Mearsheimer being wrong about Putin not going to invade on February 15th kinda…undermines his whole premise and credibility? If he doesn’t think that Putin was going to invade as of Feb 15, then that would necessarily be because NATO hadn’t done enough of the American Imperialism to force Putin to invade. And what did NATO do between the 15th and the invasion? Absolutely fucking nothing. Or, if instead you want to argue that his premise was correct, but he’s simply a poor estimator of the level of NATO buildup that would trigger Putin, then it would seem he’s absolutely fucking useless, to the point of being unfalsifiable. Because if he can’t identify that NATO has crossed the tipping point before they did so, who the fuck cares about him meting out blame to NATO? NATO members weren’t engaged in admittance talks and hadn’t undertaken material steps towards expansion for years. If NATO’s actions are to blame, but they are so subtly to blame that he himself cannot even identify them in advance, then he might as well be blaming an invisible spirit who haunts Putin and tells him what to do. No one can see the spirit, not even him, but trust him, it’s definitely there, and it’s definitely what told Putin to invade, not Putin’s own brain. Shame on the west for not making enough sacrifices to the spirit, because even though they clearly had made some, because if they had made enough, Putin wouldn’t have invaded!
how do you know you are only repeating the true part?
All good, but again doesn’t it further ensure the US as the world police?
Maybe the rest of the world should have a defense treaty vs the us.
If what I’m saying is false then point that out. That you instead choose to dismiss what I say as parroting Russian propaganda is telling.
a lot of propaganda lies by omission. it also russian propaganda lies that Nato is an aggressor. it’s a mutual defense pact, one that over time has become far more transparent than any other. why continue to entertain the argument that it’s a threat to russia, when in fact it’s only a threat to putin?
from Paul Krugman
Incidentally, one puzzle about Russia’s pre-Ukraine image of strength was how a kleptocratic regime managed to have an efficient, effective military. Maybe it didn’t?
I never said anything besides what you’re saying here. NATO was never going to invade Russia.
Might also simply be the first border location many people can get to. A friend/acquaintance posted a message on FB this morning basically asking “Hey, anybody know people in Moldova?” because his wife’s parents were finally fleeing Ukraine to Moldova. Goal was to wind up in Italy where there is family/friends.
I dont think any military has transitioned well from ww2 kinds of fighting to fighting in the 21st century. We saw America fail in Iraq with vastly more financial power and better supplies, Russia is in for a similar problem. Just so much equipment is an absolute waste while the drones and others are just way more valuable.
The blame goes to the actual country doing the butchering in Europe for creating the situation.
If Putin didn’t have any plans to re-create the soviet union via conquest or vassal state we wouldn’t need to keep spending money on defence spending.
I agree with you on this. But we shouldn’t ignore that our international community as currently constructed has divided sovereign nations into classes of countries where it isn’t ok to invade and kill innocent people and countries where it is ok. We should probably correct that going forward.
that’s the premise of mearsheimer’s thing is that russia is afraid of the nato threat?
I’ve seen this in more than one place. Does the right really believe Biden said “go get him” at the end of his speech? Like referring to Putin? If so it appears we have a hopeless lack of communication.
These are more remnants of post WW2 and the cold War more than anything really on purpose in that way. Basically what you’re kind of getting at which is true is that these power structures work until they don’t. There is no bending, there is an immediate breakdown which leads to chaos and confusion and death.
you are correct, militaries are slow to adjust. but the very large number of drones available to both belligerent sides is a late 2010s development.
having said that, drones weren’t a common battlefield thing in 2003, although versions of unmanned vehicles were bing developed as far back as early 90s, and US predator program was years ahead of everyone else when it was deployed.
ETA: krugman’s point is basically my point. we know russia’s economy and policies are shit, and they are stealing money into offshore accounts by the trillions. why did we expect that the military would be immune to this, or that it would be built like a capable fighting force (other than the atrocities of shelling with cluster and vacuum bombs) in spite of corruption?
This is a thing you keep asserting that is blatantly wrong.
Go on