Episode 602 Show Notes- How Washington Elites Prolonged War and Trump’s Plan to End It

↓ The P.A.S. Report Podcast is on every podcast platform! ↓

Episode Description

In this week’s episode of The P.A.S. Report Podcast, Professor Nick Giordano dives deep into President Trump’s announcement that he will push for an immediate end to Russia’s war in Ukraine and force both sides to come to an agreement. He discusses how the endgame in Ukraine has always been predictable, and how the Biden administration and the political elites bear much of the blame for the devastation after they derailed a potential peace agreement, the Istanbul Agreement. With the war continuing to rage, it has left a path of destruction and casualties in its wake. It is time we critique how Washington’s elites have driven the conflict by its failed policies at an enormous cost in human lives and to Ukraine.

Episode Highlights:

• Analyzing President Trump’s stance to force an end to hostilities and push for a Ukraine-Russia peace agreement.
• The Biden administration’s role in sabotaging the Istanbul Agreement which prolonged the war at a devastating cost to Ukraine.
• What a peace agreement may look like.

👉 Subscribe, listen, and share to stay informed on the issues shaping America.

Click play above to listen to the entire episode or you can listen on any podcast platform

---

Show Notes- How Washington Elites Prolonged War and Trump’s Plan to End It

Timestamps

 

Welcome to The P.A.S. Report Podcast

[Auto-Generated Transcript]

Hello everyone, and welcome to The P.A.S. Report Podcast. I’m your host, Professor Nick Giordano. Be sure to follow and subscribe to the podcast so you never miss an episode and go to The P.A.S. Report website at pasreport.com to sign up for my newsletter, read the show notes, and share the episode with family and friends.

Before we dive into today’s topic, President Trump once again shocked the political class when he announced Dan Bongino as Deputy Director of the FBI. Talk about a commitment to reform government and hold Washington’s elites accountable. Bongino is a former NYPD officer, Secret Service agent, and has been one of the most vocal critics of the weaponization of the FBI.

This appointment demonstrates just how serious President Trump is in changing the mindset and status quo within the bureaucracy. The FBI has long strayed from its original purpose as an unbiased law enforcement body that pursues justice. Instead, it has become a political tool used against those who deviate from the elite power structures narrow-minded points of view. The FBI has been used to target political opponents of the DC establishment, but most dangerous of all, is how the FBI has been used to target ordinary Americans who express nothing more than criticism of the government. Time and again, we’ve witnessed partisanship creep in, overshadowing the Bureau’s primary role—to protect American citizens and uphold the Constitution.

How Washington Elites Prolonged War and Trump’s Plan to End It

The FBI allowed political biases to cloud its mission, and they have done an enormous amount of damage to their agency. With Kash Patel as the new FBI Director, and now Dan Bongino will serve as Deputy Director, there is little doubt that change is coming. Will they face pushback from entrenched bureaucrats? Absolutely. But if there’s one thing we know about Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, it’s that they don’t back down from a fight. The days of unchecked politicization at the FBI are, hopefully, coming to an end, and you will want to stay with The P.A.S. Report Podcast as the situation develops.

Now, let’s turn to the topic at hand. The ongoing war in Ukraine and President Trump’s announcement that he intends to force a settlement between Ukraine and Russia. Let’s face it, this has been a deadly and devastating war. We’re talking about over a million soldiers dead. Young people who had their whole lives ahead of them. We are talking about tens of thousands of innocent civilians killed or injured. Critical infrastructure is in ruins, and it will take at least a decade, possibly more, to rebuild what’s been destroyed.

And we have felt the ripple effects of this war here at home. Hundreds of billions of tax dollars were transferred overseas as we have major problems ourselves. Problems like Veterans’ care, homelessness, an old and dilapidated infrastructure, a failed education system, a military that is depleted and one-third below readiness levels, and many more.

Energy prices increased and the cost of products like fertilizer more than doubled, both led to an increase in food costs and have devastated households throughout the country.

Everyday folks, like you listening to the podcast, paid the price in more ways than one. Not only did our tax dollars fund this war which has only increased our debt, we also had to take on higher energy and grocery bills.

In my view, the tragedy is that so much of this was predictable. I warned in March 2021, nearly a year before Russia’s invasion, that he may intend to invade Ukraine, and once the war started, it was easy to predict how it would ultimately go, especially the longer the war lasted.

The Biden administration and our failed policymakers, policymakers who have been in charge of our foreign policy for the last few decades, had a window of opportunity to prevent the war, but they ignored it. Once the war began, an opportunity to end the war arose with the Istanbul Agreement, but because of their hubris, they torpedoed it, and Ukraine paid a heavy price. The so-called foreign policy experts and the Biden administration prevented an end to the conflict, and they should be called out, shamed, and banished from ever influencing foreign policy again.

They claim they care about Ukraine and Ukrainian independence, but that was never the case. Understand to Biden’s inner circle to war hawks like Lindsey Graham, Liz Cheney, and Adam Kinzinger, Ukraine was just a pawn on the chessboard.

Now, you have President Trump who is going to push a false settlement, and the same people who created this mess are the same ones screaming the loudest. But what’s the alternative? Notice these fools never provide any specifics on what the endgame looks like. They never propose solutions to end the war, only the means to keep it going.

Meanwhile, Russia continues to advance ever so slowly. Taking territory inch-by-inch, foot-by-foot. Soldiers were thrown into the meat grinder to achieve Russia’s objectives. Meanwhile, what do you think the median age of the average Ukrainian soldier is? Some may think it’s 18, 19, or maybe 20 years old because it is usually young people who fight wars, but Ukraine is out of young people, and the median age is now 43 years old. Think about that and what that really means.

President Trump’s stance is bold, there’s no doubt about that, but its only bold because so many within the uniparty, so many in the DC elite circles, want the war to drag on. A forced settlement will mean putting serious pressure on both Russia and Ukraine, and it won’t be easy, but doing nothing will be a catastrophe. So, in this episode, I’ll break down how we got her, what a forced settlement looks like, and most importantly, what’s in America’s strategic interests.

I’ll get to it all so hang tight, and we will be right back.

Break

How the Washington Elites Thwarted a Deal Early On

Welcome back, everyone. Let’s take a closer look at the predictable nature of the war in Ukraine and how our own policymakers helped pave the way for this crisis. For starters, the warning signs about Russia’s intent were obvious. When Putin began moving tens of thousands of troops and heavy equipment to Ukraine’s border, it wasn’t just a standard military drill. It was an extraordinarily expensive operation. Building barracks, hospitals, and feeding thousands of troops in a remote location costs hundreds of millions of dollars. I warned on this podcast back in March 2021, nearly a year before the invasion, that Russia was setting the stage for something big.

But the real turning point, in my opinion, came after the catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan in September 2021. We spent two decades there, only to watch the Taliban reclaim the country in a matter of days, even better armed than they were before 9/11. This colossal failure put the Biden administration’s incompetence on full display. If you’re Putin, you realize the American public has no appetite for another major conflict. From that moment, I believe he green-lit the invasion of Ukraine.

We then watched President Biden bungle a press conference in January 2022, hinting that a “minor incursion” by Russia might not trigger a firm response. Not surprisingly, Putin took that as a green light. By late January, Russia was conducting joint exercises with Belarus near Ukraine’s northern border. When the exercises ended, Russian forces left their equipment right where it was – an obvious red flag that an invasion was imminent. Yet the Biden administration sat on its hands.

The invasion finally began at the end of February 2022. It created massive instability in an already volatile world. Despite this, Ukraine initially held its ground, which presented a prime opportunity to end the war quickly. Behind the scenes, then–Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, along with France and Turkey, worked to broker an agreement between Putin and Zelenskyy.

The Istanbul Agreement would have ended the conflict just a few months in. Ukraine would commit to neutrality and formally acknowledge Russia’s claim to Crimea. In return, Russia would withdraw from Ukrainian territory, including the Donbas region, and Ukraine would can receive Western security guarantees.

This deal could have saved countless lives, prevented further devastation, and added stability back into the international system. But the Biden administration and Washington’s foreign-policy hawks had other plans. They threatened Ukraine not to make any deal with Russia or else they would be cut off. They sent then–UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to warn Zelenskyy that if he signed any peace agreement with Putin, all Western support would come to an end – economic, military, and otherwise – and if Putin tried to invade again, Ukraine would be on its own.

The mindset among these policymakers was that Ukraine’s early successes on the battlefield would continue and might even topple Putin’s regime, weakening Russia for the long term.

However, anyone with two functioning brain cells could see that a prolonged conflict would eventually favor Russia. It’s simply the larger power with more resources to draw upon. It was always the stronger, more dominant country.

By rejecting the Istanbul Agreement, the neocons and the Biden administration allowed the conflict to escalate and prolonged a war that could have been contained and concluded two and a half years ago.

You have people angry that President Trump would even suggest a settlement between the two. What people should be angry about is the fact that the war is still being waged when it could have been prevented.

All this stupidity was in the name of a misguided belief that Russia could be conclusively beaten in a drawn-out fight. These are your foreign policy experts, and as the elites prolonged the war, it’s Ukrainians who paid the price.

The war they wanted was doomed from the start, but they were blinded by hubris. Hubris did immense harm to the United States.

We need to take a quick break, but in the next segment, I want to talk about realistic expectations and what a potential forced settlement would look like.

Break

As the Washington Elites Want the War to Continue, Which Option is Worse?

Welcome back to The P.A.S. Report Podcast. One of the big problems we have in the United States, and apparently, most of the Western world, is that we now base policy on what we hope happens, rather than base policy on the situation as it is.

But here’s the thing, Ben Shapiro likes to say facts don’t care about your feelings, well, the international environment doesn’t care about your emotions.

Our foreign policy used to be based on realist philosophies with hints of idealism infused into it. However, now it seems to be based entirely on idealism and what we hope happens as opposed to what will happen.

Was it right for Russia to invade Ukraine? No. Was Russia the aggressor in this conflict? Yes. Is it fair that Ukraine will have to give up some of its territory? Obviously not.

But life isn’t fair, and when it comes to geopolitics, reality seldom aligns with morality or ethics.

I will talk about what a settlement looks like, but before I get to that let’s address those who are outraged by any suggestion that Ukraine could be forced into a deal. My question for you is this: What’s the alternative? How do you envision this war ending, and how do you plan to get there?

We can’t have a debate based solely on emotion and we have to confront the hard truth. The truth is that there’s only one way Ukraine can fully defeat Russia, and that’s if America directly enters the war. We’re talking about U.S. boots on the ground, a kinetic war against Russia, and a full-scale mobilization that likely includes a draft.

I don’t know why we have these stupid superficial debates based on nothing but emotions. Let’s be honest with the American people and let’s have the debate.

There is only one possible way for Ukraine to defeat Russia, and that’s if America gets involved directly. This means American military boots on the ground and a kinetic war with Russia. Why can’t we be honest about that? We can continue to throw money at this, and we can arm the Ukrainians. But we’ve been doing that for three years, and I don’t care if you give them more sophisticated weaponry. The truth is the war will continue to grind on and Russia will continue to advance very slowly deeper into Ukraine.

It’s easy to call for perpetual fighting when you’re thousands of miles away. But consider the current state of our military. Recruitment numbers have plummeted over the last four years, and our readiness levels are below ideal thresholds. Think back to how stretched we were fighting simultaneously in Iraq and Afghanistan. Soldiers did multiple tours with some serving five, six, or even seven tours. We’re not equipped for lengthy, high-intensity conflict, especially against a near-peer adversary like Russia.

See, when you begin to add realism, it becomes a much more difficult debate when we have to commit ourselves or our sons and daughters to fight. And remember, when it comes to a draft, they aren’t starting with me who is about to be 45, they start with the 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds.

When you take the emotion out of the issue, you begin to see things more clearly. You begin to think twice about the policy and the impacts it can have. This isn’t about Democrats or Republicans.

It’s about what is in America’s best interest, and if we are being honest with ourselves, if we are unwilling to engage with Russia militarily, Ukraine cannot win this war.

Of course, we can choose a different option and let the war continue. Again, get the emotion out of it. Sure, we can keep pouring money and advanced weapons into the conflict, but as we’ve seen, the war continues to grind on. With it brings more death, and more destruction and Russia continue to make small but incremental gains.

As I said in the beginning, the average age of a Ukrainian soldier fighting Russia is about 43 years old. You need to understand that wars are typically fought by 18- to 25-year-olds. Take our military. The median age of our combat soldiers is about 24.

In Ukraine, it’s 43. Why so high? Because they are running out of young people, that’s why. For decades, Ukraine has faced an outflow of young people leaving the country. Then you factor in Ukrainians having fewer children, and then factor in the war, and it is devastating to Ukraine.

When Russia first invaded, the median age of a Ukrainian soldier was 30-33, but so many soldiers have been injured or killed that they have had to continually raise the age of the draft. They’ve also had to lower the standards, where even drug addicts and criminals can now be drafted. The median age will continue to increase as new recruits’ training is being compromised because they have to be rushed to the frontlines.

Throughout history, war has been romanticized, but the brutal truth is that war is nothing but death and destruction to achieve political objectives.

If this continues unchecked, Ukraine risks facing an unconditional surrender. Russia could take far more territory, potentially the entire country. So again, I ask: Which is worse – some form of forced settlement, or the destruction of Ukraine?

It is as simple as that. When you strip away emotions and look at cold, hard reality, you realize there are no ideal outcomes here.

So, what does a forced settlement look like and what would be in America’s interests? I’ll talk about that when we get back from a quick commercial break.

Break

Trump’s Plan to End Russian-Ukrainian War

Welcome back to The P.A.S. Report Podcast. Well, part of the problem is that Ukraine is in a position of weakness whereas they were in a position of strength when the Istanbul Agreement was developed.

However, that doesn’t mean that Ukraine doesn’t have any leverage, and let’s not forget, that the United States has leverage over both countries.

Most people are unaware, that Ukraine is still in control of parts of the Russian city of Kursk which will certainly be part of any negotiations. Russia controls many of the border provinces, particularly the Donbas region and Donetsk. They also continue to make gains in the south, moving north.

Any settlement agreement will require Ukraine to withdraw from Kursk, and Russia will pull back its forces in the south and some of the east. However, I don’t anticipate Russia to fully withdraw from eastern Ukraine as half the population wants to be part of the Russian Federation, and about half wants to remain in Ukraine. It is a very complicated area.

This is precisely where America’s sanctions on Russia can serve as critical leverage and compel Russia to return its occupied territories in the south and east back to Ukraine. In return, America could slowly lift the sanctions after certain benchmarks are met.

Similar to the Istanbul agreements, Ukraine will have to recognize that Crimea is part of Russian territory, and they will have to sign an agreement of neutrality that they will not seek NATO membership.

And I don’t know why people are hung up on this. They shouldn’t be allowed to join NATO. Listen, I completely understand why smaller, weaker countries want to join NATO. Again, let’s be honest for a second. No one wants to join NATO so they can have the support of the Belgium military. They join because of the American defense umbrella, and to a lesser degree the UK, France, and Poland’s military.

If a country joins NATO, its power increases overnight. However, for the United States it does nothing but increase our risk. They gain the instant protection of our military might, while we incur yet another security liability that could drag us into conflicts and has nothing to do with our strategic interests.

So, Ukrainian NAO membership is a no-go. However, in return for no NATO membership, Russia will be forced to allow Ukraine to seek security guarantees from other countries including the United States. Russia would also be forced to commit that it will not restart the conflict or occupy any additional Ukrainian territory. If Russia were to violate the final agreement, Ukraine’s NATO membership could be reconsidered.

What’s even more compelling is the ongoing negotiation over Ukraine’s mineral resources; the President is pushing for a deal that would grant us strategic access and mineral rights on Ukrainian soil – a bold move that would deter Russian aggression and strengthen our economy by providing crucial natural resources we need here rather than rely on China for these minerals.

Would Russia risk invading Ukraine if our presence, backed by these valuable resources, serves as both a repayment for our support and a robust strategic asset?

It will be fascinating to see what happens, but one thing is crystal clear. We need to stop listening to the so-called foreign policy experts who have routinely gotten wrong over the last 30 years. Not only have they gotten it wrong, but they have weakened our power and influence around the world.

As a nation, we have to be realistic about the issues that we face both domestically and internationally. Get beyond your emotions. Stop viewing everything through the prism of how you feel. Sometimes, in life and throughout history, things aren’t far, but they are what they are. You have to approach situations as they are, not as you wish they would be.

Finally, we need to do what’s in America’s interests. That’s the point of a nation-state. That’s the point of a president.

I hope you find the content of this episode informative, and if you did, please take 30 seconds to write a great review for The P.A.S. Report Podcast and leave a five-star rating on any podcast platform that allows it. More importantly, don’t forget to subscribe and keep sharing this episode with others. Share it with your family. Please share it with friends. A more informed citizenry leads to a stronger America for us and future generations so share, share, share.

Thank you for joining me and I will be back next week with more great episodes of The P.A.S. Report Podcast.

 

To listen to the full episode, click play above or visit your favorite podcast platform!

Click here to read Professor Giordano’s latest piece at Campus Reform

---

From Labor Camp to Media CEO: Janice Trey Warns America

The P.A.S. Report wants to hear from you. Send your feedback to podcast@pasreport.com. Please leave a 5-star rating and write a review on Apple Podcast.

Please share this episode with others & on social media.

---

*PA Strategies, LLC. may earn advertising revenue or a small commission for promoting products or when you purchase through any affiliate links on this website and within this post.

Follow Nicholas Giordano

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•