US to blame for regional crises?
Discussion
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNeKsBHSA/
Analysis from Jeffrey Sachs on how the US is to blame for the current war in Ukraine, the Middle East and tension with China.
On Ukraine it is broken promises about not expanding NATO onto Russia’s borders, assistance in overthrowing regime in 2014 and failure to negotiate a diplomatic solution.
In the ME supporting Israel in attacking, undermining and destabilising all the countries supporting the Palestinians (as well as protecting Israel from sanctions and the UN).
In the far east by their military presence, tarrifs against China, banning of technology, pushing US companies to disengage.
An interesting and very different analysis to the one normally presented by US media (and by extension British media).
Analysis from Jeffrey Sachs on how the US is to blame for the current war in Ukraine, the Middle East and tension with China.
On Ukraine it is broken promises about not expanding NATO onto Russia’s borders, assistance in overthrowing regime in 2014 and failure to negotiate a diplomatic solution.
In the ME supporting Israel in attacking, undermining and destabilising all the countries supporting the Palestinians (as well as protecting Israel from sanctions and the UN).
In the far east by their military presence, tarrifs against China, banning of technology, pushing US companies to disengage.
An interesting and very different analysis to the one normally presented by US media (and by extension British media).
I guess everyone is entitled to an opinion.
For instance, I don't see why Ukraine should be sentenced to a developing world level of economy just because Russia is scarred it's citizens might see a better alternative.
Russia shouldn't get to decide what Ukraine decide, and we're stupid to impose conditions when there are already NATO countries in Russia's boarders.
In fact, maybe if Russia didn't constantly rattle their sabre throughout the cold war, then NATO wouldn't even be a thing.
It works more than one way, and the USA not doing anything/ turning the other cheek globally when a country decides to be a dick would not be an experiment I'd like to be part of.
(I'm not saying the USA are perfect, but this guy seems like the UK academics who wring their hands over the British empire constantly).
For instance, I don't see why Ukraine should be sentenced to a developing world level of economy just because Russia is scarred it's citizens might see a better alternative.
Russia shouldn't get to decide what Ukraine decide, and we're stupid to impose conditions when there are already NATO countries in Russia's boarders.
In fact, maybe if Russia didn't constantly rattle their sabre throughout the cold war, then NATO wouldn't even be a thing.
It works more than one way, and the USA not doing anything/ turning the other cheek globally when a country decides to be a dick would not be an experiment I'd like to be part of.
(I'm not saying the USA are perfect, but this guy seems like the UK academics who wring their hands over the British empire constantly).
It's quite telling that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, most of the former Eastern Block countries have sought closer ties with the West than with Russia. Is that the fault of the US or Russia?
Almost as many Jews live in the US as they do in Israel. Plus they've been established there for far longer and significantly out number the Muslim population, so of course they will hold more influence and sway decision making. Should Arab countries be blamed for stoking the situation rather than trying to work with both sides and moderate the Palestinian extremists?
Again in the far east, the military presence is based around long term defensive packs (eg. Japan post WW2) and is done in co-operation with it's allies. Tariffs on Chinese goods is unsurprising and arguably logical given how closed the Chinese market/economy is to Western companies.
America is by no means perfect, and of course operates on the basis of self-interest, but that doesn't inherently make it the bad guy and the one to blame.
If it was to withdraw from these areas then all it would do is open up a power vacuum for another country/group to take hold.
Almost as many Jews live in the US as they do in Israel. Plus they've been established there for far longer and significantly out number the Muslim population, so of course they will hold more influence and sway decision making. Should Arab countries be blamed for stoking the situation rather than trying to work with both sides and moderate the Palestinian extremists?
Again in the far east, the military presence is based around long term defensive packs (eg. Japan post WW2) and is done in co-operation with it's allies. Tariffs on Chinese goods is unsurprising and arguably logical given how closed the Chinese market/economy is to Western companies.
America is by no means perfect, and of course operates on the basis of self-interest, but that doesn't inherently make it the bad guy and the one to blame.
If it was to withdraw from these areas then all it would do is open up a power vacuum for another country/group to take hold.
Bill said:
Hill92 said:
Looking at the wikipedia page on him, he comes across as a shill for China and Russia.
Which is obvious from the first expanding NATO nonsense.I don't know how Putin sleeps at night. I hope he is haunted at night by the faces and rotted corpses of the hundreds of thousands of people whose blood is on his hands. Putin is the only person who could stop the killing tomorrow if he wanted. It's absolutely infuriating how people make excuses for him.
Edited by AlexC1981 on Wednesday 15th January 23:04
Skeptisk said:
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNeKsBHSA/
Analysis from Jeffrey Sachs on how the US is to blame for the current war in Ukraine, the Middle East and tension with China.
On Ukraine it is broken promises about not expanding NATO onto Russia’s borders, assistance in overthrowing regime in 2014 and failure to negotiate a diplomatic solution.
In the ME supporting Israel in attacking, undermining and destabilising all the countries supporting the Palestinians (as well as protecting Israel from sanctions and the UN).
In the far east by their military presence, tarrifs against China, banning of technology, pushing US companies to disengage.
An interesting and very different analysis to the one normally presented by US media (and by extension British media).
wAnalysis from Jeffrey Sachs on how the US is to blame for the current war in Ukraine, the Middle East and tension with China.
On Ukraine it is broken promises about not expanding NATO onto Russia’s borders, assistance in overthrowing regime in 2014 and failure to negotiate a diplomatic solution.
In the ME supporting Israel in attacking, undermining and destabilising all the countries supporting the Palestinians (as well as protecting Israel from sanctions and the UN).
In the far east by their military presence, tarrifs against China, banning of technology, pushing US companies to disengage.
An interesting and very different analysis to the one normally presented by US media (and by extension British media).
ky contrarian hawking books; if his views on everything else are as simplistic as they are about the russia-ukraine war he's as good value as Mearsheimer.Ian Geary said:
I guess everyone is entitled to an opinion.
For instance, I don't see why Ukraine should be sentenced to a developing world level of economy just because Russia is scarred it's citizens might see a better alternative.
Russia shouldn't get to decide what Ukraine decide, and we're stupid to impose conditions when there are already NATO countries in Russia's boarders.
In fact, maybe if Russia didn't constantly rattle their sabre throughout the cold war, then NATO wouldn't even be a thing.
It works more than one way, and the USA not doing anything/ turning the other cheek globally when a country decides to be a dick would not be an experiment I'd like to be part of.
(I'm not saying the USA are perfect, but this guy seems like the UK academics who wring their hands over the British empire constantly).
Agreed. If Stalin was not such a total and utter For instance, I don't see why Ukraine should be sentenced to a developing world level of economy just because Russia is scarred it's citizens might see a better alternative.
Russia shouldn't get to decide what Ukraine decide, and we're stupid to impose conditions when there are already NATO countries in Russia's boarders.
In fact, maybe if Russia didn't constantly rattle their sabre throughout the cold war, then NATO wouldn't even be a thing.
It works more than one way, and the USA not doing anything/ turning the other cheek globally when a country decides to be a dick would not be an experiment I'd like to be part of.
(I'm not saying the USA are perfect, but this guy seems like the UK academics who wring their hands over the British empire constantly).
, the post WW2 world could have been a much better place.Russia want to be top dog in the world, they want to be the US, but they aren’t good enough. Mix that in with their weird psyche you can see how we get here. Russia could have been great using soft power, influence and fostering relationships but no, revert to type. It’s always been misery, hardship, killing, torture and hatred.
Middle east was a st show way before the US existed to stick their oar in.
Middle east was a s
t show way before the US existed to stick their oar in.Murph7355 said:
J4CKO said:
...
Middle east was a st show way before the US existed to stick their oar in.
At our hands in no small part.Middle east was a s
t show way before the US existed to stick their oar in.Then the US said "hold my beer".
Regarding Jeffrey Sachs and John Mearsheimer, they do a great job explaining situations in the world. Always a good listen.
As for the US, they can be held responsible for huge amount of trouble in the world. From undermining governments, invading countries, fighting proxy wars, funding various groups to overthrow governments, etc, etc. Helped in many cases by us. Hegemony is the only thing that the US seem to understand.
“Make America great again” Let’s invade Panama, Canada and Greenland! That is the way the US government and its backers think. They’re not interested in anyone else.
As for the Russians and their invasion of Ukraine. NATO was formed at the end of the second world war when Russia was an ally. Many countries were brought in under the umbrella and it was only at the fall of the USSR that the US assured Russia that they would not expand NATO 1 inch further Eastwards , blatant lies. Slowly NATO edged forwards towards Russia until we were in the situation when the talk was of bringing Ukraine into NATO. if Russia wanted to put military bases with missile capabilities in Mexico or Canada, do you think there would be any chance of America allowing this, of course not!
There are a huge amount of historic documentaries on YouTube if anyone wants to look up any of this information which not only clarifies the situation at the moment but is always a good educational as well as entertaining listen. Do yourselves a favour guys, do not rely on Western press and news to give you an honest opinion of what is happening. The truth is never fully reported whether it be what is happening abroad or who is responsible for stabbing in the UK and what their motives were.
phazed said:
Murph7355 said:
J4CKO said:
...
Middle east was a st show way before the US existed to stick their oar in.
At our hands in no small part.Middle east was a s
t show way before the US existed to stick their oar in.Then the US said "hold my beer".
Regarding Jeffrey Sachs and John Mearsheimer, they do a great job explaining situations in the world. Always a good listen.
As for the US, they can be held responsible for huge amount of trouble in the world. From undermining governments, invading countries, fighting proxy wars, funding various groups to overthrow governments, etc, etc. Helped in many cases by us. Hegemony is the only thing that the US seem to understand.
“Make America great again” Let’s invade Panama, Canada and Greenland! That is the way the US government and its backers think. They’re not interested in anyone else.
As for the Russians and their invasion of Ukraine. NATO was formed at the end of the second world war when Russia was an ally. Many countries were brought in under the umbrella and it was only at the fall of the USSR that the US assured Russia that they would not expand NATO 1 inch further Eastwards , blatant lies. Slowly NATO edged forwards towards Russia until we were in the situation when the talk was of bringing Ukraine into NATO. if Russia wanted to put military bases with missile capabilities in Mexico or Canada, do you think there would be any chance of America allowing this, of course not!
There are a huge amount of historic documentaries on YouTube if anyone wants to look up any of this information which not only clarifies the situation at the moment but is always a good educational as well as entertaining listen. Do yourselves a favour guys, do not rely on Western press and news to give you an honest opinion of what is happening. The truth is never fully reported whether it be what is happening abroad or who is responsible for stabbing in the UK and what their motives were.
Bill said:
Hill92 said:
Looking at the wikipedia page on him, he comes across as a shill for China and Russia.
Which is obvious from the first expanding NATO nonsense.I find the whole "Putin is innocent, it's all NATOs fault" shtick to be particularly hilarious as Finland fiercely maintained their neutrality for decades to avoid angering Russia but after the "innocent" special military operation in Ukraine, couldn't fill out the NATO application form fast enough.
Digga said:
Hang on a second though, if we're talking about the Middle East, pre WW2, we should not forget to dump a decent slurry tanker of blame onto France, Germany and Turkey also. Read Seven Pillars of Wisdom for details.
Not to mention Russia being an enthusiastic exporter of misery from the "great game" era right up to now.There is a difference between 'to blame' and 'could, with hindsight, have created a better outcome by acting differently'.
There is a reasonable argument that the West missed an opportunity to create a better relationship with Russia after the collapse of communism. That does not in any way change the fact that Putin and his cronies are to blame for their war, and for every death, Ukranian , Russian, or other.
There is a reasonable argument that the West missed an opportunity to create a better relationship with Russia after the collapse of communism. That does not in any way change the fact that Putin and his cronies are to blame for their war, and for every death, Ukranian , Russian, or other.
His bio is interesting reading, to an extent.
If there's a book of contrarian geopolitical opinions that have aged likely milk, he could have a chapter to himself (or maybe share it Mearscheimer, they're both deserving but there's too much crossover to give each their own.)
There's an additional irony in that Sachs was a proponent of shock capitalism in the post-Soviet world - something we can genuinely blame, at least in part, for the rise of Putin and Russian revanchism.
If there's a book of contrarian geopolitical opinions that have aged likely milk, he could have a chapter to himself (or maybe share it Mearscheimer, they're both deserving but there's too much crossover to give each their own.)
There's an additional irony in that Sachs was a proponent of shock capitalism in the post-Soviet world - something we can genuinely blame, at least in part, for the rise of Putin and Russian revanchism.
AmyRichardson said:
His bio is interesting reading, to an extent.
If there's a book of contrarian geopolitical opinions that have aged likely milk, he could have a chapter to himself (or maybe share it Mearscheimer, they're both deserving but there's too much crossover to give each their own.)
There's an additional irony in that Sachs was a proponent of shock capitalism in the post-Soviet world - something we can genuinely blame, at least in part, for the rise of Putin and Russian revanchism.
"Shock" suggests there was a plan, "gonzo" would be a more appropriate description or perhaps "lord of the flies". In the youth vernacular Russia rawdogged capitalism, or perhaps capitalism rawdogged Russia.If there's a book of contrarian geopolitical opinions that have aged likely milk, he could have a chapter to himself (or maybe share it Mearscheimer, they're both deserving but there's too much crossover to give each their own.)
There's an additional irony in that Sachs was a proponent of shock capitalism in the post-Soviet world - something we can genuinely blame, at least in part, for the rise of Putin and Russian revanchism.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff