Thank you, Ian. Really really appreciate all that you do and all that you bring to the understanding of the geopolitics of the now! It’s such useful, informative, information, and the way that you break things down and the perspective you bring I find incredibly helpful and useful. Thank you.
He's right in many points. But the real life examples go in another direction. Even with unmanned systems, cyber technology and special forces, both in Ukraine and Gaza boots on the ground are needed.
Mr. Stravridis claimed that he is more familiar with people in Taiwan than Xi because he has visited Taiwan several times. But Xi has worked in Fujian province for 17 years. Interacting with officials and business people from Taiwan was his daily job... It is just impossible to make sensible strategic plans without getting the basic facts correct.
@@jasonjean2901 Boo hoo! The facts of the matter is Taiwan wants nothing less than to become part of mainland China... especially not after what the CCP did it Hong Kong. Before Hong Kong, maybe... after Hong Kong, NEVER.
@@JohnDorian-j7x It should be pretty obvious why a conversation between mr. Bremmer and a former NATO commander could be described as propaganda right away. Perhaps you're assuming I meant "lies" with the word "propaganda," but I didn't. However, if we were to focus solely on false propaganda, let's look at the dishonesty of claiming that Putin told Xi Jinping he would "sweep across" Ukraine in 5 days. The standard lie about this claims that it was actually "3 days," so I'll give Mr. Stravridis points for creativity. Do I really need to point out that this is an opportunistic lie? The only person on record speaking of this famous estimate, which you hear all the time from people with smirks of 'I'm saying something so clever,' is the US General Mark Milley, who publicly claimed Kiev could fall in 72 hours. This is very different, isn't it? The quick fall of Ukraine is a claim made only by US officials (and eventually Ukraine's, for obvious reasons). Maybe, somewhere at a bar in Moscow, or at a barbecue at a Dasha, many other Russians claimed the same thing; maybe they claimed it would fall in hours! But I guess you'll agree with me that that's a different story. Admiral Stravridis' is just a talking point. Besides, no one with a basic understanding of military campaigns could have ever believed that the Russians truly expected to conquer Ukraine (not even just Kiev) in 3 or 5 days. The sole amount of troops (160 to 190k tops) tells us this much. And if this operational fact isn't enough, then you may ask yourself if it is normal for a "conquering" force to initiate peace negotiations the following day via not one, but 2 different channels, as we know it happened (see Turkey & Israel). Of course I could go on. This one is just too evident. But I think this should be enough to at least question the veracity (and intention) of the Stravridis' tale about what happened in the Olympics. As for the other 2 "top parts," I'll leave them as homework for you. It only takes a few minutes of sincere research to dismantle silly propaganda like the one on this video.
@@LonYi-zk7se Don't use that excuse. Just use plain, non-propagandistic/emotionally laden words, and it'll get through youtube's auto mod. Better yet, post the exact time stamps in the video (a range, so say something like 5:12 - 5:29 or 11:20 through 11:57 followed by a brief description of it)
US does not recognise Taiwan as a country, US recognise the one China policy. Ukraine has the right to retake Donbass, and China has the right to retake Taiwan. these are their internal matters, we cannot oppose Russian intervention while justifying our own intervention.
Great video with an overview of the probable direction of warfare. I question the idea that we won't need a "million man army". The one thing Russia has going for it is the big cannon fodder army. Without it, they'd be done. It seems you need a mix of high precision, expensive weapons and a lot of cheaper stuff for when you run out of the expensive stuff.
I disagree with the "Taiwanese people will fight" statement. You should talk to local Taiwanese people and understand what they think, rather than looking at maps and assume that, "they will fight like Ukraine". They won't. and It's not even fair to compare these 2 scenarios to begin with.
As a frequent traveler to TW and with many friends there, I have to disagree. They may not "Give a Sh1t" in the day to day but they are the most independence minded individuals. Be in now doubt whatsoever, there will be a fight.
They won't fight because they have much closer inter-familial relationships with citizens of China, and culturally extended family ties are very strong in people of Chinese decent whether you call them Chinese or Taiwanese.
If they suspect they will be abandoned like Ukraine, obviously they won't fight back. Not many countries did fight back during the Nazi German takeover in Europe.
Why do you think the US "skipped" Taiwan when it was fighting Japan back in WW2? The answer is because it would have cost 100,000s of thousands of troops... so they just "skipped" it and went closer to Japan.
What Ian Brewer doesn't tell you about Admiral Stavridis: He is "vice chair, global affairs, and a managing director-partner of The Carlyle Group, a global investment firm, and chair of the board of trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation. Stavridis serves as the chief international diplomacy and national security analyst for NBC News in New York." Admiral Stavridis will not mention in the interview and Bremmer will not ask how much money he and his partners will earn if the US follows his recommendations.
Personally, I'm not losing sleep over where Admiral Stavridis, or any top ranking military officer whose career was defined by integrity. His ideas may or may not be either in line with, or even considered by the active military advisors consider. If any hint of something corrupt occurred, like a bribe, that's different. But Barring that, it would be a waste to limit such accomplished people from being on corporate advisory boards.
@@gregparrott We are all relieved that you are sleeping well for whatever reasons. However, the machinations of The Carlyle Group - buying up our Defense Industries to be managed by Private Equity, merging firms to jack-up profits & reduce competition, extracting supersize profits & capital gains from the same firms they buy, lobbying & making large contributions to politicians, paying off even ex-Presidents and large numbers of the Top Military Brass, financing think tanks & their sockpuppets - these are a major reason our Military is in the mess its in - bloated budgets, too expensive weaponry that doesn't work or isn't fit for purpose, unprepared or unable to fight a war against a near-competitor. It's a waste of time listening to these ex-Brass now serving Corporate Interests.
@@JohnDorian-j7x Well I answered that, but UA-cam seems to eliminate responses and follow-up responses for all kinds of unexplained algorithmic reasons. Trying to discuss on this platform is near impossible. In short, motivation counts in evaluating any person's selection of facts to build and justify a narrative. Facts tell us little without proper context, and then the facts may not be correct and the judgements from them faulty. An interchange between, say Andre Martyanov or Larry Johnson and Admiral Stavridis would be an enlightening discussion. Brewer should arrange one, but then does the Admiral ever debate knowledgeable critics? A discussion with David Rubenstein, co-founder and ex-CEO of the Carlyle Group, at the Economic Club will not lead to improving US foreign and defense policies, but it will provide reasons for expanding defense expenditures and profits.
@@brucewolman4166 I definitely feel you on "UA-cam seems to eliminate responses and follow-up responses for all kinds of unexplained algorithmic reasons", lol... doesn't seem to have rhyme or reason to it. Can you give me two or three good examples of this "Facts tell us little without proper context, and then the facts may not be correct and the judgements from them faulty" happening in the real world?
American mindset of kinetic warfare might be good for arms exports but has nothing to do with the real world. Isn’t Ian Bremer the one who fucked up Afghanistan and Iraq. Well, some people never change their profession.
@@RAZR_Channel He started the Eurasia Group after the breakup of the Soviet Union when the West rushed to Central Asia to get a piece of the action from all the Stan’s which were thought to be oil and gas rich. Pepe Escobar, a far left geopolitical analyst, came up with the sarcastic term Pipelanistan. Then Bremmer turned on a dime when U.S.- China relations took over the narrative (and after U.S. interests failed to gain traction in Central Asia) so he pivoted to GZERO as the G7 started to talk about G2. And he had the PRC ambassador as his guest. Now with Stavridis, former NATO commander who has been hiding out at Tufts Fletcher School of Diplomacy, he is hosting the admiral with ambitions to run The Coming War on China (see John Pilger’s documentary). The most respected PACOM of the Seventh Fleet was Admiral Joseph Prueher who understood the region, was not a war hack, and was appointed by Clinton as Ambassador to China. Stavridis thinks he knows Taiwan, and therefore China. Wrong man at the wrong place at the wrong time. So is Kurt Campbell as State Dept. Deputy under Jake Sullivan. Let’s see how the elections play out.
@@CarminaIguana Which is not recognized as a sovereign country by a single government on Earth. The U.N. recognizes it as a "Province of China", most countries recognize it as a part of China, it's 12 remaining "allies" interpret it as the official government of all China; and Taiwan's constitution interprets it as the official government of all China. So, you could be ridiculous as refer to it as "a perfectly sovereign China", but that would be, of course, ridiculous.
Admiral Stavridis is an awesome guest. Loved this interview. Please have him back.
Thank you for the great interview Ian!
*Very insightful. Thanks
Thank you, Ian. Really really appreciate all that you do and all that you bring to the understanding of the geopolitics of the now! It’s such useful, informative, information, and the way that you break things down and the perspective you bring I find incredibly helpful and useful. Thank you.
Richly informative interview!
He's right in many points. But the real life examples go in another direction. Even with unmanned systems, cyber technology and special forces, both in Ukraine and Gaza boots on the ground are needed.
Excellent overview! quite enlightening, militarily speaking!
Awesome, I learned a lot , from Waipahu, Hawaii. Mahalo.
Mr. Stravridis claimed that he is more familiar with people in Taiwan than Xi because he has visited Taiwan several times. But Xi has worked in Fujian province for 17 years. Interacting with officials and business people from Taiwan was his daily job... It is just impossible to make sensible strategic plans without getting the basic facts correct.
Being a frequent visitor does not compare with being part of that culture. So I would take Stravidis claim with a huge grain of salt.
He's simply not interested in getting basic facts correct. He's interested in supporting U.S. government and media narratives.
@@jasonjean2901 Boo hoo! The facts of the matter is Taiwan wants nothing less than to become part of mainland China... especially not after what the CCP did it Hong Kong. Before Hong Kong, maybe... after Hong Kong, NEVER.
Let's go 7th Fleet
Taiwan is a totally different entity than Ukraine
Yeah, you wanna drop 'modern' from the title, guys.
If you missed 2 years and half of hysterical propaganda, you came to the right place.
It's embarrassing really... theses guy talk like high school kids...
Please list the top 3 parts of "hysterical propaganda" for us, specifically.
@@JohnDorian-j7x It should be pretty obvious why a conversation between mr. Bremmer and a former NATO commander could be described as propaganda right away. Perhaps you're assuming I meant "lies" with the word "propaganda," but I didn't. However, if we were to focus solely on false propaganda, let's look at the dishonesty of claiming that Putin told Xi Jinping he would "sweep across" Ukraine in 5 days. The standard lie about this claims that it was actually "3 days," so I'll give Mr. Stravridis points for creativity. Do I really need to point out that this is an opportunistic lie? The only person on record speaking of this famous estimate, which you hear all the time from people with smirks of 'I'm saying something so clever,' is the US General Mark Milley, who publicly claimed Kiev could fall in 72 hours. This is very different, isn't it? The quick fall of Ukraine is a claim made only by US officials (and eventually Ukraine's, for obvious reasons). Maybe, somewhere at a bar in Moscow, or at a barbecue at a Dasha, many other Russians claimed the same thing; maybe they claimed it would fall in hours! But I guess you'll agree with me that that's a different story. Admiral Stravridis' is just a talking point. Besides, no one with a basic understanding of military campaigns could have ever believed that the Russians truly expected to conquer Ukraine (not even just Kiev) in 3 or 5 days. The sole amount of troops (160 to 190k tops) tells us this much. And if this operational fact isn't enough, then you may ask yourself if it is normal for a "conquering" force to initiate peace negotiations the following day via not one, but 2 different channels, as we know it happened (see Turkey & Israel). Of course I could go on. This one is just too evident. But I think this should be enough to at least question the veracity (and intention) of the Stravridis' tale about what happened in the Olympics. As for the other 2 "top parts," I'll leave them as homework for you. It only takes a few minutes of sincere research to dismantle silly propaganda like the one on this video.
@@JohnDorian-j7x Well, somebody deleted my answer to you
@@LonYi-zk7se Don't use that excuse. Just use plain, non-propagandistic/emotionally laden words, and it'll get through youtube's auto mod. Better yet, post the exact time stamps in the video (a range, so say something like 5:12 - 5:29 or 11:20 through 11:57 followed by a brief description of it)
Violence : Is Not a Virtue...
US does not recognise Taiwan as a country, US recognise the one China policy. Ukraine has the right to retake Donbass, and China has the right to retake Taiwan. these are their internal matters, we cannot oppose Russian intervention while justifying our own intervention.
The One China Policy doesn't mean Beijing takes Taiwan by force and end democracy. It essentially only recognizes that there are no longer two Chinas.
Great video with an overview of the probable direction of warfare. I question the idea that we won't need a "million man army". The one thing Russia has going for it is the big cannon fodder army. Without it, they'd be done. It seems you need a mix of high precision, expensive weapons and a lot of cheaper stuff for when you run out of the expensive stuff.
Am I the only one who thinks that the host has the same voice as Tucker Carlson?
West is spring chicken to define ancient old China
There are two China on the planet Earth. It's impossible for China to separate itself from China ...
You're right, its about time that West Taiwan reunite and become Imperial China once again!
But Russia is winning in Ukraine. So it’s a great model for China when it comes to Taiwan.
The presenter has a clear view on the world. The former commander is very biased and says mostly propagandistic things.
Believe me, nowadays China can absolutely secure Taiwan and never allow it to be Ukraine.
Taiwan is not Ukraine, it is Donbass... =]
I disagree with the "Taiwanese people will fight" statement. You should talk to local Taiwanese people and understand what they think, rather than looking at maps and assume that, "they will fight like Ukraine". They won't. and It's not even fair to compare these 2 scenarios to begin with.
As a frequent traveler to TW and with many friends there, I have to disagree. They may not "Give a Sh1t" in the day to day but they are the most independence minded individuals. Be in now doubt whatsoever, there will be a fight.
@@leenglishman1605 yes they will fight for sure, but not like whats happening in Ukraine. Too much to cover if you ask me why
They won't fight because they have much closer inter-familial relationships with citizens of China, and culturally extended family ties are very strong in people of Chinese decent whether you call them Chinese or Taiwanese.
If they suspect they will be abandoned like Ukraine, obviously they won't fight back. Not many countries did fight back during the Nazi German takeover in Europe.
I assure you, as a Taiwanese, our generation would fight to the last man.
Good imagination Commander...555
Many pirate countries back Ukraine while Taiwan is just isolated small island.
Why do you think the US "skipped" Taiwan when it was fighting Japan back in WW2? The answer is because it would have cost 100,000s of thousands of troops... so they just "skipped" it and went closer to Japan.
What Ian Brewer doesn't tell you about Admiral Stavridis: He is "vice chair, global affairs, and a managing director-partner of The Carlyle Group, a global investment firm, and chair of the board of trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation. Stavridis serves as the chief international diplomacy and national security analyst for NBC News in New York." Admiral Stavridis will not mention in the interview and Bremmer will not ask how much money he and his partners will earn if the US follows his recommendations.
Personally, I'm not losing sleep over where Admiral Stavridis, or any top ranking military officer whose career was defined by integrity. His ideas may or may not be either in line with, or even considered by the active military advisors consider. If any hint of something corrupt occurred, like a bribe, that's different. But Barring that, it would be a waste to limit such accomplished people from being on corporate advisory boards.
@@gregparrott We are all relieved that you are sleeping well for whatever reasons. However, the machinations of The Carlyle Group - buying up our Defense Industries to be managed by Private Equity, merging firms to jack-up profits & reduce competition, extracting supersize profits & capital gains from the same firms they buy, lobbying & making large contributions to politicians, paying off even ex-Presidents and large numbers of the Top Military Brass, financing think tanks & their sockpuppets - these are a major reason our Military is in the mess its in - bloated budgets, too expensive weaponry that doesn't work or isn't fit for purpose, unprepared or unable to fight a war against a near-competitor. It's a waste of time listening to these ex-Brass now serving Corporate Interests.
Who cares? lol. How does that change any of the facts they discussed?
@@JohnDorian-j7x Well I answered that, but UA-cam seems to eliminate responses and follow-up responses for all kinds of unexplained algorithmic reasons. Trying to discuss on this platform is near impossible. In short, motivation counts in evaluating any person's selection of facts to build and justify a narrative. Facts tell us little without proper context, and then the facts may not be correct and the judgements from them faulty. An interchange between, say Andre Martyanov or Larry Johnson and Admiral Stavridis would be an enlightening discussion. Brewer should arrange one, but then does the Admiral ever debate knowledgeable critics? A discussion with David Rubenstein, co-founder and ex-CEO of the Carlyle Group, at the Economic Club will not lead to improving US foreign and defense policies, but it will provide reasons for expanding defense expenditures and profits.
@@brucewolman4166 I definitely feel you on "UA-cam seems to eliminate responses and follow-up responses for all kinds of unexplained algorithmic reasons", lol... doesn't seem to have rhyme or reason to it.
Can you give me two or three good examples of this "Facts tell us little without proper context, and then the facts may not be correct and the judgements from them faulty" happening in the real world?
Dear Ian, go easy on the coffee..or speed or what the hell you been doing.
COD
You are general?!!!! That is why you are loosing every where you put your nose.
Bias talk
Stravridis keeps living in a fantasy world.
American mindset of kinetic warfare might be good for arms exports but has nothing to do with the real world. Isn’t Ian Bremer the one who fucked up Afghanistan and Iraq. Well, some people never change their profession.
Bremer is embarrassingly Short Sighted... Especially at his age...
@@RAZR_Channel He started the Eurasia Group after the breakup of the Soviet Union when the West rushed to Central Asia to get a piece of the action from all the Stan’s which were thought to be oil and gas rich. Pepe Escobar, a far left geopolitical analyst, came up with the sarcastic term Pipelanistan. Then Bremmer turned on a dime when U.S.- China relations took over the narrative (and after U.S. interests failed to gain traction in Central Asia) so he pivoted to GZERO as the G7 started to talk about G2. And he had the PRC ambassador as his guest. Now with Stavridis, former NATO commander who has been hiding out at Tufts Fletcher School of Diplomacy, he is hosting the admiral with ambitions to run The Coming War on China (see John Pilger’s documentary). The most respected PACOM of the Seventh Fleet was Admiral Joseph Prueher who understood the region, was not a war hack, and was appointed by Clinton as Ambassador to China. Stavridis thinks he knows Taiwan, and therefore China. Wrong man at the wrong place at the wrong time. So is Kurt Campbell as State Dept. Deputy under Jake Sullivan. Let’s see how the elections play out.
It is no need to put Taiwan issue and Ukraine issue together. Ukraine is a sovereign country, but Taiwan ⋯
Taiwan is independent of communist China.
...is also a perfectly sovereign country.
@@CarminaIguana
You had better to read some books about Taiwan!
Yes and the USA aka IOU-country, has no debts and little-India is a superpower.
Ok?😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@CarminaIguana Which is not recognized as a sovereign country by a single government on Earth. The U.N. recognizes it as a "Province of China", most countries recognize it as a part of China, it's 12 remaining "allies" interpret it as the official government of all China; and Taiwan's constitution interprets it as the official government of all China.
So, you could be ridiculous as refer to it as "a perfectly sovereign China", but that would be, of course, ridiculous.