Judging Freedom - Russia invades Ukraine - What Now? w/Scott Horton

Episode Date: February 24, 2022

Russia has invaded Ukraine in an attack coming from every direction, both by land and air. #Biden #Putin #UkraineSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello there everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here with Judging Freedom. Today is Thursday, February 23rd, 24th, 2022. It's about 125 in the afternoon. We are speaking today with Scott Horton of theantiwar.com. I mean, who better to talk to about the dangers of war and the dangers of the response to war? Scott, it's always a pleasure to have you on. This is our second Judging Freedom of the Day. We had Alex Jones on earlier today, who I suspect agrees with you and me on what should be the appropriate, if any, response on the part of the American government. But let's start with where the war is today and where Putin's troops are, as far as your sources are telling you.

Well, I have to admit, I'm not up on all the very latest of the troop movements and everything as of this morning. But I guess, you know, as we're recording this, we're about half a day into a full scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia. And I don't know if they're going all the way to Romania and seizing the entire west of the country as well. They're certainly on the outskirts of Kiev. And I saw reports last night that they were landing troops in Odessa. I don't know if that's really true, but that would be a huge prize. As long as they're invading and conquering the entire east of the country, east of the Dnieper River. I think that it's, you know, highly likely that they'll go ahead and also seize the very important city of Odessa. And then, you know, I believe, Judge, that one of the reasons

that Putin did not seize the Donbass, you know, incorporate the Donbass into the Russian Federation back in 2015 when they asked to join was because he didn't want to tip the balance in Ukraine in favor of his opposition. Here he has half the population lean pro-Russia. So if he removes a significant portion of that population and makes them into literal Russians, he's now diminishing his own influence inside Ukraine, this important country on his doorstep, and giving the advantage to his opponents there. Well, I fear that that's some of the same calculation that he's making here. Well, if I'm going to take the Donbass, I'm weakening pro-Russian type factions position, which they've been on the outs, obviously, since the coup of 2014 anyway but

at least there's a potential for their power and influence to be exercised in the future there but essentially got tired of waiting for that possibility and so but then that means once he seizes the donbass then he goes okay well i guess i'll go ahead and go all the way to the neeper river or to odessa but now what's he going to do? Leave a rump state of Ukraine that's completely dominated by ethnic Ukrainians and Ukrainian speakers with virtually no Russian speakers or ethnic Russians involved in the government at all, and even have very far-right nationalists and even Nazis essentially in a stronger position than before so now he's got to preempt that danger by just going ahead and conquering the west too in other words putin's invasion of

ukraine is a government program and it keeps expanding you know um because he keeps he keeps creating more problems for himself that then he has to so what does he do what does he do with ukraine once he's uh chased the government out uh and occupied it yeah great question i mean i think especially in the west of the country there's almost certain to be insurgency there i don't know how effective it will be um i don't know about in the east of the country. Obviously, just because people speak Russian doesn't mean they want to be invaded and conquered by another country. It's far more complicated than that. Okay, so what should President Biden be doing? Do you applaud sanctions? No. Or are they essentially toothless? Is he essentially immune to them? Do we need to, for example, unleash American energy sources to compete with him and sell energy cheaper than he does? That might bankrupt the Russian state. Sure. You know, I really don't know. It's a real tough position that they put us in now.

And I mean, they on the American and Western side, but the Russians as well. You know, back in 1992, everybody should have just listened to Pat Buchanan and abolished NATO. We wouldn't have this problem at all. Now, not only did they not abolish, but they expanded it right up to Russia's doorstep. So now 30 years later, they're not going to abolish it with a gun to their head. Right. But it was their provocation, essentially, that quote unquote justified. I'm not saying morally justified, but I'm just saying became the justification for the action that Putin is taking now. So how do they back down? I mean, I would like to see a vote of no confidence in America's foreign policy establishment, which no matter how you slice it,

bears some huge responsibility for this. Oh, sure. If only not preventing it in the first place. The CIA fomented the coup of 2014 because the popularly elected Ukrainian government was not pro-NATO, pro-Western enough for them. That's right. And it was the same group of people in power, other than Obama himself. It was Joe Biden and Jake Sullivan and Antony Blinken and Victoria Nuland were the ones who did that.

And they're the same ones who are driving the car right now again. And so, I mean, essentially what we would need, Judge, right? Like, you know, perfect world would be these people all resign and Rand Paul becomes the president. And just listen, none of this was my fault. I do not, you know, happily inherit happily inherit the legacy of W Bush and Obama and Trump and Biden on this. It's a new day and it's out of respect, but not fear for just the facts that H H W Bush did promise. We would not expand NATO and we shouldn't have expanded NATO. In fact, we'll start by recognizing that Russia actually, not because of any threat, but just because it's right, that they have a good point that Bill Clinton promised, okay, fine, we'll expand NATO, but we promise not to move our military equipment into the new NATO members in Eastern Europe. And should abide by that promise. These are reasonable things that, you know, Jack Kennedy cut out the entire State Department and he sent his He had his attorney general secretly negotiate a solution

to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Because business is business. And if the State Department isn't up to it, we've got to do what we've got to do to end this thing, to nip this thing in the bud right here and not let it progress further. Well, how do we nip it in the bud? You know, war is the health of the state. The government loves to have a demon. For two years, the demon was COVID. Now the demon is Putin. I mean, the government demonizes him with the exception of smaller outlets. The media demonizes him. His background as a KGB agent, his background as a killer, not supporting what he does.

I don't like him and I don't trust him. But is what he's done in the past 48 hours a threat to the national security of the United States of America? I submit it is not. Yeah, I mean, it depends on how you define it. And in D.C., they define it as broadly as they can. You know, America's they don't even say vital interests anymore, just interests, which could mean anything. I mean, you know, Rand Paul, speaking of Rand Paul, he gave a speech where I think he's really onto something here where, and this is only one of the factors. And he said so too, but he says, listen, I don't think it's

a coincidence that some of the loudest politicians in the Congress on this issue and his friend, Ted Cruz are from States that export natural gas and they want to disrupt the pipeline between Russia and Germany because for essentially personal reasons, the profit of just certain companies, never even mind the state of Texas or the nation state of the USA at all, but just some companies will get to make some money selling natural gas to Germany if they can't buy it from Russia. And how Rand Paul says it, he calls it mercantilism and says that this is a huge disruption and perverse incentive in our policy here that should not be part of the debate at all. I agree with Rand Paul, but I want to know

what you would tell Joe Biden if he called you up this afternoon and said, what should I do? Well, he's speaking right now, actually, my peripheral vision here, and he looks mad as hell. I would he should say this is partially my fault. And I accept that me in the Obama government, we really did push hard for a regime change there and it did not work out. And so, you know, a man enough to admit that, a man enough to admit that Putin, despite whatever anybody thinks of him, he does have some real points about his security concerns. And frankly, their security concerns that we can allay. You know, I just judged an hour ago, I spoke to Joe Cirincione, the nuclear weapons expert, about how the anti-missile systems, the anti-ballistic missile,

you know, missile defense systems that Bush proposed and Obama installed in Romania and Poland, they don't work at all. They don't work. They completely use this. The whole thing is a boondoggle. And yet, from the point of view of Vladimir Putin, he has to act as don't work. They completely use this. The whole thing is a boondoggle. And yet, from the point of view of Vladimir Putin, he has to act as though they work. He has to believe that they might work. And that here America's changing the entire setup of mutually assured destruction and tipping the balance toward a first strike in our favor. And from the Oliver Stone interviews with Putin, Oliver Stone says to Putin, he goes, come on, you know, this is just a boondoggle for corporate America. You know how it

is. They don't work. And Putin, I'm paraphrasing, says, come on, Oliver Stone. I know that's true, but I'm the head of security around here, man. What am I supposed to do? You ring my country with anti-missile missiles. I have to make better missiles, don't I? And that's exactly what he did, judges. In 2018, debuted an entire new array of nuclear weapons to counteract the fact that W. Bush tore up the anti-ballistic missile treaty, and he and Obama installed these anti-missile missiles in Romania and Poland. And judge, they don't even work. We're 20 years into this crisis of this escalation in nuclear brinksmanship.

And the whole thing is just, as Oliver Stone said, just a boondoggle, just a ripoff. Is this just the tip of the iceberg? Is President Xi going to do something with Taiwan? Is the crazy Supreme Leader in North Korea going to do something, obviously with the Chinese consent, in South Korea? Or is this just Vladimir Putin deciding, I'm 69 years old, I can't have this job forever, it's time for my legacy, and this is it? I'll give you the last word. Yeah, well, I sure hope that nothing happens in the East. It's definitely right that if the Chinese were going to do it, now's probably their chance. And I would say, okay, last word. I mean, that's our absolute worst case scenario.

But even if that happened and China did conquer Taiwan, America should stay out of that too. We do not have a treaty alliance with Taiwan. 50 years ago, Nixon recognized that Taiwan is a part of China. It is one country. Eventually they'll be reunited. We want them to be reunited peacefully, but this is not the same as if they invaded Japan or South Korea or Australia or a foreign nation. This is more like if they really cracked down on their sovereignty in Hong Kong or in Tibet or in Xinjiang. It's bad and you don't have to like it, but it is their sphere of influence. It's not ours. And the real question comes down to, are you willing to trade Los Angeles for Taipei in a war where we lose Taipei anyway, right? If we fight a war with China over Taiwan, we lose Taiwan anyway. The question is

whether we also lose American cities to thermonuclear devices in retaliation. And the answer to that should just be tough luck to you guys. Sorry. Sorry. Our go-to guy on war. Sorry we have to come to you, but thanks for your time. Judge Napolitano. Thank you, Judge. Judging freedom.