Agree. We have a society that values competition over cooperation.

You realize that narcissists and psychopaths are attracted to sources of power?

I think thats a rationalization of a copout of our responsibility for our participation and support of a system which enables such monsters.

@@user-ev7vh2is6b I think its unavoidable unfortunately. And I'll just point to Mearsheimer's argument in this video for the reason why.

You are arguing for an ineffective system, that gets nothing done since war is too high of a price to pay for ambitious policy makers. You also believe that humanity can collectively gather to shut down evil politicians. You seem to hold strong to your beliefs, not everyone will agree on everything. Either every person agrees with you or businesses as usual, competition is built into the system, not everyone will agree on your idea of evil example (abortion, gun rights, freedom of speech, climate change, religion)

I'm sure there are plenty of Russian citizens that wish Putin wasn't their leader. But the guy spends his time mostly in an underground bunker, and there haven't been a meaningful election in Russia since Putin took office. The last one was around 2012. Yeah, not many elections happen in Russia. And certainly not any elections where the people have a say about things. The entire world needs new Leaders. Personally though, I have to say Zelensky may be one of the best keeping his small country together and keeping Russia fighting to a stalemate. Finland has a good President. But the good ones are few these days. It's terrible. It really is embarrassing Biden is even the President. No country respects America right now except the British, and that is only because they have to. lol

@@johannjohann6523perhaps but Trump will not be a President again. Mark my words.

​@johannjohann6523 Agreed... The whole world 🌎 needs a fresh set of leaders... At least, of a younger generation pool, enough of the baby boomer bunch 🤷🏽‍♂️ Pray for the best 🙏🏽 Good luck, USA 🇺🇸

​@@johannjohann6523Zelensky is a disaster for Ukraine.

Make sense. That's the reason why there is no US president who was able to start and stop one war in the history.

It's not what you want, it's what ccp wants

You want that. Xi doesn't. sadly.

There is no evidence the CCP or Xi wants military confrontation with anyone. None.

​@@Buzzle420lol man so effing brainwashed to demonize China.

​@@EnglishFuture-xg1gwtime to turn off your war mongering media which keeps telling you that it's the other side that wants war. Seriously what's your ÎQ

You understand America exists because the old colonial masters lost grip of their power enough to form the Constitution, as a new foundation of rules determined by understanding the old rules of oppression - and there is still a battle for control vs. freedom - in America and the greater Western values? The hydra's heads are nearing a point of devouring each other - the snake eating its own tail.

While you sloppily blow the new colonial masters. nom nom!

You are a simpleton with a simpleton's understanding of history and current affairs.

The old ‘colonial masters’ have been dethroned in the 1940s!

What does that even mean?

More than half of people are choosing not to have children. Their selfish Gene is at max and can't sacrifice for others.

True but the sacrifice also became bigger & bigger. People struggling with two incomes, getting a home, basics in life outrageously expensive and top that off with environmental challenges. I mean it isn’t just spoiled brats. People very well know what is coming. By now Everybody Knows

I have been saying much the same. Keep spreading the message. We have to keep up the momentum.

Only wars that have been started by ordinary citizens are civil wars, and not all of them. All regular wars have been started by the elite.

We keep making the choice you mention … to “risk my own life and the life of my children just that some super rich can keep their privileged status” by continuing to participate in our hierarchical capitalist market based bourgeois consumer-culture society that we accept as normal and acceptable as part of the “normal” conditions we associate with our democratic society. The neoliberal, free-trading world order demanded by the capitalist buys us (the bourgeois middle class domestic citizens that share the country with the rich capitalists) off for a time while they look to expand outward and create “new markets” elsewhere. Well … now the most successful members of those new markets are ready to go to war with the leaders who first introduced them to capitalism and free markets (yes … that includes China .. they’re not communists in any traditional sense of the word at all) and some of those most harmed by the capitalism that came to their country decades ago are now the migrants flooding across our borders looking to get away from the horrific treatment of THEIR capitalist bosses to places where they know they will have a better chance of living a slightly less physically perilous life due to a better legal system than the brutal one they have back home. The capitalists say they help spread democracy and freedom and rule of law, but they do not. They spread profit over people; and if the the native system of law supports the interests of the ownership class and permits brutal treatment of their workers they look at this as a benefit to doing business there, not something that must be remedied. Now the richest 20th century capitalist oligarchs have created a world so perilous for us there is nowhere safe for working people to be. There is only one obvious solution; rid the world of the rich oligarchy and their capitalist philosophy wherever it is found. Return the hoarded wealth to the working people who created it and form healthy middle classes again. Support democracy, NOT capitalism everywhere we go. Identify the rich as enemies of the people; there is no good rich capitalist. They have made this happen. This man here calls himself a “realist” and he’s in the tradition of Kissinger and Machiavelli and traces his thinking back through Bismarck and Metternich and others back to the famous Treaty of Westphalia (1648) which cynically decided that there is no right and wrong in politics, only “interests” and that foreign affairs should be settled by balance of power agreements. This worked for a time. Now capitalism has created a world in which there is an end in sight and it’s going to be caused by the prominent belief system of the worlds preeminent world power. And this man still counsels us to negotiate in a way as if there is no need to significantly change our own political point of view to create a BETTER WORLD for everyone. He’s fundamentally a conservative by trying only to balance our own “interests” against those of “others”, without EVER asking what exactly “our interests” are. He will tell you that “our interests” are identical with those of the rich ruling class of Americans that are currently ruining our working class lives, polluting the planet, driving the desperate populations of other more brutal capitalist countries to our doorstep, and driving us into a competitive global war with other nations in a test of who has the right to control the world’s resources. Be very careful of the hidden assumptions in this old fossil’s “common sensical” sounding “offensive realist” arguments. Like most capitalist neoliberals he believes the world is essentially chaotic and needs powerful aristocratic leaders to give it order, and that these leaders behave in unpredictable ways competing for power. He pretended capitalism and communism and rich capitalists and the working class they dominate aren’t fundamentally artificial states of affairs yet the primary means by which the world today is organized economically. Beware of this kind of cynical analysis these old “realists” propagate … they will do nothing to stop this ruination of our lives by the rich, as they continue to assert their “natural right” to drive us to the precipice.

I doubt that. "In a nuclear world, the nuclear option is the last resort to keep control over chaos in a situation in which the power that providers order loses control and chaos and destruction breaks out" ... ... this "nation states" / "competition of great superpowers" layer is not the tip of the pyramid...

@@cbdc4ai Well, look at Russia and Belarus right now. They are sorrounded by wannabe anemies. If those anemies decide to go for it, Russia can't take them on the field, it's just too much. They gonna have to use nuclear weapons. That's the poit, you can naver win with nuclear nation because just like an animal being pushed into a corner, they will have their last bite. Obviously nuclear power is here to stay, so are nuclear weapons. That's why we have to learn to live with them because we clearly don't know how to do it yet. In your mind war looks like in the movies. Brave and smart leaders and even braver soldiers. It's not like that at all. People are incopetent, corrupted, crazy or just bad, you have acces to media, you've seen american administration, it's a fucking freak show. Do you trust Kamala Harris with nuclear weapons? I wouldn't let her watch paint dry.

And that can be prevented by pious platitudes?

Dolt person will never admit that he’s dolt. So you’re not one for sure

Professor M is a great communicator of his perspective.

the established socio-economic system has reached the end of its lifecycle - so we can see it all (if we are willing to) at least since the c-actions in spring 2020 that "they are all in bed together". So yes: these wars are a lie, they are initiated to keep certain things running that ensure order and control over the masses. However: without an alternative / without an other "framework that provides order" we are running into chaos and destruction - with a high potential to ending civilisation in most areas of the world (spreading out of the mega cities and bringing chaos and destruction to those who are busy with providing food... )

I'll add Ophuls' "Immoderate Greatness".

Those empires vanished eighty years ago. Maybe it is time to stopping bitching about them and facing up to the reality of global jihad which is acually happening now. Today. In this reality.

but it was as he said a preventive war, that's why they immediately seized control over Crimea and the Sevastopol Naval Base they did not want NATO to show up there one day, it was clear way before 2014, Putin said this basically from 2008 what they will never let it happen no matter what

2004 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution

When did America fight a war for Israel?

@@arktseytlin 😂

@@thisisit9829 No seriously, please name one. You can't because there never was.

@@arktseytlin Iraq. Just Wikipedia surf Project for a New American Century.

@@IlIlIlIlIlIlIIlIlIlIlIlIlIIIII nope, that was George W. and neocons initiative after 9/11. Israel had nothing to do with that

most people in the global south still can see the sense of western entitlement in Mearsheimer's voice, as if his way of realistic thinking is the only way, trying to paint all countries like the neo colonial US

@@thewanderingh3rmit299 His thinking applies to all great powers. Mostly based in human nature.

@@Chabbrik with US and the colonial europe as his prime examples ....pretty pathetic for a man of his stature if he cannot even draw parallels since no other countries have colonial hegemonic ambitions such as the west

​​@@thewanderingh3rmit299Mearsheimer doesn't differentiate between western and non-Western countries, between democracy and non-democracy. Cultural and historical uniqueness of different country doesn't include in his IR theory, hence making his theory doesn't entangled with cultural, ideological & historical bias

@@Mmzk155 exactly my point his view is of a western view of international relations specifically a post neocolonial view, not the entire view of human race.

U rite gud...

Like the bad guy in Indiana Jones 1

Try watching : Ghost Rider : Slade's Last Ride

Mearsheimer is an old-time antisemite. His world view is a perversion of Cold War mythology.

Actually before then when the C1A organised a coup in Ukraine...

Because he values his job.

Because the one that initiated war among country from Mearsheimer's analysis is country leader, politicians, policy makers etc. Not bankers. That's very loud and clear from his lecture. Not because Mearsheimer value his job so he stay silent about bankers

Quite clear that politicians are controlled by bankers or do you think someone like Biden is capable of getting the most powerful position in the world?

Because that would piss off the oy vey crew.

Bankers don’t really want war. It’s the arms dealers, and weapons manufacturers, natural resource extraction and their connections to the pentagon/congress that push for wars. Finance is too busy making money out of thin air on Wall Street to worry about messy wars.

He has, he's just not talking about that here.

He is logical as a Westerner. The rest of the World does not think like that. BTW He said that we are not in a constant state of war. I disagree in the case of US.

@@cosmicdancer exactly his view is of a realist westerner, more like a realist yank not a international realist .... at every moment he tries to fit china in US morals and ambitions which the old fool fails to realize anyone with half a brain can make the distinction china is not

Except he simply doesn't know what he is talking about. His knowledge of russia for example is came from comic books or something I guess.

​@@cosmicdancerconstant state of war in Mearsheimer lecture basically about great power war. So yes, great power war is not constant or always happened

@@user-cu7ig6bf1x Agree. He understands the West very well. I applaud his achievement. However, his theory is based on Western history. Such a theory cannot be applied to the entire World.

Agreed, and from this perspective, there is no great power conflict today. There is conflict between colonism capitalism and indigenous capital.

So today, it's all about dollar colonialism. The British colonialists had boots on the ground. Now the USA has computer money.

You believe this is unique to the West?

That's the core of politics 😅

I think you misunderstood about Mearsheimer's point about relation between politics and war. What Mearsheimer said in this video is about how politics (leader, politician etc) is the important variable to understand what & who initiated war among state. The one that initiated war among state is country leader, government etc., not big company, capitalist, bankers etc.

Spoken like a true marxist...

bright minds are not required for politics

Except in China most Chinese only access Chinese media. I’ve lived in China over ten years, I know how it is here. Your point doesn’t apply to Chinese.

@@bathhatingcat8626 got it. I guess the conflicts the prof is here addressing pertains rather the west.

@@alexanderpeca7080 agree

From what I'm remember, Mearsheimer said war is endemic in international politics, not war is inevitable. Moreover Mearsheimer from another lecture said that "security competition" is inevitable between great power, not great power war

In the current system, it is. International politics is anarchic because there’s no authority above the level of sovereign states. If there was such an authority, war might be eliminated or at least cabined to a point where the laws of war didn’t affect civilian populations. But this idea may be Utopian.

war is god

@@elliottcovert3796 Alternatively, if there were no states, no authority. But that's unlikely to happen at a global scale any time soon.

“This is the nature of war, whose stake is at once the game and the authority and the justification. Seen so, war is the truest form of divination. It is the testing of one's will and the will of another within that larger will which because it binds them is therefore forced to select. War is the ultimate game because war is at last a forcing of the unity of existence. War is god.”

Vietnam war? Iraq war? Any other war that US has ever been in? US soldiers knew very well that it was unjust. But it's called military service for a reason. They served to their country.

@@MrZlocktar No. That generation of soldiers (I knew some of them) wrapped themselves in the American flag ie patriotism. Same with the US military in Iraq. What America wants is just. I referred to armies and states. Don’t confuse the protesters with the soldiers and the political leaders ie the state. The 2 current wars are classic examples. The IDF and Hamas both think their cause is just. So do the Ukrainians and Russians. Even Ghengis Khan believed he had the Mandate of Heaven.

@@JulianMalins-qu9gn "What America wants is just.": its leaders are messing around with the whole world and acting deranged, out of their fear of communism. The US hegemony is the true cancer of our planet.

​@@JulianMalins-qu9gnthat's by design, soldiers are specifically trained to never question authority no matter how absurd and illogical their demands and to shut off any critical thinking skills . Not all causes are equal some are more just than others . In the end tribalism will justify and rationalise any atrocities.

@@macro8236 That is correct though the argument did not find favour at Nuremburg. But my point is different. In the Christian world, the just war idea was invented to deal with the obvious fact that Christ taught that one should love one's neighbour and turn the other cheek etc. That commandment from Christ, unless modified, rather inhibited Christians from fighting - hence the "just" war solution to that theological problem. Whatever the reason, patriotism, training, duty, brainwashing, propaganda, the actual fighting troops always "believe" in their cause. In Orwell's 1984, Oceania, with its wondrous ally, Eurasia, could be happily fighting Eastasia on Monday and then on Tuesday, just as happily fighting Eurasia with its wondrous ally Eastasia. That is correct. Either all wars are just for both sides or no wars are just for either side because the issue of justice is both irrelevant and entirely subjective depending on your point of view (ie which side you are on as a soldier). So the only utility of the "just" war concept (other cultures/religions etc have a similar concept) in the Christian world is for Christians to persuade themselves that they are still Christian (despite Christ's clear commandments) because they are fighting a just war.

Sure, if teaching is lying

If teaching is provoking wars?

what books ?

Arctic resources

Scary China joining Russia. I recommend you to google translate some of the Chinese comments 😂 If China and India didn't produce so many cheap stuff for the west it would be so easy to engage those two overpopulated middle power poses against each other into disaperance 😅

For the $$$

@@RS-vu4nn Sweden does not have the "Resources" to develop the Arctic compare to....

@@Angelicaarchangelica “In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity” ― Sun-Tzu,

It is our moral duty to keep the flame inside us alive, the flame of truth and sincere consciousness.

@@cygnusghedepereu6885 interesting that Mearsheimer states he is a realist as there is an anarchic structure to nations yet his analysis of the Ukraine war is from a moral stance. Even in an unstructured system we can have a loving and just actions if the actors behave as one.

Well, we are animals. The most powerful of animals, but still animals. Our mistake is to believe that we're not.

Yes, but your perception is not what matters. What matters to a realist is that Russia DOES feel that way about Ukraine. Of course Russia's survival is not threatened in the short term, but long term? Imagine if Canada decided to ally with China, and built Chinese military bases on Canadian soil. Does that threaten the survival of the USA? Not immediately, but quite apart from the increased military threat, it would give a base for China to culturally subvert the entire West. Do you seriously think the USA would tolerate that kind of crap? Nope. Far from increasing Canadian autonomy, it would put Canada in immense danger. THAT is what happened to Ukraine.

Russia always needs excuses and feels proveked. We owe Russia nothing.

@@andyjones1982 Your whataboutism is invalid. USA is a good neighbor unlike Russia so why would Canada do it? Nato is an excuse. Ukraine is not even Nato country and had no chance to join. Putin invaded because he could invade non Nato Ukraine only. He wants Ukraine.

100%

You guys are beyond help, they weren't building bases Ukraine. If there was any evidence of that Putin would show it to the world. Russia is a dying empire with geographical security flaws, so it attacked. If you don't realise this you just are simply a shmuck

Good example is/was 1962 Cuba Crisis

Silly, no. If mexico joins Brics, no one is going to invade, and recount stories of historical American borders

BS The US is not claiming that Mexico is or should belong to the US..

You should check out his live sessions with Judge Napolitano, he appears there once per week or so to discuss mostly Ukraine and Gaza. He's said in other lectures that he thinks the US is making a massive strategic mistake and should be focusing on China, rather than being pinned down in the current wars.

@@miguelangelrojas1947 he's right. Putin just visited Xi and both came up with a new world order proposal based on equal rights, depolitization of the United Nations and other international organizations. and they want india as a permanent security council lol. the western hegemony is over

I think that as an overarching analysis, it's brilliant, and that the stinky US strategy we know and love fits well into it. It assumes that the liberal worldview most societies have adapted post-Cold War is not the only philosophy adhered to by governments, which is true, and has been true for most of history

It's an amoral analysis. I think that's a good thing.

The overarching analysis is human nature. Are you stupid?

who owns BANKING?

BlackRock , Vanguard , State Street , AIG etc. :)

@@baton5 The quick answer: A Hierarchy of private individuals that form the octopus head of the Bank of International Settlements and the IMF. These two entities form the World Bank, which controls The foreign exchange system (currencies), and funding of governments around the world.

@@baton5 Agustin Carstens seems to be a high up boss in the World Banking System.

Because its not all about economics, and even economics is not all about GDP. Russia's military industrial complex is outproducing all of them plus the USA combined, particularly in artillery shells. Japan, Germany, UK and France are unable to act independently of the USA, to the point of being embarrassing, and India does not have the technological edge that Russia has.

@@andyjones1982 According to Wikipedia, Russia's military expenditures in 2023 was $84 billion which is quite high for a country where the average yearly income is $15K (half of the US average). The US has slated $825 billion (10X that of Russia) for military in 2024. Russia is not outproducing. I'm no fan of American imperialism or our cruel support for Ukraine, but it's just a fact that Russia is not a leading power in the world. They have the bomb and, probably, a willingness to use it, but the glorious Soviet days are over. The US (and, of course Europe who depends on us) are treating Russia in a contemptuous way and you can't blame them for sticking up for their dignity. The US is really being an a**hole when it comes to Russia. That's what Mearsheimer should just come out and say, instead of BSing us about how great Russia is.

⁠@@workingTchrproduction and budget are different things. Russia nowadays really outproduces all the west in shells. It doesn’t mean that it spends more overall, it means that it sends its money to war production (which is understandable). A lot of US’ budget goes to production, yes, but I bet even larger chunk goes to support all those overseas bases in supplies, salary, operations and maintenance costs.

The Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War was only about 13% of the US GDP but it was still a super power and a peer competitor to the US. Economic and military might do not necessarily go Han in hand. The British military is no longer considered a tier 1, Germany is only rearming now after 70 years of basically being dormant and Japan doesn't even a military in the traditional sense and most importantly even if they are that powerful they all basically vassals of the US in all but name. So yes, Russia is amongst the most powerful great powers of the world with the capacity to be a significant opponent to the US led order. This is what Mr Mearsheimer is talking about.

@@abdullahialiyu2687 They got the bomb and they can destroy the world with it if they choose. If that makes them a "super power", I agree they are a super power.

Great power is a country which can afford to dictate the rules of the world order. So far Russia has been pretty successful at doing exactly that: we will draw the borders as we please, not as what the UN or anyone else tells us.

​@@traumvonhaitiUkraine should have declared neutrality. It's not as if the Ukrainian people wanted to join NATO until after 2014, when the country was torn apart by a violent ultranationalist coup.

@@hazelwray4184 Nice try ivan. Now go get your 15 rubles - you deserved it.

Yeah, he is all about might makes right.

@@davidcottrell1308 But that is not a logical way to run sociaty , in my humble opinion this is why i believe this: 1950 to 2008 the old world and the old way but we did not live in a global socity , it's better to be loved than feared as fear only last so long till people get tired and just do not deal with you at all, EG. what would happen if the china russia iran exc..exc.. Sanction the US or worst just eliminate the relationship all together. does that sound practical you would have 12% of the global population for and 88% of the global pop against see what i mean its better to be loved than feared. Say what you want about china from what i see in the past 40 years they waisted alot of time showing thier population how to be engineers .. just saying we have to move causionsly at the end of the day we are all on the North American Continent would you like to send your kids to die?

Could you remind me, who is current governer of the most western russian province - Berlinska Oblast? Since the russians took it in 1945.

Russia is going to demand unconditional surrender in Ukraine.

There were Japanese who wanted to continue the war after the first bomb was dropped.

wrong. Japan did not surrender after the first bomb, so you theory goes up in smoke. You say Japan was conducting atomic bomb research. Really..never heard that one. Citation, please.

The bombs were dropped as a demonstration. Why and for who? Nothing to do with Japan at all. Soviet Russia ended the War that was designed to crush them (not proxy Germany) so that the Anglos could walk in and gather up Soviet Russian spoils. The Allies needed to do something that would give the Soviets something to think about. Hello Nukes. (Russia doesn't start Wars, Russia ends Wars.)

If you interested about Mearsheimer's paper for this lecture, you can download the paper here ndisc.nd.edu/assets/554790/01_30_2024_john_mearsheimers_read_ahead_war_international_politics.january_30_2024.pdf

This is how deterrence works. It is highly unpleasant but still a lot more humane, economical and efficient than actually fighting an actual war. Even more efficient would be diplomacy e.g. via the UN.

你們跟大多數美國人犯的是一樣的錯誤：覺得自己方對的。美國人有american exceptionalism，中國人則有chinese exceptionalism。事實上你們根本就半斤八兩。

@@user-bf9ur1hq6v 中国人坚持的是和平共处五项原则，又一个典型的立足于原罪论思维的推断，傲慢且幼稚。

@@user-sy4ep1np7w 中國人自稱的"和平"就如同西方人自吹自擂的民主自由價值一樣虛偽可笑又骯髒，一派謊言

If you live long enough you will see it happen !

I don't think he said that. He said that there always a danger of war in the background. Morality, economic considerations, and international law normally deter war, but when survival is threatened, there is danger of war. Survival trumps morality, economics and law. So it is necessary to be very cautious about threatening another nation's survival.

@@johnwsimpson3153 Prof. Sachs says the same thing about Mearsheimer who is always talking big power adversarial relationships. China wants to compete with the U.S. but it doesn’t want war with the U.S.

It is, and countries and alliances are continously "tested". - For weakness ... Once in ..."special operation" escalate...

@@agabrielian And China and the US want to compete with each other on economics and morality, and according to international law. Those are the primary factors. War would be the ultimate factor if one threatens the other's survival. And since both are nuclear powers, war between them would be suicidal, so they don't threaten each other's survival.

@@johnwsimpson3153 Well, the US doesn't want to just compete economically with China. It wants to sanction China and prevent it from competing with the US. It cannot deal with fair competition. The US just is not capable of competing with China. Everything that the US has tried has backfired. So, it wants to bully China.

You are missing few points here. War in Ukraine started not because of Ukraine, but because Russia attacked them and took over their teritory so its obvious that Ukraine would take it back at any point possible. Its not „Russian people on Donbas”. Its Russian army and traitors. Second point is that its not possible for NATO to attack Russia because in western countries it would provoke mass protest and here, voice of people matters and politicians would immediately loose their power if they would try this because noone here wants any war. We want to work, learn, travel, spend a good time, not fight in the trenches. The first one who would say „lets attack Russia” would be out of business forever. And the last one. Russia even if has less conventinal and economical capabilities than NATO is still a nuclear power so we are not suicidal.

@@user-nx3zm3ln7m An unjust but deliberate undemocratic coup (remember the cookies?), eight years, two Minsk agreements, fourteen thousand Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens murdered and a Ukrainian force building up to strike within days. Russia and innocent Ukrainian citizens were being abused by NATO/Ukraine for years despite diplomatic efforts on the RF side. At the end and only at the end, RF struck first when conflict was building and inevitable. (If conflict is inevitable, strike first, suddenly and hard). People choose to ignore that Sevastopol/Crimea is essentially Russian and RF's warm water port. Ukraine is being used as NATO's foil. The attack is on Russia, by NATO, thru Ukraine. It is not Ukraine vs RF. It strikes me that it is you that is missing a few points here

@@user-nx3zm3ln7m The goal was to use your country as scapegoat in order to impose sanction war against Russia to defeat it economically. Your president which is soon will be considered as usurper by international law btw (after 20th May 2024) - has taunted Russia on 19 February of 2022 when he announced that Ukraine will be running nuclear program to get weapons against Russia. For Russia that was the last fucking straw. Putin admitted that this was incredibly stupid and dangerous announcement in the same day. And then war started. Your country was supposed to drop a gauntlet, provoke Russia to war by basically forcing Russia to a wall by a nuclear program announcement leaving for Russia no choice but to immediately start invasion and all that was planned in order to impose the most pathetic 16,000 sanctions pack which were so badly though out and so poorly implemented that Russia is now number 5 economy of the world even surpassing Germany. And that is happening during war against 52 countries. And these are numbers according to Lloyd Austin's words. 32 NATO countries and 52 countries in total are allied in a military coalition against Russia in a war that has been since unanimously called as THE WAR TO THE LAST UKRAINIAN LEFT STANDING

What you are saying is just bs russian propaganda. Nobody in their right mind would attack a country with 6,600 nukes.

@@user-nx3zm3ln7m There is no Ukraine after february 2014. At least no independent Ukraine. On so called "Maidan revolution" CIA took thier sovereignty and put it into US weapon against Russia. To be clear, it started in 2004 with "orange revolution" but it wasn't successful. Everything after 2014 are just consequences of reckless post-imperial mindset of United States. And no, voice of people matters almost nothing, you just have illusion of being asked for something.

It's click-baitey and unnuanced, but it's not entirely wrong. War is inevitable, also in a multipolar world.

@@ximono Please expand at great length

@@mikeharbour6345 I'd rather not :) I agree with the last part of your comment.

Yes, it's a pity that the ethnic aspect has been suppressed in the Western media and by Western academics. It was just so annoying at the start of the conflict when CNN kept interviewing Russian-speaking Ukrainians who nevertheless "support Zelensky" because "they are Ukrainians". This was a form of lying by omission because they simply brushed over the fact that while some Russophones do self-identify as Ukrainians, there are also a large number (10-15 million) who see themselves as ethnic Russians. This kind of intentional muddying of the waters by CNN and the BBC has certainly not helped people in the West to understand this key aspect of the conflict.

This lecture is not focused exclusively on Russian decision to attack Ukraine, it's focus more generally about war in international politics and it's different form based on realist perspective and just war theory

You talk about something not having evidence and then start going into extreme conspiracy theories.

Have you not been born before 2023? How can you call these extreme conspiracy theories when they are observable conspiracies. The WEF publicizing their talks and journalists getting info from their gatherings is proof enough they are conspiring, not a theory at all. And the behaviour of most states in the world post Coof is indicative (including Russia, China, USA) of aligned interests behind the scenes regardless of nationality and political ideology

@@ssssssstssssssss No, actually if you research Soviet social engineering processes known world wide, you will find the loathing of Nationalism as it opposes the melting pot theory. You don't have to like what you learn, but you should never resist factual information to feel better about any position. The other evidence as you speak would be voluminous in Marx, Leninist, or even something as simple as Joh Lennon's song "Imagine" listening to the lyrics, you can instantly appreciate that John believe in anti nationalism too. Oddly, Russia holds onto this premise today, even as they resist globalization. The PM of Canada has recently, and with great pride, announced that Canada has finally become "post Nationalist". Nationalism is a condition of supporting and advocating for one's nation and therefore it supports cohesion within the community no matter how large or small to have some commonality. Nationalism is currently misrepresented. I don't know of any conspiracies to this affect, yet there is ample global openness about the destruction of the nationalist ideology.