Scott Horton

Well, if you're going to do that, then it would make more logical sense to put combat forces there who could actually be a deterrent of some kind. Not that I'm recommending that, but I'm just saying it makes no sense to have, you know, like we have in Korea. Our soldiers are not there to really, there's not enough of them there to deter an attack or to defeat an attack from North Korea, probably.

Well, if you're going to do that, then it would make more logical sense to put combat forces there who could actually be a deterrent of some kind. Not that I'm recommending that, but I'm just saying it makes no sense to have, you know, like we have in Korea. Our soldiers are not there to really, there's not enough of them there to deter an attack or to defeat an attack from North Korea, probably.

but they are a trip wire that means if north korea ever attacks south korea our guys will be caught up in it and that'll mean the rest of the usa is also coming and so um yeah it just makes no sense whatsoever to this whole damn war dave has been fought for the principle that ukraine can too join nato right

but they are a trip wire that means if north korea ever attacks south korea our guys will be caught up in it and that'll mean the rest of the usa is also coming and so um yeah it just makes no sense whatsoever to this whole damn war dave has been fought for the principle that ukraine can too join nato right

day in the long term future from now, which we're absolutely not willing to let them in now, which might have been a deterrent, although I think it would have caused the war sooner, but we're not willing to give them a war guarantee. but we're willing to help them get into and lose a three-year war on the principle that no one else can say that they can't join.

day in the long term future from now, which we're absolutely not willing to let them in now, which might have been a deterrent, although I think it would have caused the war sooner, but we're not willing to give them a war guarantee. but we're willing to help them get into and lose a three-year war on the principle that no one else can say that they can't join.

Back to, as I say in the book over and over again, I cite all of these hawks, not the opponents of NATO expansion, which included not just our heroes like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul and Ted Galen Carpenter and other of our guys, but including vast parts of the foreign policy establishment were against this. But then even the expanders,

Back to, as I say in the book over and over again, I cite all of these hawks, not the opponents of NATO expansion, which included not just our heroes like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul and Ted Galen Carpenter and other of our guys, but including vast parts of the foreign policy establishment were against this. But then even the expanders,

like Richard Holbrooke, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Henry Kissinger and others, they all said, well, of course we have to make a special exception for Ukraine. Of course, they have to have some kind of, they all said the same thing. Like Austria or Finland during the last Cold War, where they don't have troops occupying their country from either side.

like Richard Holbrooke, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Henry Kissinger and others, they all said, well, of course we have to make a special exception for Ukraine. Of course, they have to have some kind of, they all said the same thing. Like Austria or Finland during the last Cold War, where they don't have troops occupying their country from either side.

They're not in NATO and they're not in the Warsaw Pact and they're just neutral. And we'll do the same kind of thing for Ukraine. Forgive me if I'm being redundant. I forgot what I said on your show last time, but there's a guy named Ken Pollock who was sort of the liberal hawk who told all the liberal Democrats it was a good idea to support W. Bush's war in 2003.

They're not in NATO and they're not in the Warsaw Pact and they're just neutral. And we'll do the same kind of thing for Ukraine. Forgive me if I'm being redundant. I forgot what I said on your show last time, but there's a guy named Ken Pollock who was sort of the liberal hawk who told all the liberal Democrats it was a good idea to support W. Bush's war in 2003.

He was like best buddies and writing partners with a guy named O'Hanlon, Michael O'Hanlon, who's maybe a little bit more prominent, but they're sort of alter egos, these guys. Anyway, so they're like, you know, Brookings Institution guys, right? Like very center left liberal Democrat war hawks.

He was like best buddies and writing partners with a guy named O'Hanlon, Michael O'Hanlon, who's maybe a little bit more prominent, but they're sort of alter egos, these guys. Anyway, so they're like, you know, Brookings Institution guys, right? Like very center left liberal Democrat war hawks.

And he wrote a monograph that came out in 2018 saying, we got to, you know, have a new treaty that guarantees no further NATO expansion and neutrality for Ukraine and this permanent arrangement security structure. And he had war guarantees built into it and the rest too, but still like, It was important that he was recognizing that we have gone too far in trying to take Ukraine away from Russia.

And he wrote a monograph that came out in 2018 saying, we got to, you know, have a new treaty that guarantees no further NATO expansion and neutrality for Ukraine and this permanent arrangement security structure. And he had war guarantees built into it and the rest too, but still like, It was important that he was recognizing that we have gone too far in trying to take Ukraine away from Russia.

And of course, they're reacting just like everybody knew that they would. And so we should call it off here before a real war breaks out, before it gets so much worse than this, at that time, low-level civil war under the...

And of course, they're reacting just like everybody knew that they would. And so we should call it off here before a real war breaks out, before it gets so much worse than this, at that time, low-level civil war under the...

partially implemented Minsk 2 deal let's say um and so uh so they all knew better they all knew this was the consensus was that we shouldn't do this that it makes no sense to bring them into NATO and give them an article five if if russian knew that was happening they would invade before the ceremony and the ink was dry on the page or they would you know immediately test

partially implemented Minsk 2 deal let's say um and so uh so they all knew better they all knew this was the consensus was that we shouldn't do this that it makes no sense to bring them into NATO and give them an article five if if russian knew that was happening they would invade before the ceremony and the ink was dry on the page or they would you know immediately test