Speaker 1: If you want to support the show and get the
episodes early and ad free, head on over to Freemanbeyond
the Wall dot com forward slash Support. I want to
explain something right now. If you support me through substack
or Patreon, you have access to an RSS feed that
you can plug into any podcatcher, including Apple, and you'll
be able to listen to the episodes through there. If
you support me through a subscribe, star, gum Road or
on my website directly, I will send you a link
where you can download the file and you can listen
to it any way you wish. I really appreciate the
support everyone gives me. It keeps a show going. It
allows me to basically put out an episode every day now,
and I'm not going to stop. I'm just going to accelerate.
I think sometimes you see that I'm putting out two
even three a day, and yeah, can't do it without you,
So thank you for the support. Head on over to
Freeman Beyond the Wall dot com, forward slash support and
do it there. Thank you. I want to welcome everyone
back to the Pekingana Show. John Fieldhouse is back. What's
going on? John? How are you doing?
Speaker 2: Dood well?
Speaker 1: Sir all right. I wanted to have you on because
I haven't really had a chance to talk on the
show show. On the official show about about Siria. We
talked about talked about it a little bit on the
New Inquisition show that I'm doing with Stormy and Astral
and Thomas and Jay Burden and d is going to
be in there. But I wanted to dedicate something to this,
and uh, I thought i'd have y on to talk
about it. So, I mean, I know you have to
be up on Syria. You probably know everything about Yeah,
probably up to date on Obama and Syria. You know
that that whole time, everything that went on there. Huh.
Speaker 2: Sorry, not by any stretch of the imagination. But I've
got a good, i think, grasp of what's publicly available,
which is definitely not the whole picture. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm not saying that you even if you did
know anything that you couldn't say, I wouldn't try to
get that out of you. But so this one is
looking like as you as you said in your text
this morning, it's part two of the moderate rebels. What
do you mean by that?
Speaker 2: During the late Obama years and which ended more or
less with the Trump taking office, we used to hear
so much about the moderate rebels, the guys who were
neither the secular Baptists, which are you know, definitely the
enemies of the United States and Israel or isis other
groups that we pretended that, you know, the media and
John McCain notoriously would call the moderate rebels, which I
will remind everybody there's no such thing. I mean, me
and you were moderate rebels because we have podcasts. People
overthrowing their government through armedforce are not moderates in any
sense of the word.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, one hundred percent. So you sent over this
article from the Suffon Soufon Center, and it's from two
days ago. We're recording this in the fourth This is
from the second and it's I guess it's just a
short overview of what's going on there. So I guess
I can start reading it and just jump in when
you want to say something here, yeah, because it's pretty short.
Speaker 2: But yeah, okay, for a background, this is the Sufon Center.
This is from the center run by Ali Soufon. He
was famous because if you've watched any documentary or fictionalized
history film about nine to eleven, he was the ethnic
Arab American FBI agent operating out of New York City
who was supposedly about to break open the whole nine
to eleven case right before the right before it happened,
except the CIA cut him out, which, based upon what's
publicly available, that seems more or less true. Anyways, he
did some stuff throughout the war and terror. He was
one of the FBI agents deployed to Afghanistan or initial
fighting I believe was in Iraq. I'm not mistaken. He's
the same guy who interviewed Saddam Hussein, but I don't
quote me on that. And again, after he retired, he
does a think tank that does publicly available intel briefs,
and this is one that you're linking to, right there
is one basically about the fighting that kicked off like
three or four days ago, as it were.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, So this is titled Rebel groups over
run Aleppo, reigniting Syrian Civil War and challenging Asad. He's
got some there's some bullet points before we jump in
and you if you want to comment on these and
go right ahead. An alliance of.
Speaker 2: Rebel force ahead, I'm sorry, go ahead, An.
Speaker 1: Alliance of rebel forces led by a Hayat Tarhier al Sham,
HTS from now on has successfully captured Aleppo, Syria's largest city,
in a substantive and unexpected shift in Syria's civil war dynamics.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was just going to say, I want the
reader to be aware that he mentions every other group
he mentions. He says explicitly what foreign powers and what
factions within Syria they're affiliated with. But I don't think
he ever mentions who HTS is affiliated, which to me
is red flat.
Speaker 1: Okay, So who is who's HTS associated with that?
Speaker 2: I obviously I don't know, and I'm not an investigator,
and if I knew that information, I couldn't be on
the show. But it appears to be that they are
that Salaphus faction that was a breakoff of al Qaida,
and they broke off from that group that became ISIS,
so they weren't ISIS proper, but essentially their cousins, and
they're that group that in some way apparently has had
back channels with the US and or Israel, which is
not to say that they're run by the US or Israel,
but they're definitely receiving I think it's fair to say
aid and encouragement from our government or the state of Israel.
Speaker 1: Okay. In response to the rival offensive, Syrian government forces
have pulled back from several positions across Aleppo and are
reportedly awaiting reinforcements to launch a counter offensive against the
insurgents in the city. Have you heard that about Russian
air strikes on HTS.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so there, I have seen multiple sources say that
they're both Russian and Syrian air force strikes. Apparently they
have some sort of graded chain of command for there
that have made strikes against Aleppo, the area and other
places in the country where rebels are fighting. And there's
a recurring theme that Russia has problems because a huge
amount of their forces have been diverted from Syria to
fight in Ukraine. So essentially, I think it's fair to
say that Thomas's thesis that this is indirectly a move
against both has the law and in order to aid
forces aid Israel in their fight, as well as a
move do weaken Russia once again visa the Ukraine. I
think that's completely valid.
Speaker 1: Throughout parts of northwestern Syria, the rebels have started setting
up and building upon already established proto governance structures indicating
their ambitions to government and maintain control.
Speaker 2: Up two big things here a number one, how would
you know that you know, when you have a dynamic
military operation in under a week, you're going to tell
me that you're engaged in building government's proto governments. Number one,
that's probably true. Number two, that's the kind of thing
that has Blah has done that I think all Western
counterinsurgency is looked at and said, you know, essentially us
and or our proxies need to do. So that's you know,
a reasonable thing for people who are in the governments
that represent us would do. But again, how would you
know you have a dynamic, fluid chaos situation on a battlefield?
And how would you know even if that's happening directly,
you probably wouldn't see it happen as an intelligence official
from a cleared party country.
Speaker 1: You said two things. There was did you have cover
both of them? Or was there another one?
Speaker 2: Oh? The issue of number one that I think this
is something where apparently they've copied from Hesbal law as
a counterpoint, you know, taking that part of the strategy.
But again the other one is how would we know sure.
Speaker 1: Okay, right, next last ballet point. The conflict in the
area epitomizes the importance of focusing on both state and
non state actors in an era of great power competition,
with various substate armed group armed groups active in the
country and numerous countries jocking for position and seeking to
back their respective proxies and clients.
Speaker 2: This.
Speaker 1: Why did I immediately think of fourth generation warfare when
I was reading this?
Speaker 2: Well, that's essentially it would be example of that. But
that's a really cool summary sentence right there, because that
sort of is what you would have as a thesis
statement on a PhD thesis when you're talking about a
war after the fact. So I'm not saying there's anything
directly nefarious or untoward happening here. I am absolutely not
suggesting that. But this reads a lot like people reading
things into this that you would not know that soon
in the fight.
Speaker 1: Let's read a little bit of this article, then stop
me whenever. An alliance to Syrian rebel groups launched a
significant offensive in Aleppo on Wednesday, November twenty seventh, marking
a dramatic escalation in the Syrian Civil War, which has
raised raged since twenty eleven. But gone through long stretches
of semi dormancy at times in certain parts of the country,
particularly over the last several years. The offensive led by
HTS Organization for the Liberation of the LEVANT, a US
designation foreign terrorist organization with historicized to al Qaeda, since renounced,
is led by Abu mah Muhammad al Jelani, who was
also at the helm of the group's predecessor Jabat al
Nusra Al Nusra Front and then Jabat Fata al Sham
Front for the Conquest of Syria. The LEVANT, al Jalani
first wore Bayattu, then al Qaeda leader. I meant al
al al Zawahiri. I've said that so many times. I've
said that name so many times. When I was recording
with Scott Worker, how am I stumbling over this? I
meant al Zawahiri back in April twenty thirteen before a
public fallout in separation four years later. The original group
Al Nusra was progeny of the split that went on
to produce the Islamic State under the leadership of Abu
Baker albag Daddy. HTS functions as part of a broader
coalition called the Military Operations Command, which was proclaimed in
response to alleged escalating attacks by the Syrian army and
Iranian backed militias. Elements of the rebel coalition also backed
by Turkey, which provides funding and equips to rebels to
keep pressure on the Assad regime. The rebels successful entry
into Aleppo represents the first such breakthrough since Bshar al
Assad Syrian government retook the city in twenty sixteen. The
offensive scope has also seen numerous villages and id Lib
and Aleppo Province fall to the forces as the rebels
are pushing south to Hama, Syria's fourth largest city.
Speaker 2: I do want the reader to point notice all of
a sudden that you know, secession is a good thing
in their worldview, all all of a sudden.
Speaker 1: I also would like, yeah, all right, that's funny. I
would like to say that there are reports right now
from multiple from a couple sources, but not one hundred percent.
I wouldn't be say I wouldn't feel confident saying one
hundred percent that they have reached Hamah and they are
inside the city.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and today, again, a battlefield is fluid, dynamic, chaotic,
so you're not going to get a perfect report until
after the fact.
Speaker 1: If Ever, in response to the rebel offensive, Syrian government
forces have pulled back from several positions across Aleppo and
are reportedly awaiting reinforcements to launch counteroffensive against the insurgents
in the city. Meanwhile, Syrian and Russian forces have conducted
limited air strikes on targets in Aleppo and surrounding areas
which they claim have been captured by terrorist groups. However,
the scope of these air strikes has remained narrow. Russia's
relatively limited involvement in Syria so far and its call
to restore order reflect the fact that Moscow has largely
shifted its focus to the war in Ukraine, leaving it
with insufficient will and capabilities in Syria to effectively counter
the rebel advance. Syria's other key ally, Iran, and its
extensive network of proxy groups, have also seen their priorities
shift over the past two years. The October seventh Hamas
attack on Israel and the subsequent war between Israel and
Hesbelah have diverted Iranian attention and resources way to Lebanon
and Israel. Lebanese Hezbelah, a critical Iran back group in
Syria's conflict, and allied to the Asad government has increasingly
focused on its operations in Lebanon, where it is engaged
where it has engaged in strikes against Israel. Meanwhile, Tehran
has recalibrated its focus towards the escalating conflict with Israel,
equally impacting its involvement in Syria. Allies of the Asad regime,
including Iranian backed Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani Shia groups, are however,
present on the ground to some extent. The Popular mobil
Mobilization Forces and Iranian backed Iraqi militia has for example,
reportedly been deployed in the streets around Damascus.
Speaker 2: I found this part interesting because there aren't that many
Pakistani Shia Shia groups. Afghan Shias are mostly the Hazaras,
which are an ethnically distinct group. They're part mongl We
know who they are because they have slanted eyes. And
the Popular Mobilization Forces are all those militias that were sanctioned.
Iraqi militias that were sanctioned and through a structure sort
of like National Guard Bureau, they were integrated as auxiliaries
of the Iraqi army during the war against Issus. So
I'm not accusing them of lying here so much as
this does not sound plausa okay.
Speaker 1: The unexpected success of the operation has caught both analysts
and Syrian government forces off guard, with reports indicating that
government troops have withdrawn largely from Aleppo and are suffering
losses and surrounding areas. This development signals a significant shift
in the dynamics of the conflict and raises questions about
the stability of territory controlled by the Assad regime and
the capabilities of its most prominent allies Russia and Iran.
With Moscow and Tehran and brow than other conflicts, namely
Ukraine for the former and Gaza, Lebanon and the broader
Middle East for the latter, the rebel forces have been
able to take over nearly the entire city of Aleppo,
afeat they they did not accomplish at the height of
their power there in twenty fifteen. Throughout parts of northwestern Syria,
the reel have started setting up and building upon already
established proto governance structures, indicating their ambition to government and
maintain control. You already commented on that some of these
efforts date back years, with sophisticated attempts to subsidize the
cost of food and stabilize the banking and energy sectors
in the areas under HTS control. The So basically when
they say that, they're talking about something that's that's been
going on for a while, very much like the like
the Taliban does in Afghanistan, where they basically become the
government in certain areas.
Speaker 2: Exactly, and like I said, that's something that has be
laws known for. Especially they take over or would largely
fill governance roles at a time when the Lebanese state
was largely hollow, wasn't doing its job. And not only
did they do the things that in a Western state
we would think of, they would also very often run
hospitals that were largely done for charity. They would run
new state or TV station where obviously they controlled the
news output, but they would be the main TV provider
in certain areas in you know, social welfare things, and
Hesblah was known for doing things beyond just twelve or Sheiites.
They would do things like Christians and other groups, because
again in this kind of war, humanitarianism is a weapon.
As much as you know the AKA.
Speaker 1: The Kurdish YPG militia, which also has expanded its presence
during the Aleppo offensive has clashed with some rebel forces.
According to the Syrian Human Rights Observations, two hundred and
seventy seven people have been killed in the northwestern Syria
offensive so far.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and we talked before we were recording Turkey's main
interest in the area, other than just not having civil
war break across, you know, go across his border, as
well as not having a unified Syria that could attack them,
is there very much concerned about the Kurdish separatist groups
because that mountainous part of its at north eastern Syria
that extends into Iraq, Iran as well as up into Turkey.
That mountain's area is historically what was Kurdistan and that
ethnically distinct group that all those countries are concerned about
those people de fact those seceding, which is why Turkey
in the recent past has sent troops into Iraq even
when the US forces were there, I sent forces into Syria,
has been willing to fight those groups that even when
the Syrian government had you know, essentially had a dayton
with those groups.
Speaker 1: The Assad regime has faced significant challenges in recent Oh
and also it says two hundred and seventy seven people
have been killed, is no. I mean that is a
guesstimate at best.
Speaker 2: Yeah, your initial reports are always wrong in terms of
casually so maybe, I mean maybe there was two maybe
there was two million. How would I know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, even in covering the Spanish Civil War, there were
like reports of a thousand in like, oh, there's a
thousand in this on mark Grave over there, and then
they finally get to dig it up and there's twelve
people in there.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And even best case scenario, initial reports fog a war,
it's a vague gas.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The Asade regime has faced significant challenges in recent years,
including a struggling economy and increasing geopolitical isolation. Do we
know that their economy has been struggling. I mean, we
hear that Russia's economy is struggling since the sanctions went
into play, and that's bullshit until very recently.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's probably just because of their geographic location, the
fact they just got a civil war, and that they're
you know, mostly isolated by American allies on different sides,
not to mention part of their country's still occupied by
US forces. So I imagine their economy is suffering even in
the best case scenario. But how bad? Who knows.
Speaker 1: This next sentence is is something Aside and his inner
circle have turned Syria into a narco state, fueling the
captigon epidemic throughout the region and relying on the drug
trade as an economic lifeline.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I tried to see what I could find on that.
I have no idea what captagon is. I found nothing
on the drug trade in particular as far as them
relying on it as an economic lifeline. I mean, that's
completely plausible, but I haven't found any good sources on
this one way or the other. So it's the kind
of thing go ahead.
Speaker 1: Isn't Captagon that stuff that was supposed to turn people
into super like super soldiers?
Speaker 2: Yea, I think that was the Marvel comics and maybe
it was, but I don't know if making the world
a better place.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like supposed to be for add but it's
apparently they say, oh if if soldiers take it and
high enough, and they say they were saying this about
Hamas after October seventh, they were all hopped up on
on this what is what's it called phenethyline something like that,
And it's supposed to be some kind of amphetamine that uh,
just causes, you know, turns people into blind it gives
them a blind rage kind of thing.
Speaker 2: That so far, you know, no downsides identify. Seriously, I
don't know. It's it's the kind of thing you would
get an intelligence agency, the report on that they may
or may not know that they're going to give you
a vague idea because the other guys are keeping secret.
But I found nothing on this that was credible from
me either any position.
Speaker 1: There are a speculation that Damascus's focus on this ilicit
trade has distracted it from other pressing issues, including the
readiness of its military forces and secret security services, which
which suffer from low morale and high levels of corruption.
I immediately just thought that the branch Davidians that was
like the main thing that got the army that they
were able to prove a drug nexus quote unquote prove
a drug nexus, and that's how they were able to
get what they used from Fort Hood for free instead
of having to pay for it.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, it's it's all.
Speaker 1: Everyone hates drug everyone hates drug dealers, so you know,
there's pay them as drug dealers, and that's just another
thing to add to the pile.
Speaker 2: Yeah, as far as you know, low morale. They're essentially occupyed,
functioning as an occupying force in their own country. So yeah,
low morale is part of it. Corruption. It's a Middle
Eastern security force. They're all corrupt. But I'm not anti Arab,
but understand that what we would think of as horrible, closed,
corrupt mafia systems, Arabs called that society. So are they
corrupt by our standards? Yes, but you know, so is
everything else in this part of the world, except for Israel,
which is as its own problems.
Speaker 1: The recent successful rebel offensive in Aleppo underscores the ongoing
vulnerabilities of Asad's government. Despite its heavy reliance on external support,
particularly from Iran and Russia, Assad's forces remain weak, with
these allies failing to provide the decisive backing needed to
counter the opposition's advances. Again, this just sounds like what
they've been saying about Russia all along. Russia's falling apart Russia. Yeah,
they're running out of ammunition, you know, I mean, this
just sounds like the typical propaganda you would get from
one side.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's also the kind of thing you would say
regardless when you know your enemy surprises you. Dan any extent.
This isn't so much in depth intelligence, you know, insight
as this is like, I know, shit basic, you know,
with summary of what happens when you're in deck.
Speaker 1: Compounding Assad's difficulties is a deteriorating relationship between Damascus and Tehran,
exacerbated by Asad's recent diplomatic outreach to the Gulf States.
Efforts to normalize relations have yielded little tangible progress, further
straining serias alliances. Despite these challenges, the regime should have
anticipated such developments. The Aleppo offensive by rebel forces has
apparently been planned, had been planned from mid October initially,
but was delayed when Turkey intervened, altering the timeline and
dynamics of the conflict. This shift in strategy suggests that
the Assad regime's precarious position may be even more fragile
than previously thought.
Speaker 2: Yeah, some of those things. Number one, their outreach to
the Gulf States, or Iran has had go out reach
to the Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia. So is that
something that you know has created a cleavage between Tehran
and Damascus. Maybe, but I don't see why it should
since Tehran's doing the exact same thing and on purpose.
As far as the planning of an operation in mid October,
I mean realistically, that's sort of like the minimum amount
of time you would need to plan something of this type.
So you know, that's again less intelligence inside as sort
of like you know, a basic statement of how quickly
you could do something. And by saying the Turkey intervene
that again it gets back to that issue of sort
of showing how Turkey and NATO, because again Turkey is
a member of NATO, how they seem to directly play
a role in when they can and cannot operate, which
to me is the most important thing said.
Speaker 1: So far, the implications are vast. The largely stagnant battle
lines have shifted dramatically over the course of four days. Additionally,
the Syrian Civil War, which became the golden opportunity for
sooning extremists to fill the power vacuum culminating in the
declaration of the Islamic State Caliphate in June twenty fourteen,
renders an objective assessment of the rebels and their goals
incredibly important. While there are signs that minorities and nonsunis
will be respected by even extreme elements of the rebels
such as HTS terrorist organizations participation in the offensive causes
some alarm.
Speaker 2: What signs would you see in the middle of an
attack when again dynamic, fluid and chaotic, what indication is
there of that? I mean again, Hesbelaw is known for
exercising For that matter, all the Iranian proxy groups are
known for exercising a great deal of discipline over their forces,
to the point that they stop attacking groups that are
declared non targets by whatever the command authority. Famously, during
some of the fighting in Iraq, you know, Shiai groups
that were explicitly connected to Iran would simply stop attacking
Americans in the Iraqi government at certain points in order
to you know, focus on Sunni groups. So it seems
almost as if they're reading the best part of Iranian
proxy discipline into this group, which again, how would you
know that at this point?
Speaker 1: The Wiger led Turkistan Islamic Party, for example, has said
it was involved in the insurgent offensive, a development sure
to cause concern in Beijing. To safeguard legitimacy and prevent atrocities,
it will be crucial for the rebel forces to expunge
radical elements. Additionally, the rebel forces will likely see significant
counter offensive. In the earlier years of the civil war,
a common tactic by ASSAD forces was to withdraw, reinforce
their position, and then counter it.
Speaker 2: Fact. Yeah, the part where they said there is evidence
of Chinese Wigers there people from Chinese Turkistan, which is,
you know, the far western part of the PRC that
is not ethnically Chinese. And there's like four different countries
they'd have to move through in order to get there,
a bunch of those countries which are effectively controlled by Iran. Like,
how would that happen? That's a very interesting case. And
again I'm not saying they're lying, but it's like, how
would you know this other than the initial reports? And
this seems to be suggesting it's like every group that
hates the United States less than their enemies is suddenly there,
which is the most interesting part, said so or one
of the most interesting details, said I think.
Speaker 1: Maybe the Wigers got there the same way they made
it to Afghanistan to train with the cia A in
the summer of two thousand and one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, at least you know that part of Afghanistan
borders China in some places you know, Yeah, yeah, yeah,
there's no borders there. That's sort of like when Haitians
show up at the Rio grand It's like, you know,
it takes some doing to put Haitians on the Rio Grant.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're not good swimmers, all right, So all right.
Implications extend beyond Syria. The country is the key transshipment
point for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Cuts force to
produce weapons that are funnels A has be lot in Lebanon.
With the ceasefire deal between Lebanon and Israel seemingly again
in question with Israeli airstrikes in southern Lebanon, HESBELA will
likely continue to rely on this now potentially interrupted supply.
Speaker 2: Chain motiv to why you would want this attack?
Speaker 1: Right there you go. According to Channel twelve, Israeli intelligence
officials believe that Iranian infrastructure in Syria has been negatively
impacted by the rebel forces.
Speaker 2: Well that's sort of a no shit statement. Yes, there's
a war there, so it's really hard to move there. Okay,
cool intelligence, tell me something more.
Speaker 1: Additionally, while the Assad regime has allowed Iran and its
proxies to operate within Syria, it has been careful to
not provoke Israel directly. Depending on how the situation evolves
and whether Hesbela acts emboldened in Syria, this may change
Israeli perception of the threat emanating from Syria.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and not to mention Israels occupying the Golowan Heights
has claimed that territory and a large part of the
population there, it's not really clear if they're citizens of
Israel war Syria now to include a bunch of these
people are Oloites, you know, people from the Assads extended
ethnosectarian group.
Speaker 1: So yep.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this whole area is not you know, foreign to
Israel in terms of their strategic planning. Well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and Syria is another one of those places that
has multiple, multiple groups, multiple ethnic and religious groups, just
like Lebanon.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and because again Lebanon was originally part of Syria,
the French carved it out in order to create an
explicitly Christian state. Unfortunately Christians do not pick babies like Muslims,
so that's become an issue. But yeah, it has those issues.
And a big part of what the Assad regime has
done is yeah, they're secular, but they're sort of secular
more in the American than the European sense. And since that,
you know, there's a default religious assumption that the state
represents as opposed to the state being by contemporary America
aggressive or harmful or opposition oppositional to a religious establishment.
That makes sense.
Speaker 1: Conflicting Syria epitomizes the importance of both state and non
state actors in an era of great power competition, with
various substate armed groups active in the country and numerous
countries jocking for position and seeking to back their respective
proxies and clients. That's probably one of the most important
things for people to understand about Syria.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's a good example of something that's ever
green from this right. And it's again it's not so
much great intelligence as a good summary of the world.
Speaker 1: The more attention and resources that Russia and Iran need
to dedicate to Syria, the less both countries will be
able to focus on other pressing issues more directly related
to their respective national interests. One immediate loser could be
a Libyan warlord Khalifa Haaftar, who receives backing from the
Kremlin to prop up his fiefdom. Why would they met,
Why is he mentioned here. There's no there's no reason
to mention him here. This is just something that's inserted
for a reason.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well again obviously because is made by an American
so it has an American interest. The government that you
know ostensibly claims to be ours, and it's it's presented
from an American strategic interest perspective, in its allies perspective.
So that's what it tells us. And again it's one
more example of how this offensive in Syria, hopefully from
the US perspective, hopefully will sever support from a number
of actors in both Europe and the Middle East that
the United States as opposed to.
Speaker 1: One immediate loser could be Libya, and I got that.
In the near term, Moscow may lean more on private
military and security contractors as a temporary stop gap to
fill emergency emerging power vacuums. The incoming Trump administration will
have a lot on its foreign policy agenda early on,
with Syria yet another complex situation that Washington will need
to address with urgency. To be sure. Myriad other countries Turkey, Israel, Russia, Iran,
and several Gulf nations will also be maneuvering in response
to shifting geopolitical dynamics within Syria and the broader region,
which leads me to the question, and I wanted to
ask you is a lot of people have been saying
that basically what the regime in charge is trying to
do is trying to leave It's purposely trying to leave
Trump with the biggest possible foreign policy mess pot that
they can which would what in my opinion, I mean,
this is just my uneducated opinion, would divert what he
wants to do domestically, Yeah, which would which would hurt
them more?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean Darryl Cooper said a few weeks ago
when Biden announced that they're going to be allowed to
use American and British long range arms to strike inside Russia.
You know, historically during the lame duck period, presidential administrations
tried to do as little as possible, tried to maintain
the status quo and while preparing the successor of either
party for the best case scenario to take you know,
the helm and to deal with things one second. And
whereas what we have right now is looks explicitly like
you know, intentional sabotage, which I think Morgoth said it
about a week ago. It's the American system means that
the outgoing lame duck president has two months to basically
start World War three and blow up the world just
despite you know, Orange Hitler man coming in and that. Yeah,
that's I think more or less what we happen at
number one. It could divert from any kind of domestic agenda.
It also hurts the general foreign agenda the United States
or excuse me, Trump has said explicitly, well, people accuse
him of being you know, putin stooge. Is he's said
explicitly that he wants the war to end so that
people stop dying in a war that didn't have to happen,
which is my perspective. I'm a hard neutral in the
Ukraine War, which is, I think lots of good people
are dying over something because American politicians decided that, you know,
they were going to fight into the last Russian and
last Ukrainian. So yeah, it diverts American domestic and foreign policy,
and it's it seems like pure malice, as if they
don't have to live in this world in the future.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, yeah, if you're going to start, if your
intention is to start World War three, considering what's on
the table. It seems to me you either have a
backup plan, like you're going to go to another planet,
live underground, or you're just willing to die.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I don't think Elon is going to fly
them to another planet.
Speaker 1: Yeah well, I hope not. What's your opinion on Some
people are saying that, you know, Trump has said he
wants to end the Ukraine War, so I'll ended on
day one. Well, that's not going to happen. It's not
to happen.
Speaker 2: Okay. Since the beginning, American politicians seem to operate on
the assumption that there can be a perfectly peaceful conditions.
I've heard both American and Russian politicians say that Ukraine
should be completely demilitarized. And I remind everybody Ukraine sits
in the middle of the Central Eurasian plane. It's essentially
a large flat area, which means that it's swapped hands
back and forth from invading armies for ever. Basically which
it's always going to be an arm place. There's always
going to be some kind of day tent in which Ukraine,
whether it's you know, part of Greater Russia or part
of something like the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or part of
the Habsburg Empire. It's always going to be a place
which is it's part of one side or another. It's
probably not going to be purely independent, and it's going
to be an armed camp. So yeah, is he gonna
end the day one? I don't think it's possible. I
think hopefully he can back things off. Hopefully he could
reach some kind of day tent in which a solution,
which I'm not going to say it's going to be
good enough for all sides, but something that you know,
at least keeps us from going to World War three
over at this place for another generation and hopefully doesn't
destroy the entirety of the population of that area. What
do I think Trump's going to do? I think Trump
understands that World War three is bad for business. You know,
blowing up the world's pretty bad for business. Sending Americans
to die on the other side of the world's pretty
bad for business. Blowing up you're pretty blad for business.
So I think he's he is focused on trying to
find a solution. Do I think he's capable of finding one?
I think he's more capable than anybody in the American government.
I don't know the last couple decades. I hope he does.
I think day one he's probably going to be making
phone calls and trying to see what he can accomplish.
What is he going to do? I don't know. I
know from Zelensky's latest interviews on British TV he seems
to be hedging and acknowledging that Ukraine is probably not
going to get large bounts of its territory back, while
insisting they should have fall into the NATO umbrella, which
again I remind you, NATO, you cannot join NATO if
you have territorial disputes because you're essentially trying to create
war where all those countries are obligated to go war
on your behalf. So I think Zelenski is hedging his bets,
he's acknowledging he's not going to regain all that territory
and is trying to come to grips with reality as
it is. Well again, he's essentially got to placate his
own internal hardliners so they don't assassinate him in the meantime.
Speaker 1: So what do you make of people like Sebastian Gorka,
who's been named Senior Director for counter Terrorism also Deputy
Assistant to the President, who was basically come out with
some of the most insane rhetoric about Putin being a
thug and we're going to take care of him.
Speaker 2: I'm very concerned. Again, Trump is still better than Kamali.
You know, Trump did not want to import infinity Haitians
in our neighborhoods, so he was the right and good choice.
I'm very concerned with all those things. I'm not a
pacifist by any stretch of the imagination. I'm under no
illusion that Putin is somehow a good guy as concerns America.
I'm under no illusion that he's concerned with anything beyond
his national astra rests concerning America. But I also think
we shouldn't, you know, try to piss off the bear.
We shouldn't get into a fight. We don't need to have.
One of my good rules for life that I tell
people is don't pick a fight with anybody who is
meaner and crazier than you. And the Russians are probably
meaner and crazier than you. So yeah, I'm very concerned.
I hope I hope Trump is aware of the issue.
I hope he doesn't create another John Bolton situation in
which he gets a guy that he was hoping would
be you know, intimidating to everybody, but instead derails his
own administration. So I'm concerned, but I haven't lost hope.
Speaker 1: Well, the when it comes to Putin, you get the
idea though, that as long as you don't poke the bear,
he's just going to be your typical Russian ruler who
you know, help play intelligence games. They'll be spying, they'll
be all sorts, there'll be all sorts of things. But
this isn't a guy who wants I don't think he
wants strife with his or any kind of conflict with
his neighbors, much less us. I think he's just, you know,
he's he wants to know what we what we know,
just like we want to know what We want to
know what. He wants to know what we're doing, just
like we want to know what he is doing.
Speaker 2: I think Putin is somebody as a security realist. He's
a you know, one of those security bureaucratic professionals, at
least he was by career in the former Soviet Union,
who is eternally wary of threats internally and externally against
the state and is always concerned about that. But that
same awareness and concern provides the ability to see that
some people can be, if not out at least neutral
parties that you can deal with in a non adversarial circumstance.
So America has this weird idea, at least the government.
Zeitgeis says this weird idea that the world is divided
into people who are completely in your camp and people
who are enemies. And again, I know one interpretation of
the friend enemy distinction of Schmidt, and again, unfortunately my
German is horrible, so I don't remember the exact quote
verbatim is that friend and enemy distinction should probably be
understood more as like friend outsider or obviously enemies are outsiders,
but there are also neutral parties that you you're wary
toward them, but you engage with them and you're not
necessarily wishing to destroy them because you know you have
some sort of data. You're trying to deal with them
in a non combative manner. So I think Putin is
somebody who understands that he or somebody who wants a
in which the other powers, especially in the United States,
he wishes he had a non directly adversarial relationship with
a country that you know, wasn't actively trying to destroy
him and destroy his countries, you know, administration. So what
does that mean? I think I think he's somebody that
I wish we had dealt with. And again I'm not
under any illusion of him being a good guy. But
by treating him as an enemy, we've created, you know,
a self fulfilling process prophecy, which has destroyed a large
part of the population of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: I guess another question I would ask, is Trump picked
this Pete Hegseth guy for you know, for sec def
And obviously we would have no idea we have I mean,
I don't have any idea what he would do. Probably
just be an order taker.
Speaker 2: I don't know. That's the weird thing is a lot
of people pointed out this is a really weird choice.
He's a guy who was was a major lieutenant colonel.
He's still in the Army reserves, but he's not in
a true unit, which essentially means he's in a kind
of unit where he's not going to drill regularly. He's
not going to do his one week in a month.
He's not going to get his retirement points, but at any
point he could be a signed to a unit and
deployed after some kind of a train up, which is
a really weird kind of status to have at that
point in his military career. He's somebody who has obviously
been a TRUP leader and has a lot of interesting
development in his military career, but like nothing that would
suggest making him the Secretary of Defense. And I'm not
opposed to him per se, but it's also sort of
like why would you pick him? Not saying he's a
bad choice so much as like why is he a choice?
You know, it's it's such a weird person to choose,
and I know the view and whatnot. Made the point
that hey, he's just the backup week in Fox and
Friend's house. It's like, as a military professional, but he's
he's not quite the military professional that you would choose
to be in charge of your entire security establishment. I've
written a book and I've done a lot of scholarship,
but absolutely nobody in this world is gonna put me
in charge of the military establishment. That's sort of like,
he's a great guy, but why would you pick him?
Speaker 1: Well, news has come out in the last twenty four
hours that there is a consideration that Trump because of
things with Hegeset's personal life, but maybe just more because
of all the scuttle bet about him, that he could
possibly be replaced with Ronda Sansus. Yeah, well I like that.
Speaker 2: I like the Santis. But I also think the worst
thing that could happen is taking the Santas out of Florida,
because he's the one who's kept that as a solid,
you know, anchor state for the Republican Party, and he's
done a lot, you know, on behalf of side. Yeah,
he's Prosionist, and he's done some issues with you know,
anti Semitis Semitic speech legislation, which I really don't like,
but he's done a lot of things for our side
that I really appreciate. And I think you would be
a better executive than Trump. Obviously, he wasn't going to
get elected, and I think the worst thing to do
would be take him out of Florida where he's actually
doing real good work, where he's going to be replaced
by who. So as far as the rumors, I mean,
rumors are rumors. I mean me and you can start
a rumor whether or not it's true or not has
no bearing upon whether or not we can make people
repeat what we're saying. So what do I think about
those rumors at this point? I don't know. It's just
a rumor.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, it was just he has two years
left on his term there and then he's termed out,
so he hasd to sit for four years. He could
always get re elected, but he has to sit for
four years. So I thought that was interesting. It's just
that he not knowing what heg Seth is is maybe
more more appealing than knowing what the census is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, like I said, it's just so weird. It's not
like I see anything that would really disqualify him. Soon says,
I don't see anything to qualify him.
Speaker 1: You're talking about hag Seth, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Like I said, I'm not saying he's bad. I'm
just saying what made you pick him? Right there? You know,
being a good guy with the military record is you
know a lot of people fall into that category. So
I picked this guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it just seemed really I remember I was sitting
on the couch when that came across that he picked him,
and I was I had no idea who he was
because I don't watch Fox. I mean, I don't watch
any of the legacy media outlets. And then I started
reading on him and I was just like, this just
seems like, you know, some of these picks are obviously
he's picking some people who are eminently qualified, but they're
real trolls, and that just seemed like a real troll pick.
Speaker 2: I think it's fair description. Yeah, it's it's like, why
would you pick them? And it's like, if you're going
to do that the thumb the eye in the media
or the other side, it's like, okay, but I feel
like you could get somebody who's eminently qualified to thumb
their eye in there. So I don't know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I'm sick and tired of talking about the
about the picks. I just wanted to get some, guess,
some information out there on Syria. Yeah, and you know,
it's one of those things that we just sit here
and talk for three or four hours about Syria, but really,
what do.
Speaker 2: We know exactly? And that's part of why I said,
let's go and do a read through of the Soufan report,
because I can go and do a summary of all
the groups, but it's you know, a lot more is
what's being said between the lines and what we can
question from the reports, and the big things I would
take away is, like Thomas said, is right now strategically
it only makes sense as a strike against both Hesba
Lah and Russia and so much of the things that
are being asserted by the groups that are operating in Syria.
You know, these are the sort of like, how would
you know that sort of statements you know that you're
not going to see in the early stage of of
an operation.
Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, well let's end it right there. Man,
I really appreciate it, you know, thanks for coming on
and sharing what you know and what your opinions are
on this, because I think is somebody who's been been
in that area of the world probably have a little
bit of a better idea than somebody who hasn't. So
and I'm not putting down people who haven't. I think
Scott Horton is probably, you know, one of the one
of the best guys in the world on all this
stuff or anything. But you know, there, you know I
have I have easy access to you, and Scott sometimes
doesn't return my text anymore.
Speaker 2: So Yeah, I was going to say the fact that
anti war radio, Scott hasn't put anything out there yet,
usually means that you know, a situation isn't clear and
that the sources can't confirm anything at that point, which
is part of why I was willing to come on
here to talk about this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and maybe that's exactly why Scott didn't return my
last text, because I'm like, Hey, what the hell's going
on with Syria and he's just going to come back
and be like, I don't know, man, I don't know.
We got to wait.
Speaker 2: A lot of our guys I know who do security
related stuff comment so little on Ukraine, and the point
they made in all those cases is the part that's
publicly available, even if it's on the media or through
you know, other sources, is generally so bad that they
wouldn't comment on Ukraine because it wasn't really clear what
was happening. And that's very often why you will see
guys who talk about security stuff, they won't talk about
an operations like this.
Speaker 1: All right, well, I appreciate it always until the next time.
Thank you.