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

101–110 of 225 posts

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#101

Post by forinti »

klelatti wrote: post #22

The question I don’t have an answer for here is how does Russia control Ukraine if they do win militarily? It seems incredibly unlikely that they have enough troops and doesn’t seem remotely sustainable.

I can't imagine that Russia has planned to take over such a large country.

It only makes sense if they only planned to bomb Ukraine into handing over Donetsk, Lukhansk, recognising the loss of Crimea, and agreeing not to join NATO.

From this perspective, it's hard for Russia to loose. A destroyed Ukraine won't fight for their lost territories and won't be accepted into the EU or NATO.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#102

Post by pbourke »

Overtonwindow wrote: post #10

For a while I was pushing the no-fly zone as well, until I read this article. I'm surprised Russia would be heading for an outright defeat, and if true they've marshaled the bulk of Russian forces in this conflict, I have to wonder what the rest of the defense position looks like for Russia? For example, if China were to, say, start rolling across Siberia, besides moving the mother of all bowel movements, there's abs…

Why would China ever do that when they can have Russia as a client state at zero military cost? China can merely incorporate a weakened Russia into its belt-and-road neo-colonial strategy.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#103

Post by slim »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #90
slim wrote: post #13

this guy is a fortune teller. the nerve he has is incredible. still predicting the future from a future he predicted would never exist in his book "the end of history"

He pretty much says the opposite of what everyone claims he said in that book. People who've never read the book read the title and assume they know what his argument is.

oh, that's interesting. I read the book. although I was young and I did not finish it because it was dreadfully propagandist. i remember I got the feeling the book was written by a committee under the pseudonymous fukuyama. so maybe the conclusion of the book is reasonable and that's what you are referring to. i'm going to reread it. thank you

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#104

Post by pphysch »

phtrivier wrote: post #99
pphysch wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On 2, the diplomatic option has been on the table since the civil war started in 2014 (Minsk agreements). However, it is critical to understand that it is not merely "the Ukrainians" (i.e. the current Zelensky-Klitschko-Pinchuk oligarchy) that are opposed to it, it is also Washington. After all, the latter spent billions of dollars and decades of effort tearing down the Budapest Memo, and they weren't going to easily…

"surrendering" is really not aanywhere in the spectrum in USA, historically. And, even though the "splitting and surviving" compromise seems almost inevitable to me, I have no idea how long it will take. And I can't blame all parties (Russia / Ukraine / EU / NATO) for trying to "buy time" and reach the négociation table in the best possible situation. I can imagine Putin would have preferred rolling over Kyiv, then n…

Total nonsense. Putin is not going to bomb Lviv, much less Estonia or Finland.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#105

Post by mopsi »

pphysch wrote: post #77
hkpack wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There never was a civil war in Ukraine. In 2014 - that was still Russian forces both in Crimea and in eastern part of Ukraine. Russia got sanctioned since 2014 exactly for that.

Wow. 14,000 Ukrainians have been killed by Ukrainians since 2014 in the Donbass region. Heavy weaponry involved. If that is not a civil war, what is it?

> If that is not a civil war, what is it?

Russian invasion of Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine.

Ironically, since most people living there are Russians, it's Russians killing Russians in Ukraine in the name of Putin's delusions.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#106

Post by pphysch »

zozbot234 wrote: post #98
pphysch wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you rationalize 'the West just loves peace' (paraphrasing) with our current policy of funneling huge amounts of weapons to back an Ukrainian insurgency, and the resolute opposition to Ukraine surrendering and saving thousands of lives on any terms?

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.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#107

Post by pbourke »

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 without nukes flying seems like a remote possibility. Putin realizes that defeat signals the end of his regime and likely the Russian Federation as constructed today, just like the Russo-Japanese war led to the end of the Russian Empire and Afghanistan war led to the end of the USSR.

Right now there lacks Sun Tzu’s “golden bridge” across which Russia could retreat in dignity.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#108

Post by ogogmad »

pphysch wrote: post #104
phtrivier wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"surrendering" is really not aanywhere in the spectrum in USA, historically. And, even though the "splitting and surviving" compromise seems almost inevitable to me, I have no idea how long it will take. And I can't blame all parties (Russia / Ukraine / EU / NATO) for trying to "buy time" and reach the négociation table in the best possible situation. I can imagine Putin would have preferred rolling over Kyiv, then n…

Total nonsense. Putin is not going to bomb Lviv, much less Estonia or Finland.

Can you read the man's mind? Because the rest of us are struggling to, and are preparing for the worst.

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#109

Post by pphysch »

ogogmad wrote: post #97
pphysch wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan was about Soviet/American imperial conquest & controlling Asia. Chechnya was about suppressing separatism / national security. Ukraine is also about national security, but a rung up from Chechnya because Moscow is concerned about a hostile military empire putting hypersonics there. Cuban Missile Crisis but even more extreme (imagine if Cuban extremists were shelling and killing Cuban Americans in Florida…

1. Why is Russia afraid of a defensive alliance with no compulsion to join (unlike the hilariously named Warsaw Pact)? The most enthusiastic members of the alliance are the closest to them... I wonder why... 2. NATO doesn't have hypersonic missiles. Russia has hypersonic missiles. 3. Why does Russia get to bolster their security by ravaging their democratic neighbours? Seems like zero-sum type behaviour. Maybe Russia…

[flagged]

Re: Francis Fukuyama: Preparing for Defeat

#110

Post by pphysch »

ogogmad wrote: post #108
pphysch wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Total nonsense. Putin is not going to bomb Lviv, much less Estonia or Finland.

Can you read the man's mind? Because the rest of us are struggling to, and are preparing for the worst.

No, I just hear to what Moscow has been saying for the last 15yrs and relate it to facts on the ground. No need for armchair psychology.
Post reply on HN