Такер Карлсон: фрагмент с Saagar Enjeti — «Сирия, Ливия и ядерное распространение»

It\u2019s Not About Antisemitism\u2026

Источник: https://tuckercarlson.com/live-show-may-20-highlights

[Транскрипт]

Saagar Enjeti [00:27:53] Of course it was. Exactly, and this is why I find it so galling to actually have this administration be the ones who are perpetuating this policy. We understood that the global effects of this refugee crisis inspired things like Brexit, things like Declarations of Sovereignty, the Donald Trump election in 2016. This was genuinely a rejection of that. And then to watch the Syria-Libya playbook currently being played out. I mean, unfortunately, I find many people know Syria and Libya were a disaster, but they can't eventually explain why. So let's take some time. What was it? There was a so-called protest against Bashar al-Assad. That protest movement quickly became subsumed by radical jihadists. The United States, for no reason, basically decided that it was in our interest to remove Bashar al-Assad, massively fund all of these jihadist in the region. We gave them weapons, we gave them time, money, support, of course. And what happened, it created a gigantic civil war, as you always talk about, it destroyed the Christian community, some of the less radical elements of that society. And now 14 years later, a literal al-Qaeda terrorist is their president. The only reason that we don't talk about him that way is because he's a friend of Israel and allowed portions of his country to basically be annexed by them. That's what the Israelis want. They want and they had no problem with seeing an a rump state emerge in Iran. But that's not in our interest. That's not an Europe's interest. That's on our allies interest is massively destabilizing. Same in Libya. What was the promise? No fly zone for Gaddafi. He unfortunately, he literally gets sodomized on national television on a video which, you know, deeply inspired Kim Jong-un and many other regimes that wanted to race to a nuclear weapon. I've been told directly that whenever we asked the United or when we asked in those bilateral meetings with Kim Jong-un. We said, why don't you just give up your nuclear weapons? He said, look what happened to Gaddafi. He's never going to do it. And he shouldn't. In fact, his entire policy has been vindicated. So that's another element of this. Let's think about nuclear proliferation. Since the outbreak of the Iran war, Poland has now declared their intent to try to become a nuclear power, a nuclear armed state. France said they are going to increase the amount of nuclear weapons that they have under production and they are no longer going to publicize them. South Korea and Japan are going to be having some very serious discussions around this. So in a sensible war over a nuclear program, we've actually probably inspired more nuclear proliferation than even the war in Iraq, which I did not think was ever possible. So to watch this all continue in this spiral, none of it works to our benefit. And you and I are not NATO defenders. We've talked often about the folly of expanding NATO eastward. However, we can recognize we have fundamental interests in a few select group countries. The problem with NATO is that it got far away from our core security interests. But now countries in the core security umbrella themselves are questioning their fundamental relationship. With the United States. You know, the Eastern Baltic region is not one that keeps me up at night. But Japan, South Korea, you know, Japan and South Korea the GCC countries, which look, you know I'm not saying we need a massive basis or any of that in the region, but we need oil, we need natural gas to keep flowing nicely. We need some of that money to be coming back here. And that's obviously very beneficial to our companies. Those things being called into question, it rules the foundation of the American Empire, which actually does serve. United States. So what we're watching is like the far-flung parts, which always break an empire's back, actually call into question the security core commitments, our national security commitments, at a very base level, which is very, very weakening to the United States