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

Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 54 posts

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#21

Post by armitron »

starwind wrote: post #13
armitron wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suggest you watch this John Mearsheimer talk (2015) as I think it will help clear a lot of misconceptions you seem to have and also tighten your thinking about the matter. If there's gonna be a WW3, it'll be because the West wants a WW3. [2015] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

I've never found Mearsheimer's arguments on Ukraine all that convincing. I really liked Adam Roberts succinct take down in the Economist a couple weeks ago. I know Roberts doesn't address all Mearsheimer's points, but he hits the main ones https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/03/26/sir-adam-...

I'm being super generous when I say he's splitting hairs.

Take this part:

"These factors suggest that the 2008 proposal to expand NATO to include Georgia and Ukraine is just one among many developments that have made the current crisis so acute. It is arguable, indeed likely, that the NATO expansion proposal made matters worse, as may some other Western actions, but to assert that “the West is principally responsible for the Ukrainian crisis” goes too far."

Or this gem:

"It’s questionable whether Mr Putin was right to say NATO posed a threat to Russia’s sphere of influence. From the start in 2008 there were different interpretations of what was meant by “will become members”. "

Putin made it very very clear where he stood, and yet you still see armchair psychoanalysis being done. It's all pretty shoddy. There is certainly nothing of substance here that even begins to address Mearsheimer's iron-clad arguments.

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#22

Post by starwind »

dragonwriter wrote: post #17
starwind wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I can see where you're coming from but Russia wasn't a serious challenger in the 2000s—their military was a complete mess until the end of the 2000s, and even then they didn't perform that well in Georgia, that's why I peg the start date later

> their military was a complete mess until the end of the 2000s Their military remains a complete mess, but that's largely irrelevant to the existence of a Cold War, which doesn't have to rely on both sides engaging in direct military confrontation with proxies of the other. One side doing their bit primarily by sponsoring, aiding, and instigating asymmetric threats against the other is a way a Cold War can happen, e…

Yeah, the definition of a cold war is that the two parties don't come directly to blows. But I feel like there needs to be a credible challenge, and Russia's military is today light years ahead of where they were when they invaded Georgia (even though, yeah, it still sucks). I just don't think their sabre rattling had anyone in the US government all that worried through the first decade of the 2000s—the US and Russia collaborated on several counter-terrorism efforts

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#23

Post by armitron »

Barrin92 wrote: post #18
armitron wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to think that cascading events follow some sort of hierarchy subject to the whims of the military and/or that the chain of causation following an event as probable as Russia deploying tactical nuclear weapons is subject to human stratagems. I think history has shown that nothing could be further from the truth. The outbreak of WW2 after the devastation of WW1 deserves particular study. We can zoom out and lo…

I don't think history has shown any of that given that we lived through an entire cold war with The Soviet Union that saw many proxy wars not unlike this one, missile crises and through all of this communication was intact and this remains the case, control structures were intact, and even though war is very scary hierarchies and safety systems remain intact. There are no automatisms or runaway scenarios and modern s…

If you examine the history of the cold war, you'll see that rather than any sort of deliberate control over the unfolding states of the system as a whole, we've simply been very very lucky. Stupendously lucky. If that doesn't reinforce what I said, nothing will.

Here's some folks who also think exactly that:

"Luck, in this context, seems to mean the exact opposite of control. It’s all that prevented bad outcomes when things could easily have gone in a different direction, no matter what anybody wanted. The historical policymakers who have invoked “luck” have included Robert S. McNamara, who was defense secretary during the Cuban missile crisis; Dean Acheson, special envoy of President John F. Kennedy at the time; ambassador Gerard C. Smith, chief U.S. delegate to the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks in 1969; former defense secretary William Perry, former secretary of state George Shultz, former national security adviser and secretary of state Henry Kissinger, former chairman of the Senate’s Armed Services Committee, Sam Nunn, and former head of Strategic Air Command and Strategic Command, Gen. George Lee Butler."

From: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/08/10/reason-we-...

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#24

Post by starwind »

armitron wrote: post #21
starwind wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never found Mearsheimer's arguments on Ukraine all that convincing. I really liked Adam Roberts succinct take down in the Economist a couple weeks ago. I know Roberts doesn't address all Mearsheimer's points, but he hits the main ones https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/03/26/sir-adam-...

I'm being super generous when I say he's splitting hairs. Take this part: "These factors suggest that the 2008 proposal to expand NATO to include Georgia and Ukraine is just one among many developments that have made the current crisis so acute. It is arguable, indeed likely, that the NATO expansion proposal made matters worse, as may some other Western actions, but to assert that “the West is principally responsible…

I wouldn't say Roberts's arguments are splitting hairs, I'd say he's turning the whole thing around and saying Putin interpreted every Western action in the worst light possible, Russia decided that Ukraine was its domain, and the West and Ukraine had the right to define their own relations.

Mearsheimer's argument boils down to: Russia thinks it has the right to do what it wants in Eastern Europe, and the West caused this problem by not saying "ok."

Putin violated the Bucharest Memorandum by moving into Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Russia created this mess.

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#25

Post by reducesuffering »

armitron wrote: post #21
starwind wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never found Mearsheimer's arguments on Ukraine all that convincing. I really liked Adam Roberts succinct take down in the Economist a couple weeks ago. I know Roberts doesn't address all Mearsheimer's points, but he hits the main ones https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/03/26/sir-adam-...

I'm being super generous when I say he's splitting hairs. Take this part: "These factors suggest that the 2008 proposal to expand NATO to include Georgia and Ukraine is just one among many developments that have made the current crisis so acute. It is arguable, indeed likely, that the NATO expansion proposal made matters worse, as may some other Western actions, but to assert that “the West is principally responsible…

Putin wasn't even scared of NATO coming to the defence of a sovereign country, Ukraine. It's damn sure not he was never scared of NATO actually threatening Russian territory.

I see too many people these days being reflexively contrarian, like they're on a next level of understanding, simply by being opposite of the "current thing." Mearsheimer's arguments are widely known, it's not an "aha" moment to name drop him, stick to the arguments. Personally, I prefer info from people that actually predicted the invasion months ago.

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#26

Post by klyrs »

starwind wrote: post #22
dragonwriter wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their military was a complete mess until the end of the 2000s Their military remains a complete mess, but that's largely irrelevant to the existence of a Cold War, which doesn't have to rely on both sides engaging in direct military confrontation with proxies of the other. One side doing their bit primarily by sponsoring, aiding, and instigating asymmetric threats against the other is a way a Cold War can happen, e…

Yeah, the definition of a cold war is that the two parties don't come directly to blows. But I feel like there needs to be a credible challenge, and Russia's military is today light years ahead of where they were when they invaded Georgia (even though, yeah, it still sucks). I just don't think their sabre rattling had anyone in the US government all that worried through the first decade of the 2000s—the US and Russia…

With nukes in play, one needn't have a competent military to participate in a cold war.

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#27

Post by panax »

Maybe, maybe not. There is always the potential. I think the chances are slim but the risk is high -- even with very low probability the potential consequences are enormous resulting in a significant risk. With the risk of a world war the greatest risk comes the risk of nuclear war. Especially over the past two years I have grown more wary about the risk of war between so called superpowers and the risk of nuclear war in particular. Humanity needs to learn to transcend violent conflict if we are to progress. We need to work towards the elimination of nuclear weapons globally, although there isn't a lot we can do at the individual level on that. Fortunately since WWII the world has become less violent overall and things have generally improved in a positive direction.

I disagree that everything seems pointless. If anything there is much more at stake and actions are even more important.

Lately I have been reading papers from ALLFED[1-2]. They have found quite a few alternative ways we could produce food during a sun blocking crisis and they would be enough to feed more than 8 billion people if needed through a severe nuclear winter, even if we lost all of our current agriculture. But they have also found that only few would survive if we only try to survive on stored food.

Another excellent resource for planning for the initial few moments/weeks of a nuclear war has been [3] which provides practical instructions for rapid construction of expedient fallout shelters.

Understanding these I at least have a feasible and actionable plan, and better understanding of what would be involved if worst case scenarios were to happen. It is a lot less hopeless than most believe, although still terrible.

I suggest reading through these and you can find things you can do at the individual level. Also consider supporting ALLFED as their work has potential to be highly impactful if such a scenario is ever realized.

[1] https://allfed.info [2] https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/david-denkenberger-s... [3] https://www.oism.org/nwss/

Re: Are We Sleepwalking into Wwiii?

#30

Post by stefantalpalaru »

DocTomoe wrote: post #3

EU citizen here. During the Korean War, we believed WW3 was just around the corner. ... and during the Berlin Crisis. ... as we did when Vietnam got hot. ... just like we did when the Jom-Kippur-War broke out. ... or when Able Archer 1983 was a bit too realistic for soviet tastes ... then there were several rounds of Gulf Wars... ... remember 9/11? What you are feeling is the "normal" state. In fact, between 2001 and…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN