
Imagine posting this and thinking anyone would ever take you seriously. How did you escape my permanent ignore list? Back you go lol.
1 Like
Oh, I was very sure you wouldn’t elaborate. Because you can’t. Toodles!
1 Like
The basic flaw of Mearsheimer’s theory is his black box approach to states where domestic politics don’t matter. Under his theory, Russia would act the same, whether it was a dictatorship under Putin or a liberal democracy. Thus, in his view, the West is to blame for provoking such an obvious response. He denies that Putin has any desire for “Greater Russia”, insisting that such aims are a fantasy that the US and NATO have cooked up to hide their culpability because such a motive does not fit his amoralist worldview., but doing so requires ignoring Putin’s own words.
I don’t think you will find many people here who will agree with that basic tenet of his offensive realism.
1 Like
Regarding “Greater Russia” Mearsheimer doesn’t say that Putin doesn’t desire it but rather that he can’t achieve it. He says that if Putin could restore Greater Russia, he would. But as a declining great power Russia isn’t in any position to do so.
As far as ignoring domestic politics, he doesn’t say that domestic politics don’t matter, they’re just ignored by his IR model. He says they often do matter and can be a factor when real world events don’t mesh with his or other’s IR models.
Mearsheimer still insists that Putin has no imperialist desires and is solely motivated by keeping Ukraine out of NATO. Not just that he had no such ambitions before the war, but that he currently has no such ambitions.
This recent interview was given just after Mearsheimer had met with Viktor Orbán in Hungary, something that Mearsheimer did not want to discuss.
As long as he means out of NATO and in Russia’s sphere of influence, I think that’s reasonable and I agree with him. The important thing isn’t NATO or not, it’s that being in NATO makes it impossible for Ukraine to be in Russia’s sphere of influence. I don’t really have an opinion on the extent of Putin’s imperial ambitions.
Biden was saying Russia was going to invade while Mearsh was saying they would not. That’s a big miss!
What does the kidnapping of at least 11,000 children have to do with keeping Ukraine out of NATO?
You create this perception that you are willfully ignorant about Putin’s imperial ambitions to avoid saying anything that might contradict your main argument, in the same way that one might see a Republican deny having seen something that Trump said to avoid taking a position.
How would I know what Putin wants? I’ve never even read a biography of the man.
Why would you not want to form an opinion about what he wants?