Joe Rogan Experience #2500 - Scott Horton

Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out. >> The Joe Rogan Experience. >> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY. NIGHT. All day. >> Do I sound okay? Check. Check. [music]. Check. This is my normal complaint. volume. Right. >> One of those one ear on, one ear off. guys. >> Yeah. My right ear hurts a lot from. years of this and so I usually just. leave it off. >> There's a volume adjuster thing, too. So. if it's too loud, you can turn it up or. turn it down. >> You sound good. But no, it's just I have.

a pain in my right ear, so I try not to. antagonize it. >> And thank you very much for the gift, ladies and gentlemen. Scott Horton gave. me a professorial pipe. >> And like I was saying, Mezer uses a pipe. now because of you. Like he. >> I love that guy. >> He's the best. >> He's so funny, dude. >> He's such a nut. When he. >> comes into the room, he just blows the. room away, dude. He's just a force in. there. It's incredible. >> And he's a giant dude. So he like hovers. over you like, "Oh, you didn't know? You. don't know about this?" And then he just. hits you with 15 conspiracies in a row. Rapid fire with.

>> so good. >> Yeah. With no breaks in between them. >> So, uh, thanks for doing this, man. >> Yeah. Thanks for having me. >> We have a great mutual friend and Dave. Smith. He recommends you highly. >> So, I'm glad we could finally do this. >> I wish there was more going on in the. world right now we could talk about, though. Just seems like. Vietnam or something, you know. >> Yeah. Yeah. Some the old stuff back when. we didn't know any better. [laughter]. >> It's kind of a mess. >> Yeah. Um, I've seen you argue on. television like a thousand times. >> Do you enjoy like that Pierce Morgan.

type. >> chaos? No. >> Yeah. >> Um, in fact, I just got back from England. I. got invited to do the Oxford debate, which I lost on Ukraine. Um, but then I. invited myself on Pierce Morgan Live as. long as I was in town. >> When you say you lost a debate, is that. because the people voted that were in. the audience? All those people with. Ukraine flags? Well, [laughter] they didn't have. Ukraine flags that time. I think someone. showed an old picture or something, but. yeah, same crowd.

>> So, what happened was, yeah, when they. leave, they either leave through the yes. door or the no door, and the yeses had. it, which was unbelievable to me, but uh. not that I did my very best job. >> But on on Pierce Morgan, I was trying to. get myself just a interview so I could. just talk to him about some things. And. instead, they just prefer that format. where you got to mix it up with a guy, which I can do that too, you know. >> Yeah. [snorts] Uh the interview thing is. way better. The the thing that he does. though is really good for engagement. He's very smart. Yeah. Like Pierce has.

done he's mastered it. He's taken like. the Jerry Springer type format and. thrown it into the world of politics and. and any other social issue that's going. on. >> Yeah. But it is too like um years ago. the guy from anti-war.com can't be on. TV, >> but we can be on his show. He doesn't. care. He's cool with I mean, I guess. same thing here. >> where it's that is a big change from how. things used to be. We just had this. whole separate conversation going on. below. >> the higher one where he has reach, you.

know, up and down the chain, I guess, is. a way to put it. >> Is he on TV or is it just. >> No, but he just has massive massive. viewership. So, it counts, I guess. >> TVv is actually a hindrance now cuz the. only way people watch TV is clips that. someone takes and puts on X or YouTube. That's it. >> Or they just see it accidentally. It's. just on. and it happens to be on when. they're in the room or whatever. But. >> what a [ __ ] dying market. Like. imagine if you're in broadcast. television right now and you're just. thinking like, where am I? What am I. doing?

>> Like this is a bad format. You have to. break for commercials every seven. minutes. No conversation could ever get. into depth. There's executives in your. ear telling you what to say and what not. to say. They'll edit out anything that. they think is like controversial that's. going to [ __ ] with their sponsors or. [ __ ] with the government or [ __ ] with. >> whatever their narrative is. >> It's just everything's changed. When I. first started doing podcasting, it was. the archives of the interviews for my. radio show and it was so important to me. that I'm on the radio because that's. real legitimacy. That means somebody.

hired you. Somebody thought you were. good enough to be there. Whereas. podcasting any jerk can do from his. basement and it just doesn't count. And. then that just became not true. And I. kind of clung on to my radio show. I. actually gave up my last radio show on. KPFK in Los Angeles last year [laughter]. after I mean where it didn't matter. anymore anyway. And podcasting has. completely changed the entire market, you know. >> Do you know how many people were. listening to you actually on the radio. before you quit? >> I think it's like probably.

high thousands but not 10,000. You know, KPFK in LA. It's the most powerful FM transmitter. west of the Mississippi River. It's. grandfathered in at 115,000 watts. But. it's But the thing is about it too, and. it's always been like this, the the. programming on there is so inconsistent. that you're listening to Latina lesbians. one hour and then you're listening to. Crystal Worship and then you're. listening to hard-hitting news and then. you're listening to like leftist union. organizing or then just whatever. You. know what I mean? But it's just there's. no like real rhyme or reason to us. It's.

hard to follow. You know. >> what kind of a channel is it? >> Oh, it's um you know left of the dial um. at 90.7 FM. So it's, you know, comparable to like KUT type. It's not. actual public radio, but it's no. commercials, all donations and. >> Oh, wow. >> Yeah. I mean, they were good. >> A regular radio show that's no. commercials and it's not public. >> Yeah, >> that's interesting. >> Yeah, it's like um I don't know if co-op. still exists here in Austin. Um co-op. radio.

>> You must have made a lot of money from. that. You must be so rich from doing. that. Like a leftist radio with no no. ads at all, just donations. Boy, you. must be raking it in. >> No, they never did pay me. But I looked. at it [laughter] like they let me be on. there for 14 15 years or something. And. um you know, like even when I was uh. writing my book about the Russia Ukraine. stuff, I would do my radio show once a. week and I was able to still cover what. was going on in Palestine. And in a way.

that I felt like, you know, in a, you know, something. meaningful that I can do even though my. attention was completely diverted. elsewhere. I still got all my guys from. the libertarian institute and. anti-war.com and I can interview them. once a week. And and then when I left. KPFK, I got some response. They're like, "Oh no, where are you going?" kind of. thing. So I mean, some people were. caring for it at the time. >> Did you let them know, hey, I have a. podcast. You could see them all. All. these episodes will be archived. >> Yeah, I kind of always let them know. that. You know, I've done 6,200.

something interviews since 2003 on my. various shows. So, I always try to. remind people to go check the archives. if they want for the full dose of that. stuff. >> Before we get into any of these. subjects, like how did you get into. this? >> Um, well, you know, in the 90s I was, you know, when I was younger, I was much. more of like a new world order uh truth. through type and um but then I basically. dropped all that. I grew out of that. How do you define new world order truth.

or type like? >> Okay. Well, I mean the new world order. conspiracy was that American foreign. policy ultimately is about building a. one world federal government under the. United Nations that would ultimately. dominate the United States. The John. Burch Society sort of idea of how and. and I uh I really like those guys. Um. and I believed that for a long time. really through Clinton and even the into. the beginning of W. Bush. But then I. could I finally realized with the way. that the Iraq war was prosecuted that. this is not about building up the UN.

security council. We got the National. Security Council and Cheney and his. neocons and they have their own separate. policy that just disproves the that sort. of new world order theory and the. American and and in fact so what HW Bush. meant by that was just the era of the. American empire with no one to stop us. this time was all it was never to build. up the UN as the world government. And. it was to build up Washington DC as the. world government. And of course they've. been failing and failing at trying to. establish that ever since.

>> Yeah. Um so the conspiracy was that the. United Nation would would be the. government of the entire earth and that. all other governments would somehow or. another give up their power to the. United Nations for what reason? >> Um cuz they're all in on it together in. secret. Whatever. That's the point is it. ain't right. It's not true. >> Well, my my question would be like. >> too many people would have to Exactly. Too many people have to sacrifice the. power they do have. >> exactly. >> to somebody else when they don't have to.

>> money. Yeah. >> That's the other thing. I mean, as soon. as you lose power, then you lose access. to insane amounts of wealth. >> Yeah. So we don't want, you know, obviously it's the ultimate nightmare. would be that you would have some kind. of one world government and then some. kind of totalitarian regime take power. with a monopoly on nukes and a monopoly. on police power and you know but that's. just a nightmare for centuries from now. I mean that's just not going to happen. anytime soon at all. That's not what. it's. >> You don't think there's any push towards.

centralizing things in that regard? Like. wasn't the World Health Organization. trying to push for something where the. entire world would have to respond to. their pandemic rules? >> Well, look, so yes, there there's. always, you know, the widening and. deepening of the international law as. much as they can. At the end of the day, there is no actual world state to. enforce that law other than just the. United States of America. But there is. no one world army, one world police. force to enforce these things. It's all.

about coercing and cajoling governments. to go along and right which goes to show. I mean this is the whole thing about. when they talk about. >> you know what HW Bush meant when he. talked about the new world order is the. same thing that Joe Biden meant when he. would say the liberal rules-based. international order of just doing what. America says right that's what it is you. know it's a pseudo empire it's not. exactly the ex the same kind of empires. and you know colonialism that we've had. in the past but it's sort of a neoc. colonialism where if we can overthrow.

your government with some money, then. we'll do that. A little bit of CIA help, we'll do that. And if we have if we have. to bomb your capital city, we'll go for. that if we think so. >> Yeah. >> And it does go back really to the. Wolfowitz doctrine, you know, of various. degrees. But this is a reference to. right after the first Gulf War. Paul. Wolfitz at that time was the deputy. secretary of defense for policy. and him and a couple other neocons, Scooter Libby and Zme Khalilzad, they. wrote up this document called the. defense plan and guidance and it was.

saying this is going to be you know the. posture for the postcold war era and the. post first Iraq war Gulf War era. Um, and what it said was, "We're going to be. the most dominant power on every. continent anywhere in the world. And. we're not even going to tolerate any. other nation or alliance or group of. nations anywhere to try to join together. to balance against us. We will be. dominant everywhere. And we'll never let. anyone get that far ahead or at least. we're going to try to construct an order.

where our power is essentially permanent. and they don't even try it." And so. that's what they've been trying to do. with expanding our footprint in the. Middle East, expanding our footprint. into Eastern Europe, and of course, you. know, working hard at least on building their. alliances and or tightening them and. arming their alliances in Eastern Asia. And it's, you know, under the theory. that if it's not us, it'll be somebody. else and it'll be so much worse. So we. have to stay and dominate everything. forever. But of course, you can look at. the debt and just see, well, we can't. afford it, so I don't know how anybody.

else can. We certainly cannot afford to. keep doing this, >> right? And if you look at Wolawitz, if. you see popa image of Paul Wolawitz, he. looks exactly like the kind of guy you. would expect to make something like the. Wolfwitz doctrine, >> right? And by the way, they did rewrite. it because it was a scandal. It was. leaked to the New York Times. And so. they went back and rewrote it and they. just said, "Well, we'll bring our. friends, you know, from the. international institutions along to. >> that picture right there where your. cursor is. Right below right there." No, to the right of that. That one.

>> Yeah, there you go. >> Look at that. That looks like that. completely looks like the type of guy. that would do something like. >> So, listen. There's a there's a book. about the neoconservatives by Jacob Hill. Brun called They Knew They Were Right, >> which is of course, right? Like, yeah, these guys who have no idea what they're. doing. >> really. You know, >> that's hilarious. Let me try this. Doesn't fit right on my little head. >> Like I said, you can [ __ ] with the. volume on that little knob and turn it. up and down. So, um, this was a this one. of the things that, um, when Coleman.

Hughes and, um, our buddy Dave Smith got. into it with was about whether you. remember when, um, they brought up this. seven countries thing. >> that, you know, and he was saying that. there was no real proof that that. exists, that he didn't actually read it. He was told that we were going to go. into seven countries. But, you know, I. was talking to Dave about this the other. day. He's like, I if you just look at.

the fact that we did everything on that. list except Iran, every single one of. them took place except Iran. Like he's. like, I really want to go and do that. debate again and I can't get Coleman to. sit down with me. >> Yeah. You know, yes. For people who are. interested in this subject, you know, long term, >> uh, there's no mystery about the. connection between the neoonservatives. doctrines and then the activities that. the W administration engaged in. Yeah. >> You know, subsequent. I mean, what. happened was.

>> you have, you know, Andrew Coburn, the. great journalist Andrew Coburn says that. the neoconservatives are a cross between. the Israel lobby and the. military-industrial complex. The fighter. bomber salesman needed eggheheads to. justify their policies. And the. neoconservatives. wanted to support Israel, wanted to. support American hijgemony and so took. all the military-industrial complex. money to build their think tanks to. create their consensus to build their. policy. You know, their own kind of. thousand little council on foreign.

relations is to get what they want. And. then when you know the seven countries. thing is. >> so what we're talking about just to. clarify is Wesley Clark was given well. was he was on some television show. I. forget what the show was. Do you. remember? >> There's two different statements. One of. them I know was with Amy Goodman from. Democracy Now. >> That's right. Democracy Now. >> And basically what he's talking about is. um. you know he says that a general or I'm. sorry a military officer of some rank. told then retired but still with access.

former general Wesley Clark who had been. the supreme allied commander of NATO. forces in Europe under Bill Clinton did. the Kosovo War. So very prominent. four-star general and he said the way he. told the story was he told him hey you. know we're they're planning for a war. with Iraq and he said Iraq why and the. guy said I don't know and then the. second part of the story was he came. back a week later or something and the. same guy said there's this memo that has. the seven countries and they say they. want to take them all in five years so. they meaning the office of the secretary. of defense so that's Donald Rumsfeld.

who's not a neoonservative he's his own. separate thing here. He's the secretary. of defense, but all of his guys, all of. his most important guys are. neoconservatives. So the deputy. secretary of defense is Paul Wolawitz. The deputy secretary of defense for. intelligence is Steven Kimone. The. deputy secretary of defense for policy. is Douglas Fe. And then under him is. Abram Scholsky and Bill Ludy and all of. these guys uh Michael Rubin and others. who were all working on this project to. get us into Iraq. And this is the.

neoonservative network of power. We got. Scooter Libby and um David Worms would. travel around from state to defense to. the vice president's office. But you got. Scooter Libby and John Hannah in the. vice president's office. You got Zia. Khalil Zod and Elliot Abrams on the. National Security Council, Robert Joseph. and and Steven Hadley and and uh Eric. Edelman. All of these guys were already. the network of guys who agreed with this. policy going back through the 1990s. It. was what they had founded the project. for a new American century on. And so.

what they're saying is we should not. tolerate any and remember the time in in. the they this was the stated doctrine. We will not tolerate the existence of. any Middle Eastern regime that supports. terrorism and supports terrorism can. mean anything, right? Like Abu Nidal. died in Iraq before the war even started. and was a washed up old terrorist from a. previous day. But like that's good. enough. Got muja cult kami terrorists. who've worked for us ever since. But at. that time was a good enough excuse to. invade Iraq. They would invoke that. And.

so they made up that doctrine. >> The mujaheden were in Iraq as well as. Afghanistan. >> Well, this is a particular sect of. Mujaheden Cougs who were Iranian. communist cultists who were had left. Iran and gone to work for Saddam Hussein. and then were you know he supported. them. They had nothing to do with. anti-American terrorism at that time. except you know uh I guess committing it. when they had worked for Iran previously. during the Iranian revolution. But by I.

mean by the time we invaded Iraq, Donald. Rumsfeld inherited them and they've. worked for American Israel ever since. then. They have a base in Albania now. But they in other words though this. wasn't al Qaeda. This was not any real. excuse. They would just invoke the. doctrine of fighting terrorism in order. to check off this list of all of these. governments that they didn't like. And. coincidentally and incidentally and very. importantly of course is this was really. in many cases Israel's list of enemies. where if it was say Colon Powell which.

is what people thought they were voting. for in the year 2000 by the way well I. don't know about this W. Bush but at. least Coen Powell will be up there we. can trust him. They all said if it had. been up to him, we would have done a. two-state solution in Palestine and. solved that issue and then we would have. had probably the most limited of wars. against al-Qaeda and Afghanistan and. that would have been it. The rest of it. would have been police andor special. forces action. There would have been no. invasion of Iraq, which he did lie us. into that war and he's responsible for. that. But that was not his policy. That. was the policy that came out of the vice.

president's office and this. neoonservative set. And it's really, as. Dave Smith correctly says, it's all. based on the clean break doctrine, which. David Wormser and Richard Pearl, oh, I I. neglected to mention Richard Pearl and. his friends on the Defense Policy Board, but um Pearl and David Worms had written. up this policy paper called A Clean. Break in 1996, and they wrote it for. Netanyahu when he was first prime. minister, the first time back then. And. what it said was instead of going along. with the Oslo peace process and making a.

deal with the Palestinians, we should. just forget all that and just we'll have. peace through a position of strength and. total dominance over our neighbors. And. so but the problem of course is we and. and of course meaning continue to devour. Palestine, what's left, the 22% of. what's left of historic Palestine in the. West Bank and Gaza. But the problem is. we have Hezbala on our northern border. and Hezbala is backed by Iran by way of. Syria. So if you just picture the Middle.

East, you know, um if you want you can. throw up a map uh and just kind of show. there's this arc of power from Thran in. Iran through Syria and to Hezbala, this. Shiite militia in southern Lebanon. Now, Saddam Hussein was the Sunni roadblock. in that arc of power. But these guys are. stupid, the neoconservatives. They're as. stupid as they are arrogant and certain. in their policy. And they believed in. this hairbrain scheme essentially that.

the Jordanians and the Turks would be. dominant in the new Saddam Hussein less. Iraq. and that even though it's a. supermajority Shiite Arab country, those. Shiites, they just love being told what. to do by either their original plan was. the Hasheite king, the cousin of the. king of Jordan, and then they threw that. out. And it was the guy who sold them. this line that this was possible in the. first place, an Iraqi exile. You might. remember from that time, Ahmed Chalabi, the head of the Iraqi National Congress.

They said, "Well, we'll just make him. the guy instead," which ended up not. happening. But that was their plan. And. they said the new Shiite dominated Iraq. will then the religious leaders in Iraq. will then force Hezbala to stop being. friends with Iran and start being. friends with Israel instead. And they'll. even build an oil pipeline to Hifa or. reopen the old British oil pipeline to. Hifa Israel. And they were sold this. bill of goods and they really believed. it. And so and you can find this on my. website scottorton.org. I have a clean.

break, a new strategy for securing the. realm. And then the companion piece is. called Coping with Crumbling States, a. balance of power strategy for the. Levant. They're both by David Wormser, signed off on by Richard Pearl. And then. they wrote a book where Worms wrote the. book and Richard Pearl wrote the. forward. It's called Tyranny's Ally. America's failure to remove Saddam. Hussein. Get that? America's the ally of. Saddam just because we won't launch a. war to regime change him there right in. the title. and then based on the same. hairbrain scheme. And what's funny about. this is this guy David Wormser now tries.

to defend himself and he did an. interview on a podcast not too long ago. with this uh born-again Christian about. September 11th and stuff and but he. talked about this and he's like yeah no. that's still right they'll do whatever. the hashemites tell them to do. Those. Shiites they just worship and revere. anyone who claims to have the blood of. the prophet. But if that was true, as. Dave Smith pointed out, well then how. come you can't just call the king of. Jordan right now and ask him to ask the. Ayatollah to knock it off? Call him and.

ask have him ask Hezbala to stop being. friends with Iran? Why couldn't they. have just done that this whole time? Why. do you have to have a regime change in. Baghdad before you can make this magic. wish come true? And the whole thing is. completely stupid. And the Shiites do. revere some of the lineage of the family. of the prophet Muhammad. And but one, it's not a magic spell of hypnosis and. total control over them. And two, that. has nothing to do with the Hashemites. who are Sunnis and a whole separate line.

and are the British sock puppet kings of. Jordan who used to rule Iraq back 70. years ago or something, but have no. purchase there whatsoever. And of. course, what happened just real quick, what happened then in the war was they. just empowered Iran. They didn't empower. Jordan and Turkey and America and Israel. over the Iraqis. They just gave Iran. even more power than they ever had. before. When it was all meant to screw. them over, it blew up in the American's. face. >> This episode is brought to you by Zip.

Recruiter. It's good to be passionate. about something. Exploring what. interests you adds more color to your. life. It makes it more fulfilling in a. way. And that's not just limited to your. personal life. If you run a business, you know how much of a difference it can. make when the people on your team are. excited about what they're doing. And if. you don't, well, it's time to find out. with Zip Recruiter. Try it for free at. ziprecruiter.com/rogan. It's been rated the number one hiring. site based on G2. And that's because Zip. Recruiter is always looking for ways to.

improve the hiring process, including. its newest feature that lets you see the. most qualified and more importantly most. interested people for your role to make. sure they're some of the first you start. talking to. Find candidates who really. want your job on Zip Recruiter. Four out. of five employers who post on Zip. Recruiter get a quality candidate within. the first day. Try it for free at. ziprecruiter.comrogen. That's ziprecruiter.comrogan.

Meet your match at zip reccruiter. Do. you think that that is because of total. incompetence and stupidity or do you. think that it was a scam and that they. were they kind of knew this was going to. happen in the first place, but what they. really wanted to do was sell a lot of. weapons, sell a lot of war, make a ton. of money. I mean, the amount of money. that was generated, how much money did. we spend on the Iraq war? >> Oh, I mean, on Iraq alone, at least five.

or seven trillion. I think it was. probably 10 trillion for the whole. terror war. >> Let's stop and think about that. Five or. 10 trillion. Let's just say five. Let's. be nice. >> Yeah. >> Where's that money going? How many. defense contractors were deeply enriched. by that? How many defense contractors. are involved in, you know, lobbyists, policy, influencing change, influencing. certain actions? And why would they do. that? Why would they do that? Why would. they push a hairbrain scream? Is it. because of stupidity or is it because.

they don't give a [ __ ] what the excuse. is? Let's get the party started. >> I think. >> let's get some missiles. Let's get some. new planes. >> Yeah. Okay. So, >> boom boom. But, okay. So we can see. right in front of us right here where. Netanyahu convinced Trump this would be. easy and then it wasn't. And I think. that's the same thing here. Iraq was. supposed to be easy and it was easy. after all. Right? You send the Marines. to take Baghdad. They could take it. The. the the third infantry division and the. Marines were done regime changing the. place in what five weeks. But then it.

was a matter of occupying the place and. the whole thing devolving into civil war. and all that. And I think well I'll put. it to you like this. in the clean break. It might be in coping with crumbling. states, but it might even Yeah, I think. it's in coping with crumbling states, which is the same thing. >> Are we back? >> Sorry about that. We had that stupid. glitch again. >> Yeah, this is my. >> Did we Did we get a new computer? >> I've done everything even. Yeah, I. talked to the company. They don't know. what's going on. >> [ __ ]. >> Bummer.

>> Anyway, >> I'm sorry. Let me uh. >> can I can I ask you this? Sure. So, >> well, on the stupidity of the plan, I. think, look, plan A is it'll be fine, and then plan B is, well, at least we. can make some money and and push this. thing on and let both sides fight and. weaken each other and these kinds of. attitudes for sure. >> But that's the point. Like, did they. genuinely think that this plan would. work or was this plan just a feasible. excuse to talk them into getting the. party started? I I I have one good uh.

argument in your favor there for sure, which would be Senator Joe Biden at the. time insisted that we break Iraq into. three. >> Our greatest president. >> Yeah. Right there with the worst that. that that we draw these lines and. essentially enforce ethnic cleansing or. sectarian cleansing and create three. sort of many states within Iraq. And you. know, Anthony Blinkin was his right-hand. man then. And I mean that's who these. guys are is, you know, very very much I.

mean uh Israel first, Israel instead. types. >> Um there is something before the clean. break called the Od Yanan plan uh from I. believe 1981 which is a real riot to. read. It's this Israeli strategist. and the premise of the thing is that the. Soviet Union is certain to conquer the. entire planet. Talk about one world. government. We're about to have one. world communism, run out of Moscow, and. poor little Israel is going to be all. alone out here. So, we have no choice. but to smash every near Arab state into.

as many waring tribal pieces as we. possibly can to weaken all of them. relative to us as this desperate. strategy. And of course, the Soviet. Union didn't exist anymore at all by the. end of the decade. But that was the. premise for the thing. And there's oh. and here's what I was going to say. before the glitch was there is a. statement in I think it's in coping with. crumbling states where he kind of says. yeah you know these states are pretty. artificial and without you know the. baist construct in Iraq and Syria you.

would have these smaller tribal based. type units so then you know in other. words if you can't have a completely. compliant sock puppet there might as. well make them fight and and destroy. their countries. And that certainly. happened in the case of Iraq, certainly. happened in the case of Syria under. Obama as well where they just said, "Look, if we can't get the al Qaeda guys. to sack Damascus and get rid of Assad, at least we can just destroy the place.". >> Do you think there's a parallel in um. when we first went into Iraq like Desert.

Storm? It was very easy, right? Relatively, minimal loss of American lives. And I. think everybody got a little cocky. >> Oh, yeah. That absolutely was part of. that. Just like what we just saw with. Venezuela. It was so easy. And I mean, people asked me right after Venezuela, "What do you think this means for Iran?". And I was like, "Bad news, >> right?" Like, nobody thinks we're going. to go in there and kidnap the Ayatollah, >> but if you can put eyeballs on them, you. can put a bomb on. >> they killed them. That's all you got to.

do. >> And that didn't even help. >> Of course not. >> It's like, and. >> is it true that whenever they've been. negotiating with someone, Israel kills. them? >> I think that happened at least a couple. of times early in the war. Yeah. I mean, that was what they said. In fact, was it. I forget if it was Vance or Trump who. said, "Well, we we can't say I think it. was Trump said, "We can't say who we're. negotiating with because they'll get. killed." And like, you're supposed to. think that what like hardliners in Iran. will kill them for trying to negotiate. But no, this is the Israelis will kill. them. You know,

>> that is wild. >> Yeah, >> that's wild. It's wild that it's true. Um, one of the things that's not talked. about at all since Iran, I mean, rarely. talked about is Ukraine. >> Yeah. >> It's so strange how that kind of just. left people's consciousness. >> It's like they now just concentrating. entirely on this Iran thing. >> And the uh Ukraine thing is fascinating, too, because it was one of the few wars. that I saw leftist support. It was very.

interesting. It was like kind of right. after they put the masks and the. syringes down from their profiles. Then. it was Ukraine flags, >> right? Mezer had a joke about that. Like. yeah, he starts out like hey invading. Ukraine is bad. Can't we all agree on. that? Like he really gives him like he. like leans on can't can't we all agree. that it's bad. He's like but it wasn't. cure for COVID. You got to admit, you. know. Um, and it was they just switched.

from night to day on that. And then. yeah, the other thing and look, a big. part of that is Putin is a great standin. for Trump. If you're a angry liberal. something, you got to be angry at. something. And he represents now we're. the right. >> common turn and the Russians are the. more conservative Christian force. And. so like if not that Trump's a Christian, but you know what I mean, and they're. anti-right everything that the Russians. are the right, not that the Ukrainians. are the left, but whatever. And Russia. is obviously the uh much larger country.

and the one that invaded that crossed. the border first here and and and they. are the aggressor in the war. So, it's. as far as the narrative goes, it's easy. to justify sticking up for those, you. know, pluckucky defenders, which is, you. know, I was actually surprised, but I shouldn't have been right when I. went to Oxford and lost that debate was. that was who was it wasn't not that they. were leftist, but they're liberals, you. know, or progressive type, you know, college kids, >> and they're just totally on the side of.

Ukraine. And in fact, the question of. the debate was this house would rather. go to war with Russia than lose Ukraine. And I thought that was just the most. ludicrous thing in the whole world. That's not even debatable. They've got. Hbombs, 7,000 of them. We're not having. a war with Russia. I don't even know. what you're talking about this. And then. I should have made my case better. because they did not like me or my case. at all. They were so just staunchly for. Ukraine that they were willing to. support that that they think that.

Britain should get into a war with. Russia over the Dawnbass, which is just. absurd. But I take responsibility for. not framing my argument well enough. I. just thought the question was so. ridiculous in the first place I would. barely have to make my case. I just. thought I'll just make a Hbomb joke and. that'll be the end of that. You know, I. said, "Haven't you ever seen Threads? Have you ever seen Threads? It's like. the British version of The Day After. where Margaret Thatcher gets them nuked. in a war." It's like movie. Yeah. remember the day after from 193 with. Steve Gutenberg and so this is the. Russians version from the same time.

frame. >> Oh, >> and um. >> and I was like, "Haven't y'all seen. threads?" Which of course they haven't. They're a bunch of little kids. >> Well, they probably think it's that. social media app. >> Yeah, right. >> The Instagram one. >> Yeah, exactly. >> Um we should talk about like how this. whole thing got started in Ukraine. because most Americans don't even. realize that the United States kind of. overthrew the government there. >> Yeah, absolutely. twice in 10 years. >> Yeah. >> In in the Orange Revolution of 2004 and. in uh 2014. And in fact, you know,

George Soros bragged that he had really. influenced the vote toward the. pro-Russian candidate in 1994. Um, you. know, back 10 years before that, he he. bragged about that in an interview with. um The New Yorker, Connie Brookke in the. New Yorker magazine. He said like real. estate investment trusts. I make it. happen with my investments, you know. >> Um, and yeah, >> and look, I mean, Russia and Ukraine.

have a long and difficult history, but. the long and the short of it for our. purposes is that they wanted out at the. end of the Soviet Union. And in fact, even embarrassingly for the Republicans, George Bush Senior and his government. even intended the USSR to stay together. They wanted not communism, but they. wanted Russia to be able to hang on to. Bellarus and Ukraine and at least some. of the stands. And but what happened was. really the Russians under Boris Yelen. overthrew the Soviet Union. The most.

powerful member of the Soviet Union. overthrew what was left of it. And it. was actually in the aftermath of a. hardline commi coup in August of 1991. which failed. And so it was Boris. Yeltson who saved the day but then ended. up doing his own coup basically and just. destroying what was left of the USSR and. and kicking Mal Gorbachov out. So. >> So why did the United States um get. involved in Ukraine and why did they. stage a coup? >> Yeah. Well, so it's been a contest for.

dominance there ever since. Right. And. so back to the wolfawitz doctrine that. and and they talked about this in. rebuilding America's defenses the uh pac. strategy document from the 1990s 1998 I. guess um and I believe in in the defense. plan and guidance of that he wrote 1992. uh wolitz um that we got to expand NATO. into Eastern Europe and this is the. debate at the time was whether to. include Russia or not but but and in. fact in the 90s there were some people. expo who opposed expansion alto.

together. But then there was another. school of thought that just said, "Well, we'll expand, but we'll bring the. Russians in." But then they never did. And so they ended up expanding the. military alliance up to Russia's border. in a threatening manner and in a way. that did not include them at all. And. they had alternatives like the. Partnership for Peace. And before that, what we still have the OCE, the. Organization for Security or Yeah. Security and Cooperation in Europe where. those had been brought up as. alternatives to NATO where NATO would be. more political. This is what James Baker.

and uh under HWB Bush and Warren. Christopher under Bill Clinton had. promised the Russians that we're going. to make NATO a political organization. and we're going to have as a security. organization it'll be the OCE or the PFP. which will include you guys and which. was not true. They're basically you know. never really meant to live up to those. promises. So um it's not a perfect. analogy, but imagine if America had lost. the Cold War from all the spending in.

the 1980s and then the Soviets had come. to dominate Western Europe and then they. started moving into the Caribbean and. then they started overthrowing the. government in Canada when they voted. wrong. And this is Ukraine is Russia's. Canada, right? Kazakhstan's their. Mexico. Ukraine's their Canada. It's. their most important neighboring state. other than maybe Barus, but same. difference here. And so, um, >> that narrative gets lost here. >> Yes, it does. And. >> it's weird because it's so obvious when. you lay it out like that and when you.

look at the agreement that was made at. the fall of the Soviet Union that they. wouldn't push arms closer to the border. of Russia and yet they consistently did. that. >> Absolutely. And by the way, so let's. talk about that for just a second. because people dispute that and say it's. not true, but it is true. And in fact, HW Bush gave the first promise to. Gorbachev in Malta in December of 1989. that if you let the Eastern European. Warsaw packed states go, not the Soviet. republics, but the Warsaw packed states, if you let them go, we promise not to.

take advantage. Like full stop. That's. it. 100%. And then from there, and and I. cover all this in my book, Provoke. Um, and I I it's even overkill on the. research because I wasn't sure where to. stop. So, it's all there for you where. it wasn't just on February the 9th. It. was all of these meetings over the. course of months where the Americans, the British, and especially the Germans, but with the Americans standing right. there in many cases too, affirmed to the. Russians, the Soviets, and then the. Russians over and over again that we are.

not coming, we are not going to. integrate Poland, we're not going to. integrate Hungary, then Czechoslovakia, which hadn't split apart yet. Um, and we. have no intention of doing that. And. that was, you know, came from Hans. Dietrich Genture, the foreign minister. of Great Britain, as well as Helmet. Cole, the chancellor, uh, Margaret. Thatcher, and John Major, the prime. ministers of England, and, um, Douglas. Herd, their foreign minister, and, um, even Francois Midarand, the president of.

France, and along with George Bush's. government over and over again promised. them that we're not going to do this. And then they just went ahead anyway. And the Clintons, uh, you know, went. along with it, too. And in fact in the. in the Clinton years one of the major. proponents of NATO expansion was a guy. named Strobe Talbot who originally. opposed it. And by the way so when all. of the anybody in that era whenever they. on on America's side or on the west side. whenever they opposed this it was always.

for one reason. There was no like. variety of reasons. It was always one. reason. This is an unnecessary. provocation against the Russians. These. are our friends who just overthrew the. communists for us. So why would we pick. a fight with them? Why would we. disrespect them? We should be doing. everything we can to integrate them into. the west, into Europe, into everything. And this is totally unnecessarily. antagonistic. That was the one and only. reason and it was brought up by a lot of. people including famously George Kennan.

who had coined the containment policy. against the Soviet Union in the 1940s. and you know uh was had been ambassador. to Moscow and he was the one who said we. got to contain communism. Well, now he's. saying we should not be trying to. contain Russia when they didn't do. anything. And he said, in fact, in an. interview in the New York Times in 1998, Kennan said, and he was the most highly. respected Russia expert out of all of. the old so-called foreign policy. graveyards, and he told Thomas Freeman. in the New York Times, he goes, "I'll. tell you exactly what's going to happen. here, okay? We're going to expand NATO.

right up close to Russia, and we're. going to get a negative reaction from. the Russians. And then as soon as we do, all of the people who are now telling us. that'll never happen. Don't worry about. it." Will then say, "Aha, see, that's. how the Russians are. That's why we have. to do this, which is exactly what they. say now. See, the Russians are coming. That's why we need NATO more than ever. before when it was building up NATO more. than ever before was what created this. antagonistic relationship in the first. place. And then, you know, and I should.

specify I am from Austin, Texas. I don't. have any connection to Russia. whatsoever. I don't give a damn about. Russia whatsoever. Has nothing to do. with favoring their side of the story or. whatever. This is like whatever. What. can I say? I reluctantly admit that and. I'm not saying this is a good enough. reason for war, but I'm saying that this. is true essentially in his declaration. of war when Putin said that basically we. tried independence. We tried letting. Ukraine be an independent country. But. it turns out that no, it just became a.

colony of the United States of America. It's totally controlled by America. So. well, but we're just not going to stand. for that, you know. So we're going to. intervene. We're going to do what we. have to do at least to mitigate that. If. America is still going to control Kiev, then at the very least we're going to. control the Dawnbass and the south uh. southeastern coast here. And so I'm not. saying that's a good enough reason to do. what he did. But I'm saying that was. essentially true that America had, you. know, almost like it was a a British. colony, just had total sock puppets in. charge of that country. In fact, there's.

a a clip that I quote extensively. It's. one of the only block quotes in my book. cuz I got rid of almost all of them for. space. But I I think I have the block. quote of Victoria Nuland testifying. That's Robert Kagan's wife. Um very. important neoonservative worked in Dick. Cheny's office in the W. Bush years and. everything. Um helped you know cause all. this problem. And she goes on and on. describing the level of. what can you call that infiltration. essentially of the Ukrainian government. by the United States. That she says we. have our people, State Department people.

and whoever working at every level of. the Ukrainian government throughout. their police services, throughout their. military, throughout their judicial. branch, throughout, you know, and and. out in the provinces and everywhere. We're doing everything we can to control. everything that's going on in that. country. And you know the Wikileaks are. very uh beneficial on this story because. they show where the Americans understand. clearly by the Americans I mean. Washington, the State Department, whatever these guys that um they know.

good and well that Ukraine is deeply. divided especially politically on. questions like whether they should join. the NATO alliance or whether they rather. be closer to Russia, try to split the. difference and stay out of it or. anything like that. And so they say, "Well, so we just have to push then. We'll just have to spend tens of. millions of dollars on massive. propaganda campaigns and we'll just have. to make sure to support the candidates. that support us and our wishes." And. essentially it's America, you know, the. the book is called, sorry I keep. mentioning the book, but it's how. Washington provoked how Washington.

started the new cold war with Russia and. the catastrophe in Ukraine. I'm not. blaming on Kiev. on blaming it on. essentially Bush Senior through Joe. Biden that they all of them had such a. ham-handed Russia policy that it led to. this. It's just fascinating that this. perspective is not being discussed or. wasn't being discussed when it was in. the news every day. When people were. talking about Russia and Ukraine, it was. always that Russia had done this. horrible thing and attacked Ukraine, which was horrible, >> of course, >> but no one gave any background. No, no.

one really talked about and make made. the comparison to imagine if the Soviet. Union or Russia rather took over Canada, >> right? >> You know, or was proxying Canada. >> Yeah, exactly. Or if they went back at. all, they would go, well, you know, this. all started when Russia seized Crimea. >> But of course, they seized Crimea as a. direct reaction to America overthrowing. the government and the so-called. revolution of dignity in February 2014. And uh so then it's a complicated mess, but Crimea happened after that. But they.

just want to start history at places. where it's the most convenient for them. >> And there's also the control of Ukraine. is also connected to resources, right? I. mean there's immense amounts of. minerals, natural gas, there's trillions. of dollars of that stuff there. >> that and this also connects Bisma to the. Biden administration, right? >> Yes. So. like I would not buy anyone arguing that.

these minerals or these resources are. somehow crucial for the United States of. America, for the American people, for. our betterment or anything like that. only as Ross Perau called them the. special interests right Chevron wants. that oil and Cargill and Archer Daniels. Midland and Monsanto have investments in. those grains and so this is about them. but that isn't necessarily us you look. at you know whatever benefit they have.

to our GMP or GDP is negligible. certainly not worth starting a war or. anything like that these are all the. free riders these are you know the. excuse makers for this kind of policy. but Essentially, I think what it really. is is just trying to keep Russia weak. and offbalance as much as possible. And. you know, like there's this um uh really. important Rand Corporation study that. was published in 2019. So the Rand. Corporation is a Pentagon sponsored. think tank, but it's out in Santa. Barbara. They put it in California so it.

would be somehow a little bit less. political, a little insulated from East. Coast stuff and be able to come up with. their thing. But that's that's basically. who they are. So, of all the think. tanks, they're like the most directly. connected to the Pentagon itself. And. they came up with this thing. It's. called extending Russia. And by. extending Russia, they mean. overextending them. Mean, in other. words, how to provoke them into. overextending themselves. >> like during the Cold War. >> Right. Exactly. So, what cause small. trouble for them in as many places as we.

can just to bog them down with expenses. and commitments. So, we want to at that. time the the pipeline wasn't complete. yet. So we want to intervene with. sanctions whatever we can to disrupt the. Nordstream pipeline. They said maybe we. could try to overthrow the government of. Barus again which they actually did in. 2020. Um they had done it before in 2005. and 2001 failed all three times. Um. which if they did that boy that might. lead right to a nuclear war right there. You don't want to succeed in a. especially a bloody if it turned bloody. a coup in Barus. My god. Um but anyway.

uh then they said we could increase uh. weapons to the jihadists in Syria. We. could try to overthrow the government of. Kazakhstan. We could increase support. for the uh Ukrainian military. And. what's interesting about this, so in. other words, see how they're saying do. all these things to essentially agitate. the Russians to keep them off balance, to keep them bogged down, to keep them. spending money they can't afford to. spend, right? But then all throughout it.

they have all these disclaimers where. they say, "Don't listen to us. If you do. this, it'd be terrible." Like if you. overthrow the government of Barus, the Russians might just invade it. immediately and station nuclear weapons. there to make the point, right? if we. support the jihadists in Syria, they. could break out of the Idlib province. and sack Damascus and then we'd have an. al Qaeda government in Damascus, which. is of course exactly what happened at. the end of 24. They said we could. increase support for the what was then.

the ongoing civil war that had broken. out after the revolution in 2014. We could increase support for the. Ukrainian side of that or the Kiev side. of that war, but then that could provoke. the Russians into a full-scale invasion. of the country, which would of course be. terrible for Baroo, I mean for Ukraine. and terrible for the United States, a. massive expense for us, a humiliation. for as far as our international standing. and prestige and of course untold chaos.

for the people of Ukraine. And so we. better be real careful about pursuing. these policies. And then I swear you. look at how Biden ran things and it was. like he got that memo just without any. of the disclaimers and they just went. ahead and did all of these things. And. in fact they were doing they were. messing around. It was actually the last. year of Trump that they uh tried to. overthrow Barus. Uh so that was. independent of of Biden's wishes that. was already going on. And then they were. messing around in Kazakhstan in January.

of 22 right on the eve of war. right. when you might have hoped that the. entire, you know, pressure in Washington. was to try to figure out a way to avoid. war to prevent this from breaking out. What kind of deal might we have to make. with Putin to try to prevent him from. invading Ukraine as they're threatening. to do? And we're building up their. forces in preparation for it. And then. what do they do? They support an armed. insurrection in Kazakhstan, which is. that's the big one right on Russia's. southern border there. Out of all the.

stands, it's the most important one. which is just madness. And it goes to. show that that's essentially what. they're up to when it comes to that is. just, you know, if we can't overthrow. Putin, we're going to still weaken him, hem him in, surround him, agitate him, and force him to make commitments. And. of course, this is what this is why the. war's been going on for four years. America could tell Kiev under Biden or. under Trump that look, you guys are just. going to have to compromise here. Obviously, you've lost, you know, all of. Luhansk and most of Donetsk and, you.

know, at least half of Zaprosia and. Kursan. And so, just make a deal, figure. it out, and and we're not supporting you. anymore. Instead, what they say, remember, they said over and over again, we want to inflict a strategic defeat on. Russia. Russia might win the war or but. no, we promise they won't, but yeah, but. if it takes a long time, good. And in. fact, I have a collection of quotes in. the book where politicians and pundits. and all these people would say, and. maybe they still say this, "We're. getting such a good bang for our buck in.

Ukraine." Because just think about it, Russian soldiers are dying, but American. soldiers are not. So, all we got to do. is we just give them money and then they. go fight. And then sometimes they. wouldn't even make any reference to the. Ukrainian soldiers at all. Hundreds of. thousands of whom have been killed. Hundreds of thousands who of whom have. been hor uh you know horrifically. maimed. Uh the a major part of this. country completely destroyed. Huge. segments of their population fleeing the.

country as refugees many of whom to. never come home again. Right? A total. destabilization of their culture and. society in every way. And then but you. can tune in to Fox News or hell the. Democrats too talking about or maybe. worse that oh but we're getting such a. good bang for our buck because we're. killing Russians. We're sending them. home in body bags. We're sending them. home in coffins. We're even killing. their generals in the field. But none of. our guys are dying. He as though the. Ukrainians don't matter at all. And.

that's the way they think of it. This is. inflicting costs on the Russians. Joe. Biden would say that over and over. again. It's almost like the underpants. gnomes thing with the first he steal the. underpants then question mark question. mark question mark and then profit not. really sure. >> I don't know what that is. >> oh and South Park the poor I think it's. butters the underpants gnomes are. stealing his underwear and they're. trying to explain how this is supposed. to work and they don't really have it. worked out what they're going to do with. the underpants but they're sure they're. going to make a lot of money in the end. and that's the same kind of thing here. where they skip the step about well is.

this really weakening Russ uh Vladimir. Putin's regime or maybe it's. strengthening his regime is it, you. know, increasing American power and. influence in the region or in fact we're. shown as sort of a paper tiger ourselves. and we've done more than, you know, you. could have imagined to push Russia. towards China and toward the rest of. Eurasia. Um, you know, Joe Biden is. essentially deliberately trying to. prevent them from being part of European. civilization to and to emphasize their.

turn to the east. That seems to me to be. a terrible mistake, you know, and I. think part of it is part of the longer. term cold war with China, too. And and. there you you hear them talk about this, Joe. They'll say, you know, essentially. Russia's friends with China. So, there's. two things we can do there. And this is. what I think Trump would prefer to do. would be just make friends with Russia. and pull them away from China. Maybe. he's already decided it's too late for. that or he doesn't know how. Um, and. then the other side was no, lure Russia.

into Eastern Europe. bog them down so. they're no use to China. Um, you know, weaken their power, give inflict them on. them this strategic defeat in Ukraine so. that then they won't be as useful to. China in our cold war with them or. worse. And which I think is stupid and. didn't work. I think that was the the. choice that Joe Biden made and I think. it was totally wrong because it just. strengthened the relationship between. Russia and China. The Russians have a. huge new pipeline that they opened,

well, not that new, about 12 years ago. that they opened to China and they keep. adding to it. So, they're able to sell. all the hydrocarbons they want and the. Chinese will burn every hydrocarbon you. got. So, you know, they really don't. need Europe. You know, Joe Biden kicked. them out and basically solidified their. economic break with Europe uh totally. unnecessarily, but in a way that didn't. really hurt Russia. And the blowing up. of the Nordstream pipeline was a part of. this. This was the to disconnect their.

oil supply or the natural gas supply to. Europe. >> Yeah. In fact, more specifically, right, it was to to make this break between to. solidify the break between Germany and. Russia. The previous German chancellor, Angela Merkel, she had this project she. called Eurasian home. And and what she. was trying to do was balance American. and Russian interests in Europe. And. then they were closing down all their. nuclear stuff, all the green movement, you know, environmental stuff. They. closed down all their nuclear in.

Germany. And then the idea was, don't. worry, we're going to import all this. clean burning uh CH4 from the uh. Russians. And then but to the Americans, this is the worst thing that could. happen would be an alliance or this. strengthening any any part of any. strengthening relationship or or budding. relationship between the Germans and the. Russians because with um you know German. manufacturing power and Russian raw. materials and both of their at least. potential military strength that if they.

have an alliance and dominate Eastern. Europe, they can keep everybody else. out. And so I think that has always been. the British and the American fear there. And you know there's um here in Austin. there's that sort of uh corporate CIA. Strat for run by this guy George. Freriedman. >> What is it? >> Strat for it stands for strategic. forecasting. They do dirty tricks. Yeah. It's here in Austin. Oh no. They they do. some dirty tricks but I think. >> they mostly like do like you know pseudo. CIA briefings for corporations and.

stuff. Let them know what's going on in. the world. That kind of thing. mostly. their emails got leaked on uh. wikileaks.org work uh years ago and you. know they're involved they're they're. close with some of these color-coded. revolutionaries and anyway I don't know. them or anything but their leader is a. guy named George Freriedman and I'll. give him credit I know he opposed Iraq. war I in 2003 because I heard him on the. radio back then but um I mean I'm not. vouching for the guy as like uh a good. guy or whatever but just to say he's. sort of like a realist school foreign.

policy analyst type. >> um not too ideological or anything like. that and he gave a speech years ago. where he says and this is the key words. primordial fear. This is the primordial. fear of American you know imperial. policy planners is that you would have. an alliance between the Germans and the. Russians. And so anything that we can do. to prevent that we'll do. Now I don't. know exactly who blew up that pipeline. but I'm sure they had at least the. support of the United States. Seymour. Hirs has it that it was American.

military guys who did it. Um which I. think I don't know. And then there's a. whole cover story about this yacht. And. then there's six different versions of. who rented this yacht and whether it was. used and whether it was robots or. whether it was divers or whatever. And. it's all meant to confuse and but this. episode is brought to you by Visible. Ah, spring is in the air, which means. time for some spring cleaning. We're. cleaning out the garage and finally. tossing those mystery cords. But while. you're cleaning out your junk drawer,

take a look at your wireless bill. Don't. fall for wireless traps, tacked on fees, confusing bills, and empty promises. Join Visible and cut out the nonsense. With Visible, you get unlimited 5G data. and hotspot on Verizon's network for one. flat cost. Just $25 a month, taxes and. fees included. It's everything you need. and nothing you don't. Plus, for a.

limited time, new members can get the. Visible plan for just $20 a month for. one year using code fresh start. Refresh. your wireless with visible. Head to. visible.com to get started. Terms apply, limited time offer, subject to change. See visible.com for plan features and. network management details. >> The bottom line is nobody wants to know, right? Seymour Hirsh, what did he say.

happened? >> He said that it was um miners based out. of Pensacola, Florida. Meaning not. pickaxe miners or children, but meaning. divers that go down and disable sea. mines. >> That that was their expertise. Those. were the guys that they sent to do it. >> And that was in I think he did that in. the London Review books or something. like that. >> Is is that disputed? >> Yeah. um and including by people who. blame the Ukrainians and people who. blame. um I don't know like Polish or I guess.

Polish uh groups or whatever. They had. all these different investigations that. all led different directions. I know. Jeremy I think Jeremy Scill had one. version of it and then James Bamford who. I really respect. He's the guy that. wrote all the books about the National. Security Agency over the years. um and. he had it that it was the Ukrainians and. they used robots to do it and he's you. know sused that out through documents. and stuff and decided that that must. have been what had happened and you know. there so I don't know there's there's.

six different versions of it and I have. I'm not choosing which is the favorite. here but I think it's clearly was in. America's interest and and of course Joe. Biden and Victoria Nuland have both sort. of cheekily said we're not going to let. this proceed and if they do we we will. do whatever it takes to stop it and so. Evidently they did. >> and you [clears throat] could see how. they would consider that to be, you. know, what they would be trying to. prevent would be this strengthened. relationship. >> Gas going now. Is it just pouring right. into the ocean?

>> Well, eventually they capped it, but I. think it was the biggest release of. methane into the atmosphere ever. It was. a huge thing. It was a massive, if you. were a liberal, progressive, Democrat, environmentalist type, that ought to be. like the most offensive thing you ever. heard of. >> Yeah. That's way worse than cowbs. >> Oh yeah. >> Remember they were worried about cow. burps? >> Yeah, that's centuries worth of cowbs, man. Centuries worth. >> Jesus. So the Kazakhstan Kazakhstan. thing I had never heard of. I I I hadn't. heard a peep about that. I had no idea. that we were meddling in Kaz Kazakhstan.

>> Yeah, it was one of those where much. like what just happened in Iran in. January where there's uh protest over. some economic policy. I think in that. case they had cut the gas ration or. something like that and and it's you. know it's a country that's divided by. ethnicity. Those borders are in all the. wrong places and whatever. So you have. sort of the ruling cast and the people. on the outs and whatever. So. >> you had a big protest movement and then. all of a sudden there's armed gangs of. guys killing cops, seizing police.

stations, trying to seize airports and. and this kind of thing. And um and then. what happened was the Russians invaded. They sent regular troops across. They. were asked by the government there to. come and intervene. And they sent. troops. They crushed the insurrection. And then it was funny because Anthony. Blinken said, "Oh, there's a lesson. When the Russians come, they don't ever. want to leave." And then the next day. they turned around and left. And then. they invaded Ukraine. They haven't left. there since. But um. >> so who were these insurrectionists?

>> I don't know. I mean, I think presumably. they worked for the CIA and probably the. Turks or something, you know? I don't. know. >> Just smirks. >> Yeah, them too. >> Yeah. And so this whole thing was just. what you were saying earlier, just to. try to get Russia to be spread as thin. as possible, spend as much money as. possible, cause as many problems in as. many places as possible. >> Yeah. And in fact, the same George. Freriedman from Stratfor I think it's in. that same speech or maybe a different uh. one where he says, "Yeah, when when Iran.

is doing a little bit better, you hit. them. When Russia's doing better, you. hit them. when China's achieving a thing. or two, you hit them. You do whatever. you can to always be effing with. everybody all the time in order to, you. know, that's how to press your. advantage, which I think is totally just. short-sighted. It's high time. preference, you know, sort of government. thinking, right? That like, well, if we. can get away with this now, we should. without really thinking about the. long-term consequence. In fact, that was. one of the things that failed to impress.

at Oxford that I brought up that that I. thought was crucial that is in my book. is Strobe Talbet, Bill Clinton's guy who. originally opposed NATO expansion and. then later championed it in 2018 when it. was the middle of the war, the the civil. war so-called with America supporting. Kiev and the Russians supporting the. so-called rebels on the other side. Um, a New York Times reporter named Keith. Gesson went and interviewed Strobe. Talbot and.

it just kind of went without saying that. like clearly what is going on here is. the project of NATO expansion has sort. of blown up and caused all these. problems. You know, what are we going to. do and and what do you think now pal? I. forgot exactly the way you phrase it but. it's sort of you know what do you have. to say for yourself strobe and so strobe. Thomas says well listen he goes when. you're in power you have one job and. that is to pursue your nation's national. interests and if you don't do that well. then you won't be in power very long so.

that was what we had to do but then he. says now maybe should we have had a. higher wiser conception of our national. interest. maybe. In other words, at the time, what. they were thinking is we want Lockheed. dollars and we want Polish votes for. 1996, Illinois's crucial swing state, right? So, or was, I don't know if it. still is. Uh, so that's why we got to do. this because it's in America's national.

interest that Bill Clinton get reelected. and we all get to keep our jobs. So, we're going to we're going to make these. promises to these people and pursue this. policy for our narrow interests as. rulers of the empire. But then, if he. had had a higher, wiser conception of. America's national interest, he might. have thought, wow, are we scheduling a. military conflict with Russia for the. next century, maybe we shouldn't do. that. Maybe we should look at it like. actually nothing in the world is more. important than America continuing to get.

along with the Russians. And again, when. the communists are long gone, so. whatever problem you have with these. guys, it ain't Stalinism and it ain't. evangelical Marxism at the point of a. rifle, right? I mean, this is just. whatever it is, we can deal with it. And. um and so no, they chose the lower. dumber conception of America's national. interest instead of the higher wiser one. and they blew it. You know, >> is there anyone that's ever made the. argument to you like where you've had.

these debates where you have a utopian. perspective on international relations. and that this libertarian ideology of. like staying out of people's business, staying out of the what you'll do if you. don't [ __ ] with the Russians, you don't. keep them spending, you don't keep them. stretched out, they'll just amass more. and more power and then they'll start to. try to take over what was traditionally. the Soviet Union. What was it originally. the Soviet Union? >> Yeah. You know, it it just so happens,

right, that America never leaves anybody. alone. So, we just don't have a. controlled experiment, right? We're. constantly provoking and everything that. we see them do is clearly a reaction. And just like when we talk about. terrorism, again, I'm not in any way. justifying it, but I'm just saying we. have so much intervention preceding the. terrorism. You have to be able to. attribute that. Yes. But now, so how. would things be otherwise? For example, if HW Bush had just said, "Okay, well, we won the Cold War. Pat Buchanan's. right. Let's just come home and had.

brought the empire home from Europe.". Then what would happen is the Germans. would have reunified and then they would. have joined into a new European Union. army with the British and the French and. probably the Poles. And then it would. have been on them to keep the peace. between each other, to police the. smaller countries in their region, and. hopefully strike a long-term security. partnership with the new red, white, and. blue Republican Russians. And you know, if people want to say, but and in fact,

the other side in that debate at Oxford, Daniel Frerieded said, "Yeah, but it was. Poland wanted to join our alliance. It's. not like we made them. They wanted to. But the thing is, yeah, they might have. reason to fear Russia based on old. things, but the question is, why are we. obligated to be the guarantor of their. independence? It's it's too far from. here, and it's something that we're no. good at. We only cause problems and. something that. >> the other European states, who are all. Western Christian capitalist democracies.

and friends of ours, that they can all. work together and solve on their own. I. mean when Germany reunified it's not. like the commies were taken over it was. the west that was dominant in the new. Germany right these are our pals there's. no reason a world that America should. have had to have well for example like a. big part part of the horrible war in the. Balkans was because of a contest for. power between America and Germany over. who's going to be dominant in the former. Yugoslavia. we should just let the. Germans have it or I mean not have it.

and kill everybody or whatever, but God, it could hardly have been worse than. what America helped to cause there by. trying to compete with the Germans for. dominance in a land that's quite. literally 6,000 miles from here. >> But is the fear from the American side. that if you let other countries. consolidate power, if you let them grow. in influence without [ __ ] with them. and keeping them spread out like we're. doing with Russia, >> Yeah. that they'll eventually get. stronger and then they'll become a real. problem and they keep them weak, keep. them distracted, keep them engaged in.

this Ukraine conflict and Kazakhstan and. anything else you can cook up. Yeah. >> And that keeps them down. >> Well, it's like this. When it was the. Cold War against the comm Soviet Union, I was a kid and it's I'm not an expert. on all of that history. I think there. were real questions about the dangers of. world communism at that time where at. least I'd be willing to hear you out. But since the end of the cold war, no, there's just no justification for it. because as Bill Hicks would say, right?

Like just spin the globe, man. There's. no countries out there, right? Every. power in Europe is our friend and no. threat to us and mean us no harm. whatsoever. There are no powers in in. Egypt, I mean, pardon me, in Africa that. count at all except for Egypt, which is. our friend. India will be a power in a. hundred years from now. Uh China is a. rising power but we've been their. friends for 50 years. Even when they. were still communists, Nixon went and. made friends with them in the early. 1970s and then the Soviet Union. Yeah. And then. >> but aren't they constantly infiltrating.

our different universities and people. >> I ain't endorsing that. You can keep. them out. But. >> but Chinese infiltration is kind of. crazy like what they're what they're. doing in America. It's like if you're. saying they're our friends, you know, the mayor of Arcadia just got busted. >> She was a communist spy. She's a [ __ ]. mayor of a city in California. >> I'm putting that on the FBI counter. intelligence division. That should have. never been allowed to happen in the. first place. Um, and no, I don't mean. that they're totally benign. But look, I.

worst case scenario, China invades or. just surrounds and forcibly reintegrates. Taiwan. That doesn't mean they're going. to invade Korea. It doesn't mean they're. going to invade Japan or Australia or or. have the appetite to want to do that. I. think China is already a pretty. overextended empire and it's very poor. in many parts of it and they have. something is it 14 or 15 neighbors that. they got to deal with already. you know, their their greatest ambition is to.

build this um uh you know what, highway. and and and fiber optics and whatever. from Shanghai to Lisbon, right? This. what do they call it? The why am I. forgetting the name of the damn thing? The the great uh the the great new. highway they're trying to build all the. way across Eurasia. >> Um. >> they can't do that by intimidating. everyone and lording it over everyone. They got to cut through Tajikistan. You. know, these are wild lands. They got to.

make deals the whole way across if. they're going to do that. If you know, they they're and and if you look at the. way they're building their empire so. far, it's all just briefcases, you know, >> right? >> Governmentbacked businesses making deals. and buying up resources and stuff. But I. I I really don't think that Xiinping is. looking at George W. Bush and Barack. Obama and Donald Trump and Joe Biden and. going, "Yeah, that's what I want to do. for my country is blow my own brains out.

trying to take over the whole rest of. the planet Earth.". >> Well, and you know, you know, just to. point to what you're saying is like. China's not invading anybody. >> They're not. >> They're not doing what we're doing. >> And I'm not saying they're nice guys or. whatever, but they don't rule us and. they're no threat to North America. They. have no need to pick a fight with us. People say, "Oh, you got all your. microchip factories on Taiwan." Well, then move them to Austin. We've had. advanced micro devices here for 30 years. or whatever, 35 years, maybe more than. that. They can build that stuff here.

>> They can, but they tried. It's very. difficult. The thing about what they've. got going on in Taiwan, the reason why. Taiwan is the head of it is that they're. far more advanced than anybody else in. the world at doing it. >> Bring them. >> Yeah, you would have to. You That's a. lot. >> I thought you were going to say it was. something special about the saltwater. over there or something. >> No, no, no, no, no. They're just way. ahead of everybody else. I mean, in. fact, didn't Samsung try to do a chip. manufacturing plant in Texas, and I. think their yields were so poor, I I.

don't know what the actual story with. that is. So, I'm speaking way over my pay scale here, but I think what it is is you have to. have like certain tolerances when you're. creating these chips, and they weren't. achieving what they were trying to. achieve despite spending an enormous. amount of money. So, it's not as simple. as build a plant, the schematics are. there, you just crank out chips. Like, apparently these chips are super. complicated to make.

>> Sure. >> Not worth it. No, not worth I'm not. saying it's worth harding, but I'm just. saying that this idea just move them to. Austin. I don't think it's that easy. >> I think chip manufacturing is one of the. most complex technological challenges. >> Yeah. >> In 2026. >> Yeah. I don't know. I mean, we've had um. I I don't know what all AMD does here, but I'm pretty sure that that um them. and Samsung and others have, you know,

all the facilities they need here to. >> I don't want to. >> That's quite true. >> Or they should be able to. >> they maybe could with enough resources. and time and maybe stole all the [ __ ]. eggheheads from Taiwan and bring them. over here, all the geniuses that have. figured out how to make those chips. >> Maybe. Maybe they wouldn't let them. But. what is what happened with the Samsung. chip factory? >> It's not has it's never been fully open. and it's not done yet for. >> Okay. >> But what was there was.

>> I used to be a reneop at some pretty. fancy factories here, you know, back 25. years ago. >> Oh, yeah. What kind of factories? >> Uh I think it would have been AMD or. andor Samsung. some pretty fancy like uh. chip fabrication and stuff like that. >> Well, let's ask perplexity. Let's ask. >> and I did have a job being a rent cop. because these skate parking garages at. work and do my homework at work. It was. great. >> Yeah, easy job for the most part, right?

Just free time. Um let's ask perplexity. Why are all the why are so many chip. manufacturers in Taiwan? because I'm pretty sure there's. something about the advancements that. they've made in chip manufacturing that. no one's been able to replicate. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense that. China wouldn't just make their own. >> Yeah. >> Like they're right there. >> I read this thing not long ago about how. like with the China's AI stuff, they. figured out how to write their program. where they need much less computing.

power to do the same kind of effort in. the way that they did it. So, they just. found their own workound. >> You know what I mean? >> Well, they also there's a lot of. espionage going on too. Yeah, probably. >> um a lot of the world's chip. manufacturers is in Taiwan because the. island deliberately built a specialized. ecosystem around contract chip. fabrication foundaries then compounded. that early lead with huge investment, dense clustering of suppliers and talent. and strong government support over. several decades. So early strategic bet.

on manufacturing. starting in the 1980s, Taiwan chose to. focus on precision manufacturing, fabricating chips for others instead of. trying to build its own big consumer. tech brands. And then their dominance. and scale. Yeah. Founded in ' 87. Now. the world's leading contract TSMC, the leading contract chip manufacturer. produces over half of the world's. advanced semiconductors and more than. 90% of the most cuttingedge nodes. because of advanced fabs. Uh because. advanced fabs cost tens of billions of.

dollars and must run near full capacity. to be profitable. Only a few players can. keep up and Taiwan's leader kept pulling. ahead as others dropped out. >> See, that's what I'm talking about. Like. I don't think it's easy. >> The biggest thing was that the uh no. customers is what kept popping up here. >> What is that? >> No, there are no customers. >> I mean the thing is at the same time. >> huge problem delays because there's no. one to buy them. But why not? >> I don't mean to run capacity then it's a.

lot probably. >> we got Samsung and Dell and AMD and IBM. here. I mean seems like they can invest. their own money and build their own. whatever they need to, right? >> But just read what they said there about. the amount of money that's involved in. keeping it running. Like I think they're. so I think the idea about Taiwan and. again this is not really my area of. expertise. Not that I have any, but that. they're so far ahead that this process. that they bet on early on that they've.

got their manufacturing to this point. where they've already invested this. enormous amount of money and the money. and they have to keep them running. constantly. I don't I don't I don't. think it's simple. I don't think it's. like car manufacturers. >> And then no, by no customers, you mean. that essentially everybody who needs. these chips is already getting them from. Taiwan. There's not much more demand. than that. >> Well, not necessarily. It could just. mean that they already have contracts. that they don't need them because. they've already, you know, made. commitments to Taiwan chip manufactur. If if Beijing is a military threat to.

Taiwan and these people would rather not. be under the rule of Beijing and the. Communist Party, then there's a pretty. big incentive for them to move to Texas. >> There is. But again, what I'm saying is. I don't think it's a simple step. I. think I don't think it's just like move. here. I think it's an enormous. investment in capital like beyond normal. things. And then I think to keep them. running is an insane commitment. It's. very difficult. And again, if Samsung.

doesn't have any. >> if right now they don't have any. customers, didn't they have an issue. with yields, though? Wasn't there an. issue with uh chips being made to. standard? I think there was something else on top. of that. >> I tried typing that in and out. I didn't. see anything, but they're trying to get. to two nanometer production. They. started on trials and then there's. rumors about why. they have not moved into mass production. and that's it's all these articles.

you're saying. >> Well, the Pentagon budget is a trillion. and a half this year. Let's just cut all. that. >> Then we'll have plenty of capital freed. up to your microchip. >> Cute. They're not going to do that. >> Who needs a world empire? [laughter]. Hey, look, one of the lessons of the war. in Iran is the empire is good for. nothing anyway, right? We have H bombs. that are enough to deter anyone from. attacking us. But America's military. empire in the Middle East is completely. bankrupt, right? That whole thing was a. hollow bluff and the Iranians just. called it and we lost. I mean, our bases.

have been evacuated. They keep coming. out. You I know you I think you talked. about this on your show, right? How they. were covering up the satellite photos. They weren't letting Americans have. access to the satellite photos when you. could get them online, whatever. Other. countries had them. And then you've had. the New York Times and I hate to cite. CNN, but it was a well sourced story. where they got all these great satellite. photos and went and showed how the. Iranians reached out and touched 18. bases from Irbul in northern Iraq all. the way down to Muscat in Oman and took.

out all radar stations and pitted our. runways, hit refueling tankers and Awax. radar planes and took out the entire not. the entire but a huge percentage of the. uh overlapping radars for the missile. defense systems over there. Left our. allies in Saudi, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain. wide open. You know, our our naval fifth. fleet station at Bahrain is destroyed. and offline. I read this thing said the. Qataris, our our main air base in the.

Middle East, the headquarters of Central. Command and our main air base at Qatar. The Qataris made a deal with Iran. Please stop hitting us. And they. promised to not allow America to fly any. sorties out of Qatar, our main air base. during that war. And so, as Justin Logan. from the Kato Institute said, well, what. good is a military base that you can't. fight a war from? You know, it's just. like that, I know you've seen this, right? That um that old meme that says, well, if Iran doesn't want trouble with.

us, how come they put their country so. close to all our military bases and it. has all the the map of all our bases in. the region? But the thing is what Donald. Trump I guess didn't understand was that. those were a trip wire that were. essentially we were making our own guys. hostages of Iran to prevent war. Those. bases were preventing war because it. should have been out of the question. that we would attack Iran because all. those bases would be up for grabs. against them. >> So how do how are they so poorly. defended? That's what I don't. understand. Like how is it so easy for.

Iran to attack these bases? And did they. have any for knowledge of this? Did they. understand? >> Oh, yeah. So, why they were so poorly. defended? That's got to be political. decision-making among the brass, right, about like, well, we don't want to admit. that we need these fortifications in the. first place maybe or just the other. general said don't, so we don't want to. fight with him about it for office. politics reasons or what. Like, I don't. underestimation. It's not a gross. underestimation. >> It can't be because listen, I'll tell.

you, man. Um, in January of 2007, the chiefs took W. Bush down to the tank. in the basement of the Pentagon and they. told him, "Look, we'll do your Iraq. surge where we increase the war in Iraq, but we really don't want to go to Iran.". And they told him the reason why not is. because the Iranians have escalation. dominance, or at least we won't have it. That I I shouldn't have said. I was. overstating it. We will not have. escalation dominance there. And that. means that, you know, is a Pentagon term.

for if we're going to get into a fight, we don't want to fight at all unless we. know we're going to control every stage. of that conflict. And in the case of say. invading Iraq, there's nothing Saddam. Hussein can do about it. Right? As Paul. Wolit said, Iraq is doable. In the case. of Iran, they have most importantly of. all a short and medium-range missile. force that we cannot defend from. Now, we can defend from it some. We have our. Patriot missiles and our other type of.

interceptors, but they can pour on. volume that there is no magic Star Wars. shield that can protect from. And we had. at that time a more than 100 thousand. guys in Iraq, 50,000 in Afghanistan and. then plus still as we still do um tens. of thousands air force and army in. Kuwait, air force and army in Saudi. Arabia, air force in Qatar, navy at. Bahrain, uh I guess air force and army. in in UAE, and I didn't know in Oman,

but yeah, of course in Oman they had, you know, some naval presence there as. well. So, and they knew then that all of. that stuff will be up for grabs and then. the straight of horror moose will also. be at risk. And in fact, it's true. Um, in at anti-war.com, you can find in the. archives there, I wrote an article in. August of 2005. called Who's Behind the Coming War with. Iran? And I say in there they can close. the straight and they can inflict.

economic damage, drive the cost of a. barrel of oil up above $200 a barrel and. all of that. So there were people a lot. smarter than me who were writing about. that at the time that I was interviewing. on my show at the time who were just. saying look we can start a war with Iran. but we don't really have a good way to. finish one. And so, and we talk about. the nuclear program and how unnecessary. all this was in a sec, too. But point. being that you want to do a regime. change, as you just said, you kill the. Ayatollah, it doesn't do any good. They. have a new Ayatollah. You can kill the.

whole ruling council that appoints the. Ayatollah, but then they'll just appoint. a new ruling council. So, then you can. dump in the 802nd Airborne Division, but. they can't occupy and control Thrron. There's no good land route to invade the. country. They have two massive mountain. ranges. And one of the most preposterous. narratives was like getting the people. to rise. >> Oh, yeah. We're going to arm up some. Kurds. >> Yeah. Well, not just the Kurds. They. were trying to get the just the Iranian. civilians. >> Yeah. >> With no arms. >> Yep. And they'll talk about, you know, arming the Kurds and arming the.

Belookis, which I don't know if there. are other factions, but that seems to be. a direct reference to groups like. Jandala, who the Obama and the Obama. administration and the Israelis both. backed about 15 years ago, who were bin. Laden head choppers, suicide bomber. guys. They were, you know, no different. from al-Qaeda or ISIS. And they, you. know, John Bolton on Pierce Morgan, uh, that the same show that I was on was. saying, "Yeah, we could arm up the. Belookis." And the stuff is crazy. I. actually wrote in that article at that. time the neocons's daydream that if we. just start the war then the people will.

rise up and create a new pro-American. government there. But that's crazy to. bet on that. There's no reason to. believe that. And so and there's video. of me in 2010 warning the same thing. And I'm not claiming any great insight. I didn't go to college, man. I just, you. know, I'm interested in this stuff and I. I you know have a show where I was. interviewing all these experts about it. at the time and it was just complete. consensus. everybody knew they can reach. out and and boy over 20 years I must. have said this a thousand times they can. not only hit all of our uh military.

stuff in Iraq and Kuwait and Bahrain and. Qatar etc Saudi etc but a trillion. dollars of economic targets all up and. down that Gulf which is exactly what. they did. They hit refineries, they hit. chemical plants, they hit not just at. the straight of Horamuz they hit. American oil tankers up near Kuwait just. to show that like we pone this entire. thing now. So, back to my original point. when I got on this tangent was that. America's conventional military empire. is bankrupt that Donald Trump just blew.

his big bluff that we're the big player. in the region. We're actually not in the. region. We're here. The region is over. there and the entire, you know, threat. of our dominance over there is basically. called. I mean obviously we still have. aircraft carriers and planes and bombs. and even nukes and all that but can the. leaders in Bahrain in Qatar and UAE and. Saudi rely on America to defend them. >> right. >> or they got to come up with their own. different policy now?

>> Haven't we also used up like twothirds. of our Patriot missile supply? >> Oh yes I don't know the exact. percentages but a lot. And they they're. admitting now that the Iranians still. have 70 75% of all their missiles and. launchers. All that stuff about we. decimated everything they had was all. just. >> they're admitting that. Who's admitting. that? >> Government officials talking to the New. York Times and the Washington Post in. the last three days. Yeah. >> Oh, I hadn't I 70 75% they got all their. launchers, all their missiles. They they. dug out missiles that had been buried.

They refurbished some and finished some. that were on the assembly line. That was. what they told the post. They were. finishing some that had been on the. assembly line that they went ahead and. restarted up again. And don't they have. some crazy like missile elevator system. where they're they're buried deep. underground and. >> I don't know how it works exactly but. yeah they and and even they have. apparently like the factories are buried. deep underground as well and just. dispersed throughout the country and so. >> they've been preparing for something. like this for a long time. >> Yeah. >> And so these bases that we had are all.

of them nonfunctional all the ones that. have been hit? >> I don't think so. Uh, I don't know the. exact extent of that, but as far as. their usefulness over the long term, they might as well have just been. abandoned at this point. >> So, let's uh see like what the. conventional news says. Like. >> New York Times and CNN have two big. profiles on this. I don't know off the. top of my head better stuff than that. The CNN was one Oh, and NBC also had had. one within the the CNN and the NBC are. within the last couple of weeks. The New. York Times is about six weeks old, maybe. One of the things that disturbed.

me to no end, and we talked about this a. couple times, the podcast, was um there. was uh one of the guys who was over. there who uh attended a uh a briefing. and they were told that. this is bringing about Armageddon and. that Trump was anointed by Jesus Christ. and that this war in Iran was going to. cause Jesus to return and that this was. actually being to a bunch of military.

people that were having a war. debriefing, >> man. >> And and then the guy had a whoever this. officer was that was tell talking about. this said that the guy had a giant smile. on his face when he was telling this. which made it all the more creepy. >> Oh, good. The end of the world. We. Nobody wants to die alone, right, Joe? >> But they were saying they that there's a. faction in the military that is these. religious fundamentalists that actually. believe that it's bringing about Jesus's. return.

>> So, look, there's a guy named um. >> commander claimed Trump was anointed by. Jesus to cause Armageddon to justify. Iran strikes. >> So, there's a guy named Mikey Weinstein. >> This is But look at Let's just go over. this real quick because this is so crazy. because this go up to the top, please. Right there. So, no, with the top. So, it's where it says who it was. So, it's. a military commander uh told a group of. non-commissioned officers that President. Donald Trump anointed by Jesus to light. the signal fire in Iran to cause. Armageddon and mark his return to Earth.

>> Yeah. And then that's that's Mikey. Weinstein right there, the Military. Religious Freedom Foundation. He was I. believe he was an Air Force officer, maybe as an army officer, and then he. created this group to advocate against. this kind of stuff in the military. And. I it's been a long time since I spoke to. him, but he was saying to me years ago. that it's especially in the highest. ranks of the air force, the highest. ranks of the air force. They really. believe this stuff. It is time to bring. on the apocalypse. And it's a good thing.

that they are the ones in charge of the. nukes so that they can use them. according to the divine plan and this. kind of thing. It is scary stuff. >> People need to know this. Go back to. that, please, because there's one quote. that that's below that. This is uh this. is so fascinating. He urged us to tell. our troops that this was all part of. God's divine plan. And he specifically. referenced numerous citations out of the. book of Revelations referring to. Armageddon and the imminent return of. Jesus Christ. Can you imagine if you're. over there, you already think the war is. sketchy, like why the [ __ ] are we doing.

this? And then this guy comes down, you're like, oh my god, we're cooked. >> This a big part of how they justified. Iraq. I mean, there's so many Protestant. ministers out there who told their. people that this is the Bible. Get it? Middle East, year 2000, sort ofish. Um, this is how you're going to get raptured. up to heaven in your body and all you. have to do is support this aggressive. war and all this magic stuff is going to. come true. And in fact, this is why. there's such a massive crash in. evangelical support for Israel and these. kind of foreign policies now is because. people just don't believe that anymore.

because that's what the Left Behind. series at Walmart said 25 years ago and. then it never happened. It didn't come. true. Speaking of the one world. government and all this stuff, where's. Satan? Where's the deal? Instead, it's. just Obama and Trump, you know. >> So, how do you think we got talked into. this Iran thing? Cuz JD Vance very. against it. A lot of people Tulsi. Gabbard very against it. So, what the. [ __ ] happened? >> I think that Netanyahu essentially, you.

know, all this talk about um. four-dimensional chess and whatever. I. think what it is is it's just checkers, right? is Netanyahu goes, "Listen, for Iran, for Iran to have a civilian. nuclear program, come on, that's just. cover for really a weapons program. It's. just a stage in a weapons program. We. know eventually they're going to make. nukes and then they're going to attack. Israel with them. And we also know that. um and and you already said that you're. not going to let them have nukes." Well,

having a nuclear program at all is. having nukes. Same difference. And you. already agreed to that, right? Right. Okay. Well, and they won't give up. enrichment. So, what do we do? We got to. attack. It's just like Obama's red line. on the fake chemical weapons scare in. Syria there that once you agree to this. thing, now it's written in stone. And. now, like, we got you on this. technicality. Double jump. You already. agreed with the stupid things I said and. so now you have to do the thing that I. said. And then Trump goes, "Okay." And. then plus on top of that, just the.

flattery. And like, you know, honestly, this is the most obvious thing. back. when he was on Twitter in his first. term. I used to tweet at him and I would. say wealth, strength, gold, get out of. Afghanistan, height, power, and like just tell him. like things that he likes, right, with. get out of Afghanistan in the middle. And so this is what Netanyahu does is he. goes, "Listen, you're greater than. Abraham Lincoln. You're greater than. George Washington. You're a world. historical figure. You're sure to go to.

heaven now. You're like, "If FDR had. done the right thing and invaded Germany. in 1935 and prevented that whole thing. from ever happening.". >> Well, you're just guessing that this is. how he talked to, right? >> Kind of. But. >> wouldn't it be awesome? >> Because he repeats a lot of it. Oh, it. would. It would be great. But he repeats. so much of it back that I think that. like, yeah, you could pretty much tell. this is what they're saying to him and. then this is what he's responding is. >> Obama wasn't man enough to do it. George. Bush wasn't man enough to do it. He.

knows what has to be done. He's willing. to do it. And he's ill-informed enough. to believe that it makes any sense that. if you just bomb their nuclear program. that somehow it'll go away. If you just. hit them hard enough, then eventually. they'll just do what you say. It doesn't. work like that. It often times does not. work like that. And with these guys, they've made it clear that we're not. making bombs, but we absolutely reserve. our right to enrich uranium for peaceful. purposes. And we will suffer your air. strikes. we will not give up that right.

and so that's it and and they've been. completely clear about the that this. entire time but Netanyahu convinced him. right this is why he also believed that. the straight of Hormuse was not at risk. because Netanyahu convinced him once we. hit him once he killed Ayatollah the. whole thing's going to fall apart there. will be no one too close to Straight of. Hormuse because we'll have already won. by then. >> but what do you think happens if Iran. does get nuclear weapons. >> probably. um the other states in the region will.

you know Daryl Cooper who's my partner. on our show provoked and I know good uh. friend of yours. >> I love Daryl. >> he he is so great and he's awesome. >> and he was pointing out. >> that guy gets boy does he get [ __ ]. misrepresented on. >> Oh he does. >> oh my god he does oh my god. >> heroic guy man um. >> very [ __ ] smart and if you listen to. fear and loathing in the new Jerusalem. anybody who listens to that and thinks. that guy's anti-semitic is [ __ ] crazy. >> you're crazy all that stuff is just so. balanced,

>> out of context. It's it's so balanced. and so objective and you know his. perspective on it and just people take. that one thing that he said uh about um. [ __ ]. Churchill the thing that he said about. Churchill being the real villain he's. being provocative right and what he's. trying to say is that Churchill by. imposing those embargos essentially was. starving them and was was keeping. resources from getting to Germany and he.

forced Hitler's hand to do what he did. It's not excusing him. It's not like. saying Hitler wasn't a [ __ ] evil. [ __ ] It's not It's not like saying he. he Hitler is a good guy. Winston. Churchill is the bad guy. That's not. what he was saying at all. But he was. saying Winston Churchill also a bad guy, >> right? >> Also wanted to attack Soviet Union right. after they were done with the war. And. he was actually he even introduced the. subject by saying to Tucker that you. know I like to pick on my friend Joo.

who's very waspy and I like to yeah. >> pick on him and joke with him that you. know Churchill was the real bad guy. whatever cuz he wouldn't accept. >> you know peace for an answer. He had to. finish the regime change no matter what. even if it took America doing it for him. and whatever. And then his point about. he never even finished the point about. the people starving in the camps. He was. totally taken out of context to mean. that the only people who died in the. Holocaust, all that happened was the. Germans didn't care enough to feed them.

well enough or something. But that was. not what he was saying at all. He was. essentially arguing that even if you. were some kind of German apologist, even. you would have to admit that every. single soul they took possession of, they took responsibility for. And if. people are starving to death by the. millions in their camps, then nobody. could deny that, right? And then he. didn't even discuss the rest of the. Holocaust. His point had nothing to do. with like trying to diminish the rest of.

it or discount the rest of it or. anything like that. He was just saying, you know, arguing even the devil's. advocate would have to admit so much of. the case on the face of it. And then. there he was segueing right into a point. about Gaza and how the Israelis, Gaza is. not a country. Gaza is an Indian. reservation. They were already whooped. and conquered and besieged. And so you. take control of people like that, then. you're responsible to make sure that. they're fed and that they're not. starving to death in this, you know,

under your captivity, which was the. point that he was making. So it ended up. being, you know, half half of a thing. ingested and and and half explained. about Church Hill and then a point about. the war in the East that was totally and. I think in some cases honestly. misinterpreted. But but what's dishonest. is people pretending like he didn't. explain himself on the record over and. over and over clarifying what he meant. by all that stuff.

>> And that's the problem with video clips. clips are a real problem because you. lose the context of the entire. conversation. You get one person's point. where they might be steelmanning. something else or they might be like. trying to be provocative or or whatever. it is. But to me, it's always very. fascinating that this one war is beyond. debate. Like there's no room for any. discussions of what might be true, what. might not be true. I don't think there's. a single [ __ ] moment in human history.

where we have gotten a completely. objective, 100% accurate representation. of why the war started, what were the. factors, what were the motivations. We. could go all the way back to Smemedley. Butler and Smemedley Butler's War as a. racket, which I always point up because. here's a guy in 1933. that was realizing he was a major. general realizing at the end of his. tenure like holy [ __ ] what did I do? I. thought that I was doing this to to make.

the world safer and really I was making. it better for bankers, better for all. these interests to go in and control. resources or do whatever the [ __ ] they. were actually doing. And. you can talk about that, but if you get. into discussions about World War II and. anything involving the Nazis, anything. involving the Holocaust, any all of a. sudden anti-Semitic gets thrown around. All of a sudden, you're you're a bad. person. >> Yeah. As he says, it's, you know, a huge. part of our civic religion basically. um.

you know where like George Washington. and even Abraham Lincoln and all that. stuff is too long ago where it's really. Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and. Dwight Eisenhower are the founding. fathers of the American empire and their. great project the greatest generation. and all of those things that was you. know that's that's how we know that. that's who we are. I mean my grandfather. was in that war and my great uncle was. you know death marched by the Japanese. in that war and stuff like a lot of. people have uh connections to that. That's, as Bill Crystal and his friends would.

say, this is how you build national. greatness. You need big projects that we. can all do together. And World War II is. the biggest project of all. So, it's the. kind of thing that that people don't. really want to question. >> It's also, we should point out that they. were bankrolling Smmedley Butler, trying. to get him to overthrow the [ __ ]. government. They were trying. >> He refused to do it. >> Yeah. Yeah. They marked up Capitol Hill. with the documents and Yeah. and showed. him. Yeah. They were trying to get him. to throw a military coup on the United. States government and take it over. >> Yep. I mean, you thought FDR was bad.

These guys wanted to overthrow him. He. wasn't, you know. Isn't that crazy? Wrong faction, I guess. >> Um, but um, look, I'm not an expert on, and I've only read a few books about the. Second World War, and you'd have to read. hundreds to really know what you're. talking about on that one. But I can. tell you that Pat Buchanan's great book, Church Hill, Hitler and the Unnecessary. War, that Pat knew that everybody was. going to try to smear him and everyone. was going to attack him and nobody. wanted to hear his version of how this. all happened. So he only quotes the. highest level, most credentialed English.

historians from Cambridge and Oxford. And so he's not relying on the German. point of view whatsoever. He's quoting. only these English historians saying, "Here's how the idiot Neville. Chamberlain and Winston Churchill. essentially fumbled into this war, screwed up, and got us into this war. that was way worse than we ever could. have hoped. They ended up turning Poland. over to the commies at the end anyway. and all of that." And is really honestly.

is what I think it is is a decent take. on World War II without all that. religiosity that you're referring to. there. And just take a cold look at it. You know, like they say that W. Bush, he's the Winston Churchill of the 21st. century. And I'm like, you know what? Maybe that's right. [laughter]. And maybe Winston Churchill was really. just the George W. Bush of the 20th. century. It's just you're supposed to. never admit that or talk about. >> Winston Churchill's Dick Cheney. >> Oh, yeah. That's a good question. I. don't know. >> Dick Cheney, that was Boy, that guy, he.

had no pulse for a while. >> Yeah. >> You know, is that not in the Bible or. something? >> Yeah, it should be. the [ __ ] guy who. once wore who uh is giving no bid. contract contracts to the company that. he was the [ __ ] CEO of where they're. going over there and fixing for billions. of dollars [ __ ] that we blew up. >> and this guy doesn't even have a pulse. >> I know we fake heart. >> He lives so long too. Like only the good. die young kind of thing. >> I mean how many people dropped dead. after CO of heart attacks that were.

young and healthy and this [ __ ] guy. keep on trucking. Yeah. >> Remember when he shot his friend in the. face and his friend apologized? >> Yeah. [laughter]. >> Yep. He [ __ ] they were they were. doing which is one of the most uh very. I I'd say it's one of the hardest to u. argue in support of type of hunts. It's. called a canned hunt. Do you know what. it is? >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. say what it is that they just. release. >> like in Gaza. >> ah very similar they just well this is.

you know birds they just release these. birds from a cage literally and they fly. and then they shoot him out of the sky. and even then he blasts his friend and. then he would. >> drinking and hunting. >> well allegedly so he wouldn't do any. interviews or anything wouldn't talk to. anybody for like 24 hours and so he had. to sober up or you know allegedly or. whatever and then his friend was like. a mild minor misunderstanding Got a few. pellets in my face. What the [ __ ]. >> I'm very sorry if this reflected.

negatively on the vice president. >> My fault for putting my face there. I. don't know. >> Isn't that amazing? No lawsuit, [laughter] no nothing. Your friend. shoots you in the face, no worries. >> And what angle exactly did he get shot. that he was okay after that? >> Well, you the thing about it is it's. birdshot. Just birdshot. Yeah. >> And um if you birdshot spreads, right? And depending upon the distance and how. far he was away from him, he could have. just got clipped with a most likely. that's what happened cuz I think he was. 70. >> You know, if you're 70, you get shot in.

the face with a shotgun. Usually that's. a wrap. >> So I I think he just got clipped with a. couple of pellets and you know. >> Yeah. >> He probably should have just shut the. [ __ ] up and not reported it, >> right? >> I don't know how it even got out. >> He must have had to go to the hospital. >> Yeah. He say I [ __ ] up. I dropped my. gun and it went off. >> Oh yeah. >> Yeah. You don't [ __ ]. >> The vice president shot me. I mean, >> don't tell the newspaper I said that. >> If that was my friend, you know, I would. probably say, "Let's let it go. Let's. Let's figure this out. We have to go to. the [ __ ] press.".

>> Yeah. >> Come on, bro. >> There's a guy both hammered. >> Killed and wounded a lot of people, that's for sure. Mostly vicariously, but. not always. >> Well, I mean, there's a special place in. hell. >> He's there already. >> It's just we was so weird that that. worked, you know, just all of it. the no. bid contracts, the the fact that he was. essentially running and he remember when. he was in a bunker and Bush was running. around like where's he's in a bunker. somewhere like why is he in a bunker. like what do what the [ __ ] that whole. war was so weird.

>> it was to pretend that there's a threat. that there was an ongoing threat when. there wasn't. >> I had a bit about it in my act is like. that the elites really have no idea how. dumb people are and the only way to find. out how dumb people are is make a dumb. guy president. >> and that that's what they did And then. when we went into a war with Iran or. with Iraq rather like how how did we how. did we justify that and they bought. that? What the [ __ ] And then the bit. was like he won again, >> right? Yeah. Elected on that. Yeah.

>> And then I go there's someone sitting in. the back of the room going I think we. can go dumber. [laughter]. >> That was that was the idea of the bit is. that this is the only way to find out. how dumb we are. like [snorts] that um Kurt Vonagget. story Harrison Burggeron where there's. like the ruling elite but the president. I think is the president in the movie of. is Tim Curry or something he's just a. total like buffoon and they just the the. real power is all behind the throne. running things you know. >> well my favorite movie about that is.

Doctor Strange Love cuz it's like. because it's kind of humorous and you. know it's but the whole thing is like oh. my god I think when you see this Pete. Hex thing where these guys are talking. about this and this. >> commander is saying that it's all to. bring about Armageddon. It's this is. right out of Doctor Strange love. >> Yeah. Oh, you can tell and this is one. of the most dispiriting things, right, is when you can tell a lot of times when. these people are talking that wow, they're he's really not lying. He really. thinks that that stupid lie is true and.

he's telling us what he thinks is true. like, you know, depending on their tone. and the way they explain it is sometimes. like even with Donald Trump, like it's. possible he's even talked himself or. allowed himself to be talked into. believing that they really were making. nuclear weapons and that then they were. going to use them on us. I mean, that. might just be this dumbest lie and he. knows it, >> right? But if they did have nuclear. weapons, it would be a giant problem cuz. the Iranian government, just look what. they've done to their people. Executed. protesters, they they've done some wild. [ __ ].

>> N I don't know. >> You don't think that's a big deal? what. they've done to their protesters. >> In fact, that's why we got off on uh on. Martyr Maid there a minute ago was. because on our show he was saying right. now through their conventional power and. especially because W. Bush gave their. best friends Baghdad. Iran is by far the. dominant power in the region. conventionally speaking other than us. If they rush to an atom bomb, say to. somehow deter us, which I don't think. that would work. I think we just attack.

them if they really did it. we just. attack them again. Um, but if they did. somehow get an atomic bomb, well then. that would then incentivize all of the. other powers, I mean, or other states on. the GCC there, Saudi and Qatar and. Bahrain and UAE to get their own nukes. And at that point, Iran's entire. strategic advantage is canceled because. now they got nukes too. And so now. nobody has a strategic advantage. >> But no one can do to them what happened. to them now if they had nukes. Like this. was the argument for Ukraine not include. them. That would include them being able.

to deliver them to the United States as. well. And I think you see it's like. this. Here's how it worked. Okay, the. Iranians, they're members of the. non-prololiferation treaty going way. back and they had a safeguarded civilian. nuclear program where the IAA could. verify they're not diverting their. nuclear material. >> How could they have verified this? >> They have their bases all underground. I. mean, >> no, no, no. Because all that stuff was. open and declared and and safeguarded by. the IAEA. So, they're enriching at two. major facilities at Fordo and Natants. And then they followed the uranium from.

womb to tomb, from the mine through the. conversion process. >> But how much oversight do they have of. this? I mean, how much of it could be. done in secrecy? >> It was very robust up until, you know, last June. They were pro proving the. negative there. >> Can I pause you there? Because they. didn't know that the Iranians had the. capacity to to they they sent one 4,000. km, right? The Diego Garcia attack. >> Yeah. The missile. So those missiles had.

a far greater range than anything that. they had declared. >> Actually, not quite because well, first. of all, that's the missile stuff is. totally separate from their safeguards. going with the IAEA. They had nothing to. do with that. But as far as the. missiles, the only limit on their. missile range previously was a political. limit and. >> it wasn't a capability. >> That's right. So they had. >> So it wasn't that they stated that all. we have is this. they only previously but then in October. of. I'm pretty sure it was last October in.

the aftermath of the June war and so. then in October of 25 the Ayatollah. announced we're lifting our limit on the. range of our missiles. >> and they said that publicly that they. were doing that and so and that was as a. result again of this provocation of the. war last June. >> and that's still separate from the. nuclear stuff though but go ahead. >> it was I'm sorry so it wasn't a. capability thing it was just a an. agreement Although they don't have the. capability to launch a three-stage. intercontinental ballistic missile to. the United States of America, they can.

hit Israel, but they can do that with an. intermediate range missile. >> But if they're cooperating with China, and China has that capability, >> because Bill Clinton gave it to him. Yeah. >> Yikes. >> Jesus. Why do you do that? >> I love this story. For the money. Um, if. if you remember the scandal of 96 and. all the Chinese money in his campaign in. '96, they spent all their money hyping. or all the media attention hyping up. Charlie Tree and Johnny Chung who were.

like low-level fundraisers who didn't. have anything to do with anything. And. then they framed an entirely innocent. Taiwanese scientist named Wenho Lee. And. the evil FBI persecuted poor Wenho Lee. And it was this huge distraction from. what really happened, which was this. Chinese Indonesian um billionaire named. Riyadi who was directly tied to Chinese. intelligence. He got his guy John Wong. appointed to the commerce department. where he was put in charge of licensing. missile technology transfers to China.

and they took that authority away from. state and defense and gave it to. commerce and then John Wong was the guy. who got to rubber stamp those missile uh. technology transfers. So then Hughes. Aircraft and Laurel Corporation then. sent their very best three-stage rocket. technology to China. >> Oh jeez. >> Cuz it's cheaper to have them launch the. satellites, you know. >> So they were not, I don't think, able to. deliver hydrogen bombs to the United. States before that. And they were able. to cuz I mean for a few hundred,000 or. maybe a couple of million dollars or.

whatever, they were able to buy this. from Bill Clinton. >> Jesus Christ. >> I know. Crazy. But no, you're right that. look, could China could could Iran with. Chinese help or whatever someday be able. to deliver a war here? Yes. However, uh the much better solution to that. certainly would have been we I know we. can't go back, but certainly would have. been just normalizing relations with. Iran and just dealing with them. The. reality was Iran's position was not that. they were racing to a nuke. Their. position was they had this safeguarded. program where again the IAEA is.

essentially proving the negative. We. know where all their uranium is. It's. right where it's supposed to be and they. haven't taken it and diverted it yet. We. know how much they're enriching and we. know where it all goes. And so. there so then Israel would say America. they're making nukes if they have a. nuclear program at all. This is the same. during W. Bush, during Obama. This is. true under MER as well as under. Netanyahu um who's been in charge almost. the entire time since Obama. Um and the.

policy was from the Israelis. America. bombed them. They got a civilian program. and you know that's just cover for. they're going to make nukes someday and. they're going to use them on us. So just. go ahead and let's get them now. Then. America would say no we're not doing. that. This is under W. Bush again under. Obama. um under Trump won and under Biden. No, we're not going to just start a war, but. we will warn the Iranians. Don't you. break out and try to make a nuke now.

because if you do, then we will attack. you and we'll bomb your Manhattan. project before you can complete it and. before you can get an atom bomb, we'll. see you then. And then the Iranians. would say, "We're not making nukes, so. don't attack us." And then the heavy. implication was if you attack us then we. might make nukes. So they had a latent. deterrent, right? A half-ass nuclear. weapons deterrent. They proved that they. had mastered the fuel cycle that they. could enrich uranium if they wanted to. up to weapons grade. They never did. But.

they said they were essentially saying. we have a revolver in one pocket and. bullets in the other. Let's not escalate. this. And that could have and should. have stood. Except this is what this is. the answer to your question about how do. they get us into this? because Netanyahu. convinced Trump to change that line and. to adopt the Israeli line. That for them. to have a civilian nuclear program at. all is equivalent to the exact same. thing as them making nuclear weapons and. we're just not going to allow that. So, how much.

understanding do we have of their. capabilities? And how do we have that. understanding? Like, how much do we know. about their enrichment program? How much. do we know about whether or not they're. capable of making a weapon? Because. haven't they stated recently that they. are capable of making a nuclear weapon? >> Well, do you think that's. >> that was not a threat? I think what in. fact if I if I know the statement that. you're talking about, they were saying, "Look, we're not making nukes." And the. proof that we're not is the fact that we. know how to, we could, and we're still.

not. And you can see all this time they. mastered the fuel cycle back in 2006. Once you. >> Okay, so it's like this and and they. have been set back on this. They got. their facility blown up last June. But. essentially you have remember yellow. cake. Don't drop that [ __ ]. >> Um you have that refined yellow cake is. refined uranium ore. Then you convert. that to uranium hexafflloride gas and. that's the stuff that you inject into. the centrifuges. Then you have what's. called a cascade of centrifuges. a whole.

bunch of them all connected together. with tubes. And then you spin the the. uranium hexafflloride gas in the. centrifuges and you spin the U238 which. is heavier out and away from the 235. which is the sweet stuff. And the more. you enrich it then um the more capable. it is of being used for nukes. Well is. one way to put it but so they would they. need like 3.6% U235 for their. electricity program. They need 20% U235. for targets for their medical isotope.

reactors for like cancer treatment. radiation or like that radioactive die. that they put in people for to see your. circulatory system and stuff. But then. to make weapons grade uranium, you need. typically above 90% pure uranium 235. In. any case, once you spin it through the. centrifuges to whatever stage of purity, then you got to convert it back into a. metal again, whether you're going to. make fuel rods or whether you're going. to try to make a bomb warhead out of it. So under the Obama deal of 2015, the.

JCPOA, it was really just an extra layer. on top of the non-prololiferation treaty. and on top of the safeguards agreement. that we already had. But the way that. was worked out was a big part of it was. that they would scale back their. capability to enrich by shutting down I. think it was twothirds of their. centrifuges at Natans and then at Fordo. they would change it from a a production. facility to just a research facility and. then whatever stockpile of uranium they. came up with would be transferred out of.

the country to Russia and they would. turn it into fuel rods and send it back. That way they had no stockpile that they. could just quickly reintroduce into the. centrifuges and enrich to a higher. grade. They'd have to basically start at. nothing again. And so under the theory. and the way the scientists worked it out. that if they withdrew from the treaty, kicked the inspectors out of the country. and said we are now making atom bombs, it would take them a year to enrich. enough uranium at weapons grade to make. one bomb out of it. Then on top of that,

you have to have the actual experts who. know how to machine it into the exact uh. specifications as and how to detonate it. and everything else. And the the simpler. the nuke, the harder it is to deliver. So typically like the Hiroshima bomb was. a gun type nuke where you just shoot one. uranium pit into the other one and which. they didn't even test. The Trinity test. was the Nagasaki bomb basically. They. knew it would work, but it's essentially. a very heavy bomb and very difficult to. deliver. And virtually all.

miniaturaturized. um implosion bombs in the world that can. ever be married to a missile, they're. virtually all made out of plutonium. And. they don't have a plutonium route to the. bomb because under the Obama deal, they. poured concrete into the rock that's. ark, which was supposed to be a heavy. water reactor, which can produce weapons. grade plutonium as waste. But they. poured concrete into that thing and shut. it down completely before it was even. open. Their reactor that they do have. operating is at Bucher and it's a. lightwater reactor which means that it.

is possible for it to produce weapons. grade plutonium as waste but it's much. more difficult. They would have to shut. it off all the time to harvest the stuff. out of there and all of that. Under. inspections they can't do that. >> So this is all monitored. >> This is all monitor. It's like if you. had a gun shop and you have a ATF cop. sitting at the bar stool. Well, unless. he was Fast and Furious smuggling your. guns to cartels, but assuming not that, but like assuming he was just a regular. cop. Like, you can't accuse me of. selling illegal laser rifles from my gun.

shop when I've got a cop sitting right. here. And that's the deal here is. they've got inspectors throughout the. place. And then what happened was, so we. had that perfect Mexican standoff, right? Where is Israel saying bomb them, they're making nukes. We say no, we. won't bomb them, but we will if they do. And them saying don't bomb us cuz we're. not. Then Trump called their bluff last. June. Really Netanyahu did and then. Trump jumped in the thing and they. really did set their nuclear program. back quite a bit. Now I don't think. there's any proof that they destroyed. the centrifuges at Natans and Fordo.

They're deep underground under granite. and very hard to get at. But they got. the elevator shafts and they got the air. shafts and they if anybody was working. down there, they were buried alive. The. Iranians were incentivized to move giant. boulders in front of the doors to. protect them from missiles and attack. and stuff like that. But so um all the. reporting is that the Natansen Fordo. facilities are essentially just frozen. right now. There's nothing going on. there. There's open source reporting. from last November and then there was a. report of a in the newspapers just two.

weeks ago or maybe three um based on. classified information that there is. nothing going on there. They um. >> you know what my deep concern is? >> Okay. >> No one said what you said to the. president. >> Yeah. See that's right. Not not only. that, you're right. >> that the people, these elected officials. and these appointed officials that get. into positions around him, they don't. know this, >> right? >> Which is crazy, >> dude. I'll tell you what, that New York. Times article, did you read that one. where Netanyahu came and they sat across.

from each other at the table like this. instead of Trump sitting at the head of. the table and Netanyahu gave him the. whole presentation about how easy the. war would be? Um, so as soon as he left, then they said, everyone else at the. table said, "Don't listen to him, boss. He's he's blowing smoke, man. That this. is going to be so easy." Now, they. didn't really tell him, "Don't do it, but they told him, "Don't trust. Netanyahu and that it'll be a snap the. way that he promises and all that." But. then, and look, it's Maggie Haberman and. them at the New York Times. I mean, it. seemed like a very well-reported story.

from, you know, the principles are. talking to her about this stuff. Um, >> well, this is what Joe Kenna said as. well, right? >> Yeah. So they they go around the table. and. Rubio has his say, the vice president. has his say, the chairman of the joint. chiefs of staff and whoever. But none, as you just said, none of them say what. I just said, right? >> And it really is. it's like a it's like four or five dudes. in a room who may or may not know very. much about this really and and and.

talking about it and none of them man. enough to say like, "Mr. president. permission to speak freely here. Sir, don't make this mistake, buddy. You know. what I mean? Seems that they don't know. as much as you know about it. >> I think they probably don't, >> which is wild. >> I've been at this for a long time. >> But that is wild. That is really crazy. that you'd be in a position of making. these decisions without having this. understanding of the fact that they're. not even really capable right now of. making nuclear weapons. If any of them. were capable of really knowing about it.

like this, it would be Rubio or Vance or. hell Kane too, the chairman of the joint. chiefs of staff. He all of these guys. should have been able to say to the. president, this is an illusory threat, sir. Really not wasn't Vance not there. while this was going on. >> He was not there for the Netanyahu part. But then he came in later, which he was. in Azerbaijan prepared for the war, right? Was where he was is why he was. late. Wasn't Azarbaijan, didn't they. have some sort of a peace agreement with. Armenia.

>> um. >> at the time and both of them? >> Oh, I don't know. I had missed that. then. You're right. Then I [snorts]. didn't know that. >> He visited both of them and that's one. of the reasons why he couldn't come. back. >> Okay. I visit as preparation for the war. with Iran. >> If you visit Azarbaian, you also have to. visit Armenia. Otherwise, it would cause. some sort of an international conflict. >> Yeah. because we support the hereditary. dictatorship in Azerbaijan because they. help us run the oil pipelines west. instead of north through Russia. >> But it was also because they had made. some sort of a peace agreement. Correct.

Didn't Armenia make a. >> possibly? I mean, they're they're. they're fighting over or the the the. contest was over whether Armenia is. going to open this corridor across. Armenia to an Azerba or. >> could you enclave on the Turkish border? Okay. [clears throat]. France uh [snorts] met in Baku. [cough]. JD Vance and uh how do you say his name? Ali. uh met in Baku to discuss the.

implementation of historic August 8th. White House peace summit and reaffirm. their shared commitment to regional. peace, security and prosperity. Leaders. signed the US Azarbaian strategic. partnership charter which will. strengthen bilateral relations between. our countries. The United States remains. committed to working with Azabaijan to. unlock the great potential of the South. Caucus region. So it was a peace summit. and so he met with Azarian and he also. had to meet with Armenia as well. This. was February 10th. So this is right.

before the war. >> Okay. [snorts and clears throat]. >> So yeah, >> I guess I thought he was like just. tipping them off. We're on your southern. border in a week or two. >> I'm pretty sure that the reason for this. was that he had to meet with both of. them. So he could not be there. So if I. was JD Vance and I knew or rather if I. was Netanyahu and I knew that JD Vance. was really not into this war and didn't. want to be a part of it at all, I would. probably try to. >> time it for them. >> What a good time. You can't even come. back. >> Yeah, that makes sense. >> The article here.

>> What does it say? >> That he was not [clears throat]. >> ah the gathering had been deliberately. small to guard against leaks. Other top. cabinet secretaries had no idea it was. happening. Also absent was vice. president JD Vance who was in Azerbaijan. and the meeting had been scheduled on. such short notice that he was unable to. make it back in time. Now, if I was. Netanyahu and I knew that JD Vance is. gonna be in a baron, >> you know, I don't really, you know, try. to spend too much time on the symbolism.

of things, you know, leave that to the. symbol minded, right? As Carlin said, >> symbolminded. >> But like, isn't it meaningful that this. is the situation room? The president's. supposed to sit at the head of the. table. Instead, Netanyahu sat there and. Trump sat here. >> opposite him and let him run the thing. as an equal. instead of. >> Why do you think that is? Why do you. think they have that kind of influence? >> I really don't know. I mean, they've. been friends for a very long time. All. the speculation about him being. compromised, I mean, it's very possible, but unknowable, really, right?

>> Netanyahu would do that. I mean, he he. brought up Monica Lewinsky to to Bill. Clinton. >> Did he? >> Oh, yeah. You know, we're tapping your. phone, homeboy. We got you on tape. You. better let Jonathan Pard out of prison. And then Bill Clinton refused to do it. because George Tennant and the whole top. tier of the CIA were going to resign. over it if he did it. So he didn't do. it. It was Trump that let Pard out. And. now Pard is running to the right of. Netanyahu. He's now announced that he's. running for the Knesset over there. >> So the reason why the Monica Lewinsky.

scandal went public? >> No, cuz No, no, no. >> Right. >> Netanyahu said to have offered Lewinsky. tapes for Pard. Oh, they had tapes. What do you mean? They had like. recordings where you were It may have. been after the scandal had broken, but. they had him on tape with her because. the only tapes were her on the phone. with Linda Trip that Linda Trip had. recorded, but they had him on the phone. with her. >> I forgot her name. You know, the story. is um the first time Bill Clinton met.

Netanyahu in 1996, they were in the room for half an hour. or something and when they came out, Clinton was just completely exasperated. and says, "Who the f does this guy think. he is? Who's the superpower and who's. the client state?" Because Netanyahu had. just told him like, "Look here, Butler. Here's your orders for half an hour.". Just barked commands at Bill Clinton in. a way that he was just like, "I can't. believe this guy." Wow. >> It's hard to feel sorry for him. In. fact, here's one, too. Barack Obama was.

caught on a hot mic. This is the only. time I've ever been sympathetic with. Barack Obama. He was caught on a hot mic. talking to the president of France. And. he goes, "Oh, man. You think you hate. him? I got to deal with him every day.". >> And that was about Netanyahu. >> About Netanyahu. >> Well, wasn't there an issue with JFK and. Israel over their ability to acquire. nuclear weapons? >> Yes. He was demanding inspections of. Deona, their nuclear facility there. >> To this day, they don't officially have. nuclear weapons.

>> Correct. And the reason for that is. because it's illegal for America to give. aid to a nuclear weapons state that. refuses to sign the non-prololiferation. treaty. And so, and they don't want to. do that. In fact, they did proliferate. nuclear weapons to South Africa who gave. them up before the change after. aparttheid. Um, but if if they're. if they openly possess nuclear weapons, then I mean, hell, it should already be. illegal because everybody already knows.

But the Glenn Simington law says that. you can't give aid, military aid to a. nuclear weapons state that won't sign. the NPT. That's America's treaty that we. force the whole world to accept. And. which, by the way, is in terrible. jeopardy now, right? Because, you know, um, Saddam Hussein goes, "Look, my hands. are up. I got nothing." and they invaded. him. Anyway, the North Koreans armed up. with NES. [snorts] The Libyans said, "Well, look, we have some centrifuge. material, but we have no operational. program, but you can have our junk.".

They killed him. And then the Iranians said, "Look, we. can make nukes, but we're not making. nukes, so leave us alone already." And. then we kill them. So America is the great destroyer of. America's non-prololiferation treaty. that we foisted on the world by which. the non-uclear weapon state promise the. non-uclear weapons states promise never. to get them and the nuclear weapons. states promise never to share them. >> So and that's all in jeopardy now that. may not even exist anymore. The polls.

are talking about getting their own. nukes now because of Trump's pivot away. from Europe in the middle of a war that. America helped cause over there. Jesus. So, Israel officially doesn't. have nukes. >> Officially, they don't, but everybody. knows that they have at least 200. And. in fact, I have that personally from. Morai Venunu, who is the Israeli. whistleblower who went to prison. They. kidnapped him in a honey trap plot, I. think, in in England or in Italy. >> with chicks. With chicks, they went to.

get him laid and they kidnapped him and. they held him in solitary confinement. for like 25 years or something. But he. gave the whole story to the Sunday. Times, the London Times, and they. published it back in I'm going to say '. 86. And then um what happened was he was on. Twitter. He may still be on Twitter. Um. but um I had an anecdote from Daniel. Ellsberg, the great uh whistleblower of. the Pentagon Papers and who was a friend. of mine for a long time. He died a. couple years ago now, but um he had an.

anecdote about Venounu that turned out. was incorrect. But I asked Venunu, "Is. this correct?" And then he said, "No, it's just like I told the Sunday Times. back then." And that was that they had. 200 atom bombs by the time that he. squealled on them. And we know from. Grant F. Smith's research, he got this. through some foyer documents. Um he's. from the Institute for Research, Middle. Eastern Policy, really great researcher. on this. And he showed that they had at. least been researching hydrogen bombs, the big ones, although there's no proof.

that they ever actually made Hbombs. I. don't think it's been reported that. they've made him, but they at least were. looking into how to. >> Jeez. And this was part of the conflict. that JFK had with Israel. >> Yes. And trying to register. what was then I think the American. Jewish Council, I believe is what it was. called, the predecessor to Apac as a. foreign as foreign agents. And then they. dissolved it and created Apac instead, I. guess, is the long and the short of. that. how they got around that and there. were people whacked,

>> you know, and it was, >> you know, I don't know, man. Honestly, like I told you, I was more of a. conspiracy theorist in the 90s, but I. never did all read into JFK because. there's just a hundred books about it. and 100 different theories. And I'm just. not sure if LBJ hired French hitmen to. do it or if the Israelis got James Jesus. Angleton to do it or if Alan Dulles got. some Cubans to do it or what the hell, right? Like, I don't know. And so I'm I. really get, you know, I'm uh I don't I. don't think I ever really could figure.

it out. So, >> well, no one really. speculation, but Oliver Stone, >> there are a lot of people with Yeah. You. know what's funny about that? And I. think he even admitted this at one. point, man. You watch the whole movie. JFK. Oh god. You watch the whole movie. JFK. >> and I'm sorry, man. >> No worries. It's just Dr. Pepper. I like. a little stains on this table. >> There you go. >> Makes it live. In the edit later, we'll. just clip to Joe and back. >> No, we'll just show the Dr. Pepper. Why. Dr. Pepper? Why you so into Dr. Pepper? He I should tell everybody he brought a.

whole cooler filled with Dr. Pepper. >> I got to have Dr. Pepper, man, for my. work here. Um, [snorts] no, the um the. uh you watch the whole movie JFK, right? It's got every theory under the sun in. there. And then as soon as it's over, it. says, "Produced by Arnan Milchan, who is. an Israeli spy and who helped Benjamin. Netanyahu steal cryons, which are an. essential part of these nuclear trigger, transfer their weapons. That's who. produced the movie.". >> And so then someone asked Oliver Stone.

like, "Hey man, an Israeli spy produced. your movie where you point the finger at. everyone except maybe the Israelis. What's about that?" And he's like, "Wow, you're right." Right. I I forgot exactly. how he says it, but he acknowledges that. you know what, like it could have been. even that my own film was part of a puta. on there. >> Well, especially when you consider the. fact that his own film was made in what, the '9s? >> Yeah, it came out in like 91, I think. >> Right. 90. >> So, back then, he probably didn't know. as much as he knows.

>> Yeah. Probably never even heard the. angle that it would have been the. Israelis. But, of course, you know, LBJ. was very close to the Zionist and even. had a MSAD agent for a girlfriend. and. I'm sorry I forget her name, but one of. his mistresses was a MSAD agent and then. >> he he completely reversed all those. policies as soon as he was in power. But. of course, same thing with Vietnam. He. reversed. >> well or at least released any skepticism. about Vietnam and said, "Let's go ahead. and escalate there and all that." So, >> like I say, that one's it's too muddy.

for me to try to wait through and and. figure out exactly who pulled the. trigger on that one. >> Crazy. the not so secret life of uh Matilda. Is. that how you say her name? Matilda Crim. That was his Israeli spy girlfriend. >> Uh yeah, I believe that's her. >> She looks like a dirty guy. >> Good old Phil Weiss. I love that guy. He's a great guy. That's a mande.net is. a great website for anti-ionist. >> The no daylight policy, the US alignment. with the Israeli government. So. obviously today in Trump's deference to.

Netanyahu was born under Matilda Crim's. dear friend Lynden Johnson. In the. feverish weeks surrounding the 1967 war, Crim, who had once immigrated to Israel, and her husband Arthur, a leading. fundraiser, were continually at. Johnson's side and advised him on what. to say publicly. I mean, you got to give. it up to a country the size of Rhode. Island that has that kind of [ __ ]. pull. >> They got their priorities straight. That's for sure. >> Kind of amazing that they've been doing.

this since the 60s and before. >> Yep. >> I mean. >> I mean they threatened Harry Truman. They bribed him and they also threatened. him. They sent his his daughter's memoir. said the Zionist sent letter bombs to. the White House. >> and they'd stop at nothing to get their. state. >> Truman. >> Yeah. >> Wow. >> And and they paid for his re-election, too. In fact, um there's a great scholar. named um John B. Judas uh Jud Dis. and. he wrote a book about this. >> name. >> Uh yeah, I kind of [laughter] if you.

mispronounce it, you know, he actually. also wrote, as long as I'm talking about. him, he wrote a great article for. foreign affairs in 1995 about the. neoonservatives called from Troskyism to. anacronism. And it was about how now. that the Cold War is over, who needs. these crazy hawks anymore, right? And. then these are the guys who took us who. launched the Iraq war, you know, a few. years later, seven years later or. whatever. He was he was saying they're a. spent force. They should be by now. because they had been Troskyite.

communists and then had moved to the. right for the militarism and stuff. But. he wrote a book about how Truman did. this and and I think that was part of it. was this intimidation campaign. And it. was his own daughter that in her book in. her memoir said that they sent letter. bombs to the White House. >> to intimidate and they also paid for his. elections. It was you know carrot and. stick kind of a thing. And then yeah, look, if you ran the Israeli Foreign. Ministry, you only have one priority in. the world that outranks every other. priority by a million billion, and that. is your relationship with the United.

States of America. How friendly is the. president? How friendly is the Senate? What do we got to do to make sure that. everything stays in line? It's. everything to them. >> So, let me ask you this. How what do you. think happens with Iran now? Like, how. does this play out if you had to. speculate? >> Well, I'll tell you that. First of all, they're more likely to go ahead and try. to break out and make an atom bomb now. than ever before. Although I'm not. necessarily predicting that. I think, you know, Trump has proven by calling. their bluff on their latent deterrent.

He has proven he's willing to bomb them. If they really break out and try to make. a nuclear weapon, it's almost impossible. that they could do that without us. knowing. And then this president, and I. think the next one, too, would be. willing to go back to war over it. as. Barack Obama promised, he would. absolutely launch a war against Iran if. they broke out and tried to make an atom. bomb. And you know, he did an interview. with Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic. called as president, I don't bluff, where he's essentially begging Jeffrey. Goldberg to tell Netanyahu and them, I.

really, really mean it. If they try to. make a nuke, I will bomb them, but just. let me try to solve this another way. So, I think that promise stands. This is. same as W. Bush, same as Obama, same as. Biden. And I think that will continue to. last into the next presidency. And if. the Iranians are smart, what they'll do. is they'll hold the same posture they've. had, which is we're not giving up. enrichment. We're not giving up our. capability to make a bomb one day, but. we're never going to call it that. And. just don't do this to us anymore. and.

try to bet on the fact that Trump's only. got three years left and the next. presidents won't be so belligerent and. they won't call the bluff and and and go. ahead and launch another war unless they. break out and try to make a nuke. And as. Darl was saying, they're so much more. powerful than all their neighbors. conventionally, they really have no need. to make a nuclear bomb. And they can, I. think, successfully deter Israel even. with their conventional missile force. And we saw them just absolutely blast. the crap out of Tel Aviv.

>> Yeah. >> So. >> very under reportported, right? >> And and I think. >> you know they should not have killed the. conservative old Ayatollah, right? And. they kill him and apparently like the. the new Ayatollah, his son. They killed. his mother and sister and or mother and. wife and baby. I mean that's the new. Ayatollah over there is, you know, he's. got to be more radical than his father. He's got to be angrier at us than his. father ever was. And.

>> so what is the pathway to resolution? >> Well, this is it's so unfortunate. because honestly um you know, whatever. Maybe some genius at some think tank has. a better idea. But I really think that. the thing to do is just quit. The thing. to do is for America to just come home, for Trump to say, "Look, I won." Yeah, but we don't really need these bases. over there. The American people don't. need to dominate the Middle East. We're. not worried about the Soviet Union. invading Iran and dominating the Gulf. anymore. So, forget the Carter Doctrine.

Let's just come home. And I think if we. do that, we we bring all of our ships. home, all of our planes, all of our. base, just close them all up and come. home. Then that shifts the entire burden. on to Iran that they still have to deal. with the rest of Eurasia. We're not the. one dependent on their hydrocarbon. exports. Everybody else is. So, are they. going to now levy attacks to get through. the straight of Hormuz? Absolutely. But. too bad. shouldn't have started this war. then. Nothing we can do about that now. Willie Nelson said, you know, so like. the way going forward is and by the way.

like in in Panama they tax um ships. going through the smith there through. the Panama Canal. The Indonesians I. believe it is tax people going through. some of the bottlenecks in the Indies. And so it's not entirely unheard of. that, you know, the the dominant power. there is going to uh levy a fee on. people coming in and out of there. But. again, too late. Too bad. I mean, America already we had the exactly what.

Marco Rubio says he wants now. We had on. February the 27th and then they launched. this war on the 28th, which by the way. was the anniversary of the Waco raid. This is a pretty ugly time to start an. aggressive war. And in fact, as long as. I'm on that, and I know you know this, but it's really worth dwelling on that. they killed not just one, but two girls. schools in their initial assault. They. killed in one building they killedund. and I think 73 or 74 uh almost all.

little girls. And then in the other one. was 20 more. and with and with that was. an experimental new Lockheed missile. that fires tungsten pellets out the. front before it detonates uh or as it. detonates uh in a creative new way to. cut people to shreds. And the thing is. about that is as um there's this great. media critic um named Adam Johnson who. pointed out this is equivalent to the. Oklahoma City bombing which you know for. young people uh Oklahoma was 9/11 before.

9/11 right it was massive and never mind. there was a bunch of FBI informants who. did it and got away with it. That's. another interview Joe but but it was. another interview and that's a deep one. >> Yeah it is. I'm here for you, buddy. But yeah, but. but they killed 167 people were killed. in that thing and it was just the. ugliest damn thing. And it included like. 20 kids in the daycare there, right? That was the cover of Newsweek was a. firefighter holding a dead baby. It's. the worst thing. This is the most. traumatic thing for this country. And in.

the heartland of Oklahoma City and all. that. Well, that's what America did to. Iran. Only the entire building full of. kids. All 167 of them, a few teachers, but virtually all of them little girls. and another school down the street too. or relatively nearby where they at the. volleyball game where they killed even. more. So now think about the Pearl. Harbor attack which Donald Trump himself. compared it to Pearl Harbor. Out of. context, but still it was a sneak. surprise attack in the middle of.

negotiations on behalf of a foreign. country over a lie. and then they killed a bunch of kids. It's like imagine if at Pearl Harbor if. our story of Pearl Harbor was that they. sank all our heroes and drown them down. in their ships in the hul stuck in their. holes down there. But also they wiped. out schools full of 180 little girls, the children of those sailors who drown. at Pearl Harbor. Oh, and also they.

killed FDR that same day, too. Oh, and. also is a Catholic country and he's also. the Pope. Imagine how we would react to that. Imagine what our story of Pearl Harbor. to this day would be. I'll tell you what. our story of of World War II would be. It would be that we kept nuking them. till they were all dead. is what our story of World War II would. be if that's how they had done us at. Pearl Harbor. It's just somehow we just don't really.

think of it in that context. But we. should if that had happened to us again. just like we, you know, we did a little. on Ukraine there and the way America. just absolutely pushes their luck. If. Russia overthrew the government of. Canada twice in 10 years because they. kept voting wrong, we would invade. Canada and nuke Moscow. And in fact, when you bring up the analogy, it's. completely absurd, right? How ridiculous. is it that the Russians would dare try. to overthrow the regime in Ottawa? That. they would dare threaten to try to kick. us out of our bases in Alaska or any of.

these kinds of things. That they would. go to war with the people of Vancouver. who refused to accept the new Ku Huna. It's comic book crazy. They wouldn't. dare. But we do that to them, you know, and we act like as as Dr. Paul said, if. we go around the world killing people. like this, bombing people like this, and. we think that we can just get away with. it and not have to suffer the blowback, then we do that at our own peril. And he. was speaking for the government as a. member of Congress at the time that. we're putting the American people in.

danger by acting this way. It's. completely crazy. You know the remember. the the um the Shiite fatwa that the old. Ayatollah the Ayatollah before last last. uh Kmeni put on Salman Rushi the author. of the book the satanic verses where. people and people have tried to kill him. numerous times including got his eyeball. in one case um we have had a real. problem with bin Laden jihadi terrorism. over the time we have not had the. Shiites we have not had the Ayatollah.

sistani in Iraq or the Ayatollahe. declare that all good believers should. attack the West. Now they could do that. That's the kind of fire that we're. playing with. It's extremely dangerous. I mean, Bin Laden didn't even really. have a religious rank. He was just a. rich guy who he had earned respect. because he was wounded in battle and. stuff. He had money and and influence. But if the Ayatollah Sistani put out a. full jihad, which I'm not saying he. would do that. I don't I don't have any.

real reason to believe that he would go. that far. but he's been willing to stand. up to the United States numerous times, especially during the war um in you know. the last couple of wars over there. And. so, and remember what happened the night. that they started this war on the. February the 28th, the next day on. Saturday the 29th or was it I think it. was Friday was the 28th and it was like. late in the night they started the war. and then Saturday I believe was the 29th. and a an American uh immigrant from.

Sierra Leon here in Austin took an AR-15. put on a shirt with the Ayatollah and an. Iranian flag on it. I didn't even know. they had Shiites in Sierra Leone, Joe. But I guess they do. And he went down to. Sixth Street and he shot 18 people. He. killed three and wounded 15 people in an. immediate blowback terrorist attack. Call it backdraft. I I coined the phrase. in my book that and if blowback means.

long-term consequences from secret. foreign policies that the American. people then don't understand and are. left up to false explanations or left. susceptible to false explanations. Well, then backdraft terrorism is when the. consequences of your overt foreign. policies just blow up right in your. face. And you know, frankly, like those. three people were crucified for Israel, for their sins, for for and 15 more. wounded. I don't know how terribly. wounded. For all I know, people are. still in the hospital over that thing. And that was a immediate blowback.

terrorist attack from this war just. right away. And and it's the kind of. danger that our government is continues. to put us in through these interventions. over there. at some point, you know, all. the sort of um hypotheticals about, yeah, but what if Russia took over the. world or what if China did if it wasn't. us or whatever, those have got to just. kind of fall away, you know, by the way. Like there's no real reason to fear that. in the first place. But also, who in the. hell are we to stop it at this point, right? Another South Park reference when.

Cartman is so scared by the Chinese. display at the Olympics ceremony, he. gets all paranoid that China's coming. for us. So he recruits Butters to come. with him to fight and keep all the. Chinese away. And then over and over. again throughout the episode, Butters. keeps like closing his eyes and shooting. some guy accidentally in the dick just. over and over again. And then by the end. of the episode, Cartman says, "You know. what? Just forget it. Okay, if that's. the best you can do, Butters, let's just. stop. We're just going around. We're. This is not working. Our intervention,

it's just not.". >> What do you predict is going to happen. with Iran? >> I don't know. I'm really worried. I. mean, I try not to take Trump too. seriously when he's, you know, or too. literally when he's being hyperbolic, but he has threatened to nuke them over. and over again. Including just the other. day, he said the country is going to. have a glow around it, you know, when. I'm done with them or whatever. >> I mean, I No, no, I don't. I'm not. predicting that. But I think it's it's. symbolic, right, of his frustration. He.

absolutely just should not have done. this. and now he has no good way out of. it, right? He could just declare victory. and it would be fine by me. In fact, there was a story in the Jerusalem Post. um. the end of April, I think I think it was. like April 28th about how Trump ordered. the intelligence agencies to do an. estimate about what would happen if I. just walked away, right? And then. they're looking into it. Well, just how. bad will Iran exploit the new vacuum.

that we've created and the power and. influence that we're handing to them? How bad will it really be? Because he. has no options to fix it. He just. doesn't. You want a regime change in. Tyrron, you can drop a hydrogen bomb on. the capital city and kill 10 million. people and then claim the desolation is. peace. Or you can just forget it. And. like, man, you know what? We're all. tough and badass enough to kill all. these people. We should be tough enough. to admit when we screwed up. Then look. at Afghanistan. We stayed for 20 years.

because Washington couldn't admit that. we can't win this war. There's only one. way to tame the poshunes and that is. kill them all. And we're not willing to. do that. So what are we doing? We're. just losing slowly. And then what they. do, they finally admitted it. They. finally just said, "Fine, I guess we. lost and left. That's what we got to do. here, but sooner is better." Do you. think that it's possible that this war. will go on to the end of his regime and. then whoever comes into power in 2028.

then gets out? >> God, I hope not. I I can't imagine. what's going to happen if this thing. keeps on for three years. You know, this. is a real flaw in our system, quite. frankly, is like if we had a parliament, we could just vote no confidence in this. guy and put a new guy in there whose. fault this isn't and try to get him to. resolve it. Instead, all we can do is. wait 3 years, wait for him to kill over. of a heart attack or wait for his own. cabinet to overthrow him in the name of. him being, you know, too demented to. continue, which is not going to happen.

Um, you know, that 25th Amendment, they. always invoke that like they could do a. coup against him for being a Russian. agent or whatever back in his first. term. They can't do that. >> Yeah. If they didn't do it with Biden, he would have to be completely off his. rocker and to to a degree where his own. cabinet is going to agree to overthrow. him, which I just think is virtually. impossible. So, the good news is, right, is that he's he. could just flip-flop on anything, right? He can just change his mind about. anything. In fact, when he announced the. ceasefire, he said, "We're going to.

we're going to negotiate based on Iran's. 11-point proposal." Like, okay, man. Fine. Right? go from unconditional. surrender to surrendering. unconditionally. Like call it whatever. you want. And and he is good at that. You could call that a gift if you want. to politically that he can just pretend. like yeah, no, I meant to do that. >> So what is the holdup? Like what what. are they disagreeing on? >> Well, he's got to deal with Netanyahu, right? The Master Blaster thing, you. know, from Thunderdome on his back. shouting in his ear what he's got to do. and what he's got to not do. in the 60.

Minutes interview, uh, he tells the the U, Major Garrett. that, you know, uh, we're not done. The. war is not over until we get that. uranium. And Garrett says, well, how are. we going to get it? He says, Trump. promised me he wants to get it. He's. going to get it. And and of course, they. have this. Ever since they announced the. ceasefire, the Israelis immediately. escalated their bombing campaign in. Lebanon just to destroy the ceasefire. This is what prompted Tucker Carlson to. say that Trump has clearly been somehow.

enslaved by Netanyahu, that he's willing. to put up with that. As Bill Clinton. said again, who's the superpower and. who's the client state? >> How is it that we have a ceasefire deal. and then you can come and veto it like. this and then not be chastised and not. told to get back in your corner, we're. handling this? And and I really just. don't know the answer to that. Some. people speculate that it's blackmail or. it's just the bribery or he's just into. it that he just, you know, he wants to.

be great. He wants to have a legacy. This is I really should study more about. this, but this is a part of libertarian. economic theory called public choice. theory and which is kind of a clunky. name, but it just means that the public. choices are still made by private. individuals and they're acting based on. what's good for them rather than what's. good for the country. like strobe. Talbot, we need those locked dollars. We. need those Polish votes. So, we do a. policy that ultimately is bad for the. country even though it's good for the.

Democrats at the time. And same thing. here. What's good for the country is to. just come home. But, and you can hear. this just built in. People don't even. question. It's just built in, of course, to every single discussion about this. How are we going to do this in a way. that it looks good enough for Trump that. he's willing to accept his defeat here, right? How can we spin it for him? How. big of a gold medal do we have to give. him? How big of a tick ticker tape. parade do we have to give him? How firm. of a pat on the back and a. congratulations do we have to give him.

for him to decide that it's okay to come. home? Otherwise, and without looking. like too much of a jerk himself for what. he's done here and then and having to. live with it for three years, the. aftermath of however it works out with. Iran newly dominant. And so again, Bush. put Iran up two pegs in Baghdad. Obama. put them up two pegs by building the. caliphate and then helping them destroy. it again. Um and then of course Al Qaeda. rules Damascus now. So that's a big hit. against them. But uh what what Donald.

Trump has done with this war is about at. least equivalent to what W. Bush did in. terms of enhancing Iranian power in the. region. It's like the guy in the. football gr in the football game grabs. the ball and then runs the wrong. direction and scores the goal for the. other team. >> Do you really think it's that bad? >> Oh, it's absolutely. I mean, look, before. >> despite the destruction of their new. >> Absolutely. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because I mean, it's just as simple as. this, right? On February the 27th, the.

Gulf was open for business and the. illusion of American conventional air. and naval power kept it that way and. nobody questioned it. It's America's. dominated order. Yes, Iran has Iraq and. they have Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, but hell, we even got Sunnis ruling in. Damascus now. And so the GCC and. including Jordan and Turkey and Israel, this is America's empire in the Middle. East. on February 29th, 30th. I mean, well, no, sorry, there is no uh one leap.

here. On March 1st, 2nd, 3rd this year, all that was over. I mean, Daryl Cooper. again is, you know, we do this show. provoked every Friday night. And he. said, "Listen, I'm hearing from my. friends in the Pentagon." This was one. week into the war. He goes, "I'm hearing. from my friends. This war is not going. well. They're hitting all our bases. They've killed a couple of our guys and. they're hitting our runways and hitting. our radars and hitting our planes and we. knew it then. Right then, just and I'm. sorry, man. It's just true. Told you so.

For 20 years, all of our assets in the. Gulf are up for grabs. They can reach. out and touch us there and there ain't a. damn thing that we can do about it, you. know, and it just absolutely is true. [sighs]. >> Scott, you're a real bummer, but thank. you. >> It's a lot of fun, isn't it? [laughter]. talking to me. >> D, it is it's uh it's good to get your. perspective and I really wish someone. had had your perspective before this all. got started. At least an understanding. of the uh ability to enrich the uranium.

and turn it into an actual weapon. But. thank you very much. Um tell everybody. about your shows, where people could. find them, where people could find you. >> Absolutely. So, I do the Scott Horton. Show, which is my interview show, and. Provoked with Daryl Cooper. And um I. >> Where can people get those? >> Uh on here on the YouTubes and on. Spotify and all those things. And then. um I have uh I'm the editorial director. of anti-war.com. I'm the director of the. Libertarian Institute. That's.

libertarianstitute.org. And for the deep deep dive and the the. deep background on all this stuff, I. have the Scott Horton Academy of Foreign. Policy and Freedom at scott. hortonacademy.com. And oh, you know what. I have here? If I can just show my books. real quick. If I can find the zipper on this thing. Got these for you here. Got Fool's Aaron. on Afghanistan, enough already on the war on terrorism.

and provoked on Russia and Ukraine. >> Boy, those are some fat ass books, dude. You do a lot of work. >> I do. I have a lot of jobs. I work real. hard on this stuff. Um, and these have. been very wellreceived. You know, I'm uh. I basically my job is I was inspired by. Bill Hicks like this when I was a young. kid. There's a great interview of Bill. Hicks on Raw Time, which was the heavy. metal show on the Access Channel here in. town. And I think this probably not too.

long before he died. And this is of. course the days before the internet and. everything. um where he talks about the. importance of seeing people get up there. and tell the truth and not be afraid to. tell the truth and set the example for. other people. And you know at that time. it was like to have a guy like him, a. comedian able to tell the truth on a. platform where other people could hear. it was just so exciting to even it was. like just breaking through this this you. know impenetrable force field. And then. he was just saying he says, "Well, well,

if that guy can do it, well then maybe I. can do it and I'll get up there and I'll. say what I think is true, too." And then. that kind of deal. And so I've been more. or less following that same path since. then. >> Well, thank you for all this because the. amount of work that's involved in. putting together these books and all the. interviews and all the podcasts you've. done. For most people to occupy their. mind with the kind of information that's. in yours, it's got to be very troubling. It's probably not so much fun. And uh. it's also very important for people like.

me who haven't done that work to to have. access to it and get an understanding of. it. [music] So thank you. >> Cool. >> Thank you very much for having me. It's. been great. >> We'll do it again, Scott. >> All right. Bye everybody. [music].