Great program. Very easy to listen to AND understand. One comment piqued my interest about human condition not wanting to commit suicide/ inialation. What about pilot terrorists in 911 and kamakizi s in ww2? Granted not the entire population but some groups think they're justified for the greater good. Not everyone thinks like us.
@@rufflesnbritches9441 That is just it...some groups. Individuals who are “trained” up to suicide or kamikaze. They didn’t just walk in off the streets and volunteer for the positions. I don’t believe that most soldiers, of any type, believe they are going to die at any time. They may have the mindset of possible death and will suicide rather than risk torture or imprisonment, but living is something most must hold close. This is a dreadfully simple explanation. A very general one. There are always exceptions.
Warm greetings from Ukraine! Thank you for the great conversation with Mr. Roberts. I always appreciate his insightful analysis. Heartfelt gratitude to all those who stand by Ukraine in its struggle against perpetual terror and dictatorship called Russia.
54:00 “Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.” Of course, Madame Thatcher was not a man but showed the historical and evolutionary traits of masculinity, especially in the context of this discussion.
From Wikipedia: In 2003, Roberts wrote: "For Churchill, apotheosis came in 1940; for Tony Blair, it will come when Iraq is successfully invaded and hundreds of weapons of mass destruction are unearthed from where they have been hidden by Saddam's henchmen." Make of that what you will.
If people like him didn't have the American empire to cheerlead for they would have to do some soul-searching about their own society. The British Empire got consumed by America so this is literally all they have left.
@50:45 "comes responsibility" - yes, including the responsibility to be realistic, self-critical, adjust strategy as needed, and maintain our own stability lest we lose all effect.
Thank you so much for this. I’ve listened to so much stuff (all over the map) about the Ukraine situation and, in the end, I have so much respect for Andrew Roberts that I will simply accept his analysis. 🙏🏼🇺🇸
Canada has not made 2% and doesn’t plan to anytime soon (not even if the Cons win the next election). I wonder what JD Vance et al would do about that?
Excluding UK and Greece, Europe and Canada dilly dallied for too long. One or two years do not undo _decades_ of under investment. Decades. Some members - big ones - are nearly five decades of under two per cent - nearer to one per cent in many years. That two per cent was based on a Russia behaving in ways in no longer does. The Kremlin is far worse now. We're back in the Cold War. In Europe Poland realises this. Lithuania too. What Europe fails to realise is it is incapable of aiding the US if the balloon goes up in Taiwan or Korea (and it likely Japan because the Norks will certainly fire missiles on US bases there). Britain may be able pitch in, but its military is hobbled. And let's not forget the Middle East. Europe needs to shoulder its burden _on its own_ poste haste. It's no longer a toddler or teen. It far surpasses Russia in population, wealth, and technological know-how, yet it remains dependent _by choice_ because it shirks its defence duties in favour of social spending and growing bureaucracies. Many of Europe's defence ministers, especially Germany's, have been rubbish. They have been antagonistic of the military and they let it wither. This was deliberate. Either increase the taxes on the people or shift social spending to defence. Europe's big problem is Putin captured both of Germany's major political parties, SDP and CDU, and Germany has done nothing to root out the connivers. It was Schroeder and Merkel who were cozy with Putin. And they weren't the only Germans in his pocket.
@@gagamba9198 a country can only spend what it can afford to spend....America spends 800 billion a year on the military industrial complex because its profitable for a tiny few but cant look after its people properly
He does somewhat skirt Mearsheimer's main point in that the size of the initial Russian force doesn't match one that is needed for a full occupation of a country. I wish they would debate because neither tends to really fully address the others viewpoint.
In fact, he totally affirms Mearsheimer's point later on, accepting that the Russian army's size as well as strategy does not fit the idea that he wanted to take over Ukraine.
@@dangin8811 Exactly. Who knows what Putin was thinking when he launched that invasion in 2022 but with a force of less than 200,000 men he clearly never intended to occupy all of Ukraine. Roberts's claim that Putin is eyeing Lithuania - a NATO country that currently has over 1,200 allied troops posted there as part of the Enhanced Forward Presence -- is utterly baseless. That would mean nuclear war and Putin knows it. Sad to say, the Russian president strikes me as immeasurably shrewder than most Western political leaders or analysts.
Putin believed Ukraine would break easily, surrender and accept a Russian takeover. that would not take an occupying force of millions. it was yet another miscalculation based on a limited and deeply flawed outlook on the outside world and how it has evolved. Ukrainians do not view themselves as Russian, without a culture or sense of nation. Putin does not understand, or simply does not accept this reality.
@@dangin8811 A more understandable point is that because of the reactions of Ukraine and USA to his invasion of Crimea and Biden's capitulation in Afghanistan Putin planned and funded an uncontested invasion. Notice that Mearsheimer habitually finds some American action or inaction to blame for every conflict and usually must take even that out of context - expansion of NATO is to blame for Putin's plans even though every new country begged to be given protection from Russia.
We actually DON'T have responsibility to the rest of the world As if because you are the biggest house on your block, your neighbors can get a handout... You're the leader, after all The fact remains that the countries interested in the wars are life and death interested, while elsewhere it is a source for grandstanding and politicians to get extra spending done. To dress us down for not getting involved is to ignore our propensity to muck things up worse
But you are the leader! Almost everyone 55 and younger has been told how crappy we are for being the leader by our own education system especially MEN.
I would like to see Andrew Roberts and the interviewer Peter Robinson study the Masha Gessen videos on RUclips and then bring on Dr. Van derKolk and talk about Vladimir Putin and how VP can be educated to stop the Ukraine sibling genocide. VP is a throwback frozen in forgetfulness after the WWII dead serious lebensraum military starvation of Leningrad. Great historian, great interviewer, now they need to be equipped with new viewpoints to move ahead on the looming environmental issues.
@12:05 $25B/yr is more than the GDP of over 70 countries. It's also 3% of the absurdly large US military budget. Calling that peanuts is simply insane and will never be a winning argument, no matter how often it is repeated.
Good chat fellas. Hopefully, these is a path forward of achieving peace and working together for the common good. Peace would be the best path forward for everyone. How to increase real love for each other seems to have to be come from above where Christ is. There certainly are enough problems in this world today.
The argument against Vance’s point is nonsense. If a nation doesn’t hit a number it committed to for its own and the collective defence, the it’s not serious and it is seeking to outsource that cost to those who do. It is also worth noting that these percentages spent on defence are all including social services (pensions, veteran services, etc.) which are growing as a share of defence expenditure. So in reality they contribute far less than even the 1-1.8% they spend now.
Both the UK and the US have sufficient people in your country to impact on national politics, with their loyalties to different countries. That is an indication that you have too many people of that group in your country. One should instantly stop importing them and consider of those already in your country, who is desirable and whom should be removed. Neither the UK or the US has even considered reducing Visas for those groups. This is anti survival behaviour.
Mearsheimer believes in deterrence when it is in line with key strategic interests. For example, replace Ukraine with Taiwan and Mearsheimer would advocate for complete and unrelenting support with US boots on the ground. Blood and Treasure to protect our key strategic interests. In this example it’s preventing China from creating a larger sphere of influence in the South China Sea. The main reason it’s such a different situation is that China is a true competitor to the US and Russia is not even remotely close.
A main reason why Putin invaded Ukraine was to maintain a buffer between Russia & the West. On four occasions that I can recall Russia has been invaded from the west, Napoleon in 1812, Germany in 1914, the US, Britain & others in 1917 on the side of the Whites in the Russian Revolution & Germany in 1941. I can see why Stalin may well have wanted to maintain Eastern Europe as a similar buffer.
Germany did not invade Russia in 1914, actually it was the other way around. Actually Tsarist Russia was the first major power to mobilize in WWI and the first battles all took part on German and Austrian soil. 1920 Russia attacked the newly created Poland (and failed) 1939 The Soviet Union allied with Nazi Germany to destroy Poland 1939 The Soviet Union attacked Finland 1940 The Soviet Union attacked Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania (annexing them fully) and Romania (annexing parts of it) Stalin destroyed all the buffer states, without his actions from 1939 to 1941 the Soviet Union wouldn't even have a border with Nazi Germany, where a war could start.
Miershimer’s point about Russian intent was not at all countered. His answer was that it’s largely a war of artillery? I am kind of amazed that people who call themselves experts on the topic are so easily satisfied. There truly seems to be a lot of sloppy thinking and rational in Roberts arguments.
Mearsheimer ignores that Ukraine is a soverein state and that the signatory powers of the Budapest memorandum promised to defend its sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine renouncing voluntary its nuclear arms, that it inherited from the Soviet Union. Russia back than agreed to acknowledge Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for being handed over all Ukrainian atomic bombs, making Russia the only successor state of the Soviet Union with nuclear arms, although the Soviet Union had stationed these arms in more than one republic (besides Ukraine, also Kazakhstan had more than 1000 nuclear warheads, but made a similar deal)
I was going to say something similar. Its the incorrect framing in rhetorical trope. The stance is ‘stop bleeding us dry and taking advantage of us. Its part of our corrupt governments operations to abuse the apparent necessity of foreign power projection
The statement that money spent on deterrence is money well spent is true and is what Trump had tried to get across in regards to funding NATO. When countries fail to take their military requirements seriously their opponents will take notice.
Disagree with him on almost every point, but still a good discussion and appreciate some of his past works. Won't be picking this one up, though, likely
I just wanted to add this fun fact (from what I know)… it was J. Goebbles who first described the initial Soviets occupation of eastern Europe as an ‘iron curtain’ in a radio speech broadcast in 1945!
What has changed in 70 years: -DEBT -Different generation -Drop in Christian Faith dividing the nation - morals are the foundations of legal and political unity -enemies have grown stronger?
Our GDP has shrunk as a proportion of world GDP from a third to a quarter, we have a lot of debt and poverty, The idea of American involvement is so people can stand on their own. Europe now can do that, so we should ration our resources. Everything you said is spot on. I was not a huge fan of this interview.
There are tons of atheist's who are moral and tons of Christians who are immoral. People are good or bad wholly based on who they are, no what made up cult they believe in, or not. What has changed is that people are less educated and have no critical thinking, reasoning, or logic skills. When you teach people what to think, instead of how to think, this is what happens.
At the 36 minute mark, regarding the speech to the chamber, was it the House of Lordships? How many members are there? The chamber was barely a third full. Just goes to show the level of contempt that Body has to that subject spoken of and whatever else was supposed to be done in that session.
With respect to Lord Roberts, it is a bit rich coming from a Brit that Americans can-and-must intercede seemingly at every corner of the globe when many of the flashpoints today hail from the former dominions of Britain’s heady days of empire. The United States has a destiny separate and apart from being the spiritual successor to Rule Britannia diplomacy.
Please invite Chas Freeman to provide some useful insight and counter arguments to Roberts who seems so sure of his version of history and the lessons we draw from it.
I feel Putin made the mistake of thinking that the annexation of Ukraine would be a mere matter of marching. By spreading his invasion force out in multiple approaches it made his force appear larger than it was, while attempting to spread out a numerically inferior Ukrainian military. I feel it’s not illogical to agree with those who say that Putin actually felt the Ukrainian civilians would greet him a liberator or simply capitulate after their forces were “inevitably” swept aside . Or, so I think
A historian that is too certain about the ‘facts’ is merely a propagandist. It is worth being aware that most of history is not recorded, therefore humility is of great importance.
I beg to differ. It was my understanding that Churchill wanted to take the information on surrendering German army people with a view to using them to deal with the communist marauders. Clearly the mood of the hard pressed British people and the upcoming election were on his mind. Don Hansen
14:52 believing ‘whole-heartedly’ in something as big as iraq 2 without proof was a dismal failure of america’s management of risk to its strategic interests. risks to america’s interests are also being mismanaged today
The second Gulf War resulted from a massive intelligence failure regarding Saddam's chemical and biological WMDs. In the crucial 2003 Bush war cabinet meeting, convened to decide whether or not to invade Iraq, the President, who was uneasy about the WMD issue, asked CIA Director, George Tenet, a holdover from the Clinton Administration, how sure he was about Iraq's allegedly huge stockpile of WMDs, Tenet arose, slammed his fist on the table, and shouted, "It's a slam dunk, Mr. President!" The Tenet CIA's analysis was supported by the intelligence services of virtually every Western nation including Israel's vaunted Mossad. (We may never know if the Mossad's opinion was disengenuous or not. After all, Israel was understandably the country that felt most threatened by the rogue regime in Baghdad, and had to have been the most gratified to see that threat neutralized by a war in which the Israelis would not have to directly participate) In the final analysis, Saddam proved to be his own worst enemy. He had masterfully created the persuasive illusion that he actually possessed the WMD, in his mind, the next best deterrence to invasion other than nuclear weapons. (He had no nukes because Israel had previously destroyed his nascent nuclear weapon production facilities) Saddam erroneously believed that his convincing but faked stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons would persuade the West to leave him be, the porcupine defense as he saw it. That self deceptive miscalculation proved to be his downfall. The proof of the Coalition's belief in Sadam's WMD capability was the extraordinary lengths to which the invasion forces went in order to protect themselves with cumbersome chemical warfare suits and vehicle protective systems that greatly hindered their combat effectiveness. In the initial phase of the war, the Coalition forces suffered more from debilitating heat casualties than from enemy bullets. So, this gives the lie to the oft-repeated claim by historical revisionists and Leftist anti-Bush politicians at the time, that Saddam's WMDs were a specious hoax concocted to justify a regime change invasion of Iraq by "Bush, The War Monger". Regardless of the causus belli, we can argue endlessly about whether the Iraqi people are better off without Sadam and the Baathists. There is no question that the Gulf Wars dramatically changed the balance of power in the Middle East in ways unforseen by the antagonists, for good or for ill. Iran and Syria's influence have been strengthened, but the burgeoning cooperation among the Sunni Arab nations with Israel is probably a beneficial outcome as well.
Roberts, admittedly a top notch historian, has REALLY disappointed me for the strongly boomer neocon interventionist turn he has taken, especially with regard to Ukraine.
FDR was a socialist. Small wonder ge spoke so Highly of Stalin. SCOTUS voted against many of his "reforms" because they were unconstutional. He was possibly the first politician, so he suggested packing SCOTUS (14) so they wouldn't overrule his unconstutional land reforms along with other socialist ideas. He was the right man for the job at that time but only! He's the reason for term limits on presidents.
Ukraine lost this war before it began, and likely will never recover. Russia is unlikely to return why it captured, nor its control of the Black Sea through Sebastopol.
Crimea did not want to be part of Ukraine in 1991, and 20,000 of Ukraine troops in 2014, took off their insignia and defected. Also 160k ? Let's not forget negotiations started in Belarus 2 days into the conflict. Also,Hitler went into Poland with 1.5 mil only to take half of the country. where Soviets invaded from the East couple of weeks later, per earlier.
Come to Mishawaka, to South Bend; and especially come to the eastside of Detroit that surrounds my beloved parish, Assumption Grotto. Look at roads, the sidewalks, the slumping ruins of the abandoned houses and buildings and former businesses. And take a moment to explain why we should accept the lost boys, ignorant, angry, attacking strangers, looting stores ... Come to the America that has no access to the global equations or the State First capitols of Washington and too many states. That's all... "Don't care was made to care..." I don't think so.
Yes or no. I have watched another video in which a former CIA talked about this - USA also gets benefits as a kind of “demilitarized” budget spent among Europe countries can kind of avoid wars. His argument (the former CIA) was that previous in Europe there have been a hell lot of wars, you may seen it as some sort of defense budget for world peace lol But obviously when there’s are evil bullies rise up it’s really a bad choice. I guess ppl really bought into the idea of the end of history and thought after wwll no one wanna have another ww. I don’t think previously certain countries think RU and CN as threat.
@@siuwong4588 there are pros and cons but the US no longer benefits from the arrangment and Europe has had 70 years to get it together. It is time they stand on their own two feet.
Moscow horde´s war record :- 1856 defeated by Britain and France 1905 defeated by Japan 1917 defeated by Germany 1920 defeated by Poland, Finland, Estonia and all Baltic states 1939 defeated by Finland 1969 defeated by China 1989 defeated by Afghanistan 1989 defeated in the Cold War. 1996 defeated by Chechnya 2022 defeated by Ukraine WW2 won USA/Britain , meanwhile Stalin's officers were shot or sent to the Gulags. Millions went to the Gulags, including Solzhenitsyn Moscow's only victories come from invading smaller countries :- a) Hungary 1956 b) Czechoslovakia 1968 c) Moldova 1992 d) Georgia 2008
In for a penny, in for a pound. We can’t back down, it’s too late. We have to find a way as the reputation of everything that we hold sacred is at stake. I opine, anyway
У співвідношенні до ВВП маленька Естонія допомогла Україні відносно свого ВВП в 3,8 разів більше ніж США (1,26% Естонія проти 0,33% США). Країни Балтії дали найбільшу допомогу відносно ВВП - кожна більше 1%, Данія 0,51% , Польша 0,68%, Нідерланди й Фінляндія 0,44%, Велика Британія 0,37% Абсолютний лідер в грошовому еквіваленті допомоги - США, половина з якої -військова допомога, в неї пораховано всі витрати викликані цією війною, наприклад, вартість сучасного озброєння для НАТО на заміну старому, що надали члени НАТО Україні. На другому місці Німеччина, потім Велика Британія. Євросоюз надав трохи менше допомоги ніж США. Всі європейські країни включно з Великою Британією - більше ніж США. Більша частина всієї допомоги - цільова на невійськові потреби. Допомагали не лише США і європейці: Канада, Японія, Австралія, Південна Корея, Тайвань, Нова Зеландія... Більша частина - на невійськові потреби.
In Napoleon, the Ridley Scott film, Napoleon is portrayed as a man who embarks on conquest yet has no passion for it. Since this does not describe the real-life Napoleon, I can only interpret the character as representing Ridley Scott himself: a historical film maker who has no interest in history.
Yes, one of our best & brightest proposed, when the USSR fell, welcoming Russia into the West with a sort of Marshall plan. Sorry, his name escapes me at the moment, but he was shot down I’m pretty sure by arch neocon Zbniew Brzinski (spelling?). But if the raison d’etre of NATO was defense against the USSR that could be tricky (so I think the idea would have been to offer entry into the EU). Not sure how that would’ve gone but it certainly sounds interesting as well as a lot better than pushing Russia into the arms of China, Iran and North Korea. Some have pointed out that the US would not have wanted Russia to supplant US energy sales to Europe. Such a quagmire-who can keep track of it all!
What is “control” of the border? The interviewer says the Trump administration got the border under control, but then specifies numbers for the Biden administrations time managing the border. Why not mention the numbers when the “control“ was provided? Because control is not an absolute barrier. Illegal immigrants still came into the United States from Mexico. In fact, illegal immigration increased faster than during the Obama administration in the early years of the Trump administration. That strikes me as a very politically based position by the interviewer.
The UN is paying aliens to invade -- and destroy -- America. Trump has vowed to deport them. The enemy of the deep state will do everything in his power to reverse the damage; obviously. They cut monthly checks more than double to these invaders what I got when I was on disability, an American tax payer. Scary stuff.
"Sunak my party leader" .By making that comment this man incriminates himsel,f because how could any self-respecting European accept Sunak as his leader.Sunak was trying to become an American and his wife is not even a British citizen.Laughable.
Great historian, Lord manners and language, And then proceeds to brush off massive casualties and collective punishment imposed by a state on a stateless civilian population. This man is scared and angry in his core for some reason. It's sad to witness such an intellect undeserved by deep insecurities.
pfffffff he looks absolutely secure to me and many other sane readers, who also agree on his position on terrorist ground like Hamas that initiated brutally the current conflict on Oct 7th. As to ppl living there, they should do more than the Israelis to eliminate their kidnapper-oppressor Hamas. Outsiders opposing Isreal on this matter are just kind simpletons, to say in the least rude way.
@MagnusElpron Stateless, really? Also, you didn't understand the ratio argument, but that's alright since lots of Westerners despise math they commonly misinterpret statistics. The job of a military is to hit military targets - therefore the success in terms of accuracy of the military is measured in a ratio of military targets hit to total targets, including civilians. It's the same with American cops not being racist because their methods do jail criminals and get drivers with drugs with maximum probability, it just so happens a certain demographic really likes gangs, homicides, and drugs.
@@gatocanada69That's what happens with covert socialists in America, blaming the successful out of envy, still believing in the labor theory of value. They say they're antiracist by becoming racists themselves haha.
Andrew Roberts mentions that there is nothing in the human condition that necessitates suicide, and yet very many humans commit suicide every day. Although, admittedly, very few heads of state commit suicide.
Sad to hear that "expert" denying wrongdoing of the USA in Iraq... And totally missing the point when US officials calls to Ukrainie authorities NOT TO FIGHT RUSSIAN in the Crimea. Peter, pls invite experts who knows what they talking about our ask challenging questions. Otherwise you will be 2nd to Carlson.
There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Sadam was documented as using nerve gas against whole Kurdish villages. Nukes are not the only weapons of mass destruction
We literally gave them to him And then the UN ran sanctions on him in the subsequent years post Desert Storm Hussain was tried and hanged by Iraqi courts for his killing of over 200 people by chemical agents The disaster of the Iraq war was the political generals putzing around there for over a decade after Shock and Awe. We basically wanted it to be a democracy without enforcing it
Did this guy just say that civilization and democracy would be on the floor if countries turned to China for trade and economic stability? Did this guy smoke a truckload of nonsense prior to the interview?
@douglasx6915 Unfortunately, as an understatement, China's not been a good neighbor to many of its neighbors, India, Indochina, Southeast Asia, and East Asia, at least since Xi Jinping came to power. Second, China's in a credit bubble, an incredibly high male:female ratio, and has decreasing respect for property rights. It's like they're undoing Deng Xiaoping's efforts that brought prosperity to China, and believe that prosperity will last without free markets.
Andrew Roberts is great…pure gold content.
Great program. Very easy to listen to AND understand. One comment piqued my interest about human condition not wanting to commit suicide/ inialation. What about pilot terrorists in 911 and kamakizi s in ww2? Granted not the entire population but some groups think they're justified for the greater good. Not everyone thinks like us.
He’s an Imperialist from a country that still thinks it’s important while being flooded by cheap labour
@@rufflesnbritches9441 That is just it...some groups. Individuals who are “trained” up to suicide or kamikaze. They didn’t just walk in off the streets and volunteer for the positions.
I don’t believe that most soldiers, of any type, believe they are going to die at any time. They may have the mindset of possible death and will suicide rather than risk torture or imprisonment, but living is something most must hold close.
This is a dreadfully simple explanation. A very general one. There are always exceptions.
Peter’s face when Andrew points out the age problem in American politics 😂
Thank you for a great interview as always! Peter is my favorite interviewer
Warm greetings from Ukraine! Thank you for the great conversation with Mr. Roberts. I always appreciate his insightful analysis. Heartfelt gratitude to all those who stand by Ukraine in its struggle against perpetual terror and dictatorship called Russia.
54:00 “Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.” Of course, Madame Thatcher was not a man but showed the historical and evolutionary traits of masculinity, especially in the context of this discussion.
All times create horrible men.
I didn’t realize Roberts was this hawkish. Very enjoyable as always Peter!
For most ppl ur comment would seem somehow contradictory
He appears to be very much a neo-con in his US foreign policy outlook
From Wikipedia:
In 2003, Roberts wrote: "For Churchill, apotheosis came in 1940; for Tony Blair, it will come when Iraq is successfully invaded and hundreds of weapons of mass destruction are unearthed from where they have been hidden by Saddam's henchmen."
Make of that what you will.
He’s a Churchill fan what did you expect from a War Monger
He should clear off to Ukrainian and do the ordinary person a favour
If people like him didn't have the American empire to cheerlead for they would have to do some soul-searching about their own society. The British Empire got consumed by America so this is literally all they have left.
Lord Roberts is an excellent commentator - he is so supportive of Israel and I thank God for his wisdom
@50:45 "comes responsibility" - yes, including the responsibility to be realistic, self-critical, adjust strategy as needed, and maintain our own stability lest we lose all effect.
Great Interview, Gentlemen. Thank you very much.
Thank you so much for this. I’ve listened to so much stuff (all over the map) about the Ukraine situation and, in the end, I have so much respect for Andrew Roberts that I will simply accept his analysis. 🙏🏼🇺🇸
Loved the discussion on Ukraine… couldn’t agree more with the guest.
Lithuania actually spends more than 2.5% on defense. Soon to be 3%
(not 1.1%, like this guy says)
Canada has not made 2% and doesn’t
plan to anytime soon (not even if the Cons win the next election). I wonder what JD Vance et al would do about that?
Excluding UK and Greece, Europe and Canada dilly dallied for too long. One or two years do not undo _decades_ of under investment. Decades. Some members - big ones - are nearly five decades of under two per cent - nearer to one per cent in many years. That two per cent was based on a Russia behaving in ways in no longer does. The Kremlin is far worse now. We're back in the Cold War. In Europe Poland realises this. Lithuania too.
What Europe fails to realise is it is incapable of aiding the US if the balloon goes up in Taiwan or Korea (and it likely Japan because the Norks will certainly fire missiles on US bases there). Britain may be able pitch in, but its military is hobbled. And let's not forget the Middle East.
Europe needs to shoulder its burden _on its own_ poste haste. It's no longer a toddler or teen. It far surpasses Russia in population, wealth, and technological know-how, yet it remains dependent _by choice_ because it shirks its defence duties in favour of social spending and growing bureaucracies. Many of Europe's defence ministers, especially Germany's, have been rubbish. They have been antagonistic of the military and they let it wither. This was deliberate. Either increase the taxes on the people or shift social spending to defence.
Europe's big problem is Putin captured both of Germany's major political parties, SDP and CDU, and Germany has done nothing to root out the connivers. It was Schroeder and Merkel who were cozy with Putin. And they weren't the only Germans in his pocket.
@@gagamba9198 a country can only spend what it can afford to spend....America spends 800 billion a year on the military industrial complex because its profitable for a tiny few but cant look after its people properly
@@gagamba9198thank you for explaining this.
I’ve only read the Churchill book, but after this brilliant discussion I will read them all. Thank you Hoover.
He does somewhat skirt Mearsheimer's main point in that the size of the initial Russian force doesn't match one that is needed for a full occupation of a country. I wish they would debate because neither tends to really fully address the others viewpoint.
In fact, he totally affirms Mearsheimer's point later on, accepting that the Russian army's size as well as strategy does not fit the idea that he wanted to take over Ukraine.
@@dangin8811 Exactly. Who knows what Putin was thinking when he launched that invasion in 2022 but with a force of less than 200,000 men he clearly never intended to occupy all of Ukraine. Roberts's claim that Putin is eyeing Lithuania - a NATO country that currently has over 1,200 allied troops posted there as part of the Enhanced Forward Presence -- is utterly baseless. That would mean nuclear war and Putin knows it. Sad to say, the Russian president strikes me as immeasurably shrewder than most Western political leaders or analysts.
@@dangin8811 Unfortunately, Putin continues to say that he wants to take over Ukraine.
Putin believed Ukraine would break easily, surrender and accept a Russian takeover. that would not take an occupying force of millions. it was yet another miscalculation based on a limited and deeply flawed outlook on the outside world and how it has evolved. Ukrainians do not view themselves as Russian, without a culture or sense of nation. Putin does not understand, or simply does not accept this reality.
@@dangin8811 A more understandable point is that because of the reactions of Ukraine and USA to his invasion of Crimea and Biden's capitulation in Afghanistan Putin planned and funded an uncontested invasion. Notice that Mearsheimer habitually finds some American action or inaction to blame for every conflict and usually must take even that out of context - expansion of NATO is to blame for Putin's plans even though every new country begged to be given protection from Russia.
Really depressing that there are only a half dozen men on the planet who understand the world as well as Mr. Roberts.
Just about everything he said is 100% a lie but people just swallow this propaganda up like candy! 🤦♂️
Thank you gentlemen for this very interesting video. God bless you both. Vera in Northern Ireland.
Briliant! Thank you very much.
Great interview
We actually DON'T have responsibility to the rest of the world
As if because you are the biggest house on your block, your neighbors can get a handout... You're the leader, after all
The fact remains that the countries interested in the wars are life and death interested, while elsewhere it is a source for grandstanding and politicians to get extra spending done. To dress us down for not getting involved is to ignore our propensity to muck things up worse
People like this want war no matter the cost.
But you are the leader!
Almost everyone 55 and younger has been told how crappy we are for being the leader by our own education system especially MEN.
Fantastic interview
Very interesting and engaging interview. Thank you.
This program is superb. Thank you Hoover Institute and honoured guests.
Great talk, as usual. Thank you!
Outstanding!
What an incredible interview -- I was hooked. These two are brilliant
Excellent stuff as usual.
I would like to see Andrew Roberts and the interviewer Peter Robinson study the Masha Gessen videos on RUclips and then bring on Dr. Van derKolk and talk about Vladimir Putin and how VP can be educated to stop the Ukraine sibling genocide. VP is a throwback frozen in forgetfulness after the WWII dead serious lebensraum military starvation of Leningrad. Great historian, great interviewer, now they need to be equipped with new viewpoints to move ahead on the looming environmental issues.
@12:05 $25B/yr is more than the GDP of over 70 countries. It's also 3% of the absurdly large US military budget. Calling that peanuts is simply insane and will never be a winning argument, no matter how often it is repeated.
Listening comprehension is vital here, Lord Roberts specifically said it's peanuts compared to the rest of the US military budget, period.
You are a well informed and critically thinker. The hypocrisy is staggering and makes a moral peaceful person disgusting .
Good chat fellas. Hopefully, these is a path forward of achieving peace and working together for the common good. Peace would be the best path forward for everyone. How to increase real love for each other seems to have to be come from above where Christ is. There certainly are enough problems in this world today.
28:17 ''...Trotsky....''; 34:29 ''...fulcrum moment....''; 46:39 ''...money..not...blood....''; 55:38 ''...best....''; 56:09 ''...favor....''; 59:11 ''...tripe....'';
Yeah I noticed that casual Trotsky reference. What a tool bag.
The argument against Vance’s point is nonsense. If a nation doesn’t hit a number it committed to for its own and the collective defence, the it’s not serious and it is seeking to outsource that cost to those who do. It is also worth noting that these percentages spent on defence are all including social services (pensions, veteran services, etc.) which are growing as a share of defence expenditure. So in reality they contribute far less than even the 1-1.8% they spend now.
"Good people are not going into politics" Fully agree, you included Andrew Roberts.
Very good, thanks for the video
Big Fan of AR : just finished his "the storm of war" and the "Masters and Commanders" :
A very interesting discussion. I just ordered a copy of Andrew Roberts' and General Petraeus' most recent book.
I enjoyed this episode of uncommon knowledge. One wonders.
Economic investigator Frank G Melbourne Australia is following this informative content cheers Frank 😊
Great discussion, Lord Andrew Roberts is very knowledgeable on history!
Is he ?
Both the UK and the US have sufficient people in your country to impact on national politics, with their loyalties to different countries. That is an indication that you have too many people of that group in your country. One should instantly stop importing them and consider of those already in your country, who is desirable and whom should be removed. Neither the UK or the US has even considered reducing Visas for those groups. This is anti survival behaviour.
Roberts is right. Vance, Hawley, Cotton, and Mearshimer are wrong. Deterrence is paramount.
Mearsheimer believes in deterrence when it is in line with key strategic interests. For example, replace Ukraine with Taiwan and Mearsheimer would advocate for complete and unrelenting support with US boots on the ground. Blood and Treasure to protect our key strategic interests. In this example it’s preventing China from creating a larger sphere of influence in the South China Sea. The main reason it’s such a different situation is that China is a true competitor to the US and Russia is not even remotely close.
A main reason why Putin invaded Ukraine was to maintain a buffer between Russia & the West. On four occasions that I can recall Russia has been invaded from the west, Napoleon in 1812, Germany in 1914, the US, Britain & others in 1917 on the side of the Whites in the Russian Revolution & Germany in 1941. I can see why Stalin may well have wanted to maintain Eastern Europe as a similar buffer.
Germany did not invade Russia in 1914, actually it was the other way around. Actually Tsarist Russia was the first major power to mobilize in WWI and the first battles all took part on German and Austrian soil.
1920 Russia attacked the newly created Poland (and failed)
1939 The Soviet Union allied with Nazi Germany to destroy Poland
1939 The Soviet Union attacked Finland
1940 The Soviet Union attacked Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania (annexing them fully) and Romania (annexing parts of it)
Stalin destroyed all the buffer states, without his actions from 1939 to 1941 the Soviet Union wouldn't even have a border with Nazi Germany, where a war could start.
@@ekesandras1481 The first major power to mobilize in 1914 was the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Great discussion thanks.
Miershimer’s point about Russian intent was not at all countered.
His answer was that it’s largely a war of artillery? I am kind of amazed that people who call themselves experts on the topic are so easily satisfied. There truly seems to be a lot of sloppy thinking and rational in Roberts arguments.
Mearsheimer ignores that Ukraine is a soverein state and that the signatory powers of the Budapest memorandum promised to defend its sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine renouncing voluntary its nuclear arms, that it inherited from the Soviet Union. Russia back than agreed to acknowledge Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for being handed over all Ukrainian atomic bombs, making Russia the only successor state of the Soviet Union with nuclear arms, although the Soviet Union had stationed these arms in more than one republic (besides Ukraine, also Kazakhstan had more than 1000 nuclear warheads, but made a similar deal)
46:40 What is the total of US national debt?
I was going to say something similar. Its the incorrect framing in rhetorical trope. The stance is ‘stop bleeding us dry and taking advantage of us. Its part of our corrupt governments operations to abuse the apparent necessity of foreign power projection
Thirty four trillion dollars.
The statement that money spent on deterrence is money well spent is true and is what Trump had tried to get across in regards to funding NATO. When countries fail to take their military requirements seriously their opponents will take notice.
Disagree with him on almost every point, but still a good discussion and appreciate some of his past works. Won't be picking this one up, though, likely
I just wanted to add this fun fact (from what I know)… it was J. Goebbles who first described the initial Soviets occupation of eastern Europe as an ‘iron curtain’ in a radio speech broadcast in 1945!
What has changed in 70 years:
-DEBT
-Different generation
-Drop in Christian Faith dividing the nation - morals are the foundations of legal and political unity
-enemies have grown stronger?
Our GDP has shrunk as a proportion of world GDP from a third to a quarter, we have a lot of debt and poverty, The idea of American involvement is so people can stand on their own. Europe now can do that, so we should ration our resources. Everything you said is spot on. I was not a huge fan of this interview.
There are tons of atheist's who are moral and tons of Christians who are immoral. People are good or bad wholly based on who they are, no what made up cult they believe in, or not. What has changed is that people are less educated and have no critical thinking, reasoning, or logic skills. When you teach people what to think, instead of how to think, this is what happens.
At the 36 minute mark, regarding the speech to the chamber, was it the House of Lordships? How many members are there?
The chamber was barely a third full.
Just goes to show the level of contempt that Body has to that subject spoken of and whatever else was supposed to be done in that session.
With respect to Lord Roberts, it is a bit rich coming from a Brit that Americans can-and-must intercede seemingly at every corner of the globe when many of the flashpoints today hail from the former dominions of Britain’s heady days of empire. The United States has a destiny separate and apart from being the spiritual successor to Rule Britannia diplomacy.
He is just a neocon court historian. These same guys were calling for the invasion of Iran right now due to the hamas conflict.
Hear, hear.
19:00. Lord Roberts is omitting all discussions of the players’ considerations about the emergence/continued-nonemergence of King Bob.
Please explain
I guess this shows a man who is well versed in history can look at events and come to exactly wrong conclusions.
After all, reason's only purpose is to provide us with rationalisations
"Wrong" = with which I disagree. This sums up the modern world.
He is a man of the establishment, no thinking outside the box.
We already knew that…nice rhetoric instead of a logical argument.
What are the right conclusions?
Please invite Chas Freeman to provide some useful insight and counter arguments to Roberts who seems so sure of his version of history and the lessons we draw from it.
I feel Putin made the mistake of thinking that the annexation of Ukraine would be a mere matter of marching. By spreading his invasion force out in multiple approaches it made his force appear larger than it was, while attempting to spread out a numerically inferior Ukrainian military.
I feel it’s not illogical to agree with those who say that Putin actually felt the Ukrainian civilians would greet him a liberator or simply capitulate after their forces were “inevitably” swept aside .
Or, so I think
Whatever the plan was, it failed, on both sides.
It's only a one hour chat, but no discussion of Vietnam? Or its obvious parallels with the Afghan disaster?
@briangarrett2427 I think Vietnam was mentioned a bit unless I misremember. The English subtitles transcript might help you find when.
Superb.
A historian that is too certain about the ‘facts’ is merely a propagandist. It is worth being aware that most of history is not recorded, therefore humility is of great importance.
All the countries he's invaded!
That cracked me up. Becuse its true. What a world.
Just imagine Mr. Roberts going back to Westminster after allowing Peter to insult his Prime Minister right to his face.
Thank you very much.
52:11 War, War never changes.
Brilliant!
I beg to differ. It was my understanding that Churchill wanted to take the information on surrendering German army people with a view to using them to
deal with the communist marauders. Clearly the mood of the hard pressed British people and the upcoming election were on his mind.
Don Hansen
14:52 believing ‘whole-heartedly’ in something as big as iraq 2 without proof was a dismal failure of america’s management of risk to its strategic interests.
risks to america’s interests are also being mismanaged today
The second Gulf War resulted from a massive intelligence failure regarding Saddam's chemical and biological WMDs. In the crucial 2003 Bush war cabinet meeting, convened to decide whether or not to invade Iraq, the President, who was uneasy about the WMD issue, asked CIA Director, George Tenet, a holdover from the Clinton Administration, how sure he was about Iraq's allegedly huge stockpile of WMDs, Tenet arose, slammed his fist on the table, and shouted, "It's a slam dunk, Mr. President!" The Tenet CIA's analysis was supported by the intelligence services of virtually every Western nation including Israel's vaunted Mossad. (We may never know if the Mossad's opinion was disengenuous or not. After all, Israel was understandably the country that felt most threatened by the rogue regime in Baghdad, and had to have been the most gratified to see that threat neutralized by a war in which the Israelis would not have to directly participate)
In the final analysis, Saddam proved to be his own worst enemy. He had masterfully created the persuasive illusion that he actually possessed the WMD, in his mind, the next best deterrence to invasion other than nuclear weapons. (He had no nukes because Israel had previously destroyed his nascent nuclear weapon production facilities) Saddam erroneously believed that his convincing but faked stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons would persuade the West to leave him be, the porcupine defense as he saw it. That self deceptive miscalculation proved to be his downfall.
The proof of the Coalition's belief in Sadam's WMD capability was the extraordinary lengths to which the invasion forces went in order to protect themselves with cumbersome chemical warfare suits and vehicle protective systems that greatly hindered their combat effectiveness. In the initial phase of the war, the Coalition forces suffered more from debilitating heat casualties than from enemy bullets. So, this gives the lie to the oft-repeated claim by historical revisionists and Leftist anti-Bush politicians at the time, that Saddam's WMDs were a specious hoax concocted to justify a regime change invasion of Iraq by "Bush, The War Monger". Regardless of the causus belli, we can argue endlessly about whether the Iraqi people are better off without Sadam and the Baathists. There is no question that the Gulf Wars dramatically changed the balance of power in the Middle East in ways unforseen by the antagonists, for good or for ill. Iran and Syria's influence have been strengthened, but the burgeoning cooperation among the Sunni Arab nations with Israel is probably a beneficial outcome as well.
Roberts, admittedly a top notch historian, has REALLY disappointed me for the strongly boomer neocon interventionist turn he has taken, especially with regard to Ukraine.
FDR was a socialist. Small wonder ge spoke so Highly of Stalin. SCOTUS voted against many of his "reforms" because they were unconstutional. He was possibly the first politician, so he suggested packing SCOTUS (14) so they wouldn't overrule his unconstutional land reforms along with other socialist ideas.
He was the right man for the job at that time but only! He's the reason for term limits on presidents.
This guy and his friends will absolutely get us into WW III.
Ukraine lost this war before it began, and likely will never recover. Russia is unlikely to return why it captured, nor its control of the Black Sea through Sebastopol.
At 35:44
RIP Gonzalo Lira, murdered by Zelensky.
I apologize for my ignorance. Who is Gonzalo Lurra? Thank you in advance.
RIP Givi and Motorola.
_"There are so many reasons why we should support Ukraine."_ He says right before not giving us any.
10:05 Rambo III was right?
US Army Special Forces were the heroes over throwing the Taliban not CIA.
They were overthrown? Doesn't look like it, lol.
Crimea did not want to be part of Ukraine in 1991, and 20,000 of Ukraine troops in 2014, took off their insignia and defected. Also 160k ? Let's not forget negotiations started in Belarus 2 days into the conflict. Also,Hitler went into Poland with 1.5 mil only to take half of the country. where Soviets invaded from the East couple of weeks later, per earlier.
A quite interesting interviewee - and with an appreciated sense of humor.
Come to Mishawaka, to South Bend; and especially come to the eastside of Detroit that surrounds my beloved parish, Assumption Grotto. Look at roads, the sidewalks, the slumping ruins of the abandoned houses and buildings and former businesses. And take a moment to explain why we should accept the lost boys, ignorant, angry, attacking strangers, looting stores ... Come to the America that has no access to the global equations or the State First capitols of Washington and too many states. That's all... "Don't care was made to care..." I don't think so.
Andrew Roberts is great and so is Peter Robinson who frame the questions.
Another european wanting uncle sam to foot the bill. Nothing to see here.
Yes or no. I have watched another video in which a former CIA talked about this - USA also gets benefits as a kind of “demilitarized” budget spent among Europe countries can kind of avoid wars. His argument (the former CIA) was that previous in Europe there have been a hell lot of wars, you may seen it as some sort of defense budget for world peace lol
But obviously when there’s are evil bullies rise up it’s really a bad choice. I guess ppl really bought into the idea of the end of history and thought after wwll no one wanna have another ww. I don’t think previously certain countries think RU and CN as threat.
@@siuwong4588 there are pros and cons but the US no longer benefits from the arrangment and Europe has had 70 years to get it together. It is time they stand on their own two feet.
Sorry my friend sensible people in Europe want nothing to do with America's mad wars.
Free Sam Melia
Moscow horde´s war record :-
1856 defeated by Britain and France
1905 defeated by Japan
1917 defeated by Germany
1920 defeated by Poland, Finland, Estonia and all Baltic states
1939 defeated by Finland
1969 defeated by China
1989 defeated by Afghanistan
1989 defeated in the Cold War.
1996 defeated by Chechnya
2022 defeated by Ukraine
WW2 won USA/Britain , meanwhile Stalin's officers were shot or sent to the Gulags. Millions went to the Gulags, including Solzhenitsyn
Moscow's only victories come from invading smaller countries :-
a) Hungary 1956
b) Czechoslovakia 1968
c) Moldova 1992
d) Georgia 2008
The Army argued at the time that de-Bathification was the wrong thing to do. Is this book supposed to be shelved as Revisionist History?
What percentage of Ukraine’s foreign military aid budget are non-US nations contributing? How does that compare to the US:non-US GDP ratio?
In for a penny, in for a pound. We can’t back down, it’s too late. We have to find a way as the reputation of everything that we hold sacred is at stake.
I opine, anyway
У співвідношенні до ВВП маленька Естонія допомогла Україні відносно свого ВВП в 3,8 разів більше ніж США (1,26% Естонія проти 0,33% США). Країни Балтії дали найбільшу допомогу відносно ВВП - кожна більше 1%, Данія 0,51% , Польша 0,68%, Нідерланди й Фінляндія 0,44%, Велика Британія 0,37%
Абсолютний лідер в грошовому еквіваленті допомоги - США, половина з якої -військова допомога, в неї пораховано всі витрати викликані цією війною, наприклад, вартість сучасного озброєння для НАТО на заміну старому, що надали члени НАТО Україні. На другому місці Німеччина, потім Велика Британія.
Євросоюз надав трохи менше допомоги ніж США. Всі європейські країни включно з Великою Британією - більше ніж США. Більша частина всієї допомоги - цільова на невійськові потреби. Допомагали не лише США і європейці: Канада, Японія, Австралія, Південна Корея, Тайвань, Нова Зеландія... Більша частина - на невійськові потреби.
blah blah russia bad, ukraine good ... keep spending my money
Its so boring.His knowledge of affairs in Europe is childlike.Thats why Britain is an American vassal state and Russia is a great power
Churchill w an iPhone 😂 more like Soviet Larry David in a gi joe children’s t-shirt
Why can't Ukraine just be neutral? People just don't get along and apparently never will.
_"Just give them a few more billions and they'll definitely win this time."_
Holy Shlamoly what is this guy smoking?
In Napoleon, the Ridley Scott film, Napoleon is portrayed as a man who embarks on conquest yet has no passion for it. Since this does not describe the real-life Napoleon, I can only interpret the character as representing Ridley Scott himself: a historical film maker who has no interest in history.
I had thought that the problem was the USA denying Russia to join NATO.
Yes, one of our best & brightest proposed, when the USSR fell, welcoming Russia into the West with a sort of Marshall plan. Sorry, his name escapes me at the moment, but he was shot down I’m pretty sure by arch neocon Zbniew Brzinski (spelling?). But if the raison d’etre of NATO was defense against the USSR that could be tricky (so I think the idea would have been to offer entry into the EU). Not sure how that would’ve gone but it certainly sounds interesting as well as a lot better than pushing Russia into the arms of China, Iran and North Korea. Some have pointed out that the US would not have wanted Russia to supplant US energy sales to Europe. Such a quagmire-who can keep track of it all!
The problem was the expansion of NATO after the Soviet Union dissolved.
What is “control” of the border? The interviewer says the Trump administration got the border under control, but then specifies numbers for the Biden administrations time managing the border. Why not mention the numbers when the “control“ was provided? Because control is not an absolute barrier. Illegal immigrants still came into the United States from Mexico. In fact, illegal immigration increased faster than during the Obama administration in the early years of the Trump administration. That strikes me as a very politically based position by the interviewer.
The UN is paying aliens to invade -- and destroy -- America. Trump has vowed to deport them. The enemy of the deep state will do everything in his power to reverse the damage; obviously. They cut monthly checks more than double to these invaders what I got when I was on disability, an American tax payer. Scary stuff.
Didn't he say 1 million in the best year?
He did say it went from 1 million during trumps administration to 7 million under Biden’s. It is now 10 million (June 2024).
A much higher percentage was deported under Trump.
"Sunak my party leader" .By making that comment this man incriminates himsel,f because how could any self-respecting European accept Sunak as his leader.Sunak was trying to become an American and his wife is not even a British citizen.Laughable.
He is committed to the Tory platform of achieving zero seats in the next election.
Great historian, Lord manners and language,
And then proceeds to brush off massive casualties and collective punishment imposed by a state on a stateless civilian population.
This man is scared and angry in his core for some reason. It's sad to witness such an intellect undeserved by deep insecurities.
pfffffff he looks absolutely secure to me and many other sane readers, who also agree on his position on terrorist ground like Hamas that initiated brutally the current conflict on Oct 7th. As to ppl living there, they should do more than the Israelis to eliminate their kidnapper-oppressor Hamas. Outsiders opposing Isreal on this matter are just kind simpletons, to say in the least rude way.
Or perhaps he just happens to have views on that subject that are different from yours. I did hear him give various arguments for them in the video. 🤔
Jewish blind spot
@MagnusElpron Stateless, really? Also, you didn't understand the ratio argument, but that's alright since lots of Westerners despise math they commonly misinterpret statistics. The job of a military is to hit military targets - therefore the success in terms of accuracy of the military is measured in a ratio of military targets hit to total targets, including civilians. It's the same with American cops not being racist because their methods do jail criminals and get drivers with drugs with maximum probability, it just so happens a certain demographic really likes gangs, homicides, and drugs.
@@gatocanada69That's what happens with covert socialists in America, blaming the successful out of envy, still believing in the labor theory of value. They say they're antiracist by becoming racists themselves haha.
Andrew Roberts mentions that there is nothing in the human condition that necessitates suicide, and yet very many humans commit suicide every day. Although, admittedly, very few heads of state commit suicide.
Sad to hear that "expert" denying wrongdoing of the USA in Iraq... And totally missing the point when US officials calls to Ukrainie authorities NOT TO FIGHT RUSSIAN in the Crimea.
Peter, pls invite experts who knows what they talking about our ask challenging questions. Otherwise you will be 2nd to Carlson.
….he’s way more knowledgeable than Tucker Carlson dude…..thats your partisan political isolationist position speaking.
⭐
I have doubt this getlement have his legs over the land, and everybody have doubt that Hamas could be distroyed, USa couln't with the Talibans
Well spoken, but sadly as a historian, he ignores the preamble to the war going back to the late 90's. Bad mistake as an historian I am afraid.
Roberts is acting more like Baghdad Bob than a historian.
Please have someone else on with the opposite views 🎉🎉🎉🎉
If you really want a different view, you might like Robert F Kennedy, Jr. Just sayin’
There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Sadam was documented as using nerve gas against whole Kurdish villages. Nukes are not the only weapons of mass destruction
We literally gave them to him
And then the UN ran sanctions on him in the subsequent years post Desert Storm
Hussain was tried and hanged by Iraqi courts for his killing of over 200 people by chemical agents
The disaster of the Iraq war was the political generals putzing around there for over a decade after Shock and Awe. We basically wanted it to be a democracy without enforcing it
The specific argument to invade Iraq was that they were re-starting their nuclear program, which was a lie.
Did this guy just say that civilization and democracy would be on the floor if countries turned to China for trade and economic stability?
Did this guy smoke a truckload of nonsense prior to the interview?
@douglasx6915 Unfortunately, as an understatement, China's not been a good neighbor to many of its neighbors, India, Indochina, Southeast Asia, and East Asia, at least since Xi Jinping came to power. Second, China's in a credit bubble, an incredibly high male:female ratio, and has decreasing respect for property rights. It's like they're undoing Deng Xiaoping's efforts that brought prosperity to China, and believe that prosperity will last without free markets.