Speaker 1: If you want to get the show early and ad free,
head on over to the Peak Kinyonas show dot com.
There you can choose from where you wish to support me.
Now listen very carefully. I've had some people ask me
about this, even though I think on the last ad
I stated it pretty clearly. If you want an RSS feed,
you're going to have to subscribe through substack or through Patreon.
You can also subscribe on my website which is right there,
gum Road and what's the other one, subscribe Star And
if you do that, you will get access to the
audio file. So head on over to the pekan Yonashow
dot com. You'll see all the ways that you can
support me there. And I just want to thank everyone.
It's because of you that I can put out the
amount of material that I do. I can do what
I'm doing with doctor Johnson on two hundred Years Together
and everything else, the things that Thomas and I are
doing together on Cindinal Philosophy, it's all because of you.
And yeah, I mean, I'll never be able to thank
you enough. So thank you. The pekan Yonashow dot com.
Everything's there. Want to welcome everyone back to the Peking
Yona show, and in this case, it like is really
like welcome back because Ron Dodson was just here and
he's back. How are you doing wrong?
Speaker 2: Well, all things considered, I'm doing okay.
Speaker 3: I am.
Speaker 2: I wish we had not been as correct in our
analysis on Friday as it ended up being. You know,
sometimes it's good to be wrong. I wish we had been.
Speaker 3: But it looks like.
Speaker 2: Not only are we into this thing, but we're into
the We bought bid off an awful lot, so it's
time hopefully we can start chewing. As I mentioned to
you pre show, I am a I'm an American, I'm
an America first guy. But that means once we're into
something I wanted to I don't want it to fail.
Just to be right, I want the President to pull
a rabbit out of the hat. I want when it's raining,
lemons to make lemonade. And uh so I want to
be positive, but it's it's that's a strain right now.
How about you?
Speaker 1: I'm doing okay, I want I guess where I wanted
to start was when we were texting on Friday and
you seem to have information that this was this was
not going to happen and then it happened.
Speaker 2: What happened, as I understand it, the word came across
that Israel was going to go whether we went or not,
and they were going to use all means necessary if
need be. And we could talk about what Rubio said yesterday,
which completely jibs with this, but that the idea was, well,
if we don't go, and Israel goes and it goes poorly,
which it would. I mean, as we're seeing, this is
not a small backward people. This is a nation of
ninety million people, very capable. The Persians are, the Iranians are.
These are bright capable folks and UH with a lot
of they know they have this one game they can
play and they play it very well, which is come
after us. But we're going to hammer you. We have
massive magazine depth and missiles, and they're taking the tack
of which I think has surprised very many. And there's
good and bad to this from their perspective, but they've
they've taken the tack to attack UH many Arab sites
UH that that are partnering with the US and have
partnered with the US. Some some have suggested that if
they hadn't done that and aimed all their arsenal just
at Israel or just at one spot, they would have
caused a lot more damage. But to be honest, they're
causing they're they're they're they're making some painful marks. As
it is. We've had a couple of radar sites hit
that are that are important to how we do things.
And uh, you know, they put they've put three boats
out of commit you know, three tankers out of commission
in the Persian Gulf. It's the tankers are basically unensurable
now and you've cut off supply out of the out
of the Persian Gulf through the Straight of Horn moves.
So there's they're they're causing some real pain and I
don't see how it ends quickly. So that's you know,
kind of where I see things right now. I mean,
we could get obviously love to get into the into
the minutia, but right now it's we seem to I
think you're gonna see carpet bombing. And we are now
incentivized to go B fifty two and B one, although
B one SORTI rates are limited. That's a very high
maintenance aircraft. But but you're going to have to go
root out all the IRGC, all the you know, the
the Imperial Guard, and that's tough. That's very very tough.
Republican Guard, not Imperial Guard. This isn't Rome, but the
Iranian Republican Guard troops are are dispersed. Now, I did
see that that Israel hit they were voting on a
succession plan and they had a bunch of the folks
gathered together and evidently this this just a little while back.
That's that building got hit and wiped out. So part
of the problem is is Trump I, from what I understand,
thought that okay, we're going to decapitate, We're going to
take takeout Commande, which I think was performed by the Israelis,
and there would be an opposition leader ready to step in.
And I think you've gone deep down the bin because
most of the most of the alternate leaders have been
taken out as well. So we'll see about that. There
seems to be a little bit of a little bit
of cross current as to purpose and goals in this
mission with regards to the US and Israel. And you know,
I'll be perfectly honest, everything I've seen points to Israel
doing whatever the heck they want to do, and just
expecting us to clean up the mess. And Rubio spoke
to that yesterday a little bit, and I really, you know,
whatever your views on Israel or Zionism, that should really
upset you as an American. It should it should be
a visceral reaction if if that reporting is true. And
I think we can trust the Secretary of State.
Speaker 1: All right, there's a couple of things there, But let
me start with this. You you seem to intimate that
there is an underestimation there and is this Is this
just the highest levels because you and I know that
Iran is not this. Yeah, Iran is not a rack
where you just roll in and you kill a bunch
of you know, you take over town, take over cities,
you kill people.
Speaker 4: You go.
Speaker 1: I mean that's not That's not what this place is.
So when do these people just not know anything? I mean,
it's like, what the hell's going what the hell's going
on here?
Speaker 2: Well, it's in remembered, Hey, pharaohs, how are you?
Speaker 3: I am?
Speaker 2: Well, I think I think I'll just answer this question
real quick from Pete and then we get you involved
in the in the last fifty tem to twenty years
with the officers that have progressed up the chain to
general admiral. There has been. It has been a very
corporatist environment. And what I mean by that is that
you don't you don't progress, You don't get promoted by
taking risks and having the occasional failure and learning and
still but because of your raw talent and your ability
to innovate, you're not You're not going to progress that way.
So what you have now are an entire you know,
and I think hag Seth wants to change this, but
how are you going to do it. You're gonna just
wipe out all your the entire group of generals and admirals.
You can't really do that. Although the left, you know,
Obama stale. So so what you have is you have
an entire group. That is, it's like in a corporate
board meeting where there's group thinking you can't go against well,
of course we can do this. Let's of course we
can do this. So I don't think it's necessarily underestimating Iran,
although there is maybe a part of that. I think
it's just the incentive. The incentives that currently work within
the decision matrix of the US Armed Forces is to
is to not stick your neck out and and say no,
or maybe if we do something, it needs to be
in consideration of the asymmetry that's obvious that this is
going to go down, you know. Uh and there instead
it's been just a massive build up, gumblow. You know,
I know, I do know that Trump really did think
that if we parked an armada off the Persian Gulf,
that he thought the Iranians would be forced into an agreement.
What I think really hamstrung his understanding is both wit
Coff and Kushner, who were leading the negotiation, they're both Hey,
from there, they are committed Zionist guys. They just are so.
So there wasn't any sophisticated diplomacy from the sense of, hey,
what does what can help Iran get what it wants?
We we we and and Israel gets a little bit
of what we want and we can get out of here.
There wasn't that. There was just a and look, I
don't mean to speak poorly of the President's son in
law and wit Cough I think, you know, he may
be a committed Zionist, but I think he's he loves
his country. I'm not I'm not impugning the honor of
these people. I just think they have a set of
presuppositions that led to the Again, maybe not underestimated Iran,
but having a skewed set of goals that weren't realistic.
So maybe maybe that is underestimating. But he asked, ask
Pharah's miss miss part of that question. I'd love to
hear what he has to say about that.
Speaker 1: I asked, do you is it clear that the people
in charge, the people who make the plans, underestimate Iran's
capabilities to fight because they they're just they have no
knowledge of it. They are like we, the three of
us know more about the Iranian people and the Iranian
structure and the culture there than they do.
Speaker 3: Uh. I think I think that Ron is absolutely right
in the sense that the establishment no longer permits thinking,
and that mainly comes from the long legacy of just
needing to agree with the politicians. They're not actually in
challenging wars in the sense that would be existential. Not
to say that Iraq or Afghanistan weren't challenging for American soldiers,
but to say that the quality of troops that were
on the other side, that were the enemy in Iraq
and Afghanistan were not particular challenges to a highly equipped,
technologically capable American military. So the normal process where you
would learn from the enemy, you would respect the enemy
just didn't exist, not in the same way. And it
existed to the extent that it existed, it existed in
the counterinsurgency context, not in the context of your fighting
another state. So that means you don't think about the
other side as seriously. Now when it comes to the plan,
one of my first reactions to hearing you was what plan? Like,
what is the plan? And as far as I can tell,
to the extent that it exists, it is the Americans
will pound Iran for as long as needed until Iran breaks,
and they will kill enough of the leadership for them
to change their minds. That's what hexth means by we
need more lethality, and the understanding of it is, well,
if we just kill enough of them and destroy enough
of the country, we win. But that precisely doesn't take
account of the asymmetric response that the arraigns have been
engaged in.
Speaker 2: That's right, and Farris, what is that? Here's what's Here's
what scares me because I think you're exactly right, But
whose playbook is that? What does that sound like? That
sounds like, that sounds like Israel and Gazi Gaza is
what that sounds That's the Israeli That's not the American playbook.
Nowhere in there is an Augustinian just war action. Nowhere
in there is the game theory of how do we
get the side to the point where they can you know,
to me, it seems like and we went down this
road in the last half of World War two where
instead of you know, the history of continental of European
civilizational warfare was that eventually you get to a point
where somebody has an advantage and you have a negotiated piece, right,
and everybody gets a little something, and we rearrange the pieces.
But but we understood that the look Iran is not
an existential threat to the United States. Are they a
pain in the backside? Absolutely? Do they sponsor some things
we don't like? Do they make some of our so
called friends unhappy and uneasy? Absolutely? That With that in mind,
that looks very different than an existential war. So you
apply the pressures that are necessary to get them to
change their mind on those things. Now, I personally disagree
with some of those. You know, I'd really love at
some point in this talk if we can get to
Middle East balance of power, you know, dominoes and so
on and so forth, because I think that there's we're
getting to a tipping point where things could look really ugly,
really fast if we turn the Arab coalition against us.
But but that's kind of where my thinking is is
there's no is is you bomb and kill if it's
an existential threat, and its total war. And that's the
vast exception to the rule. And yet that's the that's
the Israeli versus Gosa model that so many of us
find upsetting at least, if not, if not vastly immoral.
Speaker 3: That's the way every Israeli war has been fought. The
nineteen forty eight war was based on the Israelis massacring
bunches of Palestinian civilians in order to get them to
leave the country. Sixty seven war was state on state,
seventy three war was state on state fair enough, and
then the Lebanon Wars began on wars where all nineteen
ninety three and nineteen ninety six, the official Israeli objective
was to depopulate South Lebanon, that would be no Hesbalda,
And they tried that again in two thousand and six,
and now they're doing the same thing again in South Lebanon,
and I think one Israeli official, it might have been Natanyaho,
actually came out and said that they're going to try
to apply the Dahi doctrine to Taharran. The Dahi doctrine
is basically, we will flatten your urban areas in their
entirety until we get a ceasefire. And so this is
a fundamentally not Christian way of doing things, very pagan
way of doing things, where basically you just see the
population itself as the problem and you try to destroy
the population in order to win. Now there is a
pathway to the Americans getting some of what they want,
which is to eliminate enough of the leadership that the
next generation of the IRGC thing over and they transitioned
it into a nationalist country. But in the last couple
of times we spoke, what I said was that this
transition was already underway and that the Iranians were having
to appeal to nationalism on the back of the defeat
of Hesbalda and on the back of the Twelve Day War,
and we're looking at ways in order to relax some
social rules because they realized that being a full on
theocracy wasn't really working anymore. And Jemene he was eighty
seven or he was going to be eighty seven in April,
and so this transition would have happened under his successor
in a few years time. So the main requirement for
an Augustinian just war would be that it is absolutely
necessary and there is no other alternative. There was another alternative. Now,
some people in the administration Trump, for example, saying that
they were going to get nuclear weapons. Well, Ted Cruise
came out and said that no, they weren't. Ted Cruisive
old people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I mean I've I've done that whole deal.
I don't know if I've done it with Pete. But
we can go down. We can go down the list
of steps it takes from going from a middle not
high enrichment, I mean high in I guess in percentage terms,
but nowhere near the level of enrichment to get to
weapons grade. But going from a high enrichment to all
the steps that it takes to a deliverable and hardened
and miniaturized implosion device that you can put on a missile.
There are about a million steps. They all need testing.
They start in a very crude way. We would know
if they had detonated a device, even if it was
deep underground. And I am I am shocked at the
well I shouldn't be shocked because these are technical things
that the average person doesn't know about. And you hear
nuclear weapons and everybody just gets scared. But there is
no way they were near any kind of deliverable anything.
And I mean normally you start with a shotgun device, uh,
and you test that just so you can understand uh,
you know, you can understand uh, rapid criticality and these
kind of things and and but but making a working
implosion device and the triggers that are that are needed,
just asking that. Now, you who who helped smuggle uh,
you know, the switches back back in the day, the
kiton how do.
Speaker 3: You say it?
Speaker 2: Kryton switches. But that's a very technical thing. And you
and I uh might be pretty bright guys, or at
least you, but we're not gonna go Even if we
we had a pile of uranium or plutonium laying around,
we weren't we would we couldn't go build an implosion device,
so so so anyway, that kind of I kind of
get insulted. But by that whole well, they're weeks away,
weeks away from what building a shotgun device? Okay, so
do they have fifty sixty pounds of of highly enriched
two thirty was it two thirty nine? So anyway, I'm
really that really insults my intelligence. But I understand. I
guess why they do it.
Speaker 3: And they've been saying the same thing for twenty five
years now, right, they've been saying the same exact thing
for twenty five years, that ta and is this far
from producing a nuclear device? It's two weeks away, it's
five years away, it's one month away, et cetera, et cetera.
And it's just not credible. I mean, the IEA Raphael
Grossi came out and said that no, that's not true.
There was no indication that they were going to build
a nuclear weapon. The actual issue was the ballistic missiles,
because the punishment that the Israelis received in the Twelve
Day War made them realize that the ballistic missiles themselves
could be an existential threat. Because Israel has four ports,
three civilian airports, maybe a dozen big power stations and
a dozen air bases all in enough.
Speaker 2: Don't forget their d CEL plant that got hit, and.
Speaker 3: A desalination plant, and so it's incredibly vulnerable to ballistic
missiles because if you wreck enough of their infrastructure, they
that's it. The country becomes uninhabitable. If the chemical plants
around Haifa are blown up and enough of a reaction
is triggered, that creates a chemical's cloud over the second
city in Israel, and that makes the city uninhabitable. So
they're genuinely vulnerable to this. But the Iranians were not
on the brink of launching another war against Israel. They
were in the middle of their own various domestic concerns,
from the protests to the Israelian filtration to all kinds
of things. So there was nothing that made the timing
of this war necessary. And the argument that Rubio gave that, well,
the Israelis were going to strike, and that meant that
American bases were going to be attacked. Well, first of all,
Israel is a proxy, it's financed by the United States,
it's armed by the United States, and American decision makers
should be able to say no to the Israelis, you're
not allowed to do this, and exactly and the only
reason it isn't happening is because half of the Trump
administration are graduates of the Epstein Rothschild network and the
filth that that is involved in that Rubio is funded
by Ellison and Vance is funded by Teal, And so
what you see is that it's the lobby that forced this.
And you see the Democrats are not doing anything to
try to say, well, you've exceeded the powers of Congress
and you've went to war without authorization, and they're not
challenging the narrative that actually there was no eminent threat
because there wasn't an eminent threat. So this is fundamentally
in Israeli war. When it comes to the strategy, I mean,
they're there is a pathway to victory, which is that
you do eliminate enough of the leadership and destroy enough
of Iranian industry, and then you make some kind of
ceasefire and you say we've sold the Iran problem, and
then the transition that was going to happen maybe keeps happening.
But trying to stop Hothy missiles failed. The United States
sent two aircraft carriers to stop the Hothy, and they
bombed Yemen for forty five days. The area of Yemen
that the Hothy control it is maybe one twentieth the
size of Iran. I haven't checked, but just sort of
eyeballing it off a map.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's like greater metropolitan Terroran, you know, like the
pop you know, once Tehran starts thinning out. It's about
like that. It's not much bigger than that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And unlike the Hothy, the Iranians have an open
supply line to China and Russia through the Caspian Sea
m H because one of the terminuses of the Belton
Road ends in Kazarkastan on the Caspian Sea, and trade
between Russia and Iran uh with Iranian ships going up
the Volga into the Sea of Azov and into the
Black Sea already exists. So that supply chain already exists.
Speaker 2: That's a lot of canals, but it is. It is
a common passage exactly. I don't know, dude. Do many
people know that that you can get from the Black
Sea all the way to the Caspian through the through
the the the canal system of the Volga. It's pretty
interesting if you go and trade that on a map.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's incredible, it is incredible. But that mean but
that means that the Iranians have have viable supply chains
leading to the north of tran mm hmm.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we have no we have no interdictory capacity on
the Caspian, either by air or by you know. Uh,
so that's a uh. People need to spend more time
with their globe or Google Earth exactly. It'll it'll bless you.
Speaker 1: One thing, one thing I wanted to Paris. You mentioned
you called the Israel approxy of the United States. But
you know, you also mentioned that Trump's cabinet is littered
with Trump's administration is littered with all these epstream creators.
I mean, I hear people making the argument that the
United States controls Israel. But sure, okay, I'll accept that
if you understand that the diaspora controls the United States.
And if the diaspora controls the United States, then we're
captured either way.
Speaker 3: I mean, you got Alison and control of CBS, You've
got Murder and control of Fox News. That's the media
for you. Left. Then right, you've got APEC paying ninety
four percent of members of Congress, that's your elected representatives.
You've got the administration full of these quitters, and you've
got the National Security Council head who was also the
Secretary of State, having been vetted by Ellison or vetted
by an Israeli ambassador and Ellison and then Ellison invests
money in him and in his presidential run and that's
how he sort of rises. And you've got Jdvans, who
used to write for David Frum and now he and
then he got funded by Peter Thiel and now he's
the Vice president. So essentially, this extended diaspora influences every
single piece of decision making that this administration is taking.
And you can't say that this is you know, true sovereignty,
because what you actually have is an oligarchy that hides
behind elected representatives. And the elected representatives are absolutely shameless,
as are the political appointees. They're absolutely shameless. They will
in the end serve their donors. And to have Trump
in the Knesset say that it was Abelson money that
made him move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem
and made him recognize the Golan Heights as part of
Israel kind of, you know, that's just icing on the cake.
But it's getting to a stage where people see that
this is what's happening. And so if the plan, which
is just to kill as many people as it takes
and destroy as much infrastructure and productive capability as it takes, fails,
because the Chinese and the Russians keep on backing the
IRGC and enabling it to fire missiles into an environment
where interceptor missiles are dwindling, that becomes a major problem.
I don't know how it's going to play out, but
I can see the IRGC deciding, you know what, We're
going to keep firing for three months, and over those
three months, we will destroy this much of Israeli infrastructure
and this much of Tel Aviv. And you know that
these radis are hiding the extent of damage they're taking.
Speaker 2: They are they ran off that they ran off that
Chinese the there was a Chinese news group in in
Tel Aviv last night showing the showing the damage and
they shut them down. That that was just last night. Yeah,
one thing I wanted to mention you. You made a
very persuasive argument about the lobby's financial uh the the
lobby's financial uh arm twisting. It can do UH with
so much of the American apparatus.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 2: I think it goes at the closer you get in
the the the more familial it comes it becomes. And
what I mean by that is Jared Jared Kushner and
you know Trump by all accounts, and I don't. I
don't know the president. I I've I've never been around.
And we back in the day shared a uh in
my family business. We shared a lending team with Lehman brothers,
and so I'd heard stories and everything. But but but
his reputation is always he is he's very much typical
uh New York. He it's it's if you're part of
the family, he's he's very loyal. If you're not, you know,
he can cut your legs out from under you. And
Jared Kushner is who is not just Jewish, but very
supportive of the whole Habad and the the more radical
elements of the ultra ultra Orthodox. So uh, and that's
a Judaism is not for most of your viewers. I'm sure,
either Christian or or or or some form of Western
uh deal. But but Judaism is not monolithic. It's it's
got you know not and it's not just the three
main factions. But over past Orthodox you get some you
get some very different kind of elements, and Jared and
Kushner's very tied into that. Furthermore, he's tied and these
are elements that came out of Pale of settlement, uh,
you know, ultra Orthodox kind of stuff. Anyway, Kushner's very
tight with net Nyahu. When Net Yahoo comes to the
United States, he stays with Kushner. Now, yep, so this
is for Trump. I think this is as much as
much as the lobby has the influence over the legislature
and so forth. I don't think Trump's bought. I really don't.
I think he tries to be very independent in his
how he perceives things. But he's very loyal to his
family and and I know from reports that I've heard
from people, I trust that he will get into shouting
arguments with net and Yahoo like he would be arguing
with a with a brother or a cousin, not the
way you would talk to the head of state of
what should be a satrappie or what should be a
client state. And so I think that that's part of
the issue. And I'm really trying not to I'm trying
to understand the president. I'm not just trying to stand
in judgment over him. We all have our failings, we
all have our own presuppositions that we bring, and I
think this is one way to understand part of the
disconnect of how how he can be preached such an
American first sermon and yet not be able to get
over the bar with this is it's beyond just money
Terry's support from the Adolson's. I think this becomes almost
like a hey, look that's that's the uncle who always
comes to the family reunion and he paid paid my
way through college. And we're going to argue, but but
but I'm not going to disown him. I'm not going
to kick him out of the family reunion. There's a
bit of that dynamic at play here that is critical,
I think to understanding how we got where we are.
Does that make any sense to either one of you guys.
Speaker 1: Ferris, I'll let you go on in a second. I'll let
you go in a second. Just let me say, we
all do have our failings, but we're not the president.
Speaker 2: Of the I'm just trying to understand, Pete. I'm just
trying to understand the guy. You're exactly right, obviously.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Absolutely, And the fact that he is running it as
a family affair with someone whose loyalty is to a
different family is the fundamental problem.
Speaker 2: Yes, well that's kind of where I was wanting to go. Yeah, Yeah,
that'scause where I was wanting to get to.
Speaker 3: How About they're not just uh Jewish, which in and
of itself, you know, I'll take it as a neutral thing.
How about are insane Jewish supremacists who believe that other
people don't have a soul or only have an animal soul,
and therefore believe that everybody else is by definition less
than them mm hm. And they are a very closed,
tight knit group in one sense, they're quite open in another.
But you know, I think it was one of their
synagogues that ended up with the false walls and with
the mattresses and with the.
Speaker 1: Word that's like their world headquarters, that's where.
Speaker 2: In Brooklyn.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And so that comes with a whole massive set
of baggage that is quite different from you know, some
kind of liberal reform ton who can be a very
bleeding heart liberal at that. So there is this difference,
and Jared is going to put that loyalty before everything else.
And remember Trump said that Jared wasn't going to be
in the administration. Then a few minutes later you find
that not only he's in the administration, he's negotiating Russia
and Ukraine and helping Black Rock get into Ukraine and
profit from it. He's negotiating Gaza and helping Allison build
a total surveyance state in Gaza in partnership with Tony Blair.
And he's negotiated the nuclear file, which is an incredibly
technical question that has all kinds of details that he's
he's probably much smarter than I am, but he's just
not qualified for it. And he is going to put
his family loyalty to Nataniello above negotiating with Iran in
good faith. That's the actual issue. And he doesn't even
have an official role in the administration. He just travels
with with Whitcoff. Whitcoff has some kind of title as
Presidential envoy, but Jared, as far as I know, doesn't.
And so when you delegate the negotiation to that kind
of person, it isn't going to be the standard state
to state negotiation where you have a political agreement and
then you get to the technical details and then the
technical teams report up, and then a decision is made
that Shane is intercepted, if you will, by Kushner's family loyalty,
because I think you remember that video of Natanie who
basically saying how he knew Jared Kushner, And can I
tell people that I knew you when you were a
child because I was staying with your father and staying
at your house when I was visiting Da da da
Da da da. And then lo and behold, Jared's father
becomes ambassador to France after having been gotten out and
pardoned by Trump. So like it's incestuous in the wrong way,
not that there's a right way to do it, but
in a particularly wrong way.
Speaker 1: Well, if you remember, Chris Christie talked about how he
was being considered for VP and he got called in Kushner.
Jared Kushner called him in to tell him forget about it.
That's not going to happen because of what you did
to my father. This shouldn't this shouldn't have been handled legally.
We should have let the rabbis handle this. And it's like, no,
I'm sorry, that's not how this works. If I do
something I don't I don't get to I mean, I
can appeal to my priest, but he's probably gonna be like,
you did the crime, You're going to do the time, buddy.
You know, this is not this is not normal. And
this is why I say that. You know, if if
this doesn't, if this proves anything, we don't have a country.
Because if we don't, if if the United States cannot
put it's you know, we've basically lost California. California is
gone to some force that in New York is parts
of New York are the same way. There's other state, Minnesota.
Minneapolis is another country. There are cities in this in
this country that are lost to foreign powers. We're heading
the way of Canada now.
Speaker 3: And if we.
Speaker 1: If we can't address that, if that's not on the
if that's not a priority. But you know, a group
of people who were seventy to eighty percent of Biden's cabinet,
I mean, this is we forget about this. You know,
I wanted to bring this up. You know in Fox
News has been saying twenty twenty six Iran is not
two thousand and three Iraq. And you know doctor field
House who you know, Farris and I have done a
show with said, well, they're right. What this looks and
what this can turn into rather quickly is nineteen ninety
two to two thousand and two Iraq, where you end
up with boots on the ground invasion at the end
of And let me just remind you that ninety two
to two thousand and two is three presidencies. It doesn't
matter who the president is. These people get what they want.
Speaker 3: If you look at what the planning seems to be. Now,
in case this becomes a long campaign, they had the
So there's an ethnic group called the Baloshis who are
split between Pakistan and Iran, and they've been demanding an
independent state. And they are used by the US to
disrupt the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, which terminates at Go
out of their port. And they are used also against
the Iranians in the hope of disrupting Shahbahaport, which is
supposed to link Iran to Aghanistan. Essentially, it's supposed to
be the main trade route to to Afghanistan, replacing the
Pakistan trade route uh And that's an Indian Iranian project
backed by the Russians. And naturally these guys are quite divided.
Then a couple of months before the attack on Iran began,
they unified under one group. You have also a bunch
of Kurdish groups, five separate Kurdish groups that are fighting
engage the Iranian state, and they they.
Speaker 6: Got missled, well yeah, they got drone pretty badly, but
they got unified.
Speaker 3: Before the war began, with the idea being that they
will become some kind of insurgent group. And you had
the ISIS prisoners moved from Syria into Iraq, and if
Iran becomes unstable, Iraq becomes unstable, and that means that
they break out. So there are these three different insurgent
groups that are waiting to attack Iran. But if you
go back to what happened after the first war against
Saddam nineteen ninety one, what happened then was that the
Americans helped the Kurds break off their own region and
set up essentially and expanded region for the Kurds, and
they imposed the Northern fly the Northern no fly zone,
and the Southern no fly Zone on Iraq. And then
Clinton bombed the Iraqis in nineteen ninety eight and Bush
invaded in two thousand and three, So you could easily
see this happening again. They cripple Iran, they help these
ethnic groups set up their own little enclaves, and then
they keep it in stasis. The problem is that this
worked on Iraq because Syria was hostile and Iran was hostile,
and Jordan is a American protectorate. It doesn't exist except
to act as a buffer state between Israel and the
rest of them. At least Idan is not like that.
It's linked all the way into Central Asia and through
the Caspian it's linked to Russia, and through the Caucuses
is linked to Russia. And the Turks have a feeling
that they're next.
Speaker 7: They well, the foreign minister wasn't the foreign minister, but
one of the Israeli officials came out and said as
much that they're they're they're next up.
Speaker 2: And that that's why I wanted to talk about the
whole balance of power issue, is that a strong, a strong,
a functional Iran served many purposes in that whole Middle
East milieu. Because this they they kept Turkey occupied for
lack of a better term, and the and they also
wore a check against Israel for the Arab coalition that
hosts Our Power Project. You know, the US power projection,
the NATO power projection, and it was it was a
you know, a system not without its flaws, but it
was somewhat steady state. And uh, you know, I don't
want to be all conspiracy theory about the whole you know,
digital currency. Seven nations that didn't want didn't play ball,
and one by one they're being taken down and so
on and so forth. But heck, maybe there's something to that.
May maybe maybe there is something to that. I don't
I don't know. I don't want to think that. I'd
like to think that our.
Speaker 3: I mean, I'm willing to.
Speaker 2: Start thinking about all options at this point because this
doesn't in a in a true strategic geopolitical sense. All
this is doing is driving. Even if you balkanize Iran
and just drive it into into a state of Libya
or Syria, which is where this is headed right now,
you still got all those resources that are going to
be aligned with someone, and and the easiest someone's are
Russia and China, and a united Eurasia is exactly what
the West shouldn't want. That that is the existential threat,
not a functioning Iran, a united a really truly united
Eurasia with Iran, India, Russia and China, and then with
all the Southeast Asia satellites, which would be like little
chicks under the hen Uh. That is an existential threat
to the West, not this, and so I.
Speaker 3: Agree with you. I mean, look, God put an Ocean
and the Himalayas around India for a reason. So I'm
less worried about that.
Speaker 2: But a lot of people though, when you think, trust
me in orth Texas because they bleed over here.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, there are some things that I want to
say that I won't say about restricting air travel and
things of that nature. But but focusing on the topic
at hand, Iran sits between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia,
and it is important to have a strong Iran to
keep each of these countries in check. Initially, the Americans
perfectly understood this, and this is why they kept the
Shah around, and this is why they had this relationship
with the Shah, because the shell of Iran, in a
strong position, could act as the policeman of the Gulf
essentially and make sure that everybody in Opic and all
of the Arab countries actually played ball and behaved themselves.
And that worked if you break up Iran, Turkey expands
into northern Iraq and maybe into Iran itself. It gets
even closer to Azerbaijan, and it solves the fundamental problem
of the Turkish economy, which is energy. And that makes
Turkey into a great power even more than it is
right now.
Speaker 2: Yes, especially since yeah, it becomes a regional it becomes
a super regional hegimen. It really does exactly. That's what
we're staring.
Speaker 3: At, and not just that because of Israeli an Imaraiti recklessness,
the Saudis, the Pakistanis, and the Turks are drawing closer
together because the imarati Is, acting on behalf of Israel,
essentially have ensured that Libya is in chaos and that
Sudan is in chaos, and that's a huge problem for
the Egyptians. They try, the Imalitis try to take over
southern Yemen, and the Saudis panicked over it and kick
the Imeritis out of Yemen and probably threatened to actually
attack them. And then the Israelis tried to plant a
base in Somaliland, making the Saudis feel like they were
being surrounded by Israel, and so they've grown they and
after the Cutler strikes. The Saudis famously signed the defense
Treaty with Pakistan, giving themselves a nuclear umbrella, and now
they're cooperating more closely with Turkey. So the four main
Sunni powers in the region, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and
Pakistan are all drowing closer together because of Israelian recklessness.
And that's a behemoth like there's no American or Western
power that can take them on. It's impossible. So Israeli recklessness,
like attacking it on isn't just bad because American treasure
and lives are being wasted, which is a bad thing.
It's bad because it's bringing, its strengthening the Suddenys, who
are eighty five percent of the Muslim population, who are
a much bigger problem than the Iranian Shia, and the
Iranian Shia being naturally sandwiched between these Sudney powers, will
always look to the West for alliance. If you look
at the track record of this under Clinton and the
Rafsanjani when he was president of Iran, he tried to
open up to the Americans and to the French, and
he tried to partner. He tried to partner with American
companies and then Clinton signs a bunch of sanctions saying
that no, you cannot do business with Iran, so he
partners with Total instead. When the Afghanistan invasion happened, I
think it was actually some Saimani who gave the Americans
the maps of where the Taliban exactly were deployed, and
that's what the Americans used to bomb Afghanistan under the
Taliban in two thousand and one. But then what does
George Bush do. He declares them to be part of
the access of evil. So the policy, like the Iranians
have been trying to figure out a way where they
can get on with the United States and just focus
on helping the Shiah and strengthening the Shia and Lebanon
and in Iraq and wherever they could and throughout the Iraq.
In the years where the US was fully deployed in Iraq,
they worked with the Americans. They attacked the Americans endlessly,
but politically they worked with them as well. And there
was always a way to figure out a functional relationship
the Iranians. And it was the Iranians who wanted a
functional relationship with the United States despite all the slogan
earring they bought weapons from Israel in the nineteen eighties.
So this animosity is mainly created by the Israelis on
behalf of the United States, and they've been leading the
US into this war for decades, not just under Trump.
And you just realize that the Americans don't have an
independent foreign policy at all. And then you look at
the Epstein files and what do they tell you? They
tell you that the whole world doesn't think that the
Americans have it independent foreign policy. The Indians, when they
need anything, they talk to Jeffrey Epstein, The kutter Is,
when they need something, they talk to Epstein, The Humeriti
Is they need something, they talked to Epstein. And You're like, Okay,
how is this a sovereign country right where the foreign
relations of that country have to be conducted through an
ethnic mafia? Mm hmm, Well that becomes the issue.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's so we're seeing we're seeing the model right
were yeah, Philadelphia, the Five Boroughs Baltimore, were those majority
or even plurality Italian? No, but were they under the
management in aegis of an Italian specifically Sicilian protection racket
for years and years and years? Absolutely? So you see
how small minorities in certain situations, by the wily exercise
of power can gain effective control. And that's what's going
on in the form in the in the in the mega,
I don't control everything, just like the mafia didn't control everything,
but these certain meta uh uh aspects of of rule
and economic action absolutely are I don't want to say controlled,
but more than heavily influenced. How's that.
Speaker 3: That? That's very diplomatic and just try the Yeah, just
as with the Italian mafia, it wasn't every ital like
with the Sicilian mafia, wasn't every Sicilian?
Speaker 2: Right, It's exactly right.
Speaker 3: But to such a to like to talk about the
mafia without mentioning Sicilians is stupid.
Speaker 2: That's exactly right. And but isn't that a don't you
find that that's a good analog for what we're looking at,
just scaled up on a national basis.
Speaker 3: Even even if you take the Ukraine example, you had
the source network instigating the unrest mm hmm through the
NGOs that they backed through the Open Society Foundation, et cetera,
et cetera.
Speaker 2: Well, in our state, Norma was playing right along.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, oh yeah. Victoria Nulid's role is you know,
well documented, Yeah, very yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: Was the Russian Was it the Russians that lake that
phone call?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: It was a Russians I think, so, yeah, that was Russians.
Speaker 2: Okay, unbelievable. I listened to that occasionally just to be
did that really happen?
Speaker 3: It's it's incredible, incredible. Who should be meeting with whom? When?
And how often should they be speaking to each other?
And who should have witch post? Like? It was incredible.
But you had the Soorrows network instigating the unrest, you
had Epstein and Rothschild talking about how to profit from it,
and now you have Kushner helping Blackrock acid strip Ukraine
to help them pay off their debts for the war.
Speaker 1: Mm hm.
Speaker 3: And you have talked about how they're going to receive
eight million migrants in order to replace the losses that
have happened during the war.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so certainly Ukraine isn't Ukrainian anymore?
Speaker 3: Is it exactly like this? This whole thing. I mean,
if you're going to take eight million migrants, that's it.
You've given up your country, that's that's that's like twenty
of Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Oh what does that sound like?
Speaker 1: Sounds likely work except Israel, except Israel, yeah.
Speaker 2: Or Japan, God bless the Japanese.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm talking about I'm talking about the West, because
Israel considers themselves to be part of the Western, the
Western tradition. Yeah, they're the only demoscraph there is only
doesn't have a constitution.
Speaker 2: That's right, that's right, there is no such thing. There's
only Christendom. How about, speaking of which you'll are both Catholic. Sorry, okay,
keep on going, keep going.
Speaker 3: If you were to just compare that to the Italian mafia,
you get Kansas City, you get Philadelphia, you get New York,
and you get Vegas. It's each one of them and
up with a slice. It's all under the cross on Austra.
It's all Sicilian. It's not all Sicilians. But it's just
exactly like the mafia, which each one of them having
their own racket that they specialize in. It's very and
the destabilization Rothschild in the trading, black rock in the
hatch fund, asset stripping, same thing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's one of the reasons when people bring up
the mob. It's one of the reasons why I like
to recommend the movie, the TV show Boardwalk Empire, because
if you think about every mob movie you've ever seen,
there's always another ethnic group right there working with them.
Meyer Lanski, I mean, just think back to Bugsy Siegel.
I mean Bugsy Siegel. Is was Bugsy Siegel responsible for
building for creating Las Vegas? I mean possibly? You know,
So what you know, it's it's always networks. You know,
you talk about when Teal is talking to Epstein, that's
two networks talking to each other. When you when you
hear Hunter Biden, you hear another more junior varsity even
little league kind of network trying to operate within the world,
and it's just so funny. It's really odd that they're
the people who are the ones on the ground talking
to people just happen to be insane degenerates. Let's not
forget that Hunter Biden's laptop is I think that nine
of the police who saw that laptop are dead. Nine
of the new NYPD officers who saw that laptop are
dead at this time. So yeah, I mean, you're talking
about net You're talking about just warring faction that work
together every once in a while, and then they go
to war against each other every once in a while,
and I mean, that's the world we live in.
Speaker 3: Is just.
Speaker 1: This country was founded by a certain stock that was
too nice to allow people to allow other ethnic stocks
in to come in and become competing ethnic networks or
who were more organized and more well funded in many
cases and more well connected around the world.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, and the world connections matter because it
just allows financial opportunities that wouldn't exist otherwise. And it
allows a level of trust between different networks based on
ethnicity that wouldn't exist otherwise. And this isn't unique to
any particular group. Like all over the Levant, Armenian trades
traders are famous because they behave in a clannish way
and support other Armenians and that made them the biggest
businessmen in the Levant for many generations. So, but you
have the Israel factor, which complicates things in a particular way.
Speaker 2: Trump just announced that the Navy US Navy is going
to start escorting ships through the Strait of Horror moves.
Speaker 3: Yep, which is which is providing insurance.
Speaker 1: Yeah, which which just goes to show you that the
battle is commerce, the battle is the battle is always commerce.
I had a friend who was in the Coast Guard
and he wasn't. He was fighting fighting Somali pirates off
the coast of Somalia when he was supposed to be here,
you know, monitoring, you know, drunk people who are on
the Great Lakes driving their boat too fast. He's supposed
to go, hey, stop or every once in a while
you go down and you try and you know, kill
some drug runners off off of Miami. But he wasn't
going after Somali pirates because Somali pirates were threatening the
sovereignsy of another nation. No, they were threatening commerce. And
that's what this is all about.
Speaker 3: The thing is, this seems like a particularly stupid idea
for a couple of reasons. First, the sort of standard
Iranian navy such as it is, is destroyed. But the
asymmetric bits, like the small boats and like the drones
that they can fire at ships, these are not destroyed.
And if you thought the hothy word problem, the Iranians
are going to be ten times that problem.
Speaker 2: Well, that's exactly what I was about to bring up.
Is this is putting you think this thing is a mess.
Now wait until a US hull is sitting at the
bottom of a golf exactly or even even paralyzed by
I mean a drone probably doesn't take out a ship,
but it could, but it could disable a ship.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know.
Speaker 2: Uh so that's a you know, there's a game of
chicken that's being played here. If we go down this road,
that is, you are playing into the the the cost.
What does when you play chicken, you better have an advantage,
an incentive. If that guy you're playing chicken with values
his life or his existential crisis less than you do,
you're going to lose. You're either both going to be
dead or you're going to be you know what I'm saying.
So I understand the incentive to get shipping to say
all right, fine, we'll just escort these ships. We got
to get this going, but you are introducing a level
of risk that may not be worth the payoff.
Speaker 3: Absolutely. And the mountains are full of ballistic missile bases,
so they're going to be firing short range anti ship
missiles that's right, these ships. And they have the unmanned
marine vehicles, that's right, the marine drones which they're going
to be using. And lastly, if they think that their
embargo is failing, they're just going to hit the energy
at the source. They haven't targeted energy in as much
force as they could. Yet they've attacked Fujaia. There's been
an attack on the Adamko refinery in Rasta.
Speaker 8: Noura, but they have it, yeah, and it shut down
the refinery, and there's a story that it might be
false flag, and the Iranians said that they didn't do it,
which is weird because they've taken credit for a lot
of other things.
Speaker 3: But they haven't properly pounded the energy infrastructure. And if
you try to break their blockade, you're giving them an
incentive to go after these assets more forcefully, because what
they want to do is to convince the countries of
the region to stop shipping oil until the war is over.
Speaker 2: Mm hmmm, Yeah, you just raise it. All you're doing
is raising the cost on your adversary. I mean the
in asymmetric war. Can I make this as painful and
costly as possible so that you don't want to fight
anymore because I can't fight you head up that that's
every asymmetrical war, that's Vietnam, that's uh, you know. So
that's why I saw some weird questioning on the internet
that why would they hit an Iranian flagship the other day.
Because you're oil is fungible. You just want to raise
the cost on your adversary. Make this as painful as possible,
and we're going to see it. I don't know what
if the average gas price has been released yet, but
you know.
Speaker 1: In my area.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so so I filled up on Sunday night before
the price is hit. But you you know, it won't
take much to get to five dollars gas. And that's
painful on Americans in an election year, in a you know,
a midterm year. Again, just.
Speaker 3: This was not you know, they're going to do everything
that they can. The The Iranians have an economic Samson option.
Speaker 1: Mm hmmm.
Speaker 3: They they there there there was a bombing in Abadan,
which is where most of their energy industry is concentrated.
An advisor to the head of the IRGC said that
if you hit our primary targets, we're going to destroy
economic assets in the region. And if you try to
break their blockade, they're going to try to enforce it
in other ways. And so the first convoy that gets
in is going to be hit by everything. And in
a way, the US needs to see where the fire
is coming from, because that's part of how they're going
to acquire their targets. So it just seems a like
a serious gamble here.
Speaker 1: Well, something that doctor field As reminded me the other night.
He said he likes to remind everyone that there has
been exactly one time in recent history, and this could
be all of history when regime change was accomplished solely
by air power, and it was Serbia, and there was
also a color revolution going on on the ground, but
an invasion force was being prepared at the time, so
you know, there is that's to take into consideration as well.
Speaker 3: And Serbia took seventy eight days. Serbia took seventy eight
days to concede it on Kosovo.
Speaker 1: And Serbia is not Iran exactly.
Speaker 3: So Serbia at the time had I believe six million people.
Iran has ninety. It's a much bigger place. Serbia was
cut off from Russia. Iran is not cut off from
China and Russia. And so the calculus here, I mean, again,
maybe you do kill enough of them and it works, maybe,
but the IERGC is highly indoctrinated and they're not going
to be happy with this, uh, with this being forced
down their throat. Besides, if their aim is to rule
Iran the day after and transition Iran under their leadership.
Because every Islamic regime ends up turning into a military
dictatorship at some point, they need to have a narrative
of victory. They need to have a narrative that said,
we survived this war, we did what we promised we
would do. This is what justifies us governing. And so again,
this war is so completely unnecessary.
Speaker 1: Or do we want to discuss the fact that it
looks like now there have been two times in a
row where the United States was in serious negotiations and
the the was it no money. Was in a no
money rep who was.
Speaker 3: Talking about how the money foreign minister he was mediating
in Geneva, And basically what he's saying is that we
were incredibly close to a nuclear agreement and the Iranians
seeded pretty much everything on the nuclear thing except for
retaining an enrichment capacity at a very low level under
complete surveillance. And what the surveillance means is that every
nuclear site is known and is covered by cameras seen
by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Speaker 1: But it's just you're not going to believe they don't
believe it, you know, Hitler was lying about everything. Putin
lies about everything. The enemy always lies about everything. They
the only people that can be trusted are the Israelis.
I mean it's like they're the only ones telling the truth.
Their enemies never tell the truth. And it's this is why,
I mean, this is this is why you can't. We
can't deal with the Israelis anymore. We need them out
of our lives, out of our politics, out of our lives,
because they there is no you can't have a conversation
with them. You're not going to convince them of anything.
Whatever they want, they're going to do, and they have
it set up that this government is going to go
along with it. And if need be, American men are
American you know, boys are going to get killed and
it doesn't matter. And I'm not you know, and it's
not I'm not here clutching my pearls. I know that
people men die in war. And I'm not a total
anti war guy. If war needs to be fought, war
needs to be fought. But this war doesn't need to
be fought. There's no reason the six lives that we
know of right now have to be had to have
been lost. I mean, this is we're in a situation
where we just there's no way that you can you
can call you can call yourselves a sovereign nation. You
can call yourself a sovereign nation, or you can call
your you know, I'm a free American.
Speaker 2: No you're not.
Speaker 3: You're not.
Speaker 1: If these people, if these people are are in control
and I'm in England's not any better. England's under control,
under control of if not a foreign influence, a foreign
way of thinking that has just absolutely taken over the
whole country.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's it's you. It's not compatible with being a
free people. And you can only make democracy work under
very narrow circumstances where you have a truly virtuous and
extremely cohesive and usually small population. These are the factors
that are necessary for democracy to work. It doesn't work
when you have ethnic mafias. It just doesn't work.
Speaker 2: Or mass democracy by its nature magnifies the footprint of
of of in group, preferencing minorities. That's just that's just
how it works. So mass democracy can only well, mass
democracy really never it's like communism. It's it's a utopian
idea representative democracy and within a mixed regime. If you're
disciplined can work. Uh, but we left that along time ago.
I wanted to mention just some of the economic asymmetry
that's at play here as to why, you know again, Uh,
I want the you know, I'm a patriot, I want
the I want a return to Christendom one day. I
want the United States to to have its you know,
it's it's self interests met. But this is a huge
thing standing in the way in the case of this
particular conflict. So an Iranian shot drone is twenty to
fifty thousand dollars, depending on payload and range. An Iranian
short range ballistic missile or medium range ballistic missile that's
the short range anywhere from one hundred thousand dollars, the
medium range up to a million dollars of costs. Now,
listen to this. So you've got twenty thousand to fifty
thousand for drones, one hundred thousand to a million for
ballistic missile costs. A Patriot interceptor that's three to four
million dollars per shot, a THAD interceptor ten to fifteen
million per shot. And hey, our replacement rate on those
is like two maybe three a month.
Speaker 3: That's it.
Speaker 2: An SM three interceptor. So that's from our IJIS platforms
and our IGISA ground platforms or ijis ashore. Pardon me,
that's twelve to twenty million per shot. Now, to quote
Maggie Thatcher, pretty soon you run out of other people's money,
even if you've got a global reserve currency. This and
this doesn't even go to the inability for us to
replenish this at a much slower rate than now. Shutting
down the straight of horn Moves is a two way street.
That's going to the propellant precursors for the Iranian missile
systems are usually shipped around and through the Strait from China.
Most of the precursors come from China, but the other
bits can come in other ways. But I just want
people to be aware of the economic a symmetry here.
This calculus cannot go for long, even even setting aside
the limited magazine depth, the limited Sordie rate, because of
the geography involved. And this is a real problem in
addition to the Arab coalition showing already starting to show
some cracks because we can't defend them.
Speaker 3: We can't. And you had a Saudi analyst complaining on
TV a couple of days ago.
Speaker 2: You did Al Jazeera in non englisha Al Jazeera.
Speaker 3: That basically they find that they've been abandoned. Yes, you
have Bloomberg saying that they're asking for replenishment of their
interceptors and they're being fopped off mm hmm.
Speaker 2: And we don't have the interceptors to go around.
Speaker 3: You have the Americans talking about moving the interceptors that
are in South Korea, which means that they're probably not
going to come back, not anytime soon, not in a
meaningful timeline. And this is a wonderful opportunity for the Chinese.
So the way that this could play out, and the
Saudis can't be happy that Bahrain is on fire. I
mean the naval base in Bahrain has been pounded. But
more importantly, the Shia are rising up in Bahrain.
Speaker 2: Again social a lot of social unrest. Yeah, lots of
evidence for that in on the ocean sides.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, and the Saudis are terrified that will be contagious
because the eastern province of Saudi Arabia is mostly Shia
mm hmm, or is largely Shia. It used to be
mostly Shia. Now a lot of people have settled there,
so on every level. This war is a terrible thing
for the golf countries mm hm. And they haven't started
experiencing proper large scale economic losses yet. And the hooth
you haven't activated yet.
Speaker 2: Yeah, explain So, so Parah's explain for the average American
or the average watcher of Pete's Great Show, Why would
explain how, especially the UAE has so many visitors, how
that's going to be impacted by all this, Because this
is you're talking about You're you're talking about Disney. This
is this is Europe's for the well to do kind
of Europe's Disney World, isn't it.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean they get tens of millions of tourists
or people flying through every year. Dubai Airport is one
of the busiest in the world. And the cut that
is the the Imaratis and now increasingly the Saudis all
have their airlines with the global reach and they're a
little like they're in the middle of the planet. So
if you're going from Europe to Asia, you're probably going
either over that airspace or landing there and taking a
connecting flight. And so that whole pathway has been shut
down at a time when the Russian airspace is also closed,
so everybody is now rerouting to Azerbaijan. But Azerbaijan is
pretty close to the Israelis and it might get you know,
it might get involved at some point, and then that
airspace stops being safe. So you've cut off the West
from the East, and the Asians are going to be
scol about the oil prices. They're going they're going to
be absolutely furious because China gets fifty percent of its
old from the Middle East, Japan and South Korea is
probably something similar. So if that is shut down, it
basically triggers an economic catastrophe. If the Uranians follow through
with their threat of actually targeting the energy infrastructure properly,
which they haven't done yet, you're looking at a disaster
situation for global energy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, why are we doing this to our We're trying
to win as many friends and keep as many friends
as possible in Asia, in the in the you know,
the the Chinese theater, so to speak, the Chinese near
abroad from the Japanese all the way down South Korea,
uh uh, all the way to the Assis. This has
to be Now, the Assis have some of their own minerals,
but the but this this is this can't be good
for you know, Japan has swung hard to the right.
This should be maybe our greatest ally in the sense
of of outside are near abroad and we're we're about
to cut them off at the knees with this.
Speaker 3: Yes, and the companies have already shut off LNG exports.
That's a quarter of LNG exports.
Speaker 2: Where did where did L and G I saw the gas?
The natural gas prices were up about fifty percent yesterday
in Europe. How did they close today? Were they up again?
Speaker 3: Well, in Britain they're up almost one hundred Oh my gosh.
Speaker 4: And that's that's even the Europeans are saying to Ukraine,
of all people, please can you reopen the connections to
Russian oil because we can't handle this right now.
Speaker 2: We didn't the Ukrainians bomb up a depot Yeah, yeah,
that's just been a two or three weeks ago, right.
Speaker 3: Yes, because they are trying to cut off Slovakia and
Hungary who insist that hey, cheap energy is good. What
a crazy idea. And so the Ukrainians are threatening to
punish them, or have punished them, and they're saying, well,
if you do this, we're not going to supply you
with electricity anymore. And so the Ukrainians are acting like
drunken mafiosos of their own accord under Zelenski. And now
you cut off you've cut off Russian energy from the West,
and now you're risking a cut off of Middle Eastern energy.
How is that in anybody's interests mm hmmm. So there's
there might be a military plan which has bombed them
until they submit, but there's certainly no economic plan. The
thing is, if Trump fails on this and discredits MAGA
and discredits the right in general, which is precisely what
most senators want, let's be honest, which is precisely what
the GOP establishment wants, then you're going to end up
with infinity migration all over the West, because why not.
And if you end up with a democratic administration in
the twenty twenty eight election, they're just going to open
the border and everybody on the right in Europe is
going to lose because Trump proved to be a disaster.
So the risk reward ratio for this makes no sense. No,
And if the interceptors run out, they're going to have
to back down in a couple of weeks and if
you're the Iranians, what are you going to do? Well,
what you're going to do is try to negotiate a
separate cease fire with the Americans, then with the Israelis.
But that's the whole reason that the Americans went to
war in the first place for these Raelis. So the
ways this could go badly are numerous, and there's only
one way that this could go well, which is that
by bombing the Iranians they end up submitting, which didn't
happen to Hasbada took them a year of pounding. It
didn't happen to the Hothy and Iron is so much bigger.
Speaker 9: Oh what about Afghanistan? Oh like, how's Libya going? How'd
that work out?
Speaker 1: But you have to understand that that wasn't Trump, as
jd Vance said last year when they bombed you know what,
when when they bombed the nuclear plant, all those things
you're talking about in the past, those were done under
dumb presidents.
Speaker 2: Well, I hope he can pull a rabbit out of
a hat. I really do. I don't need to see.
I don't see how it could happen, you know, I
think I think there was in the Iranian in the
Persian diaspora. There was this unrealistic hope about Raza, but
he's a that's not gonna happen. That was never a
viable option everybody, you know, nostalgia kills and there's a
sense of would we all love nineteen sixties Iran to
come back? Yeah, the world would love that, but chiefly
the United States. It would be great, But nostalgia kills.
That's not happening. You've got to have a plan for
a way forward. There is a difference between nostalgia and reaction,
but sometimes reaction devolves into nostalgia. And that's what I
fear this has been. This is what this all smells like,
is Wow, if we could just go back to pre
uh uh you know, pre revolution Iran, well, we would
all love that, but how do you get there? How
do you really get there? And it's uh, you know,
I see the I see the the the Iranian dish
or calling for the people to rise up, but the
the what does that look like for the for the
for the Iranians, the Republican guards seems I mean, are
you just gonna are you going to depend on the
United States to carpet bomb every single uh place where
the Republican Guard might be. They're they're completely distributed throughout
the country. How what does that look like? How long
does that take? What is that? What are you left
with afterwards?
Speaker 3: You?
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're left with Iraq or Syria, right, you.
Speaker 3: Know, broken country, right, which is which is fine for
these Raelis, that's right, but it strengthens Turkey.
Speaker 2: It's fine for the Israelis for right now, exactly, it's
not for five years on the line. It's a disaster,
that's exactly right. It's it's it's a and and hey, look,
put your put your uh, you know, your funny black
hat on for a second. Let's say let's let's say
this does go, uh, the the US swings left in
twenty eight or swings hard left in in the mid
terms and then and then goes with a Democrat president.
What's interesting is everybody's black pilling on the on the
on the mid terms and the twenty eight deal. Right now,
the generic numbers are add the head to head numbers
aren't so bad because the Democrats candidates are so pissed
poor pardon me, so it all is not lost, but
but you've got to get a plan really quick. But
let's say it does swing left. Let me tell you
what the cup that what the left looks like. This
next generation of left isn't a walk in the park
for the for the Israelis, the the upcoming American left
is gonna look they need to be very realistic about
what they are, what they might be bringing upon themselves.
And it's not pretty, no, And.
Speaker 3: It's quickly getting to a point where if people believe
that voting is pointless, which it has been for three
decades now, then they're going to resolve politics the old
fashioned way, which is violence.
Speaker 2: Would would you be shocked if we start seeing political
assassinations in the US And it's harder in the UK
because of the gun laws, but I would imagine that
motivated folks could figure out a way around that.
Speaker 3: We've had two MPs killed over the last five years.
I believe five or seven years. I'm not sure when. Yeah,
I'm not one hundred percent sure of the dates, but
in the last few years we've had two MPs killed.
The left here is rabid and it's absolutely mad, and
it's more extreme than anything you could possibly imagine. They're
explicit about wanting open borders because now the left is
no longer the Labor Party. The left is the Greens,
who are insane communists led by this guy called Zach Velanski,
literally in an alliance with the worst Muslims in the country,
not any Muslims, the worst Muslims in the country. And okay,
these are people who are explicit about open borders and
transiting children. And the answer to that is, well, if
you win the election, then I'm still not going to
accept it, or for average British people, they will still
say that they're not going to accept it. In the
United States, it's pretty much the same thing. So you're
running out of ways in which to resolve this peacefully.
That's the real risk.
Speaker 10: Yeah, and if you create an economic crisis, the housing market,
it is in a precarious situation already in Britain and
in the United States, the level of debt is unprecedented
because of the global financial crisis and because of COVID.
Speaker 3: France, Spain, Italy, Britain, the US. They all have completely
unsustainable debts. Throw in a good old fashioned energy crisis
and then you could get chaos. So again, the risks
that are being taken here are not commensurate with the
level of Iranian threat in any shape, way or form,
and with Rubius saying is saying, you know, we had
to do it because the Israelis made us essentially or
we're going to make us. Well, okay, uh, how do
you how do you fix that?
Speaker 2: It's uh, it seems seemingly intractable unless here's my here's
my vision. That's not gonna happen. I realize that, but
here's my vision. And I think you had a small
you had a very tiny shadow step towards this yesterday.
But I think the way that if if if I
were suddenly you know, I would encourage just mm hmm.
What got Trump elected, which wasn't just wasn't policy genius
or anything like that. It was the ability to speak frankly,
within in in a realist manner to average people and say,
we have we need to add he needs to double
down on America first, that the citizens of the United
States should be the number one through ten beneficiaries of
both domestic and foreign policy. That where mistakes have been made,
allude to them. You don't have to bathe in you
don't have to bathe in your own mistakes, but just acknowledge. Look,
there's been times where this country has bowed to the
to the to the to the desires of others who
have been and it's good to have friends, but even
in this sense, even in the case of friends, it's
my duty to serve the American citizen first foremost, and
that that's the only way you get through something like
this and say, look, there's times where it was my
judgment that we entered into this in order to not
be the get drug around into a conflict not of
our own choosing. It's messy, and I'm gonna do I mean,
this is what Nixon did with Vietnam. Nixon was very
upfront and said, look, we made a miss He didn't
come out and actually say we made a mistake, but
he said, we're going to get out of this conflict.
It's that's my job is to get out of this
in the best way for Americans, and that's the I
think that's the only way to do this. Will he
do it? Can you stand up to the lobby and
to the absolute money avalanche that is going to fund
all these senators? And I don't know, I don't know
what the answer to that is, probably not, but if.
Speaker 3: That's constitutional, we'll have to follow the advice of courtesy,
Arvin and go fully extra constitutional and say to protect
the Constitution, I have to suspend it. And I'm doing
it on executive power. And if you don't like it,
this nice friendly Marin over there is going to pop
one in your head. Yeah, but there isn't a like,
There isn't a democratic way out of an oligarchy controlling
your elected representatives.
Speaker 2: That's the issue that and that's where we are.
Speaker 3: And so I either do it using the power of
the state and let them call you fascist, but in
five years time they'll be happy. M Or can you
do it the messy way? Yeah? You either do it,
book Ley, or you do it the messy way, which
is civil war. Yeah. So it's really bad that Trump
has betrayed the base in this way. There is a
pathway to win this, and I hope it's one for
everybody's sake, but the downside risk is immense.
Speaker 1: Well, I know Ron has to get out of here,
so I'll let you guys do plugs. Ferris go ahead first.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I'm on modad geopolitics and I'm on Firas
dad At on Twitter, Ron.
Speaker 2: Ron Dodson on Twitter. I have a substack that I've
been actually publishing very regularly to the Eyes of a Pilice,
but you can find it under my name Ronald Dodson
and all right for Claremont and American Reformer and Responsible
state Craft. I did a long essay on we mentioned
the Kabbad earlier. I did a long essay on that
back in twenty four that kind of explains where these
where that movement came from, and some of the motivations.
That was inspired by the Brooklyn uncovering of all the
tunnels and everything. So it's a couple of years old,
I still think it's timely appreciate if you're interested in
that looking at it, I'll let you.
Speaker 1: I'll link to it. Gentlemen, you know I didn't mean
to cut it so short, and everything go to plugs
so quick. I know ron has to get out of here.
But thank you for the information that you've shared today
in your opinions, and I appreciate you. Thank you.
Speaker 3: What was the pleasure.
Speaker 2: It's fantastic and we're very lucky to get a chance
to visit with For us, it's just amazing, great stuff.
Speaker 1: I was just listening to him on mister Burden had
I'm on I heard an early release of it today. Yes, yes,
go check that out because Fears breaks down exactly what
the Epstein Network is.
Speaker 3: So thank you, thanks,