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

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: How to avoid another world war

#41

Post by darthrupert »

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…

I don't understand why they are being ridiculed about military inefficiency. That's without any ill will or sarcasm towards Russia the best part of this whole situation. Literally everything would be worse if their military had been more efficient.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#42

Post by jamincan »

psychphysic wrote: post #36
jamincan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ope…

I'm rejecting Kissinger's entire framework. This isn't a war between NATO (or the US) and Russia, so as much as we might want to end the war, we can't. The entire premise of his article presumes that the west can determine the outcome at all apart from tilting the scales one way or another.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#43

Post by darthrupert »

psychphysic wrote: post #36
jamincan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ope…

Do we really need to think of Russia as being a country of utter regressed animals who are capable of nothing but the worst ideas?

Are they really comic book evil?

Re: How to avoid another world war

#44

Post by jamincan »

refurb wrote: post #35
jamincan wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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"

I'm not claiming we need war at all. I am pointing out that Kissinger's road plan for peace is built on a false framework.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#45

Post by psychphysic »

jamincan wrote: post #42
psychphysic wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ope…

I'm rejecting Kissinger's entire framework. This isn't a war between NATO (or the US) and Russia, so as much as we might want to end the war, we can't. The entire premise of his article presumes that the west can determine the outcome at all apart from tilting the scales one way or another.

Are you suggesting NATO has not had any influence on this war?

The US just agreed a further 2bn in military aid including a patriot system.

Ukraine only fighting chance has been due to NATOs support.

Eastern Europe has always been a buffer between NATO and Russia in a landwar it's obviously preferable for Russia to lose in Ukraine than in a NATO territory from NATOs perspective.

What did you think was going on here it not a war between NATO and Russia?!

No one cares about the other wars around the world with even worse humanitarian disasters. Here marks the real criticism people have of Kissinger, real politik is ugly and we don't like looking at it or those who talk about it.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#46

Post by psychphysic »

darthrupert wrote: post #41
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…

I don't understand why they are being ridiculed about military inefficiency. That's without any ill will or sarcasm towards Russia the best part of this whole situation. Literally everything would be worse if their military had been more efficient.

They are being ridiculed because their performance has been ridiculous?

Once you set aside the magic thinking idea that laughing will make Russia fight better you can see the funny side of the "Russia 'bout to find out why the US can't afford universal healthcare" memes.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#47

Post by hackinthebochs »

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!

Exactly this. When the guy who never met a war he didn't like is telling you our current path is a bad idea, you had better fucking listen.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#48

Post by jamincan »

psychphysic wrote: post #45
jamincan wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm rejecting Kissinger's entire framework. This isn't a war between NATO (or the US) and Russia, so as much as we might want to end the war, we can't. The entire premise of his article presumes that the west can determine the outcome at all apart from tilting the scales one way or another.

Are you suggesting NATO has not had any influence on this war? The US just agreed a further 2bn in military aid including a patriot system. Ukraine only fighting chance has been due to NATOs support. Eastern Europe has always been a buffer between NATO and Russia in a landwar it's obviously preferable for Russia to lose in Ukraine than in a NATO territory from NATOs perspective. What did you think was going on here i…

I think I clearly stated that the US and NATO has had influence, sufficient to tilt the war in either direction, but I also think it's unrealistic to believe that influence can be leveraged to end the war let alone set the terms for peace.

The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for understanding global politics that only considers great powers is useful.

Ukraine fought off the initial Russian attack without US and NATO, do you think they would stop fighting now if support were withdrawn? How exactly do you think the US and NATO could force Ukraine and Russia to the table? Do you think that eastern European countries would withdraw support from Ukraine even absent the US and NATO when Russian incursions on neighbouring territory represent very real threats to them? The entire premise that the US can end this war feels like a hopelessly naive relic of a different era.

My own point of view is that the only way this will end peacefully is with the full withdraw of Russian forces from Ukrainian territory. The question of how this can be achieved without Russia becoming destabilized and fracturing, which I don't feel is desirable, is certainly a concern, although I fear that that may be the only thing that leads to their withdraw. (See Timothy Snyder's piece on the subject: How does the Russo-Ukrainian War end? [1])

1. https://snyder.substack.com/p/how-does-the-russo-ukrainian-w...

Re: How to avoid another world war

#49

Post by nine_k »

psychphysic wrote: post #40
nine_k wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Exactly. A Marshall plan after WWI could be great.

Preventing WWI is a different matter entirely though. It was a very bloody lesson that seriously changes Western mentality; I suspect quite some reasons from 2022 just would not be understood in 1912.

Re: How to avoid another world war

#50

Post by hackinthebochs »

jamincan wrote: post #48
psychphysic wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting NATO has not had any influence on this war? The US just agreed a further 2bn in military aid including a patriot system. Ukraine only fighting chance has been due to NATOs support. Eastern Europe has always been a buffer between NATO and Russia in a landwar it's obviously preferable for Russia to lose in Ukraine than in a NATO territory from NATOs perspective. What did you think was going on here i…

I think I clearly stated that the US and NATO has had influence, sufficient to tilt the war in either direction, but I also think it's unrealistic to believe that influence can be leveraged to end the war let alone set the terms for peace. The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for underst…

>The world in the 21st century is not one in which individual sovereign countries are beholden to the dictates of great powers and where therefore a simplified framework for understanding global politics that only considers great powers is useful.

What reason is there to think this is true? What I see is the appearance of a post-realpolitik world in the wake of an utterly dominant U.S. hegemony. Realpolitik is still in effect; it's just sufficiently hidden behind the stability of a U.S. centric world order and the ongoing Nash equilibrium of the current borders in most of Europe that some people can convince themselves the world has fundamentally changed. It's hard to distinguish between a post-realpolitik world and Nash equilibrium. On the surface they look identical.

Post reply on HN