4:24 “what country will invade Israel and threaten its survival?” I wonder what country would invade russia and threaten its survival. But professor defends russia’s war against ukraine in all his interviews with russia’s fear of being threatened by NATO. Sounds hypocritical.
His point is that states are threats to other states. Ukraine backed by NATO was a threat to Russia. Hamas is not an existential threat to Israel. He qualifies this by saying that Iran would be such a threat, if it was somehow dragged in - and it had better not be.
@@DrMatthewAlford why can only states pose threats to states? It’s his uncategorized opinion. Did taliban pose existential threat to usa? Who else should decide it except the threatened party? And who decides that only existential threats are to be taken care of?
I'd like to address some points. The argument that one party having nuclear weapons and one party not having them means there never will be an existential threat from the non-nuclear party. Although not an existential threat to the UK - non-nuclear groups in their colonies attacked and took over and forced out the Brits from many countries post WW2, effectively ending their empire. I agree no nuclear owning country has ceased to exist. You could argue the Soviet Union crumbled with pressure from their non-nuclear owning / controlling satellite states, yes but Russia survived. If Israel allowed Hamas free rein in Gaza for another 20 years and did little in terms of offence , like they did from 2005 to pre-Oct 2023, then Hamas would continue to re-arm with more and more modern weapons from Iran. Israel would have to spend billions in defence and continue upgrading their rocket shields. It would continue to suffer similar attacks to Oct 7. This would put more and more pressure on the government resulting in more hard-liners coming in possibly causing societal upheaval. It would need to become more of a military state than it is now with a border defence similar like East Germany's cold war wall. The costs would be huge.
Attempting to apply logic to illogical parties never works. It’s internal contradiction in this gentlemen position. He is actually saying that and than trying to apply logical reasoning again.
I happen to have written about this, here: www.quora.com/Why-does-John-Mearsheimer-take-such-a-tougher-stance-toward-China-than-toward-Russia-Is-it-justified/answer/Dr-Matt-Alford
Mearsheimer means "realist" in a more specific way. Realism is a way of thinking about International Relations, which assumes that states are the most important players (rather than corporations, or transnational organisations, or whatever).
Realism is a geopolitical perspective with two camps. Basically it says that Nation States are the highest authorities and where ‘might makes right’ (law of the jungle) only applies. They all, therefore, seek to be strong and the strongest in order to survive. The ‘security dilemma’ often effects their behaviors. It also posits that they will do what is ‘right’ until their interests are threatened and once this threshold is crossed then they will resort to any means necessary to get their way. That’s a start. Do some more research. It is this ‘realist’ international relations logic that John used to predict the Russian reaction to continuous expansion of NATO on its borders despite the western medias propagandized presentation of Putin as a land hungry, unprovoked madman.
I think he's just saying there's no danger to Israel's existence, unless there is a direct war with a powerful state like Iran. I doubt he's denying that Iran funds proxies, is he?
Hamas has Gaza as a state, with 3mil population. There is Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. That is a threat to Israel. Mersh always argues in this narrow piecemeal manner.
Feel I need to know some specifics. My impression is that Hamas is too weak to do more than raids. Hezbollah and Iran *would be* existential threats but for a very long time have had no interest in escalation. The other countries he mentions are similar.
2:16 Why is hamas not a state? They have own territory, own army, own government with full control over gaza, own weapons. And not least according to pal. Study 70% of Palestinians were in favor of hamasses cause even after 10/7 massacre. Why is that not a „rational“ situation? Only because professors perception? So why isn’t this quasi state not responsible and may not be held responsible? It’s a constructed situation by professor to only left one option? Only one side can be responsible - Israel. Where in the world is that rational or applies to any thinkable reality?? The reality on the ground is following: fck around with a mighty enemy and find out. Seems professor is not aware of pure human logic. Is life loss tragic? Absolutely. But every normal state would value the life of its citizens over all others. And hamass is so stupid to say they would massacre jews time and again. Israel has no other chance to prevent the next massacre.
No it is not a state. Israel controls air, sea, land . And it is in charge of what goes in and out. Name any country recognized Gaza as a country,. 80 % peeople do not even have passport. 20 % have Palestenian authority passports. PA is also not a country.
I don't think Mearsheimer is saying that Hamas isn't responsible for Oct 7. He's just saying there is no plausible threat to Israel's survival. Personally, I'd have thought this situation could change if it engages a war on two fronts but I won't put words in Mearsheimer's mouth.
@@DrMatthewAlford The 1990s were nearly 30 years ago. What says the most about his current views is his current absurd justification and whitewashing of Russia while attacking the West for all the evils of this world, including the China and Palestine issues.
3:24 “gaza is part of greater Israel”. I wonder which criteria does professor have to claim that? Why isn’t gaza a part of greater Egypt while it has a border to Gaza like Israel? It’s hypocritical and biased. Professor shouldn’t wonder that his Israel criticism has a specific smell.
Bro nobody reading your comments and thinking “wow this guy is surely operating in good faith with no preconceived notions” 😂. Bad propaganda attempt guy
Israel controls Gaza’s water supply, Gaza’s electricity supply. It controls the food that goes into Gaza. It controls the medical supplies that goes into Gaza. It controls who can enter and leave Gaza. It has military drones hovering over Gaza monitoring the Palestinians in Gaza. Israel controls Gaza’s airspace. Israel controls the seaports and fishing rights on the coast of Gaza. Israel at one point in time did not allow chocolate into Gaza. Gaza is a part of Israel because it has a military occupation over Gaza and the Palestinian people.
@@jp__878 I didn’t say I have no prejudice. Anyone has. Some more some less. It’s not about my person. Try to challenge my argument if you want and can. And by the way talk only for yourself. Or are you a kind of borg hive member?
Mearsheimer is always a welcomed voice. the host is dangerous
This is a refreshing perspective.
Why does Mearsheimer have a cartoon of him with Henri Ramos Allup?
Palestine has been held by the State of Israel in "Belligerent Occupation,"
also known as under Military Command Occupation, since 1967.
4:24 “what country will invade Israel and threaten its survival?” I wonder what country would invade russia and threaten its survival. But professor defends russia’s war against ukraine in all his interviews with russia’s fear of being threatened by NATO. Sounds hypocritical.
His point is that states are threats to other states. Ukraine backed by NATO was a threat to Russia. Hamas is not an existential threat to Israel. He qualifies this by saying that Iran would be such a threat, if it was somehow dragged in - and it had better not be.
@@DrMatthewAlford why can only states pose threats to states? It’s his uncategorized opinion. Did taliban pose existential threat to usa? Who else should decide it except the threatened party? And who decides that only existential threats are to be taken care of?
@@paimei7246i think John is right that Hamas materially is unable to pose an existential threat to Israel but nonetheless you make good points 🎉
I'd like to address some points. The argument that one party having nuclear weapons and one party not having them means there never will be an existential threat from the non-nuclear party. Although not an existential threat to the UK - non-nuclear groups in their colonies attacked and took over and forced out the Brits from many countries post WW2, effectively ending their empire. I agree no nuclear owning country has ceased to exist. You could argue the Soviet Union crumbled with pressure from their non-nuclear owning / controlling satellite states, yes but Russia survived. If Israel allowed Hamas free rein in Gaza for another 20 years and did little in terms of offence , like they did from 2005 to pre-Oct 2023, then Hamas would continue to re-arm with more and more modern weapons from Iran. Israel would have to spend billions in defence and continue upgrading their rocket shields. It would continue to suffer similar attacks to Oct 7. This would put more and more pressure on the government resulting in more hard-liners coming in possibly causing societal upheaval. It would need to become more of a military state than it is now with a border defence similar like East Germany's cold war wall. The costs would be huge.
Attempting to apply logic to illogical parties never works. It’s internal contradiction in this gentlemen position. He is actually saying that and than trying to apply logical reasoning again.
Even without nuclear weapons they are still very powerful
Would Mearsheimer argue Hamas should not be crushed?
ua-cam.com/video/7L59yXaPaXI/v-deo.html They talk about it here. Various solutions, Israel particularly intransigent and has been long-term.
This is the prostate speaking. Take your meds daily!
That was really well put.
he's reasonable on Ukraine and Palestine but nuts on China
I`ll have to check out what he says about China.
@brianpark8758 his lex fridman interview is the clearest exposition of his views I have heard, he gets into China towards the end
@@jcoprario967Thanks mate, I`ll check it out.
I happen to have written about this, here: www.quora.com/Why-does-John-Mearsheimer-take-such-a-tougher-stance-toward-China-than-toward-Russia-Is-it-justified/answer/Dr-Matt-Alford
Plus video & commentary here: ua-cam.com/video/rCdXa_JAi8I/v-deo.html
The guy admits that he's not using a realist lens. WTF does that mean? That he's not being realistic? What's he being then?
Mearsheimer means "realist" in a more specific way. Realism is a way of thinking about International Relations, which assumes that states are the most important players (rather than corporations, or transnational organisations, or whatever).
Realism is a geopolitical perspective with two camps. Basically it says that Nation States are the highest authorities and where ‘might makes right’ (law of the jungle) only applies. They all, therefore, seek to be strong and the strongest in order to survive. The ‘security dilemma’ often effects their behaviors. It also posits that they will do what is ‘right’ until their interests are threatened and once this threshold is crossed then they will resort to any means necessary to get their way. That’s a start. Do some more research. It is this ‘realist’ international relations logic that John used to predict the Russian reaction to continuous expansion of NATO on its borders despite the western medias propagandized presentation of Putin as a land hungry, unprovoked madman.
This fool ignores the involvement of Iran. The “I don’t think so” assessment reveals a lot. Does Israel act in a “I don’t think so” basis? Absurd!
Right to the point 👌🏻
He is not a fool. He knows exactly what he says. It’s just his narrative and bias.
I think he's just saying there's no danger to Israel's existence, unless there is a direct war with a powerful state like Iran. I doubt he's denying that Iran funds proxies, is he?
Hamas has Gaza as a state, with 3mil population. There is Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. That is a threat to Israel. Mersh always argues in this narrow piecemeal manner.
Feel I need to know some specifics. My impression is that Hamas is too weak to do more than raids. Hezbollah and Iran *would be* existential threats but for a very long time have had no interest in escalation. The other countries he mentions are similar.
2:16 Why is hamas not a state? They have own territory, own army, own government with full control over gaza, own weapons. And not least according to pal. Study 70% of Palestinians were in favor of hamasses cause even after 10/7 massacre.
Why is that not a „rational“ situation? Only because professors perception?
So why isn’t this quasi state not responsible and may not be held responsible? It’s a constructed situation by professor to only left one option? Only one side can be responsible - Israel. Where in the world is that rational or applies to any thinkable reality??
The reality on the ground is following: fck around with a mighty enemy and find out. Seems professor is not aware of pure human logic.
Is life loss tragic? Absolutely. But every normal state would value the life of its citizens over all others. And hamass is so stupid to say they would massacre jews time and again. Israel has no other chance to prevent the next massacre.
Gaza could have been a gold mine, if it wasn’t run by a death cult
No it is not a state. Israel controls air, sea, land . And it is in charge of what goes in and out. Name any country recognized Gaza as a country,. 80 % peeople do not even have passport. 20 % have Palestenian authority passports. PA is also not a country.
I don't think Mearsheimer is saying that Hamas isn't responsible for Oct 7. He's just saying there is no plausible threat to Israel's survival. Personally, I'd have thought this situation could change if it engages a war on two fronts but I won't put words in Mearsheimer's mouth.
@@DrMatthewAlford... Would Mearsheimer argue against crushing Hamas?
Seriously who is this guy? He's totally detached
Is this guy in a clear mind?
How can Hamas be a threat to Israel with so less weapons'?
Mearsheimer, a well-known voice of the Kremlin, now acting as a spokesman for Hamas. Interesting.
In the 1990s he advocated that Ukraine retain nuclear weapons to deter Russia so I think the accusation that he’s a Kremlin mouthpiece is not right
@@DrMatthewAlford The 1990s were nearly 30 years ago. What says the most about his current views is his current absurd justification and whitewashing of Russia while attacking the West for all the evils of this world, including the China and Palestine issues.
3:24 “gaza is part of greater Israel”. I wonder which criteria does professor have to claim that? Why isn’t gaza a part of greater Egypt while it has a border to Gaza like Israel? It’s hypocritical and biased. Professor shouldn’t wonder that his Israel criticism has a specific smell.
Bro nobody reading your comments and thinking “wow this guy is surely operating in good faith with no preconceived notions” 😂. Bad propaganda attempt guy
Israel controls Gaza’s water supply, Gaza’s electricity supply. It controls the food that goes into Gaza. It controls the medical supplies that goes into Gaza. It controls who can enter and leave Gaza. It has military drones hovering over Gaza monitoring the Palestinians in Gaza. Israel controls Gaza’s airspace. Israel controls the seaports and fishing rights on the coast of Gaza. Israel at one point in time did not allow chocolate into Gaza. Gaza is a part of Israel because it has a military occupation over Gaza and the Palestinian people.
@@jp__878 I didn’t say I have no prejudice. Anyone has. Some more some less. It’s not about my person. Try to challenge my argument if you want and can.
And by the way talk only for yourself. Or are you a kind of borg hive member?