a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
Yes! Does Zelensky see this? And can he communicate this desire for neutrality to checkers-playing Putin?
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
Yes! Does Zelensky see this? And can he communicate this desire for neutrality to checkers-playing Putin?
Seeking NATO and EU membership is a requirement that is enshrined in the Ukraine constitution. Don’t know how hard it is to amend Ukraine’s constitution, but agreeing to “neutrality” (which probably would be something akin to Finlandization) is not something President Zelenskyy can agree to independently.
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
Yes! Does Zelensky see this? And can he communicate this desire for neutrality to checkers-playing Putin?
He's been signaling plenty...Putin's not receiving.
Putin set immense stakes for himself...he needs a complete overthrow of the Ukrainian government and nothing less will actually suffice as not a loss...and that's the rub, he probably can't take a loss.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian sentiment appears to be to push Russia out entirely, including from Crimea.
Eight Republicans opposed a House bill eliminating the favored trade status of Russia. The eight Republicans include fascist Trump supporters, Matt Goetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Lauren Boebert. They chose to stand with their fellow racist fascist, Vladimir Putin.
(Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to end regular trade relations with Russia in a move that would allow the U.S. to sharply raise tariffs on Russian goods entering the country.
… The bill, passed 424-8, would end what’s known as “permanent normal trade relations” for Russia, putting it in a category with pariah states North Korea and Cuba. The legislation, supported by President Joe Biden, would allow the U.S. to hit Russia with significantly higher tariffs than those it applies to other World Trade Organization members. The WTO has a core principle of treating all members equally.
… Eight Republicans voted against the bill: Representatives Glenn Grothman of Wisconsin; Thomas Massie of Kentucky; Matt Gaetz of Florida; Lauren Boebert of Colorado; Andy Biggs of Arizona; Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia; Chip Roy of Texas; Dan Bishop of North Carolina.
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
Yes! Does Zelensky see this? And can he communicate this desire for neutrality to checkers-playing Putin?
He's been signaling plenty...Putin's not receiving.
Putin set immense stakes for himself...he needs a complete overthrow of the Ukrainian government and nothing less will actually suffice as not a loss...and that's the rub, he probably can't take a loss.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian sentiment appears to be to push Russia out entirely, including from Crimea.
I think this is correct.
Can anyone imagine Putin accepting as a victory any scenario in which President Zelenskyy is still alive and still the President of Ukraine?
Zelenskyy would be a global hero and an instant legend, while Putin would be a diminished and humiliated global pariah. It’s difficult to see Putin ever accepting that unless he is somehow forced to do so.
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
Yes! Does Zelensky see this? And can he communicate this desire for neutrality to checkers-playing Putin?
He's been signaling plenty...Putin's not receiving.
Putin set immense stakes for himself...he needs a complete overthrow of the Ukrainian government and nothing less will actually suffice as not a loss...and that's the rub, he probably can't take a loss.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian sentiment appears to be to push Russia out entirely, including from Crimea.
I think this is correct.
Can anyone imagine Putin accepting as a victory any scenario in which President Zelenskyy is still alive and still the President of Ukraine?
Yes. Putin already said regime change is not a condition he's looking for in negotiations.
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:33 pm imho, that something is pledged neutrality of Ukraine, and a denial of NATO. That's enough, I think.
It'd be nice, but i think hanging your hat on these two statements alone is a VERY long shot. An inveterate liar like Putin knows that there is ultimately very little stock in WORDS, especially from an adversary that he considers the illegal "head" of a region that he doesn't recognize as sovereign. That, and i think they have already BEEN saying words to this effect for some time, no?
No. Ukraine has NOT pledged neutrality, or to NOT join NATO at any point. This would be new ground. Seems to me this would also be a massive win for Zelensky and his country...they are fiercely independent and don't NEED NATO.
dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 3:54 pm
In addition, Putin has wrought such heinous destruction and death on Ukraine so far...how does all THAT end with a simple statement of neutrality? Will Ukraine, the rest of the West, not demand some sort of reparations? ...some sort of accountability for all that???
I'm telling you what I would do, if I were Zelensky. There is nothing....zippo...keeping Putin from slowly reducing Ukraine's major cities to rubble...so long as Putin draw breath.
As for accountability, Russia is royally F'ed economically so long as Putin is in charge. Who the f wants to do business with this guy anymore?
NATO & EU membership are 2 way streets. They bring benefits but also impose restrictions & obligations.
Even if they are a non-aligned, neutral nation, a surviving, democratic Ukraine will be the darling of the West.
Massive economic & military aid, with few trade restrictions, will flow their way.
Yes! Does Zelensky see this? And can he communicate this desire for neutrality to checkers-playing Putin?
He's been signaling plenty...Putin's not receiving.
Putin set immense stakes for himself...he needs a complete overthrow of the Ukrainian government and nothing less will actually suffice as not a loss...and that's the rub, he probably can't take a loss.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian sentiment appears to be to push Russia out entirely, including from Crimea.
I think this is correct.
Can anyone imagine Putin accepting as a victory any scenario in which President Zelenskyy is still alive and still the President of Ukraine?
Yes. Putin already said regime change is not a condition he's looking for in negotiations.
And you believe that?
Don’t get me wrong … I hope it is true, and I have heard the same statements emerging from talks … I just don’t believe that is the case.
DocBarrister wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 5:16 pm
And you believe that?
Yes. Why else would he say as much publicly? To what end?
The door is open for peace, Doc. Only a fool or a war monger doesn't try and walk through that door..... you seem hell bent on shutting it.
Lord Halifax a bit here. Respectfully, I don't think the door is open for peace, except in the sense that receipt of concessions will allow Russia to withdraw...to fight again another day. A rules-based system doesn't work if the rules aren't enforced. This is true with children and child rearing, with communities, and with nation states. The West/NATO/the United States/Ukraine -- whoever you think are the combatants -- have to win something here. Otherwise, we will be seeing adventures like this, for population and labor, for resources, for ports, etc., the rest of our lives and our kids' lives.
I’m sure the Russian Foreign Ministry wants a negotiated settlement, even if that leaves Ukraine a sovereign nation. I am certain that is what the Russian oligarchs want.
But I am not convinced that is acceptable to Putin … or ever will be. There have been many reports of Putin’s growing isolation from his own advisors. I wouldn’t take a Russian Foreign Ministry statement at face value.
Based on what I have read and seen, this is very much a personal war for Putin. I am very skeptical he will ever accept a scenario where Zelenskyy is left in power to continue garnering global support and assistance while openly mocking Putin’s failed war.
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 6:42 pm
Dunno if this has been brought up but here's a guy (originally from God's Country, no less) who really knows his stuff:
Russophobes are not likely to enjoy any of it. Rather than criticize, try to present evidence to refute what Professor John Mearsheimer says.
J. H. C., not this Chicago guy again.
Mearsheimer is one of those morons from the misnamed “realist” school. I’m sure there’s much more to that school than I understand, but it’s basically a dehumanizing school of thought that tends to emphasize the “state” over the individual.
When I learned about that school of thought long ago, I found it useful to analogize it to the dehumanizing architectural style of Le Corbusier. As some may know, Le Corbusier’s style tends to be bleak and stark, often using massive scale to make people feel small and insignificant (imagine those vast urban plazas that were popular in the 1950s-1970s). I should note that Le Corbusier was a jerk (who the heck would call himself “Le Corbusier”?!?) and … yes … reputed to be sympathetic to fascists.
Anyway, that’s kind of what the “realists” do … they emphasize the importance of states as international actors while minimizing the needs and wants of individual people. In the video, he claims Ukraine moved towards the West because Western nations manipulated Ukraine into doing so. That ignores the more simple (and correct) explanation that the Ukrainian people wanted to move toward the West because they preferred the better jobs, the better quality of life, the better money, the better entertainment, and … yep … the greater freedom.
But no … jerks like Mearsheimer tend to minimize all of that.
I don’t know the professor, and he may be a nice guy, but I really doubt it (consider that my realist take on him).
Oh, and it is worth saying again … Le Corbusier was a jerk and his architectural style really sucks.
End of rant. Thank you, thank you very much.
DocBarrister has left the building.
Last edited by DocBarrister on Thu Mar 17, 2022 7:35 pm, edited 3 times in total.
DocBarrister wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 5:16 pm
And you believe that?
Yes. Why else would he say as much publicly? To what end?
The door is open for peace, Doc. Only a fool or a war monger doesn't try and walk through that door..... you seem hell bent on shutting it.
He says all sorts of things, lying through his teeth...why would anyone, especially anyone who has him on the run, allow him an opportunity to regroup and attack and disrupt again? Of course there needs to be an ironclad agreement that the West will defend Ukraine in order for Ukraine to accept anything but the complete withdrawal of Russia.
There is no 'neutral' for Putin, who will not ever accept that Ukraine doesn't belong as part of Russia. and that means Kyiv and Odessa must be included.
Don't guarantee complete protection and no deal.
And denying Ukraine the opportunity to economically align with whoever they want?...FU, Putin.
That's the Ukrainian position. It should be ours, too.
Again, Zelenskyy has been signaling plenty...openness for Russia to leave entirely from Ukraine, all territories back to pre 2014, and no need to join NATO, he's calling for another association of western democracies to address global issues together, not limited to NATO. So don't need NATO per se.
I think it's immensely naive not to believe Putin's most aggressive and emotional rants as exactly what he will do if he has any shot at doing so...Ukraine will continue to be the bullseye and that will continue to suppress investment in Ukraine from private companies. Meanwhile, Putin will continue to undermine, fund separatists, wage cyber warfare...disruption.
Here's a hint. Never, ever believe his assurances of peace. They're lies.
DocBarrister wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 5:16 pm
And you believe that?
Yes. Why else would he say as much publicly? To what end?
The door is open for peace, Doc. Only a fool or a war monger doesn't try and walk through that door..... you seem hell bent on shutting it.
He says all sorts of things, lying through his teeth...why would anyone, especially anyone who has him on the run, allow him an opportunity to regroup and attack and disrupt again? Of course there needs to be an ironclad agreement that the West will defend Ukraine in order for Ukraine to accept anything but the complete withdrawal of Russia.
There is no 'neutral' for Putin, who will not ever accept that Ukraine doesn't belong as part of Russia. and that means Kyiv and Odessa must be included.
Don't guarantee complete protection and no deal.
And denying Ukraine the opportunity to economically align with whoever they want?...FU, Putin.
That's the Ukrainian position. It should be ours, too.
"The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog." - Calvin, to Hobbes
(CNN)"Do not believe propaganda. They tell you lies here!" These words appeared on a sign held up by a brave employee of one of Russia's major state television networks during a live broadcast Monday in protest of Russia's attack of Ukraine (the protester, Marina Ovsynnikova, was detained).
It's a stunning contrast to Tucker Carlson's Fox News show, where he has amplified the Kremlin's lies in support of its barbaric war against Ukraine.
Republican strategist Ana Navarro -- while co-hosting The View on Monday -- suggested that the Department of Justice should investigate whether Carlson is a "foreign asset" who is "shilling for Putin." While we can debate whether he is or isn't, one thing is clear: Carlson is not on the side of democracy over autocracy.
This is not rocket science. We all understand that Russian leader Vladimir Putin's goal is to end the fledgling democracy of Ukraine and install a pro-Putin figure head to do his bidding. In fact, we have already seen an example of this in Melitopol, a city in southeastern Ukraine, where Russian forces arrested the elected mayor Ivan Fedorov on Friday and installed a new "mayor."
Yet in the weeks before Putin launched his brutal attack on the Ukrainian people, there was Carlson using his highly rated Fox News show to peddle anti-Ukrainian, pro-Putin propaganda -- as documented by the media watchdog organization Media Matters.
Just a few examples include Carlson telling his audience -- as Putin was amassing troops on the Ukrainian border -- that the democratically elected leader Volodymyr Zelensky was actually a "dictator," and then days later smearing Zelensky as "an obedient puppet of the Biden State Department."
Carlson also claimed -- again in an apparent attempt to dissuade his viewers from caring about the people of Ukraine -- that Ukraine was not a "democracy." That last point echoed one made by Putin himself days before he launched his attack as a way to justify it.
Carlson also defended Putin numerous times on his show in the days leading up to the war with sarcastic comments like, "anything less than hatred for Putin is treason." Carlson even invoked typical conservative culture war issues in his quest to defend the Russian leader by posing to his viewers questions about Putin such as, "Is he teaching my children to embrace racial discrimination?...Is he trying to snuff out Christianity?"
Before Putin launched his attack in the early morning of February 24, Carlson's comments were alarming, given the massive Russian troop buildup on the Ukrainian border. But since Putin's forces began its brutal attack upon the people of Ukraine -- engaging in what many have rightfully dubbed as "war crimes" -- Carlson's continued peddling of Kremlin propaganda makes it clear he sides with a brutal leader over a democratic nation literally facing extermination.
The worst example came last week when Carlson used his show to peddle -- as The New York Times' fact checkers framed it -- "a baseless theory promoted by Russian state media," that the United States had been funding laboratories in Ukraine that develop biological weapons.
Jaw-droppingly, there was Carlson on Fox News baselessly claiming that "The Pentagon is lying about bio labs in Ukraine," while at the same time telling viewers that what had been dubbed by experts as "Russian disinformation" was in reality "totally and completely true." It was like Orwellian TV -- or more accurately, Russian state TV.
Carlson made his case by "mischaracterizing," "distorting" and cherry picking statements from an interview of Robert Pope, director of the Pentagon's Cooperative Threat Reduction Program and the recent Senate testimony of Victoria Nuland, the undersecretary of state, The New York Times found. In the end, Carlson's buffet of lies also earned him "four Pinocchios" from Washington Post fact checkers.
Why would Carlson spew these lies? Maybe it's due to Carlson's documented affinity for strongmen like Hungary's Viktor Orban, or his seeming desire to display extremist views for his MAGA audience, but there's no disputing this is the same misinformation that had been pushed by Putin's regime days earlier to help defend its slaughter of the Ukrainian people.
And Carlson wasn't done.
Shockingly, on his show Friday, Carlson even slammed the US government for targeting with economic sanctions Russian oligarchs who, per the Biden administration, were "known to direct, authorize, fund, significantly support...Russia's destabilizing foreign policy." But in Carlson's view, it's wrong to sanction these oligarchs by "seizing the property of people" without "bothering to explain exactly what crime they had committed."
With that backdrop, it comes as zero surprise that on Sunday, Mother Jones reported that it had obtained a leaked memo to russian media outlets directing them to feature more clips of Carlson on their airwaves.
The memo -- dated March 3 -- states, "It is essential to use as much as possible fragments of broadcasts of the popular Fox News host Tucker Carlson," as they cited how he "sharply criticizes the actions of the United States [and] NATO."
They also urged airing clips of Carlson countering the attacks directed "towards President Putin, personally."
Think about this for a moment: We are seeing a well-known American television host spewing Kremlin-manufactured propaganda, defending Putin as well as his oligarchs while smearing Ukrainians with lies.
Whose side is Tucker Carlson on?
Last edited by MDlaxfan76 on Thu Mar 17, 2022 8:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Thu Mar 17, 2022 6:42 pm
Dunno if this has been brought up but here's a guy (originally from God's Country, no less) who really knows his stuff:
Russophobes are not likely to enjoy any of it. Rather than criticize, try to present evidence to refute what Professor John Mearsheimer says.
J. H. C., not this Chicago guy again.
Mearsheimer is one of those morons from the misnamed “realist” school. I’m sure there’s much more to that school than I understand, but it’s basically a dehumanizing school of thought that tends to emphasize the “state” over the individual.
I don’t know the professor, and he may be a nice guy, but I really doubt it (consider that my realist take on him).
Oh, and it is worth saying again … Le Corbusier was a jerk and his architectural style really sucks.
End of rant. Thank you, thank you very much.
DocBarrister has left the building.
Great rant !
Two things can be true at the same time :
(1) Putin is evil incarnate, vengeful after his loss of the Cold War, obsessed with restoring Russia's historic borders,...& a war criminal.
(2) our insistence on boxing in Russia, by expanding NATO all the way to include Ukraine, precipitated this.
