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