Three Decades of Bad Foreign Policy | Robert Wright & Scott Horton

[@Nonzero]

Click here to see an exclusive Overtime segment of this episode: nonzero.substack.com/p/three-decades-of-bad-foreign-policy

[@Drunkwithsuccess]

I saw that interview with Scott and Niall and it was great. Scott should not have reacted so negatively to Niall’s ad hominem attacks. Better to have acknowledged the attack and wonder out loud the lack of necessity to attack him personally and simply attack his arguments. Most people were in awe of Scott’s mastery of the facts.

[@allydea]

Yeah, unfoetunatelly that was quite the shit show, with the "do you really have to talk like a girl" comments. Niall definitely got the better of Scott in the professionalism domain. But Scott's arguments were better substantiated, of course.

[@andreselectrico]

I'm neither libertarian nor right wing, and I saw the debate too. Scott prevailed with distance. True, maybe it was too much to attack Ferguson, but Ferguson was disgraceful. He repeated all the lazy mainstream arguments, peppered with all sorts of fallacies. Scott's scholarship was impressive and all Ferguson could do was acting arrogant and disregard the facts. In fact, I'm not sure who insulted who more. I would say Ferguson was far more disrespectful.

[@cosimocub]

Niall should have walked away from the interview. Both should be ashamed

[@rudyduchau5429]

@@andreselectrico : Ferguson is bought and paid for by Viktor Pinchuk and other Ukrainian oligarchs!

[@euLIRIC]

I think both worked, Niall has turned into a complete establishment sellout for some years now and people should be made aware of that much like you would a regular charlatan

[@EWA8755]

Lessons of Empire. Power = less empathy. Absolute power = contempt.

[@StoryThyme100]

Certainly a dichotomy between the facial energy of Bob and Scott.

[@EverettNewell]

I am so happy this conversation happened. Love bob and love Scott.

[@chiddleychidds4917]

Me too ✋️

[@stephenhill545]

The millions of Ukranians fighting for the freedom you enjoy don't. Go to Kyiv and tell them it was a coup. They won't appreciate that after risking tbeir lives month over month fighting the riot squads and snipers. Horton's denial of the Ukranians own desires and the power of the people to create a new country is so unamerican, because it denies your own historical experience of fighting for your freedom against a colonial power with the help of other countries like France and the Netherlands. Unless you're saying the American Revolution was a French controlled coup of course.

[@pesez2]

Wow! Thank you both for this great interview! Mr. Horton is extremely well informed, not only about the situation in Ukraine and Russia, but also about the situation in Germany. I say this as an East German and history lover. Most people here don't know what's included in the "2+4 Vertrag" which enabled the unification of Germany, but he does. One minor thing I know is that Germany must maintain the soviet war memorials in East Germany, and it does this very carefully. This is especially noticeable in Berlin, where the largest "Sowjetisches Ehrenmal" is located in our district and even the adjacent bus station is called "Sowjetisches Ehrenmal". So if people wonder why soviet war memorials are destroyed in Poland, in the Baltic states, in Ukraine etc. but not in Germany - this contract is the reason.

[@davidzugman2166]

"Provoked" is quite an achievement. I am nearing the end of the George Bush section. It is amazingly detailed.

[@Themata]

Fascinating! Thank you

[@jessiejb4684]

It’s not just provoked through history but in the months leading to the war, it’s difficult to explain u.s. actions unless war was the desired outcome. 2021 Nato exercises in the Black Sea practicing a sea landing invasion (obviously symbolizing a threat to Crimea). The British navy purchasing property with plans for a naval base in Ukraine. Weeks before the invasion at Munich standing on stage next to zelensky our VP reiterated Ukraine will be in nato and afterwards zelensky spoke about acquiring nukes. The u.s. unwilling to negotiate and deal with Russia. Blinkin even bragged that he would not sign any agreement that the u.s. will not put missiles in Ukraine. All this and more. Does this sound like an administration doing all they can to prevent a devastating war? Why are they taking actions that literally increase Russia’s immediate motivation for war? Although I disagree with nato expansion in the 90’s, at least it wasn’t going to lead to immediate military opposition. But WTF is the excuse with Ukraine? What great benefits would Americans get from a nato Ukraine that counterbalance all of the negatives and risks, now and into the future? The death, destruction, and utterly recked relations with a nuclear armed power for generations to come. I believe they didn’t act to avoid this war simply because it would look weak if we allowed Russia to dictate nato’s open door policy and walk back bush’s 2008 declaration that Ukraine would one day join.

[@stephenhill545]

Good. I'm British, and I will now tell all those countries we invaded and colonised, that we were provoked. Hey Ireland, you provoked us by wanting to be independent. Not our fault.

[@chiddleychidds4917]

Gotta get him back on, i gotta go check some of these sources aswell but get him back!

[@chiddleychidds4917]

Loved it. Scott is good value, high energy and good value. Can't wait 2 check these footnote links, very good of him to provide that info freely. Thanks Bob.

[@sherrydionisio4306]

👍🏻Sam! Good luck with the book. Also, thanks to Bob for having humbly and quietly listened, while so much evidence was reiterated.

[@mellowEsko]

❤ Thank you for having the energy and patience to tackle this conversation 😅 ha There was a lot of information to sort through and I’m not knowledgeable enough about world politics to argue on these points, though I find it very interesting and will do my homework. I am curious to know more about who is currently regarded as a Realist ? Much love to Robert Wright for his contributions and wisdom.

[@LeftWingNationalist]

If anyone has already bought the book. Page 273. Top paragraph is the coup. Volodymyr Parasyuk

[@IliyaOsnovikov]

Volodymyr Parasyuk. He's a rare scam. Once after Maidan he was arguing with another Ukrainian politician on the Ukrainian TV talk show. After the show Parasyuk ambushed that man from behind and tried to beat him up. But when he's sudden attack was repulsed Volodymyr run down to TV station yard, kicked that man's SUV and scratched a paint all over it with a key.

[@theazov2116]

I've been watching every Scott Horton interview about the book, because it will be a while before I can buy it somewhere (I will NOT order ANYthing from Amazon.)

[@ezreality]

Good podcast... Thank you guys...

[@MrKnoxguy101]

Scott Horton knows what’s goin on..

[@romanhood4849]

this is great

[@TheCruxy]

That first frame is something

[@ollagal1]

This is so weird, but I absolutely love Bobs voice before I saw him in on vid. I listen to his podcast with I forget the other guy and I loved the voices.

[@mcnallyaar]

Solid Gold.

[@jessiejb4684]

You dare put Horton behind a paywall!

[@johns.7297]

The guest identifies government failures. Among them is rent seeking. Corporations seek governmental interventions that will yield them profits in excess of what they would get in a fully competitive market. What is more prominent? Are campaign contributions bribes or is it the shake down.

[@henrylicious]

Probably a bit of both?

[@jackshultz2024]

When we talk about the right to own property, I would be interested to know if there should be a limit to the amount of property that one individual can claim to own. The ownership of property can provide a certain amount of autonomy to the individual, but that ownership also limits the rights of others.

[@Buf-g6m]

Libertarians have dull minds, they don't seem to understand any of the inherent flaws of a exploitative for profit system, or planetary, and environmental limits.

[@henrylicious]

At this juncture, it's more concerning if BlackRock or foreign interests own property.

[@patrickashurst4535]

i wonder if Bob could look any more unenthused? lol

[@elonmusk439]

the guy's got a naturally droopy face, not his fault.

[@user-pq7jj3vs3e]

I think he got a few more gears of disinterest

[@patrickashurst4535]

@@elonmusk439that’s rude

[@stuartwray6175]

​@@user-pq7jj3vs3e he got? ... or, he's got? a few more gears? disinterest? - impartiality; lack of bias?... or, indifference; apathy?

[@stuartwray6175]

​@@user-pq7jj3vs3ea few more gears of disinterest? ...gears?; disinterest? ... you think he got?

[@SThrillz]

All this conversation about "they didn't know this and didn't know that" is ridiculous. It's not that difficult, people talk about nuance bla bla bla but all that is beside the point. NATO is a military alliance mostly led by the US, military alliance always want to expand and those who that alliance is likely to target won't want them to expand. The only reason NATO was able to reach all the way it did was because Russia is a much weaker country and that's why they kept expanding. Of course those who want NATO to expand and be able to attack Russia are going to come up with some story but at the end of the day you want to keep superpowers as far apart as possible. The Europeans are the ones who baffle me because they align their policy with US policy which makes no sense whatsoever

[@chiddleychidds4917]

This should be interesting

[@paulheydarian1281]

*Horton Hears a Coup-!!!* 🦉🦉🦉🦉🦉🦉🦉🦉🦉🦉

[@retyifourthree6929]

Scott said his debate with Niall Ferguson wasn’t his greatest performance. but he’s wrong. it was an absolutely savage beatdown!!! sure, he did get angry, but who cares? all that matters in a debate is who is making the better argument and has their facts right. and honestly, i don’t even know who had the right facts! but Scott had way more of them, with very specific pieces of evidence, and Niall sat there and said things like “have you ever even been to Ukraine bro? maybe we shouldn’t listen to you since you haven’t been there.” as if you couldn’t possibly have any credibility unless you’ve actually BEEN to a place in the flesh. we all know that’s a bunch of crap.

[@Lee-os5jq]

These two guys are going at it like some great soap opera on the international areana, like there is some profound needs of understanding: and not knowing that the only thing really matter is that America is doing all the crazy things as they like, because America is on the other side of the ocean on Ukraine and Russia, and America is there at their expense and does their our good and evil on them for America delights and has its own chase.

[@akhalif68]

Hi - I thought it worthwhile write a response to your comment regarding what Washington's establishment did in the past to fuel this conflict...The internal disagreements bw Ukrainian's political & business elites run very deep...This is my deeply held view...Over the last 3 Decades "Ukrainian Elites" have choosen the path of political dysfunction, corruption & money laundering in both government enterprises and private business as well as a total disregard of the well-being of their own citizens...The systematic disintegration of a once hardworking & law abiding society is an important lesson...As I understand both Russian & Ukrainian I have listened to both sides discuss their positions...

[@jj4cpw]

I really appreciate Horton's perspective. It's, unfortunate, however, that when he confronts someone who has a contrary perspective, unlike Bob but very much like Niall Ferguson (a neocon, no doubt), Horton goes all bezerko (see their "debate" moderated by Peter Robinson). Time, Scott, to chill, if you want to convince anyone who's not already in your corner.

[@champagnebulge1]

It's interesting. Thank you for watching that. Scott Horton is an odd old school off-right radio guy type that I can definitely see interacting with more academic personalities in a way that is not favorable to him. It's a temperament thing that gives away pedigree.

[@yyguuyg]

You love them commas

[@romanhood4849]

he's always had that problem, it's probably the one reason he's not more prolific and influential

[@chiddleychidds4917]

What do you mean mate? hahahahaha I thought it was the height of proper etiquette when Scott said he body-ed Ferguson's wife at freedom fest😂. I mean first of all, I don't know what that expression means, wr don't use it down hear, but I was shocked and amused by that outburst, very much came out of nowhere. For those interested it was somewhere around the 50min mark very roughly from memory. Still tho Fergusonas the neocon elitist he indeed is was being condescending. And had nothing of substance to say as far as I was concerned, same old tired talking points.

[@chiddleychidds4917]

Btw Scott says nothing controversial in overtime😂

[@Buf-g6m]

God forbid he start to sound like a leftist, you could be mistaken for having a brain😅

[@panicbutton4380]

"You're starting to sound like a leftie so I'd be careful; maybe we should stop here" What are you so scared of? lol

[@jamesfrench4337]

I believe that was tongue in cheek, sort of a joke.

[@terriej123]

He lost me at Bett David being a smart guy.

[@paulheydarian1281]

PBD considers himself financially savvy. He's just greedy!

[@mgriff0309]

That and that Manafort was really a pro-EU guy. Give me a break.

[@cgtian5616]

The book: American Exception - Empire and the Deep State provides a deeper understanding of the Russia/Ukraine war.

[@olyffziel4060]

"putsch" is german and just means "coup"

[@Lansdown123]

It's funny you can take one look at scott and instantly know he's a yelly libertarian with high blood pressure

[@ianw1410]

Short answer .... si... oh si...

[@jps0117]

With this, I am done with Bob and Nonzero. Horton was extremely rude to Sir Niall Ferguson in a recent discussion. And I lived in Ukraine for 7 years. His views are anathema. I wouldn't want to live in the world he advocates.

[@AndrewPalmerJazz]

Do you need someone to let you out?

[@jps0117]

@@AndrewPalmerJazz LOL

[@belindathorne9784]

You live in the world where his views are rejected and Ukraine is being demolished as a result.

[@rubensano4860]

Yes, peace is terrible isn't it.

[@thedualtransition6070]

You wont be missed

[@brianfruman123]

US foreign policy is akin to bestiality. 😂. Got that from Wilkerson Interview

[@paulgrunden5401]

Libertarians are hilarious. 🙄

[@zachsalvatore5175]

I believe B-movie legend Roger Corman was Soros’ “mentor”, for lack of a better term

[@grendelloingseach2350]

Talk about Project Russia

[@johnkoester1733]

Thank you for your careful analysis. Would this be a libertarian anthem? kzbin.info/www/bejne/bqvFgpigocugf7M

[@joech1065]

Oh no, not Scott Horton. I'm from the region, and it's blatantly obvious to me that Scott doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to Ukraine, so on all other topics I can't trust him either.

[@d.d.6045]

maybe you are too biased or not able to be objective since you are from there? I guess from Ukr.

[@joech1065]

​@@d.d.6045I'm not from Ukraine, but I have relatives in both countries, and also I have been following the events pretty intimately for many many years. I do also like to talk to different people for antropological reasons, to get a sample of their mind when particular historical events happen. And yes, I do also watch Russian propaganda occassionally for antropological reasons too (I speak fluent Russian, obviously). It is really not a surprise that somebody who doesn't know Russian nor Ukranian, yet is willing to pontificate about events in the region and write nearly a whole book about it, builds very inaccurate models of the situation. Most information that exists from those regions is in those languages. Even Westeners who arrive at “right conclusions” when it comes to foreign policy, often have carricature understandings due to this. It's a complex topic, but what are we even doing here? If we are doing history, then any respectable author, if they want to pick most controvertial topics to assist their argument, would, at least, mention those controvercies. For example, that NATO expansion promise is very controvertial because Gorbachev himself later denied in an interview that this promise was ever made (luckily, there's literally a video of Gorbachev taking about it so we don't need to worry about sources), and, moreover, in 1997 Russia signed a treaty recognizing the right of eastern block countries to join NATO. It was under Putin that Russian propaganda started to inflate this NATO expansion boogieman (probably coinciding with his decision to remain in power as a dictator, when he needed to invent an enemy to unite the country against that common enemy, to both make it easier to grab power and distract from domestic politics with foreign politics). Going back, if we want to examine how much influence foreign countries can have on historical trends and revolutions, then that is another topic. A good question to ask would be whether US would be able to STOP Maidan from happening, if US wanted it, and, if that would be at all possible, how many resources it would even take? Was Russia able to install Trump in US by “spending a little bit here and there” or were other historical factors at play here that would still result in Trump being elected, despite Russia funding “alternative” right wing media in US, which was largely pro-Trump? My personal take is Yanukovich's fault was boiling the frog too fast. If you want to take over, you need to control media. Putin's first actions were taking control over media, with so-called “разгром НТВ” in 2001. He was a talented politician and quickly gained control over parlianment in a couple of years, by making coalitions with one party, then breaking them, until reaching a configuration that was fully controlled. Even in 2008, he was very careful to be sneaky and put Medvedev first. In 2014 Putin's FSB took under control over Vkontakte, which is Russian Facebook. And repressions back then were very subtle, with FSB preferring to perform them after protests on individual people. When finally repressions reached their maximum level, Putin had one of the best propaganda machines in the world to be able to frame them in the way he needed. In sum, construction of Putin's authoritarianism and, eventually, dictatorship was an art of small changes and masterful deception. This is how Putin was able to avoid his own Maidan. Otherwise, dictatorships are not most stable configurations, you know. It's not like a dictatorship is historically bound to exist forever until CIA comes and organizes a coup. Quite the opposite, actually. Yanukovich's reason for his failure to perform an authoritarian shift is that he had to go YOLO in a country with multiple oligarchs that are not loyal to him, and when he still had poor control over press, and where he didn't even control the parliament! And then, once he provoked people, he was unable to successfully fight them, which gave even more people hope and made the fire even bigger. At that point, it was Game Over for him. Those were the major factors, in my opinion, determining the success of Maidan and the failure of Russian democratic movements. The whole world does not revolve around US, no more than US politics revolves around Russian money spent on troll farms and "alternative” media. It can be a factor, but the more you zoom in, the more it gets lost in the stream of other historical factors. However, when it comes to weapons, US indeed has the biggest amount of them and thus can make a significant historical impact when it comes to warfare. But that is another topic.

[@d.d.6045]

@@joech1065 maybe different people but with the same opinion! Everything Scott has said is backed with evidence unlike the stories or opinions you may have heard! And no, I have no connection either with Ukr or with Russia and I do not want my money to be spent on corrupt Ukr in any way!

[@vaasdaas9587]

​@@joech1065 the promise to Gorbachev is in the US archive materials, instead of spending time here writting lenghty nonsense you should study more.

[@d.d.6045]

@@joech1065 is someone deleting the comments??? wow, typical for the West now - sooo democratic and free, yuck!!!

[@GoldyMcGoldfish]

Bob, maybe have on someone from the other side to balance out this - let's be nice and call it 'one-sided' - narrative. Perhaps someone like the nice random Ukrainian woman who embarrassed Scott on Piers Morgan's show a few weeks ago because Scott doesn't actually know anything about Maidan. kzbin.info/www/bejne/oXuYoYyPq8qSfrssi=hbB-Ce82x6SU7DGN&t=1340

[@stuartwray6175]

The Maidan massacre was essentially a false flag operation by Ukrainian ultranationalist snipers, situated primarily in the hotel Ukrainia, according to a verdict handed down on Oct 18th 2023, by the Shviotoshyn District Court in Kiev/Kyiv. Right-Sector and Svoboda played the leading role in the Maidan violence which ultimately ousted Yanukovych from power, within 24hrs of him signing an agreement for early elections and the immediate establishment of a coalition interim government. Yanukovych was not a Russian puppet, see Reuters Special Report: Why Ukraine spurned the EU and embraced Russia December (19th 2013). Yushchenko, the president of Ukraine prior to Yanukovych, was opposed to renewing Russia's lease on the Sevastapol Naval base, which was due to expire 2017. Yanukovych wanted EU alignment, but military non-alignment - Ukrainian polls showed that public opinion was opposed to joining NATO, and yet it was undoubtedly US policy to bring Ukraine into NATO. Circa 2001, George W.Bush withdrew America from the Inter-ballistic missile treaty while pursuing and funding missile defence shield systems technology, thus undermining a key pillar of arms control agreements and paving the way for nuclear proliferation and a renewed arms race. He had a headstrong determination to expand NATO ever eastwards, raised military spending significantly, and launched the invasion of Iraq on bogus evidence in 2003.

[@user-pq7jj3vs3e]

Thank you. I can’t believe Bob really finds this guy compelling

[@vaasdaas9587]

This uneducated biased woman did not refute any of his argument.

[@user-pq7jj3vs3e]

@@vaasdaas9587 what ? She most definitely refuted his claim of maidan revolution/coup being some western orchestrated event.

[@thedualtransition6070]

Yeah, lets just get a blatant liar to argue with Scott

[@user-pq7jj3vs3e]

I can’t find this guys argument compelling not because I necessarily disagree but because it’s too simplistic. Certain outside individuals from soros in the 90s to nuland controlled the fate and direction of ukraines trajectory to where it is today. It’s as if Ukrainians themselves have no agency/credit/blame worthiness on events today. He completely discounts the fact that Putin and and others simply question the authenticity of deservedness of Ukraine as a sovereign in historical and demographic terms. The fact that Putin moved to annex the territories he controls instead of allowing them to be autonomous pro Russian states that will be a buffer against any supposed nato expansion.

[@nichtmeiname6941]

So -- the entirety of the US foreign policy establishment holding that opinion before Bush pushed the expansion against all of them, and the russian black sea harbor that triggered the invasion of Crimea, and Ukraine being armed enough to retake the donbas and threaten the existance of crimea (sluice gates in the Donbas), but not enought to be able to deter a russian attack is too simplistic, because... The russian blitzkrieg against Kiew failed? And that tells us the Ukraines are really in it for their country, in the long run, and they love to fight - for democracy, and even though the desertion rates are at 100.000 since the war started on the ukrainian side, and for an army of 400.000 active soldiers, .... Nato expansion is a standin for "threatened russian power projection" (Afrika, Black sea, mediteranian), Sevastopol is a standin for 40% of russias exports went throught that harbor. War "west is already in war against russia" is now also a western narrative (german reluctance be thanked). And the gag is, russia, might not even have been afraid of being attacked by nato right now - but because of demographics in 20 years its army would have shrunk by half anyhow -- so if they wanted to solve this in a military poweprlay, it was 2024, or never. Ukraine had all the time in the world. To be armed up more. To enter the EU. To be commited to NATO. And russia sits by idally and let them take the harbor they need for all of their power projection into Africa? Next nearest one (yearlong ice free) is murmansk, near the polar circle. There is a reason 40% of russian exports went through Sevastopol.. (see: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pKXTf56BjN-qbdU)

[@mgriff0309]

Bob at his credulous best in this convo (still love him)

[@thedualtransition6070]

Putin had agreed to Ukrainian sovereignty in the Turkey negotiations, only to have the Ukrainians double cross him at the behest of the West. After that there was no going back, he understood that he could not trust the West and needed to change the facts on the ground. Especially after he was cheated by the West and Ukraine with Minsk 1 and Minsk 2.

[@user-pq7jj3vs3e]

@@mgriff0309fair

[@napoleonlaguerre5587]

U S never had have a policy

[@stuartwray6175]

Never had have?

[@Lee-os5jq]

U S always has a policy, Rule-base for everyone and Freedom for US.

[@andreimustata5922]

US had a policy during the cold war. The disastrous Bush policy was obviously wrong and while there is an understanding that it was wrong nothing took its place.

[@lakedistrict9450]

@@Lee-os5jqapart from the rules it doesn’t follow. Freedom for all apart from the countries the CIA provoked coups in. I think we agree?

[@williambranch4283]

WEF and NATO provoked.

[@bh1935]

Scott Horton is a huge Lindbergh fan. Is mad America fought Hitler btw

[@TheCruxy]

Source?

[@mgriff0309]

Big surprise (NOT)

[@henrylicious]

Ok. Where in this talk did he lie about anything?

[@esakoivuniemi]

Like many Americans, Horton seems to believe everything revolves around the U.S., as if no one else has agency. This view isn’t just arrogant-it’s flat-out wrong. Russians invade their neighbors because that’s what they do. In the past 400 years, we Finns have fought them 13 times, including three wars in the 20th century. For Estonians, it’s closer to 40. And I didn't even mention the other Baltic states, Poland, Moldova and so on. Horton clearly knows nothing about Russia and just parrots Russian propaganda-the same tired excuses they always use to justify their wars. I have nothing good to say about Horton, so I’ll leave it at that.

[@georgemagoo]

This is the viewpoint of every European I have talked to. How do you assess Russian's security concerns about what the US was doing in Ukraine? I would assume Russia's reason to invade was not monocausal but it is hard to say that they didn't have legitimate security concerns.

[@mitchyoung93]

@esakoivuniemi There was no Finland, no Finnish state, 400 years ago. In fact there wasn't one until the Russian empire created it in the early 19th century. No state education in the Finnish language. No state structures controlled by ethnic Finns at all.

[@esakoivuniemi]

@@mitchyoung93 Oh, so you’ve decided to teach a Finn about Finnish history-and by repeating Russian propaganda, no less. The Russian Empire has only ever destroyed, murdered, and subjugated; they’ve never created anything but lies. Sure, Finland declared independence in 1917, but we had to fight for it against both the Russians and Finnish communists. The Finnish nation and people have existed for a long time, and we’ve always been a target of Russian bullying and atrocities. And it’s not just us-every neighbor of Russia knows the same story.

[@esakoivuniemi]

@@georgemagoo What 'legitimate' security concerns? Nobody is threatening Russia. Quite the opposite-everyone, including the U.S., has spent decades trying to appease them. The real problem is that Russia's demands are unacceptable: they want the power to dictate both the internal and foreign policies of their neighbors. The only 'security concern' they have is their inability to impose their will on others. If you think that’s a legitimate goal, fine. But you should understand this-Russia’s neighbors won’t stand for their bullying and will fight for their independence and sovereignty to the last man. With or without support from the U.S. I might add.

[@esakoivuniemi]

@@mitchyoung93 So, you’ve decided to lecture a Finn on Finnish history. Thanks for proving my point about arrogance. On top of that, you’d come across a lot better if you actually knew what you were talking about. But hey, while you’re at it, why not teach your father how to 'make children' too?

[@5p1n0za]

Ugh... Why don't you ever get any serious historians of Ukraine on this show - Serhii Plokhy, Eugene Finkel, Yaroslav Hrytsak, Sergei Medvedev? Or at least someone with a serious interest in human rights in the post-Soviet "sphere of influence" - Maria Popova, Yuri Felshtinsky; or even one of its most eloquent victims, like Stanislav Aseyev, who I'm sure could join you from the front line via zoom? I mean, the list is quite long even if you exclude the Applebaums and Snyders. Surely you can find SOMEONE who isn't just parroting the usual 'Merica Bad pound-shop (sorry - "dollar-store", ed.) Chomskyanism?!

[@stuartwray6175]

Jeffery Sachs Glenn Diesen Anatol Lieven Richard Sakwa Nicolai Petro Chas Freeman Col Lawrence Wilkerson US Ambassador Jack F Matlock Alfred-Maurice de Zayas Stephen Cohen and Vladimir Pozner

[@CosmicCompassionQuest]

You mean academics that happen to align with your position? There are dozens that don't, and they can't simply be dismissed as anti imperialist "chomskyites"- John Mearsheimer for example takes a realist view on ukraine while maintaining wariness of the growing power of China, you could hardly call him a chomsky acolyte. Jeff Sachs has extensive knowledge and experience in the region. And oh the rich irony of likening Horton's libertarian ideology to anything remotely chomskyite 😂

[@5p1n0za]

I'm not suggesting Bob should never interview people on the Nato-skeptical side (or whatever you want to call it), only that he should SOMETIMES get some perspectives from the other direction.

[@5p1n0za]

Also, neither Mearsheimer nor Sachs are historians of Ukraine. And the fact that they're two of the names most often cited in defence of the absurdly titled "realist" position suggests that the large reservoir of specialists who share their view is not, in fact, so large.

[@5p1n0za]

And (finally), there's no "rich irony" - Chomsky has always described himself as a left-libertarian.

[@midnightdl]

The promise, that was a deal, that was a handshake, that Gorbatchev denied ever happened, but "what difference would it have made which proves beyond reasonable doubt" ... Word salad

[@vaasdaas9587]

It is written in US archives, seems u have salad in ur head

[@bh1935]

He’s a bit of crank

[@TheFlameoftheWest]

Long live Ukraine 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 !!!

[@GR-wp4wb]

Ooft, painful listen. Even in agreement they shout at one another.

[@Lansdown123]

Robert had russians with attitude, he had this guy, he had the guy who had some half-baked dealey plaza esque theory that the maidan killings were a false flag... It's not wrong to question America's role in the world and the goals of institutions like NATO and the EU, yes, we all hate the blob, but there's a mirror image of the neolib/neocon "spreading democracy" childish worldview that sees the west as the cosmological origin of everything that goes wrong in the world. Can we get someone who isnt signed up to one form of infantile Manicheanism or another who can actually sort and proportion the facts of what's clearly a complicated political, moral, and strategic situation. JFC America invading Iraq = America bad doesn't mathematically prove Russia invading Ukraine = America bad. I'm a lefty but I'm so tired of these ideologues who subscribed to this materialist clockwork theory of the world.

[@saturnFIV3]

America is the global hegemon though. We are what the British Empire was 150 years ago. It won't last forever, but as long as that's the case, yes a lot of this nastiness can be attributed to our interference. The thing is, if you're an American, you have no control over what other nations desire. Only control over your country (at least nominally), so it's irrelevant how bad Putin and Xi also is. They are not our leaders. All we can do, is do our best, and based on what you've said above you know we're not doing our best. Lead by example vs, leading by "do what I say or suffer the violence". And China rising is a perfect example of a country that doesn't need to use military might to get other nations to play ball with them. We assume as Americans and western Europeans that the rest of the world's states think and act like ours. That's just not true. There's just no world in which the Russians will accept the Ukraine as outside their sphere of influence. It's as simple as that. They made it very clear that was their red line over and over, we didn't listen. And again, we're Americans (or at least westerners), so our main concern should be what was our role in making this happen? And the answer is pretty obvious. I think Russia would have been fine with a neutral Ukraine a la Austria or Yugoslavia during the cold war. EU, and especially NATO membership? Not a chance in hell. Scott's example of Russia doing the same thing in Mexico (a hypothetical), it's pretty obvious what the American response would be. Again, nobody said you have to like Putin. But the government de jure is the government de facto, that's the first rule of diplomacy according to America's founders. That is not how we act though. We think it's our business to make the world like us. And it's silly because it's the average working American who pays the price, not the ruling class.

[@andreimustata5922]

While this critic of US policy contains many valid points there seems to be an implication that the world would be a better place without US involvement. That is totally false. In fact the war in Ukraine is an example of what happens when US projects less power. The peace in Europe for the past 70 years which is the longest period of peace in Europe that we can find in history was due to US involvement. One might say that the existence of EU was due to US involvement. The fact that the era of colonialism ended is essentially due to the hegemony of US, which is a vast and rich country so it didn't need so much exploitations of other people's resources (compared with previous empires). US offered free market to the world (by the use of its fleet mainly) for the price of siding with them against USSR. Now with USSR gone, and after the disaster of Bush presidency, US should have an honest discussion about the future US policy. What is happening now is that under the pretext of morality and fairness there is a request for a retreat of US involvement in the world. This hides the fact that there is no direct interest for the US in providing the services it used to provide before. It is not that the world will be a better place without US, the contrary is true (despite of all the mess of Bush years). Rather the US should decide what role it wants to play in the world and what are its incentive to do so. If it is deciding that it doesn't care about the world anymore because it doesn't have any incentives to (as it seems the case today), at least it should be honest about it and not try to hide it under the cloth of morality. If not, while criticism of mistakes is good and healthy, it should come with a realistic future direction the Americans can subscribe to.

[@vaasdaas9587]

The war in Ukraine is the consequence of US power projection.

[@zalomendizabal5740]

"...seems to be an implication that the world would be a better place without US involvement. That is totally false." 🤣Yeah, sure.. totally false

[@andreimustata5922]

@@zalomendizabal5740 I know it is not a popular opinion and things might look differently for people from Middle East or from some countries from South America. It just seems to be the historical truth. There is not much interest in understanding the historic realities around today.

[@nichtmeiname6941]

​@@andreimustata5922 Circular argument. Tackled by Horton in the Niall Ferguson debate. Russia had always the capabiltiy to attack Ukraine, they always said, they would - when enlargement was enacted, Putin acted when the Black Sea harbor was asked back by three ukrainian presidents in writing (power projection into africa, black sea region and mediterranean, also the harbor 40% (!) or russias exports go through (src for the 40%: Globsec)). Not a day earlier. US meanwhile armored up Ukraine, enough to be "provoking" (ie. Ukraine able to retake the Donbas, and thereby threatening crimea (sluice gates), but not nearly enough to be deterring. While they told them you are a Nato member in spirit already! Now deal with russia, without full Nato support. Horray! Prolonged war, and armistice for 20 years before more war! So you read western PR and the enemies PR; but when do you actually do research or listen to the arguments brought forward? You dont. You repeat narratives. But you pick the good western PR ones of course, because...? Correct, we are the good ones. :) Oh and how many languages you speak! Have you been in Ukraine - as Niall Ferguson would promptly ask... And you answer yes, and then you win the argument. Isnt that how this works? ;)

[@MikeRaczewski-y7l]

SCOTT HORTON’S IQ IS ROOM TEMPRATURE!

[@neopatriot7716]

When your entire worldview and personality is built on 20th century definitions of left v right, you get this guy. None of these definitions mean anything anymore, if they ever did at all. There’s more meaning behind fans of Harry Potter calling themselves a Potter-head than there is for calling oneself a “libertarian.”

[@TheCruxy]

What about all the theory such as Mises and Rothbard which Scott stands by

[@vaasdaas9587]

Keep reading Potter kiddo, let the big boi books for grownups.