The issue is that it’s really uncertain how it will end exactly. To many things are up in the air. So planning for a future that won’t be as optimistic…. It could turn into a Korea of sorts. Could be anything.
Yes. Yes I can. The hell do you mean the Cold War was stable. The institutions might not have changed but still so much fear and bad luck could have ended so much of humanity.
I am curious, as someone who is from former Yugoslavia, why you don't refer to this era as a "post-war". Sure, a simple gaze at it may appear as "oh its just some regional war", but I'd argue the Yugoslav Wars showed a very key problem with how Europe reacted to conflicts without the US guiding it and resulted in an ever growing dependence on the United States in regards to foreign policy and disputes within our continent. I think a key example of this is the lack of European action up until Srebrenica went public, resulting in the United States finally going full force into the conflict. The narrative of Europe possibly "going its own way" may have ended far before February of 2022. English isn't my first language, and I'm passing this through google translate so I apologize if this isn't clear or I may have misunderstood a point or two. I appreciate your content and vigor nonetheless.
No, Communism did NOT lose the peace and Liberalism certainly did NOT win the peace. Russia lost the peace by falling out with their biggest ally fellow Communist China. The Liberal West won the peace by cooperating with Communist China against Communist Russia. So, no. Red China won the war and the peace.
Planning for the post-war is very important. If you don't think so, just look at what happen after the Iraq, Afghan and Lybian wars. If you are not ready for what comes after, then you are just creating a problem for the future.
Surprisingly many wars have no clearly defined goals or even inklin of an exit strategy when they start. Always ask yourself when your governement sends people out to kill and die : have the powers that be told you for what concrete aim they do the killing, and under what conditions it will end? Its flabberghasting how often neither applies. I dont think the US ever had something like that in the recent 50 years and wars.
Why are there some people who don’t like when Kraut talks about the Post-War? It’s extremely vital to talk about because if we don’t then we’ll get another Treaty of Versailles.
@@lordmiraak8991What do you even mean? The Treaty of Paris did not settle, acquit Germany's situation, Western powers and the Soviet Union could not reach a compromise. An armistice was all they got, which did not shove Germany into a decade-long economic depression, unlike how you think and state.
@@Tovalokodonc i mean that germany was able to get its stuff together for round 2 quickly after ww1, in ww2 there was no such posibility since germany literally stopped existing. The german people had it worse after ww2 then after ww1. After ww1 the german people had democracy for the first time. One of the most progressive states around at the time.
@@Tovalokodonc also if im not mistaken the treaty of paris wasnt a peace treaty for ww2 but was a treaty establishing the cooperation between western states
Something I don't understand is when people don't understand we can have multiple conversations at the same time. Talking about post-war doesn't negate conversations about the current war
This is one of the most generally accurate statements you can make about humans' chronic struggle to solve problems. Thank you for bringing it into focus.
I would say it's even necessary. Discussing post-war scenarios helps us understand why we can't let Russia get away with this shit. The consequences of a post-war scenario where Russia controls the Black Sea for example. People should consider that, if they defend Ukraine should let Crimea go (they shouldn't).
Oh, I just live in a country where everyone is making plans for what will happen when the current "president" is gone for over 20 years. (and soon he will hold "elections" for another 6 years, where he will be able to elect himself) During this time, this "president" has managed to destroy the entire opposition, shut everyone's mouths and start a war with a neighboring country. In general, the problem with building such scenarios is that many people start looking for an alternative reality in them, which will never happen if the current problems are not solved.
Also seemed like a huge gloss over to claim the Post-War period after WWII didn’t irrevocably change with the end of the Cold War. Post 1989-1992 is its own Post-War period, with its own new consensus.
Post-war agreements that were made _during_ the war: - Atlantic Charter (August 1941) US and UK set post-war goals, including self-determination for peoples, free trade, and disarmament. - Moscow Conference (October 1943) US, UK, and USSR agreed to recognize each other's sovereignty after the war and create the UN. - Tehran Conference (November 1943) Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin agreed to post-war occupation of Germany. - Bretton Woods Conference (July 1944) Established the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. - Dumbarton Oaks Conference (August-October 1944) Groundwork for the United Nations, including the composition and voting structure of the Security Council.
Without firing a single shot? Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, Central America, South America, a lot of Africa Better phrasing would’ve been “without direct conflict”
Kraut should probably indicate in the title when his videos are off-the-cuff opinion pieces rather than researched and higher quality essays. That comment and the Lenin tangent made me double take which channel I was on. We have to prepare for the post war or else Lenin will sneak into your country and join an ongoing anti-war, anti-imperial revolution might not be the takeaway he was aiming for.
@@MisterFoxton You guys should be legit stupid to assume watchers did not understand Kraut's point (that the smartest of the commies are being pragmatic and seeking their time as they did in WW1), otherwise you would not try to sell your own distorted message in his mouth with such a blatant insolence.
The greatest post-war effect in Ukraine will depend on how much it integrates into the European Union, it could be a fundamental pillar or what ends up defining its failure, we will see what happens
Ukraine won't be integrated into the EU for decades even after the war ends. Corrupt with billions in debt is not a good look. NATO definitely as an emergency measure, to stop further Russian agression
@@Jaxck77 im from Ukraine and I can honestly say we are much worse than Hungary. We are fighting against none other than ruzzia and our government keeps stealing money instead of giving the maximum for the army. This is just unbelievable. We dont want to fight for this. And Ukraine was always like this. And now I doubt EU will exist to the time when Ukraine will be ready to join it
I'd argue that it wasn't post war agreements after WW2 that left us with 70 years of relative peace, but that the fear of nuclear weapons is what made large scale war too dangerous.
This is exactly the reason why warfare between developed nations turned into proxy wars in "disputed" territory. The nations who are capable of nuclear war aren't going to engage with each other on the fields. Instead, they loan their weapons and training to desperate factions in civil wars, hoping their chicken wins the fight. The modern world runs off of the Spanish Civil War's experience. It's better to fight your enemy with foreign troops than your own people, lest it is your own testing out new toys on some peasant guerillas
Hmm I think that this is a case of several things can be true at once. Fear of Nuclear weapons definitely played a large part, but I do not think it was the only large player. Especially in the early post-ww2 period.
Yeah, Poles often forget about this but their foreign policy towards Germany was just as appeasement-like as Britain's or France's. Had they stood up for Czechoslovakia instead of using the Munich agreement to snatch some territory for themselves, much could have been different.
Poland was pro-intervention into Germany in the early 30s before Munich, but France and others were unwilling to engage in this. So no, they were not 'just as appeasement-like as Britain or France,' but I agree the decision to re-annex Cziesyn was foolish. Separately, I do not believe "Poles often forget" this, but rather certain people like to lecture as if Poles do to demean or denigrate them.@@filipmihalovic2822
@@filipmihalovic2822At that time, Poland occupied the territories conquered by force by Czechoslovakia during the Polish-Bolshevik war. Territories which, according to the plebiscites and the League of Nations were Polish. I'm not making excuses for anyone here. I'm just emphasizing that it's not that simple.
Totally agree on this - and frankly surprised you'd be criticised! When the Cold War ended, policy makers in the US (and other countries I suspect) were unprepared for the post-Soviet world that emerged. That failure of planning, and failure of imagination, has played a part in the situation we have today. It's impossible to predict exactly what will happen after the war, but there's no excuse for being surprised, and certainly no harm in avoiding surprise through public discourse.
I fully agree Kraut. The Post war is so important, to much so to be left to “after x side has won”. Lest we forget the numerous conferences that the allies held before Germany and Japan’s surrender.
I’ve spent most of this war as a US Army veteran of a very different sort of era of wars discussing day to day survival with my good friend in Ukraine, but this argument was Ciceronian in its elegance. I don’t believe he’ll be able to think too much about the peace as he struggles to survive on the ground being attacked by the Russians daily, but this has certainly changed the degree of thought I will be giving the sustainability of the peace itself for the sake of the rest of Eastern Europe.
@@samwill7259 Yes, these were proxy wars fought by the USA, USSR and their respective allies. Just because the Cold War didn't turn hot doesn't mean these proxy wars are irrelevant.
I really wouldn't count Yugoslavia, the USSR was dead at that point for 4 years and Yugoslavia was well... that's why NATO walked in. Yugoslavia also wasn't really part of the Cold War considering they were Non-aligned anyway despite being a communist state.
@@aircraft2His focus seems to be lore on the divide of Western and Eastern Europe. Because as soon as the Eastern Bloc and the Soviet Union collapsed, most of thsoe nations turned into liberal democracies similsr to their neighboring states in Western Europe. The reunification of Germany resulted into a democratic state, similar to Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, etc. Why? They lived to tell that full communism and socialism that was forced upon them never worked out for them and abandoned it. Heck those can be applied to Korea, Yugoslavia and Vietnam too. South Korea is literally outdoing North Korea. If not for the nukes of the latter, the reunification of Korea would have already happened a long time ago Most current states of the former Yugoslavia are now members of NATO and some of them are members of the EU. Vietnam? Well, they saw full communism and socialism didnt exactly work out so they adopted bits of free market economics and normalized relations with the US again.
@@memecliparchives2254"if not for the nukes of the latter" Don't forget their biggest backer, who could have easily went "Il-Sung, that was the bed you made. Go lie in it." but chose to prop up a shambling corpse of a regime out of an outdated view of buffer states way beyond the point where it would have been logical.
I would agree with you because that was the first thought I had, but then I started to think about the fact that the Vietnam and Korean wars didn't really have any vital part of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union dissolved because of how poorly it performed on internal politics, not because it wasn't a formidable opponent in war. So while there were shots fired in the name of ending the Soviet Union, I don't think they had any real part in ending the Soviet Union. (And also It is a figure of speech and not the main point of his video, but I can see where your coming from)
@@eeee3029 while I see your point as well, the resources that proxy wars drained from the SU are significant and definitely played a role. Mujaheddin in Afghanistan, mostly.
@@WombatOfDisaster These wars certainly drained the Soviet unions resources, however I still believe that wether these wars happened or not would only have had the effect of speeding up the dissolution, instead of being a cause of it. Basically, the wars helped to increase the speed with which the Soviet Union dissolved, and were not a driving force of that dissolution. At least to my knowledge, I don't pretend to be an expert on Soviet era politics.
The post war after WWII was not as stable as you claim it to be. The breakup of Yugoslavia, the Arab-Israeli wars and the korean war are just some of the several major conflicts during the period you described. Also Russia does not have monopoly on imperialism. The US has been creating conflicts and destabilising nations all over the world for its own gain. Those things are talked about in the very book you cited at the end of the video.
He was referring to stability in Europe after the war specifically in the context of Germany, not sure where it is claimed Russia has "monopoly" on imperialism
`The west won the peace and defeated communism without firing a single shot.` I disagree with this statement as it implies that West didn't participate in armed confrontations with pro-communist governments / groups. What about Vietnam? Or USSR - USA proxy wars? Rhodesia..?
I love kraut videos but those types of statements are what make me disagree with him sometimes. The Cold War was won by a combination of diplomacy, economic strength, proxy wars in Africa and Central Asia, a superhuman effort to make increasingly sophisticated weapons and having the good fortune that the Soviet leadership was increasingly incompetent.
Should have worded it better, but yeah communism did collapse in Central and Eastern Europe almost without a direct war with Western Europe. The Central and Eastern European states just stopped being communist states by the 90s.
You don’t need to defend yourself on this Kraut, thinking about the future and planning ahead is always important, especially if it’s as something big as the war in Ukraine. Being prepared for that eventuality will help everyone both today and when the war ends.
It liked it that there was a defense to watch. I agree with it,... ...except the anti-commie stuff, mostly because of the tone it didnt add much substance to anything, but there was spewing a lot of ideological vile there.
"such a stable political order that it lasted until 2021." Ehhhh... The main reasons for this apparent stability are: 1. European colonial powers began to collapse. Trying to maintain control of a collapsing colonial empire or navigate a post-colonial world order is not as likely to cause war as imperial expansion and imbalance of power caused by it. 2. Europe was divided between larger powers, namely, what would become NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Infighting, rebellion, or fighting the other side without orders would not be tolerated in this environment. 3. Nuclear weapons increase the chance that conflict is all or nothing. We ended up with nothing. 4. If it were not the case, most people in Europe or the US would simply be dead or never born, and perhaps 60-96% of the population of these regions would not be there to ask the question of what went wrong. Every timeline where billions of Europeans and North Americans are reflecting on their own history is one where the European postwar situation prevented a massive nuclear exchange.
After the liberation of Kherson the people at the central square waved the EU flag besides the Ukrainia flag what I found quite touching. The Ukrainians know exactly how their peace order should look like and we Europeans must do everything to support them, because its in our best interest.
@@kakun63 eh, its a coin flip. there is still military goods being sent but it could dry up depending on some huge debates coming up. Its absolutely a huge point of debate here. A lot of people I know are against sending aid to Ukraine, but their opinions on it seem to be rather weak. I suspect if there are good debates over the topic. The easier argument to make is sending military aid to Ukraine for the numerous economic, strategic, and resource based arguments that can be made. Not to mention the fact that we have large stockpiles of old decommissioned weapons that would just rust away anyway. I am genuinely surprised I haven't heard these arguments laid out yet, but I think it would be easy pickings to take down a lot of the right wing isolationist types saying we should stop "wasting money" on Ukraine. I honestly think even a dumbass like me could work these arguments very well. It just feels like a lopsided argument when you get into the nitty gritty.
Did the Ukrainian conflict not start in 2014 in Crimea/Krim? Also, despite the stability and peace in western Europe, there were many conflict globally involving the NATO and also Russia (i.e. Middle East, Russian Chechen war). Thus, there being a Post-War state in Europe seems not quite true, only that the wars that did happen were not fought on European soil.
If won't as long it believes that the USA would strike back. Take the US Army out of equation and you will see that NATO is seriously lacking in both personnel and a willingness to take a fight. The second-strongest army in NATO is Turkish. But Turkey is an opportunistic autocracy and can not be relied upon. This is why the addition of Sweden and Finland is a huge boon to NATO. These people are armed and ready to defend Europe, unlike the Germans and the French. When the war breaks out, it would be the Scandinavians, the Poles, the Baltic States and the UK who would stand up to the challenge. The others would run away and talk themselves out.
The reason why I'm against the EU is that it's no longer about co-operation but of integration. The idea of the EU as a trading block is a great idea, however the current EU is closer to a United States of Europe which is not an antidote to spheres of influence, it IS a sphere of influence. The biggest thing that turned EU into another quasi-Empire was the introduction of the Euro which basically crippled economies that worked better with a weaker currency (i.e. countries with high tourism and net exporters) and only really benefited Germany and France. To win the peace, Europe must co-operate in ways that respect the different realities of sovereign nations. Europe should go back to nation state currencies and foster stronger economic ties through trade rather than regulation. The EU needs no involvement for things like Defence because that's what NATO is for. That is how you become an antidote to spheres influence instead of becoming one yourself.
I don't know if you have been paying attention, but the post war situation will be what ever Russia decides it is. It's not looking good for Ukraine, in any scenario.
Kraut does not understand communism or cold war alot beyond 'imperial realism,' 'spheres of influence' and 'criptocratic disfunctional commie societies.' There are other sources for that. This video, however, is not about communism and cold war, so i just dont mind it all that much. It is however indeed a grave corner cutting simplifcition.
Thank you for raising this very important issue of a post-war order in Europe. Your channel is one of the most thought-provoking I know. Keep up the good work!
Honestly the issue that arises from a post-war Europe is the fact that realistically no one outside of Ukraine can realistically decide how post-war Russia will be structured, and even Ukraine can't really do much. What if Russia will be a pro-european? Will they be neutral? revanchist? Will Russia plunge in a second russian civil war? Or will have the same end of the Soviet Union? No one has really any idea it will happend. Sure, we have Duntsova and Navalny, but isn't much more probable people like Shoigu or a Prigozhin-2.0 will raise up after Putin? Also consider Ukraine's objectives to achieve peace: what they want is to ensure that Russia will not be a problem in the long term, if not even cancel the concept of Russia as a nation. Which is in stark contrast to what western europeans want, which is pretty much just a regime change. You could think that it may just pragmatism in the face of the war, but a russian collapse would also be a jackpot of Ukraine. Is it right for both parties to interfiere? Are our peace plans at odds with Ukraine? Simply said, there are too much variables that we can't realistically plan anything about Russia, our best hopes is to plan fo Europe, which is much more stable and predictable.
can't agree more. It is also indeed true that the main interest of Ukraine is vastly different from the main interest of Europe or the US. I'm not particularly sure why nobody seems to understand that.
Demographically, both of these countries are already dead. This war, no matter its outcome, will only intensify that. So there is no "long term" for these countries.
the vitriol on both sides at a grass roots will be so great that rapprochement will be neigh impossible for generations. Especially if ukraine wins, Russian pride and Western triumphalism would irreconcilable and guarantee far right Russian candidates win elections in Russia after Putin is gone. How was the peace won with the Axis powers in WW2? It took foreign occupation and a program of re-radicalization imposed on them by their occupiers. Russia having the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, would sooner end all life on earth before they let that happen to them.
How tf is Ukraine going to do anything with Russia itself? It's laughable even hearing that Ukraine could anything about concept of Russian nation. Those matters are entirely within Russia to decide and within its many peoples.
I don't believe the post-WWII agreement was that good. Britain and France declared war because of their commitments to Poland, but having defeated one of the threats to Eastern Europe, they fed Eastern Europe to another. 1945-1991 were the times of peace and prosperity for Western Europe while being the times of slavery for Eastern Europe
Bullshit They declared war due to a rabbid hatred of Germany, had it been due to commitments to Poland (false promises and kindly waiting for most of the German army to finish up and return to the west) else they would've responded to the Soviet invasion of Poland in kind
@@m1nekji165 Ally the schnatzees against the Soviets as they begged from the 1930s? Would've found out about those camps earlier, exhausted them Plenty of alternatives at the time friend, just because we decided to throw our lot in with a genocidal warmonger over another doesn't mean it was the right choice Neither does a century of unbelievable propaganda but that's neither here nor there
you shouldn't assume that russia will attack the czech republic, romania and poland after they win ukraine. these countries are in NATO and benefit from its collective defense so it is unlikely that russia attacks them
If NATO fails to defend Ukraine then Russia will have proven, at least to itself, that NATO is unable to defend its own democratic worldview and as such will become no obstacle to further expansion. The scary part is that if they win in Ukraine they're probably right.
@@samwill7259nato is a pact around a feeble promise that can imply whatever you want it to. so nato should speak with actions whether it is weak or strong
With a Donald Trump presidency and his proposal to pull the US out of NATO, Putin could use the resulting chaos to launch an attack. The irony is that Trumps butthurt over NATO is mainly over European countries 'not paying their way' whereas the first to be attacked will be the ones who have always kept military spending above the agreed threshold.
Post war after ww2 fuelled proxy wars all over the globe, brought both nations on the edge of nuclear war, caused countless deaths, soldiers killed on both sides where the superpowers were belligerent but somehow the post war after WW2 was most peaceful. 😂😂😂😂😂
I think people are saying that right now, we don't even know how the war might end - so planning and discussing a post-war with no end in sight is like putting the cart before the horse. That's what the criticisms about you are what I believe. When things are clear, we should definitely plan post-war. People were hoighty toity claiming TOTAL UKRAINIAN VICTORY but the situation changed and all those plans and discussions became wasted. For you, as an armchair analyst, maybe it's OK for you at your leisure. But for the politicians with limited timetables to make decisions and options - they need to fit that somewhere neatly in their schedule when they can.
I think one of the biggest problems for westerners imagining a post war Europe is they think it looks like a pre war Europe. They can’t understand yet that it VERY MUCH does not. It’s like the pandemic where so many institutions are trying to return to the pre war status quo but they have entirely papered over how the world changed during the pandemic, and not just because of the pandemic. Example: it’s gone barely noticed that in America, 2022 was the year that the majority of baby boomers finally retired. That’s America’s largest demographic generation is now retired. But in the face of what is a chronic labor shortage so many businesses are still trying to get workers to return to offices. They need to be casting a nationwide net for talent and the only way they can get that is remote work but despite the efficacy of remote work they’ve even commissioned studies pretending the productivity growth is the pandemic era did not happen. They want the status quo they had. But the conditions that made that status quo possible no longer exist. Same to people who are struggling to imagine a post war Europe. Sweden and Finland are now in NATO and Russian natural gas is GONE. German chemical companies have been dismantling their operations in Germany and shipping them to the American Gulf Coast. Europe will not look the way it did prior to the war, irregardless of how the war ends. Those of us who aren’t fighting need to do those who are fighting the service of having a world for them to come back to.
I can absolutely understand that people are upset when we are already talking about the post-war period. I have the feeling that many people and governments are already acting as if the invasion of Ukraine is already over as if it's a lost cause or as if it doesn't matter anymore and yeah, maybe one of the reasons for the hesitant support is that nobody knows what to do after the war the usual "I'm taking care of the problem just enough so that it doesn't escalate, but solving it is up to my successor"
Just keep in mind the profit interests of multinational corporations (rubbing their hands already) as we prognosticate about the post-war era. We're talking as if they aren't part of the conversation. Not smart.
Another reason I don't like the concepts of "guilt" and "revenge". The postwar talks after World War I had a slight chance to treat Germany and Austria-Hungary as equals when they engaged in peace talks, but the allied nations were fervently against this. "Let's build a peaceful Europe," was curb stomped into "Germany must pay for what they did to us." Even if anger is justified, it has no place at peace talks. Are you there to talk peace or are you there to wave your justice boner around? You can only pick one.
The problem is that at this rate, although Ukraine will hold out for years, it will lose. The West is doing less and less and the chances of a pro-Russian government appearing are higher and higher every day. Ukraine does not have enough soldiers now Ukraine has 1.6 times more soldiers than Russia, this is not enough to attack and the balance of power is shifting towards Russia because they receive ≈40,000 volunteers per month. In general, Ukraine has approximately 1,000,000 soldiers and Russia 700,000 and the Russian army is growing faster. Ukraine urgently needs 500,000 new soldiers at the front. The situation with artillery equipment, aviation, etc. is even worse! Ukraine produces less than 1/10 of what Russia produces and the West has stopped sending all this on the required scale. I saw news like "Germany will send 7,000 artillery shells." This is not enough even for an hour of shooting and this is supposedly a whole month’s delivery. Ukraine is fucked at this rate. we need to prepare for war and not for peace now.
You are right, but Kraut is not contradicting you at all. He states that Ukraine has more more resources, and this is true, since the Western production capacities outclass russia and China combined. But there is no political will to commit these resources and give Ukraine proper supply. There is a well known turncoat, a famous russian journalist Nevzorov, who commented it like this (this is a free quote out of my memory): "The West squandered a critical opportunity to strike evil russia down and destroy it forever. Swift imposition of comprehensive sanctions in the immediate aftermath of the invasion and prompt delivery of full and unlimited military supplies to Ukraine from the outset could have dealt a fatal blow to Putin's regime. If this all had happened, the whole rotten house would have already fallen on Putin's head burying him forever. But time was wasted, the initial shock is gone. Putin is stronger than ever. All this happened because the cowards in the West were scared to face the future where russia does not exist."
I often have to explain to people that one of the big factors on why Imperial Japan took such an aggressive stance leading up to WWII was because of their treatment at the end of WWI. Post-war agreements are so very important when looking towards the long-term.
I’m not convinced anyone would ever consider this a “post-war” era following this conflict. It’s a regional conflict. It’s not like we considered the 2000s to be a “post-war” era following the fall of Yugoslavia.
“A regional conflict”. Lmao. Bringing examples like Yougoslavia is only shows your lack of understanding what’s going on. Whenever you’re located, for your own well being, it’s better to not be too far behind events that are happening. Because at some point you’re going to catch up. And it might be very stressful at that exact moment. But I hope neither you or anyone else is going to experience that.
All of the failed peace agreements you cited have one thing in common - they all depended on a balance of power within Europe. The group of equals within Europe have proven it can't regulate peaceful co-existence without outside powers forcing peace. No matter how well planned and written the peace settlement is, Europe will fall back into slap fighting and flinging pooh at each other. Don't delude yourself that you have a plan to maintain lasting peace in Europe.
it will have to when the threat of external forces will become more important than internal ego-disputes, which will happen, given the demographic and natality trends.
People are complaining because we still don't know how this war will end. In early 2022, everything pointed to Russia losing. After 2023, everything points to Russia winning a war of attrition - certainly keeping the land they stole. These videos about "what will we do once Ukraine finishes curbstompting Russia?" seem extremely out of touch and delusional when you take into account that the outcome of this war is still very much undecided.
@@cinatiropel the outcome of the war directly depends on Western support of war efforts in Ukraine. It's not a friendly match you can watch on you TV. Kraut said what will happen if russia takes over Ukraine and I as Ukrainian agree with him. If the West continues applying half meaures, arguing about military supplies and playing their voting games by suspending finantial support because it doesn't have a vision of post war Europe with Ukraine and without today's russia Ukraine absolutely WILL fall. And then Western people will have to face not far-reaching discussions about what to do in a postwar world but the continuation of war with russia that trained itself in Ukraine, accured a lot of new logistical routes and drafted new cannon fodder on newly occupied vast territories.
Even if Post-War debates and arguments don’t stop wars from happening, they continually give us more and more insight as to why and how specific wars began. That we might be able to prevent as many conflicts from happening in the future as possible. Reminds me of the Imperial Japan: The Fall Of Democracy video. By the way when are you going to do the next part of that series? We’ve been waiting five years.
I feel like the take about WW2 is naive. The reason why WW2 "postwar" worked has a lot to do with countries in charge have a human extinction button, and I'd argue the peace agreement is largely working is due to this very fact. Without that an actual war between US and the USSR would've had happened sometime in the 50s -80s. The WW2 "postwar" will continue to work until the first post WW2 nuke lands on a foreign country and everybody dies; that or technology catches up and nukes are rendered useless and can only be used in limited tactical capacity; or when we have conquered and colonized space and having the Earth's habitability destroyed is no longer a concern for the rich and powerful. Even in this "postwar" context, talking about Russia and their supporters as if they are some sort of cartoon villain, in my opinion, does not contribute to peace. So far every video that has been dwell into Russia is either how their leaders reads books with comically evil statements (according to you, I didn't read the book) and is breaking up the peace the "west" spent so much effort to build, or how it's "this power hungry fool dooming us all". If true peace is desired, you have to figure out what Russia wants too, and actually find common grounds and not paint the other side as completely evil, incompetent, and refuse to compromise. One example; the warm water port issue goes back all the way to Nicholas II, which as far as my knowledge goes, isn't a communist, so unless they are inherently evil for wanting this, and even if it is, the issue isn't a ideological issue, but a geopolitical one. One can argue they don't "need" the warm water ports, but what they want in fact, is to be in control of their own security and economical opportunities (is that so unreasonable?), which is just a random guess I spent 5 seconds on, but for the sake of the argument that this is true, then why don't we work from there? As long as we stop caring about hearing one side; war is an inevitability until a side is destroyed or rendered impotent, but whoever remains or occupies those land next will continue to have those same issue if it remains unsolved. I'd like to think myself as neutral, and as long as the argument comes from how "my side should win, and the other should take all the blame", at least don't pretend to advocate for actual peace.
Such a strong pease thet lasted from WW2 till 2021... Iran Irak Vietnam Kosovo Korea Libia Argentina Armenia Afganistan Siria Cyprus Turkmenistan Georgia Israel Egypt And bunch of african countries couldn't agree less!
Those are only a handful of countries compared to the hundreds that make up the world. Most of the world remained peaceful since WW2, the longest lasting peace humanity has seen
@@mr.bluebird2140 you are ignorant. In soth africa and south America most countries doesn't even felt WW2. The fact that you aren't experience war doesn't mean that there are peace. It's falce logic. In fact if you american your country is involved in 4 wars right now, it doesn't make it peacefull regardless of your awareness. The only reason you don't see direct war is nukes. Nuclear deturence mede 100000000000 times more for so caled peace than any post war efforts.
Postwar planning is ESSENTIAL. The atrocity of Iraq wasn't the invasion itself, it was the utter lack of post-war planning. No one in the US military or government put serious, peer-reviewed thinking into how to Iraq would be governed, how its people would be kept fed, or how law and order would be maintained.
3:17 "The west defeated communism without firing a single shot" Weren't there a lot shots fired. Like the Korean war, Vietnam War, Soviet Invasion of Afganistan, the cambodian bombing campaign, the whole slew of proxy wars in aftrica.
@@mariamethodieva7431 hundred thousands of soldiers of both sides and millions of civilians died during these conflicts. Saying "without firing a shot" is a big yike if not huge insult. I dare him to go to Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghan and say to people there such thing. rephrase it into something like "ends communism without direct conflict"
@@hoangle2483 even that's pushing it. The US and China directly fought each other in the Korean war. Granted it was a UN intervention and Communist China was clearly junior partner to the Soviets.
I'm not pro-russian nor pro-ukraine, you need to be joking or be just highly optimistic on a lost cause (blinded by your ideology) when you mention that ukraine has both the numbers in technology and industrial power. That aside, i think post war is far from here, the war is extending to other parts where the US and EU influence is vanishing.
@@QTwoSixкроме того, что население Украины продолжает стремительно уменьшаться (в соотношении с российским - несравнимо даже), армия страдает все сильнее, а фронт удержать все сложнее (с Курском теперь особенно)
"The west won the peace and defeated communism without firing a single shot" I know what you mean to say but I couldn't help but laugh at the absurdity of this statement if you look at asia instead of Europe.
Plenty of comments here stating "im convinced" and "im surprised you've been criticized". These seemingly baffled proclamations of support are excellent examples of the dereliction of reality that now possess the neoliberal mind. This childish desire to force a favorable narrative no matter how ridiculous, unbelievable or irrational it may be has lead to a total incoherence that simply cannot envision a practical today, let alone a future at all. One could say the do this to spite history, but it's most likely the development of an alibai in the face of abysmal odds. It is funny that an ideology which only 30 years ago declared the death of history, would be rendered utterly incoherent by the historical tidal wave that is building momentum as we speak. If we were to examine metaphorically the "room" in the west, one could measure arguments such as Krauts on the grief scale. One moment, the war is fought for Ukrainian interests, another, its for geopolitical security and control of the black sea, the next, it is for a non-existent post-war europe, all the while, still, after years of conflict, continuously underestimating and disregarding the enemy, and simply deeming the logistics of its own plans "TO BE DECIDED". Considering this game for a post war Europe is all being wagered on an unreliable, destabilized proxy, this type of potificating and drawing grand parallels to previous wars is shockingly naive, extremely callous, but truthfully unsurprising. What a sad, strange hill to die on.
Both East and West fired a lot of shots during the Cold War. These shots weren't directly fired at eachother, but instead at the allies and associates of each respective power. Millions of lives were lost in the wars fought and/or supported by the US and USSR. The fates of entire countries changed dramatically in that period. Vietnam, Korea and Afghanistan are only the tip of the iceberg. Civil wars, revolutions, military coups, you name it. Conflicts supported and enabled by the superpowers to advance their position in the Cold War. In Latin America, it was mostly the US. Whereas in Africa, there was significant Soviet influence. The US alone spent trillions of dollars fighting in these conflicts. Shots were fired. They were just fired indirectly.
Overall message is good, but I think you speak way too surface level on communism as an ideology. Saying countries collapsed just because they're communist is disingenuous and ignores the bigger picture, especially saying it happened without the west "firing a single bullet"
Yo, Kraut, my man. I still don’t know what you mean exactly when you say Communism. Do you mean Russia’s communism? Or do you mean that fundamentally the core tenants of communism, whatever that means, fundamentally couldn’t achieve peace? I would like to know. Because I remember being told and coming to the conclusion my self that ‘real’ communism hasn’t ever been achieved, what communism is supposed to be. Not a brutal dictatorship, not a totalitarian regime, nothing authoritarian.
he is a liberal, that means he believes that the Marxist-Leninist ideology and its consequences are inevitable in trying to achieve the ideology of communism and in doing so will inevitably gridlock itself as an authoritarian state
What a story arc, Kraut from battling the SJW and internet nazis in 2015/2016, to becoming a reddit shill in 2022. Will you take a break and rebrand your channel again?
‘The post war period after World War Two lasted until 2021.’ What about all the cold war proxy wars, wars in the Middle East, Yugoslavian war, and there was conflict between Russia and Ukraine before 2021. Like what specifically about the Ukrainian war is so unique as to end the peace?
There is a saying,” A bad peace is even worse than war.” - Tacitus Honestly I am a realist and I don’t see how Ukraine can win this war. Russian is making 2 million shells a month and the EU and US can’t even fulfill Ukraine’s needs, that is one example out of many. Russia has the advantage and initiative, they will press on this even at the negotiation table, the failed Ukraine offensive gave them this. A peace will be made but I feel Russia will set the terms, either they will make Ukraine proxy or divide up Ukraine. The US has its priorities in the Middle East right now with, supporting Israel, tension with Iran, possible conflict for Taiwan. The Ukraine/Russian war has become forgotten war, I barely see it in the news. All I see on the news is Red Sea , Gaza, Israel. I can’t see the EU being able to support Ukraine without US support. They should have made a deal in March but all we have now is a costly war, with peace too high right now.
"Lenin and other Communists just like to sprinkle intellectual-sounding words over it to make it sound smart. Commies do that kind of stuff." Does the pot calling the kettle black mean anything to you? 😂
Lol so true, he also forgets how China and Kissinger are best friends when they turned on the Soviet Union. It's like every so called capitalist eventually allied with "commies" once they offer them a deal.
Very interesting discourse, however the argument relies on the fact that Russia wants to move on to another war because they "talked about it openly", I have never heard of that. Did I miss an episode ? I can't find what he is refering about on google, could someone tell me ?
You just check internal russian news, obviously in russian. Just general rule when dealing with russia, go and see what they talk about among themselves, not what they want to show you.
It is important to talk about post war but dismissing the Russian perspective as "they'll just start another war" is incredibly irresponsible and short-sighted. It is clear to anyone who objectively look at the eastern front that the Ukrainian idea of total victory will not happen, unless NATO intervene directly and I'm sorry if that fact burst any ideological reality bubble. Instead of dismissing the Russians as savage bloodthirsty orcs, imperialist megalomaniacs or proto-Soviets, it would be wise to include them in the post war rhetoric as a legitimate partner. That will be mostly beneficial to no other than Ukrainians themselves because smart diplomacy in the post war talks could win them much more in terms of what they gain than what is happening in the battlefield which is nothing but death, terror, mayhem and lost territory.
Unfortunately, diplomacy with Russia usually results in more invasions, just look at the period from 2014 to 2022. It's a viscous cycle because Russia doesn't want to stop: 4:30
@@sircatangry5864 It doesn't matter what I consider total Ukranian victory. Ukranians define it as "reclaming all territories of Donbas and Crimea". Which isn't happening.
"Where is the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing? They have passed like rain on the mountain, like wind in the meadow. The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow. How did it come to this?" Theoden's words resonate so much now, knowing that some people in Europe are willing to give Putin everything he wants. Europe needs to rise and prepare for all eventualities!
Honestly as a korean I feel like Ukraine is gonna end up like korea. Devided with a dmz being created. Both Ukrainian and russian line doesn't seem to be changing that much
@@4T3hM4kr0n Same thing during the last days of korean war. Massive US bombing north korea and china supply line. Unless russia and china does a massive attack it's gonna end with a stalemate
@@4T3hM4kr0n Yeah stop consuming propaganda that suits your biases. IMO peace could have been achieved ages ago in a much better deal if we pressured Ukraine into making a peace deal when they were at the height of their advantage. This whole "Ukraine could take back Crimea!" crowd has done a whole lot of damage. Russia is also hitting the Ukrainian rear, including Kiev, and can keep the war going for far longer. Attrition is taking its toll on Ukraine while Russia is only really strengthening its position (which is pretty typical of Russia, corrupt, but has the resources to recover when the corruption is exposed). The US and EU are also less interested in sending aid than they were at the start of the war, especially since they realise Ukraine is kind of a lost cause at this stage, while other conflicts like Israel take center stage.
The frontline is very much so not stable and the balance of power is dynamic. There is a lot of false equivalence when people compare Korea to Ukraine, especially at this stage when a great deal of future is still to be decided. Also, longterm balance of power is definitely not "Korean-like". There are no American troops on the ground and Russia has a much greater amount of resources and population. As such, Ukraine will require long term commitment from the West even after the war ends in order not to be overrun by Russia (a point that a lot of people seem to completely miss).
3:15 First seeing how USA, UK is falling a part I wouldn't praise the neo-liberal systems... Second in the Cold War there were many proxy wars like Korea, Vietnam, Afganistan. So there were many shotts fired!
The problem I have with this video is that it assumes the Russo-Ukrainian war will end kind of like ww2 (basically a Hollywood movie, the bad guys get completely destroyed by the good guys), when a Korean War-style ending is (right now at least) much more likely (long stalemate followed by ceasefire agreement and frozen conflict). The Russians arent winning right now but the Ukrainians arent either, it is no longer November 2022 when it seemed Ukraine could liberate all its occupied territories.
Russia is winning, they still own Ukrainian Land, the only question is if russia will achieve a minor victory or a massive one. Likely we won't know till after american presidential elections at least since it will set the tone of support to ukraine.
Neoliberalism defeated communism without firing a single shot- the CIA would like a word. So would vietnamese people one imagines. Some of the dozens of coups had 'shots'
even excluding any coup, proxy wars outside Europe significantly effected how the Soviet Union engaged with foreign policy and diplomacy, all of which still influenced domestic decisions of each soviet president. This would just so happen to culminate with Gorbachev and what he tried to do, which got the soviet union dissolved. Kraut's view here in the video is very euro-centric (as is common in alot of videos), and while it's true that the soviet union collapsed due to internal conflict and economic failure, to say that 'no shots were fired [by the west]' to get to that point is a bit rich.
7:12 "The numbers are all in favor of Ukraine in terms of technology and Industrial power" Who's 'technology'? Who's 'Industrial power'? Without US aid they are screwed both militarily and economically. Not to say that is inherently a bad thing but that if US political establishment drops it's assistance to Ukraine that will mark the beginning of the end of the not-quite-a-counter-offensive strategy that Ukraine has yet to significantly improve upon since winter of 2022 when they took Kherson. Some numbers might have been in their favor but the Russian army isn't being depleted (as multiple US senators have openly hoped) and Ukrainians are beginning to run out of ideal military-aged men. Doesn't matter how advanced your technology is if you can't train and send soldiers to battle with it. As far as industrial power goes, it's an absolute joke. Russia has clearly shown to the world that it can survive economic sanctions as long as it does business with designated US adversaries, of which that list is growing longer, and it's national wealth on nearly all metrics were superior to Ukraine before and now during the war. Ukraine is just a smaller nation compared to Russia so it's economy isn't going to be stronger when comparing them. Ukraine specializing in industrial agriculture doesn't change much either. Due to the actions of Ukraine's president, Ukraine is straddled with enormous private sector debt (mostly US; notably BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase). We also know Ukraine small to mid cap sectors are hanging by a thread solely because of this accrued debt and the generosity of western political elite. None of this screams favorable especially relative for technology and industrial power.
The only two things missing here are: 1) the analysis of the situation if Russia wins the war (either by completely conquering Ukraine or annexing the eastern parts of it), and; 2) what to do with Russia if it loses the war, or the war turns into an endless stalemate as a permanent ceasefire. The complete dismissal of Russian concerns and interests (as undemocratic or paranoid they may be, or not) is one of the main causes of this war, which means if the new postwar Europe again continues with the same attitude Russia will chimp out again sometime in the future. Some arrangement must be made together with Russia, which is at this point a heretical thing to say in the EU. And let's bear in mind that Russia feels betrayed and decieved by the West when it comes to the Minsk agreements, when Hollande, Merkel and Poroshenko openly admitted they all never had the intention of honoring them and were just stalling for time. If these matters are not taken into account, a new war will come - perhaps even more devastating than it is now.
You're talking about the multi polar world order as if that were a bad thing - it's actually a SUPER GOOD THING!!! In current world order the USA does as it wish, completely unencumbered by the rules: it invades countries, starts coups-d'etat, forcibly seizes oil tankers in the middle of the ocean, extracts oil from other countries it previously invaded, and so on. It's so brazenly hypocrytical in its moral values it just angers everybody. With Russia and China acting as counter weights, the US will have to moderate - else they risk losing even more allies to the opposing block. And Russia will keep China in check, lest they start helping the people from Washington instead. That's the stable equilibrium a multipolar world offers, avoiding the disaster that the reign of a single hegemon so far has been
I would love to see you do a video on why imperial Japan is seen in a more sympathetic light than Nazi Germnay. I have noticed online of people comparing the two as if they are the same “evil.” I really like your video on “Imperal japan: The Fall of Democracy” and I would like to see more videos about that. I also saw a video on the Golden Age of Japanese Cinema that was fascinating. It showed the historical context of that time period and portrayed Japan in a sympathetic light. I love Japan, but Should post war japan be seen this way?
Kraut, talking about the next series of steps before we arrive at the task of solving the peace needs to happen. It's like shopping for groceries. Do you leave the house when you ONLY need eggs? No you write it down and start a shopping list. Once the list is of sufficient size or you run out of a desired resource then you leave for the market. This exercise is us writing the shopping list for peace. It will change once we get into the "store " or "post war" Until then let's keep adding to the shopping list of winning the peace and communicating our needs and insecurities as simple people who happen to live in separate sovereign nations. Me personally, the peace will not be won until we arm the peoples of these regimes with information and support. We all also need to face the reality that the Axis of the 21st century is gearing up its ability to manufacture for war as much of Europe and the US of A are still sleeping at the wheel. The fact that there are no free people in Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and thier allies means the cycle of "wrong thought" will continue much like how the Hitler youth were corrupted by propaganda. The people of these nations are emotionally and mentally ill. Because of the environment thier governments force them to live within. Be well Krout, The only awkward conversation is one that doesn't take place. -Craig
I'd argue that it is the existence of nuclear weapons that "kept the peace" between major powers post war, there was no peace in places like the middle east Africa Sth America and east Asia.
1:44 Id say that the post WW2 post war lasted until 1991, with the start of the Yugoslav Wars and the break up of the Soviet Union markinv the "end" of the Cold War between the Soviets and the American, which was Id say all but a peaceful period. Again this post war was handled terribly, and led to todays War.
I'm going to be honest, the beginning was my opinion... "It's too early to think about of what comes next when the war isn't even over yet". However, I can also leave my biases aside, and say that people like you are very much needed to brainstorm the ideas of longer lasting peace... My mind is hellbent on Russia, and that's because it's next door of me, or rather us Finns. I can fully admit that you're thought process on the war exceeds mine in terms of long term thinking for how we acquire and restore the peace for generations to come. Thank you for the insightful videos, you have been great source of temper when it comes to cooling down and looking at the picture at broad.
People online talk much about how socialism has failed, but what we are seeing now in the world is how neo-liberalism has failed. Socialism is surging among gen z and milennials in the so called 'west' and feel like the system has failed them and their future prospects. The Soviet Union collapsing was not the ultimate testament to an end of Socialism, it was merely the end of the Soviet branch of it.
Soviets were not really socialism but a totalitarian empire that calls itself socialist. Just like the "democratic republic" of North Korea. Nothing really bad in true socialism, except that it never happened to work on practice.
My only criticism is that we dont even know how the war ends and by the looks of it it wont be in a decisive ukranian victory not only that but the corrupt, inept and incopetent western leaders dont even seem to want ukraine to win
Maybe instead of automatically assuming we are going to win and talking about "post-war", despite a lack of any military breakthrough, we should focus on actually winning.
"The numbers are all in favor of Ukraine in terms of technology and industrial power" Completely delusional. It might have been a more or less decent take in the summer of 2022. But now? It have become evident that the NATO bloc is a paper tiger that can't even set up a production of artillery shells after 2 years of war. Moreover, Ukraine hasn't carried out a successful offensive operation for more than a year, and the prospects for 2024 are bleak. Realistic postwar scenario: Ukraine looses 4 oblast and Crimea, permanent neutral status, country is a failed state.
The post war agreements between nations has caused recent wars such as the Israeli Palestinian conflict. This has been a re accruing issue that is causing more problems and suffering towards the people of those nation states
"The post-ww2 peace lasted until 2021" WHAT "The west defeated communism without firing a single shot" WHAT I am 3 minutes into the video and I'm not going to even bother with the rest. It's ridiculous this has so many likes and hundreds of comments not even questioning those statements
Even if we don't think about the proxy-wars between USA and Soviets, also the Yugoslav wars, also the wars between all the posti-soviet countries, etc, didn't the war start in 2014? Or 2022 on a bigger scale, but there's no way it was until 2021.
Something important to note is that some Kazakhs talked about how right after the war began, that some Russian politicians started questioning Kazakhstan’s sovereignty and that maybe *they* should redraw their borders… we know which nation Russia truly was targeting next
I mean, bro, they are the only country in CIS/Post-USSR - who: 1)Made another Maidan-like coup. (Belarus coup failed - if you want to mention them) 2)Recent Leader (Tokaev) is Pro-West 3)Building all the west tech in their country (US/EU-licensed locomotives, Talgo trains and cars factories) 4)Trying to say "FU" to Russia, in/on some political forums like "VALDAI" forum. And trying to get away with this sh__t. 5)Building a REAL NATO base inside the Kazakhstan (yes, this base in even in NATO armybase catalog, officially, so this base in real!). So, yea, without a doubt - i will tell you as russian. Kazakhstan - indeed, gonna the next target for us (Russia), bcs KZ-stan - did learn nothing from Ukraine recent 30-year span history. And they gonna do same mistakes - as Ukraine did. "History repeats itself", and "Who did learn a lesson from history - are DOOMED to repeat that." Also, they (Kazakhstan) have same cons which ukraine was still have - BIGGEST corruption (after Ukraine), worst infrastructure (For example - their famous LRT line (In Astana, i believe) - is a basically a statue of KZ-stan biggest corruption), worst internet (They are still using TV-cable/Telephone line in 2024 (Russia already have 5G, btw and high-speed optic cable for stationary internet right now - in 2024), and also dipping/"leakage" of your internet speed - is 80-90%) and etc. Also, a pitiful recent cringe propaganda - which copied Ukraine's one. Like "we kazakh - won the WW2, all other nations didn't do nothing. We are masterrace (and "mongols was our bootlickers", then in real history - kazakh was one of first nation to break a knee towards Genghiskhan and Mongol Empire/Yoke) yadda-yadda". And the most cringe - there are N@ZI groups in KZ region. Yep, there are exist and this is moronic and cringe - for muslim country. Also, news about killings of Russian-ethnic people which born there, by the nаzi kazakh radicals. So, yea - KZ is gonna next Ukraine 2.0 (in bad way and meaning). The next one (Ukraine 3.0) - is debated to Mongolia. That's how it goes. Good day to you, mate.
And about Europe and Baltic States - we not gonna do something with them, if not they started the war itself. EU/NATO - are pussies, and Baltic States... well, there goes a nickname for them - "ProEbalty", or "States which are lose everything, and blame the others".
@@sircatangry5864 bcs, it was. A coup to kill/make to exit the post of Ukraine president by Yanukovich. Are you westerners, even didn't read the history of this Ukraine coup? Oh, what did i expected from a NAFO...
With overwhelming victory. Period. Govermments and people are acting like if there was no ziggers in Ukraine already or some bs. That lack of commitment will cost NATO, the US and the EU a lot. Anything worse than a minor victory means, for example, that when Xi launches an invasion of Taiwan nobody will give two fucks about the gringos because it's commitment to help ANY ally is next to zero. What Ukraine needs is TZD and nothing less.
The book I recommend for 2024. Postwar by Tony Judt: www.amazon.com/Postwar-History-Europe-Since-1945/dp/1441778225
The issue is that it’s really uncertain how it will end exactly. To many things are up in the air. So planning for a future that won’t be as optimistic…. It could turn into a Korea of sorts. Could be anything.
Yes. Yes I can. The hell do you mean the Cold War was stable. The institutions might not have changed but still so much fear and bad luck could have ended so much of humanity.
I am curious, as someone who is from former Yugoslavia, why you don't refer to this era as a "post-war". Sure, a simple gaze at it may appear as "oh its just some regional war", but I'd argue the Yugoslav Wars showed a very key problem with how Europe reacted to conflicts without the US guiding it and resulted in an ever growing dependence on the United States in regards to foreign policy and disputes within our continent.
I think a key example of this is the lack of European action up until Srebrenica went public, resulting in the United States finally going full force into the conflict. The narrative of Europe possibly "going its own way" may have ended far before February of 2022.
English isn't my first language, and I'm passing this through google translate so I apologize if this isn't clear or I may have misunderstood a point or two. I appreciate your content and vigor nonetheless.
Excellent book. When I was an undergraduate studying international relations, Judt was required reading in many IR and European history curricula.
No, Communism did NOT lose the peace and Liberalism certainly did NOT win the peace. Russia lost the peace by falling out with their biggest ally fellow Communist China. The Liberal West won the peace by cooperating with Communist China against Communist Russia. So, no. Red China won the war and the peace.
"A bad post-war agreement can lead right into the next conflict"
Truer words cannot be said enough
In other words, what Peaceniks don't realize they're actually advocating for.
Yep. It's the biggest contributor to why we had a second world war.
Israel Palestine moment
Oh hello WW2
Treaty of Versailles moment
Planning for the post-war is very important. If you don't think so, just look at what happen after the Iraq, Afghan and Lybian wars. If you are not ready for what comes after, then you are just creating a problem for the future.
None of those wars should have happened if not for NATO war machine and calls for democracy and peace as they ravage countries worldwide
This planning for the post-war sounds like planning for revenge war against Russia
Surprisingly many wars have no clearly defined goals or even inklin of an exit strategy when they start.
Always ask yourself when your governement sends people out to kill and die : have the powers that be told you for what concrete aim they do the killing, and under what conditions it will end? Its flabberghasting how often neither applies.
I dont think the US ever had something like that in the recent 50 years and wars.
Can you correct Irak into Iraq please and yeah I agree
Or take a look at Versailles or the treaty that was signed after the First Balkan war.
Why are there some people who don’t like when Kraut talks about the Post-War? It’s extremely vital to talk about because if we don’t then we’ll get another Treaty of Versailles.
And wee all know that this peac treaty just the fiul vohr the next war was PS sorry i vor bad Englisch im a German and still learning english
The treaty of versailles didnt go far enough clearly. The peace treaty after ww2 was far worse for the germans but it stopped them.
@@lordmiraak8991What do you even mean? The Treaty of Paris did not settle, acquit Germany's situation, Western powers and the Soviet Union could not reach a compromise. An armistice was all they got, which did not shove Germany into a decade-long economic depression, unlike how you think and state.
@@Tovalokodonc i mean that germany was able to get its stuff together for round 2 quickly after ww1, in ww2 there was no such posibility since germany literally stopped existing. The german people had it worse after ww2 then after ww1. After ww1 the german people had democracy for the first time. One of the most progressive states around at the time.
@@Tovalokodonc also if im not mistaken the treaty of paris wasnt a peace treaty for ww2 but was a treaty establishing the cooperation between western states
Something I don't understand is when people don't understand we can have multiple conversations at the same time. Talking about post-war doesn't negate conversations about the current war
Is whataboutism. They don't want to talk about post-war. Especially pro-russians, who don't have a realistic plan, which they know.
This is one of the most generally accurate statements you can make about humans' chronic struggle to solve problems. Thank you for bringing it into focus.
I would say it's even necessary.
Discussing post-war scenarios helps us understand why we can't let Russia get away with this shit.
The consequences of a post-war scenario where Russia controls the Black Sea for example. People should consider that, if they defend Ukraine should let Crimea go (they shouldn't).
Oh, I just live in a country where everyone is making plans for what will happen when the current "president" is gone for over 20 years. (and soon he will hold "elections" for another 6 years, where he will be able to elect himself) During this time, this "president" has managed to destroy the entire opposition, shut everyone's mouths and start a war with a neighboring country. In general, the problem with building such scenarios is that many people start looking for an alternative reality in them, which will never happen if the current problems are not solved.
To say that liberal democracy defeated comunism without firing a single shot, seems to me like a bit of an overstatement.
Also seemed like a huge gloss over to claim the Post-War period after WWII didn’t irrevocably change with the end of the Cold War. Post 1989-1992 is its own Post-War period, with its own new consensus.
Kraut has a habit of those
korea vietnam and all the other proxy wars aswell as the soviet invasion of afganistan
It's called a metaphor, guys.
Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Afghanistan… There were definitely shots involved.
Post-war agreements that were made _during_ the war:
- Atlantic Charter (August 1941) US and UK set post-war goals, including self-determination for peoples, free trade, and disarmament.
- Moscow Conference (October 1943) US, UK, and USSR agreed to recognize each other's sovereignty after the war and create the UN.
- Tehran Conference (November 1943) Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin agreed to post-war occupation of Germany.
- Bretton Woods Conference (July 1944) Established the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
- Dumbarton Oaks Conference (August-October 1944) Groundwork for the United Nations, including the composition and voting structure of the Security Council.
literally wrote this down as I'm studying for my political science degree thank u !!
Yes.
Was yalta post war?
@ethanwatt-dz3xq these people are only concerned with Europe.
self determination for peoples didnt really work out now, did it lol
Without firing a single shot?
Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, Central America, South America, a lot of Africa
Better phrasing would’ve been “without direct conflict”
This vid is about Europe so I could give the benefit of the doubt that the statement applies to Europe only
Kraut should probably indicate in the title when his videos are off-the-cuff opinion pieces rather than researched and higher quality essays. That comment and the Lenin tangent made me double take which channel I was on.
We have to prepare for the post war or else Lenin will sneak into your country and join an ongoing anti-war, anti-imperial revolution might not be the takeaway he was aiming for.
@@MisterFoxton You guys should be legit stupid to assume watchers did not understand Kraut's point (that the smartest of the commies are being pragmatic and seeking their time as they did in WW1), otherwise you would not try to sell your own distorted message in his mouth with such a blatant insolence.
He was talkin about Eastern Europe. Berlin Wall fell without any invasion or warfare.
I don’t really see how those conflicts directly had anything to do with the collapse of the USSR
The greatest post-war effect in Ukraine will depend on how much it integrates into the European Union, it could be a fundamental pillar or what ends up defining its failure, we will see what happens
Aka it could become Poland, or it could become Hungary.
Ukraine won't be integrated into the EU for decades even after the war ends. Corrupt with billions in debt is not a good look. NATO definitely as an emergency measure, to stop further Russian agression
@@Jaxck77 im from Ukraine and I can honestly say we are much worse than Hungary. We are fighting against none other than ruzzia and our government keeps stealing money instead of giving the maximum for the army. This is just unbelievable. We dont want to fight for this. And Ukraine was always like this. And now I doubt EU will exist to the time when Ukraine will be ready to join it
@@Jaxck77Both are the same, is that the joke?
Or Ukraine will never join the EU at all and Russia will not go for any other war, at least not in foreseeable future.
I'd argue that it wasn't post war agreements after WW2 that left us with 70 years of relative peace, but that the fear of nuclear weapons is what made large scale war too dangerous.
This is exactly the reason why warfare between developed nations turned into proxy wars in "disputed" territory. The nations who are capable of nuclear war aren't going to engage with each other on the fields. Instead, they loan their weapons and training to desperate factions in civil wars, hoping their chicken wins the fight. The modern world runs off of the Spanish Civil War's experience. It's better to fight your enemy with foreign troops than your own people, lest it is your own testing out new toys on some peasant guerillas
Hmm I think that this is a case of several things can be true at once. Fear of Nuclear weapons definitely played a large part, but I do not think it was the only large player. Especially in the early post-ww2 period.
yeah
Kraut, when you talk about interbellum Poland, dont go easy on Józef Beck.
He was not a good Foreign Minister.
Even his last name is spelled in English/German instead of Polish for some reason, booo, boooo!
Yeah, Poles often forget about this but their foreign policy towards Germany was just as appeasement-like as Britain's or France's.
Had they stood up for Czechoslovakia instead of using the Munich agreement to snatch some territory for themselves, much could have been different.
Poland was pro-intervention into Germany in the early 30s before Munich, but France and others were unwilling to engage in this. So no, they were not 'just as appeasement-like as Britain or France,' but I agree the decision to re-annex Cziesyn was foolish. Separately, I do not believe "Poles often forget" this, but rather certain people like to lecture as if Poles do to demean or denigrate them.@@filipmihalovic2822
I raise you Edvard Beneš.
@@filipmihalovic2822At that time, Poland occupied the territories conquered by force by Czechoslovakia during the Polish-Bolshevik war. Territories which, according to the plebiscites and the League of Nations were Polish. I'm not making excuses for anyone here. I'm just emphasizing that it's not that simple.
Totally agree on this - and frankly surprised you'd be criticised! When the Cold War ended, policy makers in the US (and other countries I suspect) were unprepared for the post-Soviet world that emerged. That failure of planning, and failure of imagination, has played a part in the situation we have today. It's impossible to predict exactly what will happen after the war, but there's no excuse for being surprised, and certainly no harm in avoiding surprise through public discourse.
@cya1noand then we hear from the Russian troll bot, lol.
@cya1no You Russians are really hung up on feeling "humiliated", aren't you? It's not real.
@@AreYouSerious-210g with a mindset like that, you're going to repeat the history and suffer the consequences.
@@kormannn1 what mindset are you referring to?
@@AreYouSerious-210g Mindset of the simpleton.
I fully agree Kraut. The Post war is so important, to much so to be left to “after x side has won”. Lest we forget the numerous conferences that the allies held before Germany and Japan’s surrender.
I’ve spent most of this war as a US Army veteran of a very different sort of era of wars discussing day to day survival with my good friend in Ukraine, but this argument was Ciceronian in its elegance.
I don’t believe he’ll be able to think too much about the peace as he struggles to survive on the ground being attacked by the Russians daily, but this has certainly changed the degree of thought I will be giving the sustainability of the peace itself for the sake of the rest of Eastern Europe.
The West did not "win the peace without firing a single shot." Korea, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, do I have to continue?
Pretty much none of those things have anything to do with the Soviet collapse, so...yes because you didn't make your point
@@samwill7259 Yes, these were proxy wars fought by the USA, USSR and their respective allies. Just because the Cold War didn't turn hot doesn't mean these proxy wars are irrelevant.
I really wouldn't count Yugoslavia, the USSR was dead at that point for 4 years and Yugoslavia was well... that's why NATO walked in. Yugoslavia also wasn't really part of the Cold War considering they were Non-aligned anyway despite being a communist state.
@@aircraft2His focus seems to be lore on the divide of Western and Eastern Europe. Because as soon as the Eastern Bloc and the Soviet Union collapsed, most of thsoe nations turned into liberal democracies similsr to their neighboring states in Western Europe. The reunification of Germany resulted into a democratic state, similar to Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, etc. Why? They lived to tell that full communism and socialism that was forced upon them never worked out for them and abandoned it.
Heck those can be applied to Korea, Yugoslavia and Vietnam too.
South Korea is literally outdoing North Korea. If not for the nukes of the latter, the reunification of Korea would have already happened a long time ago
Most current states of the former Yugoslavia are now members of NATO and some of them are members of the EU.
Vietnam? Well, they saw full communism and socialism didnt exactly work out so they adopted bits of free market economics and normalized relations with the US again.
@@memecliparchives2254"if not for the nukes of the latter"
Don't forget their biggest backer, who could have easily went "Il-Sung, that was the bed you made. Go lie in it." but chose to prop up a shambling corpse of a regime out of an outdated view of buffer states way beyond the point where it would have been logical.
Quite strongly disagree that the west "won against the SU without firing a single shot" Kraut.
I would agree with you because that was the first thought I had, but then I started to think about the fact that the Vietnam and Korean wars didn't really have any vital part of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union dissolved because of how poorly it performed on internal politics, not because it wasn't a formidable opponent in war. So while there were shots fired in the name of ending the Soviet Union, I don't think they had any real part in ending the Soviet Union. (And also It is a figure of speech and not the main point of his video, but I can see where your coming from)
@@eeee3029 while I see your point as well, the resources that proxy wars drained from the SU are significant and definitely played a role. Mujaheddin in Afghanistan, mostly.
@@WombatOfDisaster These wars certainly drained the Soviet unions resources, however I still believe that wether these wars happened or not would only have had the effect of speeding up the dissolution, instead of being a cause of it. Basically, the wars helped to increase the speed with which the Soviet Union dissolved, and were not a driving force of that dissolution. At least to my knowledge, I don't pretend to be an expert on Soviet era politics.
@@eeee3029 it just didn't become money spent on the planned social policies, improving living situations, i guess
Alongside this, the US and USSR continuously had sword measuring contests that would eventually bankrupt the USSR.
The post war after WWII was not as stable as you claim it to be. The breakup of Yugoslavia, the Arab-Israeli wars and the korean war are just some of the several major conflicts during the period you described. Also Russia does not have monopoly on imperialism. The US has been creating conflicts and destabilising nations all over the world for its own gain. Those things are talked about in the very book you cited at the end of the video.
He was referring to stability in Europe after the war specifically in the context of Germany, not sure where it is claimed Russia has "monopoly" on imperialism
Post war europe
How many details is he supposed to pack into a 20 minute video?
You say that the 1945 post war created stability which lasted until 2021. I wonder why you picked this year and not 2014 or 2022?
`The west won the peace and defeated communism without firing a single shot.`
I disagree with this statement as it implies that West didn't participate in armed confrontations with pro-communist governments / groups.
What about Vietnam? Or USSR - USA proxy wars? Rhodesia..?
I think he's more implying a direct, massive scale war with the Soviet Union.
"defeated communism without firing a single shot" are you insane?
I love kraut videos but those types of statements are what make me disagree with him sometimes. The Cold War was won by a combination of diplomacy, economic strength, proxy wars in Africa and Central Asia, a superhuman effort to make increasingly sophisticated weapons and having the good fortune that the Soviet leadership was increasingly incompetent.
Actually "communism" was so kind as to defeat itself.
Should have worded it better, but yeah communism did collapse in Central and Eastern Europe almost without a direct war with Western Europe.
The Central and Eastern European states just stopped being communist states by the 90s.
There were no wars in europe between the eastern and western bloc. This is historically quite unprecedented. Do you see now what he meant?
@@Silver_Prussiansorry... what?!
You are going to need to make a longer version of this explaining what your suggestion is for a Post War Agreement
Yes I agree
You don’t need to defend yourself on this Kraut, thinking about the future and planning ahead is always important, especially if it’s as something big as the war in Ukraine. Being prepared for that eventuality will help everyone both today and when the war ends.
Yeah no fuck that, a good idea like this can stand up to scrutiny, it doesn’t need to accepted as a platitude
Plans heavily depend on outcome of the war however.
It liked it that there was a defense to watch. I agree with it,...
...except the anti-commie stuff, mostly because of the tone it didnt add much substance to anything, but there was spewing a lot of ideological vile there.
"such a stable political order that it lasted until 2021."
Ehhhh... The main reasons for this apparent stability are:
1. European colonial powers began to collapse. Trying to maintain control of a collapsing colonial empire or navigate a post-colonial world order is not as likely to cause war as imperial expansion and imbalance of power caused by it.
2. Europe was divided between larger powers, namely, what would become NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Infighting, rebellion, or fighting the other side without orders would not be tolerated in this environment.
3. Nuclear weapons increase the chance that conflict is all or nothing. We ended up with nothing.
4. If it were not the case, most people in Europe or the US would simply be dead or never born, and perhaps 60-96% of the population of these regions would not be there to ask the question of what went wrong. Every timeline where billions of Europeans and North Americans are reflecting on their own history is one where the European postwar situation prevented a massive nuclear exchange.
After the liberation of Kherson the people at the central square waved the EU flag besides the Ukrainia flag what I found quite touching. The Ukrainians know exactly how their peace order should look like and we Europeans must do everything to support them, because its in our best interest.
just stupid cargocult
Wait till daddy usa pulls out
lol
@@YourMentalDamagerussia will not go further than ukraine… so at the start of the war their nuclear threats were just for fun of it… very convincing
@@kakun63 eh, its a coin flip. there is still military goods being sent but it could dry up depending on some huge debates coming up. Its absolutely a huge point of debate here. A lot of people I know are against sending aid to Ukraine, but their opinions on it seem to be rather weak. I suspect if there are good debates over the topic. The easier argument to make is sending military aid to Ukraine for the numerous economic, strategic, and resource based arguments that can be made. Not to mention the fact that we have large stockpiles of old decommissioned weapons that would just rust away anyway. I am genuinely surprised I haven't heard these arguments laid out yet, but I think it would be easy pickings to take down a lot of the right wing isolationist types saying we should stop "wasting money" on Ukraine. I honestly think even a dumbass like me could work these arguments very well. It just feels like a lopsided argument when you get into the nitty gritty.
Did the Ukrainian conflict not start in 2014 in Crimea/Krim? Also, despite the stability and peace in western Europe, there were many conflict globally involving the NATO and also Russia (i.e. Middle East, Russian Chechen war). Thus, there being a Post-War state in Europe seems not quite true, only that the wars that did happen were not fought on European soil.
Imagine thinking that Russia would attack a NATO country after stucking in Ukraine for 2 years
If won't as long it believes that the USA would strike back. Take the US Army out of equation and you will see that NATO is seriously lacking in both personnel and a willingness to take a fight. The second-strongest army in NATO is Turkish. But Turkey is an opportunistic autocracy and can not be relied upon. This is why the addition of Sweden and Finland is a huge boon to NATO. These people are armed and ready to defend Europe, unlike the Germans and the French. When the war breaks out, it would be the Scandinavians, the Poles, the Baltic States and the UK who would stand up to the challenge. The others would run away and talk themselves out.
most of this made no sense.
The reason why I'm against the EU is that it's no longer about co-operation but of integration. The idea of the EU as a trading block is a great idea, however the current EU is closer to a United States of Europe which is not an antidote to spheres of influence, it IS a sphere of influence. The biggest thing that turned EU into another quasi-Empire was the introduction of the Euro which basically crippled economies that worked better with a weaker currency (i.e. countries with high tourism and net exporters) and only really benefited Germany and France.
To win the peace, Europe must co-operate in ways that respect the different realities of sovereign nations. Europe should go back to nation state currencies and foster stronger economic ties through trade rather than regulation. The EU needs no involvement for things like Defence because that's what NATO is for. That is how you become an antidote to spheres influence instead of becoming one yourself.
Russia actually has the advantage in the war against Ukraine. The only hope for Ukraine at this time is if NATO sends troops in Ukraine.
I don't know if you have been paying attention, but the post war situation will be what ever Russia decides it is. It's not looking good for Ukraine, in any scenario.
"without firing a single shot" are you sure about that
apparently Korea and Vietnam and all the other wars were all just a collective hallucination
Kraut does not understand communism or cold war alot beyond 'imperial realism,' 'spheres of influence' and 'criptocratic disfunctional commie societies.'
There are other sources for that. This video, however, is not about communism and cold war, so i just dont mind it all that much. It is however indeed a grave corner cutting simplifcition.
@@jaka2274 remember someone calling his channel liberal pragerU lol
@@dyst0pi465 I had not heard of this pragerU before. I looked it up. You ruined my day. haha thanks
He meant in Europe, not a single shot was fired for Berlin wall to fall.
Thank you for raising this very important issue of a post-war order in Europe. Your channel is one of the most thought-provoking I know. Keep up the good work!
Honestly the issue that arises from a post-war Europe is the fact that realistically no one outside of Ukraine can realistically decide how post-war Russia will be structured, and even Ukraine can't really do much.
What if Russia will be a pro-european? Will they be neutral? revanchist?
Will Russia plunge in a second russian civil war? Or will have the same end of the Soviet Union?
No one has really any idea it will happend.
Sure, we have Duntsova and Navalny, but isn't much more probable people like Shoigu or a Prigozhin-2.0 will raise up after Putin?
Also consider Ukraine's objectives to achieve peace: what they want is to ensure that Russia will not be a problem in the long term, if not even cancel the concept of Russia as a nation. Which is in stark contrast to what western europeans want, which is pretty much just a regime change.
You could think that it may just pragmatism in the face of the war, but a russian collapse would also be a jackpot of Ukraine.
Is it right for both parties to interfiere? Are our peace plans at odds with Ukraine?
Simply said, there are too much variables that we can't realistically plan anything about Russia, our best hopes is to plan fo Europe, which is much more stable and predictable.
can't agree more. It is also indeed true that the main interest of Ukraine is vastly different from the main interest of Europe or the US. I'm not particularly sure why nobody seems to understand that.
Demographically, both of these countries are already dead. This war, no matter its outcome, will only intensify that. So there is no "long term" for these countries.
If there is a Russian collapse... who will get to keep the thousands of nuclear missiles across the country...?
the vitriol on both sides at a grass roots will be so great that rapprochement will be neigh impossible for generations.
Especially if ukraine wins, Russian pride and Western triumphalism would irreconcilable and guarantee far right Russian candidates win elections in Russia after Putin is gone.
How was the peace won with the Axis powers in WW2? It took foreign occupation and a program of re-radicalization imposed on them by their occupiers. Russia having the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, would sooner end all life on earth before they let that happen to them.
How tf is Ukraine going to do anything with Russia itself? It's laughable even hearing that Ukraine could anything about concept of Russian nation. Those matters are entirely within Russia to decide and within its many peoples.
I don't believe the post-WWII agreement was that good. Britain and France declared war because of their commitments to Poland, but having defeated one of the threats to Eastern Europe, they fed Eastern Europe to another. 1945-1991 were the times of peace and prosperity for Western Europe while being the times of slavery for Eastern Europe
True. Western Europe just paid the price by feeding other countries to USSR.
This is hilarious because the West had actual colonies while Eastern Europe had no underclass to make cheap garbage that the West had.
Bullshit
They declared war due to a rabbid hatred of Germany, had it been due to commitments to Poland (false promises and kindly waiting for most of the German army to finish up and return to the west) else they would've responded to the Soviet invasion of Poland in kind
And what were the alternatives? Operation Unthinkable or what? Soviet's weren't going to relinquish control of Eastern Europe.
@@m1nekji165
Ally the schnatzees against the Soviets as they begged from the 1930s?
Would've found out about those camps earlier, exhausted them
Plenty of alternatives at the time friend, just because we decided to throw our lot in with a genocidal warmonger over another doesn't mean it was the right choice
Neither does a century of unbelievable propaganda but that's neither here nor there
you shouldn't assume that russia will attack the czech republic, romania and poland after they win ukraine. these countries are in NATO and benefit from its collective defense so it is unlikely that russia attacks them
If NATO fails to defend Ukraine then Russia will have proven, at least to itself, that NATO is unable to defend its own democratic worldview and as such will become no obstacle to further expansion. The scary part is that if they win in Ukraine they're probably right.
@@samwill7259nato is a pact around a feeble promise that can imply whatever you want it to. so nato should speak with actions whether it is weak or strong
@@NeoZondix NATO is an ideological organization. If it fails to defend western style liberal democracy than it ceases to exist.
With a Donald Trump presidency and his proposal to pull the US out of NATO, Putin could use the resulting chaos to launch an attack. The irony is that Trumps butthurt over NATO is mainly over European countries 'not paying their way' whereas the first to be attacked will be the ones who have always kept military spending above the agreed threshold.
But then we couldn't fearmonger about a puppet state being invaded after trying to break free under false promises they'd get aid
Post war after ww2 fuelled proxy wars all over the globe, brought both nations on the edge of nuclear war, caused countless deaths, soldiers killed on both sides where the superpowers were belligerent but somehow the post war after WW2 was most peaceful. 😂😂😂😂😂
I think people are saying that right now, we don't even know how the war might end - so planning and discussing a post-war with no end in sight is like putting the cart before the horse. That's what the criticisms about you are what I believe. When things are clear, we should definitely plan post-war. People were hoighty toity claiming TOTAL UKRAINIAN VICTORY but the situation changed and all those plans and discussions became wasted. For you, as an armchair analyst, maybe it's OK for you at your leisure. But for the politicians with limited timetables to make decisions and options - they need to fit that somewhere neatly in their schedule when they can.
I think one of the biggest problems for westerners imagining a post war Europe is they think it looks like a pre war Europe. They can’t understand yet that it VERY MUCH does not. It’s like the pandemic where so many institutions are trying to return to the pre war status quo but they have entirely papered over how the world changed during the pandemic, and not just because of the pandemic.
Example: it’s gone barely noticed that in America, 2022 was the year that the majority of baby boomers finally retired. That’s America’s largest demographic generation is now retired. But in the face of what is a chronic labor shortage so many businesses are still trying to get workers to return to offices. They need to be casting a nationwide net for talent and the only way they can get that is remote work but despite the efficacy of remote work they’ve even commissioned studies pretending the productivity growth is the pandemic era did not happen.
They want the status quo they had. But the conditions that made that status quo possible no longer exist.
Same to people who are struggling to imagine a post war Europe. Sweden and Finland are now in NATO and Russian natural gas is GONE. German chemical companies have been dismantling their operations in Germany and shipping them to the American Gulf Coast. Europe will not look the way it did prior to the war, irregardless of how the war ends.
Those of us who aren’t fighting need to do those who are fighting the service of having a world for them to come back to.
I can absolutely understand that people are upset when we are already talking about the post-war period.
I have the feeling that many people and governments are already acting as if the invasion of Ukraine is already over
as if it's a lost cause or as if it doesn't matter anymore
and yeah, maybe one of the reasons for the hesitant support is that nobody knows what to do after the war
the usual "I'm taking care of the problem just enough so that it doesn't escalate, but solving it is up to my successor"
Just keep in mind the profit interests of multinational corporations (rubbing their hands already) as we prognosticate about the post-war era. We're talking as if they aren't part of the conversation. Not smart.
@@juniorjames7076good point but what do we do about that?
Another reason I don't like the concepts of "guilt" and "revenge". The postwar talks after World War I had a slight chance to treat Germany and Austria-Hungary as equals when they engaged in peace talks, but the allied nations were fervently against this. "Let's build a peaceful Europe," was curb stomped into "Germany must pay for what they did to us." Even if anger is justified, it has no place at peace talks. Are you there to talk peace or are you there to wave your justice boner around? You can only pick one.
The problem is that at this rate, although Ukraine will hold out for years, it will lose. The West is doing less and less and the chances of a pro-Russian government appearing are higher and higher every day. Ukraine does not have enough soldiers now Ukraine has 1.6 times more soldiers than Russia, this is not enough to attack and the balance of power is shifting towards Russia because they receive ≈40,000 volunteers per month. In general, Ukraine has approximately 1,000,000 soldiers and Russia 700,000 and the Russian army is growing faster. Ukraine urgently needs 500,000 new soldiers at the front. The situation with artillery equipment, aviation, etc. is even worse! Ukraine produces less than 1/10 of what Russia produces and the West has stopped sending all this on the required scale. I saw news like "Germany will send 7,000 artillery shells." This is not enough even for an hour of shooting and this is supposedly a whole month’s delivery. Ukraine is fucked at this rate. we need to prepare for war and not for peace now.
You are right, but Kraut is not contradicting you at all. He states that Ukraine has more more resources, and this is true, since the Western production capacities outclass russia and China combined. But there is no political will to commit these resources and give Ukraine proper supply. There is a well known turncoat, a famous russian journalist Nevzorov, who commented it like this (this is a free quote out of my memory): "The West squandered a critical opportunity to strike evil russia down and destroy it forever. Swift imposition of comprehensive sanctions in the immediate aftermath of the invasion and prompt delivery of full and unlimited military supplies to Ukraine from the outset could have dealt a fatal blow to Putin's regime. If this all had happened, the whole rotten house would have already fallen on Putin's head burying him forever. But time was wasted, the initial shock is gone. Putin is stronger than ever. All this happened because the cowards in the West were scared to face the future where russia does not exist."
@@alexgry4763 "Western production capacities outclass russia and China combined" It's the worst comment that I read in a long time.
@@esteban8592 thank you for being so constructive!
I often have to explain to people that one of the big factors on why Imperial Japan took such an aggressive stance leading up to WWII was because of their treatment at the end of WWI.
Post-war agreements are so very important when looking towards the long-term.
I’m not convinced anyone would ever consider this a “post-war” era following this conflict. It’s a regional conflict. It’s not like we considered the 2000s to be a “post-war” era following the fall of Yugoslavia.
“A regional conflict”. Lmao. Bringing examples like Yougoslavia is only shows your lack of understanding what’s going on. Whenever you’re located, for your own well being, it’s better to not be too far behind events that are happening. Because at some point you’re going to catch up. And it might be very stressful at that exact moment.
But I hope neither you or anyone else is going to experience that.
All of the failed peace agreements you cited have one thing in common - they all depended on a balance of power within Europe. The group of equals within Europe have proven it can't regulate peaceful co-existence without outside powers forcing peace. No matter how well planned and written the peace settlement is, Europe will fall back into slap fighting and flinging pooh at each other. Don't delude yourself that you have a plan to maintain lasting peace in Europe.
it will have to when the threat of external forces will become more important than internal ego-disputes, which will happen, given the demographic and natality trends.
I don’t understand why people are complaining about postwar, for me treaties and postwar diplomacy is a fascinating part of history
People are complaining because we still don't know how this war will end. In early 2022, everything pointed to Russia losing. After 2023, everything points to Russia winning a war of attrition - certainly keeping the land they stole.
These videos about "what will we do once Ukraine finishes curbstompting Russia?" seem extremely out of touch and delusional when you take into account that the outcome of this war is still very much undecided.
@@cinatiropel the outcome of the war directly depends on Western support of war efforts in Ukraine. It's not a friendly match you can watch on you TV. Kraut said what will happen if russia takes over Ukraine and I as Ukrainian agree with him. If the West continues applying half meaures, arguing about military supplies and playing their voting games by suspending finantial support because it doesn't have a vision of post war Europe with Ukraine and without today's russia Ukraine absolutely WILL fall. And then Western people will have to face not far-reaching discussions about what to do in a postwar world but the continuation of war with russia that trained itself in Ukraine, accured a lot of new logistical routes and drafted new cannon fodder on newly occupied vast territories.
@@olgatrotsenko2153 The West already has been supporting Ukraine. It's failing badly.
Even if Post-War debates and arguments don’t stop wars from happening, they continually give us more and more insight as to why and how specific wars began. That we might be able to prevent as many conflicts from happening in the future as possible. Reminds me of the Imperial Japan: The Fall Of Democracy video. By the way when are you going to do the next part of that series? We’ve been waiting five years.
I feel like the take about WW2 is naive. The reason why WW2 "postwar" worked has a lot to do with countries in charge have a human extinction button, and I'd argue the peace agreement is largely working is due to this very fact. Without that an actual war between US and the USSR would've had happened sometime in the 50s -80s. The WW2 "postwar" will continue to work until the first post WW2 nuke lands on a foreign country and everybody dies; that or technology catches up and nukes are rendered useless and can only be used in limited tactical capacity; or when we have conquered and colonized space and having the Earth's habitability destroyed is no longer a concern for the rich and powerful.
Even in this "postwar" context, talking about Russia and their supporters as if they are some sort of cartoon villain, in my opinion, does not contribute to peace. So far every video that has been dwell into Russia is either how their leaders reads books with comically evil statements (according to you, I didn't read the book) and is breaking up the peace the "west" spent so much effort to build, or how it's "this power hungry fool dooming us all". If true peace is desired, you have to figure out what Russia wants too, and actually find common grounds and not paint the other side as completely evil, incompetent, and refuse to compromise.
One example; the warm water port issue goes back all the way to Nicholas II, which as far as my knowledge goes, isn't a communist, so unless they are inherently evil for wanting this, and even if it is, the issue isn't a ideological issue, but a geopolitical one. One can argue they don't "need" the warm water ports, but what they want in fact, is to be in control of their own security and economical opportunities (is that so unreasonable?), which is just a random guess I spent 5 seconds on, but for the sake of the argument that this is true, then why don't we work from there?
As long as we stop caring about hearing one side; war is an inevitability until a side is destroyed or rendered impotent, but whoever remains or occupies those land next will continue to have those same issue if it remains unsolved.
I'd like to think myself as neutral, and as long as the argument comes from how "my side should win, and the other should take all the blame", at least don't pretend to advocate for actual peace.
Such a strong pease thet lasted from WW2 till 2021...
Iran
Irak
Vietnam
Kosovo
Korea
Libia
Argentina
Armenia
Afganistan
Siria
Cyprus
Turkmenistan
Georgia
Israel
Egypt
And bunch of african countries couldn't agree less!
Those are only a handful of countries compared to the hundreds that make up the world. Most of the world remained peaceful since WW2, the longest lasting peace humanity has seen
@@mr.bluebird2140 you are ignorant. In soth africa and south America most countries doesn't even felt WW2.
The fact that you aren't experience war doesn't mean that there are peace. It's falce logic. In fact if you american your country is involved in 4 wars right now, it doesn't make it peacefull regardless of your awareness.
The only reason you don't see direct war is nukes. Nuclear deturence mede 100000000000 times more for so caled peace than any post war efforts.
Turkmenistan??
Argentina?? Falklands wasnt even major conflict
Postwar planning is ESSENTIAL. The atrocity of Iraq wasn't the invasion itself, it was the utter lack of post-war planning. No one in the US military or government put serious, peer-reviewed thinking into how to Iraq would be governed, how its people would be kept fed, or how law and order would be maintained.
More like they just assumed that as soon as Saddam was out of power that the entire country would become a first-world democratic society overnight.
3:17 "The west defeated communism without firing a single shot" Weren't there a lot shots fired. Like the Korean war, Vietnam War, Soviet Invasion of Afganistan, the cambodian bombing campaign, the whole slew of proxy wars in aftrica.
Yeah, was kinda put-off by that
@@skully_bonezalmost as if he is full of shit
He probably meant a single shot against each other (usa vs sov)
@@mariamethodieva7431 hundred thousands of soldiers of both sides and millions of civilians died during these conflicts. Saying "without firing a shot" is a big yike if not huge insult. I dare him to go to Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghan and say to people there such thing.
rephrase it into something like "ends communism without direct conflict"
@@hoangle2483 even that's pushing it. The US and China directly fought each other in the Korean war. Granted it was a UN intervention and Communist China was clearly junior partner to the Soviets.
I'm not pro-russian nor pro-ukraine, you need to be joking or be just highly optimistic on a lost cause (blinded by your ideology) when you mention that ukraine has both the numbers in technology and industrial power. That aside, i think post war is far from here, the war is extending to other parts where the US and EU influence is vanishing.
I am not pro-russian *proceeds to repeat russian propaganda*
@@Leo-ok3uj Bro, just watch the ukrainian mapping. They are clearly not making any advance even with this "superior technology"
Ukraine really should surrender if they want to have any remaining infrastructure post war. Ukraine future is now getting destroyed by the war
@@wmk4454you've been saying that for 2 years, nothing happened
@@QTwoSixкроме того, что население Украины продолжает стремительно уменьшаться (в соотношении с российским - несравнимо даже), армия страдает все сильнее, а фронт удержать все сложнее (с Курском теперь особенно)
"The west won the peace and defeated communism without firing a single shot" I know what you mean to say but I couldn't help but laugh at the absurdity of this statement if you look at asia instead of Europe.
Hey as long as Europe is doing fine who cares about those lesser important humans in Latin America, Asia and Africa, am I right? 😊
"GIVE WAR A CHANCE" - Sundowner
Plenty of comments here stating "im convinced" and "im surprised you've been criticized".
These seemingly baffled proclamations of support are excellent examples of the dereliction of reality that now possess the neoliberal mind. This childish desire to force a favorable narrative no matter how ridiculous, unbelievable or irrational it may be has lead to a total incoherence that simply cannot envision a practical today, let alone a future at all.
One could say the do this to spite history, but it's most likely the development of an alibai in the face of abysmal odds.
It is funny that an ideology which only 30 years ago declared the death of history, would be rendered utterly incoherent by the historical tidal wave that is building momentum as we speak. If we were to examine metaphorically the "room" in the west, one could measure arguments such as Krauts on the grief scale.
One moment, the war is fought for Ukrainian interests, another, its for geopolitical security and control of the black sea, the next, it is for a non-existent post-war europe, all the while, still, after years of conflict, continuously underestimating and disregarding the enemy, and simply deeming the logistics of its own plans "TO BE DECIDED".
Considering this game for a post war Europe is all being wagered on an unreliable, destabilized proxy, this type of potificating and drawing grand parallels to previous wars is shockingly naive, extremely callous, but truthfully unsurprising.
What a sad, strange hill to die on.
Please use plain English. I cannot understand this.
Both East and West fired a lot of shots during the Cold War.
These shots weren't directly fired at eachother, but instead at the allies and associates of each respective power. Millions of lives were lost in the wars fought and/or supported by the US and USSR. The fates of entire countries changed dramatically in that period.
Vietnam, Korea and Afghanistan are only the tip of the iceberg. Civil wars, revolutions, military coups, you name it. Conflicts supported and enabled by the superpowers to advance their position in the Cold War. In Latin America, it was mostly the US. Whereas in Africa, there was significant Soviet influence.
The US alone spent trillions of dollars fighting in these conflicts.
Shots were fired. They were just fired indirectly.
Overall message is good, but I think you speak way too surface level on communism as an ideology. Saying countries collapsed just because they're communist is disingenuous and ignores the bigger picture, especially saying it happened without the west "firing a single bullet"
MOM GET IN HERE THERES A NEW KRAUT GEOPOLITICS VIDEO !
Yo, Kraut, my man. I still don’t know what you mean exactly when you say Communism.
Do you mean Russia’s communism? Or do you mean that fundamentally the core tenants of communism, whatever that means, fundamentally couldn’t achieve peace? I would like to know. Because I remember being told and coming to the conclusion my self that ‘real’ communism hasn’t ever been achieved, what communism is supposed to be. Not a brutal dictatorship, not a totalitarian regime, nothing authoritarian.
he is a liberal, that means he believes that the Marxist-Leninist ideology and its consequences are inevitable in trying to achieve the ideology of communism and in doing so will inevitably gridlock itself as an authoritarian state
What a story arc, Kraut from battling the SJW and internet nazis in 2015/2016, to becoming a reddit shill in 2022. Will you take a break and rebrand your channel again?
‘The post war period after World War Two lasted until 2021.’
What about all the cold war proxy wars, wars in the Middle East, Yugoslavian war, and there was conflict between Russia and Ukraine before 2021.
Like what specifically about the Ukrainian war is so unique as to end the peace?
Nothing really, he's just living in his liberal dream world where Russia is the big enemy defining world eras.
"West won the peace and defeated communism without fireing a single shot" - I think Ceausescu, and Elena would disagree.
Technically those weren't our bullets.
There is a saying,” A bad peace is even worse than war.” - Tacitus
Honestly I am a realist and I don’t see how Ukraine can win this war. Russian is making 2 million shells a month and the EU and US can’t even fulfill Ukraine’s needs, that is one example out of many.
Russia has the advantage and initiative, they will press on this even at the negotiation table, the failed Ukraine offensive gave them this. A peace will be made but I feel Russia will set the terms, either they will make Ukraine proxy or divide up Ukraine. The US has its priorities in the Middle East right now with, supporting Israel, tension with Iran, possible conflict for Taiwan. The Ukraine/Russian war has become forgotten war, I barely see it in the news. All I see on the news is Red Sea , Gaza, Israel. I can’t see the EU being able to support Ukraine without US support. They should have made a deal in March but all we have now is a costly war, with peace too high right now.
kraut my beloved
Just letting you know that Yugoslavia wasn't controlled by the ussr. It was communist but it was separate.
"Lenin and other Communists just like to sprinkle intellectual-sounding words over it to make it sound smart. Commies do that kind of stuff."
Does the pot calling the kettle black mean anything to you? 😂
Lol so true, he also forgets how China and Kissinger are best friends when they turned on the Soviet Union. It's like every so called capitalist eventually allied with "commies" once they offer them a deal.
3:15 "the west won without firing a single shot"
Laughs in Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Chili, ...
Well yeah, the Cold War outsourced all the wars away from the European homeland. Not a single shot was fired in Europe.
Communism defeated itself.
@@robinma4004 wrong.
@@robinma4004
The Years of Lead in Italy doesn't come to mind?
@@gmodrules123456789 Was that a war?
Very interesting discourse, however the argument relies on the fact that Russia wants to move on to another war because they "talked about it openly", I have never heard of that. Did I miss an episode ? I can't find what he is refering about on google, could someone tell me ?
You just check internal russian news, obviously in russian.
Just general rule when dealing with russia, go and see what they talk about among themselves, not what they want to show you.
It is important to talk about post war but dismissing the Russian perspective as "they'll just start another war" is incredibly irresponsible and short-sighted. It is clear to anyone who objectively look at the eastern front that the Ukrainian idea of total victory will not happen, unless NATO intervene directly and I'm sorry if that fact burst any ideological reality bubble. Instead of dismissing the Russians as savage bloodthirsty orcs, imperialist megalomaniacs or proto-Soviets, it would be wise to include them in the post war rhetoric as a legitimate partner. That will be mostly beneficial to no other than Ukrainians themselves because smart diplomacy in the post war talks could win them much more in terms of what they gain than what is happening in the battlefield which is nothing but death, terror, mayhem and lost territory.
maybe what we need is a hardcore american president who is willing to get directly involved military. Enough of sleepy joe biden.
Depends on what you consider a total Ukrainian victory.
Unfortunately, diplomacy with Russia usually results in more invasions, just look at the period from 2014 to 2022. It's a viscous cycle because Russia doesn't want to stop: 4:30
@@adanester359 lol Trump is the biggest contender for victory in 2024, and he's Putin's lapdog. Pro-establishment Biden is Ukraine's only hope.
@@sircatangry5864 It doesn't matter what I consider total Ukranian victory. Ukranians define it as "reclaming all territories of Donbas and Crimea". Which isn't happening.
"Where is the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing? They have passed like rain on the mountain, like wind in the meadow. The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow. How did it come to this?"
Theoden's words resonate so much now, knowing that some people in Europe are willing to give Putin everything he wants. Europe needs to rise and prepare for all eventualities!
Not first time when some people in Europe give everything he wants to some fascist and then cry in their turn as they were left for dessert.
“without firing a single shot” except Vietnam, Korea, Nicaragua, Bay of Pigs…
None of those things you mentioned helped to defeat Communism. In fact these are all just American/Western failures.
100% agree to all points. Post-war (peace) agreement is as important as the war itself. Winning both = long lasting peace.
Honestly as a korean I feel like Ukraine is gonna end up like korea. Devided with a dmz being created. Both Ukrainian and russian line doesn't seem to be changing that much
despite the line "not changing that much" Ukraine has been hitting into the russian rear with targets in crimea.
@@4T3hM4kr0n Same thing during the last days of korean war. Massive US bombing north korea and china supply line. Unless russia and china does a massive attack it's gonna end with a stalemate
@@4T3hM4kr0n Yeah stop consuming propaganda that suits your biases. IMO peace could have been achieved ages ago in a much better deal if we pressured Ukraine into making a peace deal when they were at the height of their advantage. This whole "Ukraine could take back Crimea!" crowd has done a whole lot of damage.
Russia is also hitting the Ukrainian rear, including Kiev, and can keep the war going for far longer. Attrition is taking its toll on Ukraine while Russia is only really strengthening its position (which is pretty typical of Russia, corrupt, but has the resources to recover when the corruption is exposed). The US and EU are also less interested in sending aid than they were at the start of the war, especially since they realise Ukraine is kind of a lost cause at this stage, while other conflicts like Israel take center stage.
The frontline is very much so not stable and the balance of power is dynamic. There is a lot of false equivalence when people compare Korea to Ukraine, especially at this stage when a great deal of future is still to be decided. Also, longterm balance of power is definitely not "Korean-like". There are no American troops on the ground and Russia has a much greater amount of resources and population. As such, Ukraine will require long term commitment from the West even after the war ends in order not to be overrun by Russia (a point that a lot of people seem to completely miss).
@@4T3hM4kr0nHow is this going to defeat the russian army?
3:15 First seeing how USA, UK is falling a part I wouldn't praise the neo-liberal systems...
Second in the Cold War there were many proxy wars like Korea, Vietnam, Afganistan. So there were many shotts fired!
The problem I have with this video is that it assumes the Russo-Ukrainian war will end kind of like ww2 (basically a Hollywood movie, the bad guys get completely destroyed by the good guys), when a Korean War-style ending is (right now at least) much more likely (long stalemate followed by ceasefire agreement and frozen conflict). The Russians arent winning right now but the Ukrainians arent either, it is no longer November 2022 when it seemed Ukraine could liberate all its occupied territories.
Russia is winning, they still own Ukrainian Land, the only question is if russia will achieve a minor victory or a massive one. Likely we won't know till after american presidential elections at least since it will set the tone of support to ukraine.
UA havn't people to military personel. What is your plan for time after war? EU is like idiocracy - it isn't good plan...
Neoliberalism defeated communism without firing a single shot- the CIA would like a word. So would vietnamese people one imagines. Some of the dozens of coups had 'shots'
This guy's one of the biggest frauds masturbating to his.own voice for years now.
even excluding any coup, proxy wars outside Europe significantly effected how the Soviet Union engaged with foreign policy and diplomacy, all of which still influenced domestic decisions of each soviet president. This would just so happen to culminate with Gorbachev and what he tried to do, which got the soviet union dissolved. Kraut's view here in the video is very euro-centric (as is common in alot of videos), and while it's true that the soviet union collapsed due to internal conflict and economic failure, to say that 'no shots were fired [by the west]' to get to that point is a bit rich.
7:12 "The numbers are all in favor of Ukraine in terms of technology and Industrial power"
Who's 'technology'? Who's 'Industrial power'? Without US aid they are screwed both militarily and economically. Not to say that is inherently a bad thing but that if US political establishment drops it's assistance to Ukraine that will mark the beginning of the end of the not-quite-a-counter-offensive strategy that Ukraine has yet to significantly improve upon since winter of 2022 when they took Kherson.
Some numbers might have been in their favor but the Russian army isn't being depleted (as multiple US senators have openly hoped) and Ukrainians are beginning to run out of ideal military-aged men. Doesn't matter how advanced your technology is if you can't train and send soldiers to battle with it.
As far as industrial power goes, it's an absolute joke. Russia has clearly shown to the world that it can survive economic sanctions as long as it does business with designated US adversaries, of which that list is growing longer, and it's national wealth on nearly all metrics were superior to Ukraine before and now during the war. Ukraine is just a smaller nation compared to Russia so it's economy isn't going to be stronger when comparing them. Ukraine specializing in industrial agriculture doesn't change much either. Due to the actions of Ukraine's president, Ukraine is straddled with enormous private sector debt (mostly US; notably BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase). We also know Ukraine small to mid cap sectors are hanging by a thread solely because of this accrued debt and the generosity of western political elite.
None of this screams favorable especially relative for technology and industrial power.
"defeated communism without firing a single shot."
Hmmmmm
The only two things missing here are: 1) the analysis of the situation if Russia wins the war (either by completely conquering Ukraine or annexing the eastern parts of it), and; 2) what to do with Russia if it loses the war, or the war turns into an endless stalemate as a permanent ceasefire.
The complete dismissal of Russian concerns and interests (as undemocratic or paranoid they may be, or not) is one of the main causes of this war, which means if the new postwar Europe again continues with the same attitude Russia will chimp out again sometime in the future. Some arrangement must be made together with Russia, which is at this point a heretical thing to say in the EU. And let's bear in mind that Russia feels betrayed and decieved by the West when it comes to the Minsk agreements, when Hollande, Merkel and Poroshenko openly admitted they all never had the intention of honoring them and were just stalling for time.
If these matters are not taken into account, a new war will come - perhaps even more devastating than it is now.
New wars will keep coming from russia for as long as it exists. Solution is obvious.
You're talking about the multi polar world order as if that were a bad thing - it's actually a SUPER GOOD THING!!! In current world order the USA does as it wish, completely unencumbered by the rules: it invades countries, starts coups-d'etat, forcibly seizes oil tankers in the middle of the ocean, extracts oil from other countries it previously invaded, and so on. It's so brazenly hypocrytical in its moral values it just angers everybody. With Russia and China acting as counter weights, the US will have to moderate - else they risk losing even more allies to the opposing block. And Russia will keep China in check, lest they start helping the people from Washington instead. That's the stable equilibrium a multipolar world offers, avoiding the disaster that the reign of a single hegemon so far has been
I would love to see you do a video on why imperial Japan is seen in a more sympathetic light than Nazi Germnay. I have noticed online of people comparing the two as if they are the same “evil.” I really like your video on “Imperal japan: The Fall of Democracy” and I would like to see more videos about that. I also saw a video on the Golden Age of Japanese Cinema that was fascinating. It showed the historical context of that time period and portrayed Japan in a sympathetic light. I love Japan, but Should post war japan be seen this way?
Kraut, talking about the next series of steps before we arrive at the task of solving the peace needs to happen. It's like shopping for groceries. Do you leave the house when you ONLY need eggs?
No you write it down and start a shopping list. Once the list is of sufficient size or you run out of a desired resource then you leave for the market.
This exercise is us writing the shopping list for peace. It will change once we get into the "store " or "post war"
Until then let's keep adding to the shopping list of winning the peace and communicating our needs and insecurities as simple people who happen to live in separate sovereign nations.
Me personally, the peace will not be won until we arm the peoples of these regimes with information and support. We all also need to face the reality that the Axis of the 21st century is gearing up its ability to manufacture for war as much of Europe and the US of A are still sleeping at the wheel.
The fact that there are no free people in Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and thier allies means the cycle of "wrong thought" will continue much like how the Hitler youth were corrupted by propaganda.
The people of these nations are emotionally and mentally ill. Because of the environment thier governments force them to live within.
Be well Krout, The only awkward conversation is one that doesn't take place.
-Craig
I'd argue that it is the existence of nuclear weapons that "kept the peace" between major powers post war, there was no peace in places like the middle east Africa Sth America and east Asia.
1:44 Id say that the post WW2 post war lasted until 1991, with the start of the Yugoslav Wars and the break up of the Soviet Union markinv the "end" of the Cold War between the Soviets and the American, which was Id say all but a peaceful period. Again this post war was handled terribly, and led to todays War.
this video has aged like milk
I'm going to be honest, the beginning was my opinion... "It's too early to think about of what comes next when the war isn't even over yet".
However, I can also leave my biases aside, and say that people like you are very much needed to brainstorm the ideas of longer lasting peace... My mind is hellbent on Russia, and that's because it's next door of me, or rather us Finns. I can fully admit that you're thought process on the war exceeds mine in terms of long term thinking for how we acquire and restore the peace for generations to come.
Thank you for the insightful videos, you have been great source of temper when it comes to cooling down and looking at the picture at broad.
When no one is talking about what comes after, someone has to. These are things that need to be talked about and discussed- not shut down.
People online talk much about how socialism has failed, but what we are seeing now in the world is how neo-liberalism has failed. Socialism is surging among gen z and milennials in the so called 'west' and feel like the system has failed them and their future prospects. The Soviet Union collapsing was not the ultimate testament to an end of Socialism, it was merely the end of the Soviet branch of it.
Socialism in the west? Which countries?
Soviets were not really socialism but a totalitarian empire that calls itself socialist. Just like the "democratic republic" of North Korea.
Nothing really bad in true socialism, except that it never happened to work on practice.
My only criticism is that we dont even know how the war ends and by the looks of it it wont be in a decisive ukranian victory not only that but the corrupt, inept and incopetent western leaders dont even seem to want ukraine to win
ukraine was never going to win no matter how big the support for it's war effort was.
Maybe instead of automatically assuming we are going to win and talking about "post-war", despite a lack of any military breakthrough, we should focus on actually winning.
"The numbers are all in favor of Ukraine in terms of technology and industrial power" Completely delusional. It might have been a more or less decent take in the summer of 2022. But now? It have become evident that the NATO bloc is a paper tiger that can't even set up a production of artillery shells after 2 years of war. Moreover, Ukraine hasn't carried out a successful offensive operation for more than a year, and the prospects for 2024 are bleak.
Realistic postwar scenario: Ukraine looses 4 oblast and Crimea, permanent neutral status, country is a failed state.
The more time passes, the more delusional pro-ukraine apologetics seem
*Kraut on topic of Ukraine*
"We want a lasting peace"
*Kraut on topic of Islam*
"Peace was never an option "
remember the truck of peace?
Vaguely.
The goal of Ukraine: "just let us live and not be russians". The goal of Islam:" KILL EVERYTHING"
Smell the difference?
The post war agreements between nations has caused recent wars such as the Israeli Palestinian conflict. This has been a re accruing issue that is causing more problems and suffering towards the people of those nation states
"The post-ww2 peace lasted until 2021" WHAT
"The west defeated communism without firing a single shot" WHAT
I am 3 minutes into the video and I'm not going to even bother with the rest. It's ridiculous this has so many likes and hundreds of comments not even questioning those statements
Even if we don't think about the proxy-wars between USA and Soviets, also the Yugoslav wars, also the wars between all the posti-soviet countries, etc, didn't the war start in 2014? Or 2022 on a bigger scale, but there's no way it was until 2021.
You forgot about manpower. Ukraine doesn't have one.
I never thought about post war and you convinced me that wining the peace is as important as wining the war, thank you
Something important to note is that some Kazakhs talked about how right after the war began, that some Russian politicians started questioning Kazakhstan’s sovereignty and that maybe *they* should redraw their borders… we know which nation Russia truly was targeting next
I mean, bro, they are the only country in CIS/Post-USSR - who:
1)Made another Maidan-like coup. (Belarus coup failed - if you want to mention them)
2)Recent Leader (Tokaev) is Pro-West
3)Building all the west tech in their country (US/EU-licensed locomotives, Talgo trains and cars factories)
4)Trying to say "FU" to Russia, in/on some political forums like "VALDAI" forum. And trying to get away with this sh__t.
5)Building a REAL NATO base inside the Kazakhstan (yes, this base in even in NATO armybase catalog, officially, so this base in real!).
So, yea, without a doubt - i will tell you as russian. Kazakhstan - indeed, gonna the next target for us (Russia), bcs KZ-stan - did learn nothing from Ukraine recent 30-year span history. And they gonna do same mistakes - as Ukraine did. "History repeats itself", and "Who did learn a lesson from history - are DOOMED to repeat that."
Also, they (Kazakhstan) have same cons which ukraine was still have - BIGGEST corruption (after Ukraine), worst infrastructure (For example - their famous LRT line (In Astana, i believe) - is a basically a statue of KZ-stan biggest corruption), worst internet (They are still using TV-cable/Telephone line in 2024 (Russia already have 5G, btw and high-speed optic cable for stationary internet right now - in 2024), and also dipping/"leakage" of your internet speed - is 80-90%) and etc.
Also, a pitiful recent cringe propaganda - which copied Ukraine's one. Like "we kazakh - won the WW2, all other nations didn't do nothing. We are masterrace (and "mongols was our bootlickers", then in real history - kazakh was one of first nation to break a knee towards Genghiskhan and Mongol Empire/Yoke) yadda-yadda". And the most cringe - there are N@ZI groups in KZ region. Yep, there are exist and this is moronic and cringe - for muslim country. Also, news about killings of Russian-ethnic people which born there, by the nаzi kazakh radicals.
So, yea - KZ is gonna next Ukraine 2.0 (in bad way and meaning). The next one (Ukraine 3.0) - is debated to Mongolia.
That's how it goes. Good day to you, mate.
And about Europe and Baltic States - we not gonna do something with them, if not they started the war itself.
EU/NATO - are pussies, and Baltic States... well, there goes a nickname for them - "ProEbalty", or "States which are lose everything, and blame the others".
Honestly that's just the expericence that everyone boarding Russia had
@@user-ss6co6vj5fWhy Maydan is a coup.
@@sircatangry5864 bcs, it was. A coup to kill/make to exit the post of Ukraine president by Yanukovich.
Are you westerners, even didn't read the history of this Ukraine coup? Oh, what did i expected from a NAFO...
yugoslavia was never part of SSSR, your map is wrong
if kraut is a bird parrot, then he just pooped all over his own feet. that rant was wack
In what way exactly? Do elaborate.
Without discussion about 'post-war' , how are we supposed to end it?
With overwhelming victory. Period.
Govermments and people are acting like if there was no ziggers in Ukraine already or some bs. That lack of commitment will cost NATO, the US and the EU a lot. Anything worse than a minor victory means, for example, that when Xi launches an invasion of Taiwan nobody will give two fucks about the gringos because it's commitment to help ANY ally is next to zero.
What Ukraine needs is TZD and nothing less.