Strategic Talks: The War in Ukraine - Military-Strategic Implications 

PETER ZEIHAN. Everyone interested in geopolitics, and Russia at the moment should watch PETER ZEIHAN.

Fan vad intressant! Mer av detta

Russia started Syrian style siege war on Ukrainian cities on day 2, thus, subjecting citizens to indiscriminate attack. If this is the new way 'modern' war is to be fought from the onset, then civilians have no incentive not to take up arms and organize immediately.

Great discussion enjoyed watching, I hope escalation later won't go any further and both countries can find some sort of agreement to stop active warfare. Better fight with diplomatic means not with guns. As we can see history is happening in front of our eyes, and the future/destiny is changing

I do not look forward to hearing the term "urbicide" in upcoming conflicts, infrastructure spending, and quarterly statements....

평화를 기원합니다🙏

How far these people are from a real understanding of the situation! And the reality is that it is impossible to achieve peace if the West ignores Russia's interests. Everything these people say proves that they want to drive Russia into a corner. They want to put Russia in the position that Ukraine is in now. But if Ukraine, cornered, has demonstrated a high will to resist, then what will Russia show? Russia will show an order of magnitude more powerful resistance, which the West will not overcome.

Poor audio quality.

26:00 yes of course women most effected by war.

If I was in that room I´d leave at the first sentence. Such a brilliant mind and if I close my eyes im listening to SUN TZU... Jesus and Mary Chain! This guy won all the wars when they took the looney vest...

Check out Scott Ritter. Watching this was mostly wasted time.

Lots of blah blah blah but no fundamental statements, what an unnecessary event!

Is russian going invade sweden

Sweden not in nato

Putin was not secretive about his dreams and how upset he was that the Soviet empire dissolved. If I were the US president or one of the EU leaders, I would make sure all of my submarines with nuclear missiles were at sea all the time possible, given maintenance and resupply needs. Only deterrence may avoid the Russians resorting eventually to nuclear weapons to try to conquer Poland, etc. In particular, we must give Ukraine hundreds of the newly developed, long range antiship missiles that can coordinate attacks and thereby attack Russian ships from different directions at once. If Russia's navy is sunk by Ukraine, we can supply Ukraine freely and cut off Russia's access to shipping and to transportation from its critical, Black Sea ports. We have one opportunity to stop Russia right now; we may not have another later. In another video, Peter Zeihan apparently predicts that next year will be when the Boomers pull out of the markets and stocks markets go whoosh. While the economy may delay some retirements, I suspect he is right except for stocks of certain critical products which will soon be even more scarce. Millenials reportedly are not having kids. "5 reasons more millennials are choosing not to have children" and "The millennial baby boom probably isn't going to happen" in Business Insider. I sure hope that those reports are wrong for the future of the US, but suspect they are right. To supplement the lazy, less than fertile Millenials (just kidding), we should look at the Ukrainian refugees, with children, who have been raised in a better K through 12 educational system than ours, as a god-sent opportunity, open wide our doors, and welcome them as immigrants. See "8 Facts About Education in Ukraine" in Borgen Project.

So if you cannot exclude the use of the nuclear weapon as an option in Putin's head how good idea is to continue arming and firing up Ukranians in their unrealistic expectations? This does not look to me as a really wise thing to do if you are dealing with nuclear power at your border. Instead, how about looking for means to stop the war, by supporting Ukranians in the same time, but by not creating unrealistic expectations either. I mean am utterly disappointed with the level of "discussion". All single-minded. Apart from the usual stuff you can pick up anywhere in legacy media today, there was not even a limited attempt to discuss the pretext used by Russia to invade? NATO expansion and nuclear threat from Ukrainian territory as a NATO member, not to mention far-right and Russian minority position in Ukraine. Even if you find this argument mere propaganda, it is up for discussion, a relevant subject matter when you think about options you have and how far the Russian military is ready or not to go in this war. So trying to portray Russians as irrational or otherwise having their own rationality what kind of PhD scientist and expert in Russian affairs you really are. I mean bring the Russian perspective on the war and discuss it for science's sake. Indeed a lot of elephants in the room, discussing the state of moral of population or urbicide without taking in to account role of Azov in the state's defense and military structure and their (alleged) tactics to use civilians and prevent their evacuation from the battlefield, (alleged) use of civilian infrastructure in the city with large Russian speaking population., etc. For more critical views I recommend All-INN podcast 4 billionaires from California without skin in the game, discussing much more critically what West should do. As one of the mentioned biggest problems we have in the West is a lot of people with university degrees who are plain dummies. If people like these advise US and European governments, brace for the worse.

Where is the 50% of the perspective? The ukraine-russian ppl... This is only of nato garbish.

Russia took over 40% of ukraine in matter of 25 days...thts fhe size of the UK entirely

Beta tester od roku 2016 oceňujem,,