US Entry into World War One Was the Greatest Foreign Policy Blunder in its History

If the US had remained neutral during World War One, there would have been no punitive Treaty of Versailles and Nazi Germany, the USSR, Communist China and North Korea never would have existed.

The “Big Four” (from left to right British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, Italian Prime Minister Vittorio Orlando, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau and President Woodrow Wilson) Meeting Together to negotiate the punitive Treaty of Versailles in 1919. This treaty ushered in a new era of totalitarianism, turmoil, war and genocide with terrible and potentially existential ramifications that continue to this day as Communism continues to enslave over one-fifth of the world’s people.

Last week marked the 108th anniversary of the US declaration of war on Imperial Germany. The First World War was supposed to be the war to end all wars. Instead, US entry into the war on the side of the Allies led to the punitive Treaty of Versailles which gave birth to Nazism in Germany, ensured the victory of Communism in Russia, and led to a Second World War that cost the lives of nearly four times more people than died in the previous world war, including five to six million Jews. At the time the Treaty was signed in June 1919, British Prime Minister Lloyd George despaired that it would lead to a future war worse than the last within twenty-five years due to its harshness and injustices towards the defeated Germans. They had surrendered to the Allies on the basis of President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, but the final Treaty excluded seven of them, including most notably the five most favorable to Germany.

The many injustices of the Treaty of Versailles are far too numerous to list here but I have covered the main ones in a previous article. The treaty led to the loss of eighty-six percent of Germany’s territory, including her overseas colonies, annexed by no less than eight different countries, It mandated the artificial creation of the Polish Corridor which split Germany in two while depriving Germany of a self-defense force capable of defending it from even comparatively insignificant nations like Belgium. French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau sought to partition Germany and deprive it of twenty-five percent of its European territory but British Prime Minister David Lloyd-George threatened to resign from the conference if he continued to insist on doing so, which led to the Germans losing just thirteen percent of its European territory.

The treaty also mandated Germany accept crushing reparations of 132 billion Reichsmarks which it could never hope to repay. France used Germany’s inability to pay reparations to invade the Ruhr industrial region causing Germany’s currency to collapse into hyperinflation four years later. Without the imposition of these harsh terms, it would not have been possible for Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler to obtain anywhere near the popular support he needed in order for him to be appointed as Chancellor of Germany. Indeed, had the treaty been fair to Germany, it is very likely he would never have entered politics at all and would have died as an unknown to history.

Had it not been for US entry into World War One, a negotiated compromise peace would have ensued by the end of 1917. Germany would not have been racked with Jewish-led Bolshevik revolutions helping to knock it out of the war in actual history November 1918. The National Socialist German Workers’ (Nazi) Party would never have been formed and Adolf Hitler would never have become an anti-Semite, remaining an unknown to history, perhaps never getting involved in politics at all.

As late as January 1917, President Woodrow Wilson had called for “a peace without victors” and that is exactly what Europe so desperately needed to ensure against the outbreak of a Second World War. However, that same month, German Emperor Kaiser Wilhelm II met with his top military commanders. He was told that if Germany were to engage in unrestricted submarine warfare, America would likely declare war on Germany, but they could likely starve Britain within six months before the Americans could send large numbers of troops to the Western Front to help the Allies break the deadlock. The Kaiser decided to take a risky gamble on the future of the Reich by approving their plan to do so. If, instead of foolishly declaring “unrestricted submarine warfare,” the Kaiser had stuck with Germany’s previous declared “armed merchantmen” policy, Germany could have used that justification to sink any British merchant ship on the basis that it believed them to be armed and the US would never have entered the war.

Meanwhile, German Foreign Minister Arthur Zimmerman doubled down on the Kaiser’s fateful decision with an offer of German support for Mexico to reclaim some of its lost territory if the U.S. declared war on Germany, a proposal Mexico promptly rejected. Ultimately, it was Zimmerman’s March 29, 1914 revelation that the Zimmerman Telegram, was genuine that led President Woodrow Wilson to ask for a special joint session of the United States Congress for a declaration of war on April 2, 1917 giving a speech to a Joint Session of Congress calling for a war “to make the world safe for democracy” leading Congress to declare war on April 6^th. There was no compelling national security rationale for the US to overreact to the issuance of a mere letter by a German Cabinet official by plunging the US into a world war with a nation with which the US had enjoyed good relations throughout its entire history right up until January 2017 unlike its relations with Britain which was America’s oldest enemy that had fought to wars against it and burned our capital in 1812. Instead of making the world safe for democracy as Wilson had promised, US entry into the war made the world safe for Nazi and Communist tyranny and genocide, causing US citizens to rightly come to accept US involvement in the war as a tragic mistake.

Fifty members of the US House of Representatives voted against declaring war on Imperial Germany including House Majority Leader Claude Kitchin (D-NC) who noted in his comments above that the justification for the US declaring war was extraordinarily weak by historical standards.

“War upon the part of a nation is sometime necessary and imperative. But here no invasion was threatened. Not a foot of our territory is demanded or coveted. No essential honor is required to be sacrificed. No fundamental right is asked to be permanently yielded or suspended. No national policy is contested. No part of our sovereignty is questioned.”

If the Kaiser had responded by immediately firing Zimmerman for sending the telegram or even had he condemned the Zimmerman Telegram as an unauthorized rogue action by his Foreign Secretary and declared that Germany desired peace not war with the US and would never take any action to threaten it, then the US would have remained neutral. Tragically, repeated requests by the German government including the Kaiser himself beginning in August 1916 asking President Woodrow Wilson to mediate a peace conference ending the war in return for a full German withdrawal from Belgium and most of northern France had caused Wilson to plan to schedule a peace conference to be attended by all the warring powers in February 1917 but when he was notified of the German decision to begin unrestricted submarine warfare, he reacted with rage, severing diplomatic relations with Germany and expelling the German Ambassador with the US Congress declaring war on Germany a couple months later. Wilson had the potential to become one of the greatest US peace presidents of all time had he mediated a peace conference to end the war in late 2016 or early 2017. However, due to his epic mistake in bungling the US into war against a country that did not threaten us and never wanted war with us with tragic implications that still threaten us today, he must always be considered one of the worst. To underscore his desire for peace and pre-empt a US declaration of war, the Kaiser could have gone public with Germany’s eminently reasonable peace proposal to pressure President Wilson to restore US relations with Germany and mediate a peace agreement in exchange for an end to Germany’s unrestricted submarine warfare.

It was the US declaration of war on Germany on April 6, 1917, which caused the Kaiser to reluctantly authorize sending Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin to Russia three days later with 30 million Deutsche marks to overthrow the Russian government forcing it to accept peace with Germany in a last ditch effort to enable Germany to win the war. Had the U.S. remained neutral, the Kaiser would never have authorized doing so. Thus, in a very real sense, it was Wilson’s decision to seek a congressional declaration of war on Germany that led to the takeover of Russia by the Bolsheviks and the subsequent spread of Communism to control one-third of the world’s territory and people scarcely more than three decades later.

Many authors have speculated that it was the U.S. entry into World War One on April 6, 1917, that served to prevent a negotiated peace which would likely have been a far more just and lasting than was the Treaty of Versailles. In an essay entitled, “The Failure of Peace by Negotiation in 1917” published in The Historical Journal in 1991, David Stevenson concluded, “When the Americans declared war on Germany, Britain had the wherewithal to finance only three weeks' further purchases in the USA. Without American entry, economic paralysis, coupled with the February revolution, would probably have driven the allies into, at best, an unfavorable compromise.” France had also exhausted its ability to pay for U.S. goods by April 1917.

But what if the Kaiser had followed the advice of German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg not to implement unrestricted submarine warfare and the U.S. had remained neutral during World War One creating the conditions for the signing of an armistice in the fall of 1917 followed by a negotiated compromise peace treaty that was acceptable to all the great powers to ensure the future peace in Europe? Had the Germans not provoked the U.S. to war with its unrestricted submarine warfare campaign and especially by the German Foreign Minister admitting his infamous Zimmermann Telegram was genuine, Germany’s appeal to President Woodrow Wilson to mediate a negotiated peace settlement which was fair to both sides and largely restored the status quo ante bellum as early as February 1917 might well have succeeded. Even if it hadn’t, the Allies would have been forced to make peace with Germany by summer 1917 because without US loans they would have run out of money to buy U.S. arms and supplies which they needed to continue the war.

Kaiser Wilhelm II—a man of peace who desperately sought to avert the outbreak of the First World War but made the mistake of giving a blank check to Austria-Hungary to punish Serbia for assassinating Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austrian throne, causing a series of events that spiraled outside of his control. Were it not for the fateful decision of the Chief of the General Staff, Colonel General Helmuth von Moltke the Younger to refuse to obey the orders of Kaiser Wilhelm II not to invade Belgium and France in August 1914 and to instead turn his armies east to invade Russia instead, the UK would not have declared war on Germany and Germany likely would have won the First World War outright.

The French Army mutinied in May-June 1917 following the failure of the Neville Offensive causing them to refuse to engage in any more offensives for the rest of the year. Meanwhile a British offensive at Ypres in Flanders beginning in June resulted in 325,000 Allied casualties, with Allied armies advancing only five miles. Thus, the optimal time for both sides to have agreed to an armistice, when all of the great powers were exhausted, would have likely been around mid-September 1917 by which time it seemed that the war had reached an increasingly costly and protracted stalemate. That same month, the Kaiser authorized a peace offer to be sent to Great Britain offering a full-German military withdrawal in the West and a restoration of Belgian independence, which British Prime Minister David Lloyd George reportedly wanted to accept much as his predecessor had wanted to accept a similar German peace offer a year earlier. However, he too was overruled by his War Cabinet as they believed Britain could obtain better terms from Germany once millions of U.S. reinforcements arrived on the Western Front. Without hope of U.S. military intervention, the German offer might well have been accepted with certain modifications to satisfy Britain’s French and Italian allies.

Without US military intervention, an armistice ending the war likely would have been concluded by summer 1917. But rather than the armistice calling for the Allied occupation of the Rhineland and bridgeheads on the left bank of the Rhine as was the case in actual history, Germany’s armies would have withdrawn from Belgium and most of northern France but continued to occupy Luxembourg, northeastern France and Alsace-Lorraine until a final peace treaty was signed. This would have enabled Germany to negotiate from a position of equal strength with the Allies, particularly in view of the imminent surrender of Russia. In addition to withdrawing from Belgium and most of northern France, Germany could have offered to end submarine warfare against the Allies and return all U-boats to their bases in return for the partial lifting of the British-led starvation blockade allowing neutral powers including American ships to sell foodstuffs to the Central Powers to immediately relieve the starvation of hundreds of thousands of their citizens. The warring parties would agree that the final peace treaty would be signed by Christmas 1917 permitting the withdrawal of troops from occupied territories to their new national boundary lines along with their demobilization.

Terms of the Compromise Peace Agreement

The specific terms of the final peace settlement, many of which are based on peace offers that were exchanged in actual history and which incorporate elements of all of Wilson’s Fourteen Points, but the one relating to the withdrawal of all German troops from Russia and the one relating to the reduction of national armaments of all of the warring powers, might have included the following provisions:

All Central Powers troops would be withdrawn from France, Belgium, Serbia, Poland, Romania and Greece excluding territorial adjustments. Germany would fully restore and guarantee Belgian independence and ensure that all French industrial areas and mines remain intact doing no damage to Belgian or French property during its troop withdrawal in return for the restoration of Belgian neutrality and Allied agreement not to deploy their troops on Belgian soil.

Germany would return all of Alsace-Lorraine except for the Luxembourgish speaking region of Thionville (about 7-10% of Alsace-Lorraine including most of its iron-ore resources) which would be annexed by Luxembourg. In addition, Luxembourg might re-annex the southernmost two percent of Belgian territory (235 square miles) that borders the French province of Meurthe-et-Moselle as well as part of the Briey-Longwy iron-ore basin which consists of only 150 square miles of territory. Germany would then recognize its new border with France as permanent in exchange for the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (with the Grand Duke remaining as its head of state) joining the German Confederation. The rest of Alsace-Lorraine would become a self-governing French autonomous region.

SMS Bayern, one of the most advanced super-dreadnaught battleships of its time, was scuttled at Scapa Flow along with the rest of the German dreadnaught fleet to escape capture by the British after the war.

In exchange for the return of over ninety percent of Alsace-Lorraine, France would transfer control of French Indochina and French Morocco to Germany. All German colonies, excepting those occupied by the Japanese Empire, would be returned to Germany along with all captured German merchant vessels.

Germany would offer to scrap or transfer to other countries twenty-five of its surviving forty-five surviving battleships including all twenty-one of its pre-dreadnaught battleships and four of its twenty-four dreadnaught battleships representing a reduction of 55% in their total number of battleships with two of its retired battlecruisers eligible for conversion to aircraft carriers. Germany would also sign a naval disarmament treaty with Britain permanently limiting its capital ship tonnage to no more than 50% of the Royal Navy and reducing the size of its U-boat fleet by nearly two-thirds.

Austria-Hungary would cede Trentino and Trieste to Italy, whose control of the Dodecanese Islands would be internationally recognized just as in actual history, while maintaining control of most of the Istrian peninsula including the ports of Pula and Fiume. Albania would become an Italian client state (rather than a protectorate). Austria would have to adopt the trialist proposal and replace the Dual Monarchy with a Triple Monarchy of Austria-Hungary-Croatia giving the Slavs their own kingdom within the empire.

Poland would annex the Austrian province of West Galicia with its eastern borders along the same Curzon Line outlined in the actual history Treaty of Versailles, including Chelm but not Lemberg, and would be guaranteed access to the sea though an international railway between Warsaw and Danzig with its independence guaranteed by all signatories to the treaty.

The Ottoman Empire would have to withdraw its troops from and grant independence to Palestine, Transjordan, the Hejaz (western Arabia) and Hasa (south of modern-day Iraq) while granting greater autonomy to the Arabs of modern-day Syria, Lebanon and Iraq and guaranteeing the safety of Armenian Christians, allowing their safe relocation to Armenia. Serbia would be given access to the sea through a union with Montenegro.

An internationally-supervised plebiscite would be held in Vardar Macedonia (which was 81% Bulgarian) to determine whether its inhabitants wish to remain part of Serbia or unite with Bulgaria. Southern Dobruja (which was 47% ethnic Bulgarian and only 2% Romanian) would be returned by Romania to Bulgaria while Romania would annex the Russian province of Bessarabia as compensation for this loss.

All of the great powers would join together in supporting the establishment of the League of Nations. Friendly trade relations between the warring powers would immediately be resumed in order to ensure a more rapid economic recovery for the war-torn nations of Europe. The great power blocs which contributed to the outbreak of the war would be dissolved and banned by treaty.

A five-power Concert of Europe consisting of Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary-Croatia would be re-organized to negotiate all future international disputes through peaceful diplomatic means. No reparations would be owed or paid by any nation to any other. The British starvation blockade against the Central Powers would be lifted immediately after the treaty was signed.

Germany would agree not to annex any territory from Russia. Following the armistice between the Central Powers and Soviet Russia, this treaty would be modified to guarantee the independence of the newly created states of Finland, the Baltic Duchy (consisting of the modern-day states of Estonia and Latvia), Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and the Transcaucusian Republic (consisting of the modern-day states of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan).

Aftermath

Had the US not declared war on Imperial Germany the previous year, World War One likely would have ended with a minor German defeat in the West, with it having to withdraw all its troops from Belgium and France while ceding 90% of Alsace-Lorraine back to France, and an enduring German military victory in the East. The compromise peace treaty outlined above would have amounted to a separate peace between the Western Allies and Germany following the Bolshevik Revolution of November 7, 1917 and their subsequent agreement to an armistice with Germany later that month allowing the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk signed in March 1918 (likely earlier given all of Russia’s former allies dropping out of the war) to be implemented in the east and made permanent.

This is a picture of my office wall map showing Europe just after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed in March 1918.

This would have left Germany as the protector of the newly independent states of Finland, the Baltic Duchy (consisting of modern-day Estonia and Latvia), Lithuania, Poland, Belarus and Ukraine and perhaps the Transcaucus republics against future Russian aggression. Unlike World War Two, Germany didn't annex a single square inch of territory following its defeat of the once mighty Russian Empire. Retention of this treaty would have ensured that Nazi Germany, Communist China, North Korea and perhaps even the Soviet Union itself never existed, given that without the vengeful Treaty of Versailles, the Germans likely would have helped the White Russian Army defeat Bolshevikism in its cradle. The ramifications would be that the US would face no nuclear adversaries today--only great power rivals.

Had such a treaty been signed, Hitler and the Nazis could never have come to power in Germany and the Jewish Holocaust would have been entirely averted. Germany would have remained a satisfied, rather than a revanchist, power dedicated to maintaining the peace and would not have started another world war. The Soviet Union might never have existed had Germany helped the White Russian Armies defeat the Soviets in the Russian Civil War. Even if it had, it would have been more constricted in size as well as in terms of its military and industrial power, counterbalanced by Imperial Germany and its Eastern European allies in the west and by Imperial Japan in the east. The Second World War would likely have started with Soviet, rather than German aggression against Finland, the Baltic states, Belarus, Ukraine and Romania, attempting to recover lost territory just as the Soviets did in actual history from September 1939-July 1940. But in this counterfactual historical timeline, there would have been no Hitler-Stalin Pact and no unholy alliance with the U.S. and U.K. to enable them do so. In fact, it is even possible that Britain and France would have joined an increasingly democratic Germany in opposing one or more of these aggressions, fighting on the same side of the war.

The Pacific War between the United States and Imperial Japan, which was sparked by a crushing U.S.-led oil embargo on Japan imposed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt as a “back door to war” with Germany, likely would never have occurred. This is due to the fact that without the German conquest of France in 1940, Roosevelt likely would have accepted the Japanese offer to withdraw from Indochina and mainland China, excepting Manchuria and Jehol province, in exchange for lifting the oil embargo. Without Soviet involvement in a U.S.-led Pacific War against Japan, the Nationalist Chinese would likely have defeated Mao’s Red Army in the Chinese Civil War and Communist China and North Korea would likely never have existed. The world would be far safer, more secure and much freer than it is today with a Nationalist-led China fighting on the Western side during the Cold War against the Soviet Union.

History has proven that negotiated, compromise peace agreements, in which the vital security interests of all great powers are recognized, such as the one outlined above that could have safeguarded most of Europe and the world from the ravages of the Second World War, are the key to achieving a just and lasting peace. There are important lessons to be learned by Wilson’s monumental failure to continue supporting a just and lasting “peace without victory” to end the First World War and avert the catastrophic near-worst case outcomes of the Twentieth Century. Were U.S. leaders to prudently negotiate a similar compromise peace agreement with Russia, which recognizes Russia’s legitimate security interests as well as our own, it could end the war in Ukraine and prevent the conflict from escalating into an unnecessary, and potentially nuclear, Third World War involving the U.S. and NATO today.

Conclusion

By declaring war on Germany in 1917, the US effectively abandoned its historical and far more prudent role as a hemispheric hegemon and engaged in an entangling European alliance for the first time in our history which ended up making the world a much more dangerous place and led to us adopting a strategy of global hegemony in 1945, leading to US military involvement in countless unnecessary wars at a tremendous cost in blood and treasure.

Virtually all of America’s modern-day troubles stem from US entry into the First World War. The decision to declare war on Germany in 1917 was arguably one of the worst US foreign policy blunders, if not the worst of all time, all but ensuring the outbreak of World War Two which led to the Jewish Holocaust. Were it not for US entry into the war, Nazi Germany, Communist China, North Korea, Communist Vietnam, and most likely the Soviet Union, would never have existed. Had the US remained neutral, the US would likely have no major enemies today and countless lives would have been spared.

The US decision to fight in World War One was likely even worse than Truman’s 1946 decision to cut off all US support for the Nationalist Chinese freedom fighters when they were on the verge of winning the Chinese Civil War, ensuring Communist Chinese victory. Even FDR’s decision to provide Lend Lease assistance (ultimately including atomic bomb making plans and materials) to the Soviet Union to enable it to conquer half of Europe and northeast Asia was not as adverse to US national security interests as without US entry into the First World War, the Soviet Union might never have existed.

It is difficult to overstate how profoundly US and world history would have been changed had Wilson’s fateful decision to ask Congress to declare war on Imperial Germany been different. It's hard to imagine what US history would be if, as before 1941, it was not defined by constant, unnecessary, “forever wars” of choice expending America’s precious blood and treasure. The US would have remained a hemispheric rather than a global military superpower with no military presence in Europe, Africa or the Middle East. There is little no reason to believe that the US would ever have adopted a policy of global hegemony, with 750 military bases across the world fighting wars without end had it never been involved in World War Two and had never been attacked at Pearl Harbor.

The US would not be a national security state today, nor would it have a military industrial complex or a Central Intelligence Agency. There would have been no Korean or Vietnam Wars, thus saving the lives of over 100,000 US soldiers. Many Middle Eastern countries, including Turkey and Iran, would not likely be Islamist-led today were it not for CIA backed coups, US bombings and direct military interventions. Without a US military presence in the Middle East, there would have been no Al Queda attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon and thus no Global War on Terror. America would likely be much wealthier as a nation and would be infinitely more safe and secure.

Here is a great documentary outlining many of the reasons why the US should never have entered World War One. Here is an excellent documentary on how history likely would have turned out if the First World War had never broken out. The documentary blames the punitive provisions of the Treaty of Versailles against Germany for the rise of Hitler and the Nazis, the Jewish Holocaust and World War Two. It concludes that without the First World War, there would have been no Cold war as the Soviet Union and Communist China would have never have existed. The implication being that even if World War One had broken out, had there been some kind of compromise peace that was fair to Germany and restored the balance of power in Europe to something resembling the status-quo ante, then Hitler could never have come to power. Rather, the Britain Empire and Imperial Germany would likely have ended their Cold War and become allies and some kind of European Union dominated by Germany would have formed.

© David T. Pyne 2025

David T. Pyne, Esq. is a former U.S. Army combat arms and Headquarters staff officer, who was in charge of armaments cooperation with the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Americas from 2000-2003, with an M.A. in National Security Studies from Georgetown University. He is the former President and current Deputy Executive Director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security. He recently served as Defense and Foreign Policy Advisor to former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. He has also co-authored the best-selling new book, “Catastrophe Now--America’s Last Chance to Avoid an EMP Disaster” and his new book “Restoring Strategic Deterrence” will be published in July 2025. He serves as the Editor of “The Real War” newsletter at dpyne.substack.com and previously served as a contributor to “The National Interest”. Here is a link to his interview archive. He also posts multiple times a day on X at @AmericaFirstCon. He may be reached at emptaskforce.ut@gmail.com.

Recent Interviews

March 17th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss growing reports that the US is preparing to engage in joint US-Israeli missile strikes on Iran as the Trump administration continues to ramp up attacks on the Houthis as well as Chinese preparations to invade Taiwan as early as April.

March 18th—Interview with Brannon Howse on his Worldview Weekend Radio Show to discuss the latest developments with regards to US and Israeli air and missile strikes on Yemen, Gaza, Lebanon and Syria and the chances it may lead to a direct war between the US and Israel that could bring in Russia and China.

March 18th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the outcome of the three-hour long Trump-Putin phone call and the chances it could lead to a permanent end to the war in Ukraine. We will also discuss how America’s alliances don’t make us safer but rather put Americans at far greater risk of World War Three than if the US were to commit not to intervene militarily in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Taiwan.

March 20th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the ramifications of the Ukrainian drone attack on Russia’s Engels air base which may have damaged some of Russia’s T-160 “Blackjack” nuclear bombers and his continuing attempts to get the US and NATO into a direct war with Russia. We will also discuss reported Russian military buildups in Belarus and Kaliningrad and how they may relate to China’s preparations to blockade and/or invade Taiwan as early as next month.

March 21st- Interview on the Dr. Maria show on Lindell TV to discuss the ramifications of the Ukrainian drone attack on Russia’s Engels air base which may have damaged some of Russia’s T-160 “Blackjack” nuclear bombers and his continuing attempts to get the US and NATO into a direct war with Russia.

March 21st—Interview with KUTV 2 News reporter David Ochoa about the Rep. Mike Kennedy and Rep. Celeste Malloy townhall in which they were booed and heckled by boisterous liberal protesters calling for them to impeach President Trump for DOGE cuts and defying judicial orders to bring back criminal gang members to the U.S.

March 21st—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the ramifications of the fire at London’s Heathrow Airport which stopped all flights at the UK’s largest airport as well as the US decision to move a carrier strike group from the Western Pacific to the Middle East at a time that China may be on the verge of invading Taiwan.

March 25th—Interview on Main Street Radio with Jon Twitchell to discuss the progress of US and Russian negotiations on a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine and form a US-Russia grand strategic partnership for peace as well as the chances that China will blockade Taiwan in early April.

March 25th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the leak of imminent plans for US military strikes on the Houthis in a Signal group between top Trump administration national security officials to a leftwing news magazine editor and whether any of the officials responsible should face disciplinary measures from President Trump including dismissal.

March 26th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss a US intelligence official’s assertion that National Security Mike Waltz lied about knowing Atlantic news magazine’s Jeffrey Goldberg and that he was a source for Goldberg’s articles while he was on the US intelligence committee as well as Deputy National Security Advisor Alex Wong’s family ties to the CCP.

March 31st—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the leak of the DoD guidance memo saying NATO can not expect the US to defend them, ending all war planning to fight Russia at a time the Trump administration is surging US troops and even US nukes to NATO’s eastern border to threaten Russia.

April 2nd—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss whether China’s Joint Exercise Strait Thunder-2025A is a prelude to a full blockade of Taiwan and whether China would benefit from a Trump decision to start a new war against Iran and bomb Iranian nuclear sites.

April 4th—I will be giving a ninety minute presentation at the Highland Community Center at 5378 West 10400 North in Highland, Utah at 7pm followed by a 30-minute question and answer session. It will include all my latest US national security and foreign policy updates especially Trump’s chances of negotiating an end to the war in Ukraine.

April 7th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss Iran’s recent underground nuclear tests and Russia’s threat that if Trump bombs Iran’s nuclear arsenal, it will cause an “irreversible global catastrophe”—i.e. World War Three.

April 8th—Interview with Nima Alkhorshid on his Dialogue Works podcast to discuss why he started a new war with the Houthis, how a US decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites could give China an opportunity to blockade Taiwan as well as why Trump has been unsuccessful in negotiating an end to Biden’s war with Russia in Ukraine.

April 8th—Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the recent revelation that the second Trump shooter Ryan Routh, who served as a recruiter for the Ukrainian Foreign Legion asked the Ukrainian military to provide him with a Stinger missile to shoot down Trump Force One during the 2024 presidential campaign.

April 9th—Interview on Main Street Radio on the “Dan the Eagle” show to discuss the importance of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs in restoring America’s economic independence from Communist China, reshoring our Defense Industrial Base and preventing the PRC from blackmailing US leaders into doing their bidding.

April 15th—Interview on Main Street Radio with Jon Twitchell to discuss the latest developments with regards to Trump’s drive to end the war in Ukraine, his threats to bomb a nuclear-armed Iran and potentially start World War Three and the chances that China will blockade Taiwan in April.

Upcoming Interviews

April 17th-Interview with Paul Mills on his Off-Grid Desert Farming Podcast to discuss the latest developments regarding the potential outbreak of World War Three with Russia over Ukraine, with China over Taiwan, and with Iran over its continued nuclear weapons production.

April 17th-Interview with Brannon Howse on Brannon Howse Live to discuss the recent revelation that JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Hegseth succeeding in persuading President Trump to call off plans for a joint US-Israeli air and missile strike on Iranian nuclear missile sites to avert World War Three.

May 20th—Interview on Main Street Radio with Jon Twitchell to discuss the latest developments with regards to Trump’s drive to end the war in Ukraine, his threats to bomb a nuclear-armed Iran and potentially start World War Three and the chances that China will blockade Taiwan early this fall.