Wegotheeeem!
What debunked conspiracy theory am I pushing here?
Iām about to lock this thread unless someone can provide a good reason to keep it open. Danby came in with the /thread post off the top rope. Keed is obviously not willing to reevaluate his opinion on this.
Is me changing my opinion the reason for the thread? Just let people discuss this if they want to.
The only point in Mearsheimerās video I agreed with is:
- This is much more dangerous situation than Cuban Missile Crisis.
- USA would crush Russia in a non nuclear war engagement.
Those were very good points!
Also painfully obvious. Do we really need his great intellect to make these sophomoric observations?
Really? No one seems to be expecting this to end in a nuclear apocalypse.
The only thing I am truly afraid of existentially is Putin dropping a tactical mini nuke to clear out a combat area of Ukraine when he sees he canāt even win in the Donbas.
That explodes this conflict exponentially in so many different ways.
The fact that he hasnāt specifically targeted blowing up nuclear power plants, used nukes, or mass chemical weapons gives me some hope.
I havenāt watched this guyās youtubes, but if he thinks this situation is more dangerous than the time we narrowly avoided WWIII, heās a clown who should not be listened to.
Yet.
I mean see below, itās news to some peopleā¦
Uh - this could easily devolve into WWIII.
Iāve watched the part of the video where II can see Mearsheimerās head (you can just watch the beginning and the end).
I suspect that Mearsheimerās view is that war crimes and Putin are irrelevant, that this is the US pushing NATO expansion and causing Russia to perceive an existential threat that would lead to a reaction no matter what the domestic politics of Russia might look like. He sees this as the US seeking war with Russia and Russia reacting naturally as any state would. And he sees this as a reckless warmongering by people who donāt fear escalation, especially nuclear escalation, because they have forgotten the lessons of the Cold War. Mearsheimer wants to pump the breaks on anything that increases the probability of escalation. This includes demanding a higher level of evidence for anything that might provide justification for the United States to increase its role in this conflict because itās not pretty when superpowers collide.
And he may be right, but my general response is āfuck you, John Mearsheimer, I donāt care if doing whatās right leads to a greater chance of a world war or nuclear armageddon.ā For anyone who agrees with me on Ukraine, let me point out that this is consistent with how I feel about defending democracy against Republicans in a way that increases the chances that our domestic conflict escalates to civil war or some other form of violence. I donāt understand anyone who agrees with me on the former but not that latter. You are all Keeed when you quiver in fear at the idea of more militancy from the American left.
For sure agree that the middle ground makes little sense, and thatās where most people here seem to lie. Obviously being indifferent to nuclear Armageddon is complete lunacy but otherwise good post!
Why would the US ever want war with a country with 6,000 nuclear warheads? It just makes no sense.
The US just wants every country to be a peaceful happy democracy and buy our weapons and software and stuff.
And maybe Putin to stop meddling in our elections and giving our populace brain worms. Does jingleheimer ever address that? Or is he not sure he said/she said, no one can really know who meddles in whoās elections.
Iām not indifferent to nuclear armageddon, I just think itās worth the risk.
Domestic elections donāt matter to Mearsheimer because internal politics donāt matter in his model. Hence, why he doesnāt seem to care much about Putinās actual psychology, because he thinks any Russian regime would have the same incentives to act.