Good evening, everybody. Welcome to the paige turners readingsters, aim glen raucher this cowerrator and host of the page turns reading series. This used to be call the king reading sears to six miles to the west. I dont know if identity pointing west put humor me. Were glad you could be here in the nook. We started here last may ander very pleased to be here with our friends here the stage. Its a monday knight in new york, a beautiful spring day here in the late winter. And we know that even on a monday knight in new york theres 10,000 different places you could be, and nobody involved with putting together this event or participating in it take ford granted you have chosen to be here with us so thank you very much for that. We appreciate you being here, and the present you get he tend of end of your evident is the evening with a wonderful author, tim bakken and the cost of loyalty. Were joined by cspantv. If you look at the pageturners or Facebook Page i will post when this is going air. Were not live, which is probably a good thing. But it should air sometime in the early actual spring. So im going to tell you about the series, talk a little bit but the book and then bring tim up. Well talk and then well have q a. We want you to be part of the. Our only request is that your shape your thoughts in form of a question. If you cannot do that i will politely move on to the next important who has done that and then give you the opportunity to form your thoughts in shape of a question. Everyone involved is appreciative of you doing that. He book came out last tuesday and this is the first new york city event and you have the tint to purchase multiple companies of the cost of loyalty. Its 30, and remember, new york city law is a twobook minimum. And tim will be happy, if you anywhere close to nicely, hell sign the book for you. Want to thank tara kennedy for bringing this book to our attention. Do take this moment to turn your cellphones on silence. That would be appreciate evidence. Take care of your ban tender who has been in bartender and coming up here the next event we have booked is two weeks from tonight, 7 00 p. M. On march 9th, with alvarez, the author of spirit run. Its an incontribute day but memoir, the son of a working class mexican immigrant and threat a three fled a life of labor in a meat packing plant, from canada to got got get mail la. You want to hear about our events we have a mailing list. One event a month so two emails from me a month and i hope thats not too many. So once again, thank you very much for being here and now on to our featured author. Its said that Social Security is the third rail of american politics put with even the highest criticism of the military the cries from all side of the political spectrum that hey support our troops, to just perhaps a more dangerous third rail. In his deep lee researched finely written, he jumps on the perilous track and ill states our military academies are failing their mission and fated values, leaving out the truth. Endangering the country, losing wars by never actually thinking anew how wars are fought today, and thereof theyd established themselves as utterly separate from the valued harmed services of a democratic nation should serve he mentioned earlier public polling about the militarys popularity, and goes well into the disconnect. Between reality and perception. Those on the receiving end of tims harsh but fair and deeply evidence evidence examination will protest the cost of loyalty is an attack on them. But what it is, is a leadership document, a passionate call for the mill tier reintegrate with a society it was created to serve and protect to sit higher senators for Service Members that make them better in the role they have chosen and to break the decade long cycle of selfdealing and lowering of quality. Will they do it . The cost of loyalty spells of the consequenceses of not doing so. Join me in welcoming tim bakken. [applause] duane, they wont be able to hear him without the microphone. [inaudible] discussion. Thank you. Good evening, everyone. Thank you to cspan for being here and for tara kennedy for arranging this event. What id like to do to start is try to ill state some of the reasons illustrate some of the ropes why america has had difficulty winning wars and then try to draw a line which i think we can do with some precision from what has occurred in the military within the out to what has occurred in the various wars in which the United States has fought since 1945. To do that, ill look at four wars and ask you to consider a couple of things ward regard to the wars. Some people would not call them wars because there is a sense its very difficult to concede that america has lost wars or at very minimum has failed to win wars. A couple considerations about all four of those wars are, number one, that in them, the United States engaged in battles that could sometimes involve the killing of innocent civilians. Number one. And number two, in all those instances the united States Military was not forthright and covered up some of those events during those wars. In the korean war, for example, which began in 1950 there, was what became known as the no gunnery killing where the u. S. Soldiers fearing the north korea n soldiers innovating, killed people thinking they might be soldiers. Thats a violation of the rules of war. The military most distinguish between soldiers and civilians. Over 50 years the military denied that occurred, but in 1999, a Pulitzer Prizewinning expo say by the Associated Press showed on the by a is so of what u. S. Soldiers who were elderly told them, that indeed that did occur. In 1968, in the vietnam war, us soldiers engage net what become known as the mei lei massacre. The army knew what occurred and it knew who was the main proponent of the killing, a lieutenant named william cauley, put it stash imhim in what can best be described as a safe house in a basement of america until he was found by an enterprising journalist, and we know in those two incidents there were patrolly 800 to 900 People Killed. In the Afghanistan War, and the war in iraq, there were other incidents where u. S. Soldiers engaged in the killing of civilians while they were engaged in war. Now, sometimes this happens, but in the instances that we see the most prominent instances, no gunnery where somebody woman killed, mei lei, in and haditha in iraq, the kills were done by soldiers intentionally, not accidents and the same held true in afghanistan. We had in questions but why we were in afghanistan over these last 181 2 years, but the military and civilian leadership kept telling us we were making progress. We didnt see the progress necessarily but that was the perception that we were supposed to believe. It wasnt until december, just a couple of months ago, when the Washington Post revealed what is called the afghanistan papers, did we understand that we had been dereceived during the Afghanistan War . That is to say, every single military leader and civilian leader believed that we were not making progress but not in one instance did anyone tell us we were not making progress. Over those four wars, since 1950, to today, february 24th, 2020, the United States has lost 100,000 u. S. Soldiers in those wars. Where the undertaken in those four countries, and nobody really disagrees about this, but nobody really knows the exact number for sure the range of People Killed is from about 3 million to 6 Million People. But all of those maces, korea, vietnam, those are communist regimes, one is a Nuclear Weapons possessor at this opinion, and afghanistan, iraq, or more dangerous now than when the united States Military invaded. We could say that the politicians are to blame and some people will say that. But in fact, in those four wars, congress met 37 different times in january, in its sessions, and provided unprecedented support to the u. S. Military. Today 740 billion a year. Its fruitful to question why have we lost these wars or why under any realistic objective and reasonable view, United States has been up successful unsuccessful. Its useful to look at the military in korea there was the becoming of cities which were bombing of stiffs which were completely destroyed by the korean requests which motivate recommend them to develop Nuclear Weapons because they couldnt trust the out would not destroy them again. What if is happening because of that, id like to take a look at the military generally and specifically at the u. S. Military academies, which are the places where over the last 200 years, especially west point, the Army Military academy, where the top generals and admirals have originated, where they spend the most formative years of their lives, four years, prior to becoming an officer. But to do that, i mentioned that there were two considerations in regard to the four wars. One was that in each instance, when the were tragedies, in fact where u. S. Soldiers killed i civilians intentionally there was coverup, denial these things even occurred. How can that be . What happened . Is that something new or something that is been continuing for these past 75 years. In 2015dill read a portion from the become at this point the were two former colonels who were working at the Army War College and continue to work at the Army War College, len naar wong and steve garish who pushed a study that is relatively unknown but amazing in its conclusions but yet our civilian society and military society have not co lessed to recognize the coalesced to recognize thety and determine michigan to be done which obviously im urging something should be done. Its basically like this. Wong and garyis believe that, get to, the gravest peril of dishospitaly is what they describe as the facilitation of hypocrisy in army leaders because the learn to talk of one world while living in another the authors sayeth tall fading and rampant radicalization yaleize allowed leader to to espouse high val others and slogging through the mire youve dishonesty and defeat. Forme Army Officers talking about current officers as of 2015. These habits and disregard know truth create, quote, coercive corrosive it cal culture that few acknowledge and few are work to correct the end result, the authors say, is, quote, profession whose members often hold and propagate a false sense of integrity that prevents the profession from addressing or even acknowledging the duplicity and deceit throughout the formation. How does this occur . Welsh thats one reason but where does that come from . How do losses occur . Where does the deceit went the losses come from if use the example of admissions al military academiesening west point and annapolis and colorado springs. Two enroll in a military academy, generally High School Students must receive a nomination from a member of congress. However, those nominations are while necessary sometimes, relatively meaningless in regard to the actual application, and application according to the department of education, to which every college in the country must subtranscribe, is somebody who submits a formal application, a file and then is accepted, rejected, or placed on a waiting list. What the military academies have been doing now it appears for 44 years, and very few people understand or recognize this because theres this perception that theres a nomination system and that nomination system somehow affects the fabrication that is occurring, but it doesnt. It has nothing to do with it. What they do is count students who are in high school, and attend camps camps and indicaten interest in the military academy and on whom they start a file. That is west points term, on whom we file a start. A file started is then translated into an applicant. The actual number of applicants each year, at each military academy, might be about 2,000, at west point last year, 2200 or 1200 students. But to achieve 1200 students, the academies have to offer admission to more than 1200 students. In reality, the admissions rate at every academy, every year, is over 50 . From 2008 to 2018, in twoyear increments, every two years, the admission the acceptance rate was 56 to 70 . Today, and then, the military academies will claim an acceptance rate of 9 for the Naval Academy and 11 for the air force academy, and 11 for west point. Where does this lead us . These statistics are not my statistics. I didnt produce the statistics. I became aware of the statistics by thinking but why we as a country have not succeeded in the wars in which we have engaged. But let me consider one other thing as to what this produces, and this, again, is not my consideration. The social scientist at west point in 2017 conducted another study, and this study, like the wong and farris study from 2015 was publish bid the Army War College. The Army War College is supposed to be the Gold Standard of military research. Its not as though this information is hidden, and their study showed the following, and again ill read an excerpt from the become. In the 1960s, west point according to the the social scientist at west pointtwo of whom are former or prepare military of quote, had to lower academic standards to secure enough studentsup coat quote and the early 1970s it had, quote to accept virtually every qualified candidate in order to make the enrollment quote attempt unfloat. From the 70s to 90s, quote, west point continue its qualitative decline. Eventually, the intellectual capacity of the student body at west point hit bottom and remains there today. Some cadets this is according to information from the authors who are at west point and who produced the study some of the cadets produced test scores so low they would not qualify or barely qualify them to enlist at the lower ranks, quote, the worst year for the academy in this regard was 2006 when 25 of its test takers and army tests fell below the minimum officer candidate school. Officer candidate school is not way to enter the army. West point accepted students, quote, who scored in the category four range of the test which enlisted recruiting is the lowest allowable qualifying score. America has been losing wars without understanding why. The authors of the study say, this trend of deteriorating mental standards, strangely enough has generally escaped the notice of social scientists and historians. The military academies have another issue outside of their mischaracterization of the admission standards and the acceptance rate, and that deals with Sexual Assault, which of course is a problem within the military as well. Despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars dollars in t years the military cannot produce the Sexual Assault rate in the force, soldiers on soldiers, below about 20,000 a year. Today at the military academies, they dont have to report, like every other college, is required to do, the number of crimes that occur on campus that throw military academies are exempt from michigan called the cleary act, but because sexual issues and assaults became so prominent, Congress Passed a separate law for the military academies to require them to produce studies that showed what the Sexual Assaults rates were for males and females at the academies. You will hear the military say, regretably, that we cant compare apples and oranges, that civilian colleges are different from military colleges, and that the Sexual Assault rate at the civilian colleges and military colleges is, quote, on par with the Sexual Assault rate everywhere else. That is not an accurate statement by the military and the militarys own studies, and the department of justice studies, the most prominent study from 2013 shows otherwise the department of justice study in evaluating all College Students in america, community college, fouryear, Research Schools as well, found a Sexual Assault rate of 6. 1 women students at civilian colleges per 1,000 women students. 6. 1 per 1,000. If you make a fuller analysis and compare that with the pentagon studiys, required by congress, the Sexual Assault rate of women student at the academies is over 30 per youre. 30 women per year, per 100,000 women. 6. 1 versus 30. Its about five times greater the likelihood of Sexual Assault for a woman who attends one of the military academies. There are any number of other reasons why we have difficulty winning wars, and a lot of them stem from the quality of the generals who get their educations at the academies and ill round out and end with this description of what happens inside the military academies opposite these students are admit once these students are admitted. At the academies, as has been the case for over 200 years, with regard to west point, the majority of the instructors are military officers who receive a masters degree after one or two years and no matter how smart they are and how good they are as people and in every respect, and most of them are, they are nonetheless vastly less experienced than anybody else who teaches similar colleges in the United States. They do not have a professional doctorate or a doctorate in their disciplines. They do not have experience and they do not have scholarly work behind them. They rotate through the military academies and teach the cadets. The majority of the courses. A colonel once told me when i was arguing with him that these soldiers, soldier teacher, who would rotate in they rotate in every two outlers and then gone. 60 of the faculty is gone after two oar the years, they should have professional Development Experiences and this colonel, who was second in command in one of the engineering departments, 50 of the academies are focused on engineering said that it not their responsibility. Bring them here so that they can go to the blackboard and write with the same color chalk, the same principles and the same thing at the same time on the same day in the same classes. And that is something that has continued to the present. I mention briefly the engineering curriculum at the academy. Engineering was important to the military in the 1800s because soldiers built railroads. Theyre not building railroads today. Theyre hiring contractors to do it. The most important thing is Critical Thinking and creativity, and engineering would be just about the last discipline, despite the many brilliant people in it, that you would utilize to bring our soldiers into afghanistan and iraq and asked them to be the mayors of towns in those cities. Engineering is extremely important but its not the currency in the job that officers are required to do today. Finally, its almost not possible to understand how this has happened except there is a cultural within the military that continues to circle and circle and circle and produce the same kind of thinking over and over and over. At west point and the other attempts but ill just take west point as an exam over the last 200 years, approximately, there have been 150 generals who have run the institution. These are called the superintendent, the commandant. Of the 150 generals, 145 of them have been graduates of west point. They graduate from west point, they go out into the army, theyre taught by people who grad wait from west point, they come back to west point themselves to teach, and they learn what was learned in the 1900s and the 1800s and we can look back i describe this in poke how lessons from the 1800s their approached from the 1800s, which its hazing or whether it is writing on the black bird the same colored chalk, exist today at west point. We can see that without change, this will be a selfperpetuating process where there will be very little oxygen let inside and very little change, and that is why over the course of 75 years, korea, vietnam, afghanistan and iraq, we can note two things. We can note violence that is outside the law, committed by u. S. Soldiers against civilians, and we can note that the military in all those instances, has denied or covered up the violence until it was exposed. And those four places, i guess the proof is in the puddling, are more dangerous today when the United States began combat operations in those four countries. With that ill turn to glenn and invite any questions you may have. [applause] give us anoint re a minute to reset the steak. Grab that mic and go to the corner. Operations in europement how did that come about and what changed afterward inside why didnt that continue . Eisenhower was selected ahead of other people who had more longevity, but that completely changed after world war ii. The military became place that began to value loyalty and patriot thank you. As its top values. Today in the army the official number one value is loyalty. Truth is not a value within the seven army values. Its loyalty number one. What has occurred is that the military separated itself from civilian society. In 1974, almost nobody understands this case or how it happened or even has heard of this case. The Supreme Court was deciding a case called parker vs. Levy. In that case an army captain criticized the vietnam war. He was prosecuted by the army, convicted the be army sentenced to three years in prison. He appealed claiming i have a constitutional right to speak up about what i believe is right or wrong about the war him believed itself was wrong. The Supreme Court disagreed. In that case, and then two other cases after it, held that this is the Supreme Courts reasoning and phraseology and not mine the military is a separate society. The military obtained the official authorization separate itself from American Society and it has done so very effectively. The generals are no longer except in a titular way, responsible to their American People. They their own penal code and own law and own personnel system and you can see from the selfperpetuating nature of the academies that hire each other, they support each other, and when its time to come back to the military academy, they bring each other back and they teach the same lessons to new people. You mentioned that compliance equals survival. How does that manifest and what their he consequences . In america, we have always thought that free speech this most important liberty because it supports democracy. Only because of free speech will people understand that they can acquire information with which to make decisions. In the military this is just a side point i would almost call it a quirk if itself werent so dangerous if the military has a law that says disrespect is a criminal offense. That it is to say if the soldier said, colonel, the tank is broken down and we cant go into warbut the colonel considered that his statement that they tanks broken down and we cant go into war were a broken tank is disrespect the armies word, not mine he can be profited and that particular statute has a provision that says the truth is not a defense. You can go for years in the military, generals and colonels and other officers, and never hear a dissenting opinion because its not something that is wanted and its not something in many respected that is even legal. The military operates in large part by fear. It is negative reinforcement, not positive reinforcement. People are scared to speak up and scared in for their careers, and if they want to have a career in the military, the best way to have one is to remain silent. Have the members of the military especially high ranking members you mentioned only sometimes will generals be accountable have they become above the law . The law applies differently to people in the military because they have their own separate penal code. Would say theyre not above the law but if theyre outside the law and the law cant discover them, then in effect they are out the law. The best way i could characterize that is to look perhaps at a general from world war ii, when were looking for the generals to give us something to give us information. A west point graduate, general harold johnson, was the chairman of the joint chiefs of and a half actually the vietnam war in 1964 to 1968. He was an officer in earlier days. From 64 to 68 he was the chief of staff only the army. Almost every new that general westmoreland, another west point graduate who is Combatant Commander in vietnam, was fabric indicating numbers. He was saying that we were killing more north vietnamese than we were killing. General johnson understood this, and he said near the time of his death, that when i was the chief of staff of the army, what i wanted to do was go to president johnson and give him my four stars a general has four stars and go out and tell the people of america that this war cannot be won. He said i did not do that, he didnt explain i would but i think i have an idea why, which i explained to you glen just now, and previously that i will go to my grave with that moral lapse on my back. Someone once said but the wars in afghanistan and iraq issue cant think of one general who spoke up in saying that we should not go into the wars, we should get out of them, but the reality is my Research Shows theres not one general who has spoken up in regards to the war and there wasnt one in vietnam and wasnt one in korea. Not one general in all those wars said, while he was a general, we should abandon the wars or that the wars are unwinnable. Of course this creates one proposition that is an arguably true. And it is this. Either the generals are not capable of winning the wars and despite where whether they want to call them wars are didnt flick. Thats fine. Just recognize all the plays are more dangerous now than when the United States win there. They either cant win the wars or realize this is more dangerous probably and more discouraging that the wars cannot be won put they remain silent and dont tell us. Come to you folks for questions in just a minute or two. When i do that im going repeat the questions just so we can hear. The later on when we broadcast. One you talked a word that keeps coming up in the book is, separate, apart from. Theres also a very specific talk about the risks to someone who has been in the military of speaking out. Something very specific called separation. Can you talk but what separation is and how it reflects the larger problem . The separation that i note first was the separation the legal separation that had occurred, but theres also a cultural separation that has occurred as well. The wars that were currently engaged in have not involved any kind of civilian sacrifice. In most respects, american does not understand the sacrifices that soldiers have made. Now, it appears that the out went into iraq under falls pretenses and now we foe from the afghanistan papers there was no plan to win the wars. One general said in the papers, we depth have the foggiest idea huh to win the wars but the separation is that weve come to a culture in the military where nobody is telling us the truth. Its not that the military is always lying but it often is lying, as i outlined previously, but nobody is telling us what is really happening, and when we try to find out, we get the greatest resince taps from the military and only because of enterprising reporter we discovered in gunnery killing, mei lei and the afghanistan papers so its illegal and its cultural and social. Military generals will say, we want to be able to control the military as we see fit. Maybe the greatest example of that is theyre saying despite the Sexual Assault epidemic in the military we want to have total control over the precision of military cases of most people dont realize its not a prosecutor who decided who to prosecute in the military. Ate the commander. The commander decides whether to prosecute someone within his or her command the commander select jr. Personally and until 019 the commander could set aside any verdict he or she saw fit. When someone is removed from the military isnt it also called separation. Yes. At west point, when a cadet is removed, it is called in fact separation, but its not just a legal separation. Its maybe the best expression is, an outcasting, the person is cast out of the order. Its a religious in a sense. Sounds like what haves to jehovahs witnesses or menonnites. A religious kind of reckoning that the person who is separated goes through. Thats incredible. I do want to open it up for questions the microphone has gone wonky, so im sure you can hear me because i have a very loud voice. So just throw your hand up in hi general direction, right here. What are you describing is a problem that includes culture on a cultural change starts with individual taking action. Who are the individuals you hope will read the book and take action . The question is who are the individuals you hope will read the book and take action. Thank you. Ultimately what everyone must understand is that the military, as glen was very a separate society and thats a tremendous danger because we dont under the military. You question is very astute because youre focused on what can happen. How can we have change in this situation . I describe in the public how difficult that change us because studies show in the United States in the military is the most venerated institution, and its an amazing thing because despite the lack of success in the four wars, the militarys standing is very high, but it ultimately it has to be some kind of recognition by people that were not successful in wars and congress should reassert itself. Thats the ultimate answer in the beginning. Last time the United States declared war was in 1942. All authority four wars, korea, vietnam, afghanistan, iraq, were the result of congressional resolutions. Theyre the same thing. The same effect. But with the United States people have ever agreed to those conflicts, knowing that 100,000 u. S. Soldiers would die in and three to six Million People in the countries would die . I dont believe they would, but because they dope recognize the consequences of going to war i dont think they fully recognize we cant institute change. I think its interesting because my figure thought when you cascade would the American People a have been okay going to those wars, they dont know but the dysfunction you describe because it is very well hidden. Its going going to do a job with tool you think will work. Yes. Lets take the war in iraq as an example. The u. S. Government believed or at least an administration argued that there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq, and people believed that. The evidence showed we now know that when people in the government were looking at the evidence, the evidence to support there were weapons of mas destruction in iraq so we didnt really know and couldnt really make a decision about what to do. We trusted the military, but its a little bit like lets good back to the engineering example in the academies. A surgeon in a hospital. The military develops when. They engineering are adequate in being able to teach a cadet or a midshipman how to tell somebody to maca scrapple or a medical instrument but not very good at teaching them how to operate once they obtain the weapon or the medical instrument. We have all the weapons, the most lethal weapons in the history of the world bit of we dont know how to use them, dont have strategy, and the strategy of bombing all the cities in north korea into rubble is not a winning strategy. The only thing it do did was cons vaccines the north koreans the americans couldnt be trusted and the only way to present themselves was to develop a nuclear weapon. The last to win the war graduated in 1932, the last general or admiral in the United States was eisenhower who was born in 1890 cement graduated in 1950 from west point. The first iraq war an exception . The first iraq war was not an exception because most scholars who study wars, will say that for their to be a war there must be a conflict that must is going on for a year or more or a thousand people are killed yearly. That conflict were 30 or more nations help the United States expel iraq from kuwait was an initial success. But what happened was the success was shortlived. Two things happened. General schwarzkopf a graduate of west point allowed Saddam Hussein to retain some of his helicopters. Use those helicopters to drop chemical weapons on the kurds. They were great allies of the United States all along. Because general swarts cough, these are his words not mine, they were snookered by the iraqis they were able to continue to do to their people what they were doing prior to their involvement in kuwait. Nothing really changed. They just expelled from kuwait. And, interestingly enough, when the administration in 2003 argued to go into iraq, that use the fact that Saddam Hussein was not adhering to the agreements from which you was to adhere to during the first erect skirmish. That led to the second one. So i suppose that is something we could look at we might call that a positive, but look to what it led . Host set my advent tactical not strategic. Guest yes i think we forgot to mention grandma and panama something worth the size of Marthas Vineyard and said its worth invading. Those have been our successes, our military successes in the last 75 years. Guest more questions please in the back, i will repeat it. [inaudible question] guest the question is the four countries we have been at war are more dangerous than they were before we invaded, does that include vietnam . Guest i characterize it as those four areas are more dangerous and or more unstable than before. In the korean war and the vietnam war, both the north koreans and then the north vietnamese were supported by the chinese. China, fought United States soldiers in the north korean war and now china is the second most influential nation in the world. Its difficult to see if things could be worse for the United States and ive heard this, because Southeast Asia didnt fall to stop the loss in vietnam for example, what could be worse than the three primary adversaries that the United States engaged with, and korea, and vietnam, include china and that. Two of them now have Nuclear Weapons capable of striking the United States. I dont know if i want to characterize that is dangerous and i dont think it is of too much concern as to what we call it. What we know is those situations are very bad. We see very little benefit from entering those wars. More questions please. [inaudible question] switch it so the question is is in the onus really on the political ownership as opposed to the military leadership that calls a drink caused our defeat as you define them. Guest ultimately, the president and the congress have made the decision to go to war. And they have made the decisions to fund the war. But if we look only to them, then we would blame nine different president s and 37 different congresses during all of those years and say all of you are at fault for telling us to continue those wars. Even if they told us in the military to continue those wars, the military still has an obligation to win the wars. We cant really say the military has not had enough resources of which to win the wars. Whether it was iraq, that started in 2003, afghanistan that started in 2001. The military at some point have to take responsibility and the general have to do one of two things. They have to say we are not capable of winning the wars, which i describe how they dont have the mental strength to do that. I dont think they have the moral courage to say we cant win the wars. Or the strength to say we are not good enough to win the wars. Saying we are not good enough doesnt mean soldiers are poor fighters. They are excellent fighters, the most welltrained ever. Or that the military is not strong and necessary, but it is to say that we are not capable despite everything that we have. All of the resources, all the great soldiers, are able to win against fighters north korea, vietnam, afghanistan, and iraq. We have not been able to succeed. Host take a broader societal view, are there any other businesses, corporations, organizations who dealt with the same overriding issues the military has . Are there any that dealt with them and found a way through to a better way of doing things that you can think of . Guest there is none like the military. There are none thats close to the military. What some people will bring up is the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has separated itself from society like a lot of religions. And it became very insular. That insularity and separateness prevented our knowing the sexual abuse problems that were occurring within the Catholic Church. The huge difference between the Catholic Church and other religions and other groups that engage in wrongdoing, is that we can use our civilian laws and our social and core drink cultural morays to confront the problems within those institutions. Whether they are business or religion. But the military has its own penal law. It has its own law and it is resistant to anybody from the outside stepping in. Let me give a one more example, i think this will be useful. In 2015, and army gunship attacked a hospital in afghanistan for 30 minutes. Thats according to the military reports, up to 60 minutes. The hospital was one that was hospitals without borders. They were treating patients inside the hospital. They gunship circle for 30 to 60 minutes without return fire. It was an error they were not trying to kill people who were innocent inside the hospital. They were led to believe it wasnt adversary outpost. The army did to investigations. And in those two investigations it found that 15 people were responsible. The punishment or the repercussions were admonishments or reduction of rank imagine if Police Officers and the United States under u. S. , civilian law had circled the place and shot into it for 30 to 60 minutes what the repercussions would be for the police . There would certainly be legal liability. But this is the point that i think goes to the last question the military has refused to even tell us the ranks of the people who were involved in the hospital that we know they went from private to general we cant attach a name and accountability to any one person. That is unprecedented in American Society, it does not exist anywhere else. Host more questions please. [inaudible question] host the question as to what degree do the leadership issues exist in more elite military units like the navy seals . Guest the navy seals are a good example because they are part of the navy. Obviously. But they undertake non Traditional Navy operations. They engage and land warfare combat, which is often done by the marines and the army. But it has bit and the news lately, the seals have had their own problems, but have had great difficulty rectifying the problem. There have been many criminal cases i can i can give you a different incident regarding to the navy. Some people may have heard of the leonard incident regarding naval officers. It appears over the last ten to 20 years, naval officers have been engaged in a bribery scheme with the malaysian businessman who essentially paid the money and gave them services that were illegal of a sexual nature, in return for their driving their ships into his shipyard so they can repair their ships. Up to 60 admirals have been implicated over the last few years and hundreds of naval officers have been implicated as well. As of today, despite the military having its own penal law, not one naval officer has been prosecuted by the navy. The only prosecutions have been brought by civilian prosecutors in san diego. They are largely, these officers who were implicated, immune from any kind of civil, social, legal or cultural oversight. Host other questions . Go head back there please. [inaudible question] host the question is are military budgets what is a good number . Are they too high . I think i can say that military budgets have not decreased under democrats either. I think it is pretty much a bipartisan trough. You would know that better than i would. Guest i think that is correct i cannot say that for sure. I can say the military budget has increased exponentially in the last 20 years. In addition to looking at the increased budget, it is helpful to look at how the money has been obtained. If you recall in 2001 and 2003, the United States engaged in taxcutting for americans. Whether or not one believes in taxcutting for americans, most people like it to some extent. There are still needed to be money to fight the wars in iraq and afghanistan. That money was borrowed from china and other countries. Now, we owe them. This is an estimate by the Watson Institute at prout university. For those two wars and some operations in pakistan with the debt included, 13. 9 trillion over 40 years. The question that we obviously have to ask is, what could we do with 13. 9 trillion if we had not got into those wars in afghanistan and iraq . More importantly, what could we do with those 7000 u. S. Soldiers that we could have saved, who died in iraq and afghanistan . And the thousands more who today, and for the rest of their lives will have degrees of physical, emotional, and mental issues and will have hardships throughout their lives, and their families will suffer greatly along with them. None of that would have occurred if the United States has not gone into iraq under false pretenses. There were no weapons of mass destruction there. If the United States, after initial attack to remove al qaeda from afghanistan, had withdrawn within months or lets say even a year, there would have only been unfortunately a handful of soldiers killed. But it would have been many fewer than the 7000 who are dead now. But in addition to that, any people do not understand is that the number of contractors working for the department of defense and the department of state who have been killed in those two wars is greater than 7000. Those people have families also. Host more questions please i will come here and then to you sir. And i repeat the question again. [inaudible question] host the question is how can the military maintain necessary discipline if it invites and allows dissent . Guest i would address that from the perspective of changing the question around. What if somebody in the military, a leading general in the military, had said during any of the wars, im real really not supposed to speak up, but i will tell you that the war in korea cannot be one or vietnam cannot be one, or afghanistan or iraq. If that soldier or general had spoken up and was influential enough, then how many people would we have saved . I hear that, frequently because obviously i have worked for the United States government, the department of defense for 20 years. It is one that i dont think we really have a great concern with. I cant think of any instances when u. S. Soldiers in the wars in afghanistan or iraq, there might be one allegedly, one soldier left and was captured and eventually brought back. There might be one, but other than that, i cant think of any soldiers who have not been courageous in addressing the forces that they have been instructed to address. We have a voluntary military in it just doesnt seem as though its an issue. I understand what you are saying, its a little bit like, let me use the medical analogy again. In an operating room, a traction engine trauma surgeon has to be in complete control. Everybody has to follow that surgeons instructions in an emergency. Everybody recognizes that. But there is no need for an emergency room surgeon to exercise complete control over the life of every nurse and technician outside of the hospital operating room. Therefore even if we say total control is necessary in a combat situation, and it might be. Although creativity is of course, broad thinking necessary and any combat situation, maybe more than any other situation. We dont need to have total control and complete denial of free speech for soldiers in the military to have good order and discipline. And before we go to our last question for this gentleman here, just a reminder, right before he wrapped, there are books for sale. Theres now a three book minimum and new york city. [laughter] again credit cards, apple pay cash, no reasonable dollars 30 and above will be refused. Say in the room for him to sign, have a drink, come back and take his book home with a really good question. No pressure though. [laughter] [inaudible question] statement thats an interesting question. Do you lend any credence to the idea that wars are based in corporate imperatives, not actually military imperatives . Guest i think as eisenhower said with regard to the militaryindustrial complex, there is a corporate nest in military and the wars. Maybe i can end with what i think is a small story about what youre talking about. At west point, theres of football stadium called nike stadium. As you look around the stadium, you will see banners of the military contractors. Those banners are not all touristic expressions of corporations. Those banners are there to influence the generals who are at the game, and they are there to influence the students at the military academy, including west point who will become generals. At west point, during the game, this is been going on for years. The west point Army Football team moment marching down the field somewhat successfully in recent years. Not so much in previous years. It will score a first down or make a first down after 10 yards. The public address announcer would say another army, and then the cadets trained to say first down. And then the announcer will say sponsored by amcor, amcor is a large military contractor that does business of course with the military who has a ceo as a graduate of the knighted States Military academy at west point. Im not saying that anybody and any corporation once any tragedy to before a gem befall a soldier. But everyone understands we are financial incentives are presen present, there is the possibility, the great possibility that there will be distortion. Not only in the marketplace, but in what the military does what everybody does. We might not be reaching truthful resolutions to what we should be doing. We might not be acting according to the interests of the United States. And i think i would probably leave it at that and say because i have worked for the United States government and west point for the last 20 years, almost 20 years now. I will always support west point and say go army, first down, but always keep in perspective with the job of our military is. And that is to protect us into protect our soldiers from harm. And not get into unnecessary wars that have very little or no value to us. See when first about what to thank all of you for being here. [applause] [applause] here are some of the current bestselling nonfiction books according to newsmax topping the list is abc News White House correspondents Jonathan Carls recounting of his coverage of the Trump Administration and front row at the trump show. Then in the house to kennedy, bestselling author James Patterson and journalist Cynthia Fagan recalled the political lives of the kennedy family. After that is Pulitzer Prize winning invested journalists looking at the opioid chemic king at those in West Virginia and death and blood lick. Thats followed by the some of the people, data scientists census taking. Repping up our look at the bestselling nonfiction books according to newsmax is the sward and theel