Speaker 1: The Armstrong and Getty show, no idea was it's ludicrous.
Speaker 1: As far as Afghanistan withdrawal, I'm glad to see us
Speaker 1: moving up. I think a random withdrawal just because you're
Speaker 1: celebrating an anniversary is not the right decision. If we're
Speaker 1: ready to go, then I'll be supportive. If we're not
Speaker 1: ready to go, I'll be making that very clear. As
Speaker 1: reaction to the announcement yesterday that we're pulling out of
Speaker 1: Afghanistan on the twentieth anniversary of nine eleven, which seems weird,
Speaker 1: but that's just one oh by the way, Colin Powell
Speaker 1: said yesterday, and obviously he was um Secretary of State
Speaker 1: at the beginning of the War of the Second warn
Speaker 1: Iraq Uh he say, I'd say we've done all we
Speaker 1: can do about Afghanistan. What are those troops being told
Speaker 1: they're there for? It's time to bring it to an end.
Speaker 1: That is a pretty good question. What would you tell
Speaker 1: the troops are there for? But that's just one of
Speaker 1: the many military challenges that we've got around the world.
Speaker 1: One of the one of the reasons we are leaving
Speaker 1: Afghanists Stan, I think, is Russia, China, iran other problems
Speaker 1: that we have, and David French wrote a column yesterday.
Speaker 1: I'm asking whether or not we're living in a moment,
Speaker 1: that period of calm before the unexpected shattering nine eleven storm,
Speaker 1: that we might be entering another era of great power conflict,
Speaker 1: arguably unlike anything we've experienced in more than a generation.
Speaker 1: I hope he's wrong, but he certainly may be right.
Speaker 1: Let's talk to my clients military analyst about that. Mike
Speaker 1: served the United States military in both the US and
Speaker 1: Europe and Iraq with great distinction. He has been an
Speaker 1: analyst for CBS, among other folks, and enjoins us. Now, Mike,
Speaker 1: how are you, sir? Think that's great to be back
Speaker 1: with you all good, Well, thanks, it's been too long
Speaker 1: and it's a real pleasure to talk to you. So
Speaker 1: a little hypothetical here. If you were the Secretary of
Speaker 1: Defense and you were posed with the situation in on
Speaker 1: the Ukrainian border with Plute Putin, You've got China acting up.
Speaker 1: Iran is a problem as usual, UM Afghanistan. Which your
Speaker 1: meeting do you schedule first in the morning to make
Speaker 1: sure everybody's on the same page. Which feels the most
Speaker 1: urgent to you. I think it's China only because they
Speaker 1: have the most metal resources right now that are focused
Speaker 1: in all the different facets of warfare and cyber as
Speaker 1: well as things on the ground in Hong Kong, Taiwan
Speaker 1: and places and what's what's happening there and events to
Speaker 1: take place in China with the Olympics coming up. So
Speaker 1: I think, UM, that is clearly the number one now
Speaker 1: tactically on the ground. What's happening in Russia is not
Speaker 1: good either with Ukraine, UM, but I think that's going
Speaker 1: to be a regional conflict. One of the advantages of
Speaker 1: the United States has right now is the president that's
Speaker 1: just not an interventionalist. So you know, you guys are
Speaker 1: talking about David French about the moment that might be
Speaker 1: the case. But the question is whether or not we're
Speaker 1: attacked on the homeland. I don't think that will happen.
Speaker 1: The question is will be posed as to whether we'll
Speaker 1: get involved, NATO get involved if something happens in Ukraine
Speaker 1: and Russia. But but the the bottom line is China
Speaker 1: is still the greatest threat that we still have strategically
Speaker 1: as an emergent power. Boy, where do we start, UM, China?
Speaker 1: If China were to move on Taiwan in some manner,
Speaker 1: do we honor our agreement we've had since nineteen seventy nine,
Speaker 1: Do we have to can we? Yeah, it's naval power
Speaker 1: will will rule a day there, and China think that
Speaker 1: they can actually hold their own in any kind of
Speaker 1: naval engagement with us, based on how they've built their navy. UM.
Speaker 1: I think I wouldn't call it a nine ten moment.
Speaker 1: I'd call it maybe a ninety nine moment, where at
Speaker 1: that point in the time, the world thought that the
Speaker 1: French army was the greatest in the world, and no
Speaker 1: one thought anything about the Germans. Um. You know, the
Speaker 1: Chinese are if you look at their commercials, you look
Speaker 1: at what they're advertising, what they do. They get up
Speaker 1: every day and they think they're going to have a
Speaker 1: war with someone. And so if they're going to do that,
Speaker 1: they're not going to be afraid to go after us
Speaker 1: with um, you know, even with our nable resources there.
Speaker 1: So it's gonna take our allies to the Australians and
Speaker 1: others within the regions of the Japanese. But the bottom
Speaker 1: line is, I think if we if we have that
Speaker 1: conflict that takes place on the sea, and our navy
Speaker 1: is gonna get tested very mightily. Yeah, well, especially because
Speaker 1: when I know you know this better than we do.
Speaker 1: But it's a lot easier to defend a position than
Speaker 1: to retake it. And and Taiwan is to China like
Speaker 1: Martha's Vineyard is to the United States. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it's right off their coast. Yeah. Yeah, And it would
Speaker 1: be a situation potentially like destroying it to save it,
Speaker 1: which doesn't you know that's again Korean war mentality as well.
Speaker 1: So um, it's just it's hard to say there's not
Speaker 1: you know, there as an as a ground guy though
Speaker 1: there's no other opposing fourth that exists inside of Taiwan,
Speaker 1: so it would be taken very simply. The question is,
Speaker 1: you know what happens, then what are the countries of
Speaker 1: the world do? Then? I think nothing. I think there's
Speaker 1: certain they're sort of fat to completes that are out
Speaker 1: there right now, and that's one. The second one is
Speaker 1: probably the don Vast region of Ukraine, and it's going
Speaker 1: to get closer to Russia. We know that they already
Speaker 1: control Crimea. So I think these are all FATA completes.
Speaker 1: Whether or not the world wants to get involved. And again,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is not an at events and list, so
Speaker 1: I don't see him getting involved. Wow, Okay, I was
Speaker 1: just gonna ask before we get back into specifics, let's
Speaker 1: let's do a little You're you're teaching a college class,
Speaker 1: and in the topic today is mutual defense agreements? Are
Speaker 1: that sort of thing? We have the treaty with the Taiwan,
Speaker 1: We have a treaty through NATO with Ukraine. Are those
Speaker 1: things worth the parchment they're written on? Really? Well, they
Speaker 1: were when they were signed, you know, some of them
Speaker 1: thirty years ago and beyond. But today they have not
Speaker 1: been updated. We haven't updated our strategic limitations trees and
Speaker 1: and and the like. They've all expired. And the countries
Speaker 1: that sign those trees aren't the same as they worked it.
Speaker 1: The only one really is is the United States. UM.
Speaker 1: NATO would have to mobilize pretty significantly if it wanted
Speaker 1: to go in and defend Ukraine. I don't think it's
Speaker 1: a good idea to put NATO anywhere near Ukraine. UM,
Speaker 1: that's right on the border of Russia. I mean, we
Speaker 1: can't have admission and TORNATO being everybody except Russia. That's
Speaker 1: just not gonna work. That's gonna That's the same reason
Speaker 1: how World War One started, where history repeats itself all
Speaker 1: over again. So I think that while that was a
Speaker 1: great idea back in the nineties as they split away
Speaker 1: from the old Soviet Union, the bottom line is Russia
Speaker 1: can pretty much have its way in Ukraine. We all
Speaker 1: know that. Everybody knows that, and if anything, and I
Speaker 1: think Plutin knows that, Joe Biden is not an interventionalist,
Speaker 1: which is why he's been moving towards what he's doing
Speaker 1: in Ukraine right now. Well, that's why I really wanted
Speaker 1: to have you on, is because you can speak to
Speaker 1: and having the past on whether or not we can
Speaker 1: do something. So whether or not we should, you know,
Speaker 1: falls by the wayside. If someone like you says we can't.
Speaker 1: The world can't stop this from happening, so why discuss it, right.
Speaker 1: Simulations show that there's over four hundred thousand Russian troops
Speaker 1: that are in proximity closer in proximity of the Ukraine
Speaker 1: border that if they decided to roll into Ukraine and
Speaker 1: even keep going further further west, they could take virtually
Speaker 1: western Europe again in sixty hours. That's five days or whatever.
Speaker 1: I mean, live with the mass on that. It's to
Speaker 1: the point where, yeah, and the only thing holding it
Speaker 1: back is US nuclear weapons. And the question is whether
Speaker 1: or not we would fire them, because then then we
Speaker 1: start we open up that pendor to box and so
Speaker 1: we really don't have that that strategic deterrence at the
Speaker 1: tactical level. We have it at the strategic level. We
Speaker 1: have it, you know, in in in space and destroying
Speaker 1: each other's countries. But are we willing to give up
Speaker 1: an east coast city just to protect Ukraine? And I'm
Speaker 1: not I'm not sure we're gonna be boiling to do that.
Speaker 1: Military analysts Mike Lions on the line. Mike, so you're
Speaker 1: saying Russia could sweep across Europe, I mean, take Poland
Speaker 1: and Romania, Slovakia, whatever, and and head toward Germany in
Speaker 1: the space of five days. Yes, yeah, exactly, that's the stimulation.
Speaker 1: And they would do it with Russian forces plus the
Speaker 1: private military companies, the Wagner groups, the ones that the
Speaker 1: little green men so to speak, that they have mobilized.
Speaker 1: Now whether they could hold it, you know, again, we
Speaker 1: create a World War two scenario where just like the
Speaker 1: Germans going to Russian and then they get beat back there.
Speaker 1: They would eventually be beaten back. It would be tremendous destruction.
Speaker 1: Millions and millions of people are killed. They couldn't hold it,
Speaker 1: but they can sure create tremendous amount of destruction there,
Speaker 1: that's for sure. And think do you think Putin has
Speaker 1: the slightest interest in anything like that. He's got interest
Speaker 1: in Ukraine. I think that his desire is to return
Speaker 1: that in his lifetime. Right, so he's now elected till
Speaker 1: six and so he's got them. We've got to think
Speaker 1: that the world believes that Russia has a declining power.
Speaker 1: But as soon as the Germans and the Russians connect
Speaker 1: that gas pipeline together and they know whether the Germans
Speaker 1: completely relying on Russia, I just don't. That doesn't fall
Speaker 1: into place for me as well. They're not a declining power.
Speaker 1: They have nuclear weapons as well, they can threaten the
Speaker 1: United States. I think he's gonna want at least get
Speaker 1: Ukraine back and put Ukraine back in that what he
Speaker 1: calls the former Soviet Union. Well back to China, which
Speaker 1: is a similar sort of argument. And you know the
Speaker 1: Chinese officials at some level may hear this very interview
Speaker 1: where they hear somebody like you say it's fade a
Speaker 1: complete you know, more or less. Wouldn't be worth it
Speaker 1: for us to try to stop China from taking Taiwan
Speaker 1: because that's going to be the calculation on their part,
Speaker 1: right whether or not we're willing to to to really
Speaker 1: go to war over it, and I don't think we
Speaker 1: probably are. We're not, and and it would cement China's
Speaker 1: role as they want to be the priminente or in
Speaker 1: the Pacific. What is the day what does the world
Speaker 1: look like the day after China has taken Taiwan and
Speaker 1: we say to Taiwan, sorry, I know we have an
Speaker 1: agreement to you know, to protect you, but we're just
Speaker 1: we're not. Yeah. No. It's then a lot of other
Speaker 1: of our alliances, a lot of other things get called
Speaker 1: on the question. I think, um, I do believe already
Speaker 1: some of our this is not Donald Trump's fault, but
Speaker 1: some of our alliances in NATO, for example, are tired
Speaker 1: of the United States politics anyway. They're they're looking at
Speaker 1: the fact that things change every four years. I mean,
Speaker 1: let's look at why we're coming out of Afghanistan, you know, Trump,
Speaker 1: let's face it, he wanted to do this before the
Speaker 1: military wouldn't let him do it. He said the data first,
Speaker 1: he thought he was going to be president, he thought
Speaker 1: it was going to happen. What Biden do? He basically
Speaker 1: keeps the same plan, again showing me he's not an
Speaker 1: interventional This keeps the same plan. He just puts it
Speaker 1: on an AT eleven anniversary, which again I think is
Speaker 1: dumb as well, because there's too many other things going
Speaker 1: on that day. But the bottom lines, we're coming out
Speaker 1: of Afghanistan, so we're gonna find out what happened. Then
Speaker 1: we'll see what's gonna fill that back in. Well, final
Speaker 1: question for me, Well, and and this is the speculation, obviously,
Speaker 1: but we understand that, Well, what do you figure the
Speaker 1: chances are that we're exchanging ordinance with a nation state
Speaker 1: anytime soon, as opposed to a non governmental terrorist organization
Speaker 1: or something like that, which is going on as we speak.
Speaker 1: Many Americans forget that we're in dozens of countries, but
Speaker 1: a state act, right, I don't think it's for a while.
Speaker 1: I think if anything happens first, sequentially Russia goes first
Speaker 1: into Ukraine before China does anything into Taiwan, um, although
Speaker 1: we've got more of a chance diplomatically to try to
Speaker 1: fend off what's gonna happen in China. I think that's
Speaker 1: gonna happen first, and if that does happen, we do nothing.
Speaker 1: Now we've already been warned. We try. We're moving ships
Speaker 1: into the Black Sea. We're trying to again project our
Speaker 1: power there. It's not gonna matter because even if even
Speaker 1: if we get them there were they're still gonna do
Speaker 1: what they're gonna do. My clients military analyst Mike Fabulous
Speaker 1: is always we really appreciated. Great to talk to you, great,
Speaker 1: thanks for having me. It's so weird in our current
Speaker 1: world of media to talk to somebody who's so plane
Speaker 1: spoken about the facts. It's not what he wants at all,
Speaker 1: I guarantee it. He doesn't want this reality, but it's
Speaker 1: the freaking reality. So he just lays it out as
Speaker 1: this is what is and it's not through some sort
Speaker 1: of ridiculous, childish partisan lens either. I'm gonna I don't
Speaker 1: believe America backs down from anyone, you know, as the
Speaker 1: sort of reaction you get from some quarters. What does
Speaker 1: that that has nothing to do with reality? He's saying
Speaker 1: the world can't stop Russia from doing that short of
Speaker 1: a nuclear war. The world is not going to stop
Speaker 1: China from doing what they want to do short of
Speaker 1: a nuclear war. They're just not. This is why President's
Speaker 1: age like dogs. And this is why I'm grateful that
Speaker 1: we have such a vital young man in the office
Speaker 1: right now. Oh wait a minute, that was back to
Speaker 1: the partisanship to tell you what either one or both
Speaker 1: of those events happen over the next five ten years.
Speaker 1: The world is a different place than it was for
Speaker 1: the past seventy by a lot. Change is the only
Speaker 1: constant Jack, Did you know that? Yeah, I mean it's inevitable.
Speaker 1: United States wasn't gonna, you know, get to do whatever
Speaker 1: it wanted wherever it wanted forever. But it looks like
Speaker 1: those days are over. Wow, that's sobering.