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

How to avoid another world war

spectator.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: How to avoid another world war

#31

Post by jamincan »

refurb wrote: post #28
jamincan wrote: post #3

I balk at calls for peace from Henry Kissinger, who didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people for his own personal political gains. Nevertheless, I did read the article. Kissinger's framework for understanding the world is still rooted in an outdated cold war mentality and this article seems like he is naively trying to shove the cat back in the bag and return to a paradigm that he fe…

I balk at calls for peace from Henry Kissinger, who didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people for his own personal political gains. Nevertheless, I did read the article. “War monger suggests peace” Look at his track record! He’s wrong we need more war!

Do you think your straw man reflects what I posted?

Re: How to avoid another world war

#32

Post by nine_k »

jamincan wrote: post #18
psychphysic wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sounds like you're arguing for war with Russia while they are weak?

Not at all. Kissinger specifically frames this as a war between two great powers over a conventionally armed nation. In this framing, western nations have the power to end this war and set the terms for peace. But I don't believe this is true, and I feel this is a relic of a different era. Western nations can influence the war - sending Ukraine more arms, or cutting off supply would certainly influence its chances. B…

More than that: if the West pulls away and stops supporting Ukraine, it will not make peace.

Imagine Russian army overcoming the remaining Ukraine defenses and occupying 100% of it's territory. So you think the people of Ukraine will grudgingly lay down arms, and return to normal daily life? Come on.

Ukraine has always had a strong separatist movement while a part of the USSR. It was a founding member of the USSR, but the last vestiges of armed separatist forces were only suppressed by the end of 1950s. This was under Stalin, a tyrant with a very efficient suppression machine and no qualms about killing his subjects whatsoever.

A peer comment suggests that it could be fine to just let Russia have what it's currently grabbed, and cease the fire ASAP. I think it'd be the one of the worst courses of action.

An Ukraine defeated by Russia would be another Afghanistan. With current technology, and with the general ineptitude that the Russian state repeatedly demonstrates throughout the campaign, there's no doubt that guerilla warfare will be widespread and hurtful.

This is on top of letting an authoritarian regime to conquer by war and annex a sovereign European state, right next to "real" Western states. This would send many signals, of all the wrong sorts, of what the Wast is going to put up with.

In general, an abscess, once it exists, should be treated, one way or another, until it disappears completely. Stopping to treat it because it hurts is a way to make it hurt more, and become more dangerous.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#33

Post by psychphysic »

yywwbbn wrote: post #23
psychphysic wrote: post #8

I rarely agree with Kissinger but he's right as far as I can see. I'd be the first to deride Russia's military effectiveness. But consider that the vast majority of the world is against them largely on every single front. And you see why they've earned their reputation as a super power. Russia is big with plenty of fossils. They could ruin the world simply by continuing to use their fossil fuels without regard to cli…

> They could nuke themselves. How is that helpful for them? But yeah, I agree in general

Most people think MAD requires that both sides have an effective means to carry out a strike on the enemy territory.

The fact that Russian nuclear weapons used within Russian territory could destroy modern society tells you that MAD requires no such thing.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#34

Post by nine_k »

psychphysic wrote: post #14
mmmwww wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with you, I think this information will already be understood in coming negotiations. Although the author’s legitimacy is questionable, I read the solution he proposes as sensible: End of war. Removal of the army from Ukraine except for Crimea, at first and international oversight of referenda for the regions. Potential threat of cost of reparations and what it would mean for Russia to lose is probably…

What Kissinger is correct about most is that none of this matters as much as ending this war. With hindsight ww2 could have been avoided if it wasn't for the prolonged punishment for ww1. Russia has too many ways to ruin the world for it to be worth not trying out best to bring them into the fold tightly and fast. Sadly this will upset Ukrainians but that's unfortunately not as important as avoiding another world war…

WWII in Europe ended not just with the fall of Berlin, but with the Marshall plan. If something like that happened after WWI, Europe would have been very different.

But enacting a Marshall plan requires a definite military defeat first. Else it's pacifying the aggressor again, with the same efficacy as in 1938.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#35

Post by refurb »

jamincan wrote: post #31
refurb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I balk at calls for peace from Henry Kissinger, who didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people for his own personal political gains. Nevertheless, I did read the article. “War monger suggests peace” Look at his track record! He’s wrong we need more war!

Do you think your straw man reflects what I posted?

It's not a straw man. Just pointing out the delicious irony.

You claim we shouldn't listen to Kissinger because he "didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people".

Your logic being, don't listen to his calls for peace, what we need is war. Which would unavoidable result in "raining death on [..] innocent people"

Re: How to avoid another world war

#36

Post by psychphysic »

jamincan wrote: post #18
psychphysic wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sounds like you're arguing for war with Russia while they are weak?

Not at all. Kissinger specifically frames this as a war between two great powers over a conventionally armed nation. In this framing, western nations have the power to end this war and set the terms for peace. But I don't believe this is true, and I feel this is a relic of a different era. Western nations can influence the war - sending Ukraine more arms, or cutting off supply would certainly influence its chances. B…

You're missing Kissinger's point (or perhaps I'm artificially seeing my point in Kissinger's argument).

Let's continue to refuse to deny Russia at various world forums. And Russia just burns it's fossil fuels intensely. The damage from climate change is catestrophic and WE LOSE.

Let's say we continue to shun Russia economically bringing it to it's knees. How does it make money if no one will buy it's goods on the open market? It sells what it can on the black market moving oil is hard. What about selling DPRK and Iran nuclear and ballistic missile secrets? WE LOSE.

Let's say a nuclear attack is carried on on Russia and it's surrounded by a ballistic missile defense system. So it nuclears Siberia to oblivion with purposefully dirty nuclear weapons. WE LOSE.

Let's say we enter conventional war with Russia and it just blasts ITS OWN satillites out of space directly above it staring Kessler cascade that wiped out all satillites and ends the prospect of space travel for hundreds of years. WE LOSE.

How will we prevent all these things? They are all born of Russia considered themselves no longer part of the world community?

TL;DR Kissinger knows NATO can trounce Russia ina war maybe even a nuclear one. But he realises the cost would be too great even from a complete victory with civilization ending potentials.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#37

Post by jamincan »

yywwbbn wrote: post #15
jamincan wrote: post #3

I balk at calls for peace from Henry Kissinger, who didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people for his own personal political gains. Nevertheless, I did read the article. Kissinger's framework for understanding the world is still rooted in an outdated cold war mentality and this article seems like he is naively trying to shove the cat back in the bag and return to a paradigm that he fe…

> Russia's hegemony over its neighbours was not because of its nuclear power, but because of its military power Arguably dependence on Russian oil & gas was as or more important. Basically countries in the region had a choice either pay the market price (or more if you don’t have access to the global market to buy natural gas) or submit to Russia politically and get massive discounts. Not an easy choice to make for p…

That's a fair point; military power isn't the only way to project power. I do think, though, that the war in Ukraine may lead to us reevaluating just what nuclear power provides you. Certainly it is a deterrent to attack and especially a deterrent to a nuclear attack. But with time, especially after nuclear threats from Putin and Kim repeatedly prove to be empty threats, its ability to project power beyond a country's own borders seems more and more limited.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#38

Post by [deleted] »

vlovich123 wrote: post #5
jamincan wrote: post #3

I balk at calls for peace from Henry Kissinger, who didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people for his own personal political gains. Nevertheless, I did read the article. Kissinger's framework for understanding the world is still rooted in an outdated cold war mentality and this article seems like he is naively trying to shove the cat back in the bag and return to a paradigm that he fe…

With Russia‘s nukes, it seems unlikely Ukraine will invade Russia. It’s possible they wouldn’t be so cautious of Russia if it had disarmed its nuclear capabilities. EDIT: fixed the multiple wording mistakes that made the statement nonsense from start to finish.

[deleted]

Re: How to avoid another world war

#39

Post by darthrupert »

vlovich123 wrote: post #5
jamincan wrote: post #3

I balk at calls for peace from Henry Kissinger, who didn't seem to have qualms at raining death on millions of innocent people for his own personal political gains. Nevertheless, I did read the article. Kissinger's framework for understanding the world is still rooted in an outdated cold war mentality and this article seems like he is naively trying to shove the cat back in the bag and return to a paradigm that he fe…

With Russia‘s nukes, it seems unlikely Ukraine will invade Russia. It’s possible they wouldn’t be so cautious of Russia if it had disarmed its nuclear capabilities. EDIT: fixed the multiple wording mistakes that made the statement nonsense from start to finish.

By Russia's fucked up interpretation of reality, Ukraine has already invaded Russia and is currently occupying two of its cities.

Or did you mean they would invade real Russian territory, like Moscow? Why would they do that?

Re: How to avoid another world war

#40

Post by psychphysic »

nine_k wrote: post #34
psychphysic wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What Kissinger is correct about most is that none of this matters as much as ending this war. With hindsight ww2 could have been avoided if it wasn't for the prolonged punishment for ww1. Russia has too many ways to ruin the world for it to be worth not trying out best to bring them into the fold tightly and fast. Sadly this will upset Ukrainians but that's unfortunately not as important as avoiding another world war…

WWII in Europe ended not just with the fall of Berlin, but with the Marshall plan. If something like that happened after WWI, Europe would have been very different. But enacting a Marshall plan requires a definite military defeat first. Else it's pacifying the aggressor again, with the same efficacy as in 1938.

How about preventing WW2 entirely? Hitler wouldn't have risen to power if Germany wasn't in tatters.
Post reply on HN