Speaker 1: Oh, yes, Okay, here we got.
Speaker 2: December nineteenth, twenty twenty four, allegedly, according to that thing
Speaker 2: we call a calendar, you know, thankfully. And I'm saying
Speaker 2: this and nobody knows why. But and maybe I'll explain
Speaker 2: it to you on New Year's Eve or there after.
Speaker 2: But I'm waiting for twenty twenty four to be over.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 2: Anyway, as I look at the news speeds, as I examine,
Speaker 2: as I constantly do, what is happening domestically, internationally, et cetera,
Speaker 2: What is the significance of these different events that might
Speaker 2: be far far away from over there? You know, sometimes
Speaker 2: we got to spend over there so we don't have
Speaker 2: to spend over here. I know. It sounds like an
Speaker 2: army defense thing right where it's like we gotta fight
Speaker 2: them there. We don't got to fight him here. We're
Speaker 2: not there yet, But I almost feel like a new
Speaker 2: era in the war on Terror is about to happen. Okay,
Speaker 2: but is anybody paying attention? Are they all locked up
Speaker 2: into the trumpet sphere? And as to whether he has
Speaker 2: sabotaged or has a great plan for our economy, which
Speaker 2: is a disaster. By the way, Merry Christmas. You know,
Speaker 2: my holiday sucks. I hope that some of yours don't.
Speaker 2: I really do, but I don't see how they don't. Anyway,
Speaker 2: Look enough for that. I'll get into the finances and
Speaker 2: some other things that are going on toward the end
Speaker 2: of this year soon. How about international incidents, the geopolitical
Speaker 2: and status of the rest of the world, and how
Speaker 2: it's going to affect us and the rest of the world.
Speaker 2: Oh right, the thing is going on over there in
Speaker 2: Israel the Middle East as per usual, and you're yawning
Speaker 2: already stop it, okay, But Syria regime change, this occurred.
Speaker 2: Now we went from what two stars to three stars
Speaker 2: on the flag. But I gotta tell you this is
Speaker 2: a bigger change than just in symbology. I see from
Speaker 2: my perspective that something has happened strategically here, something that's
Speaker 2: going to effect Vladimir Putin, something that's going to affect
Speaker 2: one of the current conflicts on the planet, which, by
Speaker 2: the way, two plus how many months now in Ukraine. Anyway, Syria,
Speaker 2: remember when Trump was in office and we were moving
Speaker 2: to the I think it was the northeastern part of
Speaker 2: the country. Our military assets were because they were going
Speaker 2: to guard oil fields and let them sort it out.
Speaker 2: Apparently they've sorted it out, and Syria is an ally
Speaker 2: of Russia, and Russia was suddenly going to run rampant
Speaker 2: throughout the field there. I guess they were in support
Speaker 2: of the aside regime. Didn't work out too well for
Speaker 2: you there, did it?
Speaker 1: But here we are.
Speaker 2: What is happening in Syria? Why is the news media
Speaker 2: kind of covering it but not really examining what's happening
Speaker 2: or putting it in context on the globe. Okay, we've
Speaker 2: talked a lot of JFK with Larry Hancock recently, but
Speaker 2: there are other things that Larry does pay a great
Speaker 2: deal of attention to and is an excellent analyst with
Speaker 2: outside of the JFK assassination. I mean, you take a
Speaker 2: look at as many many books like Surprise Attack, Shadow Warfare,
Speaker 2: Creating Chaos. These things don't have a lot to do
Speaker 2: with the JFK assassination. Although Surprise Attack and shadow Warfare
Speaker 2: that kind of sounds like you could, but not necessarily. Look,
Speaker 2: there are a lot of things that are occurring in
Speaker 2: spheres of influence, military movements, covert, overt, etc. The global
Speaker 2: politic Djure all of it, and Larry is going to
Speaker 2: help us kind of sort out and put into context
Speaker 2: the things that are occurring in Syria because I need
Speaker 2: somebody to I don't understand it. As I said, I
Speaker 2: see a strategy unfolding. I'm not sure whose it is.
Speaker 2: I see that this has been timed for a particular purpose.
Speaker 2: Do I know what that purpose is? I see that
Speaker 2: there are various leaders who are generally worthy of headlines,
Speaker 2: and you know what those people's strategies are definitely in play.
Speaker 2: But is anybody talking about this or realistically examining it?
Speaker 2: And I don't trust what Seymour Hersh is saying. Well,
Speaker 2: you probably shouldn't anyway as a source. But anyway, it
Speaker 2: is what it is. Larry. I know that that sounded
Speaker 2: a little incoherent, but I feel like it's not. It's
Speaker 2: an accurate description for what it is. We've been fed
Speaker 2: so far. What in the world is going on in Syria?
Speaker 2: How are we supposed to take this? And what are
Speaker 2: the ongoing consequences that we're all going to have to
Speaker 2: be dealing with soon one way or another in the
Speaker 2: international geopolitical spectrum, et cetera. But before we even go there,
Speaker 2: how are you doing tonight.
Speaker 3: I'm doing okay, Chuck. I am ready for Christmas. I
Speaker 3: think I'm ready to take Christmas week is kind of okay.
Speaker 3: It's a good time to set back and relax and
Speaker 3: rest and like look towards your reset, Like you're talking
Speaker 3: about us, like lots of things have happened, we just
Speaker 3: need a pause, need to center ourselves, get ready for
Speaker 3: a while. So the holidays will be a good time
Speaker 3: for centering.
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 2: So you and I'll have the common reset time here.
Speaker 2: And you're looking forward to the new year too, to
Speaker 2: kind of says, let's bring our new resolutions, not even
Speaker 2: necessarily a New Year's resolution, but let's move forward to
Speaker 2: do something different and make things happen right going into
Speaker 2: twenty twenty five, because the world world is going to
Speaker 2: be an active place still, and it's going to be,
Speaker 2: if nothing else, dynamic and entertaining. I think, although you know,
Speaker 2: I've got some other predictions for twenty twenty five, but
Speaker 2: that's not today's show, Larry. Yeah, So at least we're
Speaker 2: looking forward to twenty twenty five for the reset sort
Speaker 2: of aspect of it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we are, and I think actually we have discussed
Speaker 3: we discussed probably a year two years back. I think
Speaker 3: we have have discussed the context for what's happening, which,
Speaker 3: as you say, the media certainly isn't reaching back in
Speaker 3: time to present any of anything except the most current events.
Speaker 1: I mean, the media.
Speaker 3: Has totally lost the ability to present context beyond oh,
Speaker 3: like two months. That's the backstory is two months, you know.
Speaker 3: But you and I have talked about this. We had
Speaker 3: conversations a while back, and when we talked about how
Speaker 3: geopolitics has flipped between the Old Cold War and the
Speaker 3: New Cold War, and when during the old Cold War
Speaker 3: the United States tended to support established regimes and the
Speaker 3: Soviet Union tend to support revolutionaries, and it was really
Speaker 3: expensive to support established regimes, and and the revolutionaries over
Speaker 3: time always seemed to take the advantage, and the US
Speaker 3: often supported regimes that got overthrown. And so a lot
Speaker 3: of our covert and deniable warfare came to not because
Speaker 3: we were taking the position of supporting regimes where the
Speaker 3: Soviet you know, where the communists where the revolutionaries. Obviously
Speaker 3: we fit with revolutionaries. And by the way, it's cheap
Speaker 3: to support them.
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, that's.
Speaker 2: The thing, you know, you send them a few guns,
Speaker 2: you send them some food, and you can be a
Speaker 2: hero in a hurry. But the US would also have
Speaker 2: this other problem where yeah, it was kind of stagnant.
Speaker 2: We were just supporting well projects or trajectories that appeared
Speaker 2: to be in favor of what stability, right, That was
Speaker 2: always the key cry really from and.
Speaker 3: You don't you don't have to build big bases. I mean,
Speaker 3: look at the gigantic military bases and ports that we
Speaker 3: built in Vietnam, for example, huge infrastructure expenditure in Vietnam, Yes,
Speaker 3: which we essentially donated to the Vietnamese over time, but
Speaker 3: it is expensive from an infocause when you're supporting a
Speaker 3: regime in place, you've got to pay for their.
Speaker 1: Infrastructure as well.
Speaker 3: Whatever country that's in, you end up paying for ports
Speaker 3: and roads and airports.
Speaker 1: And that sort of thing.
Speaker 3: And when the revolutionaries win, they just take it over
Speaker 3: and you know you have to write it off.
Speaker 1: Your books as a loss.
Speaker 3: Well that was US during the Cold War, and the
Speaker 3: Soviets were playing a you know, a low money game
Speaker 3: and maybe a long IDs game, but they often won.
Speaker 3: They wanted Vietnam, they want, you know, they want in
Speaker 3: many places. But what we've seen in the in this century,
Speaker 3: in the new Cold War era is it's flipped and
Speaker 3: Russia has decided that it's it's smart to support regimes
Speaker 3: like support the Syrian regime against the Syrian revolutionaries. Right,
Speaker 3: And so what do we see in Syria? Huge bases
Speaker 3: and infrastructure built by the Russians, huge huge investments. We
Speaker 3: see Russian forces deployed all around Syria, much like we
Speaker 3: saw in Vietnam.
Speaker 1: And I've been amazed.
Speaker 3: Actually, I didn't realize the extent of Russian military deployments
Speaker 3: within Syria until I've been watching over the last few days,
Speaker 3: these long, long lines of Russian transport trucks and heavy
Speaker 3: equipment pulling back from all over Syria into their two
Speaker 3: remaining bases to be evacuated.
Speaker 1: This, this is Vietnam. This for the Russians.
Speaker 3: The only difference is they managed to fly their people
Speaker 3: out and get their people out without taking them off
Speaker 3: the roofs of embassies.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's.
Speaker 3: It's less spectacular because of that, but in.
Speaker 1: Terms of loss of investment, loss of image, loss.
Speaker 3: Of it's the same thing. So it's much more strategic.
Speaker 3: You know, there's a lot of talk about, well they'll
Speaker 3: just they'll just retreat to Libya region. That means they're
Speaker 3: going to have to support another Libyan regime, which amounts
Speaker 3: to another Libyan general who owns the port and owns
Speaker 3: the city. And guess what if they want to they're
Speaker 3: going to have to put military resources on the board.
Speaker 1: They've already got some in o Limbya.
Speaker 3: They're going to have to build a new if they
Speaker 3: want Libya to to replace Syria, it's going to be
Speaker 3: another huge investment.
Speaker 1: So, right, strategically, this is a big deal.
Speaker 2: Well, right, so we have Vietnam minus the Hanoi Hilton
Speaker 2: and the flip. But this was predictable in my mind
Speaker 2: due to the fact that again during the Trump administration,
Speaker 2: you had the withdrawal of the US. Basically, they didn't
Speaker 2: fully withdraw from Syria, but they relegated themselves to a
Speaker 2: very small part of the map, right, which gave free
Speaker 2: reign to the Russian assets throughout their allies territory.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: So, now Asad's regime had Russians with it, they didn't
Speaker 2: have to even contend with making sure that they don't
Speaker 2: engage with the Americans. They didn't even have to contend
Speaker 2: with any of that, right, and they didn't.
Speaker 3: But what they didn't recognize and maybe they did recognize,
Speaker 3: but Turkey, Turkey did a brilliant job of playing a hand.
Speaker 1: At it is.
Speaker 3: There's a backstory too, It's why the US was even
Speaker 3: anywhere in uh Syria to begin with. And that bad
Speaker 3: story goes back to twenty twelve in the Obama regime,
Speaker 3: when we once again decided that we would we would
Speaker 3: play a hand and we would oppose Isis taking over
Speaker 3: Syria by working with the non radical Alamist revolutionary groups.
Speaker 3: Assads looks weak, he looks exposed. Somebody's going to take over. Well,
Speaker 3: we want it to be the non Islam versus Isis.
Speaker 3: The Russians played a much stronger game, no more deniable nonsense.
Speaker 3: We're playing deniable nonsense. We're trying to covertly ship weapons
Speaker 3: into Syria from Libya, which gets our ambassador killed in
Speaker 3: ben Ghazi because Isis sees what's going on, and just
Speaker 3: after he sent off one shipload of weapons. I mean,
Speaker 3: we run a special CIA mission in Libya to connect
Speaker 3: collect weapons which we're gonna ship there Soviet weapons, by
Speaker 3: the way, which we will ship to Syria, which and
Speaker 3: they're deniable, like everybody in Syria has got syvia weapons. Okay, great,
Speaker 3: so we're playing this deniability thing. Isis gets ahead of
Speaker 3: the curve and Libya becomes a nightmare for us. But
Speaker 3: Russia in Syria plays it exactly the opposite. Rather than
Speaker 3: playing around with you know, supplying rifles or machine guns
Speaker 3: or explosives to they send in heavy armor and air
Speaker 3: support for the Syrian regime. You know, that's this is
Speaker 3: how we're going to play the game. And that works
Speaker 3: for a while, and it works for a long while,
Speaker 3: and so it leaves us hung out and Trump Trump
Speaker 3: wants the Trump says he wants the oil. There are
Speaker 3: only interest in Syria. Now he says, we have no interest.
Speaker 3: But then he said we had interest in the oil,
Speaker 3: which meant we had interest in the Kurds.
Speaker 1: Because that's where the oil is.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 1: So, as you said, that's where you find you know, like,
Speaker 1: why are American troops still there?
Speaker 3: It's really a hangover from the Trump administration. And once
Speaker 3: you get in place like that. It's true that they
Speaker 3: were a blocking force for ISIS, uh, but it wasn't
Speaker 3: really Isis. The Syrians, of course, were in league with
Speaker 3: the Iranians, and it's the Uranian military equipment and shipmunths
Speaker 3: that's coming through which we weren't blocking. But that's why
Speaker 3: we're still there at all. You know, you raised that
Speaker 3: question like where are we even out there? Well, the
Speaker 3: real answer is Trump shut down the CIA support program,
Speaker 3: deniable support program for the revolutionaries. He kept troops out
Speaker 3: there where the oil fields are with the Kurds, and
Speaker 3: over the last several years, Turkey has decided that they
Speaker 3: need to play, they need to play in Syria because
Speaker 3: Turkey is opposed to We've got Turkey and Israel opposed
Speaker 3: to a ram Okay and.
Speaker 1: Turkey, actually Turkey.
Speaker 3: Russia is not saying anything about it. But it's pretty
Speaker 3: clear now that the revolutionary group groups that ended up
Speaker 3: taking Da Mascus are there because they were supplied and
Speaker 3: supported in the north across the Turkish border by Turkey.
Speaker 2: Now adding to this confusion, Larry, and after I add
Speaker 2: my last you know, five to eight cents instead of
Speaker 2: two cents here into this equation, I'm gonna shut up
Speaker 2: and let you sort it. Because here's the problem. A
Speaker 2: couple of things. One, I recall Trump basically saying ISIS
Speaker 2: is destroyed, They're done, They're gone. And I said to myself,
Speaker 2: I don't think so you're not showing me enough bodies
Speaker 2: to account for this massive force you said was there.
Speaker 2: But maybe maybe maybe he did it, you know, and
Speaker 2: we'll just never see it, because after all, this is
Speaker 2: also theoretical to the American public that they barely even
Speaker 2: know what we're talking about here. Okay, Fine, let's put
Speaker 2: that aside for a moment, because in the meantime since
Speaker 2: the Trump administration, other things have occurred here. Israel is
Speaker 2: definitely involved in something else right now when it comes
Speaker 2: to Gaza, when it comes to the Palestinian question, all
Speaker 2: of that, and guess who else is involved in that situation, Iran.
Speaker 2: So they are both occupied, having their resources trained and
Speaker 2: their attention turned elsewhere. I would say that's a serious factor, okay.
Speaker 2: In addition, the Russians, who are a main player here
Speaker 2: and clearly should have been the people that got some
Speaker 2: of this change going one way or another, either by
Speaker 2: failure okay, or by doing something covertly that worked another way.
Speaker 2: You get where I'm going with this, One way or another,
Speaker 2: Russia is a factor in why the Assad regime fell,
Speaker 2: whether it's because of errors they made, a lack of
Speaker 2: interest that they had because they were otherwise occupied, etc.
Speaker 2: One way or another. Russia's involved there, Okay, so put
Speaker 2: that all aside. And then this guy who comes in
Speaker 2: and is supposed to be the leader of the new
Speaker 2: government now that's trying to take over and saying, look,
Speaker 2: we're not going to murder everybody who was, you know,
Speaker 2: supporting a SOD. We're here to make the change that
Speaker 2: we've all been waiting for half a century to make
Speaker 2: regarding getting away from not only a SOD, the current
Speaker 2: a SOD, but his father right long standing issue in
Speaker 2: that country. And he's supposed to be an ISIS leader,
Speaker 2: and he comes out and basically says, we don't want
Speaker 2: to slaughter everybody. We don't want to do this and that.
Speaker 2: And the third thing that I've been told is the
Speaker 2: hallmark of a ISIS leader getting a country, which, by
Speaker 2: the way, this would have set off panic attacks all
Speaker 2: across every analyst, every Middle East watcher in the English
Speaker 2: speaking world would have been freaking out about eight years
Speaker 2: ago if if Siria fell to ISIS, right, what is
Speaker 2: going on here? You have an ISIS leader who's not
Speaker 2: acting like an ISIS leader. You have us basically yawning
Speaker 2: at this whole situation in Syria because we're not really involved.
Speaker 2: And I guess if all we were doing was guarding
Speaker 2: an area that the Kurds were occupying, well you see
Speaker 2: how well that that's doing for anybody, because the Kurds
Speaker 2: have been this continuous question across the region, occupying parts
Speaker 2: of countries but not having a homeland of their own
Speaker 2: for I don't know, I can't remember how long. But anyway,
Speaker 2: what does this all essentially mean? I mean, is there
Speaker 2: a significance to this? And oh, by the way, has
Speaker 2: the Islamic State, remember they were using that phrase for
Speaker 2: a while, finally captured one of the larger states that
Speaker 2: actually is an oil producer and everything else. Is this
Speaker 2: not something that people would have freaked out about a
Speaker 2: few years ago? Or am I missing something?
Speaker 3: Well the simple answer to that last question is no.
Speaker 3: But the real problem is, again, we as Americans are
Speaker 3: very sophisticated in our use of terms. Isis was a regime, Okay,
Speaker 3: radical Islamist are a faith. You need to separate separate
Speaker 3: those who believe in implementing radical Islam in government from
Speaker 3: the ISIS regime. When Trump said the Isis regime was destroyed, yeah,
Speaker 3: it's capital capital was overrun. It's bureaucracy was destroyed. I
Speaker 3: mean it was issued in its own currency. I mean
Speaker 3: the Isis as a regime was destroyed. That is true,
Speaker 3: But there are still radical Lomists all over the place.
Speaker 3: I mean it's a faith. I mean there are radical
Speaker 3: Christians in different places. It's it's the radical element of
Speaker 3: a faith. And it's not just in one place. It's
Speaker 3: all over the place. Radical Islam is in the Gulf States,
Speaker 3: it's in Africa. You have radical Islamist military groups operating
Speaker 3: in several states inside Africa. So the thought that Isis
Speaker 3: as a belief system and as a military network was
Speaker 3: destroyed as ridiculous. It just shows you don't know what
Speaker 3: you're talking about. Okay, but let's let's go back to Syria.
Speaker 3: One of the leaders and just the most obvious leader
Speaker 3: at the moment, and one of the reasons he's most
Speaker 3: most obvious is that he comes out of a part
Speaker 3: of Syria, northwestern Syria. I probably pronounced that wrong, but
Speaker 3: near the Turkey border where they were receiving group was
Speaker 3: receiving a lot of support from Turkey, and he managed
Speaker 3: to put in place a non radical Islamist regime. They
Speaker 3: didn't enforce shaha law like Isis would they you know,
Speaker 3: there were It was kind of a compromised regime. It
Speaker 3: certainly was not pure isis pure pure what we see
Speaker 3: when we look back two or three years in Iran,
Speaker 3: in Iraq, I'm sorry, it was more of a compromise state.
Speaker 1: And that's one of the reasons why.
Speaker 3: Is one of the things that the media is doing
Speaker 3: quite well at the moment is interviewing people from that
Speaker 3: area to ask them how he ran it? You know,
Speaker 3: how was it run?
Speaker 1: Is it?
Speaker 3: What would we expect if this goes national within Syria?
Speaker 3: And that's that's a good thing to do. You need
Speaker 3: to look on the ground at what their practices were,
Speaker 3: not just talk about them generically. You and I have
Speaker 3: talked about this all in regard to JFK. Don't just
Speaker 3: say c I A. Don't just say mafia. That's nonsense.
Speaker 3: That's too high a level.
Speaker 2: Okay, so really fast, yeah, so really fast. I just
Speaker 2: want to throw something in here. Is that what we're
Speaker 2: seeing as far as this really vague reporting. That's what
Speaker 2: I was representing there when I was telling you about
Speaker 2: you know, like Isis and this and that is this
Speaker 2: vague reporting and slapping these labels on things is extremely
Speaker 2: unhelpful because, like you were just saying about the JFK thing,
Speaker 2: where they go, wellse Ia, like that's supposed to be
Speaker 2: the end of the conversation. Yeah, that's what they're doing here,
Speaker 2: and it's doing no one a service, is my point.
Speaker 2: So that's why I'm asking, like, how is it that
Speaker 2: we suss this out?
Speaker 3: Because you're actually it's the beginning of the conversation, right.
Speaker 3: The other point that you brought up as far as
Speaker 3: Russia again, I think what we're seeing is why did
Speaker 3: this happen during Russia's watch? Okay, well, that obviously is
Speaker 3: it's somewhat what happened to us in Vietnam.
Speaker 1: You know, we got tired. You can't it. Can you
Speaker 1: sustain that level of expenditure for decades? You know? Can you? Literally?
Speaker 3: It's true that Osad was generating a lot of revenue
Speaker 3: pretty much for himself, not Syria through drug sales.
Speaker 1: We can see that.
Speaker 3: That's the evidence of that is turning up now with
Speaker 3: speculation afore, but it's the stashes are turning up now,
Speaker 3: so you can see it for real. But Ukraine obviously
Speaker 3: is a huge drain on Russia, Russian manpower, Russian resources,
Speaker 3: and so Russia, you know, over a decade.
Speaker 1: Or so.
Speaker 3: Putin to some extent, I don't think as badly. I
Speaker 3: wish it was as badly, but he is ended up
Speaker 3: committing himself to multiple wars at the same time. Okay,
Speaker 3: and can you sustain that financially? Could if you look
Speaker 3: at the military force that he had in Syria. And
Speaker 3: again I don't think it's not been reported on very
Speaker 3: well because it wasn't too visible to us. You know,
Speaker 3: now that we can look at the number of airlifters
Speaker 3: they have on the ground, heavy air transports, ships, that
Speaker 3: sort of stuff, taking stuff out, you get a much
Speaker 3: better feel for how much they had invested in Syria.
Speaker 3: The Russian air force and the Russian army was propping
Speaker 3: up the Aside regime, assisted by and in the West. Okay,
Speaker 3: let's make that clear in the West, assisted by the
Speaker 3: Iranian militia and the Hamas that their fighters were also
Speaker 3: propping up the Aside regime in other parts of the country.
Speaker 3: So when Russia, you know, takes it has to force
Speaker 3: to take its eye off to look at Ukraine. When
Speaker 3: Israel knocks out a lot of the the firepower, the reserves,
Speaker 3: the ammunition supplies that were going in from Iran and
Speaker 3: from Lebanon. You know, it's a new ballgame one afternoon.
Speaker 3: You know, people asked why did this happen so quickly?
Speaker 3: I would say one of the reasons that happened so
Speaker 3: quickly is the elements were there in place, and suddenly,
Speaker 3: to a large extent, Israel's attacks in Lebanon and living
Speaker 3: in Israel's defeat of Iran's missile attacks opened the gates.
Speaker 3: It's like, okay, these people they are they can be defeated.
Speaker 3: You know, Russia has other things to do, and these
Speaker 3: other players can be shown to be defeated and not
Speaker 3: all powerful. I mean, Iran was being viewed as all
Speaker 3: powerful a month ago, two months ago. Now they're not
Speaker 3: being viewed that way. So the floodgates open all at once,
Speaker 3: just the same thing that happened in Afghanistan to the Russians,
Speaker 3: the same thing that happened in Vietnam.
Speaker 1: US.
Speaker 3: When these things go, they go all at once. There's
Speaker 3: no magic to it. It's its culmination of events, well right.
Speaker 2: And a big, huge part of it is simply that look,
Speaker 2: if we were to rewind the clock a little bit
Speaker 2: and go back two and a half years ago, you
Speaker 2: don't have the conflict in Palestine, you know, draining draining
Speaker 2: away what Iran could be investing in Syria. You don't
Speaker 2: have Ukraine draining away what Russia could be investing in Syria.
Speaker 2: So two key allies being otherwise entangled elsewhere, Yeah, causes
Speaker 2: a lack of resources. Forget about strategy, forget about manpower,
Speaker 2: although manpower is probably an issue here as well, and therefore,
Speaker 2: without those two key allies to prop up the regime,
Speaker 2: it fell simple logic.
Speaker 3: Nope, Yeah, especially without the Russian Air Force. I mean
Speaker 3: the Russian Air Force. And this is one of the
Speaker 3: reasons that there's a lot of speculations, Oh, the Syrians
Speaker 3: will allow the Russians to retain those bases and so
Speaker 3: on and so forth. I mean it was the Russian
Speaker 3: Air Force, and the Russians supplies to the Russian aircraft
Speaker 3: and the Syrian air force over a decade. I mean
Speaker 3: we're talking about dropping chemical weapons, dropping, I mean massive
Speaker 3: damage created by Russian and Syrian slash Russian air strikes
Speaker 3: on the Syrian population.
Speaker 1: That just.
Speaker 3: Again it's Russians behaving like Russians are behaving in Ukraine.
Speaker 3: Russians fight total war, which is something we still haven't
Speaker 3: got our head around, is that Russians fight to win. Now,
Speaker 3: I'm not defending that, but you have to under stand
Speaker 3: they they will draw, draw, destroy a city, which they
Speaker 3: did in Syria, which they're doing in Ukraine. How do
Speaker 3: how do you destroy resistance? You literally destroy the resistance,
Speaker 3: And that's what they've been. They did that in Syria,
Speaker 3: and that's why I find a hard time believing that
Speaker 3: the Syrians do not remember that, Uh, will not remember
Speaker 3: what the Russians did to them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, so here we are right now, what does
Speaker 2: this mean for Russia now in Syria with the regime change?
Speaker 2: Does that mean all right now, we'll just withdraw everything
Speaker 2: we have here and we can focus it back on
Speaker 2: Ukraine one and two? I mean, is it a strategic
Speaker 2: move that now if there was anything left to be
Speaker 2: pulled back, you know, in reserve there say sitting in
Speaker 2: Syria that the Iranians could have utilized elsewhere, it's off
Speaker 2: the table now right because it's been neutralized and it'll
Speaker 2: probably be captured. Uh if there were resources left? I mean,
Speaker 2: are we looking at a very significant change here.
Speaker 4: Because of this, you think, well that I think the
Speaker 4: big strategic question is how important Africa is to putin
Speaker 4: because if it's not just a matter of if if everything
Speaker 4: is taken out of Syria by the end of next week,
Speaker 4: which it largely could be uh by everything that's air transportable,
Speaker 4: let's put it that way, that that that they can
Speaker 4: fly back to Russia that eventually could They're going to
Speaker 4: have to make a real decision though if they want
Speaker 4: to Syria was their transit base and they're they're really
Speaker 4: avenue into Africa. If Libya is going to replace that,
Speaker 4: they're going to have to make a massive strategic shift
Speaker 4: to this rush the the Russian supporting general in Libya,
Speaker 4: and they're going to have to sustain him, and they're
Speaker 4: going to have to build an infrastructure. They're either going
Speaker 4: to have to make sure he takes all of Libya,
Speaker 4: which he doesn't hold now, they're going to have to
Speaker 4: be prepared to allocate a good deal of that resource
Speaker 4: to whatever their plan is for Libya and Africa, because
Speaker 4: right now we see the fact that there are at
Speaker 4: least half a dozen nations in Africa that have essentially
Speaker 4: kicked out the French, kicked out the US and said
Speaker 4: that they are going with the Russian military, and the
Speaker 4: Russian military is going to have to sustain them against
Speaker 4: their own radical Islamist revolutionary groups. So Putin's got to
Speaker 4: keep He's got to either go with that and keep
Speaker 4: his avenues into those countries for natural resources and or
Speaker 4: you know, it's it's not just all about Syria, It's
Speaker 4: also about Africa.
Speaker 2: Right, And that leads to really my last logical question
Speaker 2: in this equation. And then you know, how is it
Speaker 2: that this is going to affect the US and our policies,
Speaker 2: et cetera in the region is my final thought. But
Speaker 2: really the biggest question here to me is we haven't
Speaker 2: heard a lot about the Libyan regime in the past
Speaker 2: few years, the condition of it, you know, post Kadafi
Speaker 2: and all of that. I mean, once everybody lost their
Speaker 2: desire to look into BEng Ghazi, it's over in Libya
Speaker 2: as far as you know, we're concerned, right, They're not
Speaker 2: a significant factor anymore. That regime that's in place right now,
Speaker 2: as you I think you just said, doesn't even have
Speaker 2: control of the entirety of the country, does it. So
Speaker 2: what condition are we looking at here for this fallback
Speaker 2: position for Russia anyway? And is it going to be
Speaker 2: even a factor the more they get sucked into Ukraine
Speaker 2: and that conflict. I mean, eventually all roads are going
Speaker 2: to lead to Ukraine. It looks like, you know, as
Speaker 2: far as where the Russian resources are going to go,
Speaker 2: where their attention, where the troops are going to go.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's the continent, not.
Speaker 3: If Putin wants Africa. Ah Okay, that's the point. You
Speaker 3: and I talked about this about a year ago, I think,
Speaker 3: and I remarked or two years ago maybe now, about
Speaker 3: that Putin appeared to be tactically brilliant and that he
Speaker 3: managed to, you know, acquire ports in Syria, give give
Speaker 3: Russia Mediterrane presence that had never had acquire access to
Speaker 3: huge national resources in Africa. And we're not just we're
Speaker 3: not talking about just oil and gas. We're talking about minerals,
Speaker 3: which may come to be as important as oil and gas,
Speaker 3: honestly if you take a better look at it. And
Speaker 3: that he had managed to insert himself in places where
Speaker 3: the Soviet Union had never been effective before, and he
Speaker 3: was doing it cheaply because he was doing it all
Speaker 3: with the Wagner Group. He's doing it cheaply and somewhat deniably.
Speaker 3: I mean, there were Russian flags flying in African cities
Speaker 3: because of the Wagner Group. So what happens, Well, Wagner
Speaker 3: Group's destroyed. Wagner's destroyed, But there's still Russian forces there, okay,
Speaker 3: because they've been integrated into the Russian military. So there
Speaker 3: are still Russian military forces there. Does he want to
Speaker 3: maintain that? He's going to have to. I mean, and
Speaker 3: although it doesn't get much press coverage here, only recently,
Speaker 3: within the last few months major Russian contention was slaughtered
Speaker 3: on the ground and by one of these ISIS groups.
Speaker 3: So it does. It's it does consume resources. As far
Speaker 3: as Libya is concerned. In North Africa as a whole,
Speaker 3: there is a geopolitical battle going on there.
Speaker 1: With Egypt, with uh Saudi.
Speaker 3: We don't happen to be players, but one of the
Speaker 3: things that's happened, Chuck, I think that we haven't.
Speaker 1: You asked the question what does it mean for the US, Well.
Speaker 3: These days we're not necessarily the only power sphere players.
Speaker 3: Maybe we like to think of ourselves this way, but Iran, Saudi,
Speaker 3: Turkey Egypt are the power players in the Mid East. Israel,
Speaker 3: we're we're hanging out. We supply weapons to people that
Speaker 3: we like, but we're not We're not in the.
Speaker 1: Position we once were. So the two questions that are
Speaker 1: relevant is, you know, what is our role?
Speaker 3: You know, can we can we be a peacemaker or
Speaker 3: can we help in entreaties? Can we help in alliances?
Speaker 3: Rather than being the power broker we once were, everybody
Speaker 3: still looks at us as the power broker. I'm not
Speaker 3: sure that that's the same way to look at it anymore. Yeah,
Speaker 3: we can be mediators and facilitators, but these other people
Speaker 3: are in it to the extent of I mean, Egypt
Speaker 3: has military forces in Libya and is supporting groups. You know,
Speaker 3: these people are not bashful about sending over military into
Speaker 3: these conflicts. We are, and since we are, we're no
Speaker 3: longer unless if you're not prepared to participate militarily, you know,
Speaker 3: are you really a power anymore?
Speaker 1: Today? Israel basically destroyed.
Speaker 3: Iamani shipping by deciding to take make out all their
Speaker 3: major ports.
Speaker 1: That's a power broker, right. Uh?
Speaker 3: What did we do in human We bombed missile sites.
Speaker 3: That's not a power broker, and why do we do that?
Speaker 3: Obviously we don't like to be nice guys, and you
Speaker 3: know we we're not brutal like these other people. The
Speaker 3: guys that are brutal unfortunately tend to be the power brokers. Again,
Speaker 3: not saying I like it, it's just like that's the reality.
Speaker 1: So back to your question of what is our role.
Speaker 1: Our role is probably to not do what we have tried.
Speaker 3: To do in the past, to not do to try
Speaker 3: not to try necessarily to pick sides all the time.
Speaker 3: Two uh, you know, do we really do we really
Speaker 3: have a have a place with military forces in Syria
Speaker 3: or would it be better for us to look at
Speaker 3: a way to strengthen the Syrian regime? I mean, the
Speaker 3: I got to tell you there is no sign that
Speaker 3: the current Syrian leader that is trying to you know,
Speaker 3: re establish a Syrian state would be meant any more
Speaker 3: excited about Black Flag. Isis troops pouring across the border
Speaker 3: from you know, from the eastern border than anybody else is.
Speaker 3: You know, So we've we've got to look maybe maybe
Speaker 3: we're not the power brokers, but we've got to look
Speaker 3: for the you know, least dangerous choices. That was that
Speaker 3: was the long winded answered obviously to a very complex
Speaker 3: but we've got to get it out of our head
Speaker 3: that we we are the power brokers like we used
Speaker 3: to be.
Speaker 2: Yeah, huge key, huge key there. So all right, I
Speaker 2: guess the final thing then, really the true final thing
Speaker 2: here and then we'll just put a bow on this
Speaker 2: thing until later, you know, stay tuned. I guess, right,
Speaker 2: is very a very simple question, but complex answer. I'm
Speaker 2: sure we have an administration coming in obviously there's going
Speaker 2: to be some changes here. What do you think you
Speaker 2: were looking at? I mean, are we looking at something
Speaker 2: that's going to go completely down the memory hole. Nobody's
Speaker 2: going to look at this in the West for a while.
Speaker 2: It's just gonna oh, well, something's happening in Syria. But
Speaker 2: we're going to be too busy, you know, with the
Speaker 2: with the domestic political circus, and that'll be that. Or
Speaker 2: do you think there'll be a significant change that's going
Speaker 2: to make a difference here with the incoming administration.
Speaker 3: It's clear that Trump wants to be a deal maker
Speaker 3: in terms of Ukraine and Russia and in Europe, it's
Speaker 3: totally unclear that he has any interest in being a
Speaker 3: deal maker anyplace else. Certainly, it's clear that he has
Speaker 3: a commitment to Israel, right, so is there room for
Speaker 3: some participation in negotiations mediations the same sort of could
Speaker 3: the administration? Could the Trump administration do what the Biden
Speaker 3: administration has been trying to do in negotiations Hill, which
Speaker 3: is is not a major role. It's a you know,
Speaker 3: we're here, maybe we're a neutral party.
Speaker 1: We can help, you know. But I know, I don't
Speaker 1: see us.
Speaker 3: I don't really see us getting involved in in Africa
Speaker 3: or more in the Middle East, because I think his
Speaker 3: interests are, his interests are elsewhere. His interests are domestic,
Speaker 3: and his interest are clearly he's shown that he has
Speaker 3: an interest in the Far East, you know, in the
Speaker 3: China question, you know, But I so, no, I don't
Speaker 3: I don't see him having a real focus on there.
Speaker 3: And I think it will go the way that it
Speaker 3: goes to a large extent in one of the things
Speaker 3: that he's going to be consumed by. And you mentioned
Speaker 3: it as domestically. I mean what we've seen today. If
Speaker 3: he does indeed manage to persuade Congress to eliminate the
Speaker 3: debt ceiling, his whole life for his administration's life is
Speaker 3: going to find a way to follow through on that
Speaker 3: without making the national debt explode. I think he will
Speaker 3: have more than enough, you know, between negotiating with Putin
Speaker 3: and that, I think he will have more than enough
Speaker 3: on his plate.
Speaker 2: So that's what we're looking at for the next long while.
Speaker 2: I think is that quite honestly, if his entire administration
Speaker 2: is not occupied with that issue, then you know, it'll
Speaker 2: only that would indicate that it's solved. And I don't
Speaker 2: see that being solved in any quick, sodic vas.
Speaker 3: Here in the last In the last administration, his whole
Speaker 3: platform was reducing the national debt, and it expanded by
Speaker 3: almost eight trillion. Okay, again, what happens if you take
Speaker 3: the ceiling, which is what he proposed today, there's no
Speaker 3: more ceiling, there's no more congressional oversight, there's no ceiling
Speaker 3: on the national debt. It's just a commitment to somehow
Speaker 3: reduce it by reducing spending while reducing taxation. I I
Speaker 3: didn't take a lot of economics classes in college, but
Speaker 3: I took some, and so far I haven't been able
Speaker 3: to draw a chart that makes sense out of that
Speaker 3: to me.
Speaker 1: But that's just me.
Speaker 2: The only way to make sense out of that chart, Larry,
Speaker 2: you know from again, I'm not an economics guy either,
Speaker 2: but the only way in my mind is to create
Speaker 2: another revenue stream. Okay, that's the only thing, and it
Speaker 2: better be a hell of a good one. That's all saying.
Speaker 3: You know, I agree, I don't know where it's going
Speaker 3: to come from, because the other if you don't and
Speaker 3: I've been through this in actual real world situations, if
Speaker 3: you don't do exactly that as a commer, as a
Speaker 3: commercial company in corporation that I've been with, who ends
Speaker 3: up eating the net result is your banker. I mean
Speaker 3: you may you go bankrupt and your banker will take
Speaker 3: you to court, But who actually ate the failure? The
Speaker 3: banker that you borrowed the loans from that you could
Speaker 3: not replace with income.
Speaker 2: Yeah, eventually, that's where it's.
Speaker 1: Going in this sense. How would who? Who would who
Speaker 1: would backstop that nation?
Speaker 3: The Oh oh we would no more bankers?
Speaker 1: It's us.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's what it comes down to. Except in real
Speaker 2: world business, what happens is the company, uh disbands and
Speaker 2: it's gone.
Speaker 3: Okay, and we don't really want to do that. I don't,
Speaker 3: I'm not Yeah, that doesn't sound good.
Speaker 2: That's the thing, you know, just firesale USA does not
Speaker 2: seem like the way to go. But you know, I
Speaker 2: guess we'll again have to stay tuned. Larry, any final
Speaker 2: thoughts on this before we close it out, because I mean,
Speaker 2: it's definitely it's definitely going to go the way it's
Speaker 2: going to go. And I think you're extremely accurate in
Speaker 2: saying that people need to understand that we're not going
Speaker 2: to be the big influencer here as this goes forward.
Speaker 2: We're not going to be the most significant stick, no
Speaker 2: matter how many carrots or sticks are involved here. Even
Speaker 2: though we have the biggest stick on the planet, it
Speaker 2: doesn't mean that we're going to be able to play
Speaker 2: a role in this circumstance.
Speaker 1: It seems now it doesn't. And I think one of
Speaker 1: the interesting things is the other big the other big.
Speaker 3: Thing that we need to learn from what's going on
Speaker 3: right now is big stick no longer matters except between
Speaker 3: those people that have it. They may not hit each
Speaker 3: other with it because they each have one. But in
Speaker 3: the smaller playing fields in eastern Ukraine, you know, Putin
Speaker 3: may talk all day long about nukes, but nukes would
Speaker 3: not win it. For him anymore than nukes would have
Speaker 3: won it for US in career of Vietnam. They're not
Speaker 3: ground level tactical weapons. What's going to play out in
Speaker 3: Africa and the Middle East. We're talking about people with
Speaker 3: automatic weapons and anti aircraft missiles. That's how these struggles
Speaker 3: are going to play out. So the big stick is
Speaker 3: not really relevant, and it's relevant between US and Russia,
Speaker 3: Russia and China, you know, but that part of the
Speaker 3: Cold War mentality is no longer in play because the
Speaker 3: weapons have changed. I mean, look at what we were
Speaker 3: worried about today. Are we worried about ballistic missile attacks? No,
Speaker 3: We're worried about weaponized drone swarms.
Speaker 2: And where the hell are those things going? Gee? I
Speaker 2: wish I could have done a show with you on that,
Speaker 2: but it seems as though the mainstream media has decided
Speaker 2: to pick up on it finally. So you know, they
Speaker 2: flew over over Jersey for about six weeks before anybody
Speaker 2: gave a crap, but now they do, so it's okay.
Speaker 2: And oh, by the way, there's news about that. But
Speaker 2: maybe we'll cover tomorrow night on the call in show, Larry.
Speaker 2: I know I'm not going to speak to you again
Speaker 2: until next year, and when we do speak, I think
Speaker 2: we're going to start to focus on the brand new book,
Speaker 2: which should be out. When when is the release Do
Speaker 2: you have a release date for that?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I think you.
Speaker 3: I actually should have a review copy. Those will be
Speaker 3: shipping out by the end of the year, excellent, So
Speaker 3: you should have a copy in your hands by then.
Speaker 3: We should be ready to talk about it at the
Speaker 3: end of the year, first week, because it should. It
Speaker 3: is supposed to be shipping by the second week in January.
Speaker 3: He might ship earlier. Everything seems to be on target.
Speaker 3: So and I'm really ready because I've been not talking
Speaker 3: about that for weeks now, and as you know, me
Speaker 3: not talking about something increases my stress level.
Speaker 2: Oh absolutely, And look, I definitely promoted it at Lancer.
Speaker 2: I went around, I did a special handout of the
Speaker 2: of the promotional materials at Lancer at a certain point
Speaker 2: this past year. But the Oswald Puzzle will be out
Speaker 2: and I'm looking forward to reading the final product and
Speaker 2: going over it with you here on this show. We
Speaker 2: might do a couple of parts on it, actually, but
Speaker 2: not until January. So Larry, with that all that in mind,
Speaker 2: I want to say that I hope that you have
Speaker 2: a great holiday season one way or another. You know,
Speaker 2: Christmas is less than a week away now, and of
Speaker 2: course the New Year the following week, so you know,
Speaker 2: we'll talk sometime after that and cover for people what
Speaker 2: it is that you have released in this book, which,
Speaker 2: by the way, is Boiling listed as the co author.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, okay, it's me and David and it is.
Speaker 1: It's interesting. We might want it to.
Speaker 3: It's actually two books, and one really which we're trying
Speaker 3: to get across because that's hard to communicate. One half
Speaker 3: of the book is who what really was Lee Rvy Oswald?
Speaker 3: And what did the world look like through his eyes?
Speaker 3: Not what we wanted to make it look like or
Speaker 3: the Warrant Commission, you know, what was the world like
Speaker 3: to Lee Harvey Oswald?
Speaker 1: What were his agendas?
Speaker 3: The second half of the book deals with why he
Speaker 3: behaves strangely on November twenty second, which had nothing to
Speaker 3: do with shooting President Kennedy.
Speaker 2: And you ever noticed that strange behavior is only called
Speaker 2: strange behavior until you understand what's actually happening during that behavior.
Speaker 2: Then it all starts to what makes sense.
Speaker 3: And strange behavior. That's one of the things we're trying
Speaker 3: to get across. Strange behavior looks strange from the outside,
Speaker 3: especially afterwards.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but for.
Speaker 3: An individual, behavior is either it is not strange. They
Speaker 3: know what they're doing, they have an agenda. Like internally,
Speaker 3: it's not strange. Externally it may look strange, but nobody
Speaker 3: may comment unless something. If Oswald had gone about what
Speaker 3: he was doing on a regular day and the president
Speaker 3: had not been shot, we would not even know about him.
Speaker 2: Now, nobody would notice the strange behavior unless something occurred
Speaker 2: to call your attention to it. And here's the problem.
Speaker 2: Just because your attention has been called to it does
Speaker 2: not mean you understand the circumstances that created the situation
Speaker 2: that this behavior occurred in. I know that's long winded,
Speaker 2: but that's exactly what it is we're looking at here. Anyway.
Speaker 2: It is.
Speaker 3: And when you have a guy in jail who's for
Speaker 3: killing the president, his wife comes to visit him, and
Speaker 3: his main concern is is she going to get new
Speaker 3: baby shoes?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Did you get the new shoes?
Speaker 1: It's like, wait a minute, what was really on his mind?
Speaker 1: WHOA what's going on here? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Oh, by the way, I know all this is going
Speaker 2: on but make sure Junior gets some new shoes June. Okay, sure,
Speaker 2: it makes sense to nobody except him because he's in
Speaker 2: the circumstance anyway.
Speaker 1: But we'll get there.
Speaker 2: We'll get into all that and a whole lot more
Speaker 2: in the coming years. So again, Larry, I hope you
Speaker 2: have a great holiday, and we'll talk again sometime in January.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, Merry Christmas, Chuck.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, and you guys out there listening. We have tomorrow
Speaker 2: night's call in show for sure, and yeah, we'll be
Speaker 2: talking to Larry in January. Until then, I absolutely support
Speaker 2: and endorse all of Larry's work, all of it that
Speaker 2: exists so far. I got a feeling I'm going to
Speaker 2: endorse the Soswald book as well, but I haven't read
Speaker 2: the whole thing yet, so we'll see when it comes out,
Speaker 2: right anyway, Larry Dashhancock dot com. Check out Larry's blog.
Speaker 2: All of his works again, all of them endorsed by
Speaker 2: me sitting on my shelf, taking up a lot of space,
Speaker 2: but not just taking up space. Incredible stuff, whether it
Speaker 2: is the various books that do have something to do
Speaker 2: with the Kennedy assassination, like Tipping Point, the upcoming Oswald puzzle.
Speaker 2: Someone would have talked that one's a little old, but
Speaker 2: it's been reissued a few times, gotta say. Or it
Speaker 2: is the other works by Larry and some of his
Speaker 2: fine co authors like Stu Wexler, David Boyle In et cetera.
Speaker 2: You know what, all great stuff Larrydashhandcock dot com. Go there,
Speaker 2: check it out and remember this. At o'chelly dot com,
Speaker 2: come on buy and anything you chip in will be
Speaker 2: helpful during this holiday season. If you can, I would
Speaker 2: greatly appreciate it. But there it is. The donate button
Speaker 2: at o'chelly dot com is available twenty four to seven,
Speaker 2: just like our online radio station is. Anyway, I am
Speaker 2: merely o'celly. All of you are indeed the effect Chili
Speaker 2: dot com