I want to draw your attention to a wonderful post on the situation in Ukraine from William Polk at Sic Semper Tyrannis:
In a rather ghastly 19th century experiment, a biologist by the name of Heinzmann found that if he placed a frog in boiling water, the frog immediately leapt out but that if he placed the frog in tepid water and then gradually heated it, the frog stayed put until he was scalded to death. Are we like the frog? I see disturbing elements of that process today as we watch events unfold in the Ukraine confrontation. They profoundly frighten me and I believe they should frighten everyone. But they are so gradual that we do not see a specific moment in which we must jump or perish. So here briefly, let me lay out the process of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and show how the process of that crisis compares with what we face today over the Ukraine.
As I commented at the post what Heinzmann’s experiment demonstrated was that if you heated the water gradually enough the frog would not jump out. If you raised the fire more rapidly all but brainless frogs jumped out (and, yes, they actually removed frogs’ brains in these experiments). We are not a patient people, we’ve been increasing the heat too rapidly, this frog is ready to jump, and the consequences of our raising the fire again at this point could be very dire indeed.
Read the whole thing.
I do not think the experiment has been repeated, and therefore, I am cautious of the results.
I do not know if you have been monitoring the situation, but it appears to be quite interesting. Interesting as in a total mess that the US media somehow forgets to report – Ukraine economy in shambles, military destruction, Russian gas dispute, European gas issue, Ukraine government not quite a liberal democracy.
You might have more info on the gas situation from the Russian newspapers.
I’m cinfused: Who’s the frog, and who’s turning up the heat?
We’re turning up the heat; Russia is the frog.
The experiment was performed at least five times to my knowledge. The first time a frog’s brain was removed and the brainless frog sat there as the hot water rose to boiling. The second time a frog with brain intact hopped out.
Heinzmann’s experiment was to raise the water’s temperature extremely slowly. 19th century German science (and 19th century German graduate studies) being what they were I suspect that there were hundreds of attempts until just the right pace was discovered.
In that case I think the analogy isn’t holding up. After all, the frog jumped INTO the water (Ukraine) only after it started heating up.
Somehow I’m thinking that an analogy to Gaius Helen Mohiam’s speech to Paul Atriedes about animals chewing off their own limbs vs the human trick of staying in the trap to kill the hunter would be better. That is, if it could be drawn, and if anyone other than SF geeks would get it! So maybe not better….
I’m not seeing the analogy either. It would seem to imply that we could in fact arrive at a point when Russia tolerates Ukraine aligning strongly with NATO, as long as we don’t push for it to happen too quickly.
I think he means that the U.S. is both the frog and the scientist. (“Are we like the frog?”) We are slowly turning up the heat, oblivious to the real danger to ourselves by slow escalation of hostilities with a nuclear power.
(You could say that Russia is also involved in escalation or is at equal or possibly greater risk from a nuclear confrontation, but I think the author is criticizing U.S. policy and a lack of appreciation of threats to the U.S.)
The analogy’s just a hook. I found the linked post compelling without it.
In my stock and trade, the analogy can be the whole kit and caboodle.
I’m calling PETA.
I’m no foreign policy expert, but arming Ukraine or bringing them into,our orbit seems to be pure folly. I’ve been negotiating a P&S agreement for sale of one of our companies, and our arrogant large corporate buyer kept going too close to the sun, asking for things that really strike at the heart of not just a commercially reasonable contract, but the essence of actually reaping the benefit of selling an asset. I had to tell them – in only the best and nicest possible way, mind you – “go fuck off.” After “conferring with the board” they decided they might take a reasonable posture.
A certain medically oriented commenter informed us a ways back when Putin got into Ukraine that we had him right where we wanted and he would regret the day. Well, Putin has and will tell us to fuck off, and anyone advocating a tough guy stance on this one risks flying too close to the sun. We have other more compelling, realistic and efficacious places to burn our powder.
In my stock and trade, the analogy can be the whole kit and caboodle.
In one of mine, too. (Mathematics.)
I’m really having trouble understanding why those pushing for an aggressive response don’t understand the possibilities of escalation. I see an analogy with the Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Eric Garner situations. None of those three necessarily deserved to die for their initial actions (jumping Zimmerman, robbing a convenience store + jaywalking, resisting arrest w/o violence), but once you escalate a conflict the chances of something really bad happening rise at a very rapid rate. The same is true here.
NATO needs to focus on actually providing defense for its own members, not risking a conflict with Russia over Ukraine. Sanctions are certainly in order, but arming and training Ukrainian forces just seems insane to me. How are the Russians supposed to react to that? How would we feel if they were arming the Mexican drug cartels?
A certain fiction writer assured me that Putin was a thug who craved world approval, and I was also assured that President Obama had tricked Putin and Assad into doing whatever double-super-secret Rube Goldberg plan he (Obama) put in place.
A mere mortal such as myself still cannot fathom the greatness of the elegant black man, but that is probably due to racism.
Unless there is an invasion of Russia, there will be no nuclear weapons used, but the only way to ensure there is no Russian involvement in any of the Baltic states is to occupy them with military forces.
Any of these states could have the existing NATO backed government overthrown and replaced with a Russian backed government. Unless there are enough NATO (US) troops in these countries to put down any coups (new-fangled democratic or old-fashioned military), Russia can easily supply enough equipment, supplies, manpower, and training that would be needed.
A mere mortal such as myself still cannot fathom the greatness of the elegant black man, but that is probably due to racism.
I bet the crease in your pants isn’t up to snuff either.