attacked it s an attack on everyone. how could you join under those circumstances and not put the other nato alliance members including the u.s. at war with russia? sure. and a lot of observers say that ukraine has a lot of housecleaning to do, for example, strengthening democratic institutions, cleaning up corruption. there is a lot of arms as you know, a lot of money coming in here. but, look, the other thing we have to keep on our minds, jim, is that russia watches very carefully what nato is doing, lots of talk revamping nato, creating these so-called mobility hubs, but it s well-known that it still takes a long, long time to mobilize nato. bridges, tunnels, paperwork, all that stuff. so that s something that everyone has to keep in mind as well. well, the other irony here is that ukraine s army is arguably the best equipped and by many measures much bigger than several armies of nato members today. it s certainly earned its keep so far. let s talk about another issue
about what might happen. let s listen. we have very anxious allies along the border. those allies want some assurance, that article five actually mean something. we should be doing more. i think, we should be positioning we talked about reactionary measures, positioning troops in europe after an escalation. that is the wrong way to look at it, we should be doing things now. i ll ask them to put up the map of nato members today, so that our viewers understand what we re talking about. give me an evaluation of what he was saying. we served in moscow together, i m not sure if you knew that. not many people know that. i think he s right. if it were up to me, i want to move our troops now. not later, not in response. just yesterday, the ministry of foreign affairs said we have the right to move our troops in