so that is why the united states government is still hoping to pull a rabbit out of the hat and get some kind of a conciliatory process that gets president buzzer back in office. or at least in some kind of a power sharing coalition of you know, the odds seemed pretty high against that. it is striking to see just how forward leaning nigeria has been in this situation. and i admire the nigerians for that role of the government lost the battle in during parliament to intervene. they haven't invaded you go exactly. so it is not really clear what nigeria would or could do anyway. i sort of really being willing to risk it all out war which was the presumably is not really what nigeria needs right now we're lost. so this is very much a work in progress. and it is not a good thing because in there are situations around the world where being a think tank or i can say, you know, that cooper does it look all bad to me because the government got rid of was clearly corrupt or ineffectual or, and you know inciting violence or what have you, but this is not one of those cases. there was not all that much negative to say

about the incumbent when he was the post the elections with tao to die in fantasy altogether. and of course the country is neighboring. it see, it is a great to we some of the pictures of the stadium, and they've thrown out and imperialist french. american lucky gives me but of course, victoria newland from the by the administration. a couple of the countries most, most of the countries around do not sure that you, as you know, and most of the countries around consider this to be very, very insidious and dangerous trend in west africa. we've also seen a fact malia martinez also where you have a small group of officers for selfish reasons, taking it upon themselves to throw democracy, to the winds, and then perhaps bringing the wagner group and create essentially, you know, a start where we don't, we don't know whether the self is we know the governments that were there previously, where you'd be selfish because of the amount of poverty in those countries. but do your book, i mean victorian newland the same as for that phone call. uh in the 2014 qu,

in the in ukraine. she's beat any jericho's. why is it a good book? good time for a book about military history, encompassing the civil war, world war 122, iraq, afghanistan and palestine, vietnam, korea, all of this in such a, such a small book. uh, why is it a good time for this book right now? or there's not too much on palestine, but you're right, i just, i do a set up some of some of the conflicts in the middle east that even if the united states was not directly involved, set the context for the wars that we were later involved in ourselves so in that sense, i do see my way through the 67 more of the 73 war, etc. but thank you. thank you for having the let me give 2 answers to your question . the 1st answer is very selfish. i all admit that i'm selfish, which is that this was a good time for me to write a book, because i wrote it primarily during the cold and shut down. and when you're trying to write history and historians know this better than i do because i'm not

a real historian, i dabbled in this history identity meyer and consumer history my whole life. but i am not a full time professionally story and it does archive or research, but you need to be able to just sit with your thoughts and almost imagine yourself back in that time period. if you're going to do anything like engaging writing, that captures the feel, captures the motives captures, you know, what was really the driving people's actions at that time. and so for me, the right time to write, it was when i could pull out of my busy life and spend just 3 or 45 months. just thinking about the american civil war and doing almost nothing else except going for walks with my family and you know, feeding the dog now. and that's the way history, i think, to some extent, needs to be written, needs to be researched, and that's myself as yes or in terms of why it's relevant to today's world. well, i only wish i'd gotten a copy to vladimir food before he invaded ukraine because the book was still being completed at that point. and the problem that put and exemplified or demonstrated,

which we also had in the united states with the rock or is that was almost never go as quickly or easily as the aggressor or the attacker. thanks. and there is always a ton taishan to believe that your new technologies, your really and generals, and their fancy work flags, the marshal virtues of your own country, relative to your potential adversary, that these things will combine to give you a pass to a smash down, not down victory on short order, and when most countries go to war, that's what they want and that's what they expect. but the history of nature, conflicts is almost always one of protracted war where outcomes are not at all. what were expected often become very uncertain for a projected period during the conflict itself, including shouldn't know better. just like donald rumsfeld should have known better in 2003 to believe that he could decisively defeat, you know, a substantial military and country with a 3 or 5 or 10 or 20 day operation. that would have been the best benefit and it's

going to be relevant in the future. if anyone in china or the united states somehow dilutes themselves into thinking they could defeat the other side. with the right. a i empowered, advanced military that has all these fancy gadgets and a brilliant war plan. you know, history tells you what the rest was using all the advance wolf for her. i mean, then not doing anything like the iraq or you will support it in a hitting a ministerial targets in baghdad. in fact, surely one point to the res, there is a of the payments ask in proverb of the to the americans that you may have all the tanks. we have the time. same with boots, elizabeth, i mean they just slowly exhausting. i don't know, hundreds of thousands dead. you met zalinski hundreds of thousands of the dead in this war so far and rushes just dug in there. and i think the initial point of the

move anyway, it wasn't it to protect. don't yet skin their hands, golf to boot in. did so little to give it to save the $14000.00. that was shell by nature back troops since 2014. well 1st of all, i think you're right. the president has a strategy now where he's trying to win through attrition and perseverance, and he wonders, it may be american politics or some other development in the west will give him that victory, or at least give him the 20 percent or 18 percent of ukraine. that he currently holds. so this is ulysses grass they, if going back to you, but, and as you're, nobody's grant. but in fairness that's, that's not what we want it 1st. and he did want to use shock and all to take down keys. and the government is the last night and he didn't even send it back off to bomb care if he didn't send will plans to level give. yeah. and it sounds that operation try to seize the air field in the north. he had a 40 mile long convoy of, of vehicles trying to descend on keys. and he also had commanders in the area and

cyber warriors trying to bring down the training and networks. he may have been badly done. i'm not saying it was a good plan, but he definitely was targeting keys and russia could have leveled care of goodness . well, you're making a 2nd level it tomorrow. i mean, it's choosing no, you only got to make you only get to make one point in time. if you want me to respond intelligently, your 1st point was that boot and did not really see a rapid overthrows even. that's rock. he did so you can wrap it over, so keep it may have been a bad plan, but it was very seriously attempted through a combination of airborne attacks on the airfield. cyber attacks on the networks a 40 mile long through conway, descending on key from the north and assassination teams in the capital. and he thought he would probably they want to do is fascinate landscape. right? the way i just, i, it's very difficult to compute that. anyone in washington, dc, things today that if russia really wanted to do what use edited,

it couldn't do it. i mean, the point about roger is obviously they didn't want to alienate the whole. their brothers and sisters in ukraine assisted the country. they couldn't do what the united states did to baghdad or a chevrolet in libya or in other countries as they have done little in vietnam se. but anyway, i mean that, okay, that's, that's your view. i mean, i don't know, i don't have the food in the bathroom, but as 800000 dead, there's 800000 dead ukrainians, most of them dead from showing of apartment building. so i'm not quite sure i see the new on size so they're not soldiers. you, you understand that there are 100000 civilians in ukraine that have been killed half and half, roughly speaking, and you crank, but the players, let me find a point of agreement that you and i have here, which is that at this point flute and a has settled into a war of a slow, long ride, where he still seems to think that either he has the upper hand or he just can't seem to find a graceful way out or both. and he's going to be patient. he's sitting on top of an

economy. there's barely declined in g d b since the war began, even though there is obviously grace offering throughout russia in terms of families who have lost loved ones. and there is a lack of access to it, western capital and, and technology that will hurt future generations of russians. right now, proving probably sykes, that time is on his side. so i think you're probably right about that. that's the 2nd strategy that was not as versed wrench. rusher is overtaken germany and judy b, b, b, b, a. the latest figures in terms of the world's bigger economies. but you have a pull to the c. i a for predicting rushes, move into ukraine, but fault at the wonderful gusting that the world would last a few days, presumably because they thought the strategy was a strategy you are referring to, which, you know, i don't have the, the gremlins plans in front of me to see what their, what their ambitions we have what that targets with. so you want on top of the $220000000000.00 given to zalinski you now one button to give him f 16 war plants

as well. yeah, but i'm in the ironic position. perhaps so not really thinking that will turn things radically around. so i'm at the point where yes, i favor sending and the tags sooner than we did. because i think if we are given ukraine tags by early winter, they might have been ready to launch this off. and so by spring rather than summer, but we've all seen the results even of a summer offensive, which are not particularly compelling. and the same thing, i believe will continue to be true. i think we owe ukraine a fair chance to take back as much of its territory as it can. but by this point next year, i think there is a very high likelihood that we will have to encourage ukraine to consider an alternative strategy. and then decisively defeating russia to seize and re gain. all of his territory may be morally justifiable, but is militarily unrealistic. but i can make that case now in fairness on, so we gives the lensky a chance to use a combined arms maneuver operation with f sixteens and other kinds of weapons like

that. so that's the one piece. he still doesn't have that. i think we should give him, and i think that will be what happens in the course of the next few months. this offensive will play itself out. we'll get into the cold weather. we'll have a debate. countries some countries are already offering a sixteen's, as you know will decide how many will wish the ukrainians well next spring. they'll do their best to win back some territory. we'll see how the us presidential election plays into this. and then we'll have to take stock in a year, so i hope you have any back then put to michael a 100. i'll stop you that more from the senior fellow and director of research and foreign policy at the brookings institution after this short break. the as the cranes much over 5 to counter offensive stalls. western leaders have made

a remarkable rhetorical tippett lines. as proof of his already lost board. the secretary of state lincoln says russia has lost their narrative because the form of pseudo reality because making the claim your brain is wendy, is untenable. the the welcome back to going underground. i'm still here. we don't do michael o'hanlon, senior fellow and director of research and foreign policy at the brookings institution, and former advisory board member at the c. i like you were saying i am the one about how do you think bible should send the have succeed, will planes now immediately? what could uh, what could be us do to prevent the zalinski using the f. 16 planes

against moscow? obviously uh cold. if you listen to the pentagon though, the state department briefings they uh, just look know of as generally as these, uh well, what roger calls tell her attacks because they clearly don't have any military significance. he's driven attacks on civilians, structures in moscow. surely the policy, your advocating is f, sixteens attacking mosca, american f sixteens, as well as zaleski, is obviously very strong willed and patriotic towards his own country, and wonders why he can fight back the same way, rushes fighting against him. and that's why we do see apparently these occasional ukrainian drum strikes now against russian cities. but i think president, so as he is also well aware that he depends, as you put a just a minute ago on the $220000000000.00 and assistance from the west. he's received over the last 18 months and he can't jeopardize us at a time when republicans in the united states in particular are questioning whether a to ukraine should continue at its current level or even continue at all. i don't

know the president, so as he wants to play the russian root like game of actually doing something we've explicitly asked him not to do. and we certainly can cut off the pipeline of spare parts and other support for those that succeeds where he to start using that in that regard. so that plus the fact that f, 16 a tax against russian cities are probably not going to end the war themselves anyway. i think will be a compelling enough reason. that's the ones he would use them on the battlefield. but, you know, i think he's proven so far that generally speaking, he's a man of his word, a man of great moral courage way. so washington controls you just said, washington controls lensky. and i should say he's patriotism is arguably in question given he's banned the opposition and cancel the elections next year in close down a little opposition. use papers, but you're saying washington would stop sending spare parts and things of the lens . he didn't take his orders from washington. i didn't say orders, i didn't say we control them. i say we influence so many knows where we got the $220000000000.00. and he knows that president biden is very serious about not

risking direct escalation with russian that could involve the united states. so i think the training and so far, despite these occasional drawn attacks have been quite disciplined and how they've applied military for certainly far more discipline than the russians. and i wouldn't join the tags on the screen in one bedrooms and, and the apartment blocks there. i mean, i, i do want to get back to do the book. are you watching? are you watching? what's going on in this war? there are, there are tens of thousands of ukrainians, dead glib in shells in their apartment buildings that are virtually 0 of a huge human. i mean, the game going back to us now. human did not said guerrilla flights is going to know it's in guerrilla fighters, to go and kill the people in the white house loan during the vietnam war. i mean, that's not, that's not the way normal wolf are in your book, evens has it. when you talk about the, the, the defeats of the united states and vietnam ask amazon, come body allow nicaragua, don't get a mention. i'd say serial libya, i the,

i mean the house of the real war in the united states being at home. i mean, the civil war only killed what 3 courses, the number of those who died have coded in in one year. and the does estimate the 183000 di every year according to university of california to poverty linked to diseases. and when you talk about the fact that suppose 45 things have got best in the united states, i mean the united states in prisons, more per capita, arguably than styling or malware. vintage, you have living conditions that as you say in your book, have go back to those living conditions statistics globally, a skewed by china. moving 800000000 as of poverty in 40 years. but there's a lot that you just said, most of which i agree with, but please don't quite har. prison system with style. i mean there's a certain point in which rhetoric gets carried away. but having said that,

i think you are the way you do mention race, but i mean the war is at home is martin luther king junior. would say i'll give a shortly. you say you there are we still wrestle with serious racial tensions domestically? but generally you say, you know, how would it be so successful? well, failing so often. i mean, many people in the global science and the reason to break some is and the 2nd i cooperation organization, a talking about a new world is 40000000 americans won't be able to eat tonight without federal aid . i do talk a lot about the problems of the united states in my previous book, which was not about military history like this one. and i think the book is about military history for the modern strategist. so i did stick to my actual of focus, which as you say, is already pretty broad. but if you're not want to talk about overall grand strategy, i agree with your main point that if there is anything jeopardizing america's role to help backstop this global word or that for all his problems is still done a lot for a lot of countries and allowed china to do what it's done successfully and bring so

many out of poverty that yes, we have to heal our problems at home. i mean, like why a lot of america's debate is turning to that set of questions. if you both encourages me, but it also frightens me because if we get so convinced that we cannot maintain a strong foreign policy because we have to turn all of our energy and resources, edward weekly, wider pulling back from the world in ways that are not helpful. either but i agree with your point, the probably the greatest threat to american and perhaps even global long term stability is domestic. not like, life expectancy is higher now in cuba, then the united states, the official figures in cuba. it is a country that the united states has given the being at war since 1959. uh, but the problem is you may agree with me, but a brown university estimate was 2 trillion dollars for the war. the last war in afghanistan, 8 trillion dollars of us public money that could have gone to save those americans that will be dying this year because of poverty link disease. and you didn't want

bite and to leave afghanistan, you didn't want to obama to laser rack. you want to more money spent on these was way really the americans. we don't welcome you talk 1st of all about the global south and i agree with your focus on that area. but as you know, that's a catch all term for many different regions. you're sitting in a region which as you know, better than i has been disheartened by american this engagement for a period or perceived as i'm not sure about that. you know, the saudi embassy just opened into ron, in the past. you know, a few days i'm, well, i'm happy about that myself. so i don't see this all in narrow, you know, pro us pro china pro, sorry, pro ron terms. i think that relationship should improve for the betterment of the region, but a lot of most of the middle east, experts scholars and diplomats that i interact with have regretted the rapid american disengagement from the broader middle east in afghanistan in 2021. we only had about 5000 u. s. military personnel on the ground. that was not what was producing

a trillion dollar price tags. those were the price tags associated with the big difference of yesteryear of so yes, in afghanistan discussion is certainly worth having. and i understand the other point of view, but i did favor trying to preserve what modest amount of hopefulness there was still in afghanistan. and there wasn't a lot who certainly was more than other than that. so, i mean, clearly the americans were, were with for her. and i mean i, you know, why is it that? and then when the americans leave, as you say, get more disengaged. p starts breaking out with syria with the wrong, with the b starts breaking out in between the 0 period. every tray, a piece starts breaking out in latin america. wherever the united states just engages from peaceful is that you actually want a response to that. i mean, that's just such a sweeping rhetorical over simplification. i don't know where to get afghanistan today is a mass, you're right, but at least they're not having

a civil war. but the degree of impoverishment is striking. we tried this engagement in 1989. you know, your history as well as i do. did that didn't work so well either that led to mass where ation and ultimately you have to understand we help, we help the afghans to feed the soviet squared away with these when the united states was supporting what would become al kaiser and helping been loved. what do you mean? we disengaged this thing, judge a tool we might or this is a bit like in your book when you say the reason you support a route or even retrospectively, saddam hussein got you. we got rid of saddam hussein and his family. the americans bought said i was saying they were paying am i, i do want to get back to the american civil war. ulysses grant, you use the quotes, if is the enemy half not on ami enough, is the classic the what rusher is doing and what the anti global south. what does that go back in russia? thinking when it comes to the rest, your ukraine situation isn't, isn't there

a panel the, the 1st of all, i don't think the global south is backing russia. i don't have any regard particularly for you or for me or anybody sitting in comfortable places like we both are right now. the global south makes up his own mind based on his own intro. lou is being on this program. he's president of brazil. and he clearly doesn't like the way the united states did to him on con is being on the show. he, he said it was a washing and cooling that over through him. we've had pretty major people from the global south on this show. you're making separate points, your original point was, are supporting russia, which is nonsense. and you don't know, let's just get back. it's a nonsense and you know what, what they are, what they don't support necessarily as our interpretation of why the war began. and they don't necessarily want the water be settled on the terms we propose that they don't like the war and they're not happy about what boot is gone. most of the ones i know now we're talking about a 150 countries. so obviously we can't generalize too far, but my, my central point on this issue is that you are right to say we can't just presume

that this war is going to be wound up on terms that we insist upon, or even presidents the landscape. what's the nighted states and tool? this is a war in your world. i mean, a powerful blowing of the noise dream. why? why does the united states feel it has anything to do with what's happening in your what's it going to do with you or the united state? you heard of world not far from your orders. all your questions does a lensky as to not use these billions of dollars a months needed public money at home as well. i think, you know, the history of world war one and world war 2 and their origins. and they, they happened when the united states was completely disengaged. and since world war 2, europe has been generally at peace, partly because of nato, and the american engaged they to a bottom gets live here in the ninety's may cause the only war since 1945. and that was a washington was with, to destroy your,

with the general for us. but the general thrust of history in europe was at war for centuries on sale, roughly 1945. since that time your of us had 2 substantial wars over an 80 year period. they both in tragic, i wish they didn't happen there to, to many. but the idea that the united states should this engaged to me just smacks of the united states was at war with itself, arguably for centuries before. and obviously since independence as you delineated in your book, 11 obvious question, i know we were actually in the anniversary 79 years since the world of massacre, 50000 dead stefan band era the hero celebrated in case of today. he was responsible for that in poland on the 12th of august, 1944. no mention of that in this book. is there a problem with working at the brookings institution, knowing that northrop grumman spend so much funding? your salary is lockheed martin x on mobiles, chaperone bank of america, microsoft and google pen pentagon contract as well. do you feel no influence a tool knowing that your salary comes from the ons contract?

is the benefit from the recycling of the us public money through the dead and wounded of ukraine into the bank accounts as well. if you read my writings over 30 years, you would see i have often opposed weapon systems often oppose defense budget increases . often opposed wars and by the way you misrepresented my thinking on iraq, i supported the search. i was like gnostic on the invasion and i saw that there was a way we could avoid it. well making sure saddam did not have w m d in any kind of a verifiable way. we should not have that one. so there are plenty of times where i have not done what the defense industry, whether it's necessarily by your caricature or have wanted. and so i guess that's the best i can do it answering that question. we decided not to take money from the governments of the broader middle east region at a time when we thought that we should be not accepting money from non democratic regimes. that was a big decision that happened about 4 years ago, and that was in a sense weighing the same kinds of considerations that you are putting forth. that

even though we weren't being told what to say by the saudis or the moratti's, there were concerns about perception. there were concerns about potential allegations that we were influenced more than we were. we certainly always spoke our minds. people wouldn't work here at they couldn't bring that, they believe because as we all are, as is stubborn independence scholars would like to be able to have our own voice told you, michael, are on the books out though. thank you so much. i to thank you. that's it for the show will be back on monday, ahead of indian independence day with one of india's most famous politicians and intellectuals, indian national congress and beautiful shushing through it. but until then, you can keep in touch of our less or so media, if it's so expensive in your country and had to have channel going underground tv and rumbled, they'll come to watch new and old episodes of going underground see monday, the

homework sentence. and i'm going to plan with you whatever you do. do not watch my new show. seriously. why watch something that's so different. little opinions that he won't get anywhere else. welcome to please, or do you have the state department to see i a weapons bankers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. i changed and whatever you do. don't marshall state main street because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called stretching time, but again, you probably don't wanna watch it because it might just change the ways that we have this to move on. tenderness in the united states really exported it now to the world because of multi national corporations. and we've been damaged to believe that the baby's needs be nurtured and cared for in love. and, and so you've got a whole bunch of traumatized people all over the world with post traumatic stress

disorder that don't know how to keel the to produce the yeah. you know, that's will study the bulk of it says up by that. yeah, cool. yeah. again, shows up on march. does that mean i'm a 3rd to make sure that that, that uh, that should be lost. the one that was 3 americans are created. dr. bob, show us the name. so don, let's put a clump of austin the low dr. bay. it shows up, but yeah, i know the z a h u, smooth brush cover. well 1st thing you have to go in there with this it e, say it may go to the minute. that would be a good thing that most people can trying out the cost of the, of all the so we shall draw some really out of the dollar. but actually,

not both sounds good, mostly minus you for much. mean, what's funny is that budget is going to g o type spits, you put, you mean a federal east digikey, same call. you have people sold it to ink that is sema law for the next some of us . and you have to, going to negotiate pick audience here, thought all will be actual for us with uh, the shield of trip or starting emilio and i thought she knew much came about, are you go to will, could yes them really on a lot of the about the on a little bit with southern sizes. yes. but the flat on you not to not in this there must be the boss me set to go and i would not eat. and there's one example we picked up about that i'll give them a couple of oxy. we honestly leave, that is the we're going to or what the you'd be sitting on. multi teeth around them,

move the mounts and the gardens phone books name it gets to going up on the 1st slide in that yes, so my what is odd to the bus because it allows us to sign on, you know, so let's do one more thing because it's being simple that i, you know, i'm doing it, it's not for me. see, lot, boy, that makes up amazing mazda the last thing. i have to go over to a what else to so this government, especially city to east on school, does a curious loan. it was funny and i think call me as long as you must for you, man, all the age of, of which as they all look, only met one of us like globally move us and you have to go in mostly mounts but, but still, you know, sort of fed up, even though boy, you know, political, you, man, we do, i'll tell you they, you just want to get the, you must, why product the channel. uh, ductless lucky, not school email. we do all 3 dials which i didn't buy you through the federal.