Europe under extreme duress

[Hotdogs]

Wasn't trying to be rude. Point is, expertise in something like IR, and especially IR theory, is in no way comparable to say being a surgeon, and as such lack of expertise in it doesn't necessarily inhibit thinking about foreign policy.

The irony of this statement is hilarious. There are theorists that have significantly influenced governments and currently form your way of life as you know it today. (John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, et al). But apparently because they’re not surgeons - they’re philosophical contributions to society are irrelevant. ? Can’t make this stuff up.

Theory isn’t meant to always be correct or accepted as universally valid. Its not the scientific method. It’s thought process to explain naturally occurring phenomenon. In this case human nature, state interaction, and the origin of war. Some theories can exist in coexistence with one another and others can proved incorrect or correct at times. They do not predict initiation or outcomes, but the causal factors (identity, material, structure, system etc).

You have an uninformed opinion. Nothing wrong with that, but when we bring up topics like securitization or collective defense in relation to China vis a vis Russia - It would help to understand what specifically those words mean. It’s not “well they buy jet engines from them so they gotta be friends…”

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

The idea that only those with "formal training in International Relations" are in any way qualified to comment or have an opinion on the subject, that such a person should "know their place" and leave the commentary to "the experts."

And even they are often wrong. What doesn't really mean that he who should know his place is often right. A matter of probability more than anything else, which is, in turn, a matter of formal training. When it comes to this way, it would be clearer.

Aside, in this particular problem with attempts to understand, explain and predict putin's behaviour, world really needs experts in IR, experts in history of secret societies as well as someone like Detective Rust Cohle. I don't know if putin himself is totally fucked up, but the system which created him is a sum of historical atrocious practices for unbelievers minus the subject to believe in. A KGB. But the tools this fucking system operates are from the same inventory the ancient Rome did already have, except for nuke arsenal. Military who operates nukes are so preoccupied with safety procedures that they have very little margin to develope proper nuke tactics, let alone strategy. Those are the fields for people... with formal training in IR plus much more formal training in several different fields. Hope this will make the picture brighter.

 

[Random8145]

The irony of this statement is hilarious. There are theorists that have significantly influenced governments and currently form your way of life as you know it today. (John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, et al). But apparently because they’re not surgeons - they’re philosophical contributions to society are irrelevant. ? Can’t make this stuff up.

That's not what I said. You completely misunderstood my argument. I never said their philosophical contributions are irrelevant (to the contrary, I've stated the exact opposite). What I said is that criticism of International Relations/Political Science/Economics is not the same as say criticism of surgeons. If a surgeon starts a technique and it looks stupid to me, chances are very likely I'm the one who is the idiot. If a foreign policy looks stupid however, chances may well be the experts are being idiots. We have seen this repeatedly with North Korea, Iran, China, and Russia, and the old Soviet Union, where the experts repeatedly were wrong and it was by going against them that the correct policies were implemented.

Theory isn’t meant to always be correct or accepted as universally valid. Its not the scientific method. It’s thought process to explain naturally occurring phenomenon. In this case human nature, state interaction, and the origin of war. Some theories can exist in coexistence with one another and others can proved incorrect or correct at times. They do not predict initiation or outcomes, but the causal factors (identity, material, structure, system etc).

You have an uninformed opinion. Nothing wrong with that, but when we bring up topics like securitization or collective defense in relation to China vis a vis Russia - It would help to understand what specifically those words mean. It’s not “well they buy jet engines from them so they gotta be friends…”

Jet engines was just a single example of how China and Russia are tied to one another, which deals with the whole collective defense aspect.

 

[Random8145]

And even they are often wrong. What doesn't really mean that he who should know his place is often right. A matter of probability more than anything else, which is, in turn, a matter of formal training. When it comes to this way, it would be clearer.

Oh yes, I agree 100% there. That is why, IMO, it is important to look at the hard substance of what one is saying.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

That is why, IMO, it is important to look at the hard substance of what one is saying.

In true scientific discussion yes, Decartes would applaud you. But there isn't any hard substance in politics and have never been. Sufficient part of Russian government money frozen by Western sanctions, a natural gold, is physically blocked in Chinese banks on Chinese soil. putin and his guys do have all possibilities to look at their gold and maybe even touch it, but they can't use a slightest grain of it. A state of being bad guy.

 

[Hotdogs]

We have seen this repeatedly with North Korea, Iran, China, and Russia, and the old Soviet Union, where the experts repeatedly were wrong and it was by going against them that the correct policies were implemented.

You don’t mean the talking heads on T.V., political socialite, or former DoS official turned pundit right? Significant difference between those guys and the likes of Mearsheimer, Wendt, and Keohane (amongst a litany of others). If you understood theory if you would realize that a lot of them have been spot on. Especially with regards to the former USSR and Russia.

I don’t even think you have read any theory. How could you discount them without understanding what they mean? Further, there is a ton of empirical research in that field as well. The assumption that because it’s not a technical field is unfounded. Don’t get me started on economics not being technical either - I can’t comprehend that statement. Brett was spot on with you and Dunning-Kruger. Anyways - I think I’ve made my point. Do whatever makes you feel relevant. The thread needs to move on. I’ve moved past the “some random dude is wrong on the internet” phase…

 

[RobLyman]

Some good news: Ukraine liberates Lyman

Good news indeed!!!

 

[Random8145]

You don’t mean the talking heads on T.V., political socialite, or former DoS official turned pundit right? Significant difference between those guys and the likes of Mearsheimer, Wendt, and Keohane (amongst a litany of others). If you understood theory if you would realize that a lot of them have been spot on. Especially with regards to the former USSR and Russia.

Not talking about TV pundits. And it is interesting you bring up John Mearsheimer, who is an epitome of what I have been talking about. He actually blames the West (primarily NATO and the United States) for Putin's aggression, because of "expanding NATO" after the Cold War ended and proposed that Ukraine become a "neutral" state, which is foolish in the extreme. Then he claimed Putin was not seeking to rebuild the Soviet Empire and would not invade the rest of Ukraine, which turned out to be spectacularly wrong. He has said that Ukraine becoming a pro-Western liberal democracy is unacceptable to the Russians and Putin, which I agree with. The interesting thing is that none of it supports the argument you have made that Putin is an irrational actor.

I don’t even think you have read any theory. How could you discount them without understanding what they mean? Further, there is a ton of empirical research in that field as well. The assumption that because it’s not a technical field is unfounded. Don’t get me started on economics not being technical either - I can’t comprehend that statement. Brett was spot on with you and Dunning-Kruger. Anyways - I think I’ve made my point. Do whatever makes you feel relevant. The thread needs to move on. I’ve moved past the “some random dude is wrong on the internet” phase…

Again you are misconstruing what I've said. Not sure why you do that. I never just discounted foreign policy theorists altogether. And I never said economics is not a technical field. To the contrary, it's a very technical field. But it's also a field that's had a lot of nonsense as well.

 

[Brett327]

But it's also a field that's had a lot of nonsense as well.

Do you have any formal training in economics? Just kidding - nobody cares. Let's all please move on or I'll split this thread (don't make me pull this car over).

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Good news indeed!!!

Town was russian soil for just several hours, from official claim in moscow to liberation. And just like an aircraft carrier superseded battleship in previous big war, HIMARS is definitely sharing the throne with drones. A lot of Ukranians are spelling "Hee-Mars" like "He, [the] Mars" instead of "Hy: mars" due to recognition of its role of a new God of War

 

[Random8145]

Town was russian soil for just several hours, from official claim in moscow to liberation. And just like an aircraft carrier superseded battleship in previous big war, HIMARS is definitely sharing the throne with drones. A lot of Ukranians are spelling "Hee-Mars" like "He, [the] Mars" instead of "Hy: mars" due to recognition of its role of a new God of War

Elon Musk's Starlink satellite system has also played a rather big role from what I understand. It prevented Putin from shutting down Ukraine's communications altogether and has allowed many ordinary Ukrainians to keep in contact with the outside world and with each other. It also has allowed the Ukrainian military to guide drones around and do things like blow up the Russian tanks. It has also impressed the U.S. military highly and concerned the Chinese, because the Russians have kept trying to jam it and hack it, but the Starlink engineers have shown they can very quickly counter the Russian efforts and un-jam/un-hack it. The sheer number of the satellites makes them difficult to shoot down with anti-satellite missiles if a nation wanted to attempt that and they are lower-cost, so easy to replace.

Seeing all of this has the Chinese concerned now about U.S. domination in space and Chinese military scholars saying China needs to work up a system that can destroy Starlink. So drones, HIMARS, and new satellite constellation.

 

[Flash]

Simply put Russian state stability while sitting on 3000 nukes is probably slightly more important than adding a broken country into the EU. As much as I’d like to see Ukraine victorious - It is going to come with a hidden bill. I don’t know if Europe or America fully realizes that or is willing to pay (Either in lives or national treasure). But as long as it makes us feel good right?

I think that this was a conflict we simply couldn't stay on the sidelines of, either us or Europe. 'Western' credibility was and remains at stake, with Putin believing his own propaganda about western rot and weakness. If we had actually been willing to let Ukraine hang out to dry it would have made true his beliefs and emboldened not only Putin but other autocrats and wannabes, likely leading to a greater conflict sooner rather than later. This conflict has shown Putin's geopolitical philosophy and his power to be as weak and corrupt as his country and laid bare those failures to the world.

I've been impressed at the west's response to the invasion, standing firm thus far and supplying Ukraine with the necessary arms and information that it needs to defend itself but not threatening the Russian homeland. I've been impressed with the US response in particular, along with some very able assistance from the UK and a few others, with steady and measured but increasing amount of support to Ukraine. Robust political and public support, with a few notable exceptions, has helped make sure that support is unlikely to go waver anytime soon.

So yes, I am very worried that an unstable 'genius' like Putin will make another grave miscalculation and do something incredibly stupid. But that fear should not make us sit back and watch the world burn while waiting, hoping, it doesn't reach us.

All that said, something this morning reminded me of this:

"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

 

[Gonzo08]

Seeing all of this has the Chinese concerned now about U.S. domination in space and Chinese military scholars saying China needs to work up a system that can destroy Starlink. So drones, HIMARS, and new satellite constellation.

Care to source this claim? Or is this based on your professional experience/opinion?

 

[Random8145]

Care to source this claim? Or is this based on your professional experience/opinion?

Chinese Scientists Call for Plan to Destroy Elon Musk's Starlink

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

So yes, I am very worried that an unstable 'genius' like Putin will make another grave miscalculation and do something incredibly stupid

And we all, at least in Eurasia and North America, are getting closer to one or another form of nuke exchange than ever, counting Caribbean Crisis too. Fucking footprint in world's history that each fucking "genius" is prone to leave on a sand of time.