Thank you, gents, for another interesting chat. I always look forward to these videos. A pity I missed that you were soliciting questions - I would have asked if you guys could expand on the topic of failed states/possible future failed states that you all touched upon in a recent edition of Goodfellows. I found that such a fascinating and informative subject - we just don't hear much about it at all in the MSM.
The second question’s answers answer what is missing at the family level when answering the first question - an undisciplined mobish and uncouth, directionless, and immature loose collection of childish people believing they understand the world and who, most likely, have not experienced a dedicated leadership of a good father.
Re Russia / Ukraine - I can actually see their point that the agreements they had in late 1990s under Minsk agreements were already broken. Poland and other bordering countries were to stay neutral and act as a military buffer. They have a point in not wanting Nato forces on their border and for Ukraine not be part of Nato so there would be a buffer. Am I mistaken?
How comitted is U.S to the Nato article 5, does nato have a road map should Russia harass their neighbouring countries? Doesnt U. S alone have enough of their own domesric /local present issues.?
So grateful to have stumbled upon the Hoover Institution & this discussion! I can find nothing here to indicate "libertarianism," but I know it when I hear it. Thank you!!
I love you guys but I don't think that the Russia/Ukraine is as black and white as the panel paints it Firstly the Crimean takeover is not as simple as an imperial landgrab - Crimea has always been part of Russia until the 60s when Khrushchev gave it to the Ukraine - most Crimeans are happy being back in Russia - there was a referendum and the majority voted for Russia, The Russians are concerned about the situation in the Donbas where a large portion of the population identifies as Russian and are being given a hard time by the Ukrainian govt who are no angels by the way, Furthermore the Russians are worried about the rapid eastern expansion of NATO. EU. After all they have been invaded by European powers twice in the last 200 years - both times when Europe has been run as a single entity by a military dictators.
Great programme I wondered that nobody commented on the Nordstrom pipeline.Is not the completion of this paramount in Putins long term strategy or does he need the Ukranian oil and gas reserves as well?
Very refreshing first year's episode...love all of them. My son has send me a brilliant book from Niall...The West and the Rest..definitely a great read..thks mate.
Enjoy this show and value the opinions of people who clearly have knowledge in the world events. Strongly disagree with the continued evaluation of Putin on a mission to regain the Soviet Union. While certainly he would like to regain lost countries but his focus since coming in to power when people were starving and natural resources were being raided has been on rewarding the oligarchs by letting them keep their fortunes under the condition they help rebuild Russia from the military to the public. This has worked and Putin understands he can not go on a 1700's world mission and not chance loosing Russia all together. Ukraine is simple do not bring missiles. Russia will not allow this under risk of losing their sovereignty. The color revolutions while perhaps not completely NGO fabrication were partially logistically facilitated by the NGO's. To put this in prospective think the Cuban crisis and the amount of outrage over some fb ad's in 2016. We should do what has worked well in the 90's. Work with Russia allowing theme to make money and keeping them within the structures plus bringing back the treaties we have abandoned. This works better than sanctions and threats. Was it not better to have the IAEA in Iran 24/7? Right now we are strategically failing massively by forcing a second world economy outside the US Dollar. In particular forcing deeper alliances between China and Russia. At some point sanctioning our own allies like Germany and our advisories will destroy the dollar. We fully understood Russia would not let go of the autonomous Crimea base. Our entire Senate on foreign relations were present in Kiev in 2014. McCain had stated Putin would be removed by his military if he let Crimea's base be removed. McCain stood on the stage with the far fight protestors, that represented a minority of the protestors and promised US backing. With numerous goverment buildings captured and on fire and the violent protestors calling out over the air for squads to go do the same in the east including naming Crimea the Crimean's begged for protection. This is not an invasion by any standard. It's absurd to suggest Putin would long play telegraph the not enough build up even at 175 thousand to invade Ukraine. If Russia was to decide to take on Ukraine it would be first done Shock and awe style and through the numerous long standing ties within. The build up is that happened as Bliken, Nuland and Sullivan took back over and before Belarus and now before Kazakhstan was from Russian Intel understanding unrest was afoot. Why because it's a pattern that creates oscillation prior to taking place,. Putin has agents in all of these countries and their soul mission is to read tea leaves. Pre counter insurgency while we hope to goad Putin into violence that can be used to alienate.
16:30. Good question, John. To the Crazyman it has appeared since Maidan in 2014 that the Ukrainian Constitution was ripped up and replaced. So, who was the party to the negotiations. A bit like Taliban counting on the cash pledges to a different regime, when it got to Kabul. 2014 was not a simple change in government, as Ukrainian language laws have shown as they are unfolded. 42:20. My “thank you” list is about 15 items longer than Niall’s list. Niall gives us the 1-sigma argument. My list is about 5-sigma, much of which relates to closet Bolshevism.
