Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

americanpurpose.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 225 posts

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#131

Post by civilized »

binarray2000 wrote: post #128

It hurts to read the prevailing opinion in the western sphere these days, Fukuyama and comments here included. HN was mostly logical and rational in the past, but lately (Cov-19 and Russia) it is outright one sided. Are you aware that the USA and its "allies" have orchestrated a Coup d'etat in Ukraine? Are you aware of the "F*ck EU" phone call in which Nuland moves people in Ukrainian politics like peons on the chess…

> Are you aware that the USA and its "allies" have orchestrated a Coup d'etat in Ukraine?

You mean that thing in 2014 where a few Ukrainians protested a thing the president did that they didn't like, and in response the president of Ukraine promptly fled the country never to return?

Meanwhile the current president has the entire Russian Army bearing down on him and hasn't left.

Some "coup".

The truth is, all "Evil West" whataboutism aside, Russia is weak and corrupt and cannot bend Ukraine to its will. Too bad.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#132

Post by zozbot234 »

pphysch wrote: post #106
zozbot234 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The West has tried working with Russia before the operation. The other side was actively uncooperative (they told everyone they would retreat from the Ukrainian border, but then didn't); it's not surprising at all that mutual trust and communication would break down as a result. Even so it is basically the Ukrainians who are refusing to back down now, not necessarily the West. They hold all the cards.

> The West has tried working with Russia before the operation. What is your basis for this wild claim? Washington has actively opposed the implementation of the Minsk agreements since 2014, despite Moscow's enthusiasm for them.

Moscow was far from enthusiastic about the Minsk agreements. Their position has always been that they were only acting as a "mediator" not as a party, thus - conveniently enough for them - they could not be blamed if the agreements broke down. More recently, they've stated outright that the Minsk agreements are dead.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#133

Post by zozbot234 »

rayiner wrote: post #129
phtrivier wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Macron is definitely more right-wing than might have been expected five years ago. That being said, even with the largest possible definition of "populist", he hardly qualifies. The most likely outcome of this election round (president + assembly) is a macron presidency with an "official" right-wing coalition of macron's party with the most "centrist" part of the right wing. Very run of the mill stuff. And populists…

I’m not saying he’s a populist, I’m saying that the populists have scored a significant victory by pushing him to the right on cultural issues even if he ultimately wins reelection.

Militant secularism is not a right wing position in France. It's very much part of the shared zeitgeist. This is the country that once had a "Cult of the Reason Goddess" as their state religion, and their modern über-secular laïcité is not very different.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#134

Post by cmurf »

>The United Nations Security Council has proven once again to be useless.

Useless in a practical sense, in this particular case, yes. It's not at all surprising.

Specifically the problem is due to simultaneous issues (a) only the Security Council can commit armed forces to enforce resolutions (b) Security Council resolutions need concurrence of its permanent members (U.S., U.K., France, China, Russia), i.e. this what is often referred to as a veto (c) one of the permanent members is violating the charter in a fundamental manner, and certainly will not vote to enforce the charter on itself.

Should there no longer be permanent members of the Security Council? Perhaps. It is likely to change? Nope.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#135

Post by dh2022 »

zozbot234 wrote: post #100
HideousKojima wrote: post #80

>The United Nations Security Council has proven once again to be useless. This line makes me significantly question the author's competence (as if knowing he was the author of The End of History before going into it didn't already negatively color my expectations). Russia has a permanent veto on the security council, of course it's going to be useless. Anything that goes against the interests of one of the veto membe…

Forcing the Russians to use their veto power at the UNSC is not "useless" at all. It's a meaningful signal, and very much worth doing.

What is the value of this signal? Thank you! (I always thought that UN Security Council did not have any value because veto-yielding members would always block adverse resolutions. If there is any value in the UN Security Council I would really like to know. Thanks again!)

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#136

Post by blub »

pbourke wrote: post #36
c-smile wrote: post #14

The Great Delusion (2020) by prof. John Mearsheimer: https://youtu.be/nZVIaXFN2lU That if someone really wants to understand where we are with all those Libya, Syria, Iraq, ... Ukraine. And how and when this one really started: https://youtu.be/ppD_bhWODDc As of Francis Fukuyama predictions... I am Ukrainian by myself. With family spread over West Ukraine and Russia East. Note: Russia is the second country after Ukra…

A counterpoint to Mearsheimer from historian Stephen Kotkin in conversation with David Remnick: https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/stephen-kotkin-putin-...

Interesting article overall, but the counter-point is not that strong IMO. I don’t think that those which are arguing that NATO over-extended and that they’re not innocent bystanders harbour the illusion that failing such expansion Russia would be a more democratic country.

The argument is that they wouldn’t be so aggressive because they wouldn’t feel threatened. There was a great argument that I read on HN explaining why Ukraine being NATO-friendly was causing massive problems for Russia - the gist of it was that they could project significant more power right at their doorstep.

In a recent interview Mearsheimer said that even if Ukraine wants to join NATO and NATO wants them to join, in reality Russia has a kind of veto power, no matter if that may seem immoral and unfair.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#137

Post by pphysch »

zozbot234 wrote: post #132
pphysch wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The West has tried working with Russia before the operation. What is your basis for this wild claim? Washington has actively opposed the implementation of the Minsk agreements since 2014, despite Moscow's enthusiasm for them.

Moscow was far from enthusiastic about the Minsk agreements. Their position has always been that they were only acting as a "mediator" not as a party, thus - conveniently enough for them - they could not be blamed if the agreements broke down. More recently, they've stated outright that the Minsk agreements are dead.

No post body was provided.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#138

Post by srvmshr »

frozencell wrote: post #23
ch4s3 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even supporting the Ukrainian side, it’s clear that they’re taking heavy losses and doubly so on the civilian side. What I think people are correctly surprised by is how well the Ukrainians are utilizing NATO training an arms, and how badly the Russians are performing.

We don’t have a cryptographic proof on each statistics both sides news give us.

I have never cussed reading views on HN. That is a more Reddit phenomena & this parent comment belongs there.

Makes me wonder how insensitive one has to be to make a terribly casual dismissal of the current calamity & dangers to thousands of Ukrainians. Some people have a reserved section in hell for belittling or condescending human suffering.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#139

Post by pbourke »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #125
pbourke wrote: post #107

I can’t believe you’d discuss this situation without considering the nuclear angle. Putin holds a significant wild card in terms of tactical nuclear weapons. I’m sure Russia believes that they could be deployed inside of Ukraine in order to force an end to the Ukrainian resistance and the west would continue to remain on the sidelines to avert escalation to the end of the world. A total defeat/humiliation of Russia w…

He could , but considering the relations between Russian and Ukrainian peoples and the risk of WW3 this would most likely just result in mutiny and the subsequent removal of Putin, probably even just in reaction to that order.

If Russia’s willing to drop cluster munitions on Ukrainian cities, I don’t see why they wouldn’t send a tactical nuke to a air base or industrial area. The relations between Russians and Ukrainians seem well and truly fucked at this point as it is.

We can hope that a mutiny will happen but it’s by no means guaranteed.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#140

Post by flycaliguy »

zozbot234 wrote: post #60
jonahbenton wrote: post #32

The title is deceptive- Fukuyama, writing from Northern Macedonia, has an extremely optimistic view that Russia will be "defeated" and Putin will fall- notwithstanding enormous, catastrophic losses for Ukraine- with significant downstream implications. The two subpoints with which I agree are that the NATO decision on the MiGs was wise, and that neither Russia nor Ukraine can climb down from their positions. My expec…

> gradual North Koreanification of Russia with Putin at the helm Which would still be pretty effective in preserving the current international order. If it becomes exceedingly clear that threatening your neighbors militarily means turning your country into a new North Korea at best even if you have nukes, that will deter future leaders from trying the same. (The nukes part is very important because the only thing kee…

A recent fear of mine has been a false-flag chemical attack followed up by a “justified” nuke to evaporate the evidence.
Post reply on HN