The Biden Administration now is allowing Western allies to provide Ukraine with F-16 fighter jets — including American-made ones. But just over one year ago, Joe Biden warned that taking similar steps would enter America into World War 3. The situation continues to escalate, so much so that several high-ranking military officials took to the New York Times in a paid advertisement to warn the world about this administration’s handling of the war. Glenn reads from their advertisement in this clip, and he argues that most Americans DO want to help Ukraine. We just don’t want to enter ‘nuclear winter’ as a result of it…
TranscriptBelow is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Hmm. We should know for sure in the next few days, whether it was just bumbling or bluster, or real. But we may be sending F-16s, over to -- to Ukraine.
Which, if you remember right.
PAT: That was absolutely not -- we're absolutely not doing that.
GLENN: He said, that's World War III.
GLENN: Those were his words. That's World War III.
We're now considering it.
Yeah, listen to this clip.
VOICE: The idea -- the idea that we will send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in, with American pilots and American crews.
Just understand, don't kid yourself. No matter what y'all say. That's called World War III.
GLENN: Now, he -- he has said, that, well, they've promised me, that they will only keep those planes within their territory. Their borders.
They won't fly over into Russia.
So here we are, day 452. Of a totally avoidable.
Horrific, and stupid war. A war initiated by Russia.
But also a war provoked by the Biden administration.
Welcomed by the Biden administration. Literally, green lit by the White House.
As President Joe Biden in the months beforehand repeatedly rejected overtures, seeking one last time for a NATO-based understanding of security in Europe.
Something that after the Cold War, we agreed to. And then once the Russians had indeed invaded, a war fueled by the United States, to exponential new heights of violence and destruction.
So the United States has tended this war like a garden.
We've watered it with our own crocodile tears, and nourished it on evermore terrible weaponry. Coaxing it to grow larger and larger all the time.
When the Russians and Ukrainians were both ready to quit and enter into talk peace, both sides, we shushed them and sent them back to work on more war. Were you aware of that?
Most probably missed when Stephen Kinzer, the former New York Times foreign correspondent with decades of reporting experience registered a lonely early objection.
He spoke more than a year -- more than a year ago, almost a year and a half ago now, of the two terrible afflictions that had just been visited upon Ukraine.
Affliction one was the Russian invasion.
But affliction two, he asserted, and I believe correctly, was the American response.
Specifically, quoting him, our decision to send suffering country can be massive amounts of advanced weaponry. Which guarantees more suffering and death.
US weapons will not only be used to kill Russians. But also provoke Russia to respond by killing more Ukrainians.
Those of us who have seen war up close. Know it's the worst thing in the world.
It destroys innocent lives, shatters families and communities forever.
Long after political and military conflicts end. It's about bodies blown apart, entire nations laid to waste.
The only winners are the gleeful arms makers, for whom this war is a bonanza, of blood-stained profit.
So he wrote that for the Boston Globe. And I suspect the New York Times, his old employer wanted no part of his heresy.
Which brings me to what happened this weekend.
Not only is Biden now talking about sending our fighter jets over there.
There was another story. But it wasn't a story.
It was an advertisement. It was a full-page ad, published only in the print version of the New York Times.
They didn't put it online. Only the print version.
And it calls on the United States, to work to an end, as quickly as possible, through diplomacy.
And there were several signatures on here, with credibility. Several high-ranking US military officers, Ronald Reagan's former US ambassador to Moscow. Jack Matlock. And the ubiquitous Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs. But I want to give you just some of the highlights on this.
Let us consider President Biden's promise, to back Ukraine as long as it takes, to be a license to pursue, ill-defined and ultimately unachievable goals.
It could prove as catastrophic as President Putin's decision last year, to launch his criminal invasion and occupation. We cannot and will not endorse the strategy of fighting Russia, until the last Ukrainian.
We advocate for meaningful and genuine commitment to diplomacy. Deliberate -- say it.
Delivered the Russian/Ukrainian war.
In the same manner, deliberate diplomacy can end it. It then goes on to talk about, how there will be no expansion of NATO, not 1 inch to the east. That's what Secretary James Baker told the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990.
Other assurances from other US leaders, and others, is British. The German. The French leaders. All through the 1990s. Said, we will not expand NATO. Not one inch.
So what happens?
2007, Russia warns NATO. Says, you cannot put your armed forces on our borders.
Can you imagine if Russian troops were our southern border.
Would we have a problem with that?
Of course, we would.
PAT: Well, look what happened when they put missiles in Cuba.
GLENN: In Cuba. Absolutely. Absolutely.
So they urge us to see what Russia. If Russia was doing this to us. How would we react?
Again, even as the Cold War ended, US diplomats, generals, and politicians were warning of the dangers of expanding NATO to Russia's borders.
And of maliciously interfering with Russia's fear of influence.
They say, this is a policy error of historic proportions.
They were now -- they have been talking about expansion of Ukrainian membership, into NATO.
This whole ad, a full page says, we have got to stop and turn around.
So far, the US has sent 30 billion dollars' worth of military gear and weapons to Ukraine, with total aid to Ukraine, exceeding 100 billion.
War, it's been said, is a racket. And one that is highly profitable for a select few.
I'm telling you, what we were just talking about with the Bidens.
This kickback. There are kickbacks coming some place.
I don't know if it's coming to Biden. But it is coming some place.
By the way, Comer had to leave.
Representative Comer had to leave. He was called off so he couldn't finish the interview. But I hope to have him back to do some more. It was good to hear from him, on all of these things.
So why is the New York Times not rolling this out everywhere.
Why is it this opinion is not popular?
I mean, it is so bizarre, how the Democrats have become the hawks, and the Republicans are the ones going, wait.
Now, not all Republicans.
Lindsey Graham and some of the others are just like, let's light it up.
No, let's not light it up
What do you say? Really bad. Bad precedent.
PAT: Yeah. And I don't understand how the two parties, again, on another issue, have completely flip-flopped.
It's just really amazing to see. It's incredible.
GLENN: I know. And on this one. This one is so lefty. No more wars. No more wars.
Not in my name. All of that. All of that.
PAT: Blood for oil. All of that stuff that they love to chant. And now, it's just like, all right.
We're in this until the end. We're in this forever, if that's what it takes.
GLENN: Yeah. He said, over the weekend, Vladimir Putin is not going to break our resolve.
I don't think Americans won't have resolve on this. Americans don't want this.
We want to help the Ukrainian people. And we don't like Russia.
But we don't have resolve on this. We don't want nuclear winter because of it.
We don't want to be in World War III.
I think that's really clear.
This is amazing. How this administration. How this Deep State.
How, I don't know what it is. Is just sucking us into this war.
Biden said over the weekend. He received, quote, flat assurance. That Ukraine would not use F-16s to enter Russia.
So we might be sending them, and he also announced another $375 million, in military assistance.
PAT: Plus, they found another 3 billion.
Did you see that too?
They just discovered, through some sort of accounting error, that there's 3 billion more in aid, that we were supposed to send, that we haven't sent.
So now we're going to.
GLENN: Where did I put that --
PAT: I just had it.
GLENN: Gosh, darn it.
PAT: Oh, yeah. There it is.
It's in my other wallet.
GLENN: Doesn't it -- doesn't it piss you off?
PAT: It just doesn't end.
GLENN: It pisses me off so much, that all of our money, that we pay in taxes.
All of us could use more money right now.
GLENN: And it's wasted. It's wasted.
PAT: Yeah. Well, this is a money-laundering scheme. They're sending it to Ukraine. It's being laundered. Sent back to somebody here.
GLENN: I think it is. Well, not just here too.
I think this is being said. You can change the world with $3 billion. You can change the world with $3 billion.
PAT: Oh, yeah. But I think the Bidens are getting their share. I'm sure they are.
GLENN: Well, I suspect they are.
PAT: I strongly suspect.
So congratulations on that.