 Some of the tricky parts of Figuring out when to deploy the military is when does one protect the assets of Americans? What rises? To the need for military intervention for example When the Iranians nationalized oil for American companies when then the Saudis and others did the same thing Did that require military intervention now? I believe the answer is yes I believe the United States should have but why is it because oil is so important? Yes Or as a strategic commodity owned by American companies in French and in English and so on and it was being stolen not by just by individuals But stolen by the government Governments that philosophically ideologically we're never going to be our allies not really not deep down And therefore it would have been a disgrace. There was a disgrace to allow them to allow them To have these assets I mean think about the Middle East today if The oil in the Middle East was not all of it, but a big chunk of it was owned by American companies You know it would it would completely have changed Them at least imagine an America that was stood up to nationalization Imagine America that stood up to the taking of its own embassy. I mean God. I mean talk about a fiasco Imagine a government that would have allowed The French and the British to claim for themselves this Suez Canal because it wasn't the Egyptians not in the name of Colonialism but in the name of property rights It wasn't the British government in the French government that owned the Suez Canal, but it was French and British companies But that is a that is a fascinating alternative universe that unfortunately We did not live through and there's no indication we're going to live through but that's the kind of idea of protecting property rights Imagine a government that took seriously its responsibility To protect Americans around the world and not let them be abused by foreign governments. I mean within reason right within Imagine a country It didn't allow this is another function of the military Part of what the military is their form in terms of outside American borders is To protect the property of Americans an example of that would be to secure the shipping lanes To secure the ability of Americans to trade freely with whoever they wanted to secure ships Coming to America going for America or carrying an American flag And there would be a lot more ships carrying an American flag if we didn't regulate the industry As much as we do but imagine You know our military then would have the responsibility of being out there on the seas and Protecting the shipping lanes. So you remember the Somali pirates that seemed to have lasted years It could have been dealt with in a day or two You take whatever US fleet is in the Indian Ocean you bring it to the coast of Somalia You spend two days bombarding the villages on the coast And you basically tell them If you continue with the piracy, we will continue bombarding your coastline You stop it and you stop it now if you're willing to engage with if the military is deployed properly Threats disappear quickly and the consequence of that is The consequence of that is peace The consequence of that is admiration For you by the rest of the world not hatred but admiration and ultimately the rest of the world adjusting to your values Instead of the world in which we live in today where America is Adjusting accommodating compromising with the values of anybody and everybody out there. They are the standard. They are the they are the good guys We God forbid stand out for our own values for own Right Brad, thank you. That's very generous. I appreciate that. All right, let's see. All right So I know John had a question here related to the topic How should a properly trained senior military officer deal with a political leadership that follows just war philosophy and thus puts troops at unnecessary risk? I mean, I think a Military officer should resign I mean look He is A subordinate There is a constitution the constitution clearly places the responsibility on The civilian authority To determine The engagement of wars and how wars will be fought the authority lies with the with Congress the authority lies with the president it doesn't with the generals The generals can't ignore Congress They can speak up they can try and convince they can try and change but at the end of the day if that all fails They need to leave They need to quit they can't be part of a world in which they are sending their troops whom they are directly responsible for With rules of engagement that contradict everything they know about how to win wars and what is necessary to win those wars But let me say let me say this and I think this is important Most generals agree with the rules of engagement Most generals created the rules of engagement and Need to a large extent the rules of engagement were developed in West Point not in Congress You know last time I looked at the West Point curriculum Michael waltzer Who is the Philosopher of just war theory the guy who wrote a book on just war theory the guy who's Advocated and again written books about this. He teaches at West Point. He's not some external factor He is part of the machinery of training future generals I don't think Patton could exist in the American military today MacArthur they wouldn't find a home with Sherman Be allowed to Survive in the American military. Would he want to would he resign? I mean Certainly not a Patton. I love I don't know if you've seen the movie Patton I highly recommend it with Jotsie Scott are playing Patton. It's it's a brilliant performance of a you know portrayal of a brilliant but Crazy guy Patton was a little crazy And as a speech he gives to the troops in the movie and I think this is tailored on a real speech that Patton made And one of his one of the statements in the speeches. It's not your job to die for your country It's your job to make that other son of a bitch die for his now that is True absolutely true. You do not send troops into battle to die for the country You send troops into battle to make the other guy die for whatever cause he's fighting for Your troops are supposed to live Your troops are supposed to destroy if you're interested in in Patton as a warrior. I recommend Victor Davis Hanson's I forget the name of the book but there's a book in which he has three great warriors Sherman Patton and a Greek and a Greek warrior whose name I forget but It's an excellent book much of You know a lot of what I know about military history. I know from Victor Davis Hanson. I disagree with Victor Davis Hanson emphatically about Philosophy and about certainly about his politics today, but in terms of military history, I think is brilliant There's another book of his about why the West Why the West Won its battles Versus the East and one of the claims he makes is that the West won because the West was willing To engage in total war the West was willing to eviscerate the enemy and Understood that it wasn't just the soldiers who were part of eviscerating the enemy So I recommend I recommend Victor Davis Hanson's book. I definitely recommend the movie. I think the movie is really good Yes, it portrays Patton as a bit of a nut, but he probably was a bit of a nut and No, I don't think I don't think the movie portrays Bradley as a hero at all You know, they are seen after seen after seen where Patton's judgment is for superior Bradley's judgment or Eisenhower's judgment whether it's You know, it's obvious from the movie that Patton should have led the invasion On D-Day, it's obvious from the movie The pattern should have invaded Czechoslovakia to prevent the communists from going there Bradley stops them from doing it It's obvious from the movie the unbelievable ability of Patton to pivot in the middle of his marching towards Germany to pivot I think it's northwards in order to save The the 101 division the airborne division who was surrounded by the Nazis and to pivot on a dime a tank battalion or whatever it was To pivot it to destroy the Germans. I mean it was just his genius as a military thinker Comes across I think very well in the movie even if he's made to seem like Somewhat of a kook so if you're not gonna read a lot of books on Patton the movie is a not a bad introduction to him and But I do recommend Victor Davis Hansen but but some of the scenes and and reading up a little bit about about What Patton did in World War two a patents ability to lead patents ability to cease strategically power patents ability It is truly stunning truly stunning All right All right, we're getting some super chat questions here, but I'm gonna start with the Ones that are relevant to the topic particularly the ones with the big dollars relevant to the topics So let me see yes from Brad A hundred dollars. Thank you for no overseas bases I see value and I neighbor bases in Japan and and the Western Pacific to allow us to quickly address issues in that area of a while Forefarm home similarly with a Navy base in Rota Spain I know troops in South Korea shouldn't be there, but where's the line drawn? I mean the line is drawn based on military strategy. I mean the line is It's not for philosopher. It's not for somebody like me to say where the basis should be Yes You know if you're wanting to protect the shipping lanes You probably need a base somewhere between Japan or the Philippines that we used to have a base in the Philippines And that was very useful the shipping lanes get very tight Around the South China Sea You know, there are a lot of islands there's a lot of pirates there, of course China Has claim over much of that sea and China's a real threat in that area But if you're there to protect the shipping lanes, you need some presence In the Western Pacific in the Southwest and Pacific in either Japan or the Philippines And it's it's up to you to negotiate that and to find an appropriate ally You don't want a base. It's not clear that a base in the Philippines if the Philippines is not a true ally Is the right thing at a base in Japan where Japan is a free country and an ally is a good idea I think the same thing in in Europe A base in Spain or a base in Italy or base in Israel for the Navy All appropriate because all those countries are allies of the United States a base in Turkey is not we have today Military bases with F was bases in Turkey, but it's not appropriate because they're not our island A base in Australia might be a good idea, right? But you don't need many right the point is you don't need many not with the ability of the US Army to project force What was the ability of a aircraft carrier group to be out in the middle of the ocean? for very long periods of time because of Nuclear power that that fuels You know maybe some fueling stations, but you don't need that many bases I'd say Again, but this is this is an issue of strategy not an issue of philosophy something in the Western Pacific and Something in there in there in in Europe You might need a base in Germany to be able to project force into the Middle East if the Middle East is a problem You might need a base in Italy if you consider Russia a threat to the United States, right? I Don't think we need troops in Korea But again, we have to decide are we gonna defend Taiwan if we defend Taiwan Having troops in South Korea is not a bad idea because then it's quick over to To Taiwan, but maybe maybe it's better to have the troops in in Japan Which I think if I remember my geography is closer to Taiwan and and By not having troops in South Korea We don't give the the world and the South Koreans the idea that we will defend them because we shouldn't They can defend themselves rich country North Korea's pathetic South Korea should be able to defend themselves. We shouldn't be there Taiwan if you you know depending on how you view China and depending on what happens with China Taiwan could be very very important to containing China But that depends on where do you view China as a real threat to the United States from military perspective Remember I ran did not view Japan as a military threat to the United States and was against the embargoes on selling Japanese This is before World War two before Pearl Harbor steel I Don't think I agree with I ran from that one, right? Japan was committing atrocities all over the in the Pacific it was it was clearly a Authoritarian to tell the Tyrion regime with with with expansionist ambitions I'm not sure I agree with I ran that we could have stayed out of that And we should have continued to trade with them At some point you have to draw a line So exactly where you put troops is hard to tell but for example today we have troops in 120 different countries Why we have troops in Africa? all over Africa now You could argue because the Muslim terrorists Okay, but those Islamic terrorists Threat to the United States and if they are then we should have for a while a lot more troops they destroy them and then come home But having a bunch of special forces running around Africa Helping local forces or whatever. No, that's not what Americans do if it's a threat to the US Destroy annihilate the threat if it's not a threat to the United States Then it's the country is there. It's their problems Nigeria's problem. It's Kenya and Uganda's problem It's Tanzania's problem. It's not the problem of the United States So you would have to define region by region you'd have to define look if I don't know if India developed into a potential threat to the United States Then the US might want some bases in South Asia or in Eastern Africa To be able to monitor control Be prepared for whatever threat in the opposed to the United States so you'd have to think about it strategically thoughtfully and Only have bases with allied countries and only consider allied countries. I think countries that are free Thank you for listening or watching the Iran Brook show If you'd like to support the show We make it as easy as possible for you to trade with me. You get value from listening. You get value from watching Show your appreciation. You can do that by going to your own book show comm slash support I go to patreon subscribe star locals and just making a appropriate contribution on any one of those any one of those channels also if you'd like to see the Iran book show grow Please consider Sharing our content and of course subscribe Press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get announcement when we go live and for you those of You who already subscribers and those of you who already supporters of the show Thank you. I very much appreciate it