Speaker 1: There's a lot of stuff happening, peace steals, trade deals,
Speaker 1: tax deals. It's stuff like that. Check you in often
Speaker 1: for all this stuff. You need to know this stuff
Speaker 1: on fifty five KRCD talkstation eight oh five, the fifty
Speaker 1: five KRCD talk station. It is that time of the
Speaker 1: week we get the inside scoop from bright Bart News.
Speaker 1: I'll always start by reminding folks to bookmark the site
Speaker 1: b R e I t baart dot com. Great stuff there,
Speaker 1: particularly stuff from my guests Joel Pollock. Joel, welcome back
Speaker 1: to the morning show. My friend. It's always a pleasure
Speaker 1: talking with you.
Speaker 2: Always good to talk with you as well.
Speaker 1: And expert on things Israel we're talking about. The situation
Speaker 1: is unfolding rapidly now. I woke up this morning very
Speaker 1: excited to read that they had negotiated a ceasefire. Iran
Speaker 1: Israel going to put their guns down and play nicely together.
Speaker 1: We can talk about what that might mean in the
Speaker 1: long term. But over the course of the morning I
Speaker 1: find out that Iran launched a barrage of missiles at
Speaker 1: Israel after agreeing to the ceasefire, and of course necessitating
Speaker 1: Israel to mounter. Apparently, Trump was screaming at both sides.
Speaker 1: I've got, you know, different quotes and posts on true
Speaker 1: social media. But Israel apparently has recently decided to pull
Speaker 1: its planes back, apparently not bombing them. What in the
Speaker 1: hell is going on here, Joel block Well.
Speaker 2: Trump announced the ceasefire yesterday and Israel accepted the ceasefire.
Speaker 2: Iran said it would not accept the ceasefire but would
Speaker 2: stop firing at Israel if Israel stopped firing in Iran,
Speaker 2: so effectively, it did accept the ceasefire.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: What then happened is what usually happens in most wars
Speaker 2: before a ceasefire, which is that the two militaries scramble
Speaker 2: to make sure that they achieve certain objectives before the
Speaker 2: ceasefire takes effect.
Speaker 1: So Israel was.
Speaker 2: Attacking Iranian military targets and targets associated with the Iranian regime,
Speaker 2: and Iran fired ballistic missiles at Israel. The Iranian fire
Speaker 2: continued through the ceasefire deadline, so it actually fired beyond
Speaker 2: the ceasefire, but Israel ignored that. Iran also managed to
Speaker 2: get one of its missiles through Israel's defenses, and it
Speaker 2: hit an apartment building and murdered for Israeli's wounded many others.
Speaker 2: That caused a huge amount of anguish in Israel, right,
Speaker 2: and it really cast a pall over what should have
Speaker 2: been a day of celebration that the war was over
Speaker 2: and that it had been successful. Then there was KLM
Speaker 2: for several hours, and Iran then fired two ballistic missiles
Speaker 2: at Israel. Both of the missiles were intercepted, but it
Speaker 2: was a clear and flagrant violation of the ceasefire. So
Speaker 2: the Israeli said, Okay, we have to respond to this
Speaker 2: because otherwise Hern's just gonna violate the ceasefire whenever it
Speaker 2: wants to, right. So Israel then sent pilots to conduct
Speaker 2: an airstrike on some target or targets in Tehran, and
Speaker 2: Trump blew up and made some pretty off color remarks
Speaker 2: on camera. Yeah, he basically blamed both sides, and he
Speaker 2: claimed that Israel had violated the ceasefire. He said that
Speaker 2: if Israel carried out the air strike, it would violate
Speaker 2: the ceasefire. But it's not really a violation of the ceasefire.
Speaker 2: To respond to a violation of the ceasefire, so.
Speaker 1: That Joel, I mean, it's the natural logical thing for
Speaker 1: Israel or do you know, Okay, you shoot at me,
Speaker 1: We're coming back at you. And we've already proven we
Speaker 1: can be very successful when we do it.
Speaker 2: I can understand Trump's frustration. He wants there to be
Speaker 2: calm because he has broader goals in mind, and he
Speaker 2: doesn't want the war to continue. He doesn't want the
Speaker 2: United States to get drawn into the war. He wants
Speaker 2: to preserve what has been a success for both the
Speaker 2: United States and Israel. At the same time, there has
Speaker 2: to be more outrage at what Iran is doing. I
Speaker 2: said this last night. Perhaps I should have said it publicly,
Speaker 2: but I said it to colleagues that after Iran hit
Speaker 2: the Israeli apartment building, the President really should have condemned
Speaker 2: Iran's attacks in moral terms. His primary concern was the ceasefire,
Speaker 2: and that's understandable, but there really had to be a
Speaker 2: strong condemnation of what Iran had done. Israel is attacking
Speaker 2: military targets and the regime Iran is attacking civilians, and
Speaker 2: there really needed to be a strong condemnation of what
Speaker 2: Iran had done so that Israel would feel that it
Speaker 2: didn't need to respond, that it didn't have to restore
Speaker 2: its deterrent in order to protect its civilians. A democracy, Yeah,
Speaker 2: a democracy cannot sit and do nothing when innocent civilians
Speaker 2: are attacked. It just is not an option. And I
Speaker 2: think Trump knows that he's just trying to preserve the
Speaker 2: greater piece, which again is understandable. I think this all
Speaker 2: blows over because I do think the ceasefire will hold,
Speaker 2: and I also think that the strong relationship between the
Speaker 2: two governments of Israel and the United States is just
Speaker 2: stronger than it's ever been. So I get the frustration.
Speaker 2: I think this is a minor blip, But at the
Speaker 2: same time, there really needs to be an acknowledgement that
Speaker 2: the Iranian regime is a Nazi like regime that didn't
Speaker 2: try to achieve any real military objectives before the ceasefire deadline.
Speaker 2: It just tried to kill as many civilians as it could. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and that's what we're dealing with here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like October seventh. It was just done via
Speaker 1: Iranian proxies in the form of a terrorist operation. But
Speaker 1: those are just innocent women, children, grandmothers, and I mean
Speaker 1: non military targets. It was an outrage. It's just an
Speaker 1: offense against humanity. It isn't even warfare, it's just murdering
Speaker 1: innocent people. So with that backdrop and recognizing the Iranian
Speaker 1: the theatocracy that is Iran and its leadership is really
Speaker 1: predicated on the eradication of Israel. What does a cease
Speaker 1: fire mean long term? If they're not bombing each other,
Speaker 1: sorry about that, and then they realize they had my
Speaker 1: volume on. But if they're not bombing each other, does
Speaker 1: that mean that they're going to play nicely together and
Speaker 1: just coexist peacefully into the future. I just I find
Speaker 1: that hard to swallow.
Speaker 2: The long term trajectory is that Iran becomes weaker and
Speaker 2: weaker and the Iranian regime collapses. There's no situation in
Speaker 2: which Iran can continue running itself the way it has
Speaker 2: while losing a war to a much smaller country, while
Speaker 2: losing its nuclear weapons program, while remaining isolated. You know,
Speaker 2: they've already alienated most of the countries in the region,
Speaker 2: the Arab Muslim countries in the region. But now they've
Speaker 2: also proven to Russia and China that they're not a
Speaker 2: very good investment. So the Aranian regime is basically cornered,
Speaker 2: and over time it's going to have to collapse. I
Speaker 2: don't think anything good comes out of this war for Iran.
Speaker 2: I don't think that we need to think about questions
Speaker 2: of coexistence or long term peace between the two countries.
Speaker 2: Iran does not want to make peace with Israel, doesn't
Speaker 2: want to make an agreement with the United States. Even
Speaker 2: the Iran deal that Obama organized was not any kind
Speaker 2: of treaty that was signed by both sides. I mean,
Speaker 2: it was a treaty for I think constitutional purposes. It
Speaker 2: should have been ratified by the Senate, but there was
Speaker 2: no agreement where the two sides sat down. The Iranian regime,
Speaker 2: let's understand this. The Iranian regime is founded on an
Speaker 2: ideological commitment to destroying America and destroying Israel. Yeah, they
Speaker 2: will not talk to anybody, they will not acknowledge the
Speaker 2: existence of Israel, and they will not sit down with
Speaker 2: the United States in any kind of friendly or the
Speaker 2: legitimate manner. And they're just they're fanatical. So you know,
Speaker 2: we just have to accept there's not going to be
Speaker 2: some kind of movement toward peace and prosperity until the
Speaker 2: regime is out of the way. Meanwhile, the rest of
Speaker 2: the region is going to try to move on and
Speaker 2: you'll see an expansion that I think of ties between
Speaker 2: Israel and the Sunni Arab States. But nothing's going to happen,
Speaker 2: in ironic except the slow demise of the Iranian regime
Speaker 2: I think.
Speaker 1: Fair enough, and so Iran safe to say is not
Speaker 1: going to be joining the Abraham Accords.
Speaker 2: Well not under this regime.
Speaker 1: It will in the future. Now thinking about that, I mean,
Speaker 1: there's always uncertainty with regime change, and I know Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is encouraging and I think his post the other
Speaker 1: day about if current Ibranian regime is unable to make
Speaker 1: Iran great again, why wouldn't there be regime change? He's
Speaker 1: not advocating for us to create that regime change is
Speaker 1: I think that was a shout out to the Iranian
Speaker 1: people that they can control their own destiny, because by
Speaker 1: all accounts, the vast majority of the Iranian people don't
Speaker 1: like living under this theocracy.
Speaker 2: Well, look, there's no clear alternative to the Iranian regime
Speaker 2: right now, right, You're right that most Iranians don't like
Speaker 2: their government. At the same time, the Iranian regime has
Speaker 2: been very good at eliminating all the alternatives. You have
Speaker 2: the son of the former Shah living in exile in
Speaker 2: the DC area, who plans to return. Whether that means
Speaker 2: a monarchy or a transition to democracy, he says he's
Speaker 2: a democrat, a lowercase key, so who knows. I think
Speaker 2: it's going to take a while to figure out what
Speaker 2: post regime Iran really ought to look like. But it's
Speaker 2: not our concern right now. It's not something Trump wants
Speaker 2: to get involved with. It's not something Israel wants to
Speaker 2: get involved with, even though they want to destabilize and
Speaker 2: weaken the regime. And Trump's right, you know, if the
Speaker 2: Iranian regime can't function the way a normal country should function, white,
Speaker 2: why shouldn't there be regime change. It's just not going
Speaker 2: to be up to us. I think the best we
Speaker 2: can do is to try to get whatever factions of
Speaker 2: the Iranian opposition are accessible to us, get them on
Speaker 2: the same page about what happens next, because the it
Speaker 2: really does have to be a contingency plan so that
Speaker 2: the country doesn't fall apart into warring factions. I think
Speaker 2: the likeliest thing that we might see in the next
Speaker 2: six months is some kind of military coup where the
Speaker 2: Iranian military decides that the Iotolas are leading the country
Speaker 2: down a path of self destruction, and so they step
Speaker 2: in the way the military stepped in in Egypt, and
Speaker 2: they start running the country, and who knows, maybe they
Speaker 2: will be maybe they won't be a transition to democracy,
Speaker 2: But I think there's going to be an authoritarian phase
Speaker 2: before there's a democratic phase, before the results hadn't done.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's kind of where I was going to
Speaker 1: be heading with our conversation, because that seems like the
Speaker 1: most logical thing. Then you'd have to hope that the
Speaker 1: military didn't embrace the you know, death to America, death
Speaker 1: to Israel philosophy that the Iotola embraced and has been
Speaker 1: been screaming about for well a couple of Iotolas anyway,
Speaker 1: since they overthrow the Shava ran back in the seventies.
Speaker 1: So do you see do you anticipate the military would
Speaker 1: drop that as a political philosophy or ultimate goal the
Speaker 1: existence of the country to destroy America and Israel, which
Speaker 1: obviously is an impossibility, But what would it just be
Speaker 1: like martial law declared in the military would just keep
Speaker 1: the citizenry in line and try to keep commerce and
Speaker 1: industry organized and just and move forward that way.
Speaker 2: I would think so yeah, I think that the Iranian
Speaker 2: military will decide that preserving Iran is more important than
Speaker 2: destroying America. Okay, right now, the Iotola is you know,
Speaker 2: it's a religious cult. Religious cults often destroy themselves. You know,
Speaker 2: the Heaven's Gate cult thirty years ago.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they all they all committed.
Speaker 2: Suicide because they thought the giant spaceship was coming. I mean,
Speaker 2: that's the Iranian regime. They are cult that believes that
Speaker 2: they can bring about the end of the world and
Speaker 2: therefore the salvation of the world. Remember that the end
Speaker 2: of the world is just you know, destruction. It's it's
Speaker 2: the elect get saved and everybody else is doomed to hell.
Speaker 2: And they can bring that about if they destroy themselves
Speaker 2: in the process of destroying the United States. Hitler was
Speaker 2: the same, you know Hitler. Toward the end of the
Speaker 2: Second World War, I mused that maybe it was better
Speaker 2: that the Russians were defeating Germany, because then we would
Speaker 2: know who the superior race was. Hitler was fundamentally a
Speaker 2: racist more than he was a nationalist. He believed in
Speaker 2: the struggle of different races, so at some level he
Speaker 2: was willing to sacrifice Germany to his racial obsessions. That's
Speaker 2: the Iotolis. The Iotolis are prepared to sacrifice Iran for
Speaker 2: their site obsession with the arrival of the twelfth Madi,
Speaker 2: as they put it, in the end of the world.
Speaker 2: And eventually you're going to get some generals who come
Speaker 2: in and say, you know what, we love our country
Speaker 2: and we thought this was the way to serve it.
Speaker 1: But obviously this is not.
Speaker 2: And we love our country more than we hate America.
Speaker 2: We love our country more than we hate is world.
Speaker 2: Let's step in and get some sanity going here, because
Speaker 2: otherwise we're all going to just be dead, and that's
Speaker 2: what's going to happen.
Speaker 1: They did enjoy a much greater peace and prosperity under
Speaker 1: the Shaw. I had a woman w used to cut
Speaker 1: my hair when I lived in Chicago, and she was
Speaker 1: from Iran, and she talked about how wonderful it was.
Speaker 1: It was modern cities and women were not forced to
Speaker 1: wear burkas and cover their faces entirely. And the whole
Speaker 1: thing went to hell after the shaw or the shaw
Speaker 1: was thrown out. So you know, maybe there are people
Speaker 1: who have that recollection and can see a future vision
Speaker 1: for the country along those lines, and that would be great.
Speaker 1: For everyone. I guess I'm kind of curious about the
Speaker 1: broader implications. If Iran pulls the plug or as otherwise
Speaker 1: has regime change, they're no longer state sponsors of the
Speaker 1: terrorist organizations that they've been funding and providing weapons too.
Speaker 1: Does that bring about a broader peace in the Middle
Speaker 1: East generally, or there's still a pro Palestinian pro Palestinian
Speaker 1: state faction out there, We're going to continue to see
Speaker 1: conflict from some other areas.
Speaker 2: Well. In terms of the Palestinians, you know, the last
Speaker 2: remaining part of this war is the in Gaza, and
Speaker 2: there are twenty Israeli hostages who are still in captivity
Speaker 2: fifty total if you include those who are already dead.
Speaker 2: The Palestinians have their fate in their own hands. If
Speaker 2: they want to live in peace with Israel, then they will.
Speaker 2: But if they continue trying to destroy Israel, they will
Speaker 2: also destroy themselves. And what needs to happen now is
Speaker 2: the Hamas leadership needs to let the hostages go and
Speaker 2: find a way out of Gaza and allow ordinary Palestinians
Speaker 2: a chance to rebuild their lives with the help of
Speaker 2: the United States, with the help of Israelis, with the
Speaker 2: help of Arab allies. I think that Palestinians can have
Speaker 2: a better life. It's different than having a state. I
Speaker 2: think the Palestinian state is a dead idea, at least
Speaker 2: for a generation, because these Raelis have seen what Palestinians
Speaker 2: do with self government and basically they try to kill
Speaker 2: Israelis and that's just not acceptable obviously to the israel
Speaker 2: So I think you'll have some people in this country
Speaker 2: and elsewhere we all free palace and all that. Some
Speaker 2: will know what it means, some will not know what
Speaker 2: it means, but it's really for them about symbolic confrontations
Speaker 2: with symbols of authority. It has nothing to do with
Speaker 2: reality on the ground of them. At least it's the
Speaker 2: new fashionable left wing thing, and then six months later
Speaker 2: it'll be something else. So I think we shouldn't really
Speaker 2: take it seriously. The reality is that the Palestinians do
Speaker 2: not care about their own future as a movement to
Speaker 2: take any serious practical steps toward achieving any kind of progress,
Speaker 2: and it's just not going to be possible to do
Speaker 2: anything while Palestinian terrorists still hold Israeli hostages and still
Speaker 2: try to run the lives of other Palestinians, and I
Speaker 2: think the Guisa phase is now where his war ends,
Speaker 2: and there's going to be a huge amount of pressure
Speaker 2: on Hamas and maybe not the organization itself, maybe individual commanders,
Speaker 2: individual units to give up the hostages they have, and
Speaker 2: once that happens, I think they're working it fair enough.
Speaker 1: Well, real quick here and random, we're out of time, Joe.
Speaker 1: I'm to tell my producer, I'm aware of the time
Speaker 1: I just had to. China seems to I think they
Speaker 1: enjoy the fact that we're so busy dealing with problems
Speaker 1: in the Middle East that were not as focused on
Speaker 1: the South China Sea and Taiwan, and they appreciate that
Speaker 1: our resources are being soaked up in the Middle East
Speaker 1: dealing with these challenges as they have been for years
Speaker 1: and years and years trying to play any role in this.
Speaker 1: Real quick, Joel, I.
Speaker 2: Think China had played a role, and I think they're
Speaker 2: going to step back because I think their investments have
Speaker 2: gone bad. You know, they supported Iran, they even met
Speaker 2: with Hamas. Yeah, after October seventh. I think they thought
Speaker 2: things would go a certain way. You know. The one
Speaker 2: thing nobody counted on was the resilience of the ordinary
Speaker 2: Israeli soldier. And it was that man or that woman,
Speaker 2: often a reserved excuse me, often a reservist away from
Speaker 2: their families. That was the force that nobody reckoned with. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and that really turned the tide in the middle. And
Speaker 2: I think the Chinese realized that investing in your on
Speaker 2: is not is not a good one.
Speaker 1: Joel Paulock. Always enjoy our conversation. A pleat. You appreciate
Speaker 1: your very thoughtful analysis on this complex issue, and I'll
Speaker 1: look forward to having you back on. Remind my listeners
Speaker 1: brightbart dot com and check it out and bookmark the website. Joel,
Speaker 1: take care and have a wonderful week, my friend.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Tobe A twenty two fifty five K see the talk
Speaker 1: station stick around, be right back fifty five The talk
Speaker 1: station