Endless Wars and Interventionism

The Big Picture

The conversations gathered here look at America's post-9/11 wars from the ground, the ledger and the lecture hall. Green Beret and CIA veteran Evan Hafer describes watching the Iraq War's leaders make decisions that he and his teammates believed would create an insurgency. He points to de-Baathification, announced by Donald Rumsfeld on CNN, which fired the Iraqi army and everyone in the Baath Party [1]. Libertarian comic Dave Smith adds up the costs of the last 25 years as he sees them: four to five million dead civilians, $8 trillion spent and tens of thousands of veterans lost to suicide. He argues the burden of proof belongs to those who claim things would otherwise have been worse [2].

Two historians and an economist add complexity. Stanford historian Robert Crews argues the Afghan war was a mistake, but he warns against celebrating America's defeat as an anti-colonial victory [5]. Yale historian Abbas Amanat suggests that American withdrawal from the region after Iraq and Afghanistan is making room for a new bloc that could include China, Russia, Iran and possibly Turkey [6]. Economist Chris Blattman offers a framework for why wars break out and persist. His examples include unchecked leaders who tolerate violence for political gain and commitment problems, in which a rising power cannot credibly promise not to use its future strength [4].

Where the Experts Agree

• Decision-makers often lacked wisdom or accountability. Hafer argues that Paul Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were intelligent but not wise. He says they lacked experience of war or the Middle East, relied on exiles like Ahmed Chalabi and cherry-picked intelligence [1]. Crews quotes a former Afghan American student who told him, "You never asked us if you wanted to come." She added that the US decided when it came and when it left on its own terms [5]. Blattman identifies an unchecked leader tolerating violence for political gain as a reason war persists, citing President Museveni [4].
• The human costs are profound and lasting. Hafer lost his two closest friends in Iraq, one to an Iranian-made explosively formed penetrator [1]. Smith cites tens of thousands of veterans lost to suicide [2]. Crews reports an epidemic of suicide among Afghans who feel betrayed [5].
• Rhetoric and narrative can drive conflict. Hafer says Colin Powell's UN presentation was used to sell the Iraq war [1]. Amanat warns that regimes are always victims of their own rhetoric, feeling pressure to act on what they keep saying [6]. In a discussion of Israel's position, he and host Lex Fridman agree that the existential rhetoric on both sides is extremely dangerous [6]. Fridman adds that Hitler came to believe his own propaganda about American weakness [4].
• Ground-level knowledge was overridden. Hafer says every soldier in the room believed Muqtada al-Sadr was dangerous and would become an instrument of Iran. A CIA case officer insisted al-Sadr could be an asset, and Hafer says many Americans later died trying to deal with him [1].

Where They Differ

• What happens if America steps back? Joe Rogan put the "Mike Baker" question to Smith: what if China or Russia fill the gap? Smith says war hawks almost always rely on an unfalsifiable counterfactual. He notes that Russia and China face wealthy rivals of their own, from Western Europe to Japan and South Korea [2]. Amanat, by contrast, observes that US withdrawal is already making room for a rival bloc [6]. He is most surprised by Iran becoming subservient to Russia, which Iran has seen as its greatest strategic threat since the early 19th century [6].
• Was anything of value built? Smith emphasizes destroyed nations and trillions spent [2]. Crews acknowledges that over 20 years a generation of Afghans built a public sphere of arts, universities, media and pluralism, including a young civic nationalism [5]. He wishes the US had funded 20 more institutions like the American University of Afghanistan [5]. He also notes the US backed fraudulent elections, which taught young Afghans both to believe in democracy and to see its farce [5].
• How to judge leaving. Crews calls himself a critic of empire. Even so, he argues that the power to simply walk away from a place you remade is itself a feature of empire, and he compares it to Britain's 1947 withdrawal from the subcontinent [5]. Smith frames ending wars as moral progress. He says future generations will look back on war the way we look at slavery and witch hunts [3].
• Is military strength part of peace? Blattman describes the tragedy of deterrence: peace often requires both sides to arm expensively [4]. He sees institutions that make promises enforceable, such as constitutions, as the solution to commitment problems [4]. Smith, by contrast, focuses on the costs of intervention [2].
• Current conflicts. Smith says young left-wing activists spent a year protesting what they see as a genocide in Gaza, which the US funds and arms [3]. He cites an American doctor who told reporter Dave DeCamp he treated toddlers with gunshot wounds to the head daily [3]. He also warns that major donors like Miriam Adelson are singularly focused on unconditional support for Israel [3]. Amanat respects Israel's wish for security. He makes a moral case that a people with such a history of suffering should give justice to their neighbors, and a practical case that the problem won't simply go away [6].

Practical Takeaways

• Ask who carries the burden of proof. Smith suggests weighing claims that things would have been worse against the actual record of costs [2].
• Listen to people with field experience. Hafer's team saw al-Sadr as dangerous and expected de-Baathification to create an insurgency [1].
• Scrutinize the intelligence used to sell a war. Hafer points to cherry-picked intelligence, reliance on exiles and Powell's UN presentation [1].
• Watch for leaders' private incentives. Blattman's framework counts unchecked leaders and a sense of a closing window among the forces that break peace down [4].
• Consider the people affected before entering and exiting. Crews highlights the Afghan complaint, "You never asked us if you wanted to come" [5].
• Take rhetoric seriously. Amanat warns that regimes feel pressure to act on what they keep saying [6].
• Read further on Ukraine. Smith recommends Scott Horton's Provoked, which covers a reported early peace deal that was scuttled and NATO's refusal to rule out Ukrainian membership [2][3].
• Support veteran healing. Rogan's central request to the new administration is psychedelic therapy for veterans, and he notes that RFK Jr. is interested [3].

Sources

1. Evan Hafer on Iraq, Afghanistan, Veteran Healing, Government Accountability and Bowhunting · The Joe Rogan Experience
2. 2299 - Dave Smith · The Joe Rogan Experience
3. Dave Smith on Trump's 2024 Win, the Collapse of Media Trust, and Ending Endless Wars · The Joe Rogan Experience
4. Chris Blattman on Why We Fight: The Five Roots of War and the Paths to Peace · Lex Fridman Podcast
5. Robert Crews on Afghanistan, the Taliban, Bin Laden and America's Longest War · Lex Fridman Podcast
6. Abbas Amanat on Iran's Protests, Its Modern History, the CIA and the Nuclear Question · Lex Fridman Podcast

See all 7 summaries about endless wars and interventionism →