[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
The SDI “Star wars Defense Initiative” was a ruse puled off by one of the best actors of all time to put a squash on the cold war.
[/quote]
Thats my take too.
Best actor of all time exluded. [/quote]
Yes. A president known for his lack of knowledge of world affairs dreamt up a grand strategy to bring the evil empire crumbling down.
[/quote]
Of course academics have no use for him. What he did worked.
Ta-Ta there, fancy pants.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
The SDI “Star wars Defense Initiative” was a ruse puled off by one of the best actors of all time to put a squash on the cold war.
[/quote]
Thats my take too.
Best actor of all time exluded. [/quote]
Yes. A president known for his lack of knowledge of world affairs dreamt up a grand strategy to bring the evil empire crumbling down.
[/quote]
Of course academics have no use for him. What he did worked.
Ta-Ta there, fancy pants.
[/quote]
I sense some hostility towards academia. Why disregard the work of those who devote their lives towards the study of international politics? Again, the disintegration of the USSR was an extremely complicated event that cannot be possibly explained so simply. Correlation does not imply causation.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Sorry, I’m still not sure what you’re driving at. What were the Soviets going to do? Nuke us before SDI became a reality, ensuring their own destruction? All in order to prevent a hypothetical nuclear strike by us after SDI went up? “In order to prevent the possibility of our destruction we must take an action that guarantees our destruction.” I don’t see it.
[/quote]
This is what I see. I don’t see how the SDI unbalances things here because MAD was already satisfied and besides which we are assuming both governments have an interest in self preservation. It makes absolutely no sense to say “well, we don’t fire our nukes because if we do you’ll fire yours and kill us as well, but NOW that you might have a way to negate our nuclear capabilities on the way we WILL fire just to stop you, and making sure you kill us”.
That’s irrational. If you assume the USSR is rational, or at least mostly rational, then that makes absolutely no sense. [/quote]
Where did I ever write that SDI undermining MAD would lead the Soviets to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike? That’s a step that Sloth took on his own. I simply wrote that a policy intent on increasing American security increased the degree of insecurity experienced by both superpowers. [/quote]
Well if that’s the case then I misunderstood your definition of “insecurity”. If you aren’t defining it as a real probability of retributive action holding the potential to harm the homeland of the US then I don’t see how it increases real insecurity whatsoever. If it’s simply an emotional state then whoopdedoo. A rational actor doesn’t act on emotional states and I would disagree with your claim then. [/quote]
Don’t they? States are composed of human actors. Human actors aren’t automatons who have perfect knowledge of options and consequences, nor are they devoid of emotions. The international system is characterized by anarchy and uncertainty. Fear, which can be both “rational” and “irrational,” pervades international politics. This is why states seek security. When IR theorists say that states are rational, they use it as the political equivalent of economics’ conception of Homo economicus. I failed to specify that in our previous discussions.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
The SDI “Star wars Defense Initiative” was a ruse puled off by one of the best actors of all time to put a squash on the cold war.
[/quote]
Thats my take too.
Best actor of all time exluded. [/quote]
Yes. A president known for his lack of knowledge of world affairs dreamt up a grand strategy to bring the evil empire crumbling down.
[/quote]
Of course academics have no use for him. What he did worked.
Ta-Ta there, fancy pants.
[/quote]
I sense some hostility towards academia. Why disregard the work of those who devote their lives towards the study of international politics? Again, the disintegration of the USSR was an extremely complicated event that cannot be possibly explained so simply. Correlation does not imply causation.
[/quote]
I don’t have any hostility towards academia. I just get a kick out of pushing that button.
I just don’t like the fact that social studies professors put way too much emphasis on stupid ideas that don’t work- Like communism, as if Maybe Someday if they just tweaked it like this…
It’s a bunch of crap that doesn’t even look good on paper and looks way worse in reality, which any good Prof. will completely disregard in lieu of being able to expound on a fantasy.
And believe me, the complexity of the fall of the Soviet Union was not lost on the politicians of the time. That was a well timed and highly calculated strike. That you don’t understand that tells me you are reading a re-written version of history when the people who saw it happen are still around.
Then you end up with a guy (Reagan) who had degrees in both sociology and economics being discredited for pulling off a masterful piece of political strategy.
Sometimes stuff just works, and all you can really do is stand back and say “Holy Shit! That really worked!”. You can try to analyse it and create some predictive regression formula, but those factors may never occur as they did again. A nice analogy would be the US and it’s current circumstance, though. Economic hardship + Weak and Ineffective leadership/ a tired, war torn disenchanted population = An unstable political system that is ripe for strategic collapse.
^That is why some pretty smart people are growing very weary of China right now.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
The SDI “Star wars Defense Initiative” was a ruse puled off by one of the best actors of all time to put a squash on the cold war.
[/quote]
Thats my take too.
Best actor of all time exluded. [/quote]
Yes. A president known for his lack of knowledge of world affairs dreamt up a grand strategy to bring the evil empire crumbling down.
[/quote]
Of course academics have no use for him. What he did worked.
Ta-Ta there, fancy pants.
[/quote]
I sense some hostility towards academia. Why disregard the work of those who devote their lives towards the study of international politics? Again, the disintegration of the USSR was an extremely complicated event that cannot be possibly explained so simply. Correlation does not imply causation.
[/quote]
I don’t have any hostility towards academia. I just get a kick out of pushing that button.
I just don’t like the fact that social studies professors put way too much emphasis on stupid ideas that don’t work- Like communism, as if Maybe Someday if they just tweaked it like this…
It’s a bunch of crap that doesn’t even look good on paper and looks way worse in reality, which any good Prof. will completely disregard in lieu of being able to expound on a fantasy.
And believe me, the complexity of the fall of the Soviet Union was not lost on the politicians of the time. That was a well timed and highly calculated strike. That you don’t understand that tells me you are reading a re-written version of history when the people who saw it happen are still around.
Then you end up with a guy (Reagan) who had degrees in both sociology and economics being discredited for pulling off a masterful piece of political strategy.
Sometimes stuff just works, and all you can really do is stand back and say “Holy Shit! That really worked!”. You can try to analyse it and create some predictive regression formula, but those factors may never occur as they did again. A nice analogy would be the US and it’s current circumstance, though. Economic hardship + Weak and Ineffective leadership/ a tired, war torn disenchanted population = An unstable political system that is ripe for strategic collapse.
^That is why some pretty smart people are growing very weary of China right now.
[/quote]
Reagan was an idealist. He truly believed in what SDI represented: nuclear disarmament. To say that it was a “well timed and highly calculated strike” is revisionist history. Even that term is generous. There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. Hell, the same is still true of WWI. You won’t find anyone with any amount of credibility who claims what you are regarding the role of SDI however. You are violating a cardinal rule of methodology. Correlation does not imply causation.
What are your experiences with the social sciences, and more specifically, international relations? I have never heard a reputable scholar advocate communism as a viable economic model. To the contrary, they are strong proponents of the virtues of capitalism. The conception of scholars residing in ivory towers is a bit cliche, especially in a field that has more than it’s fair share of former practitioners.
As far as China goes, some very smart people have been concerned since the 1990s.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[/quote]
That’s an epistemological question. How do I “know”?" I attempt to subscribe to the position that has the strongest historical, methodological, and theoretical underpinnings. Could I be wrong? Certainly, but it won’t be on account of the lack of intellectual rigor.
Now, semantics aside, do you care to address the rest of my post?
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[/quote]
That’s an epistemological question. How do I “know”?" I attempt to subscribe to the position that has the strongest historical, methodological, and theoretical underpinnings. Could I be wrong? Certainly, but it won’t be on account of the lack of intellectual rigor.
Now, semantics aside, do you care to address the rest of my post?[/quote]
Nope!
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[/quote]
That’s an epistemological question. How do I “know”?" I attempt to subscribe to the position that has the strongest historical, methodological, and theoretical underpinnings. Could I be wrong? Certainly, but it won’t be on account of the lack of intellectual rigor.
Now, semantics aside, do you care to address the rest of my post?[/quote]
Nope!
[/quote]
I’m not surprised. It’s not entirely dissimilar if I had attempted to have a discussion on the intricacies of metal working with you. I’m trying to learn how to stick weld on my own, how could I? It doesn’t mean I’m unintelligent or that I’m incapable of learning. I just haven’t a firm grasp of the basics yet. It would helpful if I was willing to learn from those who were the established experts in the field, although they disagree about certain aspects of their work to varying degrees. Thankfully the western world is composed of societies that encourage specialization, and welding is just a hobby of mine.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[/quote]
That’s an epistemological question. How do I “know”?" I attempt to subscribe to the position that has the strongest historical, methodological, and theoretical underpinnings. Could I be wrong? Certainly, but it won’t be on account of the lack of intellectual rigor.
Now, semantics aside, do you care to address the rest of my post?[/quote]
Nope!
[/quote]
I’m not surprised. It’s not entirely dissimilar if I had attempted to have a discussion on the intricacies of metal working with you. I’m trying to learn how to stick weld on my own, how could I? It doesn’t mean I’m unintelligent or that I’m incapable of learning. I just haven’t a firm grasp of the basics yet. It would helpful if I was willing to learn from those who were the established experts in the field, although they disagree about certain aspects of their work to varying degrees. Thankfully the western world is composed of societies that encourage specialization, and welding is just a hobby of mine.
[/quote]
So you are a professional political scientist/analyst?
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[/quote]
That’s an epistemological question. How do I “know”?" I attempt to subscribe to the position that has the strongest historical, methodological, and theoretical underpinnings. Could I be wrong? Certainly, but it won’t be on account of the lack of intellectual rigor.
Now, semantics aside, do you care to address the rest of my post?[/quote]
Nope!
[/quote]
I’m not surprised. It’s not entirely dissimilar if I had attempted to have a discussion on the intricacies of metal working with you. I’m trying to learn how to stick weld on my own, how could I? It doesn’t mean I’m unintelligent or that I’m incapable of learning. I just haven’t a firm grasp of the basics yet. It would helpful if I was willing to learn from those who were the established experts in the field, although they disagree about certain aspects of their work to varying degrees. Thankfully the western world is composed of societies that encourage specialization, and welding is just a hobby of mine.
[/quote]
So you are a professional political scientist/analyst?
[/quote]
Not quite. I’m in my 1st semester of a security studies graduate program at a professional school of international affairs. So aspiring. I know enough to know I have a lot to learn.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Bismark wrote:
There is no consensus regarding the end of the Cold War. Historians and political scientists alike have dissenting professional opinions on the matter. [/quote]
Then how do you know that the version you subscribe to is right?
[/quote]
That’s an epistemological question. How do I “know”?" I attempt to subscribe to the position that has the strongest historical, methodological, and theoretical underpinnings. Could I be wrong? Certainly, but it won’t be on account of the lack of intellectual rigor.
Now, semantics aside, do you care to address the rest of my post?[/quote]
Nope!
[/quote]
I’m not surprised. It’s not entirely dissimilar if I had attempted to have a discussion on the intricacies of metal working with you. I’m trying to learn how to stick weld on my own, how could I? It doesn’t mean I’m unintelligent or that I’m incapable of learning. I just haven’t a firm grasp of the basics yet. It would helpful if I was willing to learn from those who were the established experts in the field, although they disagree about certain aspects of their work to varying degrees. Thankfully the western world is composed of societies that encourage specialization, and welding is just a hobby of mine.
[/quote]
So you are a professional political scientist/analyst?
[/quote]
Not quite. I’m in my 1st semester of a security studies graduate program at a professional school of international affairs. So aspiring. I know enough to know I have a lot to learn.[/quote]
Hope you do well with that.
Interesting thing this morning- I left the TV on and woke up to Soviet tanks getting lit up by Afghan soldiers.
Now there is a strategy that backfired with unintended consequences.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
I’m not surprised. It’s not entirely dissimilar if I had attempted to have a discussion on the intricacies of metal working with you. I’m trying to learn how to stick weld on my own, how could I? It doesn’t mean I’m unintelligent or that I’m incapable of learning. I just haven’t a firm grasp of the basics yet. It would helpful if I was willing to learn from those who were the established experts in the field, although they disagree about certain aspects of their work to varying degrees. Thankfully the western world is composed of societies that encourage specialization, and welding is just a hobby of mine.
[/quote]
Also, if you really do want to learn how to weld- this guys has some of the best instructional vids on the web. Excellent technique demonstrations and he does have a segment on “Metals and How To Weld Them” from the James F. Lincoln foundation.
and practice, practice, practice.
edit: changed link from youtube channel to home page.