Niall Ferguson rebuts John Mearsheimer: Don't Underestimate the China-Russia-Iran Axis

[@CISAus]

What should the USA do about Russia, China and Iran?

[@INDIGOBLUE555]

@@CISAus What the US would "like to do" ?!! As for my understanding at the Pentagon they would be glad to set up a bipolar scenario with Russian Federation as a strategic partner. Never say never 🇺🇸🌐🇷🇺

[@bertilhaggman7937]

@@INDIGOBLUE555 25:43 😊😊❤q😊q😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊q

[@SI-qp7cm]

Gods you guys are in a bubble. NATO just got its butt handed to them after a full capability frontal attack. Land, Sea, Air and economic. Russia is stronger than before and NATO doctrine proven to be inadequate. Face facts, the West cannot maintain or succeed in any military conflict . We can barely figure out our gender. Our strength is not in military , to kid ourselves is criminal

[@utility00]

@@SI-qp7cm What PC game is this? Was the graphics good?

[@nimanthanadunge4549]

accept multipolarity and focus on their own peoples interests first. no ones gone come for their head. lets put an end to fear mongering please.

[@SuperKripke]

Yikes, the comments aren't buying what Niall Ferguson is selling. A huge step down from John Mearsheimer.

[@888nicklim]

Tom described him as an intellectual? More like a hired mouthpiece. What a waste of my time.

[@risumotus]

Yes, i think so too. And his talk is very boring.

[@ansa336]

Hear! Hear! A renowned Historian who forget that Russian main naval (Savastopol) base is in Cremea, the Russian part of Ukraine; or the 'one China' official policy of the US.

[@elbarca223]

Well said. Niall Ferguson is indeed a hired mouthpiece.

[@Davidbeattiification]

Obscene to put a cheap shill like Ferguson up against a serious academic like Mearsheimer.

[@ciprynus]

With Niall Ferguson is not about what he thinks, it is about who pays his bills

[@disdoncable]

Who pays his bills?

[@naeemdollie6836]

@@disdoncable The hungry hippos eating in the background.

[@kirstinstrand6292]

@@disdoncable Anyone who will hire him for his mouth.

[@bola0909]

Appears to be a common factor applies almost universaly this days.

[@elbarca223]

Niall Ferguson is misinterpreting the situation.

[@polycarp9897]

This is extremely disappointing. I came expecting to hear a coherent refutation of Mearsheimer's argument about how balance of power politics led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. What I heard was the usual neocon claptrap of "US is good and anyone who challenges US interests is part of the axis of evil", and "Putin is an irrational madman who invaded Ukraine for not reason at all". These are the childish arguments. Mr. Nial Ferguson, here's how to rebut Mearsheimer: 1. State what his central claim is 2. Explain why it is wrong 3. Provide an alternative explanation with concrete illustrations Maybe the title of the video was written for Click-bait purposes. The talk is so underwhelming it is embarrassing.

[@peterhobday]

Ferguson did. Biden showed weakness in pulling out of Afghanistan and Putin took advantage in Europe. NATO advancing in Europe would be a deterrent. Trump concurs.

[@someyoutuber99]

Agreed. What a shocker. This guy is an entertainer not a political or geopolitical analyst.

[@Blech319]

He is also a Rothschild minion. Seriously.

[@stanleyfernandes2504]

Couldn't agree more.

[@lieshtmeiser5542]

"Maybe the title of the video was written for Click-bait purposes." You seem to get it by the end of your comment...haha.

[@robertomanca9700]

From the comments it seems watching this video would be a waste of 42 odd minutes. I know Meirsheimer's argument and it's very hard to refute. But I wanted to watch this to hear other bells too and keep myself openminded. Yet, it seems this is not a counter argument and it's below an acceptable level of seriousness.

[@rageburst]

I went through the 40 min, and it's like listening to a bunch of statements without any cohesion of relevance to each other. I was hoping to have an actual counter-argument, but I couldn't even get a gist of what he is even trying to communicate.

[@voiceofreason6515]

It all comes down to if you support the West or not. You and most of the commenters clearly prefer China and Russia. Yes those bastions of freedom.

[@VaughanMcCue]

Who are the two best challengers to Meirsheimer's arguments?

[@rageburst]

@@VaughanMcCue Personally, those that argue that economic cooperation and nuclear deterrence can transcend the need for balancing against one another. However, this doesn't solve what is effectively the Prisonner's dilemma. If one nation-state decides to not play along, another state's survival will be put at risk. Nuclear deterrence is good at making everyone sober, but it does not guarantee that it wouldn't be used especially in situations where the conditions for peace are not acceptable. Mearsheimer's preferred grand strategy is Offshore balancing and it's well worth looking into. It's a step above isolationism and you can use America's decision to help in both World Wars as an example of when to use military force, and leave once the regional forces can maintain the balance of power themselves. Otherwise, I think you have to go out of the box to go against the dictates of his theory and to fundamentally change at least one of the underlying assumptions of realist theory. Example, if we transform our world to become hierarchic somehow (instead of anarchic), nation-states wouldn't compete with each other. Such an event would be like aliens inviting us to join the Star Trek Federation.

[@alirezafaryar3476]

Complaining why countries don't spend more on military! What did he say to debut John Mearsheimer argument? It seemed more like a case made for the military industries.

[@Vicky-Blue]

I came to see John. What a waste of my time.

[@BiggusDiggusable]

Didn't you read the title?

[@retrocool]

I tried, I really did. But there's only so much glib neoliberal claptrap one man can take.

[@VirginiaKa-h4h]

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

[@TheWhitehiker]

John?

[@JonWilde2105]

Yup, I got so far I thought come on, just power through. But the smug stupidity is intolerable.

[@Llewellyn2844]

Ferguson is nothing but a smug, supercilious twat.

[@aftdel]

He’s a phenomenal writer and incredibly smart. But unfortunately he has gone full neocon.

[@fronabulax63]

He should argue directly with Mearsheimer . He's wrong imo. And he's a british bigmouth with the typical british phantom pain of a former imperialist.😅

[@TheWhitehiker]

Please!

[@olgaltey3278]

It is great idea!! We should ask Tom organise this. Even zoom I hope you saw John Myershimer had stream with Piers Morgan? If not you must.

[@BiggusDiggusable]

@@fronabulax63 You should be very careful talking like that about a Scot.

[@stirlingmoss9637]

He certainly is either in denial of USA involvement in Ukraine, trying to expand NATO or in ignorance, plus the EU also grabbing oil and gas deals from the Russians, or, he is just ignorant of the above which would be hugely naive of him or knowing it and it not fitting his agenda or it seeming too conspiracy theory even though it's true which might cause problems with the CIA who caused the Russian response. That asside, his race and the former British Empire have nothing to do with him being wrong in his analysis and synthesis as presented.

[@dusanpavlovic8580]

How is this a rebuttal of Mearsheimer? The basic premise and implicit assumption of Mearsheimer’s theory is that resources, even for great powers like the U.S., are scarce. “Deterrence depends on military readiness.” Well, that’s precisely the point. The U.S. is not prepared to wage several wars independently. Mearsheimer argues that it should choose only one.

[@typon1]

Niall Ferguson is just a weak intellect. I am sorry but he's just not bright enough to be giving talks on geopolitics.

[@sahrbockarie9710]

Australia 🇦🇺 should focus on economic growth, trade cooperation with our neighbours, and good governance. We are not interested in excessive militarism.

[@gilligan87]

Define "excessive"

[@paulbestwick2426]

​@@gilligan87I think he means anything above minimal is excessive

[@gilligan87]

@@paulbestwick2426 then he likely doesn't understand the position his country is in

[@brandon-hh7jf]

But US/UK need militarism to preserve their anglo-saxon empire. They try to self-interestedly make the case that if their empire goes down so do we......which is not true.

[@mirkovic]

Australia would need to grow a pair… something that as a nation we seem to be unable or unwilling to do…

[@hdaniel2100]

Very disappointing. The intellectual level is embarrassing.

[@brandon-hh7jf]

Yes, nothing but WEF talking points and inverted truths shows Ferguson is merely an apologist for a post colonial order under threat.

[@voskoff7]

This guy is a mouth peace for the forever war of the neocons but with sprinkles on top

[@donaldseekins6516]

BUT Taiwan is a part of China. Its status as such has been internationally recognized. So Beijing's actions toward the island is not aggression against a foreign state but an attempt to complete China's reunification.

[@teoengchin]

The stand-up comedian they hired to entertain their dinner guests wasn't very funny

[@zubinix]

The Axis of Evil invaded and killed over 1 million people in Iraq. We are talking about the same countries right?

[@Psykologisss]

It is very difficult to identify arguments in Nialls speech here. Fragmented without real substance.

[@lastfirst6626]

Russia ended its empire peaceably and sought amicable relations with its old adversary. We gave them the Chicago Boys and threw them an anchor. Didn't mention the Minsk Agreements' Sounded like he gave up his Scottish accent for an Oxford British one. Also gave up any independence of mind.

[@aleinstein3223]

Drink your vodka comrade

[@awf6554]

"Russia ended its empire" 🤣 How on earth do you think Russians are ruling territory on the Pacific Ocean?

[@retrocool]

@@awf6554 because it's in Russia?

[@awf6554]

@retrocool In "Russia", populated by Chinese. But definitely not part of an Empire. 🙄 How much of the map of "Russia" is made up of subject states? But of course, Russia peaceably gave up its Empire 🤣

[@stirlingmoss9637]

You were talking sense until you became a racialist and class snob which undermined your argument.

[@thomasfarrow7053]

*China is the largest trading partner of 140 countries [there is only 193 on the planet] - and cannot afford, nor will tolerate a blockade in the South China Sea by the West. The U.S. has some 750 military bases world-wide, and over 40 within a stone's throw of the Chinese homeland. As China out produces the U.S. manufacturing by a factor of 4 - U.S. hegemony will be challenged - just as America overcame British hegemony before it. China's history is at least 2200 years old, it is in no rush - that's an illusion created by Western politicians.*

[@TheHerrUlf]

They have no oil, moron

[@stirlingmoss9637]

There ARE only x number of partners....get the grammar right at least

[@stirlingmoss9637]

The USA is a Cuckoo on the world stage which is a place it has never understood or had no interest in understanding. The USA was envious of the functioning British Empire and undermined it even as it negotiated with its colonies for independence. The world has been at war ever since. The USA is noones friend.

[@SethManex]

This is childish at best…a lot of name calling. No coherent argument against Mearsheimer’s position.

[@no_humbug1535]

Cringingly bumptious, so pleased with himself, dangerous, celebrity historian Ferguson!

[@stirlingmoss9637]

Try some facts darling or just go back to Hello Magazine.

[@krischanlive]

This man is a propagandist. Just horrible.

[@zactianne6331]

I'm surprised that someone so intellectual can be so clueless about the the global political evolution that's happening in the Near East and Far East, or does he just know which side his bread gets buttered on.

[@moonlitsky5744]

He says Hezbollah fires missiles to kill many Israelis, leaving out that israel killed 2,000 Lebanese civilians in a few weeks. Meirshaehmaer doesn’t do that. He doesn’t mock or belittle, he explains why the parties do what they do.

[@arthurhughes8659]

Prof Mearsheimer doesn't have to read his presentation! He knows what he's talking about... unlike Niall Ferguson who is just a pompous talking head.

[@WhoIsWhatIDK]

This was awful. I was hoping to hear something that might challenge my thoughts and instead I got this….

[@darrellbryant1018]

I'm glad I read the comments before watching the whole video. 7 mins in, I'm out. ✌️

[@maq6144]

I made 11 mins 40 seconds

[@Avigkit]

He cites bill burns on China, but ignores bill burns “nyet means nyet” position re nato expansion

[@DrVictorVasconcelos]

No, he outright agrees that Russia's stance is reasonable given how NATO systematically destroys its enemies. He thinks Putin is right to be concerned based on accounts of former US diplomats that the US intends to slice Russia in ethnic lines to dismantle its military power.

[@DrVictorVasconcelos]

And that is because he thinks Russia is closer to Western values than it is to Eastern values and would side with the US against China (if they are well treated) should the need arise. So he thinks their military power is best used that way rather than extinguished.

[@DrVictorVasconcelos]

My other comment was deleted for no discernible reason

[@seaside66]

My comment was deleted as well.

[@lieshtmeiser5542]

@@DrVictorVasconcelos "...he thinks Russia is closer to Western values than it is to Eastern values and would side with the US against China..." Russia is not close to Western values. It is essentially a personality dictatorship like Saddam's Iraq. The idea that the USA today would support Putin against PRC is absurd. PRC is not a Nazi / Imperial Japan level threat (at least not yet), but Putin is. The only thing that Putin has done is cement enlargement of NATO and remind the world why its good that such a thing as NATO exists. The war in ukraine makes it more likely that there will be a EU defense force.

[@zak992]

God help us if oxford, harvard and stanford can produce such a lightweight neocon, had to stop half way through, the man aint got a clue how the world works

[@marquardtfrickert3939]

This guy is so pro Israel.... I think he's almost like a CIA spokesperson to be honest lol

[@kobathedread9649]

As if Ukraine is a democracy- funny stuff.

[@easwaransanthakumar297]

This guy is Churchillian historian. Seeing every thing through anglo saxon lens.

[@theH0UNDSofD00M]

Have you built any sewers lately?

[@donaldseekins6516]

Here is yet another word we should banish from the English language: "Churchillian."

[@garymcnutt]

he'a an embarrassment to Ibrox, Glasgow and Scotland.

[@stirlingmoss9637]

What lens do you view the world through, Bubba?

[@easwaransanthakumar297]

@stirlingmoss9637 it's called Independent lens.

[@AlanCzajkowski]

Niall Ferguson claiming that USA is defending democracy in Ukraine (one of the most politically corrupt nations in Europe) and Israel (where the government has declared the nation to be exclusively a Jewish state, effectively second-classing anybody non-Jewish) ... is pure comedy

[@stevebashir9330]

This argument is weak and contrived. It's not realistic. Mearsheimer's argument is much more realistic.

[@ahmmustafakamal696]

It’s very pathetic to bring a comedian to rebut someone as brilliant as John Mearshimer.

[@donrayjay]

Remember this guy argued the Iraq war was a good idea - tells you all you need to know. His only good book was his first book, The Pity of War, that argued the First World War was unnecessary. Every book after that has been pro every US war of aggression and apologetic for British and US colonialism

[@786Plotinus]

CIS- invite Mearsheimer on to respond to these rebut Ferguson.

[@aleinstein3223]

Mearsheimer is a Russian hack. Bought and paid for. Not one thought based on fact

[@TommyAlpha-gg3ig]

4:16 Ferguson says about Henry Kissinger : Why did Henry Kissinger once say, "To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal"? So Australia has a choice or two, go BRICS .

[@lastfirst6626]

The dinner should have been hotdogs and beans to match the quality of his talk.

[@zak992]

Agreed, such a lightweight

[@kennethkong5484]

Spot on

[@thewestofpecos9096]

True 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@afshinshahzamani2297]

Just hotdogs. Beans would have been unnecessary given the excessive levels of pompous flatulence emanating from the podium.

[@moonlitsky5744]

Harvard and Stanford don’t mean much after this

[@Moliere1000]

Still not as low as Princeton. Hard to believe.

[@panicbutton4380]

John Mearsheimer would eat this guy for breakfast in a live debate.

[@peterabild1123]

It’s strange that some of these experts always must insist that the other expert is completely wrong. To say that NATO expansion has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine while not only Mearsheimer but also Burns , Merkel and Sarkosy all said already in 2008 that Russia would see it as declaration of war. Sure Putin also has imperialism on his mind and sure the withdrawal from Afghanistan encouraged Putin and sure some people in Ukraine wanted to join EU but not NATO. Many reasons combined caused the war but for sure the NATO expansion was the main reason. Furthermore to blame the Democratic Party for everything seems like election propaganda.

[@cryptohodler824]

Its about history, Great Britain wants Sevastopol since 1850, Russia will never allow Georgia, Ucraine to enter NATO, it can not happen, Russia will fight to bitter end in this aspects. Even nuclear war is on the table, and it has nothing with Putin.

[@roryg94]

Very weak speech, peppered with pathetic impersonations, typical British colonial sarcasm, and innuendos about how there's been no order in the Middle East since we and the French left. As the Waterboys famously sang "Old England is dying". Maybe you will get your bagpiper, at the funeral.

[@denisdaly1708]

The Waterboys.. I'm impressed with your taste.

[@КлимТаин]

"Ukrain is bargain. They do the fighting. They do the dying"- Nial Ferguson

[@pete1853]

"That's Putin's line!" - Talking about Meansheimer pointing out that NATO expansion on Russia's border is seen as an existential threat by Russia. But it's obviously true. His argument is that recognizing that expanding your nuclear-armed military alliance up to your nuclear-armed your nuclear-armed adversary's border will be seen as enemy action and be met with force is appeasement.

[@Myanmartiger921]

MARSHIEMER is wrong on everything from israel weakness to russia will not invade ukraine

[@nachnamevorhanden3335]

How is this a threat? The United States have a common border with russia. We have to exclude alaska from nato the we will all be safe.

[@Yahyaliye]

It’s also Bill Burr’s line in the memo he sent when Russian ambassador -you know Bill Burr being the man he said he holds in high regard…..the posh accent doesn’t hide the fact that he’s talking utter bullshit

[@BiggusDiggusable]

I don't think it's obviously true at all. The arguments for Russian imperialism is at least a strong. Putin has repeatedly made it clear that he doesn't believe Ukraine is a real country or that its people have a real identity. Of course it could be some mix of these two.

[@retrocool]

@@BiggusDiggusable "P has repeatedly made it clear..." this is not true and you should read his actual speeches rather than dishonest western media interpretations

[@street_struggle7]

How can you still talk about what happened to Israel and not what Israel has done over the past 20 years? This is a clear mental inaccuracy. It weakens the entire speech. Great speaker but the ideas are just weak and cherry picked

[@w.a.victorlipien6348]

Hi Niaĺl, For you is like religion. Your persistent denial that NATO expansion is the primely reason for the war is like putting your head in the sand but I do understand this. Is like trying to convert Protestant to Catholicism or vice versa. Totally frutile..

[@nachnamevorhanden3335]

nah nobody cared when the polish people decided that they dont want to be annexed by russia anymore. Nobody complained with the czech people, with the east germans, with the slovaks and the hungarians. Even the baltica were all free to join EU and NATO. Free nations made free decisions, but with ukraine it is different? why? The US have a direct borderr with russia. How come this never was a problem?

[@JonWilde2105]

@@nachnamevorhanden3335It was always a problem for Russia. Everyone in NATO understood NATO expansion was extremely provocative, but they knew Russia was too weak between 1997 and 2008. Now Russia has recovered its strength, and the US has stupidly tied its prestige to the defence of countries whose foreign policy is best summarised as “ start a war with Russia”

[@giannimotta5823]

Center for not-so-independed studies

[@maq6144]

No thats not fair. I think its good to get the other view, even if it is nonsense. The CIS were right to give this wrongheaded man a platform.

[@kennethkong5484]

Very shallow, and trying to be funny.. not worth continuing viewing

[@lambchop3805]

If I had to explain what “wrong and delusional” means I’ll just show this video. Dear Lord not a single argument makes sense.

[@SergioNavasDigital]

I really wanted to see a refutation, but when he says the US is "protecting the security of democracies in Eastern Europe and the Middle East" I can't just follow it any more...

[@GlobalDrifter1000]

This chap is an embarrassment to the USA

[@garymcnutt]

Embarrassment to Glasgow as well.

[@thomasfarrow7053]

*He cites Bill Burns on China, but neglects to mention back in 2008 as Ambassador to Russia in a letter [made public by Wikileaks] warned the Bush/Cheney admin that Russia would view further eastward NATO expansion, especially the Ukraine, as a potential military threat.*

[@thewestofpecos9096]

This guy is trying so hard to sound cool and exciting...what a horrible mouthpiece for the western's condescending propaganda 🤮

[@joevidrine]

Ferguson = Bantam weight Mearsheimer = Heavay weight

[@erikrivasrosenthal8317]

Ferguson = thoughtful Mearsheimer = rabid anti-American

[@3dEmil]

I have no reason to like or dislike sides of ongoing conflicts or different political views and curiously listen to all sides and views. I watched this video and after that KZbin continued with playing for me a video with John Mearsheimer stating his views. After watching both I found Niall Ferguson a lot less convincing than John Mearsheimer explanations of the world affairs. Basically Niall Ferguson call for actions is based on his vision that the world is comprised from good and bad guys and the good should defeat the bad on the world stage. John Mearsheimer's view do not consider the world as forces of good and bad but see the world as dominated by superpowers who fight for survival by competing or fighting with each other.

[@felipefrutoramirezsj5342]

Mearsheirmer is the realist. NATO has been warned many times before not to expand to the former Soviet Republics, but it ignored the warning. Moreover, NATO underestimated the strength of Russia militarily and economically.

[@TheWhitehiker]

Russia is weak--obviously!

[@JorgeRzezak]

Bravo CIS to bring an intellectual like Sir Nail Ferguson, a huge lip forward from a childish John Mearsheimer. I am very pleased again with CIS.

[@elmuchachoborracho]

Ferguson is one of the most important establishment-approved historians.

[@thomasfarrow7053]

Emphasis on "Establishment".

[@alkasolent]

Utter nonsense. The man lacks depth.

[@joekertesz8470]

This guy is a far cry from Mearsheimer. Not even close.

[@JMasque]

A childish historian? Or a sore loser...

[@bulentcinar4289]

Rebuttal of Mearsheimer is a little far fetched. Just delivered certain banal talking points. He just loves the sound of his own voice.

[@jk5042]

Mr. Ferguson is not in the same premier league as Mr. Mearsheimer

[@canadianmarauder1923]

I’m just a dumb mechanic and crane operator but I don’t believe mearsheimer’s theory either. Western values in general are Putin’s kryptonite and nato is simply part of that. Putin will feel threatened whether some of the former eastern bloc countries dabble with democracy or attempt to join nato. Putin likes to use the nato argument because it shifts blame to something else other than him. 1st time I listened to mearsheimer I thought how much is Russia paying him to say this?

[@voiceofreason6515]

Exactly sir. You're wise.

[@sheeftz]

There's a minor problem in your world view. Nobody undermined the Western values more than West and NATO countires themselves. If you comprehend this simple truth, and then listen to Mearsheimer again, suddenly you would think "Russia should pay him for this".

[@maq6144]

I believe John. His arguments make sense to me. And I'm just an old retired IT man. I don't buy the line from this Fergusun Guy. Anyway, it would take too many hours to argue this stuff out, so thats all I have to say. Cheers.

[@clintbird1294]

Good balanced opinion, theres always a need to cut away the biased perspective to get at the salient points of both their opinions. ( I was however disappointed in Nialls delivery which I found juvenile and jingoistic, seemingly condescending to his audience)

[@rageburst]

This view by Ferguson can't be taken seriously. It's strikingly obtuse and oversimplifying why wars happen and confuses correlation and causation. War happened in Ukraine because of NATO expansion. Russia did everything possible to avoid that war, but true neutrality wasn't in the cards for Ukraine. What I'm struck with is that Ferguson seems to talk about anything and everything without really making a point. It's like watching a movie that has multiple stories going on at the same time without having anything to do with each other.

[@marquardtfrickert3939]

Such a warmongerer... I like John Mearsheimer much better, he talks more boring, but he seems to be rational. Niall: if someone tries to talk emotionally, it's because his arguments aren't as good and he tries to sell something.

[@mahakyaseri6636]

I read his book and I am really trying hard to listen to him ti learn something. But he honestly is a mouth piece for the propaganda that has brought us to this unfortunate situation.

[@jaja3359]

Niall Ferguson is still stuck in the colonial mindset

[@dublintvcontent2023]

Fergie is actually a BLUFFER and BALONEY artist Clever PR and marketing guy but full of ignorant and pretentious delusions. Wrong about so much it is comical.

[@yp77738yp77739]

Not many people I would describe as ignorant *unts, but Ferguson definitely falls within that Venn diagram.

[@siukola1]

Now, he is a comedian! :)

[@surprisedmike]

Well, I don't completely agree with John Mearsheimer, my opinions are more in line with those of Jeffrey Sachs, but Mearsheimer is a thinker while Ferguson is more of a stooge for the U.S. foreign policy that the U.S. shall dominate all. This leads the U.S. into mistake after mistake. The war in Vietnam is a case in point and Ferguson conveniently ignores the fact that Whitlam was right and Kissinger was a war criminal - not someone to cite about anything. His claims about the axis are correct, but who created the axis Niall? Mearsheimer claims it was the foreign policy of the U.S. and he is right as there is no other reason for those countries to form an alliance. To go on about Trump's "foreign policy", as part of a discussion of Mearsheimer's point-of-view, is an intellectual fallacy known as a red herring that no so-called "intellectual" would employ. Ferguson has written some good books but he has no strategies worth listening to for the future of humanity or, for that matter, the future of the U.S.

[@thomasfarrow7053]

*I disagree with Niall - Europe was drawing closer to Russia and vice versa - the war with the Ukraine has been a boon to the U.S economy!* Agreements between Russia and Ukraine, brokered by France and Germany, known as Minsk I and Minsk II, intended to give the provinces a degree of autonomy - It was, said Putin, a “treaty on permanent neutrality and security guarantees of Ukraine,” with 18 articles and an appendix dealing with “armed forces and other things. ”Washington, London, and Brussels rejected it!" Read your damn history, Niall.*

[@salmivec]

Niall fails to address Israel’s alleged war crimes and the findings of the world’s highest court, which declared Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land illegal, confirmed its operation of an apartheid system, and the plausibility of a genocide. As usual, Niall omits key facts to support his worldview, one rooted in the dominance of the Western military-industrial complex rather than in peaceful methods like trade, tariffs, business, and investment. His ideas will hasten Western decline and do little to foster a balanced global order. He has been a mouthpiece for war mongers for years - the less attention he gets the better for everyone quite frankly.

[@yexela]

Some clown using Mearsheimer's name to attract attention to his stand-up.

[@awf6554]

Hegemonists around the world love Mearsheimer, whether from Russia, China, or the US. He justifies large power dominance over smaller neighbours, undermining human rights and the UN Charter.

[@retrocool]

Already a better argument against Mearsheimer than given in the video!

[@philstabler]

He’s a traitor.

[@sunhoushi1]

Mearsheimer, like Chomsky and Sachs, have compelling ideas that justify the term public Intellectuals. Ferguson lacks so may of their qualities that after (reluctantly) sitting through this presentation to the end, I was left feeling that my time had been wasted. Resistance beats acceptance? I don't think so. And what a - as a fellow scot - pompous, self-satisfied, self-indulgence reading of his script, that was!

[@INDIGOBLUE555]

My guess is that Russian Federation China and Iran do just share the same temporary interest which means fighting back the US dominance.That's why,as for my understanding,they try to team up.

[@lieshtmeiser5542]

By temporary you mean: as long it takes, as long as the dictators are in charge...eh? When does the marriage of convenience end?

[@INDIGOBLUE555]

@@lieshtmeiser5542 Exactly.

[@INDIGOBLUE555]

​@@lieshtmeiser5542Well my vantage point is that three first class players are there on the current scenario and I assume that the stronger one (US) will be trying to team up with the weaker of its two competitors.In full fairness I can't figure out which one between Russian Fed. and China will be the strategic partner of the US albeit my bid is on Russian Fed.Later on I'll be able to articulate my thought (working time now🙄).

[@skydragon23101979]

@@lieshtmeiser5542When American dominance is no longer an issue. Russia or Iran may then team up with America against the dominant nation then.

[@lieshtmeiser5542]

@@skydragon23101979 "Russia or Iran may then team up with America against the dominant nation then." I think if you look at the world today, the US strategy has been to be broadly allied to all the countries that dont like the 'axis of evil' countries. This isnt perfect, but it works ok. I think its a case of 'know thine enemy'. Even in the case of helping the USSR in WW2, I think if the West was truly aware of how horrific Stalin was, they probably wouldnt have supported the Soviets. Indeed in retrospect, all that aid helped the Soviets have the prestige of victory over the Nazis, and allowed Stalin into so much of Europe causing nothing but problems. We are still dealing with that legacy today.

[@seyedmhosseini5890]

I’m sorry, but Mr. Ferguson’s best moment was his voice impressions. His perspective is nothing more than regurgitated neo-con failed policy. This would have been much better as a direct debate with Mearsheimer than this simple speech with many incorrect facts.

[@ssrivastava3]

The contrast in intellectual capability, capacity of the speaker, with John Mearsheimer is so very obvious, that watching this video is a waste of time. Sorry, but that’s a fact.

[@dimarusanov6107]

So, he argues - Mearsheimer is for appeasement. Is he really?

[@michaelpetzold849]

When does deterrence become perceived as aggression or equivalent to it? When USA had nukes pointed at Russia from Turkey, Kruschev perceived it as aggression, and as an act of deterrence placed nukes in Cuba. To which Kennedy perceived it as aggression, not deterrence, which put us on the brink of WWIII. Deterrence is in the eyes of the beholder and it has to work both ways.

[@Eutohius]

I don't care much what he says, but can we discuss his oufit? The tie choice is outrageous

[@BarerRudeROC]

It's like someone ordered Chistopher Hitchens from Wish.

[@talmanwr]

Spot. On.

[@gfjhavik4114]

Minute 32:00 Ferguson quotes Bill Burns saying “Xi told PLA to be ready by 2027 to invade Taiwan.” Bill Burns continued though: ‘…but that doesn’t mean he [Xi] has decided to invade in 2027 or any other year as well’. I don’t like it when people use half-quotes to further their point. Also, and I’m probably missquoting this, but when you say “if you want peace, prepare for war” this also might apply to the Chinese. If Hawaï were to be invaded by China, America would reply too - while both countries don’t have any logical authority over those places anyway, except for geopolitical reasons. Not a big fan of this man’s whole presentation, but will keep it in mind.

[@dacorum8053]

There is world of difference between the Warsaw pact countries and the baltic states conquered by Stalin in 1940 joining Nato on the one hand and nato offering Nato membership to Ukraine and Georgia which had been part of Russia for centuries. Russia regarded those countries as not only in their backyard but in their front yard as well. Russia said Nato membership of those countries was totally unacceptable and an extremely hostile act directed to them. Russia could not have been clearer but nato ignored those objections. It was a fundamental geopolitical mistake to offer Ukraine and Georgia the prospect of Nato membership because Nato provoked the Russian invasion of ukraine when Nato refused to even discuss ukraine remaining a neutral country and in so doing Nato drove Russia into a close alliance with China. That suited China extremely well as they got unfettered access to russian gas, oil, raw materials and grain to grow their economy and also a big customer to further their aim of developing the Yuan as as alternative to the USD in foreign trade that would undermine the dominance of the USD. It was a win-win for China, all thanks to Nato screwing everything up. As regards to Georgia, do not forget that several years earlier Russia had invaded Georgia after nato membership was first mooted for Georgia. Just imagine if Nato had agreed that Ukraine and Georgia should not join nato, that nato had not interfered in the internal affairs of Ukraine and Georgia by backing pro western governments and the 2014 revolution that led to the civil war in ukraine and that instead nato should have closer relations with Russia! That would have prevented the invasion of ukraine. However Nato chose to isolate and to surround Russia whilst offering nothing but hostility to them. Nato's antagonism towards Russia even extended to backing regime change in Syria, which would have put extreme islamists in power, in order to expel the Russians from their only Mediterranean base but that failed at the cost of 400,000+ lives and 7 million refugees. It is clear Nato was intent on restarting the Cold war which we had won and for what purpose? It certainly wasn't to enhance our interests or to bring peace to Europe, was it? The complete opposite is true!

[@FuadMohamed-k7o]

Imagine what Israel did to the Palestinians when we couldn't see their crimes on our phones.

[@ericwillis777]

Mersheimer is long past his "sell by" date.

[@harriemeeuwis978]

Of course John Maersheimer isn't present or Ferguson the neocon would not be present. So no rebuttal, but rethoric.

[@MicheleBina]

Disappointing. Neil Ferguson has a consulting firm ? Who pays his fees ? Gone is his academic credibility.

[@willsims6748]

He is trapped in history and learned all the wrong lessons.

[@888YangJi]

this guy is.such a snake oil salesman, he would practically say anything at the command of his employer. I weep for humanity if he is considered to be one of the greatest historian of our time.😔

[@neildonaldson3408]

What complete poppycock.

[@jtlon1]

Mearsheimer has lost it

[@najibsameh]

His arguments are overly simplistic, rooted in a Western-privileged perspective, and fail to consider multiple viewpoints. In contrast, Mearsheimer offers a more nuanced and objective analysis.

[@pryazhnikov]

It is difficult to listen to this - he said she said bs