Speaker 0 00:00:00 So thank you everybody for coming. We will, um, as always, we're gonna start with Dr. Salman's comments, and then we're gonna open up for question and answer discussion. So if you have questions as we go, you can post them in the chat, uh, provide a little context maybe as to what you're referencing so that when we come back, uh, we know what to, what, what you were talking about or else, of course, you can also just unmute yourself when the Q and a starts and ask questions that is preferred. We love to see your faces. I love to have that kind of discussion here. So thank you for coming. Um, and then for my podcast, intro as always, if you are listening to this as a podcast, please like subscribe, write the podcast, share it with your friends. And if you wanna take part in question and answer and discussion with Dr. Salzman, please join us. Live the fourth, th fourth, Thursday of every month, you can find
[email protected] slash event. So tonight we're talking egoistic foreign military policy, I think it's gonna be a great discussion. And with that, I hand it over to you, Richard,
Speaker 1 00:00:59 Abby, thank you. And I thought as done in the past, I, I thought, you know, I really should read this into the record cuz it's something I did take some time with and wrote as an intro. So I'm gonna do that. It'll sound a little mechanical, but then I'll open it up. And I think I'm gonna say fewer things tonight, cuz I really want to hear from you, uh, pushback questions, uh, alternative perspectives. It turns that I, I believe that I have a minority view. I'm used to having a minority view, but this is really a minority view because in Washington, in the media, the Pentagon and elsewhere, almost everyone agrees now that the us should enter world war three. I mean, I just think it's crazy, but I here's my opening Jeff, as rational ego I'm reading now. So sorry about that. Just as rational egoism is the only proper ethic to guide an individual's life.
Speaker 1 00:01:52 It's also the only proper ethic to guide a state's relations with other states. So this is definitely IR if you know the, the term in academia now, here I go. The essence of America is its liberties, its rights and its capitalist system. Therefore the self-interest of the United States lies in preserving those values. Neither sacrificing nor surrendering them, especially not for so-called humanitarian or altruistic motives mere to help victimized foreigners. You can imagine who I'm thinking about right now. The us must rationally identify its allies and enemies then act accordingly. It must never provide national defense for other nations that mostly pretend to be sovereign nations, national legalism judge, neither passive isolationism nor imperialism America. Can't preserve her essence or institution nor again, find a way to fight and win only the right wars. Without following this egoistic principle, she must be a moral par Paragon for the world, but never the policeman of the world.
Speaker 1 00:03:04 Uh, I have provocatively said, and it can be disputed. I understand that the us has lost five wars in a row. I think it's true. I think it's tragic. I think it's off, but I think it reflects the fact that the us has not been adopting the ethic I'm talking about now, what are the last five? They start with Korea. So the last war, the us both declared and one was world war II. The now in world war II, it was attacked by Japan. It was threatened by Nazi Germany because they declared war on Germany did declare war on the us. So this is the, uh, there's echo. So people should mute. So there's no echo, uh, someone's not muted. I say this not out of any glee. I think it's disgusting that the us would lose five wars in a row because since the end of the world war II, it's the major superpower of the world. It's because it enters wars with either no real purpose nationally defined or no self into.
Speaker 1 00:04:22 And then when they engage in war, they do so in a, uh, restrictive, you know, tire, hands behind your back philosophy, a philosophy called just war, which I'll critique. If we have time to go into that, the Vietnam war is the most obvious failure. Now the U us did win the cold war, but if that's not a hot war, the, the Afghanistan disaster 20 years in Afghanistan with a bunch of people who live in caves and the us government, military Pentagon couldn't defeat them. That is a scandal of enormous proportions. Not only that, the Taliban was more powerful after we left than before we got there 20 years later and we left, I don't know, estimates of 83 billion of war material at various warehouses in Tarmax in Afghanistan. Now we have the us trying to back, not trying actually sending armaments and aid to a non NATO member Ukraine, which is at war with Russia, which means the us is at war with Russia.
Speaker 1 00:05:40 It it, and without declaring it, Russia never declared war on the United States. It's yet a another example. Now is the us gonna lose a sixth war in a row? I'm here tonight to say that, unless we adopt this principle and fast as possible, that America first, if you wanna put it that way, America first, but that would be my advice to you in your own personal life. Egoism means you must be the primary beneficiary of your own actions. It does not mean you exploit other people, but it also doesn't mean you let other people exploit. You do Ukrainian government is thoroughly corrupt. The Ukrainian government for years has been thoroughly corrupt. Zelinski is thoroughly corrupt. The Ukrainian economy is no freer than the Russian economy. I've measured these things. For those of you who know there are metrics of this, there are metrics of economic freedom. There are metrics of corruption. You could rain and Russia run neck and neck on all these things. In in fact, Russia is slightly freer and slightly less corrupt than the Ukraine.
Speaker 1 00:06:49 And yet Republicans, Democrats, all the media Fox now agrees with MSNBC. They're all on the same, um, sheet singing from the same choir funding supporting, sending military aid to Ukraine, knowing damn well. It could cause world war II. I think it is one of the most outrageous things I've ever seen, but it definitely means the us is continuing its policy of not caring about American, not caring about American borders, but caring more about Ukrainian, not caring about the United States, financial fiscal condition, caring about others. The us is slowly and sometimes quickly bankrupting itself by getting involved in ridiculous wars that use American soldiers as Canon fodder, running up the national debt, leaving chaos in the wake of deposing, all these who do they depose Mubarak, Phili Muhar. I mean you can't, it would take all night to list all the autographs that the us thought it could depose and replace with alleged democracy and all they've left is car and chaos in its wake.
Speaker 1 00:08:13 I'm not anti-American. I am so pro-American, I am sick and tired of America, losing wars and engaging in wars that are self sacrificial. Some of it is make the world safe for democracy. Some of it is we need to be the policeman of the world, but the us isn't doing either of those things and democracy itself is just rule by vote. It's just rule by people. It isn't ruled by constitutionalism. It isn't rule by any confirmation or promise of respecting rights. So if you look at just the spring of 2012, the us, um, this is not a partisan point, by the way, this is George W. Bush. This is bill Clinton. This is Barack Obama. They all believe that if you bow down to the idol of democracy, if you just have an election, all will be well. But some of these peoples just don't have the philosophy for freedom. I hate to say that I wish they'd did they know where to get it? They can read the declaration of the constitution and all our founding documents. Students don't even read those things today in America. So why would they read 'em in the middle Eastern, Eastern Europe? They don't, they have no conception of how to build free systems.
Speaker 1 00:09:33 Um, couple more points when the cold war ended, which was really wonderful. And I attributed mostly to Reagan and Thatcher, but I do give some credit to Orbi chop Orbi chop realized and go chop was no real dictator that the Soviet union was a complete disaster that it had not delivered its promises that there were revolution going on all over the place in the satellites and not, not just in the satellites, but in Moscow that Reagan and Thatcher had showed that you can not possibly keep up with even a, just a semi free semi freer set of countries like UK and the us. Now, you know, if you know that you know, that Reagan and Thatcher did not bring, uh, America and Britain to pure capitalism, they, they only stopped the move toward socialism and fascism and moved each country a bit toward capitalism, just a bit toward capitalism.
Speaker 1 00:10:37 You know, Maggie advertis, all those industries and Reagan completely revived the American economy with supply side economics and a built, not just a buildup of the military, but a moral enunciation of the Soviet union. They were the evil empire. He said, he said, tear down this wall. He said, I'm not in the cold war to have a Dayton, but to win the cold war. So it it's, it is a lesson in a capitalist argument that is both moral and practical. We're not only gonna outproduce you, we're more ethical than you and you're evil. Um, that was enormously important to bring down the Soviet union. Okay. But here's the problem. Reagan Thatcher, who were to this day, hated by the left, hated for being neoliberals. Neoliberal just means new advocates of Liberty. Yes. That's what Reagan and Thatcher were absolutely hated for that. If you remember the left wing at the time was pro Soviet pro Stalin pro Dayton prole act and Reagan and Thacher were well known as anticommunists.
Speaker 1 00:11:48 So the cold war ended in 1991 and here's, what's very weird and here's, what's very relevant to Ukraine. Russia today. NATO was not disbanded. It wasn't disbanded. Think of that. Now NATO, the north Atlantic treaty organization formed in 1949, the us and 11 other countries possibly plausible. I don't think it should have been formed at the, but on the grounds that the post-war system was going to be bipolar. The Soviet union versus the United States, the Warsaw pack, meaning the Soviet union plus 13 or 14 satellites against the us and NATO, uh, where checkpoint Charlie, you know, uh, in, we Berlin the center of everything, right with dividing, with the, what the iron curtain as Churchill called it. But when the cold war ended and the Soviet union disbanded and necessarily the Warsaw park PAC dissolved NATO did not. And I think this was a problem.
Speaker 1 00:12:57 And I think the real problem though, subsequently was that NATO expanded and Putin, you know, was elected in 2000. So Putin goes back 20 years now he's been elected four, I think maybe five to four, four different times. And I reject the idea that those were unfair or free elections. He has one elections times in a row, the only American who's ever done that is, um, FDR. And I think he's considered a idol among a, a Democrats, but Democrats today hate Putin for winning the same four elections go figure Putin at the time said it would be nice to be friends with the west, despite his back background at the KGB and elsewhere, he knew the cold war had shown that capitalism won the day. He was not interested in the rebuilding, the Soviet union. He was not interested in rebuilding zarus Russia. He was interested in, in entering into trade agreements and other agreements with the west and sad to say, but Clinton, Bush w and others just wouldn't put up with it.
Speaker 1 00:14:04 They just wouldn't agree. They literally could not win the piece. They won Reagan and Thacher won the war, but their successors refused to win the piece. Meaning refused to bring Russia into friendship with the west Putin. If you know, was instrumental in helping the us fight terrorism after nine 11, after nine 11 Putin called Bush and said, what do you want us to do? We'll kill any terrorist. You identify. We hate Muslim terrorism that he had shown that in Chenia already. Um, and the us did not, uh, coordinate it with him. Yeah. I was a lost, really a lost opportunity right now. What happened after 1991, after the end of the cold board NATO at the time had 18 members and the secretary of state under George W. Bush, James Bakker said to Putin and the Kremlin, we will not expand NATO. Putin said, why don't you disband NATO and said, they said, we can't approve that.
Speaker 1 00:15:10 But least we won't expand NATO because there's no cold war anymore. The whole point of NATO in the war stop pack was there's a cold war. If the cold war is over, neither of those military alliances should exist. My own view is because the Soviet union was so awful and so untrustworthy. It was a okay to say to them, we're gonna keep NATO for about a decade. We're not gonna expand it, but we're gonna keep it for about a decade. And if you can prove to yourself, to us that you are going to join the civilized nations, then we'll expand NATO. At the end of the century. That's not what happened, did nothing in the nineties to hurt anybody. And instead NATO expanded. It expanded enormously up to 30 members and always ever eastward, always toward the Russian border. And that every step the Russian said, and Putin said, stop doing this.
Speaker 1 00:16:10 The cold wars over, we don't consider NATO. And, uh, a, a purely defensive entity. Um, it went from being a thousand miles away from Moscow to being a hundred. And that's why Ukraine and Georgia that was Georgia was a conflict in 2008. If you know, Georgia and Ukraine have spent the last 10 or 15 years, flirting with NATO, trying to be part of NATO, which to Russia means having a us military presence right next to Russia. He doesn't trust America. He shouldn't trust America. Hillary Clinton was almost celebrating that she had killed Kadafi that there on a rampage to kill autocrats. I don't actually consider Putin to be an autocrat. Nevertheless, even if you do consider him to be an autocrat, the us policy is to kill autographs and then leave chaos and wreckage in its wake. That's what happened in Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, I could go on and on.
Speaker 1 00:17:16 I already mentioned this. So Putin knows this and his goal, I believe is simply to make Ukraine a buffer zone. He doesn't want Ukraine to be any part of NATO. Uh, he doesn't want any more NATO expansion, but he's been saying that very consistently for years, I don't think it's necessary to make this argument and be accused of it's really ad Hom to say you're a Putin puppet. I think all these other people are Linsky zombies. They're absolutely behind Linsky. And Zalinsky when you think about it is an ex comedian. This would be like America, hiring Ray Ram Romano to be the president. He has no experience. And all he is been doing since he got elected in 2019 is pop the Russian bear to tat Russia to say, and big to America to be part of NATO. Just last November, he was in the oval office begging to be part of NATO and our Doar president, our Cile president said, yeah, let's do that.
Speaker 1 00:18:24 I believe that's what instigated the invasion, Joe Biden and the Biden CRA crime family are totally in bed with Ukraine. Hunter Biden is totally in bed with Ukraine. The only reason they want to go to war with Russia is because they know they will be able to enhance their authoritarian control over America. They used COVID to extend their authoritarian control over America. Everybody knows the at war time leads to domestic authoritarian spread and control over American liberties. If we don't fight this ridiculous gauntlet of people trying to promote world war III in this country, America will lose its liberties within 10 years. That's why I feel so strongly about this. That's why I feel like people should know the history of this. That's why I think people should be fighting back. Unfortunately, it is a, it is a small group of people who are saying what I'm saying and are trying to warn the American people that these other they're Democrats they're Republicans, they're conservatives.
Speaker 1 00:19:29 They're the Pentagon. They're the media. When you see Fox news and MSNBC saying the same exact thing every night, you have to start asking yourself what the hell is going on. What's going on? Is that the war Moners are completely United. They're completely United and wanting war, war III. They have completely demonized Russia and Putin. Of course, they've been doing this for years saying Russia and Putin got Trump elected. So some of this is just them on their same old Russian collusion garbage, and they couldn't drop that. So now they have to be anti-US on this particular war. So back to first principles, I think the us is stumbling into stumbling is too nice a world. Now, now we now actively financing into the tune of billions of dollars armaments into Ukraine, sending military advisors to train them, to use the weapons. It's like Vietnam all over again.
Speaker 1 00:20:31 Only. This is against Russia and China cuz Russia and China are alive. Now they're they're in Alliance. They struck this Alliance at the Olympics before the Russian invasion, the us under Biden and Democrats do start most wars or enter most wars in us history. So this is not gonna be a surprise. This is what Democrats do. They claim to be the peaceniks they claim to be the humanitarians, but they always get America involved in ridiculous, costly and imoral wars. And that's what they're doing here. I, I think it's a think it's an abominable imoral thing that the Biden people are doing and they're being supported by certain conservatives, as you know, uh, I think I'll stop there and open it up to questions and comments. Um, I think it's about eight 20 now or something. So I know there's gonna be a lot of people who disagree with my interpretation. So that's, that's fine. That's okay with me. If I'm getting any of this wrong, let me know if you see a different way, let me know. But a lot of this is hard. This is hard to Inana analyze when you think of it because you need some of it. You need to know the history, some of it you need to know military and foreign policy strategy. I haven't really talked about economic X and economic sanctions. I have a lot to say about that. So.
