So, Andrew, just to put my cards on the table, I was always skeptical about the United States supporting Ukraine in this war, not because I think that what Putin did was just. I think it was obviously a violation of international law and something that was morally bad. But I'm skeptical of the United States maintaining its presence abroad, particularly in Europe, now and forever. I think the time has gone. You know, Dwight Eisenhower said we should be out of there in 10 years, and we've been there for a

very long time.

So I understand that you obviously think that the United States should have supported Ukraine

and supported you strength strongly, perhaps even stronger than we did.

So I was just wanted to ask a question, what are the actual United States' interests in Ukraine? And I guess I would ask to move beyond this nonsense about democracy. I don't think the United States really cares about that. I think if you look at what Blinken and Lloyd Austin said in the months after the war, it was very clear about winging Russia as a great power rival or a medium power rival. I think democracy was essentially bullshit. And I'm curious, like, do you think the United States should just be in Europe kind of forever? Or where do you see that happening? Because to my mind, if you look at the history of U.S. foreign policy, the balance sheet is not on the side of justice and good. The balance sheet is actually very much on the other side. So basically, I don't see you could have the quote unquote good parts of empire without the bad parts of empire,

which primarily take place in the global south.

And I think this was very clearly demonstrated almost immediately after the war with Gaza.

You know, you have the quote unquote good war in Ukraine and then you have the United States funding Israel to the hilt to essentially annihilate Gaza. So there was a lot there, but I wanted to maybe get out some first principal questions here. Sure. Where should I start? Just kidding. Wherever you like, wherever you like. A long bill of particulars there, which I probably wouldn't agree with most of, but I'll, you know, but I'd be happy to talk about just in the area where I have some

background. Like, I'm not an expert on the Middle East. I'm not a, you know, a meta U.S.

foreign policy analyst. So I'm not going to pretend to be one. As far as this war is concerned,

there is a, you know, clear problem, which is Vladimir Putin is a, you, is a serious guy. He's the president of the country that has

the second largest nuclear arsenal. And the United States and Russia have a lot of built-up

conflict and tensions in our relationship, which has been very bad for some of the issues you laid out that you care about,

like having the United States and Russia in a kind of period of contestation and long-term potential military competition is destabilizing.

And we saw when Vladimir Putin was looking for something to seal his legacy, which is getting Ukraine reintegrated under Russia's wing, which had escaped in the early 1990s, that that was something that he thought he could pull off and kind of deliver a fait accompli where this big country that's had a huge amount of problems since it became

independent would become essentially a vassal component of a bigger Russia. And that was a shocking

ambition that he had. And he almost pulled it off. And on the first couple days of the war,

you know, literally just, you know, within a few days or weeks of the war began. Just a quick clarification, what was shocking about it?

I mean, that's what the United States does. That's what China wants to do. I'm just curious what

was shocking about it. Just in terms of like, you know, it happening.

In the independent nation of wiping out an independent nation of more than 40 million people that like, you know, it happening.

Wiping out an independent nation of more than 40 million people that's, you know, in a significant portion of Europe,

...