Good morning and welcome to this news conference. My name is norman solomon, action. Org, roots which is hosting the event today. Cosponsor ofs the a Petition Campaign calling for no u. S. Were planes over syria. Together with ive other organizations, veterans for kos, theylor daily nation magazine, will be on war, and watchdog. Net. U. S. Government began bombing. Yria nearly three years ago that was back in september 2014. Since then that killing from many sides has continued unabated. Last two, during the years, tensions between the worlds two Nuclear Superpowers have escalated. Nd escalated sharply in the process, russia and the United States have come closer to direct military warfare with each other. When addressing the tensions between the United States and russia, former senator sam nunn, chair of the Senate Armed Services committee cosigned a letter recently and i would like to quote from it. Urgently pursuing practical steps now that can stop the downward spiral in relations and reduce real , between the night states and russia. Producing military and other risks yet, those continue to accelerate. That is the subject of this campaign and the subject of our discussion here today. On june 19 u. S. And russian planes reportedly flew within five feet of each other over the baltic sea. Also as the summer began, the u. S. Military shot down a Syrian Government jet after which the russian government threatened to shoot down u. S. Planes over syria. On july 30, the the New York Times reported that between the United States and russia now, except for in relationship to syria, there is virtually no military to military conversation of the kind that took place routinely during the cold war. Also said with russian and American Forces operating near the baltics and off the coast of europe, the chances for accident and miscalculation are high. The times described the communication between the u. S. And russia about their activities in syria, mutually suspicious and sporadic. What is at stake as the united its militaryues actions in syria including in the skies over syria what is at stake includes the real possibility that conflicts in the air could escalate into military clashes between russia and the United States that could spiral into nuclear warfare. Campaign thaton is ongoing is focused on addressing this escalating. Risis our petition so far to the u. S. Congress and to secretary of defense, james mattis, has gained more than 50,000 unique signers and the addition is very straightforward. It says, we urge you to immediately remove all u. S. Military lanes from syrian skies and keep them out of that. Ountrys airspace today, i the news conference, we l hear from tro speakers from four speakers on a wide range of vantage points. Former official of the Central Intelligence agency and a cia whistleblower, matthew ho was a marine who had two deployment in iraq and later became a Start Department state Department Officials. Authority onal International Law as it pertains to Armed Conflict and the director of will beyond war. We will start with this man who had major responsibilities with the cia. Back in december of 2014, a headline over an article by Huffington Post really summed it up, one man jailed for cia torture tried to expose it. Thank you. Trump just like president obama before him seems intent on getting the United States involved in really what is an unwinnable civil war in syria. Launching 59 cruise missiles, for example against rundown syrian air bases the middle of the night is easier enough to do, but there are consequences to these actions and republicans and conservatives celebration of this force notwithstanding, trump has put christians and christians in neighboring countries in jeopardy just as president obama and george w. Bush did in iraq. Both parties try to out hawk each other to prove who was tougher, so was stronger, who is quicker to use military force, even in countries where the u. S. Has no obvious national or vital interest. Anyever seems to be discussion about whether this military intervention is even let alone whether it is moral or ethical. There is little talk and congress for authorization despite the fact that the congress not asking for authorization is almost always a violation of the world powers act. It ought to be anathema to any politician of either party who considers himself or herself to be a christian. It is these military interventions having the effect of dooming the small Christian Communities left in places like iraq and syria. The problem for u. S. Politicians who fancy themselves as christian is bizarre al said is bassary person assad, like his father, whether you like their politics or not have protected syrian christians for generations. Syrian christians make up 12 of the population according to the cias world factbook. But nearly a third of the believers have left serious and the start of the civil war in 2011 pushed out by terrorist isis according to the New York Times. Before the war started, christians are just baited in all aspects of Syrian Society including members of the business core diplomatic corps and business community. Even these Syrian Military is fully integrated rather than having separate christian units. , under saddamraq hussein, christians served in the parliament and cabinet. They practiced their faith really and openly and they were successful in business. Bushso george w. Invasion of iraq, almost the entire Iraqi Christian Community has left for jordan, the u. K. , and the United States. The same thing is now happening in syria. There is a solution, but it is not sexy, quick or easy. It is something many of us have heard about, but havent actually seen. It is called diplomacy. Shether trump likes assad politics or not, the only way to save the country is to sit at the table with all of the stakeholders including the syrians, the russians, and the iranians. We will have to accept the fact that assad is not going anywhere. Whether we like it or not, his is the internationally recognized government of syria to matter what trump and obama have said. We should respect that and we should sit across the table from Bashar Alassad. Thank you very much. Mr. Solomon thank you. Our next speaker is matthew ho. He is a former state Department Official who resigned in protest from his post in afghanistan over u. S. Strategic policy and goals in that country. 2009. Igned in september it is worth noting that the council on Foreign Relations has cited his Resignation Letter as an essential document in the history of the war in afghanistan. Prior to his diplomatic assignment, he served two deployments in iraq. I should mention that matthew is on theohn kiriakou Advisory Board at the institute for public accuracy, which has been in this building and the National Press club the silly for 18 years and i am the press Club Facility and i have been the director for 18 years. Here is matthew ho. Thank you. I want to begin my remarks by noting we have a new chief of staff in the white house and one of my concerns over these last many years of our campaigns of our wars in the middle east, what really is the most accurate our slaughter of many people in the middle east has been the misrepresentation and miss understanding of what drives many of the actors, many of the men and women who are fighting us in the middle east. General kelly has on numerous occasions stated that this is a war about our way of life. Physicians,my particularly in the state department with access to in my positions with access to the interrogations of men who had , it was clear that the men traveling to afghanistan to fight us, as well as what we know from those people who have carried out terror attacks in europe as well as in the United States including the 9 11 hijackers in their martyrdom videos, or in their notes or what have you, their motivations are clear. They are not saying convert or die. They are not saying we hate your freedom. They are not saying we are doing this because your girls are going to school or your women are wearing dresses above the knees. Are are saying we conducting attacks because you are bombing our countries, because your military is in our country, because your supporting dictatorships, etc. There is this misunderstanding i think some of it is based on ignorance and many of it much of it is done to drive nationalism and to drive the spirit of war. I will say this also ties greatly into what norman was speaking about earlier, the dangers of a war between United States and russia. If anybody has been reading the New York Times recently, you will see the coverage over the exercises, the large nato exercises being conducted on russias borders. We remember that russia has been the victim of three major invasions in the last 150 years or so and losing tens of millions of people. However the New York Times finds it fit to characterize russia conducting military training within its own borders as aggression. So, that is the first of my concerns that i would like to my time heren about why it is so important to theamerican aircraft out of skies of syria, because we are. N the brink of war with russia and it is something that i dont think the people in washington, d. C. Can quite understand what that were would be like. The second reason is more of a moral reason, warmer reason that has to do with the fact that simply the United States air campaigns, United States air warfare may be in my estimation the greatest moral and human hazard over the last century. This is the with 72nd anniversary of the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima, something that nearly all fourstar and fivestar generals after world war ii said was not a military necessity, you know, was done for strictly political reasons. If you go into the understanding that most americans do not know, all north koreans certainly no, that the American Air Force burned down nearly every village in town in north korea, that in vietnam we dropped more bombs on the vietnamese than we did on the japanese, or on the germans in terms of tonnage. And we conducted the largest Chemical Warfare program in the history of the world against the vietnamese, something that millions of people are still sickened with. There will be babies born today with deformities because of. If we fastforward to the results of our air campaigns that the iraqis are certainly still paying for, certainly that the libyans are still paying for, that the afghans are still paying for, and for which there have been no results that anyone can point to to say this is a been a benefit. And certainly, how can anyone the air campaign being conducted by the United States rational, or moral response . Speakingrst started publicly against wars in 2009, i was asked you have been in both you were in both and that isaying served, the incorrect word, i feel. You were in iraq and afghanistan, where the similarities and differences between the two . I fell into that trap. After a time, i said, what am i doing. There is only one thing that matters, the United States military in both locations you can only accept one outcome, you are insane if you think anything different happen and that is the same thing that will happen because of the air campaign in syria. If any one thinks that anything different will occur to the people in syria from the american air campaign, already three years in progress, then they are completely naive, foolish, or have another agenda. And this is not to say that Bashar Alassad has not been a dictator, does not come from, was not born from the father of not committeds war crimes himself this is not to excuse that. I am not here as an apologist to the Syrian Government, but i am telling you that american airstrikes in syria are not the solution, and are continuing moral hazard for all people of syria just as they have been for the people of korea, vietnam, iraq, afghanistan, libya, pakistan, and interestingly enough, you have seen the news recently, they american terry is now looking American Military is interested in launching airstrikes into the philippines. First120 years after we began our military campaign against filipinos, we are looking to continue it. I appreciate you being here today and i thank you for your time [applause]. [applause] thank you. Ms. Edwards. Ker is thechair of the society on Armed Conflict, advisor for the human rights and gender issues. Thank you so much for having me here. I have been asked to provide the legal analysis for the topic which is whether or not u. S. Airstrikes by late International Law in syria. This is a really broad question and im going to take a little bit of time to drill down into some more specifics in order to be able to answer this. Im sure most of you are well aware, the u. N. Harder is the definitive legal remark Legal Framework that applies here. States that countries or states have an obligation to restrain from a threat or use of force against a territory or the political independence of any state. It seems like a definitive prohibition, but there is an exception in article 51 that states that states have a right to individual or collective selfdefense, but if any state does he use exception, any actions must be reported to the security council. I will look at two instances in the last few months to see how these legal principles apply. April 6, the attack on the chemical weapons, which occurred a few months ago the vast majority of legal experts agree that the attack violated the u. N. Charter and was on constitutional was unconstitutional for several reasons. U. S. Did not justify actions based on selfdefense. There is a Statement Released saying that this is done recently for a minute terry and purposes, based on how. Umanitarian purposes in addition, there was no authorization from congress to use force in this circumstance. Going againstnk the majority of legal opinions that came out after the attack, warmer state department a former state Department Advisor argued narrowly for a narrow defense for circumstances such as this based on necessity for humanitarian intervention. He listed criteria that would need to apply for this exception to take place, which i am happy to refer you to. Did think because of the circumstances there should be a narrow exception in this case. As norman mentioned earlier, the june 18 instance where a syrian airplane was shot down by u. S. Forces. The u. S. Claims it acted in oflective selfdefense coalition forces, because the syrian plane was bombing Syrian Democratic forces, one of the democratic groups in syria. The russians say the plane was abiding groundcover and that the and itolated sovereignty constituted military aggression against the Syrian Government. Article 51 does allow or collective selfdefense of aids, but not necessarily nonstate armed groups. Just to be clear, the u. S. Has not claimed that the sds is a defective organ of the United States. Suggested a has novel legal approach here which says that the u. S. Could use necessary and proportionate force to defend Member States of the coalition and coalition nonstate armed groups against isis if defeating isis was its sole mission. That is a very narrow exception. And the law there is no right to noncollective selfdefense for regime change or other political goals. Complicated is secretary tillerson and Ambassador Haley have indicated that the Syrian Regime change remains a u. S. Strategic objective. Here the fact that there could be mixed motives for both fighting isis, a strategic objective of the United States, and possible regime change, the mixing of motives compromised the legal basis for military operations that have occurred and may occur in the future. I look forward to your questions. Thank you. Mr. Solomon thank you, christie edwards. Our last speaker is david swanson. He is the author of several books on war, the director of the world the on war organization. In addition, he is a campaign coordinator. Org. Swanson thank you, norman. I wont have time to list all of the reasons why i want u. S. Lanes and runs out of skies overs area [cheers] over syria. These planes kill a lot of people. People all of equal value regardless of their religion or ethnicity. Have a record of such counsel generally turn out to be many times under the counts that comprehensive postwar studies arrive at. On top of which we have the problem of all of the People Killed who are not counted by virtue of not being labeled ilians, always empirically in the labeling process. Then the injuries almost always outnumber the deaths, the homelessness, the extremely longterm effects of the uranium by some of the planes we want out of the skies, the starvation that could have been prevented for a fraction of the cost of , and of course the top killer of u. S. Troops, suicide. The primary reason that what would be considered mass murder isnt given more heat is it is understood to serve a greater purpose, but what purpose is served by u. S. Lanes over syria. If longer than the wars of the past isnt enough to your it out, how about the purpose afghanistan,bing iraq, pakistan, yemen creating more enemies for the next war, what has been accomplished . Mer cia unit chief michael says the more u. S. Fight terrorism, the more it creates terrorism. Bestcia report called practices in counterinsurgency says drawn killing is counterproductive thrown killing isdrone counterproductive. Nes could be undermining if youre trying to kill your through, the matter how precise you are, youre going to upset people. That is true whether or not they plane has a pilot and it. Maintaining the momentum of permanent war is obviously not a high moral purpose. Reportedyork times for jerusalem, the status quo, as horrific as it may be, seems preferable to a victory for mr. Assads government or a strengthening of rebel groups increasingly dominated by sunni jihadists. Tie said atle for a consul general in new york, let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death. That is the strategic thinking, here. Sakeendless war for wars may be done in the name of democracy and you may begin able may be ableision to get Television Viewers to cheer as missiles are launched from the ship, like those launch most say the but u. S. Should get out of war. Public pressure was key in preventing air war in 2013, never has the public or congress advocated for our authorized this war. It is a war destructive of the rule of law. This action permitted from air, ground, or water. Thomas admitted this was illegal two weeks ago claiming to defend u. S. Troops in syria is not a legal argument for defensiveness, but a declaration of lawless imperialism. And of course stuff that herald co. Makes up is not law. Trumps decision to arm and train proxies was against the law and against the report commissioned by the caa on whether or not such efforts had six seated in the past had succeeded in the past. Given the account of President Trump dishes in of having viewing the killing of a child, but this war continues to kill children. This is before mentioning the risk of a pop lithic apocalyptic nuclear fighting and illegal and counterproductive war in syria. That alone is reason enough to remove every u. S. Plane or drone. Syriais damage done to and atmosphere, you can drive your car all year and feel guilty about it, but you wont pollute the arrow like one flight of these planes. The financial cost, 16 billion and counting, more than what would be needed annually to have clean Drinking Water everywhere on earth. This war serves as the top public justification for military spending that as up to about 1 trillion per year in the United States. That choice of how to spend our resources kills more people in all current wars put together because of where the money is not spent. A fraction of the spending could diplomacy, in unarmed peacekeeping to far better in effect. The alternatives have been available since day one and still are. Yearsited states spent sabotaging attempts at peace in syria. Noble prize laureate dismissed out of hand the u. S. Ruined last years ceasefire by firing on syrian troops. Nothing will quickly bring peace and prosperity to syria, but continuing to do what we know makes matters worse has to end. We have to get hes a chance we have to give peace a chance. Thank you. Mr. Solomon thank you, david swanson. We are now going to have question an answer of session. We have a live microphone here for the journalists present. When you ask your question, please give your name and identify your news outlet. It would like to go first . There must be a question here somewhere. I think i am seeing a hesitant ok. Here comes the microphone. [indiscernible] go ahead. N i think you are being heard. Yes, please go ahead. I have a question for mr. John kiriakou, the question is a sod is the only one person standing between im from thed region. I am from their. Re. Christians have been living there for centuries now, more than 2000 years ago. Wasey christianity i think created there. Do you think only now they survived more horrible than assad . Mr. Kiriakou i dont disagree with you. I think christianity has done very well in syria. Alassad is bashar a dictator, antidemocrat, but the truth is with the players on the eel now, he is the 1 on the yield now, he is the one that gives christians the chance of having a thriving community. If you look at the alternatives, never minding the notion that the United States remotes that that somehowomotes magically this is going to come together and everybody will live in peace and harmony, that will simply not happen, but the or some als are isis organization, or assad. Of this choices, i think those are the realistic choices of those choices, the best is assad. As recently as 2012 or 2013, where there was talk of perhaps a Syrian Military pushing assad aside, the same through the 1990s, that the best and most likely alternative to Saddam Hussein aqi a group of sunni ir generals. It hasnt happened. I think theyre best bet is with assad. The syrian conflict Syrian Crisis going on more than six years is much more complicated to look at it from one perspective or one angle, which one, but serious killings have been the headline of any community, majority or minority. So, how i can justify for example, the sunnis, that you theing them was to preserve Christian Community . The argument for them will be so unfair. You are exactly right and i think you are misunderstanding my comments. My comments were toward neoconservatives and the neoliberals and in washington that things anybody is better than assad, that assad is the problem. It is to them i was directing my comments. You are right, you cannot go to the Sunni Community and they that the deaths in their community are less important than other communities geared same in the kurdish community. I do not think that any deaths are less important, it is just that my comments were geared toward capitol hill, more than anything else. I am from rt america news. Regarding the mixed motives that were mentioned that compromise the legal basis for u. S. Yourventionism in syria, mentioned a couple of arguments that undermined the claims of few minutes here in intervention humanitarian intervention such as regime change goals and fighting isis, i wanted to ask if you would consider the u. S. Ally ship or partnership with todi arabia with regard syria as also something that might undermine the humanitarian motive claim. That is one question. The other one is the removal of assad, a lot of people expressed fear of seeing another libya or iraq in a vacuum filled with people worse than assad, is that something you could speak to . Thank you. Mr. Kiriakou i hope others world answer as well, but i just hope that outswanson i would point it violates the charter and leahy law ino the the u. S. That says you can only support another nation in mass murder when the other nation doesnt violate human rights. How you conduct mass murder without i leading human rights, i cannot answer for you. But that is an additional way in which u. S. Operations in yemen are illegal. On top of which you get into can question in yemen of and exiled dictator create reality by inviting other nations to attack his country . When donald trump is impeached and removed and invites china to bomb washington dc, we would accept that, right . No. These are nonsense. The actions of russia being legalized in the charter. That is no understanding war is ok if they did cater asks if a dictator asks you to help. U. S. Is committing a crime in syria, so is russia. I think, certainly, yet, your concerns about the removal of assad in a vacuum, you have certainly seen that in libya and other locations. As far as the relationship of the United States to saudi arabia, oh, yeah, the hypocrisy of slang i is lots could use back from new jersey. There is a lot of slang and curses i could throw at you to describe that level of hypocrisy. We provide their fuel and bombs, and intelligence that allows saudi arabia to commit those atrocities in yemen. Let alone what saudi arabia is like in its own internal humans violations, and the last week, attacks on i cant recall the name of the city. That saudi arabia is attacking internally, so, yes. Hypocrisy has always been first and foremost in america. The back to the american constitution. Maleity was only for White Property owners. You know what i mean . Thats what freedom has meant. There has never been a real standard of nonhypocrisy in american speech and thought in political ideology anyway. There has always been hypocrisy in everything america has done. This notion of talking about syria, but coordinating with saudi arabia potentially it was brought up about this notion of sabotaging efforts in 2012 in syria. That is about the same time, too, that we were utilizing the arabia qatar, and saudi their efforts with groups such as nusra and the Islamic State to try to overthrow the assad government. The notion we could use those groups for our purposes in syria while trying to keep them at bay within iraq. Iraq. This is how the United States operates. And we know this because of declassified Intelligence Agency reports. We are hypocritical, but also bipolar in many ways. We think we can not just be we can alsout manage certain situations in a way that just defies reality. Course, coming back to it all, it is the very people who live in these places, who are being burned to death and ripped apart. I think it is easy for us to forget that. As we talk about that as i stand here in my suit and tie, and drink my cup of coffee, that as we speak about this, american bombs are ripping apart men, women, and children as we speak. It is not abstract. One thing i forgot to meant and im sorry. A number of people mentioned reliance on airstrikes as a big part of stretch the of strategy, would that undermine humanitarian pretext argument, as well . Mr. Hoh absolutely. The other thing, too, i recall there being a report that was released by the United Nations last fall. And i was reminded of this yesterday by a colleague about our sanctions on syria. And the United Nations reported the our sanctions on syria, effect it has on the syrian population and how deadly those sanctions are. Prevent theons pharmaceuticals, medical supplies, food, the things that people need to survive, let alone the things that hospitals need. Somehow notion we are involved for humanitarian that is all nonsense. You dont have to look much further than go back a couple of weeks to the Washington Post where Michael Bickers has been in the cia and department of defense for a long time. He was involved in the american efforts in afghanistan in the 1980s against the soviet union, oped,ery clearly in that he states that in syria and the syrian civil war, we saw an opposition to strike a blow against iran by removing assad to cut off irans relationship with hezbollah. This is a very senior american official in both republican and democratic administrations. They may talk about humanitarian reasons, but for many people in the National Security positions in washington, d. C. , as well as politicians, what they do what they see and i was fortunate to be in senior positions and washington, d. C. In the state department and pentagon, for many of these people, it is like a game of risk. They look at the map and they want to turn Different Countries the colors they want to turn them. You can see that in vickers column in the the Washington Post from a couple of weeks ago. That is how people view the world and how they do it. Anything they say about humanitarian reasons, that is just good pr, the smart thing to say. [indiscernible] i just also wanted to address some of the Legal Framework that apply here. When we talk about human rights law, the right to life embodied in the u. N. Charter, and every human rights treaty created, the right to life is invaluable. It is one of the major themes of human rights law. When we are talking about International Humanitarian law, which governs how or is conducted, whether or not it was illegal to begin with, how we got into it, whether the circumstances were correct or not in International Humanitarian law, there are military and principles that do apply. Life undere right to human rights law is the norm and the standard, it is allowable under International Humanitarian law to kill and even kill you cannot target civilians, but civilian deaths are allowable. In order for them to be allowable, there has to be a distinction,is of proportionality, military necessity, and there is this calculus that goes on. What is your military objective and can you achieve it, and can you achieve it with the least amount of civilian deaths possible. That is what commanders do every time they commit any military action. If they have other justifications beside military necessities besides humanitarian that is necessary, but we are looking at the United States and any other actor acting in this context, are they doing everything that they possibly can to eliminate completely or to cause the fewest amount of deaths in any action that they take. I hope that answers your question. Mr. Solomon we have a few more minutes for questions. Go ahead. I will wait until i have the microphone. [applause] thank you. I truly enjoyed the presentations. I commend the panel for focusing on the military aspect of the u. S. Strategy in the middle east. I believe the narrative should on the entire u. S. Strategy in the middle east. Andthat is its engendered regime change and gendered identity regime change. Just last week secretary tillerson got in front of no and said the u. S. Is longer seeking regime change in north korea. If that is true, that is commendable. Is ok in north korea, but not ok to maintain the what isregime in syria, it the u. S. s business any way to change regimes . Its not just the aspect of the ined policy, which is orther it is syria, iraq, other areas, but it is the u. S. Policy of regime change that has brought us through several conflicts to this stage. Thank you. Very briefly, i agree with you, 1000 . Nobody has given the u. S. Government authority to decide by any means. We know through foreign elections, not the russian way, apparently, have bombed 30 countries. No one appointed the u. S. To the role, this is not enforcing law, this is violating law. And so, it has to end. The u. S. Public is not the driving force. Donald. Public put trump into the presidency after campaigning against this. It ought to become unacceptable and the u. S. To continue down that road. And i would just add that when this discussion of killing sq people in the process as possible, when the military says bombing the spot where isis stores its moneys worth of 250 civilian deaths, that is not fewest possible. And there is nothing empirical about it. Theres nothing that can say i 40died and said it is only it is not empirical, it is just rhetoric. It is immoral, illegal, and the world didnt ask or it ask for it. Most countries in the world see the United States, including russia and china, as the biggest threat. Ll had aup po similar result. Local policing is not policinged global is not appreciated by the people being policed. I think we have time for one more question. Two questions. My first question is, wars are bad and killing people and you bad and killing people and you dont want the u. S. To intervene in other countries policy, ok. But, syria is like a chess board and wars are reality and International Relations are another reality. If the u. S. Takes its aircraft from syria, dont you think that the United States will lose its ground in syria . International policy or International Relations and leave the space to russia, iran and the other powers . Thats a hard question and i will preface this by saying im not an attorney. You are, but im not. But, its my understanding that legally, if the internationally recognized government of syria invites another country to come and help it, that other country is there legally. The russians have been invited by the Syrian Government. The u. S. Has not been invited by the Syrian Government. Im all for humanitarian assistance if we can provide medicine or humanitarian relief, food, water, even safe passage out of the country for refugees. Thats great. But, its my understanding that anything more than that at this point in syria is illegal. We are supposed to be a nation of laws in this country. We like to tell people and we like to tell other countries that we are this shining beacon of respect for human rights and Civil Liberties and the role of law and democracy and its simply not true. Its rhetoric. Its propaganda. So, if we were serious about this being true, we would live that policy and we dont. We just want other countries to. Do you think that russia and iran take their soldiers from syria also . No, i dont think so at all. Real politik is real, but i dont think so at all. Im not sure that thats really the most important thing to worry about in this scenario. Real i think that there are bigger issues of respect for human rights and respect for human rights and Civil Liberties and peace in the region. Do you want to add something on this issue . Yeah, i mean, i look at it like this the u. S. Has been heavily involved in the middle east for seven decades now. About five or six years ago, Princeton University did a survey or a study and found that since jimmy carters presidency, the United States had spent 10 trillion policing the persian gulf region. And i would say in my lifetime, nearly every country from the edge of the Mediterranean Sea through afghanistan with the exception no, thats not true including iran has been destroyed. Gulf region. Every city has been raised to the ground more or less in my lifetime. I was born in 1973 and thats with the United States having spent 10 trillion in the region , having had a massive military presence. I see no reason why the u. S. Should remain in that region. It has provided no help to anybody in the region and has wasted vast amounts of sums of american money wasted, and millions of people are dead, so i see no value in it and i cant see any explanation for how or any reason for how things would have been better im sorry, how things would have been worse if we had not been there. That is the way i view it. Iffar as whether or not we are not they are, the iranians are there, the russians are there, the finish are there. All i know is what has occurred and what is occurring. I know that the American Military is responsible for so much of it. It. Is where i view second question. Were unfortunately all of time. All of the speakers are available to talk oneonone here. I would like to thank everyone for participating and attending today. And to emphasize that the Petition Campaign calls no u. S. Planes over syria is continuing. Anyone can sign and participate and be part of the National Campaign by going to the web, by visiting rootsaction. Org. Id like to acknowledge and thank all six organizations who have made this a nationwide and interNational Campaign. Rootsaction. Org, veterans for peace, nation magazine, watchdog. Net and world beyond war. Thank you all for being here. [applause] [inaudible conversations] cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up wednesday morning, a look at escalating tensions with north korea over its Nuclear Weapons program. The independent institutes ivan eland and anthony ruggiero. Bruce brown, executive director of the Reporters Committee for freedom of theof the reporters r freedom of the press, on the trump administrations crackdown on release and the potential impact on journalists and press freedom. Watch cspans washington at 7 00 eastern wednesday morning. Join the discussion. President trump took a break from his vacation today to take on the u. S. Opioid epidemic. Speaking from the Trump National golf club in new jersey, the hill writes that the president vowed to work with Law Enforcement against drug dealers that poison our communities both inside and outside the country. His
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.