Tales from the first tee
Stories about my life experiences and others as I work at one of the premier golf clubs in Charleston, SC. Interviews with golfers around the world that have one thing in common...the pursuit of excellence on a golf course and everything else that happens along the way.
Tales from the first tee
From Lifeguard to Ambassador: John Gundersen's Journey and Insights on U.S. Foreign Policy and Leadership
Can a lifeguard from Jones Beach become a federal air marshal and an ambassador to Ukraine? Join us for a riveting conversation with John Gundersen, whose journey from West Hempstead, Long Island to international diplomacy offers a wealth of insights. Rich Easton explores John’s transformative experiences, from his service in Vietnam to meeting his wife during the historic fall of the Berlin Wall. This episode captures the essence of John's adventurous spirit and the profound impact of his multifaceted career.
Why is supporting Ukraine crucial for international law and stability? We tackle this pressing question by examining U.S. foreign policy through John’s seasoned lens. Drawing on his extensive diplomatic service, John contrasts the conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan with the current situation in Ukraine. His firsthand experiences underscore the diverse national identities within former Soviet states and shed light on the complex dynamics within the U.S. Senate and House regarding military involvement. This discussion is a must-listen for anyone seeking to understand the geopolitical stakes and the importance of a clear mission in foreign engagements.
How do we navigate the polarizing politics of today, especially with figures like Donald Trump on the scene? John shares his perspective as a former Republican who has served under 11 administrations, offering a candid analysis of Trump’s leadership and its impact on the United States. We delve into the reasons behind Trump's enduring popularity, the challenges Democrats face in bridging the divide, and the critical importance of treating all voters with respect. In a final call to action, we emphasize the need for unity, civil discourse, and the power of voting to shape a collaborative and inclusive future. Don’t miss this thought-provoking episode that encourages us all to engage thoughtfully and respectfully in the democratic process.
Spotify
Apple podcasts
Amazon Music
all other streaming services
you're tuned in to another episode of tales from the first tee. I'm rich easton telling tales from beautiful charleston, south carolina. Welcome back. This is episode 125. Over the past three years, tales has been downloaded in 73 countries over six continents and 1,320 different cities worldwide. Most of the episodes, with the exception of this one, pertain to golf, golfer stories and celebrity fitness.
Speaker 1:With my college buddy, josh Salzman, I like to deviate at times when I find someone interesting or a story that catches my attention as far from golf as climbing Mount Everest. Over the years I've been invited to join a diverse group of men that share cocktails while embellishing on personal anecdotes at the storied COVID cabana. Most every time I attend I see this gentleman, john Gunderson, a next-door neighbor to the Thatched Hut and a mixologist of the famous Long Island iced tea. The more I spoke to John, the more I wanted to air his various points of view on serving the United States on this podcast. I knew it was a departure from golf, but I like the discussions. John served in Vietnam, worked as a federal air marshal and served in the Foreign Service under multiple presidents Republican and Democratic, republican and Democratic. He was an ambassador to Ukraine and has been a local source of information and intelligence for news sources and local schools teaching our future leaders on the history of Ukraine and Russia. He's informed world leaders on his points of view and was gracious enough to allow me the time to pick his brain. Over the last several months, john and I encountered each other while walking our dogs on one of the local beaches in Charleston and he shared his interest in getting his voice out to voters before the 2024 presidential election. So we sat down the other night and well, the following 40 minutes cover most of what we spoke about.
Speaker 1:If you love, hate or are indifferent to any of the presidential candidates, you might find John's point of view aligned with yours or counter. His years of service in the armed forces and foreign service legitimize his point of view and gives him permission to voice an experienced point of view. We should all have permission to voice our point of view. I mean remember a time when we listened to the points of views of those that didn't align with our own, but had the dignity to respect the sacrifices of those who went before us and respected their points of view, because maybe the history that they had gave them more information on what would be best for the country. So I say, hear them out and formulate your own opinion, but whatever you do, vote. It's a right that we enjoy in the United States.
Speaker 1:Okay, first of all, this conversation at least for the podcast, is a long time coming. You and I have talked about doing this several times. We've met on the beach, we've talked to each other at your house and I kind of liked your idea. Before I get into kind of a message that you have that you'd like to speak to and it has to do with the upcoming election, I'd like to at least ask you a few questions so that the listeners kind of understand your background, how you got things that you did in your career, things like that. You're raised in South Hempstead, long Island, not to be confused with South Hampton.
Speaker 2:Actually, if I could correct, it's West Hempstead. Oh West Hempstead right, which is more or less the same.
Speaker 1:More or less the same, but not the home of the rich and famous.
Speaker 2:No, we're the aspiring working middle class Okay great, that's how you started.
Speaker 1:You lifeguarded at Jones Beach.
Speaker 2:Yes, jones Beach was a place where lifeguards had a good thing. It was very tough training we have to pass tests and using whale boats and swimming and most of the lifeguards were probably in their late 20s. A lot of them were teachers and people who worked regular jobs and then in the summer they worked at Jones Beach. And I think those are the years you remember because you were carefree. You're on the beach, you're living the lifestyle and I had made some good friends there.
Speaker 1:But now you're a family man with a lovely wife and three very self-sufficient adult boys. I want you to talk a little bit about how you met Ike, your wife, and how do you raise a family to be curious about experience in the world and traveling the world, because I know everybody in your family travels the world.
Speaker 2:Well, first of all I was a long-time bachelor. I waited until my 40s and I was traveling the world. I worked with the Army State Department. I was a counterterrorism, so you know I had a lot of nice female companionship, but I would always move. But at a certain time in your life you realize there's more to life than just being a bachelor and working hard. So I was in Frankfurt, germany, and I was working, actually in a classified job. I was the head of a counterterrorism unit that operated in Europe and the Middle East. So I was head of an interagency group which included intelligence, military, and we would fly into places and advise governments on counterterrorism.
Speaker 2:And Eike, my wife, who's German, was working at the US consulate in Frankfurt and we had our plane there in Frankfurt. So the only one I could inform was the council general, the head of the mission, and I would go in there once or twice a week and go by this very attractive young lady who was sitting outside the consulate's office. Her name was Eike Rautzus and I would find excuses to brief the Counsel General and I was trying to make myself known. She sort of ignored my advances for a while, but I'm very persistent and so we started going out.
Speaker 2:This was a fascinating time because it was 1990, the Berlin Wall had fallen apart, east Germany was opening up. So what we did every day, every time we'd go on a weekend, we'd go to East Germany, we'd go to Czechoslovakia it was known as Czechoslovakia then, so it was a good time. And well, we fell in love and I was going and they wanted me to go to Kiev or Kyiv to open up our mission in Ukraine. And you know, I invited her to come to visit me there. And anyone stupid enough to go to Ukraine was a keeper and smart enough, and that was Ike.
Speaker 1:How did the US government feel about you dating her? Were there any restrictions there, any conflicts of interest?
Speaker 2:Interesting. Yes, because she was a foreign national, which is okay, especially a NATO member, but she had a lot of relatives, east German. So it was just in the cusp at the end of the Cold War, but you still had the suspicions about the East Germans. And when I was about to get married but you still have the suspicions about the East Germans. And when I was about to get married, I was in Ukraine and we were building up our mission there.
Speaker 2:Ukraine was moving towards independence and a real key time was when the President of the United States, bush, sr HW Bush, was going to go to Ukraine to determine what we were going to do and I was his host as Counsel General and I wanted to marry Ike beforehand and they told me it would take six months to marry her before all the clearances. This is the security people. And I said in a cable, in a message I said well, if you want me to meet the President of the United States with my girlfriend at the time, not married you'll just hold up the clearance, but I would advise you to keep clearance. So I have an honest woman next to me when I meet the President of the United States.
Speaker 2:That's a good play, and they relented reluctantly.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So then we're going to get back a little bit to some of the things you did for the United States with Ukraine. But I just want to skip to your boys. Did you raise them out of the United States or in the Virginia area?
Speaker 2:Well, we lived in various places. One was born in well I would say conceived in Ukraine, born in Germany because you didn't want to have a baby in Ukraine at the time in its medical facilities. And another one was born in Virginia. One was born in Florida when I was advisor to the Special Operations Command. So we traveled and as we were young they traveled with us and you know I traveled to Iceland, estonia, ukraine and then Norway, and all three of them went to school as kids in Norway, to a German school actually, and so they were used to that. And then when we came to the States, when they were eight, nine, ten years old, we wanted a stable life because we had moved so much and we owed that to the kids. So I stayed in the States, but we went to a very international public school in Northern Virginia. They had friends from all over the world, so that was part of their DNA.
Speaker 1:And so they got a taste of traveling the world. I think I met one of your boys that I was here for Thanksgiving, and I think the next day he had a one-way ticket to Thailand.
Speaker 2:Yeah, right.
Speaker 1:So my nephew did the same thing. I'm glad the generation gets to do that now.
Speaker 2:When COVID happened, they all had to come back to the States. One was in Argentina, one was in Morocco and one was in Scotland.
Speaker 1:Nice. So let's go back to you. After high school, you served in Vietnam.
Speaker 2:After college.
Speaker 1:After college. How did that come about? You served in Vietnam After college.
Speaker 2:After college. How did that come about? Well, I graduated in 66, and the draft was blown hard and I was going to be drafted. So I decided to enlist. And I enlisted first with the Army Security Agency. Then I went through basic training and I did okay on my physical tests and mental and said do you want to do something really stupid? I said, sure, I'd like to do that. And so how do you like to do some special operations? So that's what I did. I went to OCS Officer Cannae School. I was trained in Vietnamese for almost a year to work with the Vietnamese and went through all the normal things jump school and betting in jungle school in Panama. Went to Vietnam and worked with the mobile advisory team, which is a five-person unit attached to local forces.
Speaker 1:So how did your work in Vietnam shape you for a life of service for the US government, for the rest of your career?
Speaker 2:Well, I think one thing happens. I'm sort of a little against the way oftentimes Vietnam vets are portrayed. Certainly they're either physically or mentally unstable or they're gung-ho, and hundreds and thousands have gone through that experience and they've grown from it and it hasn't affected.
Speaker 2:It affected their life. That, in the sense that they can appreciate some of the things we have and they can also appreciate the concept of service, and I think that I think that's what happens is that Vietnam makes you realize you can handle almost any situation and you can give commands, you can take commands, you can work in dangerous situations and as long as you do your job, you'll come out okay. So I think a lot of people have grown in Vietnam and those who have experienced that sort of good part of it, they don't talk about it very much, yeah.
Speaker 1:You did a recent interview with the SIP magazine and asked about US involvement in the second Iraq war. You said sometimes you have to know when not to get involved. That in itself has to be one of the hardest decisions for a president to make. Second to when to get involved and what are the risks. What can we learn from Russia's aggression in Ukraine and why should we support Ukraine? Yeah, there's a lot of things.
Speaker 2:Yeah, there's a lot to unpack there. Well, firstly, I think it's important to know the situation on the ground. You have to define your mission and the mission has to be clear-cut and defensible, like World War II clearly clear-cut. We were attacked by a foreign force that was trying to conquer the world, so it's an easy call. Vietnam, iraq, afghanistan are a little more gray areas. We weren't directly attacked there, the sitting government was not democratic or clearly on our side, and we're in areas we didn't understand very much. So then you have to look at do you have authorization to do that, both internationally and by the Congress? Have all the stakeholders been discussed in defense and state and NGOs and the people? And what about the people on the ground? You have to listen to what they are saying in Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam and in Vietnam.
Speaker 2:When I started I was very pro-Vietnam War because I was sort of a traditional conservative background and people don't realize that in 1965, 1966, 1967, the vast majority of the American people supported the war in Vietnam. That was what we did. We supported the Korea and World War II and that was the same generation. But the more I found out about the Vietnamese, it was a very murky situation. The leadership there was, you know, not democratic it was. There was a large support for Ho Chi Minh. There was differences between Catholics and Buddhists something a young GI you know, lieutenant, didn't know, but you realize and they didn't want to do their fighting so much. And so, if they're not willing to do the fighting, why should we do that fighting?
Speaker 1:How long did it take you to have that epiphany? Or was it just by death through a thousand cuts?
Speaker 2:That's a good way of saying it. I read a lot. I talked to people I talked to in Vietnam. I talked to the local village chiefs. I talked to everyone and I get a sense. I also had a sense that there was ethnic differences between the Vietnamese and the mountain people and the Vietnamese looked down on the mountain people even though they were anti-communists. They were considered not….
Speaker 1:Was it a different class? A different class?
Speaker 2:and they were not Vietnamese. They spoke different languages and they were a little more primitive, but they were very loyal. So they didn't even get the best equipment. So all these things together make me realize why should American boys be fighting for something that is a little murky Now? That's different than Ukraine. Ukraine, like World War II, it's clear act of aggression, unprovoked by Russia, onto a sovereign country trying to maintain its independence and sovereignty. So there was a clear violation of a very cardinal principle of international law. And they didn't ask us to fight for them, unlike in Vietnam. They said we'll do the fighting, you just give us, help us with the equipment and we'll defend and they're defending our interests when they defend their interests.
Speaker 1:So what interests are they defending of ours by defending their?
Speaker 2:own. Well, they're defending their freedom and independence and they are right on the forefront in Europe. Now Russia has taken over Crimea, donbass, and that's one of the core principles of international affairs is you don't take over your neighbor. If you can do that, what's next? What does China think if Russia can take Ukraine? Take over Taiwan, Take over Taiwan. What are the Baltics? What are Moldova? What about Poland? Why should they stop if they can do that? Putin thinks that Russia is an empire and that that empire had been destroyed in the Cold War and he's going to resurrect it.
Speaker 1:So I think you're very astute at analyzing people that have the opposite opinion of yours. Right, I think you have to be in intelligence. Why do you think so many senators and Congress people believe we shouldn't be defending Ukraine? Is it just the divisiveness of our House and our Senate, or do you think they have a point of view that is just different from yours about that?
Speaker 2:Well, firstly, I believe in civil discussion, civil discussion and we should have this discussion. I think in the post-war period most people have seen Russia through the eyes of Moscow and this has been not only post-war. Since 50, 60, 80 years, almost all the journalists, the senators, the tourists, they've gone to Moscow and Moscow says that we are a great empire, the Russian soul and these other messy little countries, places like Ukraine and Tajikistan and Georgia and Armenia and Estonia, they're part of Russia and even the dissidents say that they're part of Russia and even the dissidents say that. So there was no sense.
Speaker 2:And when I was a young diplomat in Moscow in 79, 81, nobody thought the Soviet Union would break apart. Everyone thought this was one solid mass and that they agreed with it. But the more you knew and I travel a lot in the Soviet Union as a young diplomat and you talk to people on the ground, not the leaders they are following Moscow's line but the cab drivers, the local workers. They felt they were Armenian and not Soviet or Russian. They felt they were Estonian, they felt they were Muslim, so they didn't identify with the center.
Speaker 1:Do you think they were fearful of talking to you about a position that's not the same as Moscow's position?
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's where you have to sort of sneak around and avoid the KGB tales, and that's what we did a lot. So there was a sense and I think a lot of Americans who followed that had a Moscow-centric point of view not realizing that there are all these nationalities.
Speaker 2:And also we have a sense that and this has changed a bit that union was good. We fought as a union against, you know, in our own revolutionary war and we were United States. So we had a sense, well, all these small little countries, that's the devil we don United States. So we had a sense, all these small little countries, that's the devil, we don't know. We knew Russia and we could deal with them. So it was very difficult for us to accept that you're going to have 15 different countries there. And if you accept that and accept their right to be sovereign countries, you accept their right to protect themselves and make their own decisions.
Speaker 2:Like a lot of the argument is well, we pushed russia because we expanded nato. One, we didn't expand nato and they weren't. Ukraine was not going to go in. Two, it's not up to moscow, it's not up to washington, to Washington or Brussels to determine what people want. If the Poles want to be part of NATO because they've been attacked for generations by Russia and Germany, that's their right. It's not Moscow to decide or Washington to decide. So if they have that right, then they have the right to seek alliances too. And to me the fact that Ukraine has done as well lately as it has in the wars because they believe in what they're fighting for, unlike in Afghanistan and Iraq or Vietnam, where there were so many different factions and there was no common sense that we've got to do certain things. In Ukraine they want to fight and they want to keep their freedom sense that we've got to do certain things In Ukraine.
Speaker 1:They want to fight and they want to keep their freedom. Do you think there's an end game, or do you think this just goes prolonged until another set of power, a power vacuum, happens in that part?
Speaker 2:of the world.
Speaker 2:Yeah, well, that's what Petraeus General Petraeus, who was our commander in Iraq, said to the president Tell me how it ends. As a military guy In Ukraine. It shouldn't be for us to determine how it ends. It's for them, and if they believe that they need to have the united Ukraine with all their territory and they're willing to fight for it, we should help them.
Speaker 2:Now I don't think that. I don't know the exact end game. I know that the end game is not Russia taking over, because I think there's so many unintended negative consequences to Europe, to our own defense. We'll have to be spending more on military. What happened to China, what they do, what Iraq and what Iran does. It will be a bad signal to the world if, on this most basic European continent, that we cannot defend Ukraine. I see that if we are steadfast we being NATO and democratic countries in support of Ukraine, they will ultimate triumph. Now it may be they agree to a demilitarized Crimea or a long-term neutral part. Those things are beyond us right now, but it's not for us to tell the Ukrainians.
Speaker 1:So their triumph might be in what they believe the end is Right, a fair ending. This might be a long-winded question. You might have a sip of your beer while I'm asking. Let's finish it up.
Speaker 1:I think you and I might agree that actions around the world impact the United States in some degree, depending on what those actions are International alliances, oil and energy production, food sourcing, pandemic oversight, stewards of the environment, stewards of human rights and election world leaders that influence all the above. Am I missing anything else in here that would be an action that would affect us, certainly wars. It leads me to the business of managing and running. The United States has a significant effect on the world stage. In five months, us citizens get to elect or reelect the influencer in charge. Some would say the president should have the most informed viewpoint of the world stage, domestically and internationally, the power to influence and declare war if necessary to protect US interests. It leads me to this next question of why do you feel so passionate about sharing your thoughts and feelings about who should or shouldn't be the leader of the free world for the next four years?
Speaker 2:Okay, where do you start? I think we all should. We are stewards of our future and if you believe strongly I believe strongly in the United States of America that we play a special role and I believe we have certain ideals to uphold and I think we've done a decent job certainly we've done that in post-war war Europe and those beliefs and liberal democracy, rule of law, accountability, decency, civility are things we should defend and I think that if you are an engaged person, you do the little things you can, even though you realize you're just one person. So my view is and I think I know where we're going with this is that Donald Trump is a danger to the United States, and I say that as somebody who's voted Republican oftentimes.
Speaker 1:As I have.
Speaker 2:I've been a young Republican in college, come from a conservative family and very proudly served 11 administrations since Linda. I was an officer in the Army under Linda Johnson. That's 11 administrations and I an officer in the Army under Lyndon Johnson. That's 11 administrations and I've never had a difficulty serving. And for example, let's take 12, 14, 16 years ago, when you had Obama versus McCain, obama versus Romney I would have happily and loyally served any of those people, even though I didn't agree with all the policies of any of them, because I thought they were decent human beings who believed in this country. And I don't think Donald Trump is that person. I think he is transactional. I think he doesn't understand what patriotism is. I mean, daddy got him out of the draft. Everyone who's worked closely with him his closest conservative advisors, secretary of Defense, state National Security Advisors all have quit or left office. He's had more turnover in his cabinet than any person in American history.
Speaker 1:So let me talk to that while you're on that subject, I think there are two ways to evaluate a leader. One is did they do what they say they were going to do and certainly there are always forces against them, right? And the other is what are people that have worked for them? How did they feel about them? And would they follow him into war again? As I say, so as I know it today, 11 senior people that have worked for him have been sentenced to jail, right. So Bannon, navarro, cohn, manafort, papadopoulos, stone, gates, weisselberg, broidy, underswan, pinedo and Flynn. After the insurrection of January 6th, 1,000 people were charged, 500 pleaded guilty, 78 were found guilty at trial. They're still working on some people. There were 18 people that he hired, that he either fired or quit national security advisors, chief of staff, so all these things kind of underscore what you're saying. And then he had those 18 he fired, 36 quit.
Speaker 1:And these are loyal Republicans, so they're not some liberal Democrat that he's getting rid of Right and some he hired in the first week, where these are the greatest people, but it all comes down to there's something in common with every single person that he's fired or quit and that when they didn't agree on a certain subject matter or they wouldn't follow him on a policy that he thought was detrimental to the United States, he became an enemy because he wasn't loyal anymore. So I agree. So this is something when you're looking for good leadership. In everything I've read about any president or any leader, I don't think I've seen this amount of people that have either are serving time in federal prison or that have been fired or quit. So there's a common theme here, and so my question is you and I see it, we read it why does he maintain his popularity with all of these facts that we're talking about?
Speaker 2:Good question and the Democrats are asking that question themselves. I think there is a certain amount of tribalism that you are if you have this messianic leader who tells you this is simple, I'm going to solve everything. Just believe in me. We've had that through history. I'm just reading or watching a thing about the Nuremberg trials and the lead up to the trials and how a smart you know intelligent people with a lot of entrepreneurship have followed this guy, hitler, because they believe that one, he would leave this to destiny easily. Two fear of the other he would leave this to destiny easily. Two fear of the other.
Speaker 2:And when you have a fear of the other, whether it was Jews in Nazi Germany or immigrants to this country, you appeal to the dark side of human nature. And we all have a little bit of the dark side and the good presidents appeal to the bright side, like Lincoln and the better angels. The bad ones are appealing to the dark side and it's us versus them and making fun of people and it makes you then part of a tribe to do that. Whatever the leader says, you follow and there's a little bit of that psychology and I'm not a believer and I think it's wrong for the Democrats to have said these are a basket of deplorables or that they are all racist. You have to treat people individually and the Democrats have to go out and talk to people as smart voters and not to say they're deplorable. The ideas that Donald Trump talks are not conservative principles, conservative values or principle liberal values. They are the values of a transactional narcissist and a con man with no loyalty to his own people, and you cannot vote for somebody like that.
Speaker 1:Since he was convicted of 34 counts. His base, I think, is stronger than ever. Now this is alleged the Trump campaign raised $141 million days after his conviction. I'm not sure how verifiable that is, because it's coming from their camp, but it's safe to say that his conviction didn't scare away his ardent supporters. That being said, in this conversation we're having, who do we hope to sway with this podcast, or are we just weighing in ourselves?
Speaker 2:Yeah, well, we, probably we are weighing in ourselves. But if you look at the polls and again, polling is just a little snapshot the numbers have not gone up for Trump. Of the true believers, they say, well, this is just a bad guy's idea to get me, it proves that it's a witch hunt. But the numbers went down one or two percentage points after that and it's that 4% to 10% in the middle, many former Republicans, independents, youth, who will not vote that you want to talk to and you want to talk to them as intelligent people and talk about Donald Trump as he really is. Talk about Donald Trump as he really is, and my view is that he a lot of people will say, well, I don't know, he's not the best guy in the world, he fools around.
Speaker 1:I've heard that so much.
Speaker 2:But he's a tough guy.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:He gets things done.
Speaker 1:You think?
Speaker 2:he's a tough guy. I think he's a coward, I think he's weak and you have to go to his masculinity. That's something we stay away from. You have to go to his masculinity. That's something we stay away from. But I've said this I think a real man is loyal to the people around him. If you've ever been in basic training or military training or you've been on a sports team, you take care of your buddies. And what did he do with his buddies?
Speaker 1:The minute they disagree, he's up there yeah, and not only the way he fired them too. He did it with a tweet, yeah, and in many cases, they might have known it was coming. Other times they're reading it on twitter and he's not calling him into his office and say look, we don't agree with these, which?
Speaker 2:is a cowardly way of doing these things. Another thing is what I think you know. I think there are certain traits. Individuals of male and female have many traits and you can't define it, but I would think a real man takes care of those who cannot take care of themselves and I bring up, like the Beatitudes they don't talk about. Blessed are the tough guys, the bullies, the war makers. It's blessed are the poor and the meek and the peacemakers. Now, that doesn't mean you have to follow the poor, the meek, the peacemakers, but it does mean that if you're a real man, you take care of those who are least able to take care of themselves in society and you don't call them vermin, you don't make fun of people. That's a cowardly, unmanly act and that's how I think we should portray him, and portray him to those followers who think he's a tough guy.
Speaker 1:The wokeness, the overcorrection to real problems that we've had have made it easy for him to point his finger at that overcorrection and say he's going to do all these bring us back to the way things used to be. And I think his soundbite, I think he appeals to a lot of people that are either fed up with the direction. You know, the pendulum has swung probably farther than it should have and he's pointing that out to everybody and his, his position is he is going to be the savior of that and while some points are valid, I don't think he's. I don't think he could fulfill any promise because I don't think he has the wherewithal to create alliances. I think great leaders can create alliances and that's how they build their strength. I I don't think that's his thing.
Speaker 2:And I think that there's always a longing for a past that probably wasn't there any, but there is this Camelot idea that there was this. That's well said, and I think that Trump appeals to people who think they're going to find this past. He, however, the next administration, if he's reelected, he's not going to have the guardrail of all these people who said you can't leave NATO, you can't bomb Mexican cartels which you wanted to do, you can't bomb Iran. They're consequented. Those people are all gone, everybody who said those things he has denounced.
Speaker 2:He's going to have a bunch of sycophants and lackeys around him and all these things that he wants to do. It's all transactional for him. You know, when he seeks to go with Saudi Arabia, how many planes can I sell you? None of those sounds pretty good. You make Boeing and Lockheed made some money out of it, but those planes are bombing Yemen and that's creating all these other unintended consequences and hatred of the United States. You have to think through these things. It's not talking to the North Korean leader about having hotels on the beach. That's what he's talking about. He has no sense of what American interests are and no sense about what the long-term prospects. He just looks at it for himself, for his family.
Speaker 1:Certainly, your service to the United States suggests that you have served the United States in a lot of different countries three presidents right, Both Bushes and Clinton, if I remember correctly and so I think you've got some credibility to speak to the cause and effect of leadership and how the effect that it has worldwide. Any last words for the listeners on something to think about for them.
Speaker 2:Well, I think we should vote, and I think we should vote based on what the better angels of our soul are the good America, the America that is the rule of law, that we take care of our neighbors, that we have alliances, that we work with other people and that we don't look at that this country is us versus them. We're all Americans and that we can do that.
Speaker 2:And even though we may disagree with, let's say, biden. I think he's too old, honestly, but you're going to have these discussions. We can discuss what's the best immigration reform, what do we do about crime. We can discuss all these issues, but I worry, if you're in a tribal sense, that you hate the other. We're not going to have that chance. That's why everyone should vote.
Speaker 1:Okay, well, thanks for your time.
Speaker 2:Thank you very much.
Speaker 1:I hope this reaches somebody's ears that hasn't decided yet.
Speaker 2:Good Well, thank you for giving a free platform. Sure, there's life after retirement.
Speaker 1:Yeah, there, sure is For both of us, thank you.