Speaker 1: Meaning a light. Man like this, man letting butterfly flapping
and wing.
Speaker 2: They've down in the forest. Man gonna cause the tree fall,
letting five thousand miles away.
Speaker 1: Man, nobody see.
Speaker 2: Nobody.
Speaker 1: See. You don't need to know.
Speaker 2: Man, like you followed another story and.
Speaker 1: You got back to flect. That's man, Man got black
and dag on Panama.
Speaker 2: Man, you don't matter, man, I.
Speaker 1: Know all right. Kyle Ansloan, Welcome to Jay Burdon Show.
How you doing Man, great?
Speaker 2: Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, man, I'm I'm really excited to have you on.
I've been aware of your work for for quite some time.
We travel in similar circles, but recently you were a
guest host on Provoked with Scott Horton and Darryl Cooper,
one of my favorite podcasts, and so yeah, man, I'm
really excited to finally.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, thanks for having me. I also saw you
on Provoked and that was the first time I became
aware of your work, and I believe I started following you,
following you on nets and I've seen some of your
stuff since. And you know, obviously we travel in the
same circles because you know, just great knowledge. I really
like your perspective on something. So I appreciate you having
me on glad to be on the show.
Speaker 1: Well, I appreciate it, man. Uh So, really, as much
as I hate to talk about it because it is
is incredibly depressing. But obviously, the story of really twenty
twenty six at this point is the war in Iran,
And you and I were kind of joking about the
fact that this war has been we have claimed victory
in this war depending on who you ask, six, two,
nine times in a war that is still ongoing. And
look like, I'm not a professional when it comes to
international relations, but it seems to me that if you
say the war is over and it keeps happening, it
probably wasn't over. Just a kind of wild guest there.
Speaker 2: Right, I mean, how many times too saying the war
is won? Are saying Iran is defeated. I mean there's
been times where Trump says Iran is defeated and with
thirty minutes, who are an now where they're firing a
slavo and missiles at both Israel and US bases in
the region. So it's it's wild that Donald Trump has
tried to say that we've won this war so many
times when the administration is still looking at options for escalation,
so clearly it's not one if we're preparing the ground invasion.
Speaker 1: Well, Kyle, I hate to inform you that you have
runed out. You are a foreign agent, maybe a trader
to America for remembering something that happened three days ago.
In all seriousness, right, the thing that I have found
the most aggravating has primarily been the sort of post
Hauck justifications. You probably saw a clip from Ben Shapiro
going around where he was arguing for a ground invasion,
you know, like we need to do this in order
to you know, finish the fight, and he very disingenuously
turned and said, well, and this is why our soldiers
are so great. That's why you have to support our troops,
because they knew that this this was on the table,
and they put their their lives at risk. Albeit I'm
sure you remember many people will that that is not
what Ben Shapiro said a week ago or two weeks ago.
First it was, you know, just a decapitation strike just
to take out the mullets. Then it was, well, we
need to blow up some stuff to stop the nuclear
program or the ballistic missiles and now, of course, you know,
the whole time while saying we're doing this so we
don't have to send troops in on the ground, Well,
all of a sudden, right, you got walked like a
dog by the neocons. And I bring up Shapiro because
I find him irritating. I don't like him, but he's
not the only one. Right, have you noticed that same
kind of slow escalation in rhetoric.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, you know, in one way, it is a
slow escalation in rhetoric. In another way, It's only been
a month, and in that month, Ben Shapiro has gone
from claiming that people say that the Iran war is
an escalation trap and the US is going to get
drawn into this prolonged thing. It's going to turn into
a ground invasion. And he was saying, you know, he
was saying that the people saying that are saying it
because they're anti Semits.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: That was a month ago, not years ago, not a
decade ago. It's not something he was writing when he
was at UCLA and College. He was saying that on
his current show a month ago. And now he's just
saying that this is the policy and we all need
to accept it now. Of course, you know Shapiro who
likes to brand himself as like, you know, a conservative,
and he believes in the Constitution. This isn't legally a war.
I mean, you know, it's an illegal war being waged
by the United States. It is a war, but Congress
hasn't declared war, given an authorization for use of military force.
Hell even provided the Pentagon funding to fight a war
in the Middle East, to send our soldiers to the milie.
So Shapiro saying, well, this is what you signed up
for when you joined the military, is to go fight
at the Dretcha and the commander in chief. No, they
fight in defense of their country or when Congress declares war,
and neither of those things are going on here. So
it really isn't third duty to fight this war. And
of course Shapiro is all on board with this because
the real beneficiary, the only party that really benefits from this,
is the select group in the Israelis leadership. It is
a widespread view of Israel, but it's not all Israelis
who want the Greater Israel project. They want to expand
Israel's borders and doing that requires them to be the
only power in the region and this is you know,
achieving that goal through numerous effects. One, it's destroying Iran.
It's also destroying the Golf States. But it's also getting
rid of the framework or it could get rid of
the framework in the Middle East that would prevent Israel
from attacking Jordan, Our Saudi Arabia or the UAE if
they chose to do so, which is those states are
protected by the US. And so you know what this
war is proving to the leadership in you know, Riod
and in all these Golf Arab countries, is that this
deal you made with the United States where we put
our bases in your country and you buy our weapons
and in exchange, you're a part of the American security
block and we will defend you if attacked. Simply isn't true.
I mean, these countries are being at tat not because
Iran wanted to go to war with them, because the
US and Israel chose to go to war with the Rod.
So this is I think really a huge, a huge
step in the right diredge and for those people who
want the Greater Israel project. Should this war work out
where Iran is in some way like in the middle
of a civil war, or just utterly, utterly destroyed.
Speaker 1: Well, and this is something that I spoke about Scott
Horton with If I'm remembering my schedule right when you
were listening to this listener, this will happen two days ago,
so you know, scroll back if you're interested in more
contexts there. But it's incredibly disingenuous, and that's what's so
frustrating about this. As you mentioned, it's not like you
were i ed or digging up in someone's statements from
when they were sixteen seventeen, you know, when you say
things maybe you don't mean or where We've had enough
time that the facts on the ground can change, People
can grow and evolve their thinking over time. This is
two weeks ago, right, It isn't a vast span of time.
And really, there is an attempt to gaslight people. There
is an attempt to you know, effectively convince them that
they are crazy, that they are you know, irredeemable racist
anti Semites, that they harbor some irrational hatred, you know,
for the state of Israel. And that's the only reason
why you have objections, not the very real on the
ground problems we are seeing, right, gas prices, diplomatic issues
things that I might add, Many of the critics of
this war before it started brought up said, well, what
happens when Iran shuts down the strait of horror moods?
You know what happens to our diplomatic partners who rely
on Iranian energy? Well, that was all on important nonsense.
You know, you again, were maybe an agent of before
and power for bringing that up. And now that those
predictions have come to pass, Well, that argument, we never
had it, right, This is always what we were saying.
One of the comments that I received, and you know,
you shouldn't read comments, but every once in a while
they're sort of insightful, said, you know this, this feels
very much like we were always at war with Eurasia. Right,
we have always been, you know, in the exact situation
we have been now. Right again, I bring up the
straight of horror moves, not because I particularly know anything
about how global shipping works, but I'm old enough to
remember when it was open a month ago, right, And
I think that that's what's sort of crazy making about
this is the the the constant kind of willful sort
of like acclusion of the facts, right, willfully resetting the
chatbot if you will every day right, It's like this
isnt This is a story that has been has been
sort of truncated at every moment. It's is you can
probably tell I get a little bit upset about it.
But I'm curious, Kyle, what do you make of the
Joe Kent resignation, because to me, it seems symptomatic of
a wider split within MEGA specifically and the general cultural right.
But I'm curious to get your thoughts on it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I think from this is my assessment,
from how Joe Kent has handled the resonation and how
he's spoken about Trump afterwards, where he look a lot
of people have said, oh, Joe Kent is looking for
you know, his nets political move right. Essentially, he's the
first rat jumping off of the ship. Here he sees
it going down and he's gonna say, ah, you know,
I told him it was all a bad idea. But
he's really just trying, I think, to end this conflict
like that is his only goal, and uh, you know,
we're This has really bothered me. I've kind of noticed
this where a lot of people, particularly on the right
half of America, will say we should all praise Donald Trump,
and you say it was a great move if he
ends this war tomorrow, right, Like, we all have to
appeal to Trump's ego because we know if we don't
do that, then we're not going to get this war.
And it's just but it's disgusting, right, no, Like, even
if this war ends tomorrow, Like Donald Trump is a
war criminal. A US bomb destroyed an Iranian school in
a surprise attack on a country that posed no threat
to the United States of America. Right, they don't have
a nuclear program, they don't have an ICBM program, And
they would say they would only attack the US in
response to a US or Israeli attack on Iran, which
you could say, oh, they're making a threat, but that
is the standing case with every country in the world, right, Like,
if we attack China, China is going to attack US
allies in US bases in their region. And just the
same as if the United States was attached by another country,
we would attack, you know, their bases in the region,
maybe their allies that they're involved in the fight. So
you know, that's just standard how the world operates. That's
what sovereign countries do, is they say, if we have to,
we will defend ourselves against your military assets and allies.
So you know, Kent is really just working hard here.
They'll to try to sell to Donald Trump that the
right move is to take an off ramp. I guess
as he understands where we go up the escalation ladder
from here that bombing Iran into submission really isn't an option.
And so unless you're willing to just pack up and go,
they're going to put ground troops in. If not, like
you know what, towards maybe using nuclear weapons are really
the only two options up the escalator ladder. I think
the US has you know, they could bomb more targets,
but again that's not going to remove the Islamic Republic
and they're going to rebuild once this conflict is over,
and if we continue to attack, they'll continue to fire back.
So Kent is just trying to resign it and trying
to get Trump out of office. And one thing I
want to say, you make a really good point. It's
like resetting the aich chatbot every day with the new
round of propaganda that we're hearing, right, Like, what we
said yesterday is completely irrelevant. This is what we're doing today.
The interesting thing is it doesn't seem to be working,
because even if you reset the AI chatbot, everybody on
ets could post a video of what Shapiro was saying
in the first days of this conflict, how it was
going to be a quick war and we are going
to be out, And the people saying this was going
to be entangling a conflict with a ground occupation like
a rock are now only raw and they're hysterical, they're pannikins,
they're anti submit, they're pro ron whatever he wanted to say,
But now he's saying those exad things, and so it
doesn't I don't think it's going to work this time.
I don't think it worth. The propaganda worked very well
in Ukraine for the same reasons, because everybody was able
to play clips of all these figures during the two
thousand's twenty tens, mainly saying that hey, you know, if
you do this, you're going to provoke Russia and we're
going to end up having the conflict. You know, it's
not like the Iraq War, where Americans are basically forced
to rely on CNN, Fox News, the Washington Post, the
New York Times for their information about the conflict, and
they didn't do these kinds of things where they said, hmm,
this is what did Cheney said two weeks ago, this
is what he's saying now. But we you know, in
anti war dot com existed be then. But you know,
unless you're in those niche corners of the Internet, you
really didn't know. Now it's on ends every day in
front of very by his face, humiliating Ben Shapiro and
Mark Levin and Mike Kacabee and Ted Cruz. I mean,
they're just getting annihilated on the platform every day, and
so I think public opinion is going to continue to move.
The only thing with Kent's resonation is I hope somebody
joins him, right I think the only problem right now
is he's kind of on an island. Had Toulsi Gabbert
resigned to I think it would have made a bigger deal.
So hopefully, you know, more momentum roles. As you know,
people look on ets and they see overwhelmingly the Americans
not only are opposed to this war, but really do
hate the people who are lying to them about it.
Speaker 1: Well, and to that point, this is additionally to any
you know, moral concerns we may or may not have,
This is an abject political disaster. You'll notice speaking of
the kind of continually redefined goals measurements, you know, how
we define success, how we have defeated Iran six to
nine times. The polling and how the polling has been
reported has been quite interesting because you'll notice that the
focus is on MAGA Republicans, and as I'm sure you're aware,
Kyle Uh, there's no official voter rolls for that. You
don't join the MAGA Republican Party if you self describe
as that, that basically means I'm personally myself a giant
fan of Donald Trump, which is basically a proxy for
what do I think about this war. So when they're
saying things in kind of in North Korea s fashion,
that one hundred percent of people who like this war
say they like this war, It's like, well, I mean, yeah,
I probably could have figured out one out because on
pretty much any other issue, and you know, I'm sure
we're all aware of how polls are manipulated in any
number of directions, but I can think of almost no
issue that one hundred percent of Americans agree on. I'm
talking about like really basic ones like is murder right
or wrong? Like there's gonna be at least someone out
there right right, even just to throw the poll.
Speaker 2: It's it's absurd because typically they would maybe pull like
they would say, Biden voters are Trump voters, like that
would be the collection. And that's kind of I think
what maybe people think of when they hear maga are
Trump supporters people who voted for Donald Trump? But really,
if you're asking people, are you maga, and then they
say yes, And then they asked, do you support the
president's main initiative right now, they're gonna say yes if
they if they did support the president's main initiative at
the current time, then they don't support the president and
they're not maga. And I mean, you bring up the
North Korea reference. I think Kim Jong gun only one
chairman of the Workers Party in North Korea by ninety
nine point nine to three percent. So even there's a
margin Bnavara and Pyongyang that doesn't exist in Washington anymore.
Now on the political point, I think this is really
really really important. After nine to eleven, the Republicans in
the United States, like the Conservatives, had the cultural momentum.
It wasn't just that, you know, the Republicans have political power,
but you know, the rally around the flag and kind
of the base conservative values were I think dominant, and
that dominance was lost in Iraq, right, like, the administration
lied so much about the war and exposed themselves as
such horrific people that the American people went out and
they elected Barack Obama with a Democratic Congress. But not
only that, the culture in this country moved really, really
and unacceptably far to the left right, Like we got
to the point where the trans cultural move had actually
outpaced like the medical science of it, right like they could.
And it was because the Republicans has so greatly discredited
it themselves. It wasn't until the Democrats went so overboard
on the trans issue, the cultural issue, the women's sports stuff,
the BLM that you know, we really got in twenty
twenty four, a real shift back to a culture, you know,
more conservative culture, which I think needs to happen a
little bit. But Donald Trump is going to blow it all, right.
The Democrats are going to annihilate the Republicans, and I
think for years to come, you know, they're going to
play clips of Donald Trump not only saying we won
the war, but kind of like joking about killing people.
Pete Headset in particular talking about how you know, the
our bombs are blessed by the Lord and all this
other like religious cookery he's trying to insert into the
war making jd vance suggesting that some Iranian is going
to walk into a supermarket with I'm not even joking,
he actually said this a nuclear weapon suicide vest and
blow himself up. I mean, the claims coming out of
the administration right now are absurd, and they're really going
to discredit the right wing. I think not only are
we going to see a massive, just like political victory
for the Democrats in the midterms, but also it's going
to lose the Republicans early their their cultural moment they had,
which even if I don't agree with all of it,
I do think was needed after the past two decades.
Speaker 1: Well, and there are several things we've already seen this happen, right,
And what happens is that you see this in you know,
my state of Virginia, where you know, the Democrats run
someone who on first inspection seems very sense, right, you
know this, you know, nice white lady from the CIA,
you know, she seems great, and then it's like, oh, well,
we got rid of mandatory minimums for murder and rape
and decriminalized vagrancy. And it's like, well, they didn't lead
with that. It's not like she came out as you know,
the head of the pro the pro rape and murder party,
I think, a minority position in the US. But all
of those excesses will come, they will not be broadcasted.
And on the other issue is someone who is to
shall we say, significantly to the right of you know,
many people. What I've noticed, and I've been sounding the
bell on this since the election, is that there has
been a deliberate desire to paint the sort of secondary
parts of the American right, the anti war movement, uh,
you know, the more shall we say, stridently religious conservatives.
You see, you know, a lot of attacks on you know,
traditional Catholic or the scare phrase Christian nationalists, and to
lay the groundwork and say, oh, that's why we're going
to lose the next election. It's not because Trump didn't deliver,
it's not because of this unpopular war. It's because of
you people, many of the same people who have been
fighting against the neocons for thirty years. That's the problem.
We did too much of that. What we need is
another John McCain. And if we had just done that,
then we never would have you ended up in these
dire straits. And I think that that's was a very
interesting admission, even shortly after the election, right saying what
gave Trump this incredible victory and the people taking credit
for it, and also laying the ground afterwards, well before
we got into this ill conceived for and war, were
saying this is who you're gonna blame when things go wrong.
And I'm not going to say it's working, but if
there is a massive, you know, electoral defeat, that's what
narrative will you know, be presented. It will not be
we did something wrong. We you know, sort of acted
as Israel's lapdog. It's the bad guys, it's the woke
right is the term you see, you know, being thrown around.
And so that that scapegoat has sort of already been made. Right,
they've laid the ground to blame what, in my mind
are the only redeemable parts of the American right, and
to say, well, if we just had if we had
only been more neo conservative, if we had only done more,
that's what would have saved us, So we need to
purge these people. You saw this happen even well before
this at places like Heritage. My I am hearing from
many people, but more more than a handful that the
same fight is happening in a less public version at
every major conservative institution. Right there's a major war over
this issue. And we understand that that same generational is
present in support for this war. And so for those
people who were bought in hook line and sinker, well,
that's their highest priority. Seemingly, you know, the continuance and
the support of foreign nation, Well, that can't be challenged.
That can't be the reason we lost. The reason is
we let bad people in. And seemingly the message in
you know, many conservative institutions you saw this in the
Heritage scandal is uh, cut out anyone under the age
of forty. Just get rid of them. And look, even
if you just understand how a population pyramid works, or
when the baby boomer generation hits fifty percent mortality, you
understand that's not a great long term strategy. And all
of those secondary groups, you know, the people you saw
brought in from kind of the you know, the health sphere,
the more kind of conspiracy minded folks, the anti war
folks who were brought into that big tent coalition, who
may not self describe as maga Republicans were in drobes
and recognizing that fact does not make you an agent
of a foreign power. You are simply believing your lying eyes. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, and you know, while we're on the politics of
this real quick, one other thing. You know, they're going
to blame Tucker Carlson and Candas Owens and whoever else,
But you know, Mike Johnson might deserve most of the
blame because he allowed the War Powers resolution to come
to a floor vote. Now, I'm not on principle, I'm
not saying that this is a bad thing, but tactically
as the leadership allowing these votes to happen, allowing the
Democrats to Chuck Schumer supports this war, right, But Chud
Schumer actually got to go and vote against this war.
Almost all the Democrats voted against the war on the
War Powers except John Fetterman. I think in the Senate,
similar numbers in the how right, where it's almost all
Republicans voting for all Democrats voting against it. And so
now even if like Chud Schumer is largely responsible for
the political situation the US was in that led to
the US going to war with Israel against Iran, and
Chud Schumer supports that supports Israel, will probably vote to
fund it right coming up here in a couple of weeks.
But when they run for reelection, all the Democrats will
get to tell the American people we tried to stop it,
we tried to vote against it, but the Republicans railroaded us,
and that's why you had to vote them out and
vote us in. I mean, you know, the handling of
the Epstein files was probably the worst political blunder of
the Trump administration so far, but this is a very
close second. And I think come November, it's really going
to make a big deal when gas prices are well
over five dollars a gallon, when the war has hurt
the American economy, inflation is three or four percent, and
the Democrats will get to say we tried to stop it,
and the Republicans all voted for it. It'scept Thomas Massey
and just a few others, who, by the way, are
the Republicans that the party establishment are trying to exile
from the party right now. Also, you said, they're trying
to kick out all the under forties from the Republican Party.
It is interesting that polling shows that even among Republicans,
you only have a majority that support the US relationship
with Israel over the age of fifty. Under the age
of fifty, it's at least like a plurality that support Israel.
It's not a full aw majority. And once you get
I think under thirty five, it's actually they don't support
the American relationship with Israel.
Speaker 1: Well, and to that point, you've heard this same messaging
from We'll bring them up again a second time. Ben Shapiro,
you had a really interesting section in one of his shows.
I believe the show. I wrote an article on this,
so I should know. This citation is can nyc survive
Mumdani's regime? Maybe you'll find it that way. Most of
those words are correct. But in that episode he makes
a very interesting inference where he says, and who knows
where he got these numbers from, but he said, fifty
three percent of American or of male Republicans under the
age of fifty are Holocaust deniers, right, they don't believe
the official narrative of the Holocaust. I believe. The exact
phrase he uses is they don't believe historians. Now, you know,
a rational actor would be might ask, well, which historians sidebar?
Speaker 2: You know, like sometimes they'll ask these quot question so vaguely,
like do you question any of the official narrative of
the Holocaust? And somebody might say, oh, you know, I
heard the thing about the lamb shades, and that sounded
a little far right like, It's not like these people
are saying I don't believe Hitler killed the Jews. They're
just being asked, are they skeptical about anything? And they
answer yes. So I really hate the polling because I
think it actually to some degree ends up fueling anti
Semitism by making it seem like it's a far more
popular position than it is. But sorry to interrupt, No, no,
not at all.
Speaker 1: And you know, look like someone is someone with their
own shall we say, you know, revisionist tendencies. Right. My
objection is, of course, right that he makes a very
interesting transition from that, right he believe he says, the
Manhattan Pole or the Manhattan Institute rather came with this pole.
And from that statement, right, he goes from you know,
the majority of young Republicans believe the Holocaust didn't happen.
And he immediately transitions to talking with no break into
the critics of the Iran war and what he says,
and this is very interesting because you'll hear this all
over in discussions of this issue. Is he says, and
this is exactly the problem we have, these young conspiracy
theorists who are buying into what he calls grievance politics,
which is a really long roundabout way to basically say,
if you'd disagree with us, you're part of the woke
left right, you are the you know, the blue haired
gender goblin. Basically, it is, if you're not with us,
you're with the terrorists all over again. Time is a
flat circle. The last twenty years didn't happen. We're just
doing it all over again and again. It's incredibly disingenuous, right,
It's incredibly dishonest to basically say, you know, the only
reason you can disagree with me is if you are
what I have described as the most horrible people in
the world. The only people who don't agree with me
are horrible and irredeemable. And you might say, well, I
don't share the same you know, I don't share the
same opinions about you know, the group. But we've got
to understand functionally, in America, being a Holocaust denier is
like up there with being a child molester. It is
perceived to be very negative. So even if you you know,
have opinions about wooden doors, which you know, I may
I might not share, you've got to understand what's going
on here. Right. It is a slimy rhetorical trick, and
it is one we have seen echoed over and over
and over again. For instance, Kyle, one of my favorite
games I've been playing for the last couple of days
is gone to John pod Horraz's Twitter and search any
insult you can think of, and he has been screaming
it it people for the last week, for the last month.
Right again, bringing in all of these kind of low,
underhanded tactics to basically say, if you don't support this war,
you are you know, a list of every insult and
for letter word you can think of. Right, And I
think it's very interesting that one we don't really have
a defined victory condition. What's what's our goal here? What
are we doing? And if you object that, if you
bring that up, if you have any objection, however small Well,
according to the neocons, the only place you can go
is into the bucket of deplorables. But sorry, Kyle, ha
Ben a ranting for a while.
Speaker 2: No, No, I mean you make a lot of points there.
I just you know, it's I don't think it's going
to work for a couple of reasons. You know, again,
things aren't the way they were when you could write
an article in National Review and say that, you know,
Pap you can and and Justin Romondo are just too
far to the right and we can't accept those guys.
When you know, Ben Shapiro tries to levy those kinds
of the tats, and when they're levied against me, I mean,
it's laughable, right like, because the same people with you know,
I'm poles with Darryl Cooper, and so they would call
me a Nazi for too far to the right, for
hanging out with Darryl, and then the next week they're
going to call me a leftist, you know, on green
haired leftist for the same position. I just don't think
it's going to work because it's so much easier for
people to defend themselves now when everybody when somebody calls
me wote Now I'm you know, you do realize I
work at anti war dot com, the site founded by
Justin Romondo. I work for Judge Andrew Nepolitano, right like
I work at a website that's published articles by Pap
Buchanan and Ron Paul and you know again, I'm Poles
with Darryl and Dave Smith, and you know, people who
just are so far from the left and have been
so critical of the left that I don't think it's
going to work, especially trying to make these attacks against
you know, people like myself are Tucker Carlson or Dave Smith,
our Candice Owens, They're just so clearly to the right,
and everybody's handed to be calling them hitler for the
past ten years that nobody's going to believe that. Oh no,
you know, Candae Owen, she didn't have a secret Hitler stash.
What she really did is has a secret blue wig
and was going to BLM protests that night or something like.
Nobody even remotely believes any of this, and so, and
I think that's why the US is now in certainly
a month into the conflict, probably the most unpopular war
that we've ever been in right. You know, usually at
the start of war, particularly this early on, people are
rallying around the flag and some people have. But you know,
the shine is going to wear off this war and
it is not going to look good. What people realize.
It already doesn't look good, right, Like the polls are
already majority unpopular. But I mean by the time the
inflation and the oil prices really start to hit, and
this is dragging on for two or three months, and
you know, it's one thing to pay an extra twenty
thirty bucks to fill up your game astained two or
three times, right, most people have enough money to take
that hit. But when it's in your car and your
wife's car and it's happened for four months now, right,
you're filling up that since teen times, you know, thirty
two times both cars. That's dipping into your savings territory, right, Like,
this isn't like accounting that you can maybe make work
out for a couple of weeks in your household. And
so once that starts to happen, I mean, I think
we're going to see just like really the most die
hard Trump supporters that say they still support this conflict, well.
Speaker 1: I mean, and look man to that point is someone
who drives a twenty eight year old vehicle that gets
twelve miles to the gallon downhill. Uh yeah, I'm feeling it,
you know, I really don't appreciate it, to put it mildly,
And I think one of the interesting features that we've seen,
both on the political and on the military side, is
this seems to be a very short sided set of decisions. Right,
this seems to basically be what we might call a
high time preference behavior. Right, I want it, and I
want it now. Like even on the most basic level, right,
you look at the you know, the assassination of Comeni. Well,
Comeni was what eighty seven eighty six? Okay, he apparently had,
you know, colon cancer. I'm not going to pretend to
know anything about Iranian medical technology. But if he were
an eighty six year old living in Los Angeles, right
near some of the best hospitals in the world, you
wouldn't exactly be, you know, planning too far ahead, I'll
put it that way. Right, that is a very old man,
one who has passed the point where most people die.
So kicking off a war to kill him, it's like
one wants the point similarly, right, all of these problems
were easily foreseeable, and yet nonetheless here we are at war.
When we look on the political front, clearly the issue
of Israel and our relationship to Israel is alive and
well on both the right and the left. The left
sort of did their purges a little bit earlier, right,
kind of in late Biden. Sure you remember the you know,
the protest that you know, kind of sparked up after
October seventh, But people knew this was an issue on
the American right before, and so to burn all of
that capital, even from the president's position, like he very
likely not directly because of this, but for other reasons,
is going to be impeached because of this war and
its consequences. And again, all of these issues. You didn't
have to be a genius. You didn't have to have
the one hundred and forty IQ to project six months
into the future. And so that's the part of it
that's both very galling and sort of disturbing is seemingly
no one has made that calculation or for whatever reason,
they think it's worth it. And one more thing, and
I'll throw it back to you, Kyle, because this is
supposed to be an interview instead of just me monologuing
at a guest I brought in, but as you can tell,
him a little fired up on this. Uh. This was
a point that you know that Brett Weinstein brought up
when he was on Tucker and Tucker appeared on his
show at the same time. We basically said it, it
sort of feels like they're going for broke, that they're
pulling out all the stops. I'm curious, one, have you
felt the same way and can you think of anything
that might explain it? Ah?
Speaker 2: Sorry, is there I mean, it's really difficult to try
to puzzle out what's actually going on in the White
House and in how we got into this conflict. As
you mentioned at the start of it, the Ayatola, the
former Ayatola, was an eighty six year old at least
cancer survived, it didn't actively have cancer. And if you
saw them in public, like there are maybe some eighty
year olds that are fairly spry and healthy, he wasn't
that he was. He was an eighty six and average
eighty six year old man. And it seemed to me
that if you really wanted to destroy the Islamic Republic,
you probably could have exploited the slow decline and death
of the man who's been leading the Islamic Republic for
over half of its existence, right and try to you know,
stir up some like kind of Polish politics and you know,
just put out like use your resources in the media
to be like, oh is the Ayatola planning to hand
power to his son? And just you know, there's a
lot of opportunity in the decline of a long time ruler,
the medical decline of a long time ruler, as his
faculties fail, as is kind oftive abilities fail to exploit
the position and try to weaken Iran in that sense,
and look over the past several decades with that Iatolia
in power, the US has been able to severely weaken Iran.
We ran an article or no, next week we'll have
an article at anti war dot com by David Stockman
laying out like how far behind the Iranian economy has
fallen under the Islamic Republic and how a lot of
that is due to the US intervention in political pressures
and what we've done to Iran, you know, during that period.
Speaker 1: And so.
Speaker 2: Again I'm not somebody who advocates that the CIA go
around the world and try to overthrow governments and destabilize
guard I think there's always blowback involved with that, but
if you wanted to destroy the Islamic Republic, it seemed
like there was a really beautiful opportunity in front of us,
especially since there wasn't a clear secession plan in Iran.
I mean, they said there were some behind the scenes,
but it's not like it was accepted like in Saudi
Arabia right now, it's accepted that when the king dies,
NBS is going to be the nets leader. That wasn't
the situation in Iran before, And it's it's baffling that
we didn't exploit that. It's also baffling, and this is
something Pete Headset that said that's actually correct in the
past few weeks that when the Trump administration took over
just a year ago now, the American stoppiles were depleted
and that got worse, particularly among our stop pile of
interceptors during the Twelve Day War in June. And so
we went into this conflict with our stop pile of
patriot that and other interceptors at maybe best fifty percent
of what the Pentagon hoped for. I mean, we are
gaining reports last summer that the US only had twenty
five percent and of the Patriot interceptors that needed for
its defense plans. And so clearly we're strained on a
very key piece of what it's going to take to
win this conflict. If you really, really, really thought the
US had to go to war with Iran in just
a week ago, right Toulsey Gabbert, the Director of National
Intelligence told the American people, told Congress that Iran was
not rebuilding its nuclear program yet. So I think you
could reasonably assume that if Iran at the you know,
US did everything it could to delay when Iran started
to rebuild its nuclear program, you know, we could probably
engage in talks with the Iranians for six months and
we tell them that, hey, you know, we're willing to
talk with you and try to work out a deal
as long as you don't start rebuilding your nuclear program.
You know, we already got six month delay. And then,
of course, even once they start rebuilding it, it's gonna
take quite a bit of time before it's functioning. And
so it's reasonable to think that the US would have
had at least a year or two to fill our
stop piles to prepare our military. The I think it
was the four that was in Latin America and the
Caribbean before going over to the Middle East. Is now
after a laundry fire in a Greek Iportan is going
to need repairs for twelve to fourteen months. And so again,
if we want to go to war with Iran, something
that's going to be heavy on our navy, require a
lot of aircraft carrier use over the next two years.
Let's get a good number of these ships and dry dock.
Let's do all the overhauls, all the maintenance. So when
this war starts, not only do we have you know,
two aircraft carriers in the region ready to go, but
we also have two three four more that could be
deployed at any time to replace them. And that's not
the situation that we have today. You know, I think
that George H. W. Bush is maybe the only other
aircraft carrier that could get to the Middle East relatively quickly.
There's some reports that the White House is either deploying
or thinking and deploying it, but we certainly don't have
like that that long list that we need with our
fighter jets. You know, before the conflict. They would say
that a lot of the F thirty five and other
F twenty twos, F eighteens, in particular, the readiness rate
for those aircraft hovers between like fifty and eighty percent.
So again, let's not at sport so many spare parts
to the Israelis and the British and the Turrets and
the Germans over the next two years, and really made
sure that our F thirty five program, our fighter jets again,
we're going to be relying on them very heavy. We
have not only a large number of them, but we
got all the spare parts that we need in everything
else to ensure that we could operate at Matt's capacity
for the longest period of time. None of that was done.
I've interviewed Larry Johnson a few times on my show
since this war has started, former CIA analysts, and I
keep asking Larry, what is the plan, what was the plan?
What do they want to do? And he keeps telling
me there is no plan, there was no plan, They
have no idea. And so you know, you brought the
AI chatbot being reset every day. To some degree, it
seems like that's going on in the White House too,
with what they have planned for this conflict where you know,
they wake up in the morning, they look at what
they have and they say, Okay, this is what we're
going to do today. There is no long term plan, right,
they said, oh, we destroyed the Iranian navy, we destroyed
the Iranian air force. Aron barely had an air force
and barely had a navy. Right, They had speedboats in
US F four Tomcats that they bought from US in
the seventies. So destroying Iran's air force or navy are
not even meaningful goals for the United States of America.
They didn't have long range bombers that could come over here.
They didn't have a navy that could cross the Atlantic
our Pacific Ocean, and so it means absolutely nothing. They
have this you know what, the Iraq War. They would
often say that we didn't have clear objectives, we didn't
have a clear strategy with this war. It's not just
that there it's not clear. There just is not.
Speaker 1: One thing that I think has been perhaps overstated, is
because I think that everything that you are bringing up
is correct. And one of the most interesting bits of
information I've been tracking is there's an app and let
me pull up see you can find the name of it. Ye. Yeah,
there's an app called I think it's so Far tzo Far.
But basically what it is is it's the Israeli government's
way to let their citizens know they need to get
to a bomb shelter. Right. And it's sort of an
interesting bit of information because you can look at that
and say, okay, well, clearly, if we had, as is
often claimed, no problem with interceptors, we had many as
we wanted. The Iranians were, you know, had an ever
degrading capacity to hit Israel, you assume that those government
alerts would be reducing in frequency. Right, if the propagandam
mact mashed up with reality, you would see results. But
you're not seeing that the bombardments are continuing. Right. We've
seen bombardments get very very close to the kind of
old part of Jerusalem, right, the part that's in sacred
obviously the Temple mount we've seen you know, no direct hits,
but there's been damage there. So to me, between the
two of those, that indicates that all, right, like, clearly
this isn't going as well as Fox News will have
you believe. But I think that there is a desire
to read into certain things too much. So for instance, right,
an F thirty five got hit, made it back, that
story kind of died, but there was a desire to
sort of make the mountain out of that mole hill. Right. Yeah, sure,
we haven't had any fighter jets hit at all, but
you know, one fighter jet taking a missile and making
it back to base is not It's not the end
of the world, right, It doesn't mean we're going to
get absolutely smashed tomorrow. But that said, and I'm glad
you brought up the aircraft carriers because we've seen these
people lying so consistently that when you're starting to hear
weird stories about aircraft carriers and it's like, oh, it
caught on fire for no reason. Oh wait, no, it
was an electrical issue. It was a dryer. Like the
amount of stories I've heard on that had been numerous,
and you start to think, even if you're not particularly conspiratorial,
was that what really happened? Because we've heard from you know,
military hospitals, from inside sources mine as well as many
other people's, that the number of casualties, both killed and
wounded is being deliberately hidden. Right that we've heard, you know,
from sources inside the Pentagon that they are delaying notifying
family members, they're delaying issuing you know, medals, they're issuing
commendations for people hurt. And again, taken as a whole one,
the conclusion is, obviously, you can't believe anything these people
are saying. And two, if this were going great, why
are you hiding so much? Right, why are you being
so evasive if this is the soaring success? And so again,
don't get me wrong, I think that, you know, Iranian
claims that over a thousand Americans have been killed are
probably a bit overstated, to put it mildly, I don't
think it's anywhere near that. Just because we're in an
unjust war with the Iranians does not mean the Iranians
are speaking truthfully, right, But nonetheless, my general thought has been,
if this were going well, people would be acting differently.
We would see different things on Israeli, you know, air
raid announcements, we'd see different things coming from the Pentagon.
And I realized it's sort of a gross measuring stick.
You know. It's not like I have, you know, an
official document, but just knowing a little bit about human nature,
how people react to incentives, I feel like it's a
very reasonable assumption to say the war with Iran is
turning into a debacle. And I didn't even have to
get into my opinion on the Holocaust to arrive at
that decision.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's kind of a great way to put in
on that remarked there is that that had nothing to
do with it. I really do so. I will never
overestimate I guess the military industrial complex's ability. I think
that they struggled to produce functioning weapons systems of all kind,
and so you know, the Ford was out at sea
a little too long and too much lint built up
and it started a laundry fire. I think it's entirely possible,
just because I don't think very much of the people
who made those ships. I think the most likely explanation
is that was an intentional fire set by an American
service member as a way to sabotage the ship because
it was on its way from the Eastern Mediterranean, where
it was effectively just defending Israel, over to the Middle East,
where it was going to be involved in operations, potentially
even in operation to try to reopen the Straight of
Four Moves. Maybe somebody found out and they because before
on that ship there were reports of you know, the
sewage the sceptic system was failing, and they said that
they were finding T shirts in the toilet system where
you know, not I'm sure it happens. You know, you
got a little kid at home and they flushed their
T shirt or something. Believe it soldiers flushing their T shirt.
I don't think so, So I think sabotage is the
most likely, although we also shouldn't roll out that maybe
an Iranian drone snutt through or I think it was
in the Red Sea are around the Suez at the time,
so could have even been like Ansaralla or somebody got
a sneaky drones strike in and it caused a fire
or something like that. What the F thirty five game hit.
One thing I want to mention is it's kind of
presented as well. The US has been bombing Iran for
four weeks, which means the US has been flying over
Iranian skies for four weeks, and Headset has really tried
to sell this, but I'm not so sure that's the case.
I know the fighter jets are dropping bombs, but they're
dropping the bombs from Iraqi and Kuwaiti airspace. And we
know that because some American fighter jets have been shot
down over Kuwait by a supposed friendly fire, which if
it was one, I believe it. If it was two,
I'd be highly skeptical. It's three, Maybe the kuwaitis intentionally
shot down that American fighter jet. That that seems maybe
more likely to me.
Speaker 1: Or maybe, Kyle, maybe the Iranians did it if people
were at war with Like again, I'm not saying one
one theory has you know, more weight over the other.
But to your point three friendly fire airplane incidents in
a couple of days, you're like, all right, man, Like,
I just don't believe you, right, Yeah, not you, of course, Kyle.
Speaker 2: No, I know, I know what you mean. The only
reason I'm skeptical of Iran is because the pilots were,
you know, ejeted over a Kuwaiti airspace, all three of them.
If Iran has like that capable of air defenses, that
because I imagine, you know, they're fairly inland, they're not positioning
their their missile defenses on the planes. They're probably hidden
and tucked away in the mountains or closer to Tehran
and things like that, which that's pretty far from from Kuwait.
That that's the only reason I suspect somebody in Kuwait
who shot those down. But let's say that you know
that F thirty five that was hit or nearly hit,
if that was the furthest inland that an American fighter
jet had gone, or you know, only a few fighter
jets had verged that far over Iranian airspace and they're
still getting shot at once they actually get into you know,
the more mountainous areas of Ran closer to Tehran. That
certainly would suggest that the American control over Iranian airspace
isn't all that secure. I mean, you know, we could
lob as many Tamahawks and other you know, standoff crewis
and blisted missiles, and certainly the extended range JDAN missiles
have quite get hit from quite some distance away if
fired from enough altitude over a rock or Kuwait or
something like that into Iran. But eventually you do run
out of those munitions, particularly the Tamahawks, and so at
that point you need to start moving more and more
inland to be able to hit the same targets are
the same depth away from you know, where the aircraft
carrier is stationed.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's an interesting point. I mean, I think generally
if we can sort of you know, bring this to
you know, some sort of conclusion. As you've said earlier, right,
this war is unpopular, and it's unpopular very early. And
you don't have to be a politics nerd. You don't
have to be you know, in the weeds on these
issues to notice. And you know, I know I see
this in my peer group, people who you know, the
kind of guys you you know, sports bet and drink
beers with, you know, normal guys who have you know,
jobs and wife and kids, who aren't super political, and
they are saying things that would be uh, wouldn't be
out of place in like twenty fourteen pole, right, that
is what has sort of you entered a certain part
of particularly young male discords. And is it the most serious?
Is it the most reasoned? No? But those people thirty
years ago would have been your normal Republican voters, right,
the kind of guys who listened to Rush Limbaugh maybe
and you know George Strait, and those people are gone
completely and totally lost at least, you know, looking at
the war part. And so this incredible just conflagration where
all of this political and social capital was burnt up,
apparently to secure the greater Israel project that will have consequences.
We've already seen the global consequences with our our erstwhile allies,
and so when I'm saying this is a bad idea,
it is primarily motivated because I live here. I care
about how this country ends up. You know, it's not
because the Iranians are you know, sliding me seven thousand
dollars a post under the table, although you know would
make a difference. But in all seriousness, right, there are
very real consequences to these actions. Thankfully, it seems who
knows again we've we've expressed anything. It's that you can't
really trust these people. The level of Americans directly killed
has been relatively low in the grand scheme of things.
But unless something changes, and it seems as if we
didn't even mention this, but all signs are pointing towards
boots on the ground, this is only going to get worse.
You know, this is an ill conceived goal, you know,
poorly pursued, and unfortunately we will be bearing the consequences
for it. But Kyle, this has been fascinating conversation. I
really enjoyed it. If people are interested in you and
your work, well where can they find you?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I host the Kyle Ansloan Show. That that's my program.
As I think I mentioned on the Today, I've interviewed
people like Larry Johnson and Darryl Cooper. You talked about
Sky Horton. He's coming back to the show net suite.
So that's what you'll give if you check out the
Kyle Lambs Loan Show. I'm an editor at anti war
dot com, the Libertarian Institute, and judge nap dot com,
and then follow me on at Kyle Lamb's Loan Underscore.
Speaker 1: Well, this is actually really good because I haven't spoken
to Larry in six or nine months. I need to
reach out to him, so this is helpful for me. Yeah.
All of those will be linked down in the description.
Everyone should check those out. As far as my stuff,
The Jay Burdens Show, Apple, Spotify, YouTube, anywhere you listen
to podcasts. This is what I do. If you want
to support me, a few bucks a month, Patreon, Substack
or gum road gets you access to the episodes early
in ad free. In the comments. I'm actually curious, as
I've said on a previous episode. I've changed up some
stuff on the back end, so the ads should be
both less I guess, kind of in your face. It
should be more subtle. And also we're running fewer of them,
so let me know if that's what you're seeing on
the audio version. Just curious. I can't get rid of
him because I need to pay my mortgage, but hopefully
it'll at least be less irritating for you guys. Also
check out our sponsor Axios Remote Fitness and Coaching JD
good guy, small businessman makes a good product. If you
want to learn how to get jacked, you can ask him.
I mean, you actually have to do the work right.
Just asking him won't help. But it's better than nothing,
I guess, and that's why he pays me to say
that his business is better than nothing anyway. At all. Seriousness, Kyle,
this has been a ton of fun, and everyone at
home keep your head up well. I can't last forever.
Good night,