It would be nice if small countries could just do whatever they want without any interference or influence from great powers, but that's a fantasy, not reality.
@@danielshepard1449 like a sizable country with 40 mln people deciding that joining EU is in their interest as compared to being on their own alone in the middle of continent or siding with corrupt crooked country that terrorized them for last 5 centuries?
@@yuriib5483 Well unless they want to not have cities leveled, a new refugee crisis in europe, and tens of thousands of people dead, it seems like the smarter decision would be to make a deal with Russia. And yes, compared to great power countries like Russia, the US and China Ukraine is small, they don't have the geopolitical power to do whatever they want right along Russia's border with no consequences. That's the harsh reality here. When you live next to a sleeping gorilla, you can't poke the gorilla in the eye and expect nothing to happen. Also, believe it or not, not everyone in Ukraine loves the west and hates Russia and wanted to join the EU/NATO. Especially not before the civil war in 2014.
It just feels like people with these arguments, don't even *see* the people of Ukraine as human beings. As if the Ukrainians only matter as "buffers" to the big powers. It's so f*cked up
@@vertigo4236 because even though they would hate to be compared but they're just like neocons. These aren't people with rich cultures and history and lives outside of the US; they're just means to an end, toys and tokens bigger countries can play with and trade. NATO may not be an unalloyed good, but if it's that or annihilation of your autonomy then it's not even a choice.
@@vertigo4236 You should have seen Kyle Kulinski's original take. Where he out right called countries like Ukraine, Poland, and The Baltic states fake nations.
This guy literally made an argument of victim blaming with him saying that “If I wear/walk around with nice things shouldn’t I take responsibility for getting mugged” that argument could literally turn that into if a girl walks around in revealing clothing she was asking for it real fast buddy.
I don’t see how not being dumb is victim blaming, for the context the example made sense. Don’t go to poor crime ridden areas and act surprise when you get mugged for your 100,000k sticking out ur pocket
@@skeliton1505 yeah dude she shouldn’t have been walking around with shorts that short, she totally should’ve expected to get raped and she’s stupid for doing that.
@@skeliton1505 In this case the "100k sticking out of your pocket" is "Ukraine existing independent of Russia" so a more apt analogy would 100% be blaming someone for wearing a short skirt near a local college for being assaulted/harassed.
"The West caused this by wooing Ukraine to join NATO." "Ukraine joining NATO is a separate issue, nothing to do with this." Argued unironically by the same person in the span of about 5 minutes.
What a historically naïve reductionist view. Try super power politics and facts of life. But you morons choose death for Ukraine, my aren't you morally superior. Destroy the country to save it. Save it from what?
Its weird how he's arguing about carrying a wallet full of money in a bad neighborhood when actually he's arguing you should pay the criminals every week to avoid being mugged. It's just the mob saying "it would be a shame if someone broke your shop window, so pay us and it won't happen" and arguing you should submit to blackmaile because they could destroy your property.
But in that scenario if there was no one to help you what would you do? Stand on your moral high ground but physically unable to because they’ve broken your legs? What’s moral and what’s rational to reality don’t always mix
@@skeliton1505 well you could go to the police. Its also why you have insurance to cover broken windows. But I certainly wouldn't be arguing the moral position is to pay submit to criminals under threat.
@@russellward4624 you don’t seem to understand that morality isn’t a god given right... the point is if the mob is threatening you, the police isn’t gonna make those problems go away. Ukraine can’t call the “police” to have Russia arrested. In the real world, the world outside of “civility” of man, you would have your legs broken and your family would be next. If it was so easy as call the police people wouldn’t be extorted
@@skeliton1505 This is assuming that the police and justice system are useless. Ukraine has called the "police" and has over history received aid. Perhaps not direct aid like actual police or swat teams coming over to bash down doors and whatnot but aid nonetheless. It's funny how in America you have people clamoring for 2nd amendment rights and saying that if only a person had a gun, x, y, z problem could've been fixed. Here we have Ukraine getting military aid from the USA before this whole invasion despite Trump trying to stop it in order to get political dirt on Joe Biden. What is going on is you have the mob bosses stooges breaking down the front door only to get a face full of bullets while the mob boss back at home pretends that things are all right while eyeing nearby associates for being possible rats. You make poor assumptions while ignoring all the possibilities because of a narrow skewed perspective. This is a problem when one tries to debate and relies on a small narrative that can easily get destroyed by broadening the scope of said narrative. Perhaps the police help, perhaps the neighborhood steps up and starts a watch, maybe the owner sets up some security cameras, perhaps the mob is thrown into jail or killed for some other issue they are entangled with. Ukraine isn't trying to get Russia arrested but is asking for defense from the psychotic neighbor. The world has responded by "arresting" a ton of financial assets from those in Russia both for the civilians and those who are more in charge of this invasion. Indirect arrests have been made.
These people are unbelievable. If Ukraine can't determine its own future because Russia wont "accept it" then Ukraine isn't really a sovereign nation is it?
Yes, welcome to how global geopolitics works. It would be nice if great power empires didn't exist or they just said "go ahead and do whatever you want guys we will respect your sovereignty!" but that isn't how the world works. Ask Cuba, pretty much all of Africa and South America, Iraq, Iran, Syria, etc. etc.
@@secularsocialist It doesn't matter what Ukraine did or does, as long as Ukrainians choose democracy and distancing from Russia, it caused & will cause an aggressive brutal illegal reaction from Putin. Putin planned on taking Ukraine by getting a puppet president & government in power in Ukraine that would go against the people & align with Russia, next would be creating a total police state with Russian propaganda being pumped 24/7, then would be getting rid of all opposition, and finally with another Russian lead referendum for Ukraine to join Russia where Ukrainians would be made to vote pro Russia at the end of a gun. Just like Putin has done in Crimea. Remember those "separatists" were Russian infiltrators sent to instigate & form separatist movements. The people in the "contested" areas have said over & over they don't want to be a part of Russia. Russians are massacring the very people Putin claims he's "protecting." Putin's original plans were ruined when pro democracy Ukrainians in 2014 kicked out the Russian puppet out of office & decided to further distance themselves from Russia. Putin responded by invading and taking Crimea. Nothing was done & so he continued his plans to forcibly take Ukraine. Putin knows that Ukraine isn't a threat neither is Europe. Russia is a nuclear state--the only threat is Russia! Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in return for GUARANTEES that Russia wouldn't antagonize or invade & that other European nations would guarantee Ukraine's safety. Russia has a problem with NATO because Putin wants to invade & continue taking other resources & land. If Russia wasn't antagonistic NATO wouldn't be necessary.
Vaush: "Do you think Poland should have just ceded to Nazi Germany?" Guy: "That wasn't in the best interest of Poland" Vaush: "Why not?" Guy: "Uhh...." Update: Edited to Vaush's exact quote rather than my paraphrasing.
@@warmetalpacifist The small amount of WWI history I remember had Russia promising to go to war for their "fellow Slavs" in Serbia. But yeah, that was when the Romanov dynasty was still around.
@@cuckoophendula8211 Serbia is like the Australia to Britain, cultural similarities and friends, besties. The rest of the eastern slavs that actually are geographically close enough to Russia, are a lot like Ireland to England, lot of cultural similarities and friends, but systemic oppression for centuries. All families treat certain members different than others.
@@rexfordmorgan7552 well said, as an Irish American with a history background and special interest in Russian and Eastern European history, your allegories are spot on. Additionally, the position of Russia to support Serbia in what could have been the Third Serbian War (in the prior ~5 years there had been a First and Second) but instead became the Great War could be argued was not a matter of geopolitical solidarity based on shared Slavic heritage but instead an opportunity for Imperial Russia to flex it's muscles in Europe (Russia, after all, was the first of the major powers to begin mobilization in the runup to WWI).
Just wanted to add I like seeing people draw the comparison between domestic abusers and Russia, that's something I've been saying from the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I've seen pro-Russia Twitter users blame anything and everything for the invasion of Ukraine except Russia. It's the same "logic" wife beaters use.
These “West is at fault for Ukraine invasion” takes are all the same. It discounts non-Russian interests, minimizes Ukrainian agency, makes Russian decisions more of a computer program where “IF NATO does not say NEVER to Ukraine, THEN Invasion.exe = YES”, and ignores that Russia would continue to increase hegemony in Ukraine even with a no NATO guarantee. Maybe through non-invasion means, but it would be more due to not needing an invasion rather than a better outcome for Ukraine.
All of this comes down to a bunch Americans, some Europeans too, who are stuck in the Cold War mindset. Europe has been integrating for 75+ years resulting in the EU. We have a common EU Citizenship, Flag, Anthem, Currency, Parliament, Court, Constitution and border with it's own border security. You're not just dealing with individual countries, you're not going to be able to say France gets this but Poland must settle with that. There is a European Union, a growing sense of belonging and we are not being divided up by Russia, America or anyone. That's the new reality Putin can't handle but that's the new reality he will learn deal with.
@ToniK Just fyi this account is a bot copy pasting the same comment everywhere in this video. Probably you are not responding to a human or a good-faith actor.
@@bluemoonrpg326 No. Not letting Russia steal Ukraine does not mean we have to let anyone else increase elsewhere. Also, Russia is not the equal and opposite of "the west." WTF kind of bait and switch is that? Russia is not "the east" is it? Nor, frankly, is China. China's foes include countries like South Korea and Japan, which are as East as you can get. This attempt to pretend the west and east are at war and then substitute in only the great powers is pretty transparently serving a narrative. Ukraine is fighting for their own sovereignty. They want to be more aligned with the west than with Russia, but that's because Russia has not exactly been the best god parent. Ukraine isn't anti-east. They are anti-RUSSIA controlling them. They kinda don't want to be controlled, by anyone. The west hasn't tried to control them the same way Russia has. Not to say there has been NO control by the west. They've put pressure on Ukraine to reform and get rid of right wing extremists and recognize their former war crimes, for instance. But they haven't installed a puppet or tried to control their economy. That's kind of important to this equation. White supremacy? This war is between two mostly white nations. Ukraine has their share of neo-nazis and white supremacists, but they don't control their government. And Putin is himself a white supremacist. Russia has instituted more racist policies while Ukraine has been working to eliminate their own problems with racism and nationalism. So no, none of this indicates a war of western hegemony or white supremacy.
@ToniKI think AB was saying RUSSIA doesn't understand the new EU. And it is a new EU, not at all like the way they had to individually negotiate before the EU existed. I also see nothing about the US in AB's comments. (The US has a fair share of people who definitely are stuck in the cold war mindset. Watch Morning Joe sometime, and you get a feel for it. They still side with Ukraine. They just have this weird America-centirc, warmongering sort of way of supporting it, vs they way most of the left views it vs the way the right views it. America is not united in so many ways. The majority support Ukraine. That's clear. What that breaks down to in the details, is anything but.) I think we do recognize that countries like Moldavia, Poland, and Romania have very close relations and in depth understanding of Russia and Ukraine, and countries next to them have more than their more distant neighbors. Of course! Understanding each other is important. My understanding of what AB was saying is, Putin counted on being able to play the European neighbor countries against each other, and they are learning this is harder to do these days, thanks in part to the formation of the EU. And frankly, I would add that may be part of why they helped engineer that stupid Brexit idea in UK. It has definitely made them the odd many out. And they have to struggle to prove they aren't xenophobically excluding Ukranian refugees, and thus worsen their racist exclusion of refugees from elsewhere in the world. It was a smart move on the part of Russia and their useful idiots in England. Boris is looking real dumb about now. If Putin could trick the other countries in doing similar things, he really could play them against each other to make them less effective in their help to Ukraine. At least consider it.
well this aged like milk didn't it. I'm pretty sure Mearsheimer's last video was available for weeks when this debate took place, and it's just so funny that EVERYTHING Vaush theorized turned out to be true! Honestly pathetic that this guy's arguments were already debunked before he made them lmao
I never understood that saying. People like cottage cheese and sour cream... Not a defense, just fine the phrase funny. And yes, I understand it, I just think it's a weird saying.
@@cctomcat321 eh, but cottage cheese and sour cream arent just aged milk, normally orher additives have to be added like renin, citric acid, enzymes etc. Milk aged on its own is just...bad milk
The current American regime is bad. It spies on citizen and wages global war, but then it wraps a priests collar around it's neck and pretends that Russia is evil for doing the same.
@@jeptoungrit9000 Both are bad, Russia is just MUCH worse. For all the US's faults, it's not throwing thousands of people in jail for protesting an invasion.
@@jeptoungrit9000 I wonder if they (rioters, not "protestors") might have tried to do something extreme, like overthrow the government? :o Further, they had bail hearings.
The fact that the caller keeps saying "the ukraine" betrays his position that he thinks Ukraine is still a soviet state and that Ukraine has no right to be its own nation.
Tbf, I sometimes slip up and do that, and Vaush used to as well until someone explained why not to. A lot of news people called it the Ukraine until very recently, so a lot of people assume that's the right way to refer to it.
All of this comes down to a bunch Americans, some Europeans too, who are stuck in the Cold War mindset. Europe has been integrating for 75+ years resulting in the EU. We have a common EU Citizenship, Flag, Anthem, Currency, Parliament, Court, Constitution and border with it's own border security. You're not just dealing with individual countries, you're not going to be able to say France gets this but Poland must settle with that. There is a European Union, a growing sense of belonging and we are not being divided up by Russia, America or anyone. That's the new reality Putin can't handle but that's the new reality he will learn deal with.
@@JustSomeGuyNoBigDeal Grecian isn't even a term used to refer to Greeks, It's like calling the polish polaks. I guess a chauvinist wouldn't apply that much nuance when talking about other countries though.
@@mariomario1462 Drunk driving is in no way similar. Everybody understands minimizing risk, but that does not mean we shouldn't attempt to fix the root of the problem instead. Using it as an argument against solving the problem is putting the fault on the victim, or in this situation, Ukraine.
His wallet analogy is complete garbage. He's effectively saying Ukraine should just give their wallet to Russia, instead of doing something to prevent Russia from taking their wallet. That was some of the most hamfisted apologia I've seen
This is the problem with modern international relations and political science. They are removed from political philosophy and morality so much that they believe they are “just stating the fact” when they are actually making moral or normative claims.
Sometimes that is necessary to attempt (even if not successful) because as the history of anthropology as a discipline has shown, people will misuse or misapply their moral beliefs when describing things. And that will cause deep misunderstandings based on their own preconceptions about other cultures. But that doesn't mean I couldn't, for example, say the indigenous societies who did human sacrifice weren't doing bad things (they were). That said, it's not actually *bad* to discuss ethics in international relations. It just needs to be very clear when one does it, otherwise you get the nonsense like with the Russia stuff where they're clearly saying Russia isn't bad while Russia is in the middle of doing a bad thing.
There are two layers though. You can judge individual moves on the chess board without factoring in morality, yet choose the best move to advance a strategic moral agenda. Doing least overall harm is an example.
@Mitthenstein If there's not morality in geopolitics, there would be no underlying logic to any decision made. There has to be some ought(s) which are prioritized, otherwise there would be no motivation to maximize achieving it (after all, why ought they do so? there's no morality with respect to a nation according to you). It's not anthropomorphizing it. People ultimately are unavoidable in geopolitics since they both run nations and decide what avenues to pursue in geopolitics, and we are already human. And even if that weren't the case (somehow), we can still talk meaningfully about the morality of allowing certain geopolitical states of affairs to come about, which doesn't involve applying ethics to the actions of nations at all: Considering the damage being done to the people in Ukraine, what should we individually support to minimize or reverse their suffering? Whatever argument you think you're giving, it's probably the worst version of it.
@Mitthenstein Perfect, I was hoping for someone to make this line of argument. "You can have moral discussion about people - not about nations" this is the crux of the problem, "nations" do not make decisions, people do. You have to anthropomorphize nations (as in move past the the nation and look at the people running it), because nations aren't things that make decisions, people are. There isn't some thing called "Russia" in the ether that is sending down commandments on what "Russia" will do. There are people with moral and ethical considerations in political power making decisions. Why is "Russia" attacking Ukraine? Because Putin, the leader of Russia, has dictatorial power over the nation and military and has a close group of people with similar blood-and-soil moral considerations towards the land, resources, and people of Ukraine. He also has a parnoid level of self-security beliefs with the moral perspective that anything that could ever possibly harm him or the idealized "Russian" state ought to be combated with lethal force. That obviously wasn't an exhaustive reason to why they are fighting (I didn't go over the history of NATO or the western political players), but I'm shortening things for brevity. To understand political conflict, you must understand the moral foundations of the people making political decisions. And bound up in that is the history of the individual and their identification with a people or territory.
This is so much funnier after Vaush's review of the recent Mearsheimer video. I'd love for this viewer to come on again and give his own takes rather than defending a guy who refers to NATO and the US interchangeably.
@@justdo-it2748 I could also tell Zelensky that, because it's obvious - UA is in active conflict with Russia. UA joining NATO now would trigger the mutual defense clause and thus WW3. Does that make me the NATO in Europe? What was the exact quote and when did this happen? Also, any member states have veto rights according to Article 10, so any NATO country is NATO in Europe? Even if the US was vetoing UA membership, it wouldn't imply that they 'are' NATO. Make sense please.
I'm sorry if it makes you angry how the world works, but this is how the world works. It would be nice if small countries could just do whatever they want without any interference or influence from great powers, but that's a fantasy, not reality. "So what are you supposed to do when I'm in a dark alley and a bunch of muggers want to take my money? Just give it to them?" Yes. In fact that's the more responsible thing to do.
@@danielshepard1449 then don’t complain if a small person hires bodyguards to walk around dark alleys or if the bodyguards are offering protection against criminals
@@jasonbrenagan7930 "hiring bodyguards" is not analogous to a hostile cold war era military alliance expanding up to your borders with lethal weapons and troops. If the goal is preventing war with Russia, NATO expansion makes that impossible.
Vaush, I have found myself facing down a particularly cringeworthy tankie in a little internet community I belong to. His takes on Ukraine: *Zelensky should just surrender and trying to stand up to Russia prolongs the inevitable. *By feebly standing up to Russia Zelensky creates a 'lost cause' where thousands of Ukrainians die. *By not surrendering Zelensky is trying to pull NATO in and this could cause a nuclear conflict. *NATO is responsible for this. *Because of the second Gulf War Tho(tm) Something-something America's past half century of adventurism means America has no authority to tell anybody not to do shit. Because Ukraine 'harbors terrorists' Putin's reaction is no different or unjust than America's invasion and occupation of Iraq. I did try explaining to him that yes, the occupation of Iraq was a disaster. But it was a disaster and a text book case of what NOT to do. So somebody running out and copying it verbatim as a "That'll show you!" is in fact idiotic to an impressive extreme. Let's say I get drunk. I hold a lit firecracker in my hand and let it explode and everybody's like "Why the fuck did you do that?" for the next 20 years. This guy that hates me decides he's gonna do it with two lit firecrackers. And nobody can tell him he can't because I did it that once.
Zelenski is not the one (-the only one-) standing up against Russia. It’s the whole country. If civilians weren’t behind Zelenski’s rhetoric, Ukraine would have fallen quickly. The fact that regular civilians are fighting vigorously shows the stupidity of that argument.
Forget about them. At this point its literally an abusive mentality, where literally everyone should walk on eggshells around internet communists and russian military industrial complex. Just like with maga rise, it took us all a while to realize that we are dealing with anti-humanist movement that fetishizes brutality while covering with bad faith crocodile tears arguments. Generally those people avoid actual right wing/centrist communities and plague cucked leftist groups. Use assertive language and arguments, they get scared like rats they are.
Just ask him why he's so anti-democratic and thinks Ukrainian people have no agency whatsoever. As he seems to think Zelensky is a dictator who controls the entire country. As you see, he does not, he is simply a vessel of Ukrainian people (as any democratic leader) and even after he surrenders, Ukrainian people would still fight on, so that surrender would only lead to guerilla warfare, instead of a conventional one. Thus not saving any lives, but probably costing even more lives (guerilla warfare is even more hazardous to ones health than conventional warfare).
I don't know if you're looking for feedback but there are many unexplained presumptions in their argument. as you characterized. For instance, "the inevitable" Russian annexation of Ukraine that they seemed to expect (from early leaked propaganda pieces) is now inevitable NOT to happen. This could have happened if they instantly surrendered like Tankies wanted, but now it wont. Even Russian negotiation positions have moved back to somewhat more sane demands though still not acceptable ones. This also refutes the "'lost cause" argument, obviously. Because depending on how the war goes, each side's negotiation position changes. It goes without saying Russia by default has a MUCH weaker political motivation because Ukraine is fighting for their existence whereas Russia is potentially destroying their economy and isolating their country for nothing. Their goal now is likely the annexation of southern regions of Ukraine like they did with Crimea but even that is by no means "inevitable," particularly with how the war is going and their ability to sustain it. Also the whole Nato is responsible argument--while already false--is an imperialistic argument that larger countries have any right to dictate the national policies of smaller countries, particularly against their national interests. But of course we already understand Tankes are ultra-imperialists. They worship the Soviet Union after all.
doesnt the name come from a slavic word for borderlands and ukraine is at the border or russia idk theres other proper nouns with 'the' slapped in front, i dont find 'the ukraine' particularly annoying
The phrase “The Ukraine” is basically signaling that you don’t believe Ukraine is it’s own sovereign nation and that it is in fact still part of the Soviet Union. It’s like a middle finger to Ukrainian independence that have struggled with for over 40 years…
It would bring me immense pleasure to see Sweden, Finland and Kosovo join NATO after this. I want to see Russia's actions backfire and have the exact opposite effect they wanted. Let's get Georgia and Moldova in the EU while we're at it. I want Russia malding.
As a Swede who was formerly very "anti" NATO. Yeah, no in the next election (later this year) I will absolutely vote on NATO membership as one of my top priorities. Putin sure changed my mind (and many people that I know) on this topic very quickly.
How? Without the Soviet Union Western Europe UK and America would be under Nazi occupation. Russians liberated the world from Nazis. Without them you lost the war. Facts. Vaush is a clown
@@bluemoonrpg326 How the fuck would America be under Nazi occupation, or even the UK for that matter? Without the Soviets Germany would've probably lost even sooner in a weird way.
@@bluemoonrpg326 Germany was _winning_ battles, they had no means to _win_ the war. The Soviet Union ultimately triumphed over the Germans on the Eastern Front and dealt the killing blow, but the resources Germany managed to conquer in Russia before they were driven back is how they managed to prolong the war. They were running out of fuel, so all of their motor powered vehicles would soon have to be stalled and the entirety of Europe was facing starvation because of the North Sea Blockade. I ask again. How would America and the UK ever come under German occupation?
It’s really funny being from Illinois bc the overwhelming majority of Chicago is super clean and really safe all the violence is concentrated on the south side which is literally cut off by highways lol you can’t just “woops” your way into those neighborhoods lmao
@@trentirvin2008 part of the reason the south side is the way it is, is the high ways cut it off from the rest of Chicago which was whiter and wealthier
"It's the West's fault for letting Ukraine flirt with NATO" This is insanity. Imagine you're at a bar, and a woman walks in. Some dude hits her up, and she flirts with him a bit, but after a while sais "Hey, you're nice and all, but I think I'm not interested." He then accepts this and walks away. Up walks her ex and PUNCHES HER IN THE FACE because THE OTHER GUY LET HER FLIRT WITH HIM. What kind of absolutely hare-brained take is this?! Who comes up with this and thinks "ah yes, this is good!"
@@Weeping_Somnambulist authoritarian and not part of the western hegemony click. If we’re on a morality soapbox Saudi royals are way worse than Putin and Russia. How Israel treats Palestinians and setting up settlements is evil. We have no problem being aligned with those countries. I don’t care to hear western hypocrisy and nothing Russia is currently doing is worse than what America has done since Vietnam. We are way worse that’s a fact. America has murdered millions illegally
Imagine you're a small island country living next to one of the largest nuclear imperial powers in the world. Then your neighbor's arch nemesis offers to put nuclear missiles and military weapons into your country. And you say yes. And then you don't expect your neighbor to retaliate.... Oh wait, that already happened and it was the cuban missile crisis. And now the shoe is on the other foot.
It seems really weird that anyone is trying to say Voosh is wrong on this stuff. This is the most correct international politics stuff he’s probably ever done since all it really took was “invading bad, and they will”. And it is, and they did. Simple as.
So NATO is at fault… for letting the Ukrainians decide for themselves if they want to join? Consider this: Why is Ukraine considering NATO to begin with? Why should Ukrainians have to appeal to an oppressive regime that made it explicitly clear they do not consider Ukraine a legitimate state and want to absorb it whether it’s citizens like it or not. It’s doubtful Russia would’ve left Ukraine alone even if they weren’t considering NATO. This whole argument really seems like it’s just blaming the victim. Mearsheimer also just straight lied about what happened in 2014. Viktor Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he would bring Ukraine closer to the EU, only to immediately change his mind after he was already elected. He then tried to take full control of the country by force, essentially to become a dictator, and issued violent crackdowns anyone that criticized him until he was finally chased out. It was later uncovered that he was being bribed and propped up by Russia. Mearsheimer tries to claim that the West staged a coup but that is not the case here, that never happened, the Ukrainian people removed him themselves and the guy was literally attempting to become a tyrant. He’s literally repeating Putins propaganda narrative. Also, the fact that Mearsheimer completely disregards the views and concerns of the Ukrainian people really exposes just how much of an elitist prick he is.
This call was too easy. It didn’t take much brain power to reach it. “Imperialism bad, Russia is engaging in imperialism, Russia bad.” Any other take is wrong. You can acknowledge other things (Russia fearing losing influence, some Nazis in Ukraine), but at the end, nothing justifies this invasion.
@@SaraphDarklaw the argument that it’s the wests fault is not a justification of russias invasion. It’s an argument of causation not justification. Vaush seems to be incorrectly picking a morally justified and game winning move (joining nato) without contemplating the opponent gets to move several times before that winning move can be played.
@Genocide oh, so germany taking over poland because it´s historical prussian territory was fine then. Or maching into Austria and taking that country as well? Those so called historical areas were signed off by the Sovjet Union, unless Putin has a time mashine he has no right taking over an independent country or even parts of it like Krimea. Its not like the territory was lost anyway, Ukraine and Russia were on good relationship with each other untill Russia pulled this abusive partner shit by invading crimea soon after the pro-russian puppet president got the boot
I’ve always been the first to point out America’s failures but for fuck sakes the lengths some will go to deny the reality of this situation is so pathetic!!! Ukraine is its own nation free to determine what is best for them and their nation. the west and Russia doesn’t get to determine who is and isn’t a fucking buffer state!! If Russia does not like former USSR states leaning towards the west then offer something better than oligarchs and dictatorship!! I’m also the first to shit on capitalism but I am pro democracy-secularism-free speech things a nation will never get living under a dictatorship.
"Ukraine is its own nation free to determine what is best for them and their nation." And so is Russia. That means if Ukraine was smart, they would dich the EU/NATO and make a deal with Russia to prevent there country from being destroyed. Empires, unfortunately, DO get to determine who the buffer states are, that's how the world works. The US has been funding pro western, right wing "pro democracy" groups to train activists in Ukraine since 2004 and the color revolutions and they blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics with Euromaidan. Russia has been supporting pro Russian separatists since 2014. This isn't about the sovereignty of Ukraine, they are being used by the west as cannon fodder against Russia. They tried to expand NATO and get a pro western government in Ukraine knowing full well the risks this would pose for russian military/political retaliation. Lets not be naive.
"Things that happen have to happen" is a terrible definition of causation. That's the opposite of a definition of causation. (I'd never heard the historical precedent. That's wild.).
Uh huh, uh huh. NATO's expansion and likely future establishing of military bases across Russia's border is indeed just a contingency removed from material reality and in no way does it warrant Russia retaliating. It's childish to think that an imperialist nation will respond to another imperialist nation's military expansion by war, as opposed to throwing love rays at them while waving rainbow flags.
It seems like some kind of wild metaphysical claim about determinism where the only possible verification method would actually disprove it (with a time machine). Or we could look at quantum physics which already seems to disprove a statement like that haha.
@@goblin6587 most interpretations of the uncertainty principle do explicitly rule out determinism and Bell's theorem seems to rule out hidden variables that, for instance Einstein initially tried to appeal to. At least so far it seems "god" does play dice.
@@delos2279 Most interpretations of QM don't necessarily converge onto ontological randomness, with interpretations all over the spectrum about what the probabilistic nature of QM actually is. It's just that the most popular interpretation of QM, the Copenhagen Interpretation, assumes metaphysical randomness, but the next most popular, the Many-Worlds Interpretation, is deterministic, and other well-known interpretations, like Pilot Wave Theory, are also deterministic. There's a good Wikipedia page about the Interpretations of QM that offer a decent overview of the different views, but the point is it's far from a settled matter.
@Aditya Chavarkar Right that makes perfect sense. How would that conversation go? NATO: Hey Russia we are goona surround you with military forces all over eastern Europe, overthrow the governments that support you, and flood the country with US weapons and military training, but it's all good, trust us we won't attack. Russia: Ok sounds good guys! we respect your sovereignty friends! And in regards to Maidan and NATO, the US pledged to bring Ukraine into NATO in 2008, the 2010-2014 Yanukovych government wanted to remain neutral, the post Maidan government prioritized joining NATO and absorbing Ukraine into the west.
@@danielshepard1449 Do you have any proof that The Governments were overthrown? No? Maybe they were pro west because the USSR fucking sucked, and they don't want to be under Russian dominance any longer.
@@danielshepard1449 More like hey Europe we see you want to be with us. We will find you because historically your neighbour constantly shits on you. Provide one example of overthrowing pro Russian European leaders out? Go on. Name one county. Also you sound like pro Russian by stating we installed a puppet government when majority of Ukrainians wanted their current president. There’s no proof of installment.
Russia is the ex girlfriend that tries to kill you because you move on and start dating someone else. Not only is it someone else, but it’s someone who can protect you from the abuse you suffered from your ex. This guy blames you because you “brought it upon yourself” by getting a new partner. “Well, that would make Russia mad and therefore you’re also to blame for them trying to murder you” He also implies that Russia has a valid ability to determine who your partners are while also dishing out consequences if you go against their will.
Newsflash: EVERY great power is an ex girlfriend that attacks you for moving on. Look how Spain treats Catalonia, look how the UK treated Ireland, look at the US and Puerto Rico/Cuba. Living next door to Russia and trying to bring Western weapons/military expansion right up to their borders is equivalent to poking a gorilla in the eye. Same thing with Castro putting Soviet missiles in Cuba.
At one point, with the wallet in south Boston bit, he literally is just doing the 'don't wanna get assaulted, don't wear a skirt' bit. Dealing with a symptom instead of the disease at someone else's expense.
@@smackfanxion Yeah because wearing a skirt is just like inviting a hostile cold war era military alliance to your country to point lethal weapons at their arch nemesis right along their border. In what fantasy world do you live in where a great imperial power would not react to this?
@@danielshepard1449 Doesn't matter if it is. My comment was about the way he phrased his argument. The values required to give the argument weight do align with victim blaming and... more importantly, the actual example used, walking around with fancy stuff in a high crime area. Also, yes. It is the "she was asking for it"(by doing something completely normal and legal) response. Not only that but Russia isn't claiming that's why they are doing it. Nor does it fit with anything going on inside Russia right now. This is Lord Commissar Putin's egotistical, political bid gone sideways. Unless you think claims of N'Zz and Bioweapons in Ukraine are to somehow get the west to not send more investigative(and military) assets into Ukraine. All while Russian forces shell and cluster bomb hospitals. How to fail at keeping the west out starter kit. PS: "Great imperial power"... I'll let you in on a secret, Putin is not the senate. Large imperialistic theater troupe.
@@smackfanxion It does matter, because it means your analogy is useless to this situation. Do you think that people who live in bad neighborhoods telling their kids "If you get mugged, just give the muggers everything you have and walk away" is victim blaming? Because "the values required do align with victim blaming" right? We have to live in the real world. Not your idealistic fantasy. In the real world, any great power would not allow a hostile military alliance expanding right up to their borders, so if you want to prevent confrontation, we should probably not do that. Russia has been claiming since the 90's that NATO expansion is unacceptable to them, this invasion happened directly because of the US pledging to absorb Ukraine and Georgia into NATO in 2008, and backing the coup for a pro western government in 2014, starting the civil war which lead to the invasion today. Even today, Russia's only terms for ending the invasion are to recognize separatist territories, and to pledge to not join any foreign military alliances.
It is unfortunate that this debate took place before Vaush came across the video he went over that he put on the Vaush Pit going over Mearsheimer's March 2022 talk, instead of his 2014 lecture.
well, that segment with the video definitely happened BECAUSE of this debate he was a touch less likely to look at that video unless it blew up more otherwise
Showing you any kind of support, Vaush. Everytime I get on YT I see people on both sides of the aisle, intentionally pretending that you're some bad faith hack...even when you try to be as straight forward as possible, smh. Stay up man.
This guys argument is that if you see a girl with an abusive boyfriend and try to intervene its your fault when she gets beat. Instead of doing what a sane person would do and blame the abuser
You know what I find funny (sorry if this gets addresses in the video. I’m only at the 50 minute mark)? The West is blamed because Ukraine-right between Russia and Poland (a NATO country)-joining NATO would bring NATO right up to Russia’s doorstep, this potentially threatening Russia and justifying a defensive invasion. But let’s say it was reversed. Let’s say the people of Ukraine really wanted to be part of Russia, or at least under Russian protection. And let’s say the prospect of having Russian troops right at Poland’s border prompted a NATO invasion of Ukraine. Do you think any of these tankies (and all the intellectual window dressing in the world doesn’t make them not tankies) would ever give NATO even a fraction of the charitability they give to Russia? They would never!
"Do you think any of these tankies (and all the intellectual window dressing in the world doesn’t make them not tankies) would ever give NATO even a fraction of the charitability they give to Russia? They would never!" So rather than actually addressing the argument, you are just trying to hypocrisy burn tankies.... This is the problem with Vaush, he's spent so much time arguing with tankies that he's overcorrected his position to become an unironic NATO stan and Ukrainian nationalist.
@@angryretailbanker5103 What argument? That tankies are hypocritical? I don't even disagree with that argument, so what do you want me to address buddy? lmao my point was about how you are hypocrisy burning tankies rather than addressing the argument about NATO expansion, which is a valid argument.
@@danielshepard1449 My point was that tankies would condemn NATO/America/the West for what they praise Russia for. Because their only argument is that brutal authoritarian regimes are good as long as they aren’t America. Because they hate America. I’m fine with NATO expansion. NATO exists to contain Russia, a rogue authoritarian state with a bloodthirsty psychopathic fascist who wants nothing more than to massacre people in neighboring countries and steal their lands. Until Russia changes its tune, I’m okay with every other country on the planet joining NATO. Let in South Africa and New Zealand.
@@danielshepard1449 yeppp wow so standing for Ukraines choice to be it’s own free nation is suddenly the same as being a nationalistic state? Not the country invading trying to wipe out Ukrainian ethnicity and culture? Didn’t know defense meant nationalism, way did twist Vaushes arguments. Just call anyone you disagree with a nationalist huh?
John McCain said it in 2014 - By not arming Ukraine back then we showed weakness and to Putin any sign of weakness is an invitation for him to capitalize on and that's exactly what happened. He was threatening Finland and Sweden, too, when they said they wanted to join NATO. The moment they actually went through with officially requesting to join Putin literally said it was fine and not a problem. Russia would continue their behavior until they are forced to stop and pretending otherwise is ridiculous. There is an old Lennon quote they still live by - It's something like 'Charge forward with bayonets. If you find mush, keep pushing. If you hit steel, retreat.'
16:00 demonstrates that he's just straight-up victim-blaming. Literally the same argument that women shouldn't dress "provocatively" if they don't want to get raped.
@@danielshepard1449 Why is Russia worried at all? I mean, Poland is fine. Czechia is fine. The Baltics are fine. What makes Russia not want to align itself with the west?
@@It-Will-All-Be-Okay-I-Promise They are worried for the same reason the US would be worried if Russia was putting troops and military bases in Mexico and Cuba. Also, Russia tried to join NATO in the early 2000's. US basically laughed at them.
@@danielshepard1449 You don’t have to join NATO to align with the west. The only reason it would worry the US is due to conflict with Russia, so if Russia and The US aligned there’d be no problem. There are EU troops in French Guyana and British troops in British Caribbean islands, you don’t see the US complaining about that.
@@It-Will-All-Be-Okay-I-Promise Then what do you mean by "align with the west"? One of the largest superpowers in the world isn't just going to submit to give up their hegemony and submit to US hegemony. There needs to be compromises if we want to avoid war. Correct, if Russia and the US aligned we wouldn't have this problem, but they won't align...the US won't even try diplomacy. Trying diplomacy is what I'm advocating for. We've been ignoring Russia's core security concern since 1991. Immediately after the cold war the US tricked Russia with the "not one inch east" agreement on NATO expansion and immediately expanded NATO into Germany and started expanding western hegemony into eastern europe. We decimated Russia and eastern europe's economy with neoliberal market reforms, causing hyperinflation and instability with Clinton's puppet Yeltsin...We humiliated Russia on the world stage, and that's what fueled the Russian nationalism that gave rise to Putin in the first place. US foreign policy toward Russia since the end of the cold war has been disastrous, we had a chance for a good relationship and pretty much just chose to get greedy and push them farther into a corner. "There are EU troops in French Guyana and British troops in British Caribbean islands, you don’t see the US complaining about that." Yeah because those state's militaries are vassals of the US military system and are there with US approval. That's like saying "Belarus has troops near Russia's borders and they don't care about that" this should be obvious...
This guy doesn't understand his own argument.....and it's demonstrated in the 13th minute. He says that trying to stop Russia is a waste of time as Russia taking parts of Europe is inevitable. Vaush challenges with, "should Poland have ceded to Germany?" He answers with, "No." "What's the parallel you're asserting?"
@@bluemoonrpg326 Lend-lease played a major role in USSR being able to keep up the war effort. Their production capacity was shattered and many supply lines cut off.
He said the only line that really matters at 18:20: "The only reason Russian doesn't want Ukraine to join NATO is because that would prevent Russia from conquering Ukraine." That's it. Full stop. There is no other argument. Ukraine is not a Russia ally, their internal Westernization isn't a threat to Russia unless you consider Ukarine a part of Russia, and all the pearl clutching, couch fainting bad arguments to the tune of "Russia wouldn't have done this if Ukraine hadn't done x" fails to interact with it. If anyone disagrees with that... What's your argument? You explain to me how Russia sees Ukrainian Westernization as a direct threat to Russia, as the borders are currently drawn.
It's also precisely why Russia have seeded their Imperialist spores in Georgia and Moldova - it prevents NATO membership. Putin clearly has designs on those two nations next if he's not stopped.
I understand where this guy is coming from but I just think the premises he and Mearsheimer give are wrong. The main reason for Putin's aggression is not NATO expansion, it's mostly about Putin not wanting eastern european countries like Ukraine to choose democracy and sovereignty over being under Russia's influence. Ukraine choosing to become more like the western world is not western expansion. It's their own will.
his argument, at the beginning anyway is basically, Ukraine shouldn't try to join NATO because that puts them in a high state of risk, the problem is that joining NATO takes their risk and drops it to zero unless Russia wants the world to end.
As soon as he said "college wifi" I just had PTSD flashbacks of my poly sci classes in college and he's 100% the dude who just "wants to play devil's advocate"
The only reason that Russia didn't take Ukraine earlier was because they were close to the west, but this guy is arguing that if they weren't close to the west then Russia would have just left them alone. Love these arguments. This is clearly someone who is too smart for their own good. I have conversations like this with my students all the time.
So if a battered woman leaves her husband because he keeps beating her and he says he'll kill her if she gets a restraining order, and she tries to get the restraining order so he kills her, it's her fault then right? Well i guess according to this guy the blame would be shared by her and her friend who told her she should pursue a restraining order. Like what the hell were you thinking woman? You forced him to kill you. Shoulda just stayed with him and accepted endless beatings.
@@danielshepard1449 Hostile military forces haha. Russia has been invading and slaughtering it's neighbors for decades. Those countries joined a defensive pact because they don't want to be invaded and slaughtered. That's why it's such a good analogy. Husbands beat their wives often for years before they finally get up the courage to separate from them and get a restraining order.
Hi Ukrainian history student here. I can take at least one positive point away from Mearsheimer: if you let the door for Ukraine open, you should help more. (Not by making Ukraine part of NATO giving much needed military equipement much earlier.
You can tell someone is losing an argument if they start nervously laughing, like holy shit. He said he made notes on Vaush' points when addressing Mearscheimer's video but it sounds like he hasn't thought much about the arguments or the possible counter arguments. His wallet / mugger examples is disanalogous, a more analogous situation would be a person says the money in your wallet is theirs and when you refuse to give them the money they end up mugging you to get the money. He's just victim blaming, absolutely disgusting.
When people live in a bad neighborhood, they tell their kids that if they ever get mugged, to give the muggers whatever they want and to walk away to avoid conflict. Is that "victim blaming"?
@@danielshepard1449 No, victim blaming would be to fault the kid for the mugging by resisting it/not complying with the muggers. Just like faulting Ukraine for the invasion by resisting it/not complying with the invader.
@@Ink129 We aren't talking about blaming, we are talking about what the best solution is to the problem. The responsible thing to do if you are getting mugged is to hand over the money and avoid violence. Especially if other peoples lives depend on it. Mugging is bad, that doesn't mean trying to fight a guy with a gun or a group of people is a good idea. Also, I don't fault Ukraine, I fault the west for trying to expand NATO/the EU into Ukraine and blatantly interfering with Ukrainian politics in the color revolutions' and Euromaidan.
@@danielshepard1449 But you don't fault Russia at all here? For ACTUALLY expanding through a violent invasion of Ukraine? Surely we agree that Russia is the main culprit here, no? They are "the mugger" in this analogy after all.
@@Ink129 I blame Russia for bad stuff Russia does. The invasion is bad, it's a huge escalation in the conflict and it makes diplomacy much more difficult. That has nothing to do with solutions though. It was also very avoidable. Also Russia isn't expanding, they are trying to retain control of there sphere of influence, not expand it. At most they wanted regime change in Kyiv, not to occupy it or absorb Ukraine into Russia. I doubt that would even be possible.
I do buy the argument that half assing NATO entry is a really bad idea. It’s like having someone testify without witness protection. If you’re gonna do it, don’t take your time and don’t do half measures
@@danielshepard1449 They make a blood and soil argument as justification for annexing and invading parts of another country. Then proceed to invade the entire country. People were literally saying that Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine because they only wanted to ethnic Russian parts of the country. The comparison is absolutely fair in this context as the stratagy being employed is very similar to what Germany did with The Sudetenland's.
"I'd hope my friends would prevent me from walkint in southside chicago" Yeah great idea, let's just tell Ukraine to not be Russia's neighbour anymore, problem solved. What a brainlet.
Oh man in the first 10 minutes you already realize the guy has a real confusion about description and prescription. He constantly switches back and forth between them and when you then point out he is doing the moral argument he will revert back to "No I am just describing what happened and what kind of incentive structures were caused". If there is a wife beater, the wife will also create and incentive for the wife beater to continue beating her if she plans to divorce him. To then say "Therefore the wife should have not tried to divorce him because it just creates the bad incentive", is a moral argument, a prescription. And that's the entire contention here. Sure, in a purely causal way, everything is the fault of the big bang, but as soon as you start to "blame" and assign "fault", you are making a moral argument and no longer are working merely in description. Was the state of NATO and it's behavior part of the causes that made Putin act the way he did? Yes, but that's not what matters, like it doesn't matter that the wife behavior is a partial cause for the abusers actions.
" If there is a wife beater, the wife will also create and incentive for the wife beater to continue beating her if she plans to divorce him" Except in this scenario, the wife isn't just planning a divorce, she's planning to surround the husband with cold war era military alliance forces and lethal weapons. So the analogy doesn't really apply. And the "police" in this scenario don't exist, because it's international geopolitics were basically might makes right, and interfering would cause nuclear war. I'm more interested in solutions than assigning blame. Changes to US foreign policy toward Russia since the cold war could of easily avoided this scenario by simply not expanding into eastern europe, not doing color revolutions, not backing Euromaidan and not trying to bring Ukraine into NATO and the EU.
@@danielshepard1449 except the wife has reason to surround weapons as he started the beating and he has had a history of beating the shit out of other people and she doesn’t want to be a victim again? And the wife doesn’t want to set up those weapons at him but rather have them at her disposal (there are no bases in Ukraine) Also where are your solutions all of them are appeasement ?
The moral argument that Seabass/Mearsheimer is making is in an implicit assumption about the legitimacy of geopolitical interests. I'm not sure if his position is that A) Russia's interests are more legitimate than anyone elses or B) All geopolitical interests are equally legitimate But it's one of the two, and it's absurd. Also, "Totally not pro-Russians" stop calling it "The" Ukraine challenge (impossible)
I have not felt proud to be a human the last 20 years of my life. That was until I saw how the free world stepped up to help the people of Ukraine. If we don't help countries that ask for our help, I will not be able to feel that my race is worth anything. If we help and we succeed, I will be very proud. If we help and Ukraine is lost, I will be very sad. If Putin decides to destroy the world, well, I will be dead, and that sucks, but it's better than bending the knee.
" If Putin decides to destroy the world, well, I will be dead, and that sucks, but it's better than bending the knee." You sound psychotic. So you would rather start ww3 and destroy civilization then keep Ukraine a neutral state? Jesus christ.
@@danielshepard1449 Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, but I'm not against Ukraine being a neutral state as a token gesture. Any outcome in which Putin loses more than he gains is theoretically acceptable. My point is that we can't give in to nuclear blackmail. It's better to die as free people than live as slaves.
The Chicago example has a good counter argument. Does this guy believe then because he cannot control other people’s behaviour only his own, then robbery shouldn’t be legal, it should not be punished and the responsibility falls entirely on you to protect your properties?
Mearsheimer’s version is effectively “the reason those robbers rob is because they feel their territory got threatened when they were told by law enforcement they cannot rob people and they exist in their neighbourhood.
This is distilled appeasement politics wrapped in a thin veneer of intellectualism. The guy sounds nice but he would 100% have given Germany the world if given the opportunity back in the 30s and 40s. I totally understand wanting to prevent war and undue suffering but there are times when it is preferable to letting bad actors seize control as they would do more harm in the long run than a war will cause.
His point is that the West should have not said they are ready to accept Ukraine before the West is ready to protect them. His points are pretty good but he is wrong. Ukraine was already unable to join NATO because they had conflicts with separatists and because Russia is occupying Crimea so Ukraine was not able to join NATO anyway. He is a good dude and I understand his points and he is clearly not simpimg for russia.
The better analogy is having a big wallet and your neighbor coming in your house and taking it. Is it your fault for having the big wallet? Total victim blaming, he just can't accept he is talking in circles.
I have to say it's refreshing to see someone who can actually argue their points against Vaush, whether I agree with them or not, without them devolving into some sort of slavering rage creature
It's because he wasn't arguing HIS points, he was arguing meerschimer's points, which he clearly didn't wholly agree with. He even said he's not a geopolitical realist, which would mean that he's arguing through a framework he doesn't even view geopolitics through. I'm more than halfway through this 'debate' and it's agonizing because vaush keeps trying to pin HIM with moral arguments even though he very clearly doesn't morally agree with meerschimer's perspective, and being a realist perspective means the point he's debating doesn't rely on morality anyway. Just because someone tries to clear up incorrect information about something doesn't mean that they believe it themselves. I studied and researched Russian disinformation campaigns for 4 years before the invasion started, but when i would say I studied Russia and cleared up misconceptions people had they would automatically assume I was just pro Russia, and not someone who wanted better information going around because i wanted people to understand Russia to be better equipped to to oppose it.
All of this debate aside, I'm on the final boss and just now learned from Vaush that you can just use the golden runes to get runes instead of selling them at a merchant.
His downtown Chicago example is so bad. This is better: Your neighbour is a known burglar. He has stolen things from your home before, and others. You call a security company to install a high-tech security system. Your neighbour then proceeds to break into your home that very night, before the system can be installed, because he knows that they system will make it impossible later. Now this guy blames the security system company for talking about installing a system in your home, for the burglary. Hey, if you just would not have talked about getting a new security system, your burglar neighbour would not have broken into your house that night!
I love how every time he loses the plot (nearly every other sentence) he changes the subject to ask a stupid question, then try to wonder about “how to frame this” for another five minutes
If we had said that Ukraine was never going to be allowed into NATO to make the Russians happy, that is a clear signal from the West that we won't help Ukraine in a conflict, ever. Thats a green light to Russia, not a de-escalation.
15:40 why would you say this to leftist? Our default response is to ask why the guy would mug (invade) someone and address that directly. Also self defense....
I don't see how the "inevitability" of Russias response even factors in. It's the moral thing to do, to offer Ukrainians a better life in the EU, and to allow them to make that decision if they desire, regardless of what Russias response may or may not have been. The war in Ukraine is tragic, but if it was indeed inevitable on the path to EU membership for Ukraine, and they are willing to fight - which they are - then, the sooner the war the better I say!
Anyone defending Mearsheimer is fucking insane. The man's crackpot theories justify any country invading its neighbor over any disagreement. And yes, I understand Mearsheimer isn't making any moral justifications with his offensive realism stance, he's just *explaining* things (poorly). But the reality is, morality is baked into the cake. You cannot sufficiently explain human relationships, or relationships between states without moralization. There are a million other things wrong with Mearsheimer and offensive realism as a whole (such as the theory's complete disregard for domestic policies), but the disingenuous nature by which Mearsheimer deploys his offensive realist theories in an amoral fashion is telling.
The people who opposed this war will be justified as we were with the Iraq conflicts. Only difference is this war will cost Americans way more with mass poverty depression and deaths. The empire is up in flames
@@rabadeuce814 I condemn the west arming radicals to destabilize countries and using usd to strangle people. China is ending it. Soon we will pay the price for our crimes against humanity. We deserve it
37:00 I wouldn't use the word "westernize" . After joining NATO, Baltics are still Baltics, Poland is still Poland. Countries that join NATO, join or equal terms and retain their own culture. Western culture is influential because of trade, language, and services western countries provide. But this is also why Asian countries become more "western". Even China copies some of western culture. Ukraine is not getting turned to be more western by the West. They do what they want to do themselves
You can tell this kid was a bully in grade through highschool and is trying to justify his actions through Russia. "Russia feels that they should own other countries that want to join NATO/were former Soviet satellite states, they are morally justified in waging war and killing tons of civilians" "Hey Nerd I feel your lunch money is miiiiiine" *proceeds to beat-up an innocent person*
@@bluemoonrpg326 Cool whataboutism deflect a current issue with the same issue from different circumstances as well. Have you never been taught common sense of “two wrongs doesn’t make a right” or a negative+negative doesn’t equal a positive just more negative.
russia not wanting ukraine to join nato is the same situation as in "school shooter does choose the location of school because it's gun-free zone so nobody can defend themselves"
The mugging analogy sounds a lot similar to r*pe apologia. “Of course it’s the assailant’s fault but there is some naivety and stupidity in putting oneself into that kind of situation.” 🤔
This guy needs to learn that philosophers and political scientists aren't perfect beings. Mearsheimer this, Mearsheimer that. Man if there was one theory that is 100% correct we would all be following it. People can be wrong no matter how hard you simp for them.
Countries can't join just NATO whenever they wish. There is an application process. Every country has to take this way. Russia for example didn't want to apply like every other country. They wanted a special treatment. And NATO refused to treat Russia differently. That is why Russia didn't join NATO.
This entire argument boils down to:
“What was Ukraine wearing?”
Those sexy Western democratic shorts were just begging for Russia to make a move
She was wearing a blue shirt with a circle of yellow stars and a skirt with red, white and blue.
It would be nice if small countries could just do whatever they want without any interference or influence from great powers, but that's a fantasy, not reality.
@@danielshepard1449 like a sizable country with 40 mln people deciding that joining EU is in their interest as compared to being on their own alone in the middle of continent or siding with corrupt crooked country that terrorized them for last 5 centuries?
@@yuriib5483 Well unless they want to not have cities leveled, a new refugee crisis in europe, and tens of thousands of people dead, it seems like the smarter decision would be to make a deal with Russia. And yes, compared to great power countries like Russia, the US and China Ukraine is small, they don't have the geopolitical power to do whatever they want right along Russia's border with no consequences. That's the harsh reality here. When you live next to a sleeping gorilla, you can't poke the gorilla in the eye and expect nothing to happen.
Also, believe it or not, not everyone in Ukraine loves the west and hates Russia and wanted to join the EU/NATO. Especially not before the civil war in 2014.
I swear Russia defenders are like a couple weeks away from arguing that Ukraine was promised to Russia by God
Considering that there're far right evangelists supporting Putin because he's pro Christian and anti LGBT I don't think it will take so much time
You are so brave, thank god we have people in America who say "Russia bad" because who else would say it?
@@danielshepard1449 thank you sir, for braving the TH-cam comment section to make a point. God bless you
@@Dietzbeatz Thank you, someone in my good guy country needs to speak up about the horrors of the bad guys in the bad guy country.
@@danielshepard1449 Not you, it seems.
I'm from Poland and I can state for a FACT, that what antagonizes Russia in other countries is the fact, that they are NOT Russia
Czech Republic, double that.
"The West is at fault for letting Ukraine flirt with NATO..." That's like saying it's ok for man to beat their wife because she called the cops.
It just feels like people with these arguments, don't even *see* the people of Ukraine as human beings. As if the Ukrainians only matter as "buffers" to the big powers.
It's so f*cked up
@@vertigo4236 because even though they would hate to be compared but they're just like neocons. These aren't people with rich cultures and history and lives outside of the US; they're just means to an end, toys and tokens bigger countries can play with and trade.
NATO may not be an unalloyed good, but if it's that or annihilation of your autonomy then it's not even a choice.
It's actually "It's okay to beat their wife because the cops picked up the phone when their wife called them."
It's actually worse somehow.
@@vertigo4236 You should have seen Kyle Kulinski's original take. Where he out right called countries like Ukraine, Poland, and The Baltic states fake nations.
@@vertigo4236 No that’s how the west views it’s hegemony white supremacy. Which is collapsing in real time
This guy literally made an argument of victim blaming with him saying that “If I wear/walk around with nice things shouldn’t I take responsibility for getting mugged”
that argument could literally turn that into if a girl walks around in revealing clothing she was asking for it real fast buddy.
The soylibification of every issue in real time is such a treat. Just brazenly displaying white knight complexes.
I don’t see how not being dumb is victim blaming, for the context the example made sense. Don’t go to poor crime ridden areas and act surprise when you get mugged for your 100,000k sticking out ur pocket
@@skeliton1505 yeah dude she shouldn’t have been walking around with shorts that short, she totally should’ve expected to get raped and she’s stupid for doing that.
@@skeliton1505 In this case the "100k sticking out of your pocket" is "Ukraine existing independent of Russia" so a more apt analogy would 100% be blaming someone for wearing a short skirt near a local college for being assaulted/harassed.
Sophism and lies are all they have since they’re wrong.
"The West caused this by wooing Ukraine to join NATO."
"Ukraine joining NATO is a separate issue, nothing to do with this."
Argued unironically by the same person in the span of about 5 minutes.
And trying to pin him down results in the oily "no, I'm not here to make arguments, just defend the other guy"
@@Gloomdrake whom he then apparently disagreed with multiple times
What a historically naïve reductionist view. Try super power politics and facts of life. But you morons choose death for Ukraine, my aren't you morally superior. Destroy the country to save it. Save it from what?
Its weird how he's arguing about carrying a wallet full of money in a bad neighborhood when actually he's arguing you should pay the criminals every week to avoid being mugged. It's just the mob saying "it would be a shame if someone broke your shop window, so pay us and it won't happen" and arguing you should submit to blackmaile because they could destroy your property.
But in that scenario if there was no one to help you what would you do? Stand on your moral high ground but physically unable to because they’ve broken your legs? What’s moral and what’s rational to reality don’t always mix
@@skeliton1505 well you could go to the police. Its also why you have insurance to cover broken windows. But I certainly wouldn't be arguing the moral position is to pay submit to criminals under threat.
@@russellward4624 you don’t seem to understand that morality isn’t a god given right... the point is if the mob is threatening you, the police isn’t gonna make those problems go away. Ukraine can’t call the “police” to have Russia arrested. In the real world, the world outside of “civility” of man, you would have your legs broken and your family would be next. If it was so easy as call the police people wouldn’t be extorted
@@skeliton1505 This is assuming that the police and justice system are useless. Ukraine has called the "police" and has over history received aid. Perhaps not direct aid like actual police or swat teams coming over to bash down doors and whatnot but aid nonetheless.
It's funny how in America you have people clamoring for 2nd amendment rights and saying that if only a person had a gun, x, y, z problem could've been fixed. Here we have Ukraine getting military aid from the USA before this whole invasion despite Trump trying to stop it in order to get political dirt on Joe Biden.
What is going on is you have the mob bosses stooges breaking down the front door only to get a face full of bullets while the mob boss back at home pretends that things are all right while eyeing nearby associates for being possible rats.
You make poor assumptions while ignoring all the possibilities because of a narrow skewed perspective. This is a problem when one tries to debate and relies on a small narrative that can easily get destroyed by broadening the scope of said narrative. Perhaps the police help, perhaps the neighborhood steps up and starts a watch, maybe the owner sets up some security cameras, perhaps the mob is thrown into jail or killed for some other issue they are entangled with.
Ukraine isn't trying to get Russia arrested but is asking for defense from the psychotic neighbor. The world has responded by "arresting" a ton of financial assets from those in Russia both for the civilians and those who are more in charge of this invasion. Indirect arrests have been made.
Its also odd because Ukraine isnt walking through a bad neighborhood. Its being actively burgled at home
These people are unbelievable. If Ukraine can't determine its own future because Russia wont "accept it" then Ukraine isn't really a sovereign nation is it?
Yes, welcome to how global geopolitics works. It would be nice if great power empires didn't exist or they just said "go ahead and do whatever you want guys we will respect your sovereignty!" but that isn't how the world works. Ask Cuba, pretty much all of Africa and South America, Iraq, Iran, Syria, etc. etc.
Ukraine stopped being a sovereign nation when the US helped facilitate a coup that overthrew their democratically-elected leader
@@secularsocialist
That's a lie, Russian puppet.
@@secularsocialist
It doesn't matter what Ukraine did or does, as long as Ukrainians choose democracy and distancing from Russia, it caused & will cause an aggressive brutal illegal reaction from Putin. Putin planned on taking Ukraine by getting a puppet president & government in power in Ukraine that would go against the people & align with Russia, next would be creating a total police state with Russian propaganda being pumped 24/7, then would be getting rid of all opposition, and finally with another Russian lead referendum for Ukraine to join Russia where Ukrainians would be made to vote pro Russia at the end of a gun. Just like Putin has done in Crimea. Remember those "separatists" were Russian infiltrators sent to instigate & form separatist movements. The people in the "contested" areas have said over & over they don't want to be a part of Russia. Russians are massacring the very people Putin claims he's "protecting."
Putin's original plans were ruined when pro democracy Ukrainians in 2014 kicked out the Russian puppet out of office & decided to further distance themselves from Russia. Putin responded by invading and taking Crimea. Nothing was done & so he continued his plans to forcibly take Ukraine.
Putin knows that Ukraine isn't a threat neither is Europe. Russia is a nuclear state--the only threat is Russia!
Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in return for GUARANTEES that Russia wouldn't antagonize or invade & that other European nations would guarantee Ukraine's safety.
Russia has a problem with NATO because Putin wants to invade & continue taking other resources & land.
If Russia wasn't antagonistic NATO wouldn't be necessary.
@@danielshepard1449 found the fascism defender
Vaush: "Do you think Poland should have just ceded to Nazi Germany?" Guy: "That wasn't in the best interest of Poland" Vaush: "Why not?" Guy: "Uhh...." Update: Edited to Vaush's exact quote rather than my paraphrasing.
Unfun fact, red army was also attacking Poland at the start of WW2. Russia wasn't ever good to other slavic countries.
@@warmetalpacifist The small amount of WWI history I remember had Russia promising to go to war for their "fellow Slavs" in Serbia. But yeah, that was when the Romanov dynasty was still around.
@@cuckoophendula8211 Serbia is like the Australia to Britain, cultural similarities and friends, besties. The rest of the eastern slavs that actually are geographically close enough to Russia, are a lot like Ireland to England, lot of cultural similarities and friends, but systemic oppression for centuries.
All families treat certain members different than others.
@@rexfordmorgan7552 well said, as an Irish American with a history background and special interest in Russian and Eastern European history, your allegories are spot on. Additionally, the position of Russia to support Serbia in what could have been the Third Serbian War (in the prior ~5 years there had been a First and Second) but instead became the Great War could be argued was not a matter of geopolitical solidarity based on shared Slavic heritage but instead an opportunity for Imperial Russia to flex it's muscles in Europe (Russia, after all, was the first of the major powers to begin mobilization in the runup to WWI).
Just wanted to add I like seeing people draw the comparison between domestic abusers and Russia, that's something I've been saying from the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I've seen pro-Russia Twitter users blame anything and everything for the invasion of Ukraine except Russia. It's the same "logic" wife beaters use.
These “West is at fault for Ukraine invasion” takes are all the same. It discounts non-Russian interests, minimizes Ukrainian agency, makes Russian decisions more of a computer program where “IF NATO does not say NEVER to Ukraine, THEN Invasion.exe = YES”, and ignores that Russia would continue to increase hegemony in Ukraine even with a no NATO guarantee. Maybe through non-invasion means, but it would be more due to not needing an invasion rather than a better outcome for Ukraine.
So will you admit this war is about western hegemony white supremacy and the fear of China?
All of this comes down to a bunch Americans, some Europeans too, who are stuck in the Cold War mindset. Europe has been integrating for 75+ years resulting in the EU. We have a common EU Citizenship, Flag, Anthem, Currency, Parliament, Court, Constitution and border with it's own border security. You're not just dealing with individual countries, you're not going to be able to say France gets this but Poland must settle with that. There is a European Union, a growing sense of belonging and we are not being divided up by Russia, America or anyone. That's the new reality Putin can't handle but that's the new reality he will learn deal with.
@ToniK Just fyi this account is a bot copy pasting the same comment everywhere in this video. Probably you are not responding to a human or a good-faith actor.
@@bluemoonrpg326 No. Not letting Russia steal Ukraine does not mean we have to let anyone else increase elsewhere. Also, Russia is not the equal and opposite of "the west." WTF kind of bait and switch is that? Russia is not "the east" is it? Nor, frankly, is China. China's foes include countries like South Korea and Japan, which are as East as you can get. This attempt to pretend the west and east are at war and then substitute in only the great powers is pretty transparently serving a narrative. Ukraine is fighting for their own sovereignty. They want to be more aligned with the west than with Russia, but that's because Russia has not exactly been the best god parent. Ukraine isn't anti-east. They are anti-RUSSIA controlling them. They kinda don't want to be controlled, by anyone. The west hasn't tried to control them the same way Russia has. Not to say there has been NO control by the west. They've put pressure on Ukraine to reform and get rid of right wing extremists and recognize their former war crimes, for instance. But they haven't installed a puppet or tried to control their economy. That's kind of important to this equation.
White supremacy? This war is between two mostly white nations. Ukraine has their share of neo-nazis and white supremacists, but they don't control their government. And Putin is himself a white supremacist. Russia has instituted more racist policies while Ukraine has been working to eliminate their own problems with racism and nationalism. So no, none of this indicates a war of western hegemony or white supremacy.
@ToniKI think AB was saying RUSSIA doesn't understand the new EU. And it is a new EU, not at all like the way they had to individually negotiate before the EU existed. I also see nothing about the US in AB's comments. (The US has a fair share of people who definitely are stuck in the cold war mindset. Watch Morning Joe sometime, and you get a feel for it. They still side with Ukraine. They just have this weird America-centirc, warmongering sort of way of supporting it, vs they way most of the left views it vs the way the right views it. America is not united in so many ways. The majority support Ukraine. That's clear. What that breaks down to in the details, is anything but.) I think we do recognize that countries like Moldavia, Poland, and Romania have very close relations and in depth understanding of Russia and Ukraine, and countries next to them have more than their more distant neighbors. Of course! Understanding each other is important. My understanding of what AB was saying is, Putin counted on being able to play the European neighbor countries against each other, and they are learning this is harder to do these days, thanks in part to the formation of the EU. And frankly, I would add that may be part of why they helped engineer that stupid Brexit idea in UK. It has definitely made them the odd many out. And they have to struggle to prove they aren't xenophobically excluding Ukranian refugees, and thus worsen their racist exclusion of refugees from elsewhere in the world. It was a smart move on the part of Russia and their useful idiots in England. Boris is looking real dumb about now. If Putin could trick the other countries in doing similar things, he really could play them against each other to make them less effective in their help to Ukraine. At least consider it.
well this aged like milk didn't it. I'm pretty sure Mearsheimer's last video was available for weeks when this debate took place, and it's just so funny that EVERYTHING Vaush theorized turned out to be true! Honestly pathetic that this guy's arguments were already debunked before he made them lmao
doesnt that mean this aged well?? unlike milk??? or do you like spoiled milk lmao
I mean the guy's points & interpretation of JM didn't age well, while on the other hand Vaush's predictions aged like a fine wine as they always do
@@Blaurot they mean it aged like milk for the other guy
I never understood that saying. People like cottage cheese and sour cream...
Not a defense, just fine the phrase funny. And yes, I understand it, I just think it's a weird saying.
@@cctomcat321 eh, but cottage cheese and sour cream arent just aged milk, normally orher additives have to be added like renin, citric acid, enzymes etc. Milk aged on its own is just...bad milk
I wish these people would just say "America bad, Russia good" and be done with it. There is a physical cost for being this slippery.
The cost: WD-40's price has gone up due to lack of supply 😭
The current American regime is bad. It spies on citizen and wages global war, but then it wraps a priests collar around it's neck and pretends that Russia is evil for doing the same.
@@jeptoungrit9000 Both are bad, Russia is just MUCH worse. For all the US's faults, it's not throwing thousands of people in jail for protesting an invasion.
@@MindForgedManacle No just the Jan 6th protestors for trespassing, and they still haven't been released on bail.
@@jeptoungrit9000 I wonder if they (rioters, not "protestors") might have tried to do something extreme, like overthrow the government? :o Further, they had bail hearings.
The fact that the caller keeps saying "the ukraine" betrays his position that he thinks Ukraine is still a soviet state and that Ukraine has no right to be its own nation.
Tbf, I sometimes slip up and do that, and Vaush used to as well until someone explained why not to. A lot of news people called it the Ukraine until very recently, so a lot of people assume that's the right way to refer to it.
@@MindForgedManacle yeah I think part of it is one of those weird english issues.
@@MindForgedManacle personally, i've never even heard it called "the ukraine" until recently, but that's just me.
@@MindForgedManacle you’re not really helping with the overall goal of finding the caller guilty
@@bl1398 lol
Internally screaming every time he calls it 'the Ukraine'. Showing his true colours right there.
Getting this guy to actually make his own points was an absolutely painful process
All of this comes down to a bunch Americans, some Europeans too, who are stuck in the Cold War mindset. Europe has been integrating for 75+ years resulting in the EU. We have a common EU Citizenship, Flag, Anthem, Currency, Parliament, Court, Constitution and border with it's own border security. You're not just dealing with individual countries, you're not going to be able to say France gets this but Poland must settle with that. There is a European Union, a growing sense of belonging and we are not being divided up by Russia, America or anyone. That's the new reality Putin can't handle but that's the new reality he will learn deal with.
@@AB-zl4nh Oh I hadn't realized that you are a propaganda bot copypasting the same comment everywhere. Who are your funders lad?
@@JohnYannoulas Imagine that. A mad Grecian calling someone who is positive about EU a bot. LOL
@@CannaCult"Grecian". Why do people still think vaushites aren't a mob of racist chauvinists?
@@JustSomeGuyNoBigDeal Grecian isn't even a term used to refer to Greeks, It's like calling the polish polaks. I guess a chauvinist wouldn't apply that much nuance when talking about other countries though.
He's the type of person that hears about a woman being attacked and says "Well how was she dressed?"
That really does seem to be his argument doesn’t it? The Chicago mugging analogy was very telling
I was thinking the same thing! This dude clearly would think sexual assault victims are at fault for their own assault.
"Ukraine just needs to stop flashing its ample balkan-boobies at Putin."
"I'm not saying it's her fault, but she should've taken precautions and not wore that dress" 🤔🤔🤔
@@mariomario1462 Drunk driving is in no way similar. Everybody understands minimizing risk, but that does not mean we shouldn't attempt to fix the root of the problem instead. Using it as an argument against solving the problem is putting the fault on the victim, or in this situation, Ukraine.
His wallet analogy is complete garbage. He's effectively saying Ukraine should just give their wallet to Russia, instead of doing something to prevent Russia from taking their wallet. That was some of the most hamfisted apologia I've seen
It's infuriating because Ukraine's mere existence IS the wallet
"Autonomy is like a gucci wallet" is the craziest part
Definitely an own goal.
Also Ukraine did something so the wallet wouldn´t be taken. They hired a bodyguard wich Russia heavily disliked
That girl deserved it, did you see what she was wearing?
This is the problem with modern international relations and political science. They are removed from political philosophy and morality so much that they believe they are “just stating the fact” when they are actually making moral or normative claims.
Sometimes that is necessary to attempt (even if not successful) because as the history of anthropology as a discipline has shown, people will misuse or misapply their moral beliefs when describing things. And that will cause deep misunderstandings based on their own preconceptions about other cultures. But that doesn't mean I couldn't, for example, say the indigenous societies who did human sacrifice weren't doing bad things (they were).
That said, it's not actually *bad* to discuss ethics in international relations. It just needs to be very clear when one does it, otherwise you get the nonsense like with the Russia stuff where they're clearly saying Russia isn't bad while Russia is in the middle of doing a bad thing.
The farcical pseudoscience of economics has exactly the same problem.
There are two layers though. You can judge individual moves on the chess board without factoring in morality, yet choose the best move to advance a strategic moral agenda. Doing least overall harm is an example.
@Mitthenstein If there's not morality in geopolitics, there would be no underlying logic to any decision made. There has to be some ought(s) which are prioritized, otherwise there would be no motivation to maximize achieving it (after all, why ought they do so? there's no morality with respect to a nation according to you).
It's not anthropomorphizing it. People ultimately are unavoidable in geopolitics since they both run nations and decide what avenues to pursue in geopolitics, and we are already human. And even if that weren't the case (somehow), we can still talk meaningfully about the morality of allowing certain geopolitical states of affairs to come about, which doesn't involve applying ethics to the actions of nations at all: Considering the damage being done to the people in Ukraine, what should we individually support to minimize or reverse their suffering?
Whatever argument you think you're giving, it's probably the worst version of it.
@Mitthenstein Perfect, I was hoping for someone to make this line of argument. "You can have moral discussion about people - not about nations" this is the crux of the problem, "nations" do not make decisions, people do. You have to anthropomorphize nations (as in move past the the nation and look at the people running it), because nations aren't things that make decisions, people are. There isn't some thing called "Russia" in the ether that is sending down commandments on what "Russia" will do. There are people with moral and ethical considerations in political power making decisions. Why is "Russia" attacking Ukraine? Because Putin, the leader of Russia, has dictatorial power over the nation and military and has a close group of people with similar blood-and-soil moral considerations towards the land, resources, and people of Ukraine. He also has a parnoid level of self-security beliefs with the moral perspective that anything that could ever possibly harm him or the idealized "Russian" state ought to be combated with lethal force. That obviously wasn't an exhaustive reason to why they are fighting (I didn't go over the history of NATO or the western political players), but I'm shortening things for brevity.
To understand political conflict, you must understand the moral foundations of the people making political decisions. And bound up in that is the history of the individual and their identification with a people or territory.
This is so much funnier after Vaush's review of the recent Mearsheimer video. I'd love for this viewer to come on again and give his own takes rather than defending a guy who refers to NATO and the US interchangeably.
US officials told Zelenskyy that he wouldnt get NATO membership, not NATO officials. NATO is the US in Europe.
What's hysterical is americans thinking NATO is anything other than the USA's reach into global matters. We are talking about massive cluelessness.
@@justdo-it2748 I could also tell Zelensky that, because it's obvious - UA is in active conflict with Russia. UA joining NATO now would trigger the mutual defense clause and thus WW3.
Does that make me the NATO in Europe? What was the exact quote and when did this happen?
Also, any member states have veto rights according to Article 10, so any NATO country is NATO in Europe? Even if the US was vetoing UA membership, it wouldn't imply that they 'are' NATO. Make sense please.
@@justdo-it2748 Considering the US is a NATO member, it was just as likely for the US to deliver that message as any other NATO member.
@@JohnYannoulas we already have a global economy. The US is already everywhere.
A PHD in victim blaming seems like an easy degree to obtain.
I'm sorry if it makes you angry how the world works, but this is how the world works. It would be nice if small countries could just do whatever they want without any interference or influence from great powers, but that's a fantasy, not reality.
"So what are you supposed to do when I'm in a dark alley and a bunch of muggers want to take my money? Just give it to them?"
Yes. In fact that's the more responsible thing to do.
@@danielshepard1449 then don’t complain if a small person hires bodyguards to walk around dark alleys or if the bodyguards are offering protection against criminals
@@danielshepard1449 I hope you are never in a position where one of your loved ones gets raped. "Maybe you shouldn't have been wearing that dress."
@@jasonbrenagan7930 "hiring bodyguards" is not analogous to a hostile cold war era military alliance expanding up to your borders with lethal weapons and troops. If the goal is preventing war with Russia, NATO expansion makes that impossible.
@@danielshepard1449 so if Ukraine were to join NATO, would there be war?
Vaush, I have found myself facing down a particularly cringeworthy tankie in a little internet community I belong to.
His takes on Ukraine:
*Zelensky should just surrender and trying to stand up to Russia prolongs the inevitable.
*By feebly standing up to Russia Zelensky creates a 'lost cause' where thousands of Ukrainians die.
*By not surrendering Zelensky is trying to pull NATO in and this could cause a nuclear conflict.
*NATO is responsible for this.
*Because of the second Gulf War Tho(tm) Something-something America's past half century of adventurism means America has no authority to tell anybody not to do shit. Because Ukraine 'harbors terrorists' Putin's reaction is no different or unjust than America's invasion and occupation of Iraq.
I did try explaining to him that yes, the occupation of Iraq was a disaster. But it was a disaster and a text book case of what NOT to do. So somebody running out and copying it verbatim as a "That'll show you!" is in fact idiotic to an impressive extreme. Let's say I get drunk. I hold a lit firecracker in my hand and let it explode and everybody's like "Why the fuck did you do that?" for the next 20 years. This guy that hates me decides he's gonna do it with two lit firecrackers. And nobody can tell him he can't because I did it that once.
So that guy is just a red neocon on top of being a red fascist
Zelenski is not the one (-the only one-) standing up against Russia. It’s the whole country. If civilians weren’t behind Zelenski’s rhetoric, Ukraine would have fallen quickly. The fact that regular civilians are fighting vigorously shows the stupidity of that argument.
Forget about them. At this point its literally an abusive mentality, where literally everyone should walk on eggshells around internet communists and russian military industrial complex. Just like with maga rise, it took us all a while to realize that we are dealing with anti-humanist movement that fetishizes brutality while covering with bad faith crocodile tears arguments. Generally those people avoid actual right wing/centrist communities and plague cucked leftist groups. Use assertive language and arguments, they get scared like rats they are.
Just ask him why he's so anti-democratic and thinks Ukrainian people have no agency whatsoever. As he seems to think Zelensky is a dictator who controls the entire country.
As you see, he does not, he is simply a vessel of Ukrainian people (as any democratic leader) and even after he surrenders, Ukrainian people would still fight on, so that surrender would only lead to guerilla warfare, instead of a conventional one. Thus not saving any lives, but probably costing even more lives (guerilla warfare is even more hazardous to ones health than conventional warfare).
I don't know if you're looking for feedback but there are many unexplained presumptions in their argument. as you characterized. For instance, "the inevitable" Russian annexation of Ukraine that they seemed to expect (from early leaked propaganda pieces) is now inevitable NOT to happen. This could have happened if they instantly surrendered like Tankies wanted, but now it wont. Even Russian negotiation positions have moved back to somewhat more sane demands though still not acceptable ones. This also refutes the "'lost cause" argument, obviously. Because depending on how the war goes, each side's negotiation position changes.
It goes without saying Russia by default has a MUCH weaker political motivation because Ukraine is fighting for their existence whereas Russia is potentially destroying their economy and isolating their country for nothing. Their goal now is likely the annexation of southern regions of Ukraine like they did with Crimea but even that is by no means "inevitable," particularly with how the war is going and their ability to sustain it.
Also the whole Nato is responsible argument--while already false--is an imperialistic argument that larger countries have any right to dictate the national policies of smaller countries, particularly against their national interests. But of course we already understand Tankes are ultra-imperialists. They worship the Soviet Union after all.
idk if it’s because I’m autistic or because my parents are from ukraine, but this guy referring to ukraine as “the ukraine” is incredibly irritating.
doesnt the name come from a slavic word for borderlands
and ukraine is at the border or russia
idk theres other proper nouns with 'the' slapped in front, i dont find 'the ukraine' particularly annoying
The phrase “The Ukraine” is basically signaling that you don’t believe Ukraine is it’s own sovereign nation and that it is in fact still part of the Soviet Union. It’s like a middle finger to Ukrainian independence that have struggled with for over 40 years…
The US language thing I think.
@ToniK yea you are right but I think it's the habit of it from The US and the media misusing it too.
@@haharmageddontv6581 except slavic languages do not have articles such as "the" or "a"
It would bring me immense pleasure to see Sweden, Finland and Kosovo join NATO after this. I want to see Russia's actions backfire and have the exact opposite effect they wanted. Let's get Georgia and Moldova in the EU while we're at it. I want Russia malding.
Seems rather likely us Finns are gonna join. Putin mad SKRRAHH.
@@Riddle99-v7q don't you guys and Sweden have an agreement in which you both join if one wants to.
As a Swede who was formerly very "anti" NATO. Yeah, no in the next election (later this year) I will absolutely vote on NATO membership as one of my top priorities.
Putin sure changed my mind (and many people that I know) on this topic very quickly.
@@Riddle99-v7q I love Finland! My best friend is from there. We both have the same tattoo of the Finnish National flower. Greetings from NL!
@@Bradley2806 lmao bros follow bros I guess
You really got his ass with the Poland-Nazi Germany analogy. He had nowhere else to go.
How? Without the Soviet Union Western Europe UK and America would be under Nazi occupation. Russians liberated the world from Nazis. Without them you lost the war. Facts. Vaush is a clown
@@bluemoonrpg326 How the fuck would America be under Nazi occupation, or even the UK for that matter? Without the Soviets Germany would've probably lost even sooner in a weird way.
@@DominionSorcerer Germany was winning the war. What are you talking about lol read a book. It was Russia that bailed us out
@@bluemoonrpg326 a) that has nothing to do with the analogy
b) I sure as fuck wouldn't call that winning
@@bluemoonrpg326 Germany was _winning_ battles, they had no means to _win_ the war. The Soviet Union ultimately triumphed over the Germans on the Eastern Front and dealt the killing blow, but the resources Germany managed to conquer in Russia before they were driven back is how they managed to prolong the war. They were running out of fuel, so all of their motor powered vehicles would soon have to be stalled and the entirety of Europe was facing starvation because of the North Sea Blockade.
I ask again. How would America and the UK ever come under German occupation?
"When I'm walking on the South Side of Chicago..." This guy is starting to sound a little too like Tim Pool with his Chicago flex
It’s really funny being from Illinois bc the overwhelming majority of Chicago is super clean and really safe all the violence is concentrated on the south side which is literally cut off by highways lol you can’t just “woops” your way into those neighborhoods lmao
@@trentirvin2008 part of the reason the south side is the way it is, is the high ways cut it off from the rest of Chicago which was whiter and wealthier
@@avinashreji60 im well aware lol, in fact that very practice is what started red lining in the united states
"It's the West's fault for letting Ukraine flirt with NATO"
This is insanity.
Imagine you're at a bar, and a woman walks in. Some dude hits her up, and she flirts with him a bit, but after a while sais "Hey, you're nice and all, but I think I'm not interested." He then accepts this and walks away.
Up walks her ex and PUNCHES HER IN THE FACE because THE OTHER GUY LET HER FLIRT WITH HIM.
What kind of absolutely hare-brained take is this?!
Who comes up with this and thinks "ah yes, this is good!"
I'm yoinking this argument.
You don’t understand white hegemony and our history. You live in a deluded western bubble. We aren’t the good guys
@@bluemoonrpg326 and Putin is?
@@Weeping_Somnambulist authoritarian and not part of the western hegemony click. If we’re on a morality soapbox Saudi royals are way worse than Putin and Russia. How Israel treats Palestinians and setting up settlements is evil. We have no problem being aligned with those countries. I don’t care to hear western hypocrisy and nothing Russia is currently doing is worse than what America has done since Vietnam. We are way worse that’s a fact. America has murdered millions illegally
Imagine you're a small island country living next to one of the largest nuclear imperial powers in the world. Then your neighbor's arch nemesis offers to put nuclear missiles and military weapons into your country. And you say yes. And then you don't expect your neighbor to retaliate....
Oh wait, that already happened and it was the cuban missile crisis. And now the shoe is on the other foot.
It seems really weird that anyone is trying to say Voosh is wrong on this stuff. This is the most correct international politics stuff he’s probably ever done since all it really took was “invading bad, and they will”. And it is, and they did. Simple as.
So NATO is at fault… for letting the Ukrainians decide for themselves if they want to join? Consider this: Why is Ukraine considering NATO to begin with? Why should Ukrainians have to appeal to an oppressive regime that made it explicitly clear they do not consider Ukraine a legitimate state and want to absorb it whether it’s citizens like it or not. It’s doubtful Russia would’ve left Ukraine alone even if they weren’t considering NATO. This whole argument really seems like it’s just blaming the victim. Mearsheimer also just straight lied about what happened in 2014. Viktor Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he would bring Ukraine closer to the EU, only to immediately change his mind after he was already elected. He then tried to take full control of the country by force, essentially to become a dictator, and issued violent crackdowns anyone that criticized him until he was finally chased out. It was later uncovered that he was being bribed and propped up by Russia. Mearsheimer tries to claim that the West staged a coup but that is not the case here, that never happened, the Ukrainian people removed him themselves and the guy was literally attempting to become a tyrant. He’s literally repeating Putins propaganda narrative. Also, the fact that Mearsheimer completely disregards the views and concerns of the Ukrainian people really exposes just how much of an elitist prick he is.
This call was too easy. It didn’t take much brain power to reach it. “Imperialism bad, Russia is engaging in imperialism, Russia bad.” Any other take is wrong.
You can acknowledge other things (Russia fearing losing influence, some Nazis in Ukraine), but at the end, nothing justifies this invasion.
Woweeee what incredible analysis by Vaush
@@SaraphDarklaw the argument that it’s the wests fault is not a justification of russias invasion. It’s an argument of causation not justification. Vaush seems to be incorrectly picking a morally justified and game winning move (joining nato) without contemplating the opponent gets to move several times before that winning move can be played.
@Genocide oh, so germany taking over poland because it´s historical prussian territory was fine then. Or maching into Austria and taking that country as well? Those so called historical areas were signed off by the Sovjet Union, unless Putin has a time mashine he has no right taking over an independent country or even parts of it like Krimea.
Its not like the territory was lost anyway, Ukraine and Russia were on good relationship with each other untill Russia pulled this abusive partner shit by invading crimea soon after the pro-russian puppet president got the boot
I’ve always been the first to point out America’s failures but for fuck sakes the lengths some will go to deny the reality of this situation is so pathetic!!! Ukraine is its own nation free to determine what is best for them and their nation. the west and Russia doesn’t get to determine who is and isn’t a fucking buffer state!! If Russia does not like former USSR states leaning towards the west then offer something better than oligarchs and dictatorship!! I’m also the first to shit on capitalism but I am pro democracy-secularism-free speech things a nation will never get living under a dictatorship.
What is America not oligarchs lmfao I’m glad we’re collapsing you people are unbearable
"Ukraine is its own nation free to determine what is best for them and their nation."
And so is Russia. That means if Ukraine was smart, they would dich the EU/NATO and make a deal with Russia to prevent there country from being destroyed. Empires, unfortunately, DO get to determine who the buffer states are, that's how the world works. The US has been funding pro western, right wing "pro democracy" groups to train activists in Ukraine since 2004 and the color revolutions and they blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics with Euromaidan. Russia has been supporting pro Russian separatists since 2014. This isn't about the sovereignty of Ukraine, they are being used by the west as cannon fodder against Russia. They tried to expand NATO and get a pro western government in Ukraine knowing full well the risks this would pose for russian military/political retaliation. Lets not be naive.
"Things that happen have to happen" is a terrible definition of causation. That's the opposite of a definition of causation. (I'd never heard the historical precedent. That's wild.).
Uh huh, uh huh. NATO's expansion and likely future establishing of military bases across Russia's border is indeed just a contingency removed from material reality and in no way does it warrant Russia retaliating. It's childish to think that an imperialist nation will respond to another imperialist nation's military expansion by war, as opposed to throwing love rays at them while waving rainbow flags.
It seems like some kind of wild metaphysical claim about determinism where the only possible verification method would actually disprove it (with a time machine). Or we could look at quantum physics which already seems to disprove a statement like that haha.
@@delos2279 quantum physics does not conflict with determinism imo
@@goblin6587 most interpretations of the uncertainty principle do explicitly rule out determinism and Bell's theorem seems to rule out hidden variables that, for instance Einstein initially tried to appeal to. At least so far it seems "god" does play dice.
@@delos2279 Most interpretations of QM don't necessarily converge onto ontological randomness, with interpretations all over the spectrum about what the probabilistic nature of QM actually is. It's just that the most popular interpretation of QM, the Copenhagen Interpretation, assumes metaphysical randomness, but the next most popular, the Many-Worlds Interpretation, is deterministic, and other well-known interpretations, like Pilot Wave Theory, are also deterministic. There's a good Wikipedia page about the Interpretations of QM that offer a decent overview of the different views, but the point is it's far from a settled matter.
"Ukraine was asking for it by wearing that miniskirt."
Right surrounding a country with a hostile military alliance is just like wearing a miniskirt.
@Aditya Chavarkar Right that makes perfect sense. How would that conversation go?
NATO: Hey Russia we are goona surround you with military forces all over eastern Europe, overthrow the governments that support you, and flood the country with US weapons and military training, but it's all good, trust us we won't attack.
Russia: Ok sounds good guys! we respect your sovereignty friends!
And in regards to Maidan and NATO, the US pledged to bring Ukraine into NATO in 2008, the 2010-2014 Yanukovych government wanted to remain neutral, the post Maidan government prioritized joining NATO and absorbing Ukraine into the west.
@@danielshepard1449 shut up tankie
@@danielshepard1449 Do you have any proof that The Governments were overthrown? No? Maybe they were pro west because the USSR fucking sucked, and they don't want to be under Russian dominance any longer.
@@danielshepard1449 More like hey Europe we see you want to be with us. We will find you because historically your neighbour constantly shits on you. Provide one example of overthrowing pro Russian European leaders out? Go on. Name one county. Also you sound like pro Russian by stating we installed a puppet government when majority of Ukrainians wanted their current president. There’s no proof of installment.
Russia is the ex girlfriend that tries to kill you because you move on and start dating someone else. Not only is it someone else, but it’s someone who can protect you from the abuse you suffered from your ex. This guy blames you because you “brought it upon yourself” by getting a new partner. “Well, that would make Russia mad and therefore you’re also to blame for them trying to murder you”
He also implies that Russia has a valid ability to determine who your partners are while also dishing out consequences if you go against their will.
Newsflash: EVERY great power is an ex girlfriend that attacks you for moving on. Look how Spain treats Catalonia, look how the UK treated Ireland, look at the US and Puerto Rico/Cuba. Living next door to Russia and trying to bring Western weapons/military expansion right up to their borders is equivalent to poking a gorilla in the eye. Same thing with Castro putting Soviet missiles in Cuba.
At one point, with the wallet in south Boston bit, he literally is just doing the 'don't wanna get assaulted, don't wear a skirt' bit. Dealing with a symptom instead of the disease at someone else's expense.
@@smackfanxion Yeah because wearing a skirt is just like inviting a hostile cold war era military alliance to your country to point lethal weapons at their arch nemesis right along their border. In what fantasy world do you live in where a great imperial power would not react to this?
@@danielshepard1449 Doesn't matter if it is. My comment was about the way he phrased his argument. The values required to give the argument weight do align with victim blaming and... more importantly, the actual example used, walking around with fancy stuff in a high crime area.
Also, yes. It is the "she was asking for it"(by doing something completely normal and legal) response. Not only that but Russia isn't claiming that's why they are doing it. Nor does it fit with anything going on inside Russia right now. This is Lord Commissar Putin's egotistical, political bid gone sideways.
Unless you think claims of N'Zz and Bioweapons in Ukraine are to somehow get the west to not send more investigative(and military) assets into Ukraine. All while Russian forces shell and cluster bomb hospitals.
How to fail at keeping the west out starter kit.
PS: "Great imperial power"... I'll let you in on a secret, Putin is not the senate. Large imperialistic theater troupe.
@@smackfanxion It does matter, because it means your analogy is useless to this situation. Do you think that people who live in bad neighborhoods telling their kids "If you get mugged, just give the muggers everything you have and walk away" is victim blaming? Because "the values required do align with victim blaming" right?
We have to live in the real world. Not your idealistic fantasy. In the real world, any great power would not allow a hostile military alliance expanding right up to their borders, so if you want to prevent confrontation, we should probably not do that.
Russia has been claiming since the 90's that NATO expansion is unacceptable to them, this invasion happened directly because of the US pledging to absorb Ukraine and Georgia into NATO in 2008, and backing the coup for a pro western government in 2014, starting the civil war which lead to the invasion today. Even today, Russia's only terms for ending the invasion are to recognize separatist territories, and to pledge to not join any foreign military alliances.
It is unfortunate that this debate took place before Vaush came across the video he went over that he put on the Vaush Pit going over Mearsheimer's March 2022 talk, instead of his 2014 lecture.
Yeah I noticed that.
well, that segment with the video definitely happened BECAUSE of this debate he was a touch less likely to look at that video unless it blew up more otherwise
Why do these people treat Mearsheimer as a 5Head geopolitical analysis on this?
because they want to feel smart so they go contrarian for the sake of it.
Showing you any kind of support, Vaush.
Everytime I get on YT I see people on both sides of the aisle, intentionally pretending that you're some bad faith hack...even when you try to be as straight forward as possible, smh. Stay up man.
17:00 this is an incredibly racist thing to say about the Southside. Plus a little of "what was she wearing" thrown in
This guys argument is that if you see a girl with an abusive boyfriend and try to intervene its your fault when she gets beat. Instead of doing what a sane person would do and blame the abuser
You know what I find funny (sorry if this gets addresses in the video. I’m only at the 50 minute mark)?
The West is blamed because Ukraine-right between Russia and Poland (a NATO country)-joining NATO would bring NATO right up to Russia’s doorstep, this potentially threatening Russia and justifying a defensive invasion.
But let’s say it was reversed. Let’s say the people of Ukraine really wanted to be part of Russia, or at least under Russian protection. And let’s say the prospect of having Russian troops right at Poland’s border prompted a NATO invasion of Ukraine.
Do you think any of these tankies (and all the intellectual window dressing in the world doesn’t make them not tankies) would ever give NATO even a fraction of the charitability they give to Russia? They would never!
"Do you think any of these tankies (and all the intellectual window dressing in the world doesn’t make them not tankies) would ever give NATO even a fraction of the charitability they give to Russia? They would never!"
So rather than actually addressing the argument, you are just trying to hypocrisy burn tankies....
This is the problem with Vaush, he's spent so much time arguing with tankies that he's overcorrected his position to become an unironic NATO stan and Ukrainian nationalist.
@@danielshepard1449 “So rather than address the arguments....!!!!” *Doesn’t address the arguments*
@@angryretailbanker5103 What argument? That tankies are hypocritical? I don't even disagree with that argument, so what do you want me to address buddy? lmao my point was about how you are hypocrisy burning tankies rather than addressing the argument about NATO expansion, which is a valid argument.
@@danielshepard1449 My point was that tankies would condemn NATO/America/the West for what they praise Russia for. Because their only argument is that brutal authoritarian regimes are good as long as they aren’t America. Because they hate America.
I’m fine with NATO expansion. NATO exists to contain Russia, a rogue authoritarian state with a bloodthirsty psychopathic fascist who wants nothing more than to massacre people in neighboring countries and steal their lands. Until Russia changes its tune, I’m okay with every other country on the planet joining NATO. Let in South Africa and New Zealand.
@@danielshepard1449 yeppp wow so standing for Ukraines choice to be it’s own free nation is suddenly the same as being a nationalistic state? Not the country invading trying to wipe out Ukrainian ethnicity and culture? Didn’t know defense meant nationalism, way did twist Vaushes arguments. Just call anyone you disagree with a nationalist huh?
John McCain said it in 2014 - By not arming Ukraine back then we showed weakness and to Putin any sign of weakness is an invitation for him to capitalize on and that's exactly what happened. He was threatening Finland and Sweden, too, when they said they wanted to join NATO. The moment they actually went through with officially requesting to join Putin literally said it was fine and not a problem. Russia would continue their behavior until they are forced to stop and pretending otherwise is ridiculous.
There is an old Lennon quote they still live by - It's something like 'Charge forward with bayonets. If you find mush, keep pushing. If you hit steel, retreat.'
16:00 demonstrates that he's just straight-up victim-blaming. Literally the same argument that women shouldn't dress "provocatively" if they don't want to get raped.
So what is your strategy for how NATO can encircle Russia with military bases and weapons without Russia responding?
@@danielshepard1449 Why is Russia worried at all? I mean, Poland is fine. Czechia is fine. The Baltics are fine. What makes Russia not want to align itself with the west?
@@It-Will-All-Be-Okay-I-Promise They are worried for the same reason the US would be worried if Russia was putting troops and military bases in Mexico and Cuba. Also, Russia tried to join NATO in the early 2000's. US basically laughed at them.
@@danielshepard1449 You don’t have to join NATO to align with the west.
The only reason it would worry the US is due to conflict with Russia, so if Russia and The US aligned there’d be no problem. There are EU troops in French Guyana and British troops in British Caribbean islands, you don’t see the US complaining about that.
@@It-Will-All-Be-Okay-I-Promise Then what do you mean by "align with the west"? One of the largest superpowers in the world isn't just going to submit to give up their hegemony and submit to US hegemony. There needs to be compromises if we want to avoid war.
Correct, if Russia and the US aligned we wouldn't have this problem, but they won't align...the US won't even try diplomacy. Trying diplomacy is what I'm advocating for. We've been ignoring Russia's core security concern since 1991. Immediately after the cold war the US tricked Russia with the "not one inch east" agreement on NATO expansion and immediately expanded NATO into Germany and started expanding western hegemony into eastern europe. We decimated Russia and eastern europe's economy with neoliberal market reforms, causing hyperinflation and instability with Clinton's puppet Yeltsin...We humiliated Russia on the world stage, and that's what fueled the Russian nationalism that gave rise to Putin in the first place. US foreign policy toward Russia since the end of the cold war has been disastrous, we had a chance for a good relationship and pretty much just chose to get greedy and push them farther into a corner.
"There are EU troops in French Guyana and British troops in British Caribbean islands, you don’t see the US complaining about that."
Yeah because those state's militaries are vassals of the US military system and are there with US approval. That's like saying "Belarus has troops near Russia's borders and they don't care about that" this should be obvious...
Damn this guy is really insufferable
This is over an hour of:
"But what about... "
"Sure, Russia was trying to take over ukraine for decades, but what if they only invaded because the west?" - celsius iq take
this comment made my night
This guy doesn't understand his own argument.....and it's demonstrated in the 13th minute.
He says that trying to stop Russia is a waste of time as Russia taking parts of Europe is inevitable.
Vaush challenges with, "should Poland have ceded to Germany?"
He answers with, "No." "What's the parallel you're asserting?"
Without the Soviet Union you’d be under Nazi occupation
@@bluemoonrpg326 Obviously you know nothing of the actual history of WWII.
@@joemagarac405 I actually do. The Soviet Union is why we won the war.
@@bluemoonrpg326 another one who snorts russian propaganda.
@@bluemoonrpg326 Lend-lease played a major role in USSR being able to keep up the war effort. Their production capacity was shattered and many supply lines cut off.
America bad? Yes, very. Russia good? Uhhhhh no, God no.
This guy just made the "you're asking to get raped wearing that" argument on a global geopolitical stage. Like wut lmao.
He said the only line that really matters at 18:20: "The only reason Russian doesn't want Ukraine to join NATO is because that would prevent Russia from conquering Ukraine."
That's it. Full stop. There is no other argument. Ukraine is not a Russia ally, their internal Westernization isn't a threat to Russia unless you consider Ukarine a part of Russia, and all the pearl clutching, couch fainting bad arguments to the tune of "Russia wouldn't have done this if Ukraine hadn't done x" fails to interact with it. If anyone disagrees with that... What's your argument? You explain to me how Russia sees Ukrainian Westernization as a direct threat to Russia, as the borders are currently drawn.
It's also precisely why Russia have seeded their Imperialist spores in Georgia and Moldova - it prevents NATO membership. Putin clearly has designs on those two nations next if he's not stopped.
Hope you're doing well, Vaush!
I understand where this guy is coming from but I just think the premises he and Mearsheimer give are wrong. The main reason for Putin's aggression is not NATO expansion, it's mostly about Putin not wanting eastern european countries like Ukraine to choose democracy and sovereignty over being under Russia's influence. Ukraine choosing to become more like the western world is not western expansion. It's their own will.
his argument, at the beginning anyway is basically, Ukraine shouldn't try to join NATO because that puts them in a high state of risk, the problem is that joining NATO takes their risk and drops it to zero unless Russia wants the world to end.
As soon as he said "college wifi" I just had PTSD flashbacks of my poly sci classes in college and he's 100% the dude who just "wants to play devil's advocate"
The only reason that Russia didn't take Ukraine earlier was because they were close to the west, but this guy is arguing that if they weren't close to the west then Russia would have just left them alone. Love these arguments. This is clearly someone who is too smart for their own good.
I have conversations like this with my students all the time.
Meanwhile, half the Asian continent:
I don't think any part of this argument was particularly smart, honestly...
Not really. This is more about the collapse of western hegemony. This war was always about China.
@@bluemoonrpg326 no
@@esbenm6544 Yes maybe you should pay for gas food utilities and see what is occurring globally. USD is going bye bye
"Where is the parallels"
holy fuck Vaush has the patience of a saint
So basicaly "USA bad, because Middle East, but when Russia bad, USA good"
Why do Americans always say 'The Ukraine' instead of Ukraine.
Why do they say Rashida Talib even tho everyone can clearly see her name is actually Rashida Tlaib?
Stuck in cold war mindset
Literally no clue. Maybe it's a regional thing? Everyone I've ever heard talk about Ukraine here in North Carolina says "Ukraine".
So if a battered woman leaves her husband because he keeps beating her and he says he'll kill her if she gets a restraining order, and she tries to get the restraining order so he kills her, it's her fault then right? Well i guess according to this guy the blame would be shared by her and her friend who told her she should pursue a restraining order.
Like what the hell were you thinking woman? You forced him to kill you. Shoulda just stayed with him and accepted endless beatings.
Sure if you think a battered woman getting a restraining order is just like surrounding a country with hostile military forces.
@@danielshepard1449 Hostile military forces haha.
Russia has been invading and slaughtering it's neighbors for decades. Those countries joined a defensive pact because they don't want to be invaded and slaughtered.
That's why it's such a good analogy. Husbands beat their wives often for years before they finally get up the courage to separate from them and get a restraining order.
I notice that tankies use the form "the Ukraine" as if it is just a region rather than a nation.
LIke I would genuinely give this to a 2nd year philosophy class to understand how to decompose/analyise arguments.
15:40 I sort of want Vaush just to make clear that there was nothing wrong with his analogy rather than just letting the fool move on again.
the caller really should’ve just rolled over and accepted that his arguments were bad.
Hi Ukrainian history student here. I can take at least one positive point away from Mearsheimer: if you let the door for Ukraine open, you should help more. (Not by making Ukraine part of NATO giving much needed military equipement much earlier.
I love the silences when he realizes the holes he digs himself into.
Every fuckin time with these people it’s “I’m not saying it’s appeasement” and then they literally describe appeasement.
The fact that he refers to Ukraine as The Ukraine almost every time is very telling...
Putin "this is a stick-up, I have nukes and I'm not afraid to use them, so give me all your valuables". ( he will never stop aggression)
You can tell someone is losing an argument if they start nervously laughing, like holy shit. He said he made notes on Vaush' points when addressing Mearscheimer's video but it sounds like he hasn't thought much about the arguments or the possible counter arguments.
His wallet / mugger examples is disanalogous, a more analogous situation would be a person says the money in your wallet is theirs and when you refuse to give them the money they end up mugging you to get the money. He's just victim blaming, absolutely disgusting.
When people live in a bad neighborhood, they tell their kids that if they ever get mugged, to give the muggers whatever they want and to walk away to avoid conflict. Is that "victim blaming"?
@@danielshepard1449 No, victim blaming would be to fault the kid for the mugging by resisting it/not complying with the muggers. Just like faulting Ukraine for the invasion by resisting it/not complying with the invader.
@@Ink129 We aren't talking about blaming, we are talking about what the best solution is to the problem. The responsible thing to do if you are getting mugged is to hand over the money and avoid violence. Especially if other peoples lives depend on it. Mugging is bad, that doesn't mean trying to fight a guy with a gun or a group of people is a good idea.
Also, I don't fault Ukraine, I fault the west for trying to expand NATO/the EU into Ukraine and blatantly interfering with Ukrainian politics in the color revolutions' and Euromaidan.
@@danielshepard1449 But you don't fault Russia at all here? For ACTUALLY expanding through a violent invasion of Ukraine? Surely we agree that Russia is the main culprit here, no? They are "the mugger" in this analogy after all.
@@Ink129 I blame Russia for bad stuff Russia does. The invasion is bad, it's a huge escalation in the conflict and it makes diplomacy much more difficult. That has nothing to do with solutions though. It was also very avoidable. Also Russia isn't expanding, they are trying to retain control of there sphere of influence, not expand it. At most they wanted regime change in Kyiv, not to occupy it or absorb Ukraine into Russia. I doubt that would even be possible.
I do buy the argument that half assing NATO entry is a really bad idea. It’s like having someone testify without witness protection. If you’re gonna do it, don’t take your time and don’t do half measures
It's interesting to watch people in real time show that they, if alive during the 30's, would have defended Germany.
It's interesting how every time there is a war everyone compares the "bad guys" to Nazi Germany.
@@danielshepard1449 They make a blood and soil argument as justification for annexing and invading parts of another country. Then proceed to invade the entire country.
People were literally saying that Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine because they only wanted to ethnic Russian parts of the country.
The comparison is absolutely fair in this context as the stratagy being employed is very similar to what Germany did with The Sudetenland's.
"I'd hope my friends would prevent me from walkint in southside chicago"
Yeah great idea, let's just tell Ukraine to not be Russia's neighbour anymore, problem solved.
What a brainlet.
Oh man in the first 10 minutes you already realize the guy has a real confusion about description and prescription. He constantly switches back and forth between them and when you then point out he is doing the moral argument he will revert back to "No I am just describing what happened and what kind of incentive structures were caused". If there is a wife beater, the wife will also create and incentive for the wife beater to continue beating her if she plans to divorce him. To then say "Therefore the wife should have not tried to divorce him because it just creates the bad incentive", is a moral argument, a prescription. And that's the entire contention here. Sure, in a purely causal way, everything is the fault of the big bang, but as soon as you start to "blame" and assign "fault", you are making a moral argument and no longer are working merely in description. Was the state of NATO and it's behavior part of the causes that made Putin act the way he did? Yes, but that's not what matters, like it doesn't matter that the wife behavior is a partial cause for the abusers actions.
" If there is a wife beater, the wife will also create and incentive for the wife beater to continue beating her if she plans to divorce him"
Except in this scenario, the wife isn't just planning a divorce, she's planning to surround the husband with cold war era military alliance forces and lethal weapons. So the analogy doesn't really apply. And the "police" in this scenario don't exist, because it's international geopolitics were basically might makes right, and interfering would cause nuclear war. I'm more interested in solutions than assigning blame. Changes to US foreign policy toward Russia since the cold war could of easily avoided this scenario by simply not expanding into eastern europe, not doing color revolutions, not backing Euromaidan and not trying to bring Ukraine into NATO and the EU.
@@danielshepard1449 except the wife has reason to surround weapons as he started the beating and he has had a history of beating the shit out of other people and she doesn’t want to be a victim again? And the wife doesn’t want to set up those weapons at him but rather have them at her disposal (there are no bases in Ukraine) Also where are your solutions all of them are appeasement ?
The moral argument that Seabass/Mearsheimer is making is in an implicit assumption about the legitimacy of geopolitical interests. I'm not sure if his position is that A) Russia's interests are more legitimate than anyone elses or B) All geopolitical interests are equally legitimate
But it's one of the two, and it's absurd.
Also, "Totally not pro-Russians" stop calling it "The" Ukraine challenge (impossible)
I have not felt proud to be a human the last 20 years of my life. That was until I saw how the free world stepped up to help the people of Ukraine. If we don't help countries that ask for our help, I will not be able to feel that my race is worth anything. If we help and we succeed, I will be very proud. If we help and Ukraine is lost, I will be very sad. If Putin decides to destroy the world, well, I will be dead, and that sucks, but it's better than bending the knee.
Your race huh?
@@JohnYannoulas The HUMAN race.
@@christianpetersen163 Phew
" If Putin decides to destroy the world, well, I will be dead, and that sucks, but it's better than bending the knee."
You sound psychotic. So you would rather start ww3 and destroy civilization then keep Ukraine a neutral state? Jesus christ.
@@danielshepard1449 Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, but I'm not against Ukraine being a neutral state as a token gesture. Any outcome in which Putin loses more than he gains is theoretically acceptable. My point is that we can't give in to nuclear blackmail. It's better to die as free people than live as slaves.
The Chicago example has a good counter argument. Does this guy believe then because he cannot control other people’s behaviour only his own, then robbery shouldn’t be legal, it should not be punished and the responsibility falls entirely on you to protect your properties?
Mearsheimer’s version is effectively “the reason those robbers rob is because they feel their territory got threatened when they were told by law enforcement they cannot rob people and they exist in their neighbourhood.
"The state of Chicago" he says lol. Yup. He's definitely gonna get robbed
This guy has a similar cadence and voice to the LAW LAW guy. I don’t know, these calm apologists all seem to be cut from the same cloth
This is distilled appeasement politics wrapped in a thin veneer of intellectualism. The guy sounds nice but he would 100% have given Germany the world if given the opportunity back in the 30s and 40s. I totally understand wanting to prevent war and undue suffering but there are times when it is preferable to letting bad actors seize control as they would do more harm in the long run than a war will cause.
His point is that the West should have not said they are ready to accept Ukraine before the West is ready to protect them. His points are pretty good but he is wrong. Ukraine was already unable to join NATO because they had conflicts with separatists and because Russia is occupying Crimea so Ukraine was not able to join NATO anyway. He is a good dude and I understand his points and he is clearly not simpimg for russia.
The better analogy is having a big wallet and your neighbor coming in your house and taking it. Is it your fault for having the big wallet? Total victim blaming, he just can't accept he is talking in circles.
And then taking your house and assigning you chores
So .... don't stand up to an abuser because it will make them mad.
I have to say it's refreshing to see someone who can actually argue their points against Vaush, whether I agree with them or not, without them devolving into some sort of slavering rage creature
agreed I enjoyed this even though the caller's point was so belabored
It's because he wasn't arguing HIS points, he was arguing meerschimer's points, which he clearly didn't wholly agree with. He even said he's not a geopolitical realist, which would mean that he's arguing through a framework he doesn't even view geopolitics through. I'm more than halfway through this 'debate' and it's agonizing because vaush keeps trying to pin HIM with moral arguments even though he very clearly doesn't morally agree with meerschimer's perspective, and being a realist perspective means the point he's debating doesn't rely on morality anyway. Just because someone tries to clear up incorrect information about something doesn't mean that they believe it themselves. I studied and researched Russian disinformation campaigns for 4 years before the invasion started, but when i would say I studied Russia and cleared up misconceptions people had they would automatically assume I was just pro Russia, and not someone who wanted better information going around because i wanted people to understand Russia to be better equipped to to oppose it.
"But are you sure that this isn't the wests fault?"
All of this debate aside, I'm on the final boss and just now learned from Vaush that you can just use the golden runes to get runes instead of selling them at a merchant.
An understandable mistake if you've never played a Fromsoft game before! Hope the game is fun for you
His downtown Chicago example is so bad. This is better:
Your neighbour is a known burglar. He has stolen things from your home before, and others. You call a security company to install a high-tech security system. Your neighbour then proceeds to break into your home that very night, before the system can be installed, because he knows that they system will make it impossible later.
Now this guy blames the security system company for talking about installing a system in your home, for the burglary. Hey, if you just would not have talked about getting a new security system, your burglar neighbour would not have broken into your house that night!
I love how every time he loses the plot (nearly every other sentence) he changes the subject to ask a stupid question, then try to wonder about “how to frame this” for another five minutes
If we had said that Ukraine was never going to be allowed into NATO to make the Russians happy, that is a clear signal from the West that we won't help Ukraine in a conflict, ever. Thats a green light to Russia, not a de-escalation.
15:40 why would you say this to leftist? Our default response is to ask why the guy would mug (invade) someone and address that directly.
Also self defense....
I don't see how the "inevitability" of Russias response even factors in.
It's the moral thing to do, to offer Ukrainians a better life in the EU, and to allow them to make that decision if they desire, regardless of what Russias response may or may not have been.
The war in Ukraine is tragic, but if it was indeed inevitable on the path to EU membership for Ukraine, and they are willing to fight - which they are - then, the sooner the war the better I say!
Anyone defending Mearsheimer is fucking insane. The man's crackpot theories justify any country invading its neighbor over any disagreement. And yes, I understand Mearsheimer isn't making any moral justifications with his offensive realism stance, he's just *explaining* things (poorly). But the reality is, morality is baked into the cake. You cannot sufficiently explain human relationships, or relationships between states without moralization. There are a million other things wrong with Mearsheimer and offensive realism as a whole (such as the theory's complete disregard for domestic policies), but the disingenuous nature by which Mearsheimer deploys his offensive realist theories in an amoral fashion is telling.
The people who opposed this war will be justified as we were with the Iraq conflicts. Only difference is this war will cost Americans way more with mass poverty depression and deaths. The empire is up in flames
@@bluemoonrpg326 I, too, oppose the war. I condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Don't you?
@@rabadeuce814 I condemn the west arming radicals to destabilize countries and using usd to strangle people. China is ending it. Soon we will pay the price for our crimes against humanity. We deserve it
“The Ukraine” and “The Crimea”
This dude sounds like he'd let his kids get their asses kicked and their lunch money stolen if the school bully was stronger than them.
Another video of Vaush schooling some guy while playing video games 😂🤣🤣
1:05:40 did he just call Ukraine a "small Balkan country"? Ukraine is not in the Balkans, and it's the second-largest country in Europe, after Russia.
37:00 I wouldn't use the word "westernize" . After joining NATO, Baltics are still Baltics, Poland is still Poland. Countries that join NATO, join or equal terms and retain their own culture. Western culture is influential because of trade, language, and services western countries provide. But this is also why Asian countries become more "western". Even China copies some of western culture. Ukraine is not getting turned to be more western by the West. They do what they want to do themselves
You can tell this kid was a bully in grade through highschool and is trying to justify his actions through Russia.
"Russia feels that they should own other countries that want to join NATO/were former Soviet satellite states, they are morally justified in waging war and killing tons of civilians"
"Hey Nerd I feel your lunch money is miiiiiine" *proceeds to beat-up an innocent person*
Wouldn’t this best describe America and Americans for our crimes against humanity over the decades
@@bluemoonrpg326 Fair enough
@@bluemoonrpg326 Cool whataboutism deflect a current issue with the same issue from different circumstances as well. Have you never been taught common sense of “two wrongs doesn’t make a right” or a negative+negative doesn’t equal a positive just more negative.
@@enriqueperezarce5485 you said nothing I’m right and you’re wrong
russia not wanting ukraine to join nato is the same situation as in "school shooter does choose the location of school because it's gun-free zone so nobody can defend themselves"
The mugging analogy sounds a lot similar to r*pe apologia. “Of course it’s the assailant’s fault but there is some naivety and stupidity in putting oneself into that kind of situation.” 🤔
Man, this guy's voice is so similar to Kulinski's...
lol this guy just likes to infantilize Ukraine and make it seem as if they got tricked or hypnotised into "flirting with" NATO
like wtf
This guy needs to learn that philosophers and political scientists aren't perfect beings. Mearsheimer this, Mearsheimer that. Man if there was one theory that is 100% correct we would all be following it. People can be wrong no matter how hard you simp for them.
Countries can't join just NATO whenever they wish. There is an application process. Every country has to take this way.
Russia for example didn't want to apply like every other country. They wanted a special treatment. And NATO refused to treat Russia differently. That is why Russia didn't join NATO.
Holy shit that guy was ridiculous. He was so off.