Speaker 1: Here's your nine first one to weatherforar Cask cloudy day
Speaker 1: to day, spotty light rain at a high fifty four
Speaker 1: frost overnight thirty five for the low clouds to move out.
Speaker 1: We got sunny sky tomorrow with a high fifty five,
Speaker 1: more frost, Wednesday night with the lower thirty five and
Speaker 1: clear skys and a sunny Thursday sixty three forty seven
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 2: See what Chuck has on traffic from the UC Health
Speaker 2: Tramfic Center.
Speaker 3: Mammogram's Saint Vives called five one three five to eighty
Speaker 3: four Pink to schedule your annual mammogram with UC Health
Speaker 3: expert team. That's five one three five eight four Pink.
Speaker 3: Cruise are working with the wreck right wings bocked. He
Speaker 3: spend two seventy five near the Double A Highway that
Speaker 3: traffic is now backing up to Dixie and close to
Speaker 3: a forty five minute delay. North Found seventy five is
Speaker 3: running close to an extra forty five out of Florence
Speaker 3: into town with a broken down just before the bridge.
Speaker 2: Chuck Ingram went traffic on fifty five KRC the talk station.
Speaker 1: Ay twenty eight to fifty five Karra see de talk
Speaker 1: station Happy Tuesday. Made always happier because it's that time
Speaker 1: we'll get an update on the various conflicts going on
Speaker 1: in the in the around the globe with a deep
Speaker 1: dive with Daniel Davis. It is that time for the
Speaker 1: allertive moment, Daniel Davis Deep Dive. Welcome back, Daniel. It's
Speaker 1: always a pleasure to have you on the fifty five
Speaker 1: KRC Morning Show. My friend.
Speaker 2: I look forward to this every week. Glad to be here.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you do because I find it just absolutely
Speaker 1: fascinating tapping into your years of military expertise in the
Speaker 1: field of conflict. If you don't mind, I'm going to
Speaker 1: start with the Russia Ukraine situation. I've recently read that
Speaker 1: Russia is making some gains taken over some more land Ukraine.
Speaker 1: But the thing I wanted to start with now I've
Speaker 1: acknowledged time and time again with you and other segments
Speaker 1: on the program, the fog of war. You have no
Speaker 1: idea what in the hell's going on on the ground
Speaker 1: and any given conflict, we don't know what the actual
Speaker 1: casualty number is, but the New York Times just recently
Speaker 1: reported that the Russians have suffered six hundred thousand casualties.
Speaker 1: Now that's dead and wounded collective. But I did a
Speaker 1: quick check and during the entire nine years that the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union was in Afghanistan, they lost a total of
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand met and they were there nine years. So
Speaker 1: in terms, even if the figure is half of what
Speaker 1: the New York Times says, I mean, that's a significant
Speaker 1: amount of carnage. And I can only imagine how bad
Speaker 1: it's been for the Ukrainians.
Speaker 4: Yeah, my, honestly, I don't think that that number is
Speaker 4: anywhere close to being right, just based on how the
Speaker 4: war is being waged, what the Russians are doing. I
Speaker 4: think that that, frankly, is part of the disinformation campaign
Speaker 4: by the West. But I will tell you, and I've
Speaker 4: talked to some pro Russian people who say the number
Speaker 4: isn't minor. They say it's somewhere around eighty thousand dead,
Speaker 4: which is a staggering number. It is when you're talking anything,
Speaker 4: because it's like probably double that wounded, seriously wounded we're
Speaker 4: talking about. So it's massive numbers no matter what. And
Speaker 4: the reason I say I don't think that the high
Speaker 4: number is right is because of how Russia conducts itself.
Speaker 4: It doesn't use these so called meat wave attacks, which
Speaker 4: everybody in the West seems to say as a matter
Speaker 4: of fact that that's what they do. That's not how
Speaker 4: they operate. They actually lead with firepower, artillery, drone strikes,
Speaker 4: missile strikes, et cetera, so that they don't put their
Speaker 4: troops in as much risk. Now then they're not going
Speaker 4: straight bull rushed into cities like they did in back moot.
Speaker 2: They're doing flanking maneuvers, et cetera.
Speaker 4: So I think that they're causing a whole lot more
Speaker 4: casualties on the Ukraine side, but they are now prioritizing
Speaker 4: not losing their men and spending more ammunition in response.
Speaker 1: Honestly, sir, that's exactly what I expect you do to say,
Speaker 1: because when I saw that, I'm like, there's no way
Speaker 1: six hundred thousand. But we'll take the numbers as we
Speaker 1: see them and will analyze them accordingly, which is why
Speaker 1: I appreciate we have you to talk to about it.
Speaker 4: And you know, it doesn't make any sense what they claim,
Speaker 4: which they claim Russia has more casualties than the Ukraine
Speaker 4: side does, even though they also claim that Russia has
Speaker 4: between a five and ten to one firepower advantage, And
Speaker 4: I just don't know how you get the logic that
Speaker 4: says that guys with ten times more ammunition and weapons
Speaker 4: suffer ten times more casualties.
Speaker 2: It's just irrational, all right.
Speaker 1: Moving to what seems to be a certainty, it's widely
Speaker 1: reported Russia has made some gains in Ukraine, in the
Speaker 1: territory within Ukraine, and they are advancing rather than while
Speaker 1: being held held on a line. Yep, that's right, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's not a stalemate. It is a methodical
Speaker 1: grind forward.
Speaker 4: And in the last about month and a half, Russia's
Speaker 4: gains have been picking up speed. This incursion into the
Speaker 4: into the Curse where the Ukraine and in August invaded,
Speaker 4: a portion of Russia is being squeezed out, and it's
Speaker 4: it's now a serious risk of being completely cut off
Speaker 4: at the neck, so that Ukraine will either have to
Speaker 4: withdraw them all real quick, or they'll have they may
Speaker 4: lose them. But on the eastern front, around the Pokrolsk area,
Speaker 4: around a city called Tourets around they just lost another city.
Speaker 2: Called around Vuladar. They're moving forward, et cetera.
Speaker 4: All the places that that they're fighting there's three main
Speaker 4: ones in the east and they're just making methodical progress
Speaker 4: in each of them.
Speaker 1: And they're holding the line there too. This isn't like
Speaker 1: they capture a city and then the Ukrainians come in
Speaker 1: around side or flank them and push them back out.
Speaker 1: They're holding the territory as they advance forward.
Speaker 2: That is correct.
Speaker 4: There haven't been any meaningful counter attacks, even tactical counter
Speaker 4: texts by the Ukraine side, maybe since February of this year.
Speaker 2: So it is non stop backwards for the Ukraine side.
Speaker 4: Occasionally as sending reinforcements into one area lock just in
Speaker 4: front of Pokrovs, one of the probably the number one
Speaker 4: target in the east.
Speaker 2: They have slowed down the initial or the.
Speaker 4: Direct front in there, but then that means Russia has
Speaker 4: gone elsewhere around the flanks. So they stop one place,
Speaker 4: but then they pulled troops away to make it firm
Speaker 4: and they hold the line a little while, but then
Speaker 4: when they pulled troops from here, then Russia goes there
Speaker 4: with other troops and then they penetrate there. So it's
Speaker 4: just to lose lose for the Ukraine side right now, well,
Speaker 4: ignoring whether or not they have sufficient arms to defend themselves.
Speaker 4: Does that suggest that there are insufficient troops to get
Speaker 4: the job done? On the Ukraine side, that's the primary
Speaker 4: issue right now. It's primarily a troop. Is you actually
Speaker 4: a lot of the sixty one billion dollars that we
Speaker 4: approved earlier this year? A lot of stuff is also
Speaker 4: coming from several European states. They're actually getting more and
Speaker 4: more ammunition right now. But it's a man power issue.
Speaker 4: It's always been. War is always won by men, not machines,
Speaker 4: not money. But they are having an incredibly difficult time
Speaker 4: because they're just running out of men, quite frankly, and
Speaker 4: they've been press ganging them into service.
Speaker 2: They literally take them off the streets.
Speaker 4: They're trying now recruiting print drives, which are kind of
Speaker 4: curious because they featured lots of sexual in tone ads.
Speaker 4: I don't know why they think that's going to get
Speaker 4: somebody to go to the front, but that's what they're trying.
Speaker 2: They're doing.
Speaker 4: They're pulling out all the stops. They just don't have
Speaker 4: enough to offset losses.
Speaker 1: Maybe they should promise them the number of virgins after
Speaker 1: death when they die as an incentive to anyway, don't
Speaker 1: go down that road. Just let me how about the
Speaker 1: idea of North Korean North Korean troops helping out the
Speaker 1: Soviet or the Soviets very slipped again, north Korean troops
Speaker 1: helping out the Russians. Did I read that correctly?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 1: You did.
Speaker 4: There's been more and more credible reports that North Korea
Speaker 4: has not simply been helping Russia with artillery shells other
Speaker 4: kinds of military help, which has been enormous. I'm reportedly
Speaker 4: between three and four million shells have been sent by
Speaker 4: North Korea, but now also thousands of men, especially some
Speaker 4: of the defensive positions.
Speaker 2: The rumor is that.
Speaker 4: Some of the North Korean troops are going into places
Speaker 4: to replace Russian troops that are like defending borders, etc.
Speaker 2: To free up more combat troops to go into Ukraine.
Speaker 4: So far, there has been one report of North Korean
Speaker 4: troops that were killed in action, so that there has
Speaker 4: been some fighting in the front, but we don't know
Speaker 4: quite the numbers. Apparently it's in the low thousands at
Speaker 4: the moment, but a lot of that maybe just be
Speaker 4: to kind of test the international waters to see what
Speaker 4: the pushback may be, and if there's not a lot
Speaker 4: more could come later.
Speaker 1: Well, this does not sound like it is aligning up
Speaker 1: to be very good, at least as far as the
Speaker 1: Ukrainian's bargaining position. To the extent some sort of treaty
Speaker 1: or settlement is negotiated, they're going to have to probably
Speaker 1: give up a sizeable chunk of land in order to
Speaker 1: get to get some peace in the region.
Speaker 4: Well, you know, Zelenski continues to make all I mean,
Speaker 4: he just went on another European tour this past few
Speaker 4: days where he keeps talking like he did when he
Speaker 4: was in Washington for the United Nations Summit, that he
Speaker 4: wants to have a strong, peaceful settlement that he can
Speaker 4: quote only get peace through strength, which you said just
Speaker 4: two days ago, that he wants to force Russia into peace.
Speaker 4: But there is no forcing Russia into peace when he's
Speaker 4: losing territory by the day.
Speaker 2: So the longer he waits to make that.
Speaker 4: Kind of offer to where he's willing to make a
Speaker 4: negotiated settlement and lose some territory, they're just going to
Speaker 4: keep losing more territory that's going to be taken by
Speaker 4: force of arms, not by negotiation. And every day his
Speaker 4: position gets weaker, not stronger. So I worry about the
Speaker 4: fate of Ukraine if they don't make a deal pretty soon.
Speaker 1: All right, let's pivot over to Israel and the ongoing conflicts,
Speaker 1: multi front battles being waged there. What's your assessment on
Speaker 1: going forward and where those conflicts are going to lead Israel.
Speaker 4: Well, the biggest thing right now is that a lot
Speaker 4: of people have been surprised, me being one of them,
Speaker 4: that Israel has not already responded to the October first
Speaker 4: Iranian strike of one hundred and eighty missiles. A lot
Speaker 4: of people thought that it would be a response within
Speaker 4: I don't know, a lot like three or four days,
Speaker 4: maybe you're a week, But now then it's two weeks
Speaker 4: since that had happened. And I think that the reason
Speaker 4: is because there's a tremendous amount of diplomacy going on
Speaker 4: behind the scenes where the US is trying to talk
Speaker 4: Israel down from some of their bigger strictures. Because you
Speaker 4: hadf Tally Bennett in the first few days saying, man,
Speaker 4: we need to go after their nuclear weapons, we need
Speaker 4: to go after their oil infrastructure, and a lot in
Speaker 4: the United States were saying that.
Speaker 2: But that's how you get into a region wide war.
Speaker 4: And I think no matter what the administration wants to
Speaker 4: happen on the ground, they also don't want it to
Speaker 4: go into all that war that whose end is unknown,
Speaker 4: that could cost us a great deal. So I think
Speaker 4: that's starting to have some success. There was reports that
Speaker 4: the Israeli said over not that they won't hit the
Speaker 4: energy or the oil infrastructure, and so they're going to
Speaker 4: go after military targets. The problem is, I'm not sure
Speaker 4: that that's going to be viewed as you know, appropriate
Speaker 4: for the Uranian side, and they may still respond back,
Speaker 4: so we may not be out of the woods yet.
Speaker 1: This thing could still escalate into a war. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: was surprised that Israel has actually said that out loud.
Speaker 1: I mean, what you know, for a Wall Street Journal
Speaker 1: article from this morning, Israel is sure as US it
Speaker 1: will not strike Irans oil and nuclear facilities. Officials say,
Speaker 1: I don't know why you would say that out loud,
Speaker 1: even if you were not planning on hitting those. As
Speaker 1: long as the threat exists, maybe you keep her on
Speaker 1: at bail a little bit.
Speaker 4: Well, I mean that assumes that that's a true statement
Speaker 4: and is not a deceptive plan, which it could be
Speaker 4: like to make them okay, good, they're not gonna come here.
Speaker 4: Oh shoot, they did, so I don't take that at
Speaker 4: face value at all.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, you're now general of the army, and
Speaker 1: you're a five star general, and you're in charge of
Speaker 1: making the decisions on behalf of the Israelis What would
Speaker 1: you do by way of whether retaliate or not? What
Speaker 1: would you what would be your path forward? Considering, of course,
Speaker 1: as we have talked about, and you just alluded to that,
Speaker 1: a serious escalation like hitting their oil manufacturing or hitting
Speaker 1: their nuke sites may very well result in potentially a
Speaker 1: global conflict considering all the players that are involved on
Speaker 1: the Iranian side of the equation.
Speaker 2: Right right, that's exactly right.
Speaker 4: What I would do is I would do some version
Speaker 4: of what they did after the April attack when Iran
Speaker 4: sent all those missiles and drones into Israel in response
Speaker 4: to Israel blowing up the embassy in Syria. By striking
Speaker 4: something that doesn't cause casualties like what the Uranians did.
Speaker 4: They made sure that both of their responses didn't kill
Speaker 4: anybody on the ground. They took out a few targets,
Speaker 4: and they just basically just said, hey, we don't want
Speaker 4: this to escalate, so we're gonna hit nonsensitive targets. If
Speaker 4: you hit do something like that, then there's a chance
Speaker 4: that you can now tamp this down and stop going
Speaker 4: up the escalation rater. Then I would focus on not
Speaker 4: expanding the war, because they've already committed themselves to this
Speaker 4: new incursion into southern eleven, which is a full out
Speaker 4: war by itself.
Speaker 2: Don't let anybody tell you any differently.
Speaker 4: Every aspect of warfare is being engaged here, and that
Speaker 4: is already going to be a monumentally difficult task for Israel.
Speaker 4: They should not take on more than their military can handle.
Speaker 4: So I would if I was a fovester general, I
Speaker 4: would say, let's figure out what to do about this
Speaker 4: one in Lebanon before we even think about doing anything
Speaker 4: with Iran.
Speaker 1: And then, of course, I presume that strategy that you
Speaker 1: could propose is coupled with maybe cracking down and reimposing
Speaker 1: the sanctions on around to cut off their money supply,
Speaker 1: which the Biden administration hasn't been doing a late.
Speaker 4: Well, you know that's I see that in the news
Speaker 4: a lot, and I scratch my head and I wonder
Speaker 4: what they're talking about, because there are incredible sanctions still
Speaker 4: in place on Iran. They were crippling sanctions, but the
Speaker 4: biggest place where they get money is areas. We don't
Speaker 4: have the power to sanction ie money going to China
Speaker 4: because China and India, because they're buying Iranian oil, not
Speaker 4: subject to our sanctions. Because so there's really not much
Speaker 4: more room to knuckle down there, and none of the
Speaker 4: sanctions have had any impact so far, so that's not
Speaker 4: really going to solve any problems.
Speaker 2: And most of the things that might are beyond our reach.
Speaker 1: So what we then would have is two foreign powers,
Speaker 1: Iran and Israel, just continuing this tit for tat game
Speaker 1: over time with no will.
Speaker 4: Here's the thing, though Iran does not want a war.
Speaker 4: They have signaled in every way possible that they want
Speaker 4: to defend their interest as they see it, but they
Speaker 4: don't want it to escalate. So they're fine, especially after
Speaker 4: seeing is Hassanzreela assassinated in Beyrout in a lot of
Speaker 4: their senior general some of the senior IRGC leaders have
Speaker 4: also been killed. Iran is fine with not escalating this
Speaker 4: and I think they would like nothing more than for
Speaker 4: this tip to tat escalation ladder process to stop.
Speaker 2: So there is a reason to think that could happen.
Speaker 1: I suppose one of the ways they could get it
Speaker 1: to stop is quit funding the terrorist organizations.
Speaker 4: Well, and again that depends on your perspective. From our perspective,
Speaker 4: that's it's a terrorist organization, but from their side, it's
Speaker 4: a resistance to all the things that Israel is doing
Speaker 4: against it, and it's interest in the region.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 4: And that's an unsolvable deal because you're one guy's freedom fighters,
Speaker 4: another guy's terrorists.
Speaker 1: Lots of layers in this cake, Sir, It's always a
Speaker 1: pleasure to talk through them with you. Retired Lieutenant Colonel
Speaker 1: Daniel Davis. Another fun edition of The Deep Dive with
Speaker 1: Daniel Davis. Search for it online you find his podcast
Speaker 1: throughout the week and I'll look forward to another discussion
Speaker 1: with you next week, my friend, you next week. Take
Speaker 1: care brother A forty two fifty five cars the talk
Speaker 1: stations stick around. We got a little more talk about Joe.
Speaker 2: Open the phone lines.
Speaker 1: If you have a comment, I'd love to hear from you,
Speaker 1: so feel free to call five one, three, seven four
Speaker 1: nine fifty five hundred, eight hundred and eighty two to
Speaker 1: three talk pound five fifty on.
Speaker 2: At and T phones. This is fifty five KRC and
Speaker 2: iHeartRadio station. Men over forty five