Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent
Speaker 2: coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about,
Speaker 2: it just means the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 2: But enough with that, let's get to the show.
Speaker 1: Speaking of Biden, an accidental moment of candor here he
Speaker 1: gets asked a question about our ongoing attacks on the
Speaker 1: hoo Thies. Now remember the context here. The Huthis, who
Speaker 1: basically are in charge of running Yemen. They're basically now
Speaker 1: the official government in Yemen, have been blocking the Red
Speaker 1: Sea in opposition to Israel's bombardment and what they and
Speaker 1: I describe as a genocide of the Palestinians in the
Speaker 1: Gaza Strip. So they've been doing that. The US decided
Speaker 1: that we had to get involved here. We had to
Speaker 1: protect commerce on the Red Sea, and so because our
Speaker 1: initial response wasn't working, we decided to go that step
Speaker 1: forward and stop start bombing hoo They facilities in Yemen
Speaker 1: without congressional authorization. By the way, so Biden gets asked
Speaker 1: about this, Hey, is this working. Let's take a listen
Speaker 1: to what he has to say.
Speaker 3: Well, when you stay working, are they stopping?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 3: Are they going to continue?
Speaker 5: Yes?
Speaker 1: Are they stopping? The houthis no? Are they going to continue? Yes?
Speaker 2: Okay, I mean, this is.
Speaker 1: Such an incredible admission. I guess he's like too elderly
Speaker 1: to come up with a lie on the spot, so
Speaker 1: he just tells the truth. But it's just remarkable how
Speaker 1: US foreign policy, like, what is it even about. Clearly
Speaker 1: he's admitting they don't even have an expectation that this
Speaker 1: completely foolish and dangerous escalation that they've decided to engage
Speaker 1: in here. They don't even have an expectation that it's
Speaker 1: going to work. We know from the reporting not only
Speaker 1: has it worked, it hasn't damaged the hoothi's offensive capability significantly.
Speaker 1: It has not deterred them whatsoever. If anything, they have
Speaker 1: scaled up the attacks since we started bombing them directly,
Speaker 1: and you have more cargo ships than ever rerooting outside
Speaker 1: of the Red Seat and avoiding this area completely because
Speaker 1: now it's an active war zone. Gas prices immediately once
Speaker 1: we announce this bombing campaign went up. We talked last
Speaker 1: week about how Shell is saying, we are not bringing
Speaker 1: our ships through here whatsoever. So it has been completely
Speaker 1: wildly counterproductive. They know that he admits it, and yet
Speaker 1: it's still yeah, but we're going to keep doing it,
Speaker 1: this foolish, stupid, counterproductive policy for no reason whatsoever.
Speaker 2: If I were to describe blob foreign policy, Blob, by
Speaker 2: the way, is like the nickname for you know, Washington
Speaker 2: establishment thinking, I would actually put this as the perfect
Speaker 2: example where it feels good, right, We're like, Wow, these
Speaker 2: guys are gonna fire. We're going to take it right
Speaker 2: to them. I have nothing against that as long as
Speaker 2: it works. But that's the issue. It's got to work.
Speaker 2: And this is, it always feels good to drop a bomb,
Speaker 2: to drop, you know, a couple million dollars or whatever
Speaker 2: in ordinance. Everybody gets to play with their toys and
Speaker 2: we get to watch some cool videos online. But then
Speaker 2: you're like, but now, what do the bombing actually stop?
Speaker 2: And we's brought everybody the news that in general, you know,
Speaker 2: the offensive capability had been only slightly reduced. It didn't
Speaker 2: take a genius. I've said it from day one. I
Speaker 2: was like, look, Saudi's carpet bomb these people for nine years,
Speaker 2: they haven't been able to do any real, you know,
Speaker 2: real destruction to their capabilities. It also, though, exposes what
Speaker 2: the war war means and what the Pentagon actually has
Speaker 2: the disdain for the American people, for the democratic process.
Speaker 2: This was the perfect example where a Pentagon spokesperson was asked,
Speaker 2: is it fair to say that the US is at
Speaker 2: war with Yemen? And look at the way that this
Speaker 2: woman twists herself into knots to avoid the obvious answer
Speaker 2: of yes, Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6: Is it now fair to say that the US is
Speaker 6: a war in Yemen? And secondly, there are some reports
Speaker 6: about a USMQ nine being shut down over Iraq by
Speaker 6: Iranian back militia.
Speaker 2: Is that's something you're trying?
Speaker 7: Thanks to Jerse In terms, I'll take the second the
Speaker 7: the last one. First, I have seen those reports. I
Speaker 7: don't have anything for you on that, so I'd have
Speaker 7: to circle back with you. I just I've seen those reports,
Speaker 7: but don't have anything to add in terms of your
Speaker 7: first question. No, we don't seek war, we don't think
Speaker 7: that we are at war.
Speaker 2: Just a follow up On's question. You said that we
Speaker 2: are not at war with the hoodies.
Speaker 1: But if if you know this Tit.
Speaker 2: For tat bombing, we bombed them five times now, So
Speaker 2: if this isn't war, can.
Speaker 5: You just explain this a little a little bit more
Speaker 5: to us, If this isn't war, what is war?
Speaker 1: Sure, Laura, Sure, great question.
Speaker 7: I just wasn't expecting it phrased exactly that way. Look,
Speaker 7: we are, we do not seek war. We are we
Speaker 7: do not we are not at war with the who
Speaker 7: thies In terms of a definition, I think that would
Speaker 7: be more of a clear declaration from the United States.
Speaker 7: But again, uh, what we are doing and the act
Speaker 7: that we are taking are defensive in nature.
Speaker 2: I love those grizzled Pentagon reporters be like, all right,
Speaker 2: what is war then? And here's the thing she actually
Speaker 2: gets the right answer with a correct answer, is one
Speaker 2: that is declared by Congress. And yet what are we
Speaker 2: finding ourselves in a Tit for tat campaign? The problem
Speaker 2: was is that, as Rokanna articulated on our show about
Speaker 2: offensive capabilities, that was clearly an offensive action. It was
Speaker 2: described as such. It's a very different thing. And that's
Speaker 2: why previously an incidence where the who thies it approached
Speaker 2: like a US ship and we fired back at them.
Speaker 2: People were not upset about it from a congressional point
Speaker 2: of view, because it's obviously an act of self defense.
Speaker 2: Somebody's shooting at you and you shoot back, that's a
Speaker 2: different story. But when you're actively trying to remove their
Speaker 2: offensive capability, then that's not the same thing, and you
Speaker 2: have to get some congressional authorization for that. And the
Speaker 2: problem is is that the only sign right now from
Speaker 2: Washington is that we're going to increase and as we
Speaker 2: have said previously, if you want to just solve this
Speaker 2: via airpower, it's not possible. We're going to talk, I
Speaker 2: think tomorrow a lot about the Israeli as the assessment,
Speaker 2: the US military assessment of the Israeli military campaign. You
Speaker 2: can drop as many bombs as you want to on
Speaker 2: some of the most densely populated regions on the planet,
Speaker 2: you still can't kill everybody. Guess who found that out
Speaker 2: in Japan? The United States in our war with them.
Speaker 2: There's a reason Japan had to surrender and we've got
Speaker 2: militarily conquer the entire island because even though we could
Speaker 2: kill one hundred thousand people in a single night. It's
Speaker 2: still very very difficult in order to remove total enemy
Speaker 2: infrastructure and all that with bombs alone. That's why the
Speaker 2: plans at that time called for a ground invasion of
Speaker 2: you know, some quarter million troops or something crazy. So
Speaker 2: at the end of the day, you want to solve
Speaker 2: this militarily, there's only one option we got occupy Yemen.
Speaker 2: I don't think this should be on the table, and
Speaker 2: yet this seems to be. Honestly, I think that seems
Speaker 2: to be the more likely scenario than something else been
Speaker 2: an actual negotiated diplomatic explosure.
Speaker 1: And it is so important anytime we talk about this
Speaker 1: to remind people that if we just force Israel into
Speaker 1: a ceasefire and use our leverage to push them to
Speaker 1: the table and to end these hostilities, this all stops.
Speaker 1: We don't have to occupy Yemen, we don't have to
Speaker 1: bomb Yemen, we don't have to do any of this.
Speaker 1: And we know this because when there was a brief
Speaker 1: negotiated ceasefire, the Huthis all but stop their attacks. All
Speaker 1: of the you know, Iranian backed milicious in a rack.
Speaker 1: All of these attacks stopped during the ceasefire. So we
Speaker 1: know that this isn't just oh they're claiming it's about Israel.
Speaker 1: It's really not about Israel. No, it is about Israel.
Speaker 1: It is about what Israel is doing in Gaza right now.
Speaker 1: And yet that is taking completely off the table, and
Speaker 1: you are lead to the US foreign policy establishment. You know,
Speaker 1: even going against the Rand Corporation is like, this is
Speaker 1: a stupid policy and it's not going to work. Clearly,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden and co. Know that, and yet they feel
Speaker 1: like we have to do something and we have to
Speaker 1: be the tough guy. So I guess we need to
Speaker 1: like wage a war, but not go to Congress to
Speaker 1: make it an official war. And speaking of that, let's
Speaker 1: put this up on the screen from the Washington Post.
Speaker 1: Apparently the US is preparing for a sustained bombing campaign,
Speaker 1: but definitely not a war, just a sustained bombing campaign.
Speaker 1: I'll read you some of the details here that Biden
Speaker 1: administration crafting plans for sustained military campaign targeting the Hoofies
Speaker 1: in Yemen after ten days of strikes failed to halt
Speaker 1: the group's attacks on maritime commerce, stoking concern among some
Speaker 1: officials that an open ended operation could derail the war.
Speaker 1: Ravaged country's fragile piece and pull Washington love that terminology
Speaker 1: into another unpredictable Middle Eastern conflict. I love how we
Speaker 1: just get pulled in like it's a force of nature,
Speaker 1: like there are other options on the table, like our
Speaker 1: concerted offensive bombing campaign. Is US somehow being pulled into
Speaker 1: war without any choice or other possibilities, It's just insane.
Speaker 1: They say they don't expect the operation will stretch on
Speaker 1: for years, like previous US wars in Rock, Afghanistan or Syria.
Speaker 1: At the same time, Sager, they acknowledge they can identify
Speaker 1: no end date or provide an estimate for when the
Speaker 1: Yemeni's military capability will be adequately diminished. As part of
Speaker 1: the effort, US naval forces also are working to intercept
Speaker 1: the weapons shipments from Iran, and it was part of
Speaker 1: that operation that led to we now have confirmation, sadly,
Speaker 1: that two US Navy seals died attempting to intercept weapons
Speaker 1: from Iran to Yemen. So it shows you this is
Speaker 1: not costless whatsoever, not in terms of treasure, not in
Speaker 1: terms of lives, and certainly not in terms of global stability,
Speaker 1: let alone Middle Eastern regional stability.
Speaker 2: It just used to be. I mean, remember Chris, do
Speaker 2: you remember when those soldiers died in I think they
Speaker 2: were green Berets in Niger, and there at least was
Speaker 2: it up roar over that people were like, what the
Speaker 2: hell or a bunch of green berets doing in the
Speaker 2: middle of the desert getting into a firefight with isis.
Speaker 2: To this day the entire thing has been covered up
Speaker 2: by the pens.
Speaker 1: Oh, they absolutely lied about what right.
Speaker 2: They those guys were left out in the cold. There
Speaker 2: were some crazy stuff that happened at command to people
Speaker 2: should have been prosecuted for what happened to those men,
Speaker 2: but that's a whole other story. Now the same level
Speaker 2: though of scrutiny on this I don't see it. Two
Speaker 2: US Navy seals were dyed killed in action. Now it
Speaker 2: appears in this mission. One of them, I mean, is
Speaker 2: a genuine hero who jumped in after one of the
Speaker 2: guys slipped off of the ladder and was carried off
Speaker 2: in heavy swells away. And these their bodies have still
Speaker 2: not been found. They've been declared deceased now by the Pentagon.
Speaker 2: And the problem is is that this is only ramping up.
Speaker 2: Let's put this up there on the screen. This is
Speaker 2: a terrifying thing that happened just a couple of days ago.
Speaker 2: So the main US base in Iraq was I love
Speaker 2: the headline, attacked by Iranian backed rebels. Okay, but that's
Speaker 2: not the headline. The headline is is that quote multiple
Speaker 2: ballistic missiles and rockets were fired by these militants from
Speaker 2: western Iraq that rained down on the base. Now, the
Speaker 2: reason why this is different is it's the first time
Speaker 2: so far that multiple ballistic missiles have been used against
Speaker 2: US troops inside of Iraq. And what's even more troubling
Speaker 2: is that fifteen Patriot missiles were actually fired to intercept
Speaker 2: these ballistic missiles and to shoot them down. Guess what, guys,
Speaker 2: of those fifteen lists, we can put that up there, please.
Speaker 2: Each one of those costs four million dollars. That means
Speaker 2: that we fired sixty million dollars in ordinance. And what's
Speaker 2: even more terrifying is that these so called pitally rock
Speaker 2: missiles are just coming from Iran, that they've been able
Speaker 2: to assemble without sanctions, They were able to get past
Speaker 2: our Patriot missile defense systems. So we fired sixty million
Speaker 2: dollars in rockets and multiple of our troops appear to
Speaker 2: have suffered traumatic brain injuries, and I believe one person
Speaker 2: was actually injured directly. That should terrify the hell out
Speaker 2: of all of us. A. Our weapon systems don't work
Speaker 2: as well as we thought. That's number one. But two
Speaker 2: is that these guys are sitting ducks. And with the
Speaker 2: amount of technology now available to many of these Iranian
Speaker 2: backed groups, this to me was a perfect preview of
Speaker 2: how much of a nightmare and how almost certain regional
Speaker 2: wars likely if Hesbala does enter the war because they've
Speaker 2: got technology actually, frankly, even more advanced than this. And
Speaker 2: this is another thing where things are all ramping up.
Speaker 2: Who these obviously are Iranian backed. You've got these Iranian
Speaker 2: backed militias in Iraq, They've got ballistic missiles and much
Speaker 2: more advanced technology. We do not have that many troops
Speaker 2: who are in Iraq right now. And then the question is,
Speaker 2: you know, Iraq too, is in a major diplomatic problem.
Speaker 2: They're negotiating with US over our presence in the region.
Speaker 2: But they want they don't want us there anymore. But
Speaker 2: it's complicated, the Iranians tell them not whatever, It's a
Speaker 2: different story. My marine point is just that there's a
Speaker 2: lot at stake and basically everything is being disrupted around
Speaker 2: all of this. And you're right, I mean, the center
Speaker 2: of gravity for this is God. If the seasfire were
Speaker 2: to stop, or if the seasfire were to go into effect,
Speaker 2: then a lot of this would ramp down. Yeah, that's
Speaker 2: not really an option that's currently being floated by anybody
Speaker 2: really in the American establishment. And what really disgusted me
Speaker 2: was John Kirby, the spokesperson for the Pentagon, who went
Speaker 2: on Good Morning America yesterday and downplayed the tvis that
Speaker 2: were suffered by these US troops in this attack. Here's
Speaker 2: what he had to say.
Speaker 8: What can you tell us about potential injuries to American
Speaker 8: troops rock and how will the US respond to this
Speaker 8: latest attack. Well, as we understand at this early hour
Speaker 8: on Sunday morning, it's only a very small number of
Speaker 8: US troops that were affected. They're being seen for traumatic
Speaker 8: brain injuries with some symptoms of concussions, but no serious
Speaker 8: physical injuries other than that. Not that that's not serious enough,
Speaker 8: of course it is, but we understand it's a small
Speaker 8: number and it's limited to traumatic brain injuries.
Speaker 1: Obviously, what we're going to do what we have.
Speaker 8: To do to protect them. I mean, these sacks have
Speaker 8: to stop, and we've made that very clear.
Speaker 2: Just a very small number of crystal. This is from
Speaker 2: the same people who believed Havana syndrome, who believe that
Speaker 2: Russians were shooting secret microwaves into US diplomat's ears, and
Speaker 2: they passed how many millions of dollars in health? These
Speaker 2: are our servicemen who are sitting there getting missiles rained
Speaker 2: down on them. And he's going on national television, a
Speaker 2: former admiral in the US Navy to downplay traumatic brain injury,
Speaker 2: which last time I checked, is actually one of the
Speaker 2: worst things that can happen in combat because it follows
Speaker 2: you forever. You have no idea the personality changes that
Speaker 2: could come. I mean, there's all kinds of downstream effects
Speaker 2: that these guys may have to live with for the
Speaker 2: rest of their lives. How can you feel, you know,
Speaker 2: being sitting there, you have missiles raining down on you,
Speaker 2: and either freaking Pentagon or the Press secretary go on
Speaker 2: television and just be like, oh, it was a very
Speaker 2: very small number. I don't even care if it was,
Speaker 2: you know, if it's just one, So what you know,
Speaker 2: every one of their lives and all these matters. It's
Speaker 2: the entire purpose of the government because they don't want
Speaker 2: to acknowledge even any option or the failure of their strategy.
Speaker 2: We're downplaying. I'm just it's repulsive.
Speaker 1: It is repulsive, just a little traumatic changer. Imagine that's
Speaker 1: your son or daughter.
Speaker 6: I know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and the tallest man out there. And you know,
Speaker 1: I was saying this to Usager, like the other flax
Speaker 1: for the White House, the other shameless propagandas and liars
Speaker 1: that they employ, they at least look a little squirrely,
Speaker 1: like a little uncomfortable when they're faced with the utter
Speaker 1: lies and propaganda that they have to continue to Not
Speaker 1: this man, no shame there, none whatsoever. He will just
Speaker 1: go out and proudly lie and spin and misdirect. And
Speaker 1: it is discussing. And you know that article that we
Speaker 1: put up before it has an astonishing statistic in here
Speaker 1: which I did not realize because we've tried to cover
Speaker 1: these attacks as much as we can, because they are
Speaker 1: incredibly dangerous. This particular assault, which was one of the
Speaker 1: largest since October seventh, this was the one hundred and
Speaker 1: forty fourth attack on US troops stationed in a rock
Speaker 1: in Syria since October seventh, one hundred and forty four
Speaker 1: attacks on US troops in the region. I mean, first
Speaker 1: of all, this again begs the quation like why are
Speaker 1: all these people still in the reason? That's number one,
Speaker 1: But number two like what are we doing here? I
Speaker 1: saw another commentator say yesterday, like, listen, even if you
Speaker 1: do not care a bit about Palestinian lines, even if
Speaker 1: you are not repulsed by the videos of fifteen year
Speaker 1: olds having to have their legs amputated with no anesthetic,
Speaker 1: even if that doesn't move you whatsoever, what possible US
Speaker 1: interest is being served by this policy? Like what possible
Speaker 1: end are we pursuing? And this is the insanity. To
Speaker 1: go back to the original comments from Biden where he
Speaker 1: acknowledges are the bombings of the who he's working? No,
Speaker 1: are they going to continue? Yes, it's the same thing
Speaker 1: with our policy with regard to Israel. You have Tony
Speaker 1: Blinkett just recently come out soccer and say there is
Speaker 1: no military solution to Hamas. I mean, it's true, it's obvious,
Speaker 1: But then what the hell are we doing? Like what
Speaker 1: are we supporting? We're the ones sending the two thousand
Speaker 1: pound bombs to drop on Gazas Strip and destroy infrastructure
Speaker 1: and murder civilians, mostly women and children. And we're openly acknowledging, well,
Speaker 1: we know this isn't going to work, then why are
Speaker 1: we doing it? Why are we supporting it? And it
Speaker 1: shows you the level of complete insanity and disconnect from
Speaker 1: reality that has taken hold among the DC blob establishment.
Speaker 1: That they will bomb, they will you know, ship weapons
Speaker 1: to murder civilians. No way that not only is it
Speaker 1: not going to work, it is actually going to achieve
Speaker 1: the opposite end of what you claim to support. Because
Speaker 1: the WHO things have never been more popular locally or
Speaker 1: around the world than they are right now. Hamas has
Speaker 1: never been more popular in the Gaza Strip or the
Speaker 1: West Bank than they are right now. Every civilian murdered
Speaker 1: in Gaza is likely a new Hamas or other militant member.
Speaker 1: They know this, they know this, and yet they continue
Speaker 1: to pursue the policy. Anyway. If that's not the definition
Speaker 1: of insanity, I don't know what is.
Speaker 9: Well.
Speaker 2: I mean, like I said, it's all blob politics. Everything
Speaker 2: feels good, you know, everything is about obscuring like actual
Speaker 2: national interests. I Chris Leslie said, I am a big
Speaker 2: fan of talking in the language of national interests, because
Speaker 2: when you do talk to American you'd be people are
Speaker 2: pro Israel. I would say in general, for people who
Speaker 2: are pro Israel, if you were talking to them like
Speaker 2: do you think you would be worth sacrificing US lives
Speaker 2: and you know, US military in order to fight for them,
Speaker 2: they'd be like, oh no. And it's like, well, what
Speaker 2: if I told you that American troops have been fired
Speaker 2: upon one hundred and fourteen times? People were like, well,
Speaker 2: you know, that'd be a little bit of a problem. Look,
Speaker 2: it's only a matter of time. And I hate to
Speaker 2: say it, We've already got too dead who've been killed,
Speaker 2: these brave heroes in this interdiction mission. It's only a
Speaker 2: matter of time. Ballistic missiles and all this stuff flying around,
Speaker 2: this amount of ordinance, somebody's gonna die. And when they
Speaker 2: do that, we are so lucky that it hasn't happened before.
Speaker 2: And it's just purely a matter of chance. One hundred
Speaker 2: and fourteen forty four, sorry, one hundred and forty four attacks.
Speaker 2: Once we get to two hundred, like what are we
Speaker 2: doing here? And it just gets worse and worse already.
Speaker 2: I've seen some of the images of some of these
Speaker 2: ships that have come out of the Red Sea. This
Speaker 2: is no joke. I mean, go back and look at
Speaker 2: the damage for example of like the USS coal back
Speaker 2: in two thousand. I mean a lot of sailors died
Speaker 2: in that attack. It's only a matter of time, you know,
Speaker 2: before something like that is allowed to happen. And that
Speaker 2: was just a tiny little skiff or something. These guys
Speaker 2: have advanced military technology, and yes, as we see with
Speaker 2: the patriots, we can shoot some of them down. But
Speaker 2: ask Ukraine, you can't shoot everything. And it's like it's
Speaker 2: only it only takes one and you can do a
Speaker 2: hell of a lot of damage.
Speaker 8: You know.
Speaker 2: We can see it in Israel, we can see it
Speaker 2: in Gaza, we could see it, you know, in Kiev
Speaker 2: and everywhere else. It's been targeted by these things and
Speaker 2: a lot of people can die. Now one missile goes
Speaker 2: in the wrong place and you're in a whole other situation.
Speaker 1: So speaking of what the hell are we doing here,
Speaker 1: the longtime stated goal of the US government, through successive
Speaker 1: administrations and especially amplified now in the wake of October
Speaker 1: seventh by the Biden administration is the two state solution?
Speaker 1: And Biden was asked this was a great question. By
Speaker 1: the way, Biden was asked in a sort of a scrum,
Speaker 1: is it impossible to achieve a two state solution while
Speaker 1: bb Netanyahu is Prime Minister of Israel? Given that he
Speaker 1: continues to assert that not only does he oppose a
Speaker 1: Palestinian state now and forever, he has been a primary
Speaker 1: opponent of ever getting a Palestinian state for decades. At
Speaker 1: this point, let's take a listen to what Joe Biden
Speaker 1: had to.
Speaker 5: Say, interestate solution impossible, the power.
Speaker 9: The power president, the Demain negotiations in Ukraine and the border,
Speaker 9: what did they?
Speaker 1: Are you going to reconsider conditions on Israeli? Given what
Speaker 1: n Younger said about at one stage, I think something.
Speaker 3: The number of the types of two state solutions. There's
Speaker 3: a number of countries that are members of the UN
Speaker 3: that are still don't have their own militaries, a number
Speaker 3: of states and or have limitations, and so I think
Speaker 3: there's ways.
Speaker 2: In which this kept working.
Speaker 9: But bbe I said he's opposed to two state.
Speaker 2: Solutions, So what is he open to? Did you talk
Speaker 2: about it this morning? So I was interesting.
Speaker 1: Every part of that is very revealing, So let me
Speaker 1: go through it. So first of all, you know, he's asked,
Speaker 1: do you think it's impossible with bb as prime minister?
Speaker 1: And he says he says no. He says there are
Speaker 1: a number of types of two state solutions. He says no,
Speaker 1: he didn't say that he's totally opposed to two states.
Speaker 1: What he has said that multiple times and continues to
Speaker 1: say that, I'll show you in just a moment. But
Speaker 1: he lays out his specific idea of basically like, you know,
Speaker 1: a Palestinian state that isn't really a state, that doesn't
Speaker 1: really have sovereignty, some sort of state minus solution that
Speaker 1: he thinks maybe he can sell to the Israelis, even
Speaker 1: with netnya who as Prime minister. I mean there's a
Speaker 1: lot to say about this. I mean, first of all,
Speaker 1: I think that solution is unacceptable, you know, to give
Speaker 1: them some sort of like pretend state that isn't real
Speaker 1: Number one is unacceptable. Number two, even that Netna who
Speaker 1: is not going to go for He is adamantly opposed
Speaker 1: to any form of anything approaching a Palestinian state or
Speaker 1: Palestinian sovereignty. So Biden is living in some sort of
Speaker 1: fantasy delusion, even in spite of the fact that Beebe
Speaker 1: continues to make it clear that there will never be
Speaker 1: a Palestinian state so long as he is in power.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean Christ, he made that very very clear
Speaker 2: in his speech. It's amazing too, because this is the
Speaker 2: perfect example of Hebrew versus English. In English, I don't
Speaker 2: believe he's ever said it, but in Hebrew he's not
Speaker 2: tweeted it. Now multiple times he's saying it to the public.
Speaker 2: He seems to forget that some of us can actually
Speaker 2: listen in on English language broadcast. That's translating his remarks live.
Speaker 2: Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 1: For thirty years.
Speaker 9: I am very consistent, and I'm saying something very simple.
Speaker 9: This conflict is not on the lack of a state
Speaker 9: of Palestinian but the existence of a state, the Jewish state.
Speaker 9: Every area that we evacuate we received terrible terror against that.
Speaker 9: It happened in South Lebanon, in Gaza, and also to
Speaker 9: there in Summarrea, which we did it. And therefore I
Speaker 9: clarify that in other arrangement, any other arrangement in the future,
Speaker 9: the State of Israel have to twelve on the entire
Speaker 9: area from the river.
Speaker 1: To the sea.
Speaker 9: This is what happens when you have sovereigny. This truth,
Speaker 9: I say to our American friends, and I also stopped
Speaker 9: the attempt to imposes us a reality that will jeopardize us.
Speaker 9: A prime minister in Israel has to be able to
Speaker 9: say no, even to the best of friends, to say
Speaker 9: no when you need to, and to say yes when
Speaker 9: you can.
Speaker 2: Christly, you were explaining to me that the river to
Speaker 2: the sea is not the perfect translation, but it's this
Speaker 2: still the inspiration if you want to just give that.
Speaker 1: Because okay, so obviously the exact freezing from the river
Speaker 1: to the sea has been framed as genocidal when it's
Speaker 1: coming from college students on campus here, any sort of
Speaker 1: Palestinian activist, et cetera. And then BB says it here
Speaker 1: and you know, apparently that's fine. It's also in the
Speaker 1: Lacud party charter, by the way, as it is in
Speaker 1: the Hamas Charter from you know, when the when Hamas
Speaker 1: was originally founded. Now the cope here was, oh well,
Speaker 1: he didn't actually say from the river to the sea.
Speaker 1: He said the entire area west of the river Jordan,
Speaker 1: which is literally defining the exact same territory, but that
Speaker 1: was the go Well, he didn't actually say from the
Speaker 1: river to the sea. He said from the river to
Speaker 1: the sea, but use like different technical words in Hebrew.
Speaker 1: In any case, he's making as clear as he possibly can.
Speaker 1: He literally says, for thirty years, I am very consistent,
Speaker 1: and he's correct. He has never hidden his disdain and
Speaker 1: disgust for the idea that there would ever be a
Speaker 1: Palestinian state, and he's making it incredibly clear here that
Speaker 1: the entire area west of the Jordan, or from the
Speaker 1: river to the sea, however you want to put it,
Speaker 1: he wants it to be under Israeli control. So makes
Speaker 1: for very awkward situation for US officials who have gone
Speaker 1: out of their way, you know, they friction censured. Were
Speaker 1: Shida to leave from saying this when she's using it
Speaker 1: to call for equal rights for everyone, whether they are Muslim, Arab, Jewish,
Speaker 1: any nationality, any religion group in that area, She's censured
Speaker 1: for it. And yet let's take a listen to this
Speaker 1: is D four guys, John Kirby trying to clean this
Speaker 1: one up based on Netanyahu's comments. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1: The President addressed Yak who's using the phrase from the
Speaker 1: river to the sea in their conversation today. I know
Speaker 1: the way house is previously, so that's a phrase is divisive, So.
Speaker 10: I'm not aware that that specific phrase was discussed.
Speaker 2: Using that phrase.
Speaker 10: Look, there's a there's a connotation with that phrase. We
Speaker 10: talked about this before. But when you know, when you
Speaker 10: use the phrase river to the sea, it speaks basically
Speaker 10: to the mantra of amas And in their manifesto where
Speaker 10: they basically describe the geographic bounds of what they believe
Speaker 10: to be palace signed and if you look at it
Speaker 10: on the map, if you go look at the four
Speaker 10: corners that they describe it, it's basically the state of Israel.
Speaker 10: They just don't believe it should exist. So again, it's
Speaker 10: not a phrase that we recommend using given because of
Speaker 10: that context.
Speaker 2: This wasn't a moss This was I understand.
Speaker 10: I don't have anything more on that, and I certainly
Speaker 10: don't have anything more in the conversation to read out
Speaker 10: with respect to that.
Speaker 1: But this wasn't a mass This was Metannahu. And by
Speaker 1: the way, like just again, this man is not hiding
Speaker 1: his aspiration, societyology, what his views are Before any of
Speaker 1: this happened, he went to the UN with a map
Speaker 1: of Israel, remember that from the river to the sea,
Speaker 1: with no Palestinian you know, no West Bank, no Gaza Strip,
Speaker 1: no Palestinians whatsoever. That was all fine and good, and
Speaker 1: apparently Joe Biden is still operating under some delusion in
Speaker 1: which bb Natanyahu could be some sort of partner for
Speaker 1: an actual negotiated peace settlement. And just sober in case
Speaker 1: it wasn't totally one hundred percent clear from the literally
Speaker 1: thousands of times he said it before. Nan Yahoo also
Speaker 1: tweeted out, let's put this up on the screen. This
Speaker 1: is d three, guys. I will not compromise on full
Speaker 1: Israeli security control over the entire area west of Jordan.
Speaker 1: And again, to be totally clear, he says this is
Speaker 1: contrary to a Palestinian state. So he's making it as
Speaker 1: plain as he possibly can. And yet Joe Biden still
Speaker 1: still not getting the message here somehow.
Speaker 9: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean at a certain point, it's like, look, guys,
Speaker 2: like what are we doing here? And same thing. I
Speaker 2: have a very simple proposition, which is to treat Israel
Speaker 2: like you treat every other nation. If you treat I mean,
Speaker 2: but the problem is that this is America. This is
Speaker 2: apparently the way that we treat our so called allies.
Speaker 2: We're like, hey, Ukraine, we're going to give you all
Speaker 2: these weapons, but just don't use it to attack Russia.
Speaker 2: And they're like, okay, yeah, sure, we'll just use it
Speaker 2: to attack Russia. And we're like, oh, well, you probably
Speaker 2: shouldn't do that. But here's a couple more and now
Speaker 2: we do the same thing here. You know, the EU
Speaker 2: has a much more sensible policy. If we can put
Speaker 2: the tear sheet up there, please d five. You know,
Speaker 2: I was reading this just yesterday. And look in the EU,
Speaker 2: I mean, Germany literally has laws on the books where
Speaker 2: they'll imprison you, you know, if you protest for Palestine. And
Speaker 2: yet for them, they're like, book, we need to quote
Speaker 2: seek consequences for Israel over opposition to Palestinian statehood. They
Speaker 2: have urged Member states now to impose basically sanctions from
Speaker 2: Brussels and from all member states if they continue to
Speaker 2: oppose Palestinian statehood. I find this to be an eminently
Speaker 2: reasonable policy, which is that, look, if you are going
Speaker 2: to go against the wishes of what we believe is
Speaker 2: a sustainable peace and or a sustainable solution, then we
Speaker 2: are not going to support you monetarily. It's very simple.
Speaker 2: That's what you usually would do in the past. This
Speaker 2: is also the fanatical way that we talk about. This
Speaker 2: is deeply contrary to historical American foreign policy towards Israel.
Speaker 2: Henry Kissinger often would lecture Goldemeyer, who was a hell
Speaker 2: of a lot more liberal than Netanyahu. George W. Bush
Speaker 2: would often lecture Nettan Yahoo and the Israeli government. And
Speaker 2: in fact, you can go back and pull that transcript
Speaker 2: I've read it here in the past a couple of
Speaker 2: years ago of our a flight Sure who is like,
Speaker 2: they're literally justify the war in Iraq, and he said,
Speaker 2: we don't. Can we condemn Israel attacking apartment buildings in Goz?
Speaker 2: Like that's how much the somehow, that is how much
Speaker 2: the rhetoric and the policy has changed here. I don't
Speaker 2: really know what happened, to be honest, it seems that
Speaker 2: we've somehow gone in the opposite direction, which is kind
Speaker 2: of crazy considering what the overall situation is. But look,
Speaker 2: they've humiliated us. There's just no question they've humiliated President
Speaker 2: Biden the Ukrainians did too. They probably learned from Zelenski.
Speaker 2: They're like, well, if he can do it, you know,
Speaker 2: what are we going to do? And they've got our
Speaker 2: political system basically rigged. So, you know, I see these
Speaker 2: Republicans all the time. We're attacking Biden for not being
Speaker 2: pro Israel enough. I'm like, what do you what do
Speaker 2: you want? You know, it's like I almost said the
Speaker 2: F word, but like, what else could you possibly want?
Speaker 2: They're getting their weapons. I mean, Biden even talked to
Speaker 2: them for twenty days, which, in my opinion is nuts.
Speaker 2: How do you go twenty some days without talking to
Speaker 2: the person who is actively engaged in this war and
Speaker 2: is escalating and doing things they're getting us involved in
Speaker 2: situation at very least you would expect some sort of
Speaker 2: bilateral communication. Then the question is like, are they the
Speaker 2: ones that snubbed us? And then he goes out and
Speaker 2: you know, gives a speech saying sometimes you have to
Speaker 2: tell your American friends, no, where's the requisite policy from
Speaker 2: our president? Why doesn't he give a speech and be like, listen,
Speaker 2: I support the state of Israel. As we often understand,
Speaker 2: the state is different than the politician him and I
Speaker 2: have differences, and as long as he's going to have
Speaker 2: this policy, then the policy of the United States is
Speaker 2: going to be support what we believe is in the
Speaker 2: long term interest of Israeli national security, which is a
Speaker 2: two state solution. And if you have a government that's
Speaker 2: in place that believes that, then I'm sorry. That is
Speaker 2: where counter odds here. That doesn't mean I have anything
Speaker 2: against you. I'm not anti Semitic. We have a disagreement.
Speaker 2: What's wrong with that? Yeah, you know we can't talk
Speaker 2: that way yet.
Speaker 1: You know it, sccer. It is interesting to think about
Speaker 1: how we've gotten to this place because you tell me
Speaker 1: if you think that I'm wrong with this. But Trump
Speaker 1: and then Biden have been the two most pro Israel.
Speaker 1: Total unconditional support for whatever they want, whatever they want
Speaker 1: to do, no criticism, We ship the weapons, We don't
Speaker 1: say a word in grievance that we've ever had. I mean,
Speaker 1: thinking back.
Speaker 2: Probably definitely trum Biden to Yeah, I'll say Biden to
Speaker 2: Obama actually was extremely pro Israel until he no longer
Speaker 2: was campaigning for office.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I don't know if you remember this in two thousand
Speaker 2: and sixteen. I believe it was actually during the campaign,
Speaker 2: he allowed some un resolution to go through. That's right,
Speaker 2: people freaked out, But that was, I mean, frankly, the
Speaker 2: only real counter Israel thing that he ever did. There
Speaker 2: there was no political consequences.
Speaker 1: I mean, listen, I'm not saying that any of the
Speaker 1: other presidents were good on the issue, but Biden and
Speaker 1: Trump have taken it to a whole other level. And
Speaker 1: it is interesting because it comes at a time when
Speaker 1: the American public has moved in the opposite direction. There's
Speaker 1: a lot more skepticism of Israel, especially in the Democratic base,
Speaker 1: but also in there's some rising numbers among independence and
Speaker 1: a little bit among Republicans as well. For the first time,
Speaker 1: you have some actual dissident voices in Congress. Not a
Speaker 1: lot of them, because you know, it's still very difficult
Speaker 1: to win a campaign if you're going to have courage
Speaker 1: on this issue, but there are actually a few dissonant
Speaker 1: voices who have from the beginning and calling for a
Speaker 1: ceasefire and been taking absolute hell for it too. So
Speaker 1: it is a strange situation where you know, you end
Speaker 1: up with this president who is absolutely lockstep at a
Speaker 1: time when the US public is really reassessing what this
Speaker 1: relationship is why we're supporting it, why our tax dollars
Speaker 1: are going to fund these absolute horrors and atrocities that
Speaker 1: are unfolding before our eyes.
Speaker 2: I could see it going both ways. I could see,
Speaker 2: you know, things wrapping up and then maybe everybody's moves
Speaker 2: on or whatever. But I mean, I've said it before.
Speaker 2: I mean I think the biggest mistake that BB ever
Speaker 2: made was coming here and criticizing Obama to his face
Speaker 2: in his own country, because it's just like, who do
Speaker 2: you think you are?
Speaker 5: Man?
Speaker 2: You think the American President's going to go to the
Speaker 2: Canessa and speak against you? By the way, we should
Speaker 2: now at this point after you dare to do that
Speaker 2: in our country. We always have an Israel exception, it
Speaker 2: seems to be.
Speaker 1: So.
Speaker 2: I do think that in the long run, they definitely
Speaker 2: have lost it, you know, in general, the Democratic Party. Look,
Speaker 2: you can ignore it for as long as you want,
Speaker 2: but if you've got a small d democratic consensus, I
Speaker 2: don't think things have reached the breaking point quote unquote yet.
Speaker 2: It will come more likely if there is kinetic action
Speaker 2: involving US troops, because that's when the debate and the
Speaker 2: fire really breaks in general, is if US military lives
Speaker 2: are actually, you know, are really being spent, and we're
Speaker 2: getting involved, and especially in a bigger war, but even
Speaker 2: a minor one, I could see things changing. Yeah. Look,
Speaker 2: on the domestic side.
Speaker 1: You bring up an important thing with the Iranian nuclear deal,
Speaker 1: because Israel did not want that deal to be signed,
Speaker 1: and so that is another really significant instance where Obama
Speaker 1: went against Israel in a way that Joe Biden certainly
Speaker 1: wouldn't have. And there's these stories too about Biden like
Speaker 1: undermining Obama's policy Visa VI Israel and sucking up to
Speaker 1: Netna and telling him like, I'm the only friend you've
Speaker 1: really got here you can rely on me. Basically I'm paraphrasing,
Speaker 1: but that was effectively what he was saying to him.
Speaker 1: And you know, so listen, in a lot of areas
Speaker 1: up till now, I would have said Biden's certainly his
Speaker 1: domestic policy and really probably his foreign policy was better
Speaker 1: than obamais I and getting a sound of Afghanistan rolling
Speaker 1: back the drone ward, those were all positive steps in
Speaker 1: the right direction. Just to completely squander it with these
Speaker 1: absolute horrors that we are backing one hundred percent and
Speaker 1: creating tremendous risk for our service members for global stability,
Speaker 1: just absolute insanity. And just last thing here as a reminder,
Speaker 1: because I never want to lose sight of what continues
Speaker 1: to unfold on the ground in Gaza. An American doctor
Speaker 1: who went and worked in al Axa Hospital in Gaza
Speaker 1: came back and was interviewed by PBS News Hour about
Speaker 1: what that experience was like. Just take a listen to
Speaker 1: what she has to say.
Speaker 5: There is no death with dignity when you're lying on
Speaker 5: the ground of an emergency room in Gaza. In my
Speaker 5: first three hours of working at Alexa Hospital, I treated
Speaker 5: a one year old boy with a bloody diaper and
Speaker 5: his right arm and right leg had been blown off.
Speaker 4: There was no leg below the diaper. He was bleeding
Speaker 4: into his chest. I treated him on the ground because
Speaker 4: there were no stretchers and no beds available, and when
Speaker 4: the orthopedic surgeon came to wrap his stumps up to
Speaker 4: stop the bleeding. I would have imagined in the US
Speaker 4: this would have been a straightforward case that went immediately
Speaker 4: to the operating room because of the severity as a
Speaker 4: stat case, and instead, the impossible choices inflicted on the
Speaker 4: doctors of Gaza have made it such that he wasn't
Speaker 4: the emergency of the day. There was a waiting list,
Speaker 4: and the operating room was already full with other more
Speaker 4: pressing cases. And so I asked myself, what's more pressing
Speaker 4: than a one year old without an arm, a leg,
Speaker 4: and who's bleeding into his chest and choking on his blood.
Speaker 4: And that will tell you a little bit about the
Speaker 4: scale of devastation that the people of Gaza are suffering.
Speaker 1: Ess absolutely unimaginable. I mean, this woman is a hero
Speaker 1: for going in there and doing everything that she can,
Speaker 1: but I literally cannot imagine. She says, what's more pressing
Speaker 1: than a one year old without an arm and a leg,
Speaker 1: who's bleeding into his chest and choking on his blood,
Speaker 1: And he's not even the top priority at that moment.
Speaker 1: And remember this is happening to ten kids are losing
Speaker 1: their legs every single day. We're talking cesareans with no anesthetic,
Speaker 1: amputations with no anesthetic, hospitals consistently under bombardment. You actually
Speaker 1: had Jordan just complaining to Israel Field hospital that they
Speaker 1: set up was coming under attack. The level of devastation,
Speaker 1: the level of generational trauma. Imagine what these kids are
Speaker 1: going to deal with for their whole lives. The ones
Speaker 1: who are lucky enough to survive all of this, the
Speaker 1: horror is indescribable.
Speaker 4: WoT you put take,