All Episodes
Previous Next
May 17, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
34:09
New Study: 4.5 Million Died In Post 9/11 Wars

A new study by Brown University's Cost of War Project has estimated that post-9/11 wars launched by the west have directly and indirectly resulted in more than 4.5 million dead, most of them civilians. Also today, France, US, and UK set to begin training Ukrainians to pilot western fighter jets.

|

Time Text
License to Wage War 00:15:25
Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
I'm doing well.
And, you know, we talk a lot on this program about big government, COVID and all, and a lot about foreign policy.
And we've often mentioned the cost of our foreign policy, which is immeasurable because they hide a lot of it.
And they have free license to do whatever they want because they can hide the funding.
And sometimes there's a lot more damage and costs that anybody knows.
But we have to give some credit to Brown University.
They have a group up there called the Cost of War Project.
And we've quoted them before.
And it seems to me that they're about as objective as you can get in this day and age.
And they've come up with a new study.
And it's not good news.
It's horrible.
And of course, we've complained about this.
And it looks like we're not succeeding in stopping it.
And, you know, the more we and others like us, you know, get the information out, the more secretive it becomes.
You know, they hide more things.
So if there's something that we can point out about monetary policy, okay, we'll do it secretly and you won't know.
We'll create a trillion dollars and send it to Russia or China and do it secretly, you know, whatever.
But anyway, the statistics aren't good.
They've come out and said that over 4.5 million people have died as a consequence of illegal wars since 9-11.
The takeoff point was 9-11 was the excuse, you know, with days afterwards they were going to plan for the remaking of the Middle East.
They did a fine job.
They remade it, but not quite the way they pretended that they were going to do it.
And then also they said, well, you know, we have to be more determined about civil liberties.
So we're going to have this Patriot Act.
It's been sitting around so long.
You know, what do we do?
Oh, this looks like an opportunity.
So the Patriot Act was, imagine with 24 or 48 hours they got that passed and there were no hearings or anything because they've been sitting there.
And of course, those are two disasters, you know, the license for war and the license to violate our civil liberties, which they ended up using a lot of that authoritarian stuff, you know, for COVID and that kind of thing.
So anyway, to me, it's a shame, but we want to visit today a little bit about the insanity of all this spending and the obvious limitation of this and the undermining of an empire when they go beyond their capabilities.
And I think we're at that point.
So in one sense, this may be a sign that things are coming to an end because it's so bad.
And otherwise, though, that this might continue for a while longer because they always have a trick up their sleeve and how they can hide what's really going on.
But there's a limit to that.
Yeah, there is for sure.
Well, let's put up that first quote.
Now, this is a really good write-up on this study, which is at the Watson Institute of Brown University, the Cost of War Project.
And this is written up by The Cradle, which is an online publication that focuses on the Middle East for the most part.
Over 4.5 million people killed in post-9-11 wars, according to the report that Dr. Paul mentioned.
Here's kind of the guts of the report.
If you can go to the next one.
A new study from Cost of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute estimates over 4.5 million people died from wars launched by the West in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 attacks.
And first of all, it estimates between 906 to 937,000 people killed as a direct result of wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia.
But here's the other part.
More than 3.6 million are estimated to have died indirectly from the effects of Western wars, including economic collapse, food insecurity, destruction of public health facilities, environmental contamination, and recurring violence.
And these are the wars, of course, done in the name of counterterrorism, when in fact they've terrorized a lot of the rest of the world.
So what I think is unique about this study, and we've cited the Cost of War Project a lot because they do talk about people killed in war.
But I think what makes this study particularly interesting is all of these millions of people that are affected in wars.
And the average American just doesn't see it.
Oh, we're out of Afghanistan, whatever.
You know, nobody notices what goes on and on.
I think this really captures it well.
And that's probably why they're driven to fighting all these wars behind the penalties.
Especially, you know, you have to say they've been doing a lot of fighting, a lot of killing, a lot of failures, but not many body bags.
Now, one, two, ten makes news.
But in the past, just think in Vietnam, thousands would be killed in a week.
So this is a real, real tragedy.
So this is something that I think deserves a lot of attention.
And I remember it so well because they date this from the beginning of a bad era, is the way it is.
And that was 9-11.
And a lot happened after 9-11 because it wasn't that the ideas were new, but it gave them an opportunity.
It gave Bush a lot of an opportunity.
And some of the plans laid for an attack on civil liberties and the plan to expand the empire.
This is a chance we have.
This is a chance we have.
And they went to town.
And that is why they wanted to expand the empire and they needed the authority.
So the very difficult vote I had to cast was to use military force to deal with the big, the folks that came and bombed it.
But that was taken and totally distorted as a license to perpetuate war.
Everywhere, without any declaration of war whatsoever.
And this, and then also that first day or two, what they had, they had the Patriot Act, which was attack on civil liberties, which they were able to use many of the authorities that was granted there for enforcing COVID rules and regulations.
So these are opportunities.
And one thing that sort of got me on all this was when George Bush, not in a confrontational manner, and that was probably his greatest asset for what he wanted done.
He said, well, we understand exactly what's going on.
They came here and bombed us, and we have to deal with it, and we have to attack.
But we have to understand why they do it.
People want to know.
Why did they do it?
He says, they did it because they hated our freedoms and our prosperity.
And I consider that a gross distortion of the facts and a gross distortion that has led and participated and maybe even caused most of this tragedy by not asking the one question.
Every time there's a murder, domestic murder or killing, what's the motivation?
What's the motivation?
Who could be motivated to shoot this guy?
And, you know, and they look into it.
But the American people and the journalists have never asked what was the real motivation.
This idea that all this was because of Hollywood and because of our living standards and because we are prosperous.
It was all rigged in order to put into place plans that had already been laid.
Yeah.
Well, you know, they hate us for our freedom and prosperity.
Ironically, we took care of that because we don't have any freedom left and our prosperity is gone.
So they won.
Now, you mentioned the authorization for the use of force in 2001.
And here's something interesting from that cradle write-up of the Watson report, which is that according to the Congressional Research Service, the 2001 authorization for the use of military force has been used to justify more than 40 military interventions in at least 22 countries without congressional approval.
I didn't realize that.
I didn't know 40 military interventions in 22 countries without Congress, all from that little resolution about 9-11 going after the people who attacked us on 9-11.
Yeah, so you give them an inch of authority to respond to an emergency, and they turn it into license to kill, license to operate war at will.
And actually, this article pointed out something that I was not aware of.
They talked about a secret cooperation authority, SCA.
And it's part of what they're doing is they're involved in many of those cases.
They never make it to Congress.
Nobody ever hears about it.
But their pursuit in that was part of those 44 countries that we've been involved in.
And that is done in secrecy.
So the big issues are always secret, and there are no audit.
If you want to know how they're doing at the Fed and spending their trillions of dollars and taking care of everybody's friends and fighting these wars, then you ought to audit the Fed.
And if you're worrying about what's going on with the war and how the weapons disappear and then they're resold and all this, oh, doesn't the Pentagon ever audit?
No, they've never been audited in the true sense of the word.
And as long as the money machine goes and the authoritarians want to have a global economy and you have the sources cooperating with some people that are supposed to be the good guys, that's going to continue.
But the dead end, unfortunately, isn't going to be when the light bulb goes on for the American people to really wake up.
It's going to be when this whole thing comes down in bankruptcy because this cannot continue.
But whether it's going to last six months or six years, nobody really knows because they've been able to patch it together.
But you can't have any society operate like this other than without the loss of more liberty, but you've already described.
That's exactly what happened.
We lost our freedoms and we certainly haven't been living in peace by our great victories.
Yeah.
Well, I'm glad that you brought up the security cooperation authorities because I have to confess I wasn't really aware of this either.
I hadn't read it before.
And this is in the cradle article and recommend that people look at it.
But these SCAs they're called allow the Pentagon to covertly deploy troops and wage secret wars across the world.
And they have been used to train and equip foreign forces anywhere in the world and provide support to foreign forces, paramilitaries, and private individuals who are supporting U.S. counterterrorism operations.
They can have a spending limit of $100 million, which is not too bad.
But this is the other part, Dr. Paul.
Researchers and reporters uncovered these SCA programs not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in Cameroon, Egypt, Kenya, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at the NY University School of Law.
So this is another way of waging covert wars, and it's everywhere.
And it's completely out of control of Congress whatsoever, although ultimately they would have control because they have the power of the purse, which they never exercise when it comes to the Pentagon.
You know, whether it's the secret cooperation authority or AUMF authority that they've taken, they've essentially been able to, it's part of a coup, even though that's what my theory is.
It's a part of, you know, disposing of the Constitution.
You know, they don't even talk about it.
And you know, the comment they made to me, they said, Brian, why do you bring this up?
We don't follow that stuff anymore.
That is ancient history.
So don't pretend.
So the words mean nothing.
And they've been able to do this without, you know, it's because most people, that would be the best thing that could happen is to insist on a debate on repealing it.
Just think of the attention that repealing the Second Amendment gets.
It gets a lot of attention because the people know, oh, we want our Second Amendment, and then they respond.
But some of this stuff that's in those countries that you just listed where most people don't even know where they are and why are we over there and why do we put up with all the spending and all the killing?
And it's usually money and power and it's been known to happen for a long time.
Yeah, and I just, again, I think it is just important for people to understand that when the war is over with regard to the mainstream media and the television screens, it's certainly not over for the people on the receiving end.
You know, certainly people still in Serbia suffer from things like depleted uranium poisoning.
You have that in Iraq.
The infrastructures are destroyed.
Economies are destroyed.
You can't just, as we learned from COVID, you mentioned COVID, you can't just turn an economy on and off.
So when we bomb a place and destroy the economy, they just don't recover.
And that's why places like Libya is an absolute disaster.
But there are other related things.
If we can put on this next clip, because this is from the report itself, it also, go back one if you can.
It also highlights that women and children are the most vulnerable to the effects of war.
With researchers calculating over 7.6 million children under five suffer from acute malnutrition in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia.
These are all countries that we were supposed to have liberated.
And it turns out that these people are suffering horribly over there years and years later.
There are still generations of people suffering.
And, you know, from a medical perspective, that malnutrition affects your mental cognitive development, you know, and so many other things.
One of my articles, you made me think of this, that I wrote when I went to Congress, was the disease that kills the most people is Kwashiorkor, which is starvation.
You know, and that is true.
That happens when you lack liberty and you can't even take care of yourself if you want it because the people aren't allowed to do it.
I mean, like in a Soviet system, they couldn't even feed themselves.
And then it's also the war issue.
I mean, even now, we're not suffering.
We're suffering the side effects of war, but we're not suffering the effects of people total control of us, and yet people are starting to get hungry.
If it's an economic war or a war on the monetary system or a war overseas, it's not very good for the people.
And, you know, even if you can get a group together, which I frequently have, and they'll say, yeah, yeah, we understand that.
Suffering Side Effects 00:04:11
But what are you going to do about it?
What can you do about it?
Well, you have to understand why you have to sort of bite the bullet and live within your means.
The world isn't run on a free lunch, even though the free lunch can be pretty big for a while, but eventually it ends up where we are today.
And they say, yeah, but how do you get that to happen?
But it's not like you have to read thousands and thousands of pages and can recite the textbooks that you think are just great on these issues.
All you have to do is grab a book like Bastiat's Law, a simple little thing that teaches one solid principle, that you should never permit your government to do anything that you yourself can't do, which means you can't rob, steal, or kill.
Well, what's been going on here?
I mean, a lot of that happens.
Even the gun issue.
Why wouldn't we hold the government responsible for too many guns doing the wrong thing?
So when you have an insurrection, the wrong people are shooting the wrong, you know, the right people that shouldn't be shot.
So that kind of thing happens.
But the other thing in the Bastiat principle is if government couldn't do anything that were prohibited, and most people understand from a moral principle, a higher law tells them, you know, I don't think it's very nice to shoot and kill and rob people.
And one reason is, is if you will go into somebody's house, you might be stopped.
So the rules are there, and they're not that complicated.
You know, just allow some good instincts to prevail.
And with, of course, these ideas have to be passed on.
And that's why I think family life has a great deal of value in promoting these ideals.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, you know, President Trump made a lot of boneheaded choices when he was president in terms of personnel.
John Bolton, Nikki Haley.
We can go down the list.
But he should get some credit for some good picks.
And this next clip is, from what I can see at least, and I don't know the man.
I don't know an enormous amount about him.
But based on this quote alone, I think he's a very good guy.
This is Chris Miller.
Now, he was acting Secretary of Defense.
He wasn't confirmed by Congress.
This was in the last days of the Trump administration.
But remember, his senior advisor was our friend Colonel Doug McGregor as well.
So we had a couple of good guys.
Well, listen to this quote, Dr. Paul.
I'm sure you saw it.
It's very, very good.
He said, Christopher Miller, former acting head of the Pentagon, said in his memoir released earlier this year that the U.S. should be held accountable for the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And here's this quote.
This is a great quote.
The U.S. military-industrial complex has grown into a hydra-headed monster with almost no controls on the American war machine.
That's very, very good quote and accurate quote.
So the enemy had to make sure he wasn't in office and blame the last administration.
Yeah, if Trump comes back, maybe he'll look at Chris Miller again if that's the way he's thinking about it.
Well, I would hope so.
Let's hope he has a learning curve on some of the things we think are important.
You know, I was thinking about this.
How do people get influenced by ideas?
And this is not to be challenging, which we do, about Trump, but the person that's doing this that seems to be grabbing hold of some of the views that we like.
He said, this is Robert Kennedy.
When you think of the anti-war position and anti-compulsion of vaccinations and on and on.
And I think he's even said some stuff that shows that he is not a radical left-wing interventionist on economic policy.
I think it makes common sense on that, too.
So, boy, are they getting scared of him right now?
You know, the Democrats are frightened.
Can we even have a primary with him there?
He could embarrass us.
Yeah, well, it's not hard to embarrass Biden.
Russian Dominance Over Ukrainian Skies 00:08:01
Well, let's move on to our second story for the day.
And then, actually, this follows well from the first one because here we are.
I mean, we haven't learned a thing.
Let's put this next one up.
This is from Zero Hedge.
Actually, go ahead, Juan.
We're going to skip that one for now.
France to join U.S. and U.K. in training Ukrainian fighter pilots.
Here we go again, Dr. Paul.
Remember, it was going to be this missile and that missile was going to change the game.
This tank and that tank, this armored personnel carrier, High Mars, what have you, we're going to change the game.
None of it has worked.
None of it has changed what's happening in Ukraine, which is that the people of Ukraine are being destroyed by a proxy war.
So now it's going to be, let's train Ukrainian fighter pilots.
And this is what's happened with Zelensky went to Paris to beg for more money, and the French president Macron confirmed that his country has opened the door to training Ukrainian fighter pilots.
Now, I'm not an expert in flying jets, Dr. Paul.
I've flown in them, but I've never flown them.
But I suspect operating a sophisticated piece of equipment like the F-16 or what have you is a little more complicated than getting in a car and turning on the key, which is about as far as I can go toward driving.
A little bit more.
You know, and I think you've mentioned this idea of air dominance is a very important thing to consider.
And that country that gains air dominance, usually in combination with other things going on, not just shoot all their airplanes down.
But the countries that can maintain it are in a much better position than the ones who either can't do it or won't do it.
But, you know, with the technology moving, you know, when you think of the first air dominance or air use of planes in war was World War I.
And that's when the number one issue there was you had to have planes where the wings didn't fall off.
And then you had very, very creative pilots who, the dog fighting that went on.
And I imagine there were a lot of guys that just saw that as a fancy video game.
But anyway, that technology is moving rather quickly.
And there are some people who specialize and can make a lot of money just sending satellites up into the sky.
And the technology related to space is something else.
So I think air superiority is going to include the knowledge of space.
That one will be more difficult to deal with.
But it might end up that the decisions will be made with the old-fashioned airspace, taking care of the people who are sending them up there.
I don't know what will happen there.
But the airspace now, compared to World War I and where we are now, it could even get bigger.
And that's a good point about air dominance, because that's why this whole thing won't work.
That's why training pilots, Ukrainian pilots, first of all, it takes over a year to train these guys.
You just can't speed it up.
It takes a year to train them.
But it won't work because, as you say, air dominance.
Now, the first thing, we know this from Iraq, we know it from Afghanistan.
Well, not so much from Afghanistan.
But everywhere the U.S. intervenes, it first establishes air superiority.
You take out their airfields, you take out their missiles, you take out their ability to protect their skies, and you have to maintain total domination.
Say Ukraine got 10 or 15 fighter jets.
They've already lost hundreds and hundreds of jets.
But say they got 20 or 30 F-16s.
Well, the Russians right now dominate the airspace.
They don't even have air defenses.
We know that from the Patriot missile battery yesterday that the Russians took out in Kiev, costing us, what was it, $150 million or something.
So they don't have air dominance.
So there's nothing they can do with these planes.
They can't take them off.
They'll be immediately shot down.
It's just a fact.
So what it is is another example of these Western governments, the U.S., UK, and France, doing something just to be seen as doing something, even though everybody knows that this won't work.
This won't change anything.
It can't change anything because Russia rules the skies.
It's just a fact.
You know, I consider it rather ironic that up until recently, you know, the Ukrainians depended, and they still do.
They still have Russian airplanes.
They're our enemies, and they're using their weapons.
And it goes to show how power shifts around and how if we're getting involved and it has to do with our empire, you're going to get mixed up.
And then the profiteering that goes on with these weapons.
Some of the ones things we do send, even the ones we've sent already, you know, into Syria and these other places and into Ukraine, they end up in the marketplace.
And, you know, remember what happened in Libya where some of the weapons went.
Hillary couldn't stand the thought of, well, we have to quit this.
Let's go to Syria.
It's time Syria saw it has to go.
Yeah.
Well, the other danger with sending these planes is the danger that Zelensky is going to use these to use an F-16 to fight deep to attack something deep inside Russia.
Because so far, Russia hasn't responded to the fact that the U.S. and the UK and Western governments have given tons and tons of military equipment.
These military equipment are being used to kill Russians.
If the shoe were on the other foot and they were being used to kill Americans, we would be highly, highly mad about it.
So they haven't so far, but they're afraid that this is going to send it over the edge.
And if we could do this next one, this is from the article.
So Zelensky again is on another tour begging for stuff.
Zelensky touted this week that he plans to push for a fighter jet coalition which would give advanced Western-made aircraft to Ukraine's Air Force, but he's consistently met with quiet resistance by the Biden administration, for example, on fears it would bring Russia and NATO into a direct clash, which certainly it could do.
And if you go to the next one, now this is interesting, they quoted a French official who said, before delivering a plane, you need to train pilots.
It takes a long time.
Ukrainian pilots are not trained to use French systems.
They don't speak French, let alone English, an unnamed official told Politico, and it's quoted in the article.
But another question is whether the Ukrainians would use the jets to attack border areas inside Russia, as they're now doing with drones, despite Zelensky's official stance of not having approved such measures.
And here's the other thing, Dr. Paul.
If you can go to the next one, because this is part of the leaks, these Pentagon leaks that we've been talking about.
The leaked documents confirm Zelensky favors occupying Russian villages to gain leverage over Moscow, bombing a pipeline that transfers Russian oil to Hungary, a NATO member, and privately pining for long-range missiles to hit targets inside Russia.
So this is what we learned from some of these Discord leaks, that Zelensky is actually planning on attacking a NATO country, a NATO member, Hungary, and blowing up their pipeline.
So that, of course, would give pause to the idea that we should give them more sophisticated weapons because the question is what are they going to do with these?
Well, that's one area where we have some expert over there in the CIE, CIA, they know how to blast up and destroy pipelines.
What a mess.
All the destructiveness that could be meant for better things and peaceful uses is twisted around.
And I keep thinking of the relationship between Germany and Russia, which was, after the close of the Cold War, there was a tremendous improvement.
And there still is trade going on with these countries.
We still, you know, the other day somebody gave me a present.
I wonder where this was made.
Made in China.
Solving Global Trade Issues 00:06:15
Well, it was probably a pretty good deal.
It looked like pretty good clothing.
But there's a lot of things going on, but we're bonded determined to stop it.
So what do we do?
We go out of our way and put on sanctions.
I keep thinking, you know, I tell people, I said, why do you hate the Chinese?
I said, yes, they have problems.
We have problems.
They should deal with their problem.
We should deal with ours.
But we ought to talk to each other.
We ought to trade.
But why do you want to punish poor people in this country?
You know, they suffer from our inflation, so they go searching for tennis shoes.
And if I don't know prices anymore, but I guess you could pay $100 for a pair of tennis shoes.
And then they go over, but you go to China, you get for $20, and you want to punish these people and lower their standard.
You've already lowered their standard of living by giving them inflation, and they have to play the inflation tax.
So none of it is positive.
It's always, if there's something good, somebody's going to think of an evil way of using it.
And it's just, it has to be explained that it's much better for everybody if they just go and decide that maybe all these disputes, everything that goes on, let's have a deal.
Before we do anything, both sides have to agree to it.
You can't do anything else.
Nobody's the boss on how to tell people how to live, what they're going to read, where they're going to go.
If they want to fight in wars, you can go all by yourself.
I mean, volunteerism is a great term, and it just erases all the hostility that we read about every single day, and we talk about every single day.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, before I close out, Dr. Paul, I'm going to thank our sponsors again, 4patriots.com.
Everything you need to survive from food to generators and more, can think supplies, everything you need.
Thanks to a new generation of portable, safe, silent, and 100% fume-free generators, you can take care of your family in case of lengthy power outages.
You see the Patriot Power Generator 2000X here.
It comes in different sizes available depending on your needs.
It's a solar generator.
It doesn't use gas, so it doesn't have fumes, which can be dangerous to your family carbon monoxide fumes.
And it's not loud.
It's quiet as a laptop.
It's lightweight.
You can take it with you.
You can even use it inside your house or your motorhome or whatever you're in.
It's powerful enough to power your phones, your medical devices, or even your refrigerator.
And it's 100% solar.
The great thing about it now is that you can get a 10% discount on your purchase when you go to 4patriots.com and use the code word RON.
So you can go to 4patriots.com and I will put a link in the description.
Enter RON, get 10% off that first order, and get yours today.
Dr. Paul, I'm going to turn it over to you.
Very good.
I'm going to finish with re-emphasizing something we talked about earlier on the project at Brown University and Watson Institute that talks about the real cost of war.
And we know, generally speaking, how many billions, it's close, it'll be a trillion, probably really is over a trillion dollars for our militarism that we have.
And that's a cost, but the authors of this article evaluating total costs of war, it's almost like a disclaimer.
However, the researchers go on to stress, quote, the true impact of war are so vast and so that they are unqualifiable, quantifiable, and thus the report does not generate a precise mortality if we instead provide a reasonable and conservative estimate.
It's a guesswork, and there are so many.
And they list it, I think you mentioned it in our report, that there are natural disasters to consider in the midst of all this, climate, chaos, forced displacement.
There's a lot of costs that go on.
And of course, economically, it's the cost of the people who have to pay, which is the middle class.
But there's one thing that is mentioned once in a while.
It wasn't mentioned here, but it was well recognized when we had a lot of troops going over from reservists, and there were a lot of single women, mothers, that were in reservist for various reasons, and they would be called up and be taken away from their real purpose of caring for children, for instance.
But also, there's the family life that is altered by all war, and there's more divorce, more conflict, more problems.
And that, I think, is something that not a lot of people talk about.
I'll bet you, though, those people who have suffered through it realize that it is not easy on the family.
And when it happens that we get into a war that becomes less popular, those conflicts, my guess would be that they skyrocket.
If you're in a war where you feel like you've been attacked, more like the atmosphere in World War II, that there's probably less of that.
But I don't know if that's true or not on just how much, how you would compare the family problems that occurred during World War II versus, say, Vietnam or the wars in the Middle East.
So that's a high cost that is not going to be measured by dollars and cents, but it could be measured by just social order.
And that will not contribute to improving our social order.
Because one thing is, there's an easier way to sort all this out.
All you have to do is think all problems should be solved between two individuals, two groups of people, two countries, it's through volunteerism.
Both sides agree on the issue that they're about to transfer and to transpire.
And that, to me, would solve a lot of problems.
So volunteerism, especially in personal relationship, is something that we should give serious thought.
Export Selection