As the world waits to see what the hell is gonna happen between the US and
its allies and all the tension that's building up over Ukraine and Russia.
There are some corporations, their CEOs and
boards who are already salivating at what this could do for them.
We have this January 25-26 leaked phone call,
it was part of a earnings report with investors.
And we have a little bit of what the the CEO of Raytheon,
Greg Hayes has to say about this situation is being reported by in these times.
And here's a little bit of what was going on that call.
Greg Hayes, CEO of Raytheon says, we just have to look to last week where we saw
the drone attack in the UAE, which have attacked some of their other facilities.
And of course the tensions in Eastern Europe,
the tensions in the South China Sea, all of those things are putting pressure on
some of the defense spending over there.
So I fully expect we're going to see some benefit from it.
I mean sure some people might die some, but it's gonna be good for
our bottom line, is that awesome.
You also have the chairman, President CEO of Lockheed Martin,
another massive defense contractor Jim Tackling.
Who said, if you look at the evolving threat level and
the approach that some countries are taking, including North Korea, Iran and
through some of its proxies in Yemen and elsewhere.
And especially Russia today these days, and china, there's renewed great power
competition that does include national defense and threats to it.
This great power competition he suggested bodes more business for the company.
So they had three months following the pullout from Afghanistan
where there might have to be a little bit less defense spending.
And then the US government reassured them all.
No, just because there's less wars does not mean there will be less spending.
And now we're gearing up for some excuse to keep the spending there.
Were very worried about China,
Russia over there to chaos in the Middle East as always.
They're gonna find a way to spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars.
Francesco, to your thoughts.
>> I mean this is when you go, why do we have president Biden and
not president Sanders for the love of God.
And here's why, because democrats have no vision for
real security for this country.
They have no vision that is alternative to continuing to prop up the war machine,
right to what end to create blowback in other countries,
to destroy alliances to get involved in democratic elections and overturn them.
Why real security is having a safe bridge to drive over having clean water to drink,
having housing, having healthcare, having reproductive freedom,
having education and access to not just access guaranteed education.
So and then look the hawks the GOP go into Afghanistan and or Iraq and
literally take everything, leave no spoon, [LAUGH] That's their vision.
But the democrats vision for war is a cut below that.
It is just as hawkish in so many ways, and obviously, there are gradations of that.
But I'll say it of course they were doing this behind the scenes.
And it's frustrating and it makes us realize, man,
if we don't get a new vision soon, we're gonna we're sleepwalking into another war.
Yeah, absolutely.
And that's sleepwalking is exactly what I've been trying to caution against.
And I think there are a lot of well meaning people who identify as on
the left.
Who unfortunately, I think it's because of the media climate that we've experienced
throughout the Trump years, and yes, even during the Biden administration.
Just the constant, Russia's the boogeyman, Russia's the boogeyman.
And look a lot of that is true, Vladimir Putin is awful.
There's no question about that, he does assassinate journalists,
there's no question about that.
So it's not like we wanna whitewash or make excuses for
service apologists for for Putin.
However, I think that with any type of foreign policy issue,
you can apply the same analysis that you typically do where you look
at incentives and disincentives.
What are the drivers toward escalating toward war?
And and also what are the government officials of Ukraine saying,
I would argue that there are far more important since they're the ones who
are facing this alleged imminent threat from Russia.
And so obviously the incentives really fall on the private defense contractors
who were as john said salivating at the idea of escalating war with Russia.
But also I wanted to bring up the fact that Ukrainian officials,
including the president of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky.
Have said repeatedly, listen, we do see Russia as a threat, but Russia is not
an imminent threat, right, in fact, he had a call with Joe Biden just yesterday.
I'm gonna read a quick excerpt from the CNN article.
And it's CNN it's not like CNN is looking to do antiwar content.
But they write that on the call with the Ukrainian official,
which the Ukrainian official described as long as and frank.
Biden warned his Ukrainian counterpart, Zelensky,
that a Russian attack may be imminent, saying that an invasion was now
virtually certain once the ground had frozen later in February.
Zelensky, however,
restated his position that the threat from Russia remains dangerous but
ambiguous and it's not certain that an attack will take place, the official said.
So, I don't know guys that the intelligence and
analysis coming from Ukraine is important here.
But I think it's a little questionable that the United States continues moving
forward, continues escalating its war rhetoric,
despite what Russia is saying is actually happening on the ground?
>> Yeah, I mean, at the same time though, don't put too much faith in what
the politicians have literally any country say, Biden don't trust him.
Ukraine, they are much more proximate to the situation, but
he also has reasons to want to not panic his population.
And definitely listen to- >> This is just a call between,
this is just a call between.
>> But he's put out public state,
he's put out public statements as well saying that he doesn't play.
And definitely, listen to what Russian diplomats are saying,
but they also could take the 100,000 troops away if
they really wanted to send a strong signal that they're not gonna work.
I personally think that the situation is different than maybe what you're
describing, but almost in some ways worse.
We we have been on the precipice of a lot of wars, and we've had media pushing for
a lot of wars, just in the past 22 years or so in this country.
I don't think that Biden wants a war with Russia,
I don't think that most people in his administration.
But I definitely think they want effectively a mini cold war centered
around Ukraine that can generate an arms race.
I think they want the economic military industrial complex benefit of a war,
but without a hot war with a nuclear armed country.
That could easily become far worse than anyone could expect.
I think that they can keep tensions high and
pump hundreds of billions of dollars into these corporations over the course of
the next few years under the auspices of like, well, it could happen at any time.
But I don't, I don't think,
like when they were saying they wanted to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
They wanted to invade Afghanistan and Iraq,
they wanted to send in the troops and dropped the bombs.
I don't think Biden wants to attack Russian soldiers.
But I think there's a lot of people surrounding him that desperately want
to sell weapons, especially in the absence of a conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq.
>> Regardless of what the intention is, whether it's a hot war or a cold war,
it's insanely irresponsible when at the heart like the motivating factor here is
weapons sales.
A cold war in your analysis, that would be a boon for
the very defense contractors who were getting a lot of money [LAUGH]
Taking advantage of that gravy train in Afghanistan.
But I also wanna note,
we've been engaging in an arms race in regard to China as well, right?
I mean, we've been selling record weapons to Japan to India.
And that the rhetoric in regard to China has a lot to do with
selling weapons as well producing weapons as well.
I don't think we're actually going to go to war with China, but
I do think that there are financial motives in place.
That maybe we should reform, maybe we should really rethink the influence that
these corporations have on the foreign policy decisions and
even the foreign policy rhetoric that we hear from the federal government.
>> Yeah, I mean, especially when sitting Congress people can trade
stock in those very weapons contractors.
Let us never forget.
I think the Biden administration, when it comes to foreign policy is pretty much
a wash except in one area, which I think we can see movement on and
that is around its support for Saudi Arabia.
He continues to support Saudi Arabia even though Congress is super against it.
There is a large majority, and we could see pressure.
That to me is like a little sliver of hope, especially when
it comes to their behavior in Yemen and also against American journalists.
Russia, China, I don't, I'm not holding my breath that's gonna get better