I really appreciate the discourse and push-back by both of you throughout this conversation. This is exactly why I love listening to ProfG: the analysis is spot on, the opinions are debated with logic and facts, and the discussion is civil. Wonderful!
He didn't explain the facts around what JD Vance has said publicly and privately regarding Ukraine. He also weirdly thinks Mike Pompeo is bigger indicator of Trump second administration than, for instance, Steve Bannon.
Honestly, an armistice when russia was "losing" 1 year ago would only have given them time to regroup. Today, the limitation on long range weapons usage on military strategic targets beyond 500Km of the border must be removed.
I believe it came from former CIA Dir Mike Pompeo. Use back channels to negotiate a cease fire and in return release $ from sanctions. However, Russia has many avenues for income from petroleum. 15:16
Just adding on - this was frustrating to listen to - at least Scott pushed back a little bit. Mike Pompeo is not Trump. The idea that Trump listens to his advisors is a joke right? Sure the plan sounds good in theory, however getting the government to follow through would be a different story. Trump will talk about many "plans" without specifics - throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks and gets votes...
Deeply disingenuous of Niall to suggest that the funding holdup "misses the point." That is exactly the point. He's evading the question. It was not the will of a majority of Congress to block that funding. It wasn't the will of the majority of REPUBLICANS in either the House or Senate to block that funding. It was solely Johnson, at the behest of Trump. Being charitable, Trump didn't want to give Biden a "win." Being less charitable (but no less realistic), Trump is beholden to Putin, for one reason or another.
It misses the point in that public support for continued funding of the war will decline. Americans will lose interest in keeping this thing going, as they already have.
Its so agreeable to have an interview conducted by someone who is as intelligent and able to communicate as the interviewee and yet does not grandstand his own opinions, but directs the conversation so that we get real answers to real questions.
Ya, I don't believe Ferguson's opinions are based on facts. The far-right republicans and isolationists responsible for delaying the Ukraine aid were looking to trade it for their demands related to U.S. / Mexico border policy. I don't see this going away if Trump were to be elected. It would only intensify. Trump himself doesn't have a plan. It's clear by his remarks on ending the war within a day. That's reminiscent of him saying he had a plan for healthcare in his first term when there was no bill written for it. If Russia doesn't want to negotiate, they won't. Ferguson is saying there was a missed opportunity for a truce, but Russia has never expressed interest in a truce without the capitulation of Ukraine. His claim that the US is purposefully holding back is somewhat true. Though Ukraine has gotten most of what they asked for. A lot of the more advanced U.S. military hardware takes time to train on and long logistics chains to operate. F16's for example, don't just ship over in a box and snap together like Ikea furniture. Other things like artillery shells needed to be ramped up in production. During Trumps first term he led a campaign of appeasement with Kim Jong Un. So, what makes Ferguson think Trump will be more inclined to threaten Russia? Trump was also famously friendly to Putin and his diplomats during his first term. I think it's likely we'll get the same thing we got in 2016 with maybe a few new twists if Trump gets elected.
It shouldn't be so remarkable but when you pair someone with intellectual heft (Prof G) who has the capacity to ask muscular, relevant and core questions and then allow your solid guest to talk, uninterrupted and the pose a counter, you end up with an output that is equally intellectually stimulating and thought provoking. What I like about these Prof G podcasts, is that you come away smarter. And I do not agree with Prof G on everything, it has become increasingly clear that he has few peers. These are important discussions.
O dear! Mr Fergusson has lost any credibilty on this subject. If he ever had any. Where is he`? In New England meeting with JD Vance? He is posing as someone who has Ukraines back. Shameful. Awful.
biden is bleeding Ukraine out, with no intention of helping it achieve victory. Of course, it's not really Biden, but the deep state moles running things.
Can’t believe Niall believes he can trust anything Trump says or believes that comments from Vance have any bearing on Trump policy. Trump policy is whatever makes things better for Trump in the next month or makes him richer.
I literally cannot find anything similar to what he claims Vance said about putting pressure on Russia. Only one who has said anything similar is Mike Pompeo.
Can’t agree with Mr. Ferguson’s assessment of Ukraine - I think the Ukrainians and Europeans have shown the ability to be much more efficient and effective with less (weaponry, manpower, etc).
This man is simply an academic who occasionally gets on TV and an appeaser. His opinions are no more valid than any other rent-a-pundit. Appeasing dictators has, on multiple occasions, been proven to be a losing strategy.
Is just his opinion, nothing more. He also doesn't particularly like russia. His teory has some truth in it but nothing is established in advance. If everything would have been based on resurses US would have pacified Afghanistan and Irak long time ago.
Agreed, I could tell this guy was pompous when Scott asked where this podcast finds him, and he says “I can’t say as a measure of national secuirty”😂 Sweet bro, you write books on international affairs, but act like you’re jason bourne or tom hanks circa the davinci code
Good to hear other views but not sure this guy was the right person to deliver the message. I thought Scott had pretty reasonable push back and the guest failed to explain why he believes what he did other than he's a right winger.
It is remarkable and beyond sad that presently someone who is. “conservative “ will be shouted down at a university presentation or generally not listened to with an open mind.
Ukraine is different, it’s a frontline where the excuse to impose national service - and further leverage over European citizens - is made available to those in power: to maintain & increase their power over the citizenry. You only have to look at where spending has occurred, where it’s been interfered with, what problems are on the horizon and how war++ solves these problems ie failures of successive western governments. Ukraine & the ME are the same war, and to use the chess analogy: the west are playing white. They aren’t that powerful to guarantee a win, and, even if the west ‘wins’, we the people lose. There’s a significant likelihood of nuclear conflict escalating from a ME tactical nuke being used, too. BRICS are the new Gaddafi/Lybia, and again: this is nothing similar to previous conflicts. The Samson Option should concern everyone globally: religious & irrational. MADness = secular & rational
It is totally different, Russia can easily administer the territories it occupies bcs the population is close to Russia, culturally, ethnically etc; in the US in Vietnam or Soviet Union in Afghanistan this was not the case
@@korespodance2815 not that easily, even if they "win"... there will be terror and repressions, the Russian way... They've created an enemy for years to come perhaps generations
Niall is engaging in wishful thinking about Trump, probably as condition of his continued employment at the Hoover Institution. Trump could have come out and endorsed Pompeo plan on Ukraine, but he didn't. Instead he picked running mate who openly advocates abandoning Ukraine.
Agreed, I could tell this guy was pompous when Scott asks where the podcast finds him and he says “I can’t say as a measure of national secuirty”. He writes books about international affairs, he’s not jason bourne
He didn't lie about it, he said it didn't matter in the context of the original question, and he explained why. The buck stops at the White House, not at the Kremlin when it comes to a US election. The Biden administration has no qualms whatsoever taking credit for outcomes they had no measurable input/effect upon, they're also going to take the hit for perceived issues regardless of where the blame lies. He could have gone a bit further IMHO and pointed out how most of Biden's "stellar" data is directly due to measuring the difference between an economy shutdown unnecessarily for Covid and one that is allowed to spring back to life. Again, something that would have happened even if the administration had done nothing.
It is people like this who are disingenuous and spreading outright lies that hurt the citizens. He failed to mention the fact that Trump has openly been obsequious to Putin for decades. It is blatantly obvious to everyone who is not brainwashed to see that Trump will serve up Ukraine the minute he takes office.
I think Americans are tired of war and gaslighting. Let Europe sort their issues out, they should pay more into Nato if they feel deeply concerned or beef up their own security.
Russia is fine taking human losses; they are mostly it seems from the rural republics not the major cities and they don't care about what number of their troops are killed, apparently. And as far as finances, Russia has plenty of room to spend to support it's economy as they have nowhere near the debt levels that western countries including the US have on their balance sheets. Russia is playing a long game and are fine to take hits short term, so long as they win and take what they want from Ukraine. Sad to see a bully abuse a smaller nation that is trying to become democratic.
Ten GOP Senators, including Hawley, Cruz, VANCE, Lee, and others voted against the Foreign Aid bill. The GOP neo-isolationist segment is growing and Trump easily goes along with that.
America needs to fix its own problems. Today, America's communist deep state is spreading its horrific ideology to all of America's colonies. Ukraine would be better off ruled by Russian kleptocrats than by American child abusers and third world worshippers.
This was the best interview in a bit. Good for you Scott for bringing on someone that pushes back a bit. I especially loved the digs about Democrat elites in Aspen, meanwhile you joined this call from your fourth or fifth home..in Aspen. Chef's kiss
Ferguson is fairly predictable. If a Democrat is in power every conflict should be escalated, but because they don't they are weak. Also he ignores practically everything Vance and Trump have said about Russia and Ukraine. Ferguson is presumed to be credible because he has a Ph.D. has that Oxford English accent and writes a lot of book. If you boil him down he's just a garden variety conservative with a smooth delivery.
I did a quick fact check on his statements about Vance changing his mind about funding Ukraine. As we all could predict this was total BS. Ferguson is a smart, convincing guy so it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. But basically any time he tries to normalize the MAGA Republicans, particularly the leadership, a red flashing BS beacon should blare.
I have to agree, sadly. I like his historian tilt with his counterfactual approach. But his massive blinders on current foreign policy is getting silly, when the Maga-Republicans are todays isolationist and strongman-supporters. Also his support of Netanahuo-Israel and China-belligerence.
From Argentina here. I could not care less about America's internal affairs. That said, I was happy when Biden won because I thought that Trump Presidency was bad for world geopolitics. Now I am praying God the almighty for Trump to win, because democrats ended up being 10 times worst.
Great insight from Niall in relating the 1953 Korean armistice, to the situation in Ukraine. Sadly, very few academics or analysts recognise the parallels.
great convo- thank you both to your candor; Prof- i appreciate your follow up questions. great guest to help me understand a different intellectual perspective about global and domestic events
@@Studeb it was a civil discussion, and Galloway wasn't shy about interjecting in places where he disagreed. This was multiple viewpoints, not a platform to spout anything unchallenged.
@@MillmanPercussion You don't need two points of views on every topic, Trump and Vance have been very clear on their stance, if they get power, they will give Putin everything he asks for in return for helping him getting elected.
Ferguson is one of the West’s geopolitical thought leaders. His analysis of issues is unparalleled in clarity and concision. It doesn’t mean he is always or will always be right. Thanks to Scott Galloway for giving him a platform to share his views even though I know they have some fundamental differences of opinion.
This guest sounds absolutely clueless with regard to how a 2nd Trump administration would operate. As if Trump would listen to "wise counsel" from anyone in his cabinet or that he'd do ANYTHING that displeased Putin. He can't even STAND with a straight back while next to Putin. 🤦
Confiscating Russia's foreign currency reserves would GREATLY accelerate de-dollarization from from many governments around the world. Very, very risky to pursue this if we hope to maintain our exorbitant privilege.
Two assumptions that we shouldn't necessarily back too much: 1.) that a Harris administration will be just as drip-feedy as Biden, she may very well end up being her own woman, and 2.) that Mike Pompeo has any real read on what Trump would do, in the nightmare scenario he's reelected. Pompeo and Trump do not have a good relationship; the former is not playing in role in the latter's campaign. Pompeo can say whatever he wants concerning what ought to be done regarding Russia-Ukraine, just don't conflate that with a likely Trump policy. For as wonderful a historian as Ferguson certainly is, his analysis on the current balance of capabilities, regenerative capacities, will of Europeans to collectively ensure against Ukraine's defeat, and other critical variables is seriously lacking.
Niall Ferguson talks about the next Trump administration, as though it will perform as some former Trump admin officials say it will. What about the major problem with Trump's instability? Are you trying to say he has never ignored the experts?
A few seconds in and already questioning why prisoner exchange is a cold war thing. What about the 3,000 years before the cold war we exchanged valuable prisoners ?
Prof.G does not particularly "like" this guest, nor does he agree on most of the talking points. However, it is an interview with some self-consciously defended and true statements by Niall Fergusson.
It's strangely distracting the Scott rarely looks into the camera, almost as if he's not fully engaged. Regardless, a great conversation between two wise Scots, concerning issues with serious consequences and plenty of warnings of what is coming next. And by all means, yes, let's give Ukraine the support it needs to win, not simply hold on. What's new since this interview is the Ukrainian incursion into the Kursk Oblast, which perhaps won't continue, but could lead to a major shakeup in Putin's police state. P.S. to follow Niall's comments about Dickens in the U.S., see Dickens' novel Martin Chuzzlewit, where he describes the perfect prototype of Donald J. Trump (Major Pawkins) and the widespread practice of property fraud by professional conmen on the prowl for innocent and naive British nobles looking to make a quick buck (or pound).
Niall envisions the war ending without a tribunal and Putin in the dock, which is a fantasy born of his dependence on unfortunate allegiances. Bucha, Mariupol, etc.
"If you set aside the personalities of the candidates...." 🤦♂ Does Niall imagine that the majority of American voters pull the lever for policies over personalities? Good grief.
There was a really excellent deal negotiated in Istanbul back in the spring of 2022. Boris Johnson, presumably at the behest of the US, told Zelensky that Nato would not support Ukraine if he accepted that offer. Concerning Israel how can Hamas negotiate when Israel assassinated the chief negotiators (one notably Tehran)? As for tepid US support the war on Gaza would stop tomorrow without daily US arms shipments. It is Israel and Ukraine/Nato that are acting outside of international law and that is why countries all over the world have had enough of the so called rules based order and wish to join Brics and dump the dollar.
Didn't find a lot of this particularly well reasoned particularly the bit on Israel, but it was refreshing that ProfG gave him room to lay it all out instead of hair splitting on every point. He nailed it on the description of the presidential race. Anybody but Trump would wipe the Democrats off the map.
Niall forgets the main difference between candidates. Democrats' platform is that Ukraine is autonomous and sovereign in their decisions to start or not start the negotiations, and that US merely provides needed military support. Putin's view is that this is a play, and that there's no point negotiating with Ukraine, and the only negotiation he will have is with the United States. Trump offers exactly that, which ignores Ukraine's agency and confirms its status as a chesspiece (which, funnily enough Niall agrees she is). This also confirms Putin's whole premise for starting the war.
I love how Proff G held Nial Ferguson to account on his anti- Biden rhetoric that was not factual but rather promoted by his own ideology. I used to really like Nial but I’ve found lately he’s overstepped commentary for right wing propagandist. Great work Proff G.
I can see Scott’s assessment on Western support to Ukraine as much more feasible and rational than this Niall. Dunno why a random historian can’t disclose his location due to “national security” issues, first red flag…
I think Ferguson is a pretty good historian. His 'Paper and Iron' 'House of Rothschild ' and 'others are all good. But the more I see him talk on current geo politics and domestic politics the more disappointed I get. Occasionally he hits the mark but more often not.
I totally agree. Being a historian myself I am disgusted by Fergussons wrong assesment of the entire Ukraine thing. He could know better. but he decides to just be a trumpian bootlicker
I was on an usaf base during the 1973 war. They woke us up 3am and isreali warplanes were landing on our base to pick up supplies. It was a bit frightening that all of our nuclear bombers were gone as were about 100 F111. I have no idea where the aircraft went.
Like others here, I also admire your bringing guests with differing perspectives, and hope you continue to do so. But I must say, this man was remarkably disingenuous. And even if I take him at his word: 1. So J D Vance now...FINALLY... 'gets it' about the importance of Ukraine's success. Now that's the kind of quick mind I want my VP to have. 2. Putin knows it is NOT to his advantage to have Trump win this election. Trump [made of such stern stuff] will be HARD on him. Really? 3. Like JD Vance, the GOP House has had a foreign policy expert come talk to them and explain how critical Ukraine's success is, and now THEY get it. If they had only known, they would NEVER have held up the military aid package to Ukraine. Somebody [looking at you, Biden] should have told them this sooner. Niall Ferguson, as opposed to being a serious scholar of history, seems to be battling to be the heir apparent to Newt Gingrich as the GOP token [pseudo]-intellectual, providing paper-thin coverage of their incompetent / malicious strategies. Good Grief!
Every time I listen to Ferguson I come away feeling he is making judgments to effect a political outcome. He wants Trump in there, and he's willing to mischaracterize events to make it sound as good for Trump and as bad for Biden or Harris as possible. He's a historian who has become a political partisan. That's unfortunate.
So now the new Ukrainian Kharkiv offensive had captured 500+ square miles of maybe Russian territory, perhaps it would have been stupid to appease Putin last year?
I wouldn't generalize about the relationship between China, Russia, Iran, and N. Korea, the alleged "Axis of Evil" and the US and Europe. The Chess Game analogy is more apt. Nor would I assume (implicitly for the most part) that the "West" = "Good Guys" and the "Axis" = "Bad Guys." No good or bad, just power structures protecting their perceived and real interests. Arguments about which power structure is more or less "democratic" are difficult to make (from where I'm standing). Russia's "Threats of Nuclear Escalation" explain the West's reluctance to go full tilt in Ukraine? "Rational," if you ask me to be "reluctant": Why would Russia be any LESS serious about going nuclear to protect its borders now than the US was during the Cuban missile crisis? That's assuming a consistent definition of the word (and the underlying concepts) of "rationality."
Right. Vance is owned by Thiel. And before Musk reneged on his $45 million monthly donations Trump was going to give him whatever he wanted. And those are the billionaires we know about.
It just boggles my mind that these "strategists" can't see that Russia is acting with great restraint. The recent "invasion" by Ukraine is the equivalent of the Canadian Army crossing the border into North Dakota and taking a small town's police force as prisoners.
This is a great, civil conversation between two people who disagree on a lot of things. Bravo.
I'm not sure that they disagree at least on the conversation issues, Ukraine and Israel conflicts
I really appreciate the discourse and push-back by both of you throughout this conversation. This is exactly why I love listening to ProfG: the analysis is spot on, the opinions are debated with logic and facts, and the discussion is civil. Wonderful!
I absolutely agree. We need more people like prof G.
Agreed
He didn't explain the facts around what JD Vance has said publicly and privately regarding Ukraine. He also weirdly thinks Mike Pompeo is bigger indicator of Trump second administration than, for instance, Steve Bannon.
I admire the fact that you do bring on guests with different perspectives and opinions on topics. Great video.
Honestly, an armistice when russia was "losing" 1 year ago would only have given them time to regroup.
Today, the limitation on long range weapons usage on military strategic targets beyond 500Km of the border must be removed.
This person speaks with a certainty that obscures his ignorance of American politics. He states his opinions as facts.
...his ignorance of American politics.... Don't stop there. His ignorance is vast.
Just fir the record he's a us citizen living in america. So his "ignorance" is shared with the rest of you.
considerably less ignorant than 99.9% of his fellow Americans
@@BenRobinson1974 That’s an ignorant statement.
Give one specific example?
Where in the world did this Trump plan come from? It doesn’t sound like a Trump plan at all.
I believe it came from former CIA Dir Mike Pompeo. Use back channels to negotiate a cease fire and in return release $ from sanctions. However, Russia has many avenues for income from petroleum. 15:16
Just adding on - this was frustrating to listen to - at least Scott pushed back a little bit.
Mike Pompeo is not Trump. The idea that Trump listens to his advisors is a joke right? Sure the plan sounds good in theory, however getting the government to follow through would be a different story. Trump will talk about many "plans" without specifics - throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks and gets votes...
You must admit the Biden plan of helping Ukraine NOT LOSE but never WIN can only lead to eventual defeat once America gets tired or distracted.
I agree.
@@ChrisMarx, Absolutely. It's bizarre that anyone claiming any intellectual integrity would structure the activity of planning to Trump.
Deeply disingenuous of Niall to suggest that the funding holdup "misses the point." That is exactly the point. He's evading the question. It was not the will of a majority of Congress to block that funding. It wasn't the will of the majority of REPUBLICANS in either the House or Senate to block that funding. It was solely Johnson, at the behest of Trump. Being charitable, Trump didn't want to give Biden a "win." Being less charitable (but no less realistic), Trump is beholden to Putin, for one reason or another.
It was the will of the people
Biden Administration did all it could too slow everything down as much as possible too.
yes, your are correct. Trump killed funding for 6 months, people in Ukraine dying the mean time.
@@wesleybaker9724 : I take your point, but you ignore the variable of time (t) at your peril.
It misses the point in that public support for continued funding of the war will decline. Americans will lose interest in keeping this thing going, as they already have.
Its so agreeable to have an interview conducted by someone who is as intelligent and able to communicate as the interviewee and yet does not grandstand his own opinions, but directs the conversation so that we get real answers to real questions.
Why the delay getting funding/arms to Ukraine? Simple and clear: Putin --> Trump --> Mike Johnson
EXACTLY!! It wasn't Democrat politicians, it was Putin's fanboy Donald Trump. Ronald Reagan is SPINNING IN HIS GRAVE!
Ya, I don't believe Ferguson's opinions are based on facts. The far-right republicans and isolationists responsible for delaying the Ukraine aid were looking to trade it for their demands related to U.S. / Mexico border policy. I don't see this going away if Trump were to be elected. It would only intensify.
Trump himself doesn't have a plan. It's clear by his remarks on ending the war within a day. That's reminiscent of him saying he had a plan for healthcare in his first term when there was no bill written for it. If Russia doesn't want to negotiate, they won't. Ferguson is saying there was a missed opportunity for a truce, but Russia has never expressed interest in a truce without the capitulation of Ukraine.
His claim that the US is purposefully holding back is somewhat true. Though Ukraine has gotten most of what they asked for. A lot of the more advanced U.S. military hardware takes time to train on and long logistics chains to operate. F16's for example, don't just ship over in a box and snap together like Ikea furniture. Other things like artillery shells needed to be ramped up in production.
During Trumps first term he led a campaign of appeasement with Kim Jong Un. So, what makes Ferguson think Trump will be more inclined to threaten Russia? Trump was also famously friendly to Putin and his diplomats during his first term. I think it's likely we'll get the same thing we got in 2016 with maybe a few new twists if Trump gets elected.
I thought JoeBiden was the 🇺🇲 President Jonathan?
@@JohnCorrUKBiden needed the Republican controlled House to authorize the transfer of resources.
@@JohnCorrUKCongress controls the power of the purse , you've known that your entire adult life
Dear Mr. Fergusson shows what the British do best - provoke others to do mad shit and not take any responsibility for it.
It shouldn't be so remarkable but when you pair someone with intellectual heft (Prof G) who has the capacity to ask muscular, relevant and core questions and then allow your solid guest to talk, uninterrupted and the pose a counter, you end up with an output that is equally intellectually stimulating and thought provoking. What I like about these Prof G podcasts, is that you come away smarter. And I do not agree with Prof G on everything, it has become increasingly clear that he has few peers. These are important discussions.
Pompe' ain't trump.
Thanks Prof G, your audience needs more of this type of discourse. I hope you’re up for more of it.
Kudos to prof G for hosting Ferguson. Brings a good balance to otherwise leftleaning program
Except the lefty loonies are not hearing anything this man says.
They can't stand the truth
O dear! Mr Fergusson has lost any credibilty on this subject. If he ever had any. Where is he`? In New England meeting with JD Vance? He is posing as someone who has Ukraines back. Shameful. Awful.
biden is bleeding Ukraine out, with no intention of helping it achieve victory. Of course, it's not really Biden, but the deep state moles running things.
Can’t believe Niall believes he can trust anything Trump says or believes that comments from Vance have any bearing on Trump policy. Trump policy is whatever makes things better for Trump in the next month or makes him richer.
I literally cannot find anything similar to what he claims Vance said about putting pressure on Russia. Only one who has said anything similar is Mike Pompeo.
Can’t agree with Mr. Ferguson’s assessment of Ukraine - I think the Ukrainians and Europeans have shown the ability to be much more efficient and effective with less (weaponry, manpower, etc).
We still can't go on forever and lose as many people as we have. it's unsustainable.
I think the prof‘s assessment is more right here. I would recommend inviting prof Sarah Paine.
This man is simply an academic who occasionally gets on TV and an appeaser. His opinions are no more valid than any other rent-a-pundit. Appeasing dictators has, on multiple occasions, been proven to be a losing strategy.
And a buffoon.
LOL…. A little cognitive dissonance perhaps?
Is just his opinion, nothing more. He also doesn't particularly like russia.
His teory has some truth in it but nothing is established in advance.
If everything would have been based on resurses US would have pacified Afghanistan and Irak long time ago.
Agreed, I could tell this guy was pompous when Scott asked where this podcast finds him, and he says “I can’t say as a measure of national secuirty”😂 Sweet bro, you write books on international affairs, but act like you’re jason bourne or tom hanks circa the davinci code
@@Masterdebater-q5c I think this secrecy has more to do with his wife which is under protection for the last 15 years or so.
This guy is a straight hypnotist.
Good to hear other views but not sure this guy was the right person to deliver the message. I thought Scott had pretty reasonable push back and the guest failed to explain why he believes what he did other than he's a right winger.
It is remarkable and beyond sad that presently someone who is. “conservative “ will be shouted down at a university presentation or generally not listened to with an open mind.
“This guy” is widely regarded as one of the greatest historians if not the greatest of our time. He is not “right wing”
Great interview. Thanks.
The longer it lasts, the bigger the participant wins? Vietnam and Afghanistan say no.
Ukraine is different, it’s a frontline where the excuse to impose national service - and further leverage over European citizens - is made available to those in power: to maintain & increase their power over the citizenry.
You only have to look at where spending has occurred, where it’s been interfered with, what problems are on the horizon and how war++ solves these problems ie failures of successive western governments.
Ukraine & the ME are the same war, and to use the chess analogy: the west are playing white.
They aren’t that powerful to guarantee a win, and, even if the west ‘wins’, we the people lose.
There’s a significant likelihood of nuclear conflict escalating from a ME tactical nuke being used, too.
BRICS are the new Gaddafi/Lybia, and again: this is nothing similar to previous conflicts.
The Samson Option should concern everyone globally: religious & irrational.
MADness = secular & rational
Agreed. Also having NATO support is advantageous. Far more resources to work with than Russia.
It is totally different, Russia can easily administer the territories it occupies bcs the population is close to Russia, culturally, ethnically etc; in the US in Vietnam or Soviet Union in Afghanistan this was not the case
@@korespodance2815 why are they administering over a foreign country?
@@korespodance2815 not that easily, even if they "win"... there will be terror and repressions, the Russian way... They've created an enemy for years to come perhaps generations
national security 😂😂… get a grip Neal
I had the same reaction.
Ferguson is delusional about Trump.
Niall is engaging in wishful thinking about Trump, probably as condition of his continued employment at the Hoover Institution.
Trump could have come out and endorsed Pompeo plan on Ukraine, but he didn't. Instead he picked running mate who openly advocates abandoning Ukraine.
Niall blatantly lies about the responsibility for US inflation, and when Scott pushes back Niall's all, "Haha, well, that's politics!" GFed.
Agreed, I could tell this guy was pompous when Scott asks where the podcast finds him and he says “I can’t say as a measure of national secuirty”. He writes books about international affairs, he’s not jason bourne
@@Masterdebater-q5c I'll bet his "undisclosed location" was actually a Mar-A-Lago guest room
He didn't lie about it, he said it didn't matter in the context of the original question, and he explained why.
The buck stops at the White House, not at the Kremlin when it comes to a US election. The Biden administration has no qualms whatsoever taking credit for outcomes they had no measurable input/effect upon, they're also going to take the hit for perceived issues regardless of where the blame lies.
He could have gone a bit further IMHO and pointed out how most of Biden's "stellar" data is directly due to measuring the difference between an economy shutdown unnecessarily for Covid and one that is allowed to spring back to life. Again, something that would have happened even if the administration had done nothing.
Gosh u people can't handle truth
@@Masterdebater-q5cIt’s called humour, you should try it sometime.
Niall was much better when he stuck to his knitting as a historian rather than trying to be a political hack.
It is people like this who are disingenuous and spreading outright lies that hurt the citizens. He failed to mention the fact that Trump has openly been obsequious to Putin for decades. It is blatantly obvious to everyone who is not brainwashed to see that Trump will serve up Ukraine the minute he takes office.
Km plp😊p ppp😊😊o😊😊😊die 😊oder oder Pl lp😊😊l
Thank you so much Niall for sharing your wisdom and insights.
I think Americans are tired of war and gaslighting. Let Europe sort their issues out, they should pay more into Nato if they feel deeply concerned or beef up their own security.
Does Niall imagine that this has NOT cost Russia? 🤔🙄
Russia is fine taking human losses; they are mostly it seems from the rural republics not the major cities and they don't care about what number of their troops are killed, apparently. And as far as finances, Russia has plenty of room to spend to support it's economy as they have nowhere near the debt levels that western countries including the US have on their balance sheets. Russia is playing a long game and are fine to take hits short term, so long as they win and take what they want from Ukraine. Sad to see a bully abuse a smaller nation that is trying to become democratic.
Has Russian economic performance massively exceeded that the west assumed would be the case? Yep.
Ten GOP Senators, including Hawley, Cruz, VANCE, Lee, and others voted against the Foreign Aid bill. The GOP neo-isolationist segment is growing and Trump easily goes along with that.
America needs to fix its own problems. Today, America's communist deep state is spreading its horrific ideology to all of America's colonies. Ukraine would be better off ruled by Russian kleptocrats than by American child abusers and third world worshippers.
This was the best interview in a bit. Good for you Scott for bringing on someone that pushes back a bit.
I especially loved the digs about Democrat elites in Aspen, meanwhile you joined this call from your fourth or fifth home..in Aspen. Chef's kiss
Ferguson is fairly predictable. If a Democrat is in power every conflict should be escalated, but because they don't they are weak. Also he ignores practically everything Vance and Trump have said about Russia and Ukraine. Ferguson is presumed to be credible because he has a Ph.D. has that Oxford English accent and writes a lot of book. If you boil him down he's just a garden variety conservative with a smooth delivery.
@@scottgaillard8486 his tenure at The Hoover Institute tells you all you need to know about his political leanings.
No doubt
I did a quick fact check on his statements about Vance changing his mind about funding Ukraine. As we all could predict this was total BS. Ferguson is a smart, convincing guy so it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. But basically any time he tries to normalize the MAGA Republicans, particularly the leadership, a red flashing BS beacon should blare.
I have to agree, sadly. I like his historian tilt with his counterfactual approach. But his massive blinders on current foreign policy is getting silly, when the Maga-Republicans are todays isolationist and strongman-supporters. Also his support of Netanahuo-Israel and China-belligerence.
An Oxford English accent? Are you sure about that?
Interesting the entire media establishment advocated for evans release yet not a squeak over julian assange.
From Argentina here. I could not care less about America's internal affairs.
That said, I was happy when Biden won because I thought that Trump Presidency was bad for world geopolitics.
Now I am praying God the almighty for Trump to win, because democrats ended up being 10 times worst.
Great insight from Niall in relating the 1953 Korean armistice, to the situation in Ukraine. Sadly, very few academics or analysts recognise the parallels.
great convo- thank you both to your candor; Prof- i appreciate your follow up questions. great guest to help me understand a different intellectual perspective about global and domestic events
Superb Scott and Nail
Listening to this podcast gives you intelligent and intellectual analysis of geopolitics.....❤
really, really, REALLY appreciate Galloway bringing on someone with whom he knows he does not often agree.
Why give somebody not serious the airtime to mislead people who may not know better?
@@Studeb it was a civil discussion, and Galloway wasn't shy about interjecting in places where he disagreed. This was multiple viewpoints, not a platform to spout anything unchallenged.
@@MillmanPercussion You don't need two points of views on every topic, Trump and Vance have been very clear on their stance, if they get power, they will give Putin everything he asks for in return for helping him getting elected.
F.O. Niall
Americans would be crazy to pay for Ukraine’s war.
Great guest. Well informed and sober view of the Ukraine and Israel conflicts.
Ferguson is one of the West’s geopolitical thought leaders. His analysis of issues is unparalleled in clarity and concision. It doesn’t mean he is always or will always be right. Thanks to Scott Galloway for giving him a platform to share his views even though I know they have some fundamental differences of opinion.
This guest sounds absolutely clueless with regard to how a 2nd Trump administration would operate. As if Trump would listen to "wise counsel" from anyone in his cabinet or that he'd do ANYTHING that displeased Putin. He can't even STAND with a straight back while next to Putin. 🤦
He's either clueless, unlikely, or he knows and endorses trump anyway. Which is more likely.
I lost all my respect for the man.
An informative talk.
Confiscating Russia's foreign currency reserves would GREATLY accelerate de-dollarization from from many governments around the world.
Very, very risky to pursue this if we hope to maintain our exorbitant privilege.
Guys, think not about how Ukraine may lost war, think how Ukraine can win!
Pampeo isn't in the Trump administration, and he won't be
This cat is speaking directly out his butt
As usual Ferguson is wrong on Ukraine.
Evidence ?
That geezer’s right about everything.
Scott , One of your best interviews. And even as a liberal you’re open to changing your views. You actually don’t have OPS
"The Trump Plan"? 😂 Whatever Putin Wants!!!
The sad thing is your comment should be cynical but unfortunately it's very close to the truth
Two assumptions that we shouldn't necessarily back too much: 1.) that a Harris administration will be just as drip-feedy as Biden, she may very well end up being her own woman, and 2.) that Mike Pompeo has any real read on what Trump would do, in the nightmare scenario he's reelected. Pompeo and Trump do not have a good relationship; the former is not playing in role in the latter's campaign. Pompeo can say whatever he wants concerning what ought to be done regarding Russia-Ukraine, just don't conflate that with a likely Trump policy.
For as wonderful a historian as Ferguson certainly is, his analysis on the current balance of capabilities, regenerative capacities, will of Europeans to collectively ensure against Ukraine's defeat, and other critical variables is seriously lacking.
Niall Ferguson talks about the next Trump administration, as though it will perform as some former Trump admin officials say it will. What about the major problem with Trump's instability? Are you trying to say he has never ignored the experts?
A few seconds in and already questioning why prisoner exchange is a cold war thing. What about the 3,000 years before the cold war we exchanged valuable prisoners ?
Why can’t conservatives be more like Ferguson and less like Trump. I might even vote for one then 😅
Prof.G does not particularly "like" this guest, nor does he agree on most of the talking points.
However, it is an interview with some self-consciously defended and true statements by Niall Fergusson.
It's strangely distracting the Scott rarely looks into the camera, almost as if he's not fully engaged. Regardless, a great conversation between two wise Scots, concerning issues with serious consequences and plenty of warnings of what is coming next. And by all means, yes, let's give Ukraine the support it needs to win, not simply hold on. What's new since this interview is the Ukrainian incursion into the Kursk Oblast, which perhaps won't continue, but could lead to a major shakeup in Putin's police state.
P.S. to follow Niall's comments about Dickens in the U.S., see Dickens' novel Martin Chuzzlewit, where he describes the perfect prototype of Donald J. Trump (Major Pawkins) and the widespread practice of property fraud by professional conmen on the prowl for innocent and naive British nobles looking to make a quick buck (or pound).
Regardless of the campaign rhetoric, anyone who thinks Trump would not throw Ukraine under the bus is simply naive.
Niall envisions the war ending without a tribunal and Putin in the dock, which is a fantasy born of his dependence on unfortunate allegiances. Bucha, Mariupol, etc.
His idea to solve self induced problems : pressure, military, sanction, threat,
I thought and hoped US elites are smarter than this
"the trump plan" ? really ? is there one ? c'mon
Yea there is. But if u go to Harris website u won't find one
Great conversation, thank you.
This guy is full on Trumpian. Netanyahu basically interjected himself into US politics in 2016
"If you set aside the personalities of the candidates...." 🤦♂ Does Niall imagine that the majority of American voters pull the lever for policies over personalities? Good grief.
An appeaser on the Russian war against Ukraine; a hawk on Israel's war against Palestinians. Otherwise a garden variety ideologue for the right.
Very well said, I could feel it but I couldn't stay at the way you just did.
This guys take on trump is absurd
Sir Niall is waay easier to listen to than Sir Kneel!
There was a really excellent deal negotiated in Istanbul back in the spring of 2022. Boris Johnson, presumably at the behest of the US, told Zelensky that Nato would not support Ukraine if he accepted that offer. Concerning Israel how can Hamas negotiate when Israel assassinated the chief negotiators (one notably Tehran)? As for tepid US support the war on Gaza would stop tomorrow without daily US arms shipments. It is Israel and Ukraine/Nato that are acting outside of international law and that is why countries all over the world have had enough of the so called rules based order and wish to join Brics and dump the dollar.
27th and 28th minutes I'd say would be wishful thinking Niall.
Yeah it looked real good
Didn't find a lot of this particularly well reasoned particularly the bit on Israel, but it was refreshing that ProfG gave him room to lay it all out instead of hair splitting on every point. He nailed it on the description of the presidential race. Anybody but Trump would wipe the Democrats off the map.
Hoover Institute = absolute BS
$90B aid packages aren't 'drip feeding'.
Great discussion!
Niall forgets the main difference between candidates. Democrats' platform is that Ukraine is autonomous and sovereign in their decisions to start or not start the negotiations, and that US merely provides needed military support. Putin's view is that this is a play, and that there's no point negotiating with Ukraine, and the only negotiation he will have is with the United States. Trump offers exactly that, which ignores Ukraine's agency and confirms its status as a chesspiece (which, funnily enough Niall agrees she is). This also confirms Putin's whole premise for starting the war.
I love how Proff G held Nial Ferguson to account on his anti- Biden rhetoric that was not factual but rather promoted by his own ideology. I used to really like Nial but I’ve found lately he’s overstepped commentary for right wing propagandist. Great work Proff G.
The interview is a jewel
I can see Scott’s assessment on Western support to Ukraine as much more feasible and rational than this Niall. Dunno why a random historian can’t disclose his location due to “national security” issues, first red flag…
Niall is certainly a bright man, but I think he's looking at the world through Fox News lensed glasses
Ferguson must get something right sometime, but I am unaware of it.
I think Ferguson is a pretty good historian. His 'Paper and Iron' 'House of Rothschild ' and 'others are all good. But the more I see him talk on current geo politics and domestic politics the more disappointed I get. Occasionally he hits the mark but more often not.
I totally agree. Being a historian myself I am disgusted by Fergussons wrong assesment of the entire Ukraine thing. He could know better. but he decides to just be a trumpian bootlicker
I was on an usaf base during the 1973 war. They woke us up 3am and isreali warplanes were landing on our base to pick up supplies.
It was a bit frightening that all of our nuclear bombers were gone as were about 100 F111. I have no idea where the aircraft went.
rare props to scott who is a super left wing koolaid drinker - that i love to follow - for having a real thinker on.
Like others here, I also admire your bringing guests with differing perspectives, and hope you continue to do so.
But I must say, this man was remarkably disingenuous. And even if I take him at his word:
1. So J D Vance now...FINALLY... 'gets it' about the importance of Ukraine's success. Now that's the kind of quick mind I want my VP to have.
2. Putin knows it is NOT to his advantage to have Trump win this election. Trump [made of such stern stuff] will be HARD on him. Really?
3. Like JD Vance, the GOP House has had a foreign policy expert come talk to them and explain how critical Ukraine's success is, and now THEY get it. If they had only known, they would NEVER have held up the military aid package to Ukraine. Somebody [looking at you, Biden] should have told them this sooner.
Niall Ferguson, as opposed to being a serious scholar of history, seems to be battling to be the heir apparent to Newt Gingrich as the GOP token [pseudo]-intellectual, providing paper-thin coverage of their incompetent / malicious strategies.
Good Grief!
This guy doesn't really know anything.
Maybe he should call you 🤣
Every time I listen to Ferguson I come away feeling he is making judgments to effect a political outcome. He wants Trump in there, and he's willing to mischaracterize events to make it sound as good for Trump and as bad for Biden or Harris as possible. He's a historian who has become a political partisan. That's unfortunate.
Amazing guest. Please have Mr Ferguson back soon!
So now the new Ukrainian Kharkiv offensive had captured 500+ square miles of maybe Russian territory, perhaps it would have been stupid to appease Putin last year?
Just look at how Trump cancelled the Republican written Border bill to keep a talking point for the campaign
I wouldn't generalize about the relationship between China, Russia, Iran, and N. Korea, the alleged "Axis of Evil" and the US and Europe. The Chess Game analogy is more apt. Nor would I assume (implicitly for the most part) that the "West" = "Good Guys" and the "Axis" = "Bad Guys." No good or bad, just power structures protecting their perceived and real interests. Arguments about which power structure is more or less "democratic" are difficult to make (from where I'm standing). Russia's "Threats of Nuclear Escalation" explain the West's reluctance to go full tilt in Ukraine? "Rational," if you ask me to be "reluctant": Why would Russia be any LESS serious about going nuclear to protect its borders now than the US was during the Cuban missile crisis? That's assuming a consistent definition of the word (and the underlying concepts) of "rationality."
'Because the republican party is not under the control of eletes...' 😂 preferences.
Right. Vance is owned by Thiel. And before Musk reneged on his $45 million monthly donations Trump was going to give him whatever he wanted. And those are the billionaires we know about.
It just boggles my mind that these "strategists" can't see that Russia is acting with great restraint.
The recent "invasion" by Ukraine is the equivalent of the Canadian Army crossing the border into North Dakota and taking a small town's police force as prisoners.
canon hallucination Doom
"cannot disclose my location because of national security"- niall ferguson
Is he blind to the situations, or just in the pocket of the right wing?
He is a right wing pocket !
Niall Ferguson is not being intellectually honest. The idea that Trump and the Republicans are going to stand up to Putin is laughable.
How do you define loosing or winning.