E70: EMERGENCY POD! Russia invades Ukraine: Reactions, Putin's ambition, Biden's response and more

**Jason Calacanis** (0:19)
Alright everybody, welcome to another episode of the All In Podcast episode number 70 We made it to 70 episodes, which is just shocking to me. And we're recording a little bit earlier because one of our besties had to change their schedule, Chamath.
And it's a crazy day to be doing this. Last night, Putin decided to invade the Ukraine late Wednesday night, early into Thursday morning. Putin started a special military operation, in quotes, to demilitarize the Ukraine. And we've been watching this build up for weeks.

**Chamath Palihapitiya** (1:00)
You're missing it. He said to demilitarize and denazify.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:03)
And denazify, yes, of course, because the Ukraine was filled with so many Nazis. His trolling continues, I guess, just starting it off.
Sacks, you're a big Putin fan, along with Tronch and your right wing. So tell us how glorious is this invasion for the Republican Party?

**David Sacks** (1:28)
Well, it's funny, but it's also kind of sad because what you're doing right there is exactly what the whole Twittersphere is doing, which is anybody who wants to actually de-escalate and diffuse this war before it escalates and metastasizes and something much worse gets denounced as a Putin apologist.
I have no dealings in either Russia or Ukraine, for that matter. Ukrainian cash is not lining my pockets like many of our politicians and their families in Washington. I have no interest except preserving the safety of the United States of America. And the point is that I think Biden, the one clear elusive point that he made in his last speech, I know he's giving one today, is that the United States of America would not intervene militarily in Ukraine. We should all understand that. He made it very clear.
The troops that were being sent over there were to defend our NATO allies. Ukraine is not one. We do not have a treaty obligation to defend them. What is happening right now is tragic. Putin is the aggressor. It's a humanitarian disaster. I do feel bad for the people of Ukraine. Our thoughts and prayers are with them. However, we are not going to intervene militarily in that conflict, nor should we, because we cannot risk starting World War III. It is not a vital American interest.
Who rules the Donbass in a way that it is a vital American interest to avoid a war with Russia? The tragedy here, the second tragedy, is that we did not do everything we could to diplomatically try and solve this problem. What do I mean by that? On this pod three weeks ago, I said that Ukraine was never going to be part of NATO. Why? Because Biden just said it. We can't defend them militarily against Russia. We were never going to admit them. Why didn't we give up that card?
We don't know for sure what would have happened, but if we had been willing to basically affirm that we believe in Ukraine's sovereignty, but they are not going to be part of NATO, that might have diffused this conflict.

**Jason Calacanis** (3:23)
I think we had consensus on that. We said like, hey, what if I think actually I suggested, what if we set a five-year moratorium on them joining or something like that?

**David Sacks** (3:30)
Absolutely.

**Jason Calacanis** (3:30)
We put that out there.

**David Friedberg** (3:31)
Can I just ask Sacks one question on this?

**Jason Calacanis** (3:33)
Okay, yeah.

**David Friedberg** (3:34)
Sacks, do you not think that the US, you know, regardless of the obligations under NATO, faces a little bit of an issue on a global stage where, you know, we told this leader back down, don't do this, and then we don't respond militarily, that that action effectively reduces America's influence and credibility when it comes to these sorts of defensive statements in this kind of global theater.
And our primacy is being challenged because we laid down the law. We said this is not allowed. You cannot do this. There's going to be repercussions.
And then it happened and there are economic sanctions. And maybe we'll talk in a second about some other potential repercussions. But by not doing something militarily, we weaken ourselves and we weaken our position. And it gives permission to others to take action that may be counter ultimately to kind of the US interests abroad.

**David Sacks** (4:30)
Okay. So in response, I have to quote what Barack Obama said.
And we've mentioned this on a previous pod. He said, the fact is that Ukraine, which is, and this is back in the Atlantic interview he gave, the fact is that Ukraine, which is a non-NATO countries, can be vulnerable to military domination by Russia, no matter what we do. This is an example where we have to be very clear about what our core interests are and what we are willing to go to war for. The fact of the matter is none of us on this pod want to send our sons and daughters to go fight and risk their lives and die to determine who rules the Donbass or even Ukraine. We sympathize with them. We may impose sanctions on their behalf. We may arm them militarily, but we are not willing to fight. And so, therefore, us trying to lay down this law to Putin was a bluff. And he called our bluff.