After watching Peter for a while, I think I’ll sum it all up with: We’re fucked, but the other guys are fucked more.

I think there is a big difference between using nukes to demand tribute from other countries and using nukes to deter an invasion

The warsaw pact actually invaded Czechoslovakia in 68, although soviet troops outnumbered others 5 to 1, but still, thats a precedent.

Choose invasion over nukes? Because using the later would be suicide.

Russia has never ever wanted to use nukes, only nuclear blackmail.

Well if you want to occupy and control and area it makes sense not to make that area radioactive

Zeiny misunderstood the question. He asked why does Russia feel the need to occupy territory for national security, when the ownership of nuclear weapons guarantees national security from external states.

What about the Warsaw pact countries invading Czechoslovakia? That is those countries deployed outside their own country

China deployed to Tibet and india and vietnam maybe more😊 Russia was in cuba and nicaragua and grenada and georgia and ...maybe many more

Cubans were on Grenada. Clint Eastwood even made a movie about it.

Also with Cuba's deployments in Africa(he forgot Ethiopia) Castro did it without Soviet approval and of course the Soviets were fine with Cuban military intervention anyway but after the cold war ended Castro said in a nutshell " there i was fighting the cold war and the Russians were sitting on their butts, they didn't care" "One of the reasons we lost the cold war"

I always listen to Peter Zeihan! ❤

3:28 tickled his whiskers 😂

If the goal of Russia was to prevent invasion thru the gateways, why don't they recognize that tactical and strategic nukes provide more than sufficient deterrence? No one is going to invade a nuclear armed Russia and they have more territory and resources than they can utilize. This video answered the wrong question.

The problem with this thinking that the USA can give up it's security monopoly without an impact is that other countries will be forced to build a military and then the USA will not be able to get the monopoly back without another prolonged standoff (at best).

It is called Mutually Assured Destruction

You had Polish soldiers in Prague...

BTW, Russia used Hungarian troops to beat down the rebellion in Prague. They typically didn't trust the troops from the Warsaw Pact, gave them inferior equipment, but preferred to pit them against each other, and use them canon fodder in case of a war. For example, Hungary built extensive fortifications in the south to prepare for a confrontation with Yugoslavia.

As much as I like to listen to Peter talk, take what he says with a grain of salt. I am a Bulgarian and I'd like to say that contrary to what he staited, we were one of the five Warsaw Pact nations that deployed troops in Czekoslovakia during the Prague Spring. There was even a very famous graffiti here in Sofia about 10-15 years ago, by which the Bulgarian street artist apologized to the Check people, for our tanks participating in the invasion of their country. Peter is extremely articulate and intelligent, but we gotta remember that this is a double edged sword sometimes. I guess what I'm trying to say is, confidence and being articulate is not equal to being factual and that's what we gotta remember, nowadays more than ever.

Peter what’s the impact of Saudi Arabia not extending the petroleum dollar agreement? Thanks

Did someone really ask why Russia hasn't used nukes? A dumber question I could not imagine.

1968 Prague? Forgoten??

5:09 Could someone elaborate on his claim that the US Navy ceasing trade route security would destabilize Iran, China, and Russia specifically? I’m assuming it means they cut off coverage for Eastern trade routes, but would it be a viable (or realistic) option in the future?

The books on the shelf behind the interviewer look new and unopened, but the liquor bottles show some use.

Isn't Russia directly downwind?

chinese and russian troops were absolutely in korea peter.

Our "nuclear blackmail" is cutting off either shipping lanes or USD access. It's also not as effective, but somehow Peter makes it seem we have absolute superiority. It does make us feel good but probably not a good bet

To your comment about the (paraphrasing here) ‘US interfering with international shipping that China, Russia, Iran would end the next day’, at that point wouldn’t those countries then feel threatened and retaliate?

I'm puzzled by the deliberate placement of a collection of alcohol bottles and the unusual stacking of books. I don't follow the signal being sent.

Why did this start in the middle?

Don't forget the Prague Spring! On 20th of August, 1968 Warsaw Pact countries invaded Czechslovakia to crush the Prague Spring. Truth to be told, it was a much less bloody invasion than anything the Soviet Union did over its existence. The Hungarian revolution of 1956 was invaded by soviet forces alone, and the threat of a Soviet/Warsaw Pact invasion of Poland was enough to make everyone calm down in Poland in 1981.

The questions I submitted were Superior to these. Not sure why questions that were so easy were addressed.

If you have no arguments on merits (Russian Mir means poverty, decline, oppression and corruption), no wander they have to make allies by force. All Central Europe joined West because we WANTED to. Voluntarily. And Ukraine wanted the same with their Maidan revolution. This is part that russian propaganda and people thinking about geopolitics as a game of big powers always miss.

there was global maritime shipping even before america became a country ....

Peter im sorry but you are wrong. In 1968 soviet, polish, east-german and hungarian armies are deployed in Czechoslovakia to destroy the Prague Spring with 165000 troops and 4600 tanks

Why isn't Ukraine issuing Letters of Marque against Russian and Iranian shipping, and why aren't we respecting them in American courts?

4th minute, Peter states that only Cuba invaded other country, but there was 1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia. USSR, Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria invaded CSSR to prevent reforms lead by Dubcek. Although they were hoping there will not be resistance by the Armed forces, they did know for sure.

Hi, would love to hear Peter's take on sodium batteries, cheap Chinese EVs, and western countries basically putting an embargo on those imports.

Ask Peter: Is there a scenario for internal change in Russia and a restoration of it's status as a trade nation? Is such a scenario necessary to avoid a nuclear confrontation? You've previously stated Russia will dissolve into breakaway states, but they will still have nukes to kill the planet five times over. How does this stabilize?

Soviet, Polish, Hungarian, GDR and Bulgarian soldiers attacked Czechoslovakia in August 1968. My father was mobilized in winter 1981 for attack into Poland which was prevented by Polish coup d'etat.

Probably same reason Americans chose 20 years of failure in Afghanistan over nukes

The last point is just not true for example, the NVA of the GDR was delpoyed in czechia unter the soviets to crush the revolt

He had great challenging questions. Thx for the questions and thx to Peter for clear precise answers. Great clip!

4:11 Warsaw pact troops in Prague 1968 (there were tens of thousands of troops and thousands of tanks) , the Soviet forces in Hungary 1958 also had troops from Warsaw Pact countries

these are only assumptions...

Quetion is really stupid one

A real no brainer question, but Peter answered it interestingly.

CHANGE THE FORMAT, slightly. Have Peter start with a monologue that addresses the question written in the title. Then....the host can ask follow up questions

You had Polish troups in Czecoslovakia 1968.

The question was why does Russia feel the need to occupy the buffer states when no country in their right mind would invade a country with the largest nuclear arsenal. And on that point I still don't understand the Russian mindset and this wasn't addressed. But I think what Peter is trying to say is they still need the strategic recourses from outside countries to function as a modern state. And even with nukes they can't bully other countries beyond their own borders into providing them with whatever they want without a fair trade system which Russia isn't great at working in.

Alot of people forget about china's deployment to Djibouti. It was a disaster for the Chinese.

I want a drink now and its 5;45 AM. Thanks!

Great comments from peter. Well explained.

I think there's interesting parallels between Turkey and Russia. Turkey used to have its usual coup d'états to maintain its secular constitution. The last and unsuccessful attempt took place in 2016 demonstrating that Turkey was now a mature, strong, democratic nation. Modern Russia is barely thirty years old, with still a relative recent history of invading surrounding sovereign nations to maintain its security. Note also that the policy of Bush and Blair dealing with regime change in Iraq had a profound influence upon the Russians coming up with their strategy in dealing with rising Ukrainian nationalism.

Unfortunately, Peter makes assertions that often go wrong. He said only about 18 months ago that Russia would lose. Anyone following carefully will appreciate that Ukraine cannot and will not win. Indeed, it will become a rump state and a landlocked one at that. Also, He says China has only deployed outside of China once (to Djibouti). Then what about the 1979 Vietnam invasion where it was spanked?

Weird question. Putin did not invade to destroy cities and reign over the ruins. His goal was to regain control over the rebellious province by force, because in his understanding, Ukraine is not a country, but a territory, and Ukrainians are not a nation but simply the population of these territories. All Ukrainian assets would be divided among his accomplices, and those who disagreed would be sent for re-education, and maybe even quietly executed. This is exactly what Prigozhin was talking about in the last months of his life, completely discarding fairy tales about the Nazis and the salvation of some Russian-speaking population. Now, more than two years after the start of this “brilliant” military operation, the gloves have been thrown off and the Russian army is simply leveling cities with missiles and bombs. But not because they hope for victory, but because in their military doctrine it is written to destroy what they cannot capture. Nevertheless, if the Russian army collapses at some stage and is forced to leave part of the territories already recognized as part of Russia, then Putin can press the button regardless of the consequences.

Thank you for the great video.

I usually agree with Peter, but didn’t other countries in the Warsaw Pact other than the USSR successfully deploy to Czechoslovakia in 1968 and achieve their mission? Granted that was a long time ago and a relatively short distance for those Eastern European neighbors. Just seeking accuracy.

The CIA's mouthpiece holds forth. It was to forestall a nuclear conflict that Putin initiated his "special military operation." Including Ukraine in NATO would have meant US nuclear-tipped missiles minutes away from St. Petersburg and Moscow. How would the USA feel with Russian missiles in Mexico or Canada?

Zeihan is today’s version of Max Headroom. He spews words, and sometimes they make sense.

Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds observes that the US used to worry about how to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, and now all it has to worry about is how to close it.

Great content!

how many times has america done the occupation?

Sam Hyde and Jay Dyer roasting little Pete was hilarious.

Prague Spring? The USSR itself, plus Bulgaria, Poland and Hungary all invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968.

04:10 - what about Polish troops deployed to Czechoslovakia in 1968? My own grandfather woke up in his AFV to find out these were no manouvers but an actual invasion of a neighbouring country. Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia.

Even at the height of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, Russia was insecure. It’s a condition that cannot be allayed. And their belief in a constant existential threat is an existential threat to the West. We must work hard to contain their ambitions.

I've subbed to you twice today already!

The claim no one other than Russia put troops outside of their own border aside from Cuba is patently wrong. China deployed 2.4 million troops to Korea during the Korean War and to a much lesser extent into Vietnam and Rhodesian Brush War. The last few videos Peter has released have been riddled with poorly researched adhoc responses like this or claiming the swing towards the political right in Europe hasn't had anything to do with immigration.

Peter you are mistaken about deploying forces by warsaw pact, it happened in Hungary and Czech Republic in 1960s

WHY? Because of the: Prevailing Westerly Winds.

Great content. Thank you Peter. Hello from Australia.

Russia was very reluctant to do what they are doing in the borderlands.

Short term consequences and long-term consequences the action can be very different

Thanks!

The wind

Which nuke card do you mean -- strategic or tactical?

Can we please get some thoughts on the recent US-Ukraine security agreement?

Nukes ARE used by just having the ability to use them

What about the BRICS ? Is that not moving the dial without war ?

Hi Peter (and team)! Very curious about your perspective on what signs we would see that would mean China is imminently going to invade Taiwan? We’ve seen them buying gold and selling US treasuries heavily, what would happen in the weeks and even days/hours before the invasion?

The map in the background looks like a crazy hat

Mr Zeihan do not forget about joint warsaw pact forces invasion on Czechoslovakia in 1968.

Come Peter, maybe you could consider getting a better headset… your audio is always bad in these interviews, worse than your videos on the fly… Maybe you could consider an Audeze Maxwell, Razer Blackshark V2 Pro, Corsair Virtuoso… these tree has Incredible mic qualities.

Given the realities of game theory over enough turns of play…once you play the asshat repeatedly…you will lose eventually. But looking back at history, some of the most aggressive leaders turned out in the long run to be pathetic at long term strategy!

From Europe: Merci!

Czechoslovakia in 68 involved whole Warsaw Pact.

No credit or mention of the one that asked the question.

The coalition of the BRICS nations will ultimately be a problem for the US. Saudis Arabia just ended the petrodollar agreement with the US. China and other countries have slowed their purchasing of US treasuries and started buying gold. And with the loss of the petrodollar these countries will not have to hold US dollars anymore. This can cause hyperinflation here as those dollars return. I am waiting to hear Peter dismiss this as insignificant.

Q: For years I’ve warned that a war between Russia and Ukraine was inevitable... A: Such war would be impossible since Ukraine is only historical Rusь, Rosia, Russia or Ruthenia on this planet. As for the Muscovite-Ukrainian war, it never stopped since 1486 when Muscovy invaded Severia (northeastern Ukraine) for the first time. Speaking of modern time, this particular iteration of the same war has been started in 1991.

Collection of empty bottles is seriously affecting my concentration.

Peter please comment on the recent end of the Petro dollar deal!

Why was this so short? Where’s the full version?

It annoys me that the map behind you doesn’t have New Zealand…

Factcheck , there were Polish troops in Czechoslovakia in ‘68, alright

not yet

Sound quality is really bad. I hardly understand anything.

The primary reasons Russia is attempting to occupy rather than nuke are: 1. Russia wants farm land in an effort to control global food supplies and feed troops in future invasions. 2. Russia wants warm water ports. 3. Russia wants to control the Chinese Road and Belt plan which passes through Ukraine. 4. Russia wants minerals, gas, and oil as they seek to control markets. 5. Russia wants territory from which attacks on the rest of Europe can be launched. 6. Russia wants children they can brainwash. Nukes would make all that impossible for at least 100 years. Nukes would destroy everything Russia wants. And finally, 7. Moscow lies directly in the path the fallout would travel as the winds travel west to east.

Just a friendly reminder, that Bitcoin is currently at 67.5k USD, not minus 16k like Peter famously predicted…

Interesting perspective. China has deployed troops around the world, a lot of it is clandestine operations. Same with North Korea and Iran.