Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
Speaker 3: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 3: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 3: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 3: news media, and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 3: dot com. All right, let's turn it down to the
Speaker 3: full Tucker Carlson Ted Cruz interview. I gotta tell this,
Speaker 3: it's probably maybe one of the top five moments of
Speaker 3: my life was watching Ted Cruz get owned completely into
Speaker 3: the sun. This clip has been more viral than any
Speaker 3: news clip that I have seen in a long time.
Speaker 1: I'm well left right, so it's everywhere.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I have to say, listen, I understand why
Speaker 2: the right loves this guy. It's fun when he's on
Speaker 2: your side. Well, this was a treat to watch. I
Speaker 2: have to say the whole thing.
Speaker 1: I'm glad.
Speaker 3: I'm glad to have you with us, at least for
Speaker 3: a moment. There's a reason he's been in generational talent.
Speaker 1: For thirty years. Let's start, though.
Speaker 3: There are several moments of this which I think are
Speaker 3: really important. First and foremost is actually getting to the
Speaker 3: core of Ted Cruz's ideology, of his explanations, and of
Speaker 3: the vicious tactics that a lot of people who are
Speaker 3: Israel supporters use to shut down the debate around striking Iran.
Speaker 3: First and foremost is anti Semitism. Now, you're going to
Speaker 3: watch here in this clip where Ted Cruz says that
Speaker 3: one of his pledges sworn pledges when entering the United
Speaker 3: States Senate it was to be the main defender of
Speaker 3: the state of Israel, and then also accused Tucker Carlson
Speaker 3: at the same time of saying he is obsessed with Israel.
Speaker 3: Every accusation is a confession.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 4: It's just interesting because what you're now describing in a
Speaker 4: very defensive way, I will say, is foreign influence over
Speaker 4: our politics. Now, and you began, and it's so transparently
Speaker 4: obvious to everybody. I don't know why you would be
Speaker 4: embarrassed of it. You've said that you are sincerely for Israel.
Speaker 4: I believe you. I don't think you have some weird
Speaker 4: to agenda.
Speaker 5: You seem to be, by the way, Tucker, it's a
Speaker 5: very weird thing, the obsession with Israel. Well, we're talking
Speaker 5: about for it. You're not talking about Chinese, you're not
Speaker 5: talking about Japanese, you're not talking about the Brits, you're
Speaker 5: not talking about the French. The question what about the Jews?
Speaker 5: What about the Jews? Like anti semi?
Speaker 1: Now, Senator, you're just.
Speaker 5: In the question you're asking why are the Jews controlling
Speaker 5: our foreign policy?
Speaker 4: And that's what you just asked, hardly saying that, and
Speaker 4: I have that that's exactly what you just said.
Speaker 1: Well, actually, I.
Speaker 4: Can speak for myself and tell you what I am
Speaker 4: saying on behalf, not simply of myself, but on my
Speaker 4: many Jewish friends who would have the same questions, which
Speaker 4: is to what extent? And it's interesting you're trying to
Speaker 4: derail my questions by following me an anti semi, which
Speaker 4: you are. I did not, of course you are. And
Speaker 4: and rather than be honorable enough to say it right
Speaker 4: to my face. I are city squeezy feeline way implying
Speaker 4: it or just asking questions about the Jews. I'm asking
Speaker 4: questions about the Jews I have. There's nothing to do
Speaker 4: with Jews or Judy is and it has to with
Speaker 4: foreign government.
Speaker 5: Is in Israel controlling our foreign policy. That's not about
Speaker 5: the you said I'm asked by. You're the one that
Speaker 5: just called me, I think a sleazy feline.
Speaker 4: So it's sleazy to imply that I'm an anti Semite,
Speaker 4: which you just did.
Speaker 5: No, I just you're asking give me another reason if
Speaker 5: you're not an anti Semi, give me another reason why
Speaker 5: the obsession is Israel.
Speaker 4: I am, in no sense obsessed with Israel. We are
Speaker 4: on the brink of war with Iran, and so these
Speaker 4: are valid questions.
Speaker 5: But you're not.
Speaker 4: If I can finish, you asked me why I'm obsessed
Speaker 4: with Israel three minutes after telling me that when you
Speaker 4: first ran for Congress, you elucidated one of your main goals,
Speaker 4: which yes, to defend Israel. Yes, And I'm the one
Speaker 4: who's obsessed with Israel. I don't see a lawmaker's job
Speaker 4: as defending the interest of a foreign government, period, Any government,
Speaker 4: including the ones that my ancestors come from.
Speaker 5: So that's my position.
Speaker 4: That does not make me an anti Semite, and shame
Speaker 4: on you for suggesting otherwise.
Speaker 3: And I mean that, yeah, that is exactly That is
Speaker 3: how that should be handled. Is that this guy says,
Speaker 3: one of my sworn pledges is to enter the United
Speaker 3: States Senate and be a sworn defender of the State
Speaker 3: of Israel.
Speaker 6: Be the strongest defender of the State of Israel.
Speaker 3: And then says, you are obsessed with Israel. You know
Speaker 3: why we're not talking about the UK. Look, if a
Speaker 3: UK wants to drag us into some shitty war, I'll
Speaker 3: talk about the UK all day long. If Japan wants
Speaker 3: to drag us and do some shitty war, I'll talk
Speaker 3: about that well.
Speaker 2: And he says that they're talking about a Rod and
Speaker 2: the Mullus because we're not giving them.
Speaker 6: We're not like giving them the bombs. We're talking about
Speaker 6: the country that.
Speaker 2: We said billions of dollars to every year that has
Speaker 2: helped persuade our president.
Speaker 6: And again he's a willing participant.
Speaker 2: To get into an insane war, like of course we're
Speaker 2: going to talk about that.
Speaker 1: That is yeah, and I love that he.
Speaker 6: Calls him out on how he's just trying to.
Speaker 2: Like suggest it, like fucking man up and say it
Speaker 2: to my face then, And I can't. I cannot tell
Speaker 2: you how many times I remember Dean Phillips doing this,
Speaker 2: in particular when I interviewed him where Yeah, well, why
Speaker 2: are you so interested in the Jews? Yes, first of all,
Speaker 2: no one said anything about the Jews. We're talking about
Speaker 2: a foreign government. And actually, thank you very much, it's
Speaker 2: quite anti semitic to conflate every Jew with this foreign
Speaker 2: governm if you want to talk about actual anti semitism.
Speaker 2: So it felt so good to see him call out
Speaker 2: his sleazy feeline suggestion here instead of just listen, if
Speaker 2: you want to call me an anti semi do it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, so is the best Israel is both a
Speaker 3: multi ethnic incredible democracy or it's a Jewish state, and
Speaker 3: it's like, well, which is actually twenty five percent of
Speaker 3: your own population? Oh yeah, by the way, I actually
Speaker 3: know something about population. Twenty five percent of that population
Speaker 3: is not Jewish, all right, And they brag about that
Speaker 3: all day long.
Speaker 5: Right, They're like, oh look.
Speaker 3: All yeah, but that's what they hold up, right, it's
Speaker 3: a multi democracy. They got better rides here than they
Speaker 3: do in any other country in the world. And it's like, well, oh,
Speaker 3: you're just talking about the Jews, right, It's like you
Speaker 3: can't have it both ways. And I was so glad
Speaker 3: to see this defenestration on the anti semitism question because
Speaker 3: they are the ones who use the anti Semitic tropes.
Speaker 3: You can't talk about the State of Israel without being
Speaker 3: than an anti semi yourself. And look, this is part
Speaker 3: of a year's long campaign and especially post October seventh,
Speaker 3: to conflate Zionism and Judaism itself with the state, which,
Speaker 3: by the way, is anti Semitic. Remember, Joe Biden, not
Speaker 3: a Jew in the world would be safe if the
Speaker 3: State of Israel did not exist. They're more Jews living
Speaker 3: in America. Okay, there's a huge Jews Jewish population in America.
Speaker 2: There's no place that is more unsafe for Jews than Israel.
Speaker 1: Yeah, at this point, right.
Speaker 3: In terms of being bombed in the Middle stry, Yeah,
Speaker 3: would you rather live in New York City?
Speaker 1: Would you rather live in Tel Aviv? Right now?
Speaker 3: All right, let's get to apac then, because this was
Speaker 3: also an incredible moment because Tucker asks Ted Cruz whether
Speaker 3: APAK is the foreign lobby and why it's not required
Speaker 3: to be registered as such. And here you see Ted
Speaker 3: Cruz twist himself into knots about APAC.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 4: Well, I don't think I'm obsessed with this, okay, but
Speaker 4: I think a lot of people are in like the question.
Speaker 5: Israel spies on us? Well, so does every other country.
Speaker 5: Why are you mad at israel I?
Speaker 4: Guess no, No, I'm hardly the one who's I've never
Speaker 4: taken money from the Israel lobby?
Speaker 5: Have you taken money from the israel A pack? So
Speaker 5: APAK raises a lot of money for me, But it's
Speaker 5: actually a missnomer because the people who raised money are individuals,
Speaker 5: So it's not the pack itself, but their individual members
Speaker 5: in the American Israeli UH friendship and foreign lobby. No,
Speaker 5: it's an American lobby. It's the A pack stands for
Speaker 5: the America Israeli political action. What is it lobby for? So,
Speaker 5: to be honest, not a whole lot effectively, Listen, I
Speaker 5: came into to Congress thirteen years ago with the stated
Speaker 5: intention of being the leading defender of Israel in the
Speaker 5: United States Senate. I've worked every day to do that
Speaker 5: a pack. A lot of times APAC I wish were
Speaker 5: much more effective. Like they're there are the swamp terrified
Speaker 5: of a pack and APAC.
Speaker 4: I'm not terrified of a pack at all. I'm you're
Speaker 4: the one who seems little uncomfortable. I'm asking now, I'm
Speaker 4: not uncomfortable all. I'm just asking what APAC does. My
Speaker 4: understanding having none, we could tell you that is the
Speaker 4: lobbies on behalf of the Israeli government.
Speaker 3: Oh actually, and by the way, you want some evidence
Speaker 3: of that?
Speaker 1: Who what c six? Please here up on the screen.
Speaker 3: Here we have a story from our friend David Dan
Speaker 3: just you know from yesterday Ryan sayline and Ryan grim
Speaker 3: is on that byline as well. A PAC demands democrats
Speaker 3: quote stand with Israel. Okay, I don't know how much
Speaker 3: evidence that I need to shove in your face to
Speaker 3: show literal direct coord coordination between APAC and the State
Speaker 3: of Israel, including photos post October seven showing a PAC
Speaker 3: members in the same room as Benjamin Nutt and Yahoo
Speaker 3: in Israel, or the number of conferences that they hold
Speaker 3: here in Washington, DC and across the United States on
Speaker 3: every college campus in America, to basically turn US citizens
Speaker 3: to foreign lobbyists. And by the way, fine, okay, but
Speaker 3: then just be registered under the law, which is under
Speaker 3: the Barker, Which is exactly the point that Tucker I
Speaker 3: know lots of.
Speaker 2: People who lobby for foreign curners. He's like, I'm related
Speaker 2: to some of them, think his brother, they have to register?
Speaker 2: Why does an APAC? And then he asked Ted cru
Speaker 2: Is a really simple question, like because Ted Cruiz tries
Speaker 2: to oh, well, they're not just representing what the Natanyahu
Speaker 2: government wants. He's like, okay, I'm an example, one example.
Speaker 2: Of course he can't do it. Yes, Oh well I
Speaker 2: have to go back and look. Yeah, because there isn't one.
Speaker 6: I have to go because there isn't one.
Speaker 2: Because whatever it is that the current Israeli government, which
Speaker 2: has been led by Benjamin Attaniaho over quite a while now,
Speaker 2: you know, off and on for decades at this point,
Speaker 2: whatever they want, that's what APAC signs up for. How
Speaker 2: is that not foreign lobbying?
Speaker 1: So exactly there, Well, now let's get to my personal favorite. Now. Look,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna put my cards on the table. I'm an atheist.
Speaker 3: So anytimes people start citing scripture to justify their behavior
Speaker 3: like an in a national context. I'm getting pretty skeptical.
Speaker 3: But this shit, I mean, look, I grew up around
Speaker 3: these people, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. But
Speaker 3: Tucker asked tud Cruz why he supports Israel. He says
Speaker 3: two reasons. First, and he starts to cite the Bible,
Speaker 3: and not just citing the Bible. There's this school I'm
Speaker 3: trying to get up to speed on this, So Christians,
Speaker 3: I apologize, which I believe is called dispensationalism, which is
Speaker 3: basically like taking the Bible the words applying them is
Speaker 3: to be literally true. And in particular, here Israel as
Speaker 3: it's mentioned in the Bible is conflating that with the
Speaker 3: actual nation state of Israel, created in nineteen forty eight.
Speaker 3: So watch here Ted Cruz cite the Bible. Ben can't
Speaker 3: even quote which verse of the Bible that he is saying.
Speaker 3: And for the primary reason that he supports the state
Speaker 3: of Israel, let's take a listener.
Speaker 5: Growing up in Sunday School, I was taught from the
Speaker 5: Bible those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those
Speaker 5: who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective.
Speaker 5: I want to be on the blessing.
Speaker 4: Side of things, of those who bless the government of Israel.
Speaker 5: Those who bless Israel is what it is. Doesn't say
Speaker 5: the government of It says the nation of Israel. So
Speaker 5: that's in the Bible. As a Christian, I believe that.
Speaker 5: Where is that? I can find it to you. I
Speaker 5: don't have the scripture off the tip of mine. You
Speaker 5: pull out the phone and use it. It's in Genesis.
Speaker 4: So you're quoting a Bible phrase. You don't have context
Speaker 4: for it, you don't know where the Bible it is.
Speaker 4: But that's like CRI theology. I'm confused.
Speaker 5: What does that even mean? Tucker. I'm a Christian. I
Speaker 5: want to know what you're talking about. Does where does
Speaker 5: my support for Israel come from? Number one, because Biblically,
Speaker 5: we're commanded to support Israel.
Speaker 4: But number two, no, no, no, hold on. You're a
Speaker 4: senator and now you're throwing out theology. And I am
Speaker 4: a Christian. I am allowed to weigh in on this.
Speaker 4: We are commanded as Christians support the government of Israel.
Speaker 4: We are commanded to support Israel. And what does that
Speaker 4: mean is we're told those who blessed Israel be blessed.
Speaker 5: But what hold on? Define Israel? This is important? Are
Speaker 5: you kidding this majority Christian country define Israel? Could do
Speaker 5: you not know what Israel is? That would be the
Speaker 5: country you've asked like forty nine questions about.
Speaker 4: So that's what Genesis refer That's what God is talking
Speaker 4: in the nation of Israel. Yes, and he's so does
Speaker 4: that the current borders the current leadership. He's talking with
Speaker 4: the political instity called Israel.
Speaker 5: He's talking about the nation of Israel. Yet nations exists,
Speaker 5: and he's discussing a nation. A nation was the people
Speaker 5: of Israel is the nation is referring to in Genesis.
Speaker 5: Is that the same as the country run by Benjamin
Speaker 5: Yahu right now? Yes, yes it is. And by the way,
Speaker 5: it's not run by Benjamin Etnia who is a dictator.
Speaker 5: It's it's a.
Speaker 1: Democratic but he's the prime minister.
Speaker 5: Right But just just like you know, America is the
Speaker 5: country run by Donald Trump? Not actually the American people
Speaker 5: elected Donald Trump the same principle.
Speaker 4: Sicily, I'm talking about the political entity of modern Israel. Yes,
Speaker 4: and that is you believe that's what God was talking
Speaker 4: about is Genesis?
Speaker 5: I do. But but that country's existed since when for
Speaker 5: thousands of years now, there was a time when it
Speaker 5: didn't exist, and then it was recreated just over seven.
Speaker 4: But I'm saying, I think most people understand that line
Speaker 4: in Genesis to refer to the Jewish people God's chosen people.
Speaker 5: That's not what it says.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is batch crazy.
Speaker 3: I mean, I'm just gonna, you know, remind people of
Speaker 3: Glenn Greenwall's joke here on our show we think Iran
Speaker 3: is a theocracy.
Speaker 1: We what, all right, you know, give me some mulla
Speaker 1: if that this is the ship that's running my country.
Speaker 6: Well, and here's the thing, is like it's funny, but it's.
Speaker 1: No, it's really curious.
Speaker 6: It's deadly serious.
Speaker 2: Go back to that text that Mika could be sent
Speaker 2: to Trump. That Trump then publicized the number of people
Speaker 2: in this in this government, including our ambassador to Israel
Speaker 2: and our Secretary of Events, who have this like end
Speaker 2: Times theology around this. Apparently who knows how many senators
Speaker 2: and members of Congress share this view as preposterous and
Speaker 2: absurd and disturbing, as it is offered by Ted Cruz
Speaker 2: that you are commanded as a Christian to do what
Speaker 2: Bibi Netanya, who wants you.
Speaker 6: To do that's his position.
Speaker 2: Okay, then you couple that with the absolute religious zealot
Speaker 2: psychos that command so much power in Netanyahu's government, and
Speaker 2: you put that together with very clear indications that Trump
Speaker 2: himself has some sort of Messiah complex after you know,
Speaker 2: narrowly escaping death in Butler, Pennsylvania. As if this isn't
Speaker 2: terrifying enough, the fact that you think that you have
Speaker 2: people involved, powerful, the most powerful people involved, who think
Speaker 2: they are commanded by the BYI or divinely destined to
Speaker 2: effectuate some outcome here, that shit terrifies me me too.
Speaker 2: And so I know, you know, the Christians went in
Speaker 2: on what specifically that passage in the Bible is. I
Speaker 2: hear have from Grok that it most commonly Israel refers
Speaker 2: the collective descendants of Jacob's twelve sons, not the fricking
Speaker 2: nation state that was created in nineteen forty eight arbitrarily,
Speaker 2: by the way, by.
Speaker 6: The United States of America. I'll let them do that.
Speaker 2: I just object to any biblical or religious text being
Speaker 2: used to justify wars, or foreign policy or national policy whatsoever.
Speaker 2: That is where I get off. Regardless of how you
Speaker 2: want to interpret any particular Biblical line.
Speaker 3: Apparently in this dispensationalism and end times eschatology like these
Speaker 3: are Look again, I am not qualified to talk about this,
Speaker 3: and it's just not even really worth it. I would
Speaker 3: just look at it and be like this is preposterous,
Speaker 3: Like you have a United States senator here, I mean,
Speaker 3: you know this, look, I guess to go all religious
Speaker 3: and two thousand and six atheists. So what doing nineteen
Speaker 3: forty seven before Israel existed? Like who were they commanded to,
Speaker 3: you know.
Speaker 1: To support?
Speaker 3: Like what the fuck? I can't even get my mind
Speaker 3: around this stuff. But you know, this maybe is a
Speaker 3: I don't know. I know they don't listen, but I
Speaker 3: want people to know. In Israel they're laughing at you.
Speaker 3: The secular Jews who make up a huge portion of
Speaker 3: Israeli society. They think you're kooks and they think you're crazy.
Speaker 3: The secular edge, highly educated Jews who live in New York,
Speaker 3: in Los Angeles and Philadelphia or whatever.
Speaker 1: They think.
Speaker 3: They look at you like, you know, they're liberal Democrats.
Speaker 3: They think this is gross and weird. And yet you know,
Speaker 3: the only thing they're really using you for is your
Speaker 3: biblical interpretation. To support a foreign state. When I went
Speaker 3: to Israel, I think ninety percent of the people on
Speaker 3: my plane were people like this, you know, from like
Speaker 3: evangelical churches and when if you have ever been to Jerusalem,
Speaker 3: I mean you know, it's full on, like ear piece
Speaker 3: in pastor in the in the front and they go
Speaker 3: to the cliff or wherever where the apocalypse.
Speaker 1: Is going to. I've seen this stuff with my own eyes,
Speaker 1: and they believe it. They think it's serious.
Speaker 3: And when they're there, by the way, the Israeli government
Speaker 3: uses them as pawns for American support. Now, look, they're
Speaker 3: not going to listen because you know they're listening to
Speaker 3: their churches and all this other. But the one thing
Speaker 3: I would at least ask is if you're religious and
Speaker 3: you have pride in your own beliefs, shouldn't you wonder
Speaker 3: if you're being taken advantage of. I promise you I've
Speaker 3: seen I met these people. They think you're a joke.
Speaker 3: They're laughing at you and using you as a tool
Speaker 3: to support their own country and their foreign policy. That's
Speaker 3: really degrading in my opinion.
Speaker 2: I mean, no, just what kind of a religion would
Speaker 2: compand you to support to endlessly support with no criticism
Speaker 2: a country that is actively.
Speaker 6: Doing a genocide, like.
Speaker 2: Because that is a religion, you should not want to
Speaker 2: have anything to do with it. If that's the real command,
Speaker 2: you must endlessly but it is. I mean, at this point,
Speaker 2: there's really no dispute. You ask any legitimate scholar of
Speaker 2: genocide around the world, go look at what's.
Speaker 6: Going on in Gaza. See.
Speaker 2: I mean, we haven't even been able to cover the
Speaker 2: fact that these aid massacres are still going on day
Speaker 2: after day where they lure in innocent Palestinians and then desperate, hungry,
Speaker 2: starving Palestinians and then murder them as they try to
Speaker 2: seek some basic nourishment. Your God tells you to support
Speaker 2: that that uh uh, you got to convert to some
Speaker 2: other religion if that's what's commanded, because that is monstrously,
Speaker 2: outrageously gore tesque, And that is where religious zelotry, I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: is such a cancer. It is such a cancer because
Speaker 2: then you think that you have some sort of divine
Speaker 2: right and commandment to commit horrific atrocities and turn your
Speaker 2: brain off because God commanded you to. I mean, there's
Speaker 2: reason why if you look throughround history so many of
Speaker 2: the worst crimes and atrocities are committed in the name
Speaker 2: of some sort of outrageous religious fanaticism, and that is
Speaker 2: one of the elements here that is deadly serious. And
Speaker 2: you know, I really appreciate actually this exchange with Tucker,
Speaker 2: because I'm not a Russian. He is, so for him
Speaker 2: to be in there, and for Candice Owens to be
Speaker 2: out there also, I saw her doing her explanation saying, no,
Speaker 2: this is not what the biblical text means, and it
Speaker 2: is a grotesque absurdity for you to interpret it that
Speaker 2: your commandment as a Christian is to endlessly support whatever
Speaker 2: the policy of bb net Yahoo is like total insanity.
Speaker 1: Yeah whatever.
Speaker 3: I mean again, look, they're not going to listen. They
Speaker 3: probably don't even watch the show. They're watching Glenn Beck
Speaker 3: or Rush Limbaugh or whatever. So I'm good luck to you.
Speaker 3: You want to continue to be a tool of a
Speaker 3: foreign government. I mean there again, they're laughing their asses
Speaker 3: off at you. I can promise I've seen it inside
Speaker 3: of that country. But whatever, it's your choice. It's a
Speaker 3: free country. Last thing here a clip that will show
Speaker 3: everybody is about Donald Trump and the meaning of America
Speaker 3: first is back and forth between Tucker and Ted Cruz.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: You engage in reckless rhetoric with no faction. And to
Speaker 5: be clear, I'm not calling you. You are put out
Speaker 5: a newsletter attacking Donald Trump and calling him complicit John. Yes,
Speaker 5: you have and and by the way, pained for Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: Yes, this is like after anti Semitism, this is the
Speaker 4: last refuge.
Speaker 5: You're an antiseminin and you hate Trump. Okay, I have Trump.
Speaker 5: I will read you put out a whole newsletter saying
Speaker 5: Trump is a rand in America first, and here's what
Speaker 5: Trump said in response. Well, considering that I'm the one
Speaker 5: that developed America first, and considering that the term wasn't
Speaker 5: used until I came along, I think I'm the one
Speaker 5: who decides that for those people who say they want peace,
Speaker 5: you can't have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 5: So for all of those wonderful people who don't want
Speaker 5: to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon, that's
Speaker 5: not peace. That was directed at you.
Speaker 7: Man.
Speaker 5: This is you got me busted. No, I'm just saying, okay,
Speaker 5: I'm my views. Look, I like Trump. I can't paign
Speaker 5: for Trump. I know Trump.
Speaker 4: I talked to him last night, not against Trump, and
Speaker 4: you know that I but policy.
Speaker 3: So yeah, look that's a very revealing exchange. And look,
Speaker 3: Ted Cruise is correct. Trump does operationally get to Descisin.
Speaker 2: This is the one point he got against Stucker to
Speaker 2: be on.
Speaker 3: But because it's a political point and it's one which
Speaker 3: is Trumpian. But you know, again, I'm not gonna let
Speaker 3: sit here and just let the record, you know, say
Speaker 3: that Donald Trump gets to define America first at an
Speaker 3: actual level when it's a movement which has existed since
Speaker 3: the nineteen twenties. Any you know, this is preposterous. Operationally
Speaker 3: it may be true, and that's actually a separate question,
Speaker 3: but that's the part that really bugs me is the
Speaker 3: way that it is being weaponized in that form. And also,
Speaker 3: you know, look, there are at least some maga folks
Speaker 3: out there who probably did vote for Donald Trump because
Speaker 3: he's anti war or appear at anti war, believed he
Speaker 3: was anti war.
Speaker 1: Maybe not all of them, not a sizeable.
Speaker 3: Percentage, ten, fifteen, twenty percent. Sure I'm claiming it is
Speaker 3: a majority, But what's wrong with them for protesting against
Speaker 3: us and say, hey, this is not what I believed
Speaker 3: a lot of Biden supporters got upset at Biden over
Speaker 3: Israel that they're like, hey, that's not what I thought
Speaker 3: was going to happen.
Speaker 1: A lot of George W.
Speaker 3: Bush supporters got mad at him over the war in Iraq.
Speaker 3: It's perfectly fine, normal and democratic small d you know,
Speaker 3: to protest even when if somebody is doing something, even
Speaker 3: if you did vote for them, that you don't support her,
Speaker 3: you don't like because it doesn't conflict with the understanding
Speaker 3: of what you had when.
Speaker 2: You went, Well, what you're talking about is a normal
Speaker 2: functioning political system, which we do not have. And I
Speaker 2: mean that's the sad truth is, like, you know, whether
Speaker 2: or not Tucker called Trump to apologize, it doesn't really
Speaker 2: matter if it's true unless he actually comes out and
Speaker 2: is like, no, I didn't do that, That's not what happened,
Speaker 2: because then that just becomes facts in reality because Trump
Speaker 2: says that it is. You know, if you listen to
Speaker 2: the entire Tucker versus Ted debate, if you listen to
Speaker 2: the entirety of I listened both to Sure Tucker on
Speaker 2: with Steve Bannon, Steve Bannon on with Tucker. I listened
Speaker 2: to all of those and the whole effort and you
Speaker 2: hear this in Charlie Kirk's Rutter as well, Marjorie Taylor
Speaker 2: Green's Rheter as well. Is to say, this is the
Speaker 2: true representation of what Trump really wants, and to the
Speaker 2: extent that he's not pursuing this path, which is the
Speaker 2: most true to his intentions, beliefs, and ambitions, it's because
Speaker 2: he's being tricked by this person or that person, or
Speaker 2: the deep state or the neocons or whatever. That's where
Speaker 2: the battle is fought. Because Tucker knows. And if they
Speaker 2: didn't know, Trump demonstrated that when you went after Tucker
Speaker 2: and said he was kookie and you know me said
Speaker 2: he needs to go get a television network because basically
Speaker 2: he's a husband. They know that the minute that they
Speaker 2: actually go against Trump, if you do anything other than
Speaker 2: signal in advance that at the end of the day
Speaker 2: you're going to one hundred percent bend the knee, then
Speaker 2: you're out, Then you become you become Liz Cheney, you
Speaker 2: become Adam Kinzinger, you become justin homaj you become you know,
Speaker 2: any number of the senators or members of Congress who
Speaker 2: are no longer senators or members of Congress who've been
Speaker 2: consigned to the dustbin of history. You are excised from
Speaker 2: the movement, and that's it. Your influence is over your
Speaker 2: whatever perks you get being in the Trump world, in
Speaker 2: the Trump circle and having access to President and all
Speaker 2: that stuff.
Speaker 6: It's done.
Speaker 2: So that's why they fight on that turf of well,
Speaker 2: I am the true representation of what Trump, in his
Speaker 2: all knowing brilliance, what he really wants, which is why
Speaker 2: Steve Bannons is now running around telling Financial Times an
Speaker 2: other outland. Let's do like listen, at the end of
Speaker 2: the day, if he has more intelligence than we do,
Speaker 2: then we're going to go along. It's why when Bannon
Speaker 2: was out criticizing Elon at the beginning and Trump told
Speaker 2: him shut up, that he did until Elon was persona
Speaker 2: on Grada and then he went back to it. Well,
Speaker 2: that's the way that this works. That's why Charlie Kirk
Speaker 2: changed his tune. And Charlie Kirk was never critical of Trump,
Speaker 2: but he got a call from the White House saying, hey,
Speaker 2: tone it down, and he said, yes, sir, no problem.
Speaker 6: All.
Speaker 3: Look, they're all the same and it's operational. It's the
Speaker 3: only way that you maintain your access and your ability,
Speaker 3: and that's the problem of trying to straddle these two worlds.
Speaker 3: You can be honest and you could say what you think,
Speaker 3: like me by I'm telling my phoney ringing off the.
Speaker 1: Hook right now on my phone.
Speaker 3: My phone calls are going one way and not there's
Speaker 3: not a lot of incoming, and there's a lot of
Speaker 3: us screw you that.
Speaker 1: Is happening right now.
Speaker 3: But that's the world that it is what it is,
Speaker 3: and that's it's very unfortunate. But I also think it's
Speaker 3: important to show people and to even tell people, you know,
Speaker 3: from my perspective of that is the only way that
Speaker 3: you can maintain influence within the system.
Speaker 1: It's really unfortunate.
Speaker 3: I guess there is a second way though, actually, and
Speaker 3: this is a good transition because we're now going to
Speaker 3: talk about theovon is. Sometimes you become like this cultural
Speaker 3: and you become a big enough figure. That's some of
Speaker 3: the things that you say becomes something that the White
Speaker 3: House or others need to respond to. And so that's
Speaker 3: why when I saw this clip here of THEO vaugh
Speaker 3: somebody who I don't know if he voted for Trump,
Speaker 3: I don't know if he's ever said he attended his inauguration,
Speaker 3: and he's had on.
Speaker 6: And Jared Dona, Marl.
Speaker 3: Banka just had JD vans On, had JD vance On
Speaker 3: before previously on the campaign, the first major podcaster to
Speaker 3: have on Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: So you know, he's also somebody.
Speaker 3: Though who is not has been willing to at least
Speaker 3: speak out against Israel and his campaign in Gaza. But
Speaker 3: here you have a very very interesting message direct a camera,
Speaker 3: pretty rare in my opinion from THEO on political events
Speaker 3: speaking out against a war with Iran.
Speaker 7: Let's take a listen, we're trying to get us into
Speaker 7: a war with Iran or not America if Israel is
Speaker 7: trying to. I don't trust the Israel leader at all.
Speaker 7: I don't believe anything that guy says. And I I
Speaker 7: don't think that our soldiers should have to go and
Speaker 7: defend stuff that they start. I'm not a soldier, so
Speaker 7: I might I'm obviously speaking out of turn. I'm not
Speaker 7: even brave enough to serve. So there's that element. But
Speaker 7: that is kind of how I feel, I guess, And
Speaker 7: so it's like, yeah, when do I speak?
Speaker 5: When do I say that?
Speaker 7: You know, because it feels like they're trying to push
Speaker 7: Trump to go do that, and it's like who makes
Speaker 7: that choices? He make that choice, and then what do
Speaker 7: we get? You know, what's the win for us? We're
Speaker 7: just involved in some other thing while we have suffering
Speaker 7: here at home. So maybe something like that is like, yeah,
Speaker 7: I have Should I even speak up? Because I'm not
Speaker 7: in service. Servicemen and women may be like, we want to,
Speaker 7: We'll do it, you know, and that's their commitment and
Speaker 7: their job.
Speaker 5: Uh, But yeah, I just I don't know.
Speaker 7: That guy really scares me and and I don't know
Speaker 7: why we support them. I don't understand that. I wish
Speaker 7: they would really give us a better explanation, you know,
Speaker 7: especially after the massacres in Gaza. I don't understand. I
Speaker 7: do not understand that. And some people say, well, you
Speaker 7: don't know enough about it. That may and it may not.
Speaker 7: But it's like, dude, can I still speak about it?
Speaker 7: Can I speak about how I feel about it?
Speaker 1: Serious as it gets on the theio Monto?
Speaker 3: But look, I mean I appreciate him doing it, and
Speaker 3: because look, you know, there was so many and I
Speaker 3: talked about this yesterday, Yeah, Chrystal. And this is even
Speaker 3: in the context of our own show, The White House
Speaker 3: made a huge deal about alternative media and podcast right, yeah, right,
Speaker 3: well guess what you know, we literally had either our
Speaker 3: second or our first biggest day ever this week ever
Speaker 3: in terms of our analytics. Why because we're providing content
Speaker 3: which is both newsy and it is obviously some A
Speaker 3: lot of it's opinionated and against the war, and anti
Speaker 3: war content literally could not be bigger right now. So
Speaker 3: if they care so much about YouTube and about anti
Speaker 3: war content, I'm sure Kyle's channel has blown the hell up.
Speaker 3: You can go and you can look at the YouTube
Speaker 3: views on any you know, major content creator who's political,
Speaker 3: who's speaking out against the war.
Speaker 1: I'd be willing to bet that they're all seeing similar rise.
Speaker 3: And so they cared so much about all the views
Speaker 3: of the bros and the podcast and all.
Speaker 1: This other stuff.
Speaker 3: It's like, we'll pay attention, pay attention right now, Dave Smith, Right,
Speaker 3: you know, you guys made a big deal about him.
Speaker 3: It's like, well, what happened whenever he speaks out against you?
Speaker 3: You know, really it's only cable news and the political establishment,
Speaker 3: which is really just willing to go along with this.
Speaker 3: People were not connected to the system think this is very,
Speaker 3: very messed up what's.
Speaker 1: Happening right now.
Speaker 6: But we all know what Trump is watching.
Speaker 3: Sure, we all know you're at your taking a case
Speaker 3: for influence on Trump. I'm saying though, that if in
Speaker 3: some way, like again, they claim to have the pulse
Speaker 3: of the American people, then at that time, well.
Speaker 1: Here's the pulse.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying we're representative of the whole country, representative
Speaker 3: of some of the country a decent amount of our audience.
Speaker 1: But for Trump, I know that so well.
Speaker 3: A lot of them don't support this war, so she'll
Speaker 3: probably take that into account.
Speaker 1: Here's what I.
Speaker 2: Would say is, listen, I think the Trump I think
Speaker 2: Trump is one hundred percent correct that his base, his movement,
Speaker 2: they're going to be along for the ride. And also listen,
Speaker 2: I'm sorry when you pull the Republican base. They are
Speaker 2: just more pro war than the Democratic base. That's just reality.
Speaker 2: They always have been, they still are, even as there's
Speaker 2: been some erosion in that direction. And you know, there
Speaker 2: was obviously like it was important for Trump politically in
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen when he finally speaks the truth about the
Speaker 2: Iraq war. And I think this time around it wasn't
Speaker 2: that people perceived him as anti war that solidified his
Speaker 2: support with the base. The base was going to be
Speaker 2: there no matter what. It's Independence, and that's who you know,
Speaker 2: I think will be unhappy. I think Independence will. They
Speaker 2: may at the beginning actually support the war. I don't know,
Speaker 2: because there's just that's if. You would be hard pressed
Speaker 2: to find a war that the US got into that
Speaker 2: didn't enjoy some level of public support. Unfortunately over the
Speaker 2: course of my lifetime. But I think, you know, THEO
Speaker 2: Vaughn and those sorts of voices matter for Independence.
Speaker 6: I will also say, though, just in terms.
Speaker 2: Of his framing there, it's so convenient for Trump that
Speaker 2: it's not him, it's he's getting pulled in. You know,
Speaker 2: it's the Israelis and who's really making the decisions here,
Speaker 2: And I don't trust that guy being that Yahoo Like
Speaker 2: I just it's very convenient.
Speaker 6: It's not even critique of Trump.
Speaker 2: It's like, oh, these nefarious forces are pulling us into war,
Speaker 2: which is also like I said, it's just it's a
Speaker 2: convenient and inaccurate narrative. Maybe I'm being too expecting too
Speaker 2: much from THEO Vonn say, I think you are, Like
Speaker 2: I said, it is a way to justify what is
Speaker 2: already a horror show from Trump. Already a horror show
Speaker 2: from Trump. It's a way to justify the things that
Speaker 2: already you know should be unacceptable. And people with character
Speaker 2: like Dave Smith have already said that's it, like already,
Speaker 2: even without whether we get directly offensively or have boots
Speaker 2: on the ground or you know, actively put up the
Speaker 2: mission accomplished banner.
Speaker 6: I'm done. I'm out.
Speaker 2: He should be impeach already for what he's doing. Like
Speaker 2: that is the actual, like principled, accurate read of where
Speaker 2: you are, if what you actually cared about was keeping
Speaker 2: the station.
Speaker 3: Out of I would say, with THEO and with the look,
Speaker 3: one of the things I actually detected a lot, and
Speaker 3: I'm sure you saw. This is when he's like, I'm
Speaker 3: not sure if I'm allowed to speak about it. This
Speaker 3: is the concern trolling around expertise and really about people
Speaker 3: being willing to speak out on war. And he's like,
Speaker 3: I don't know if I know enough about it, because
Speaker 3: what happened THEO had Candice Owans, and I forget who
Speaker 3: else on the show who spoke out against Israel, and
Speaker 3: what do you think ninety eight percent of his phone
Speaker 3: was from some of the people who are pro Israel
Speaker 3: you don't know nearly enough to be able to comment
Speaker 3: on this, Like how dare you say the word genocide
Speaker 3: to the Vice President of the United States, Because that's
Speaker 3: what they did, is they'll be like, oh, you're not
Speaker 3: qualified enough or knowledgeable enough to be an involved actors.
Speaker 3: I actually detected like a lot of discomfort from him,
Speaker 3: like having to speak about this issue. And ultimately, I mean,
Speaker 3: I think what's penetrated as conscience is about the Israeli
Speaker 3: military action in Gaza, which kind of informs a lot
Speaker 3: of his thoughts here.
Speaker 1: So anyway, I cut him and many other as much
Speaker 1: much bigger break.
Speaker 3: I mean, one of the reasons why you could shouldn't
Speaker 3: hold Dave in theater the same standard is like Dave
Speaker 3: is you know, incredibly knowledgeable.
Speaker 6: Well, Dave has an ideology.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I was gonna say, Dave is an ideological liberty
Speaker 3: amount of anti war actors thought deeply about his own politics,
Speaker 3: about where things are going to go. I mean, this
Speaker 3: is just like I don't know, I think, take what
Speaker 3: you can get, because for me, it's a barometer of
Speaker 3: where things are and what is important.
Speaker 1: Should we move on to the polling because.
Speaker 3: This is the biggest black pill that we can possibly take.
Speaker 3: And so yes, as I might say, it is true,
Speaker 3: YouTube and many other places big online audiences, anti war
Speaker 3: content is doing very well. But unfortunately that is not
Speaker 3: what the vast majority and particularly the voting boomer base
Speaker 3: of this country is watching. They're watching cable news, and
Speaker 3: over on cable news, it is just a mainline of
Speaker 3: pro war propaganda. And even worse, you are just watching
Speaker 3: the framing by the Trump administration be accepted here by
Speaker 3: a lot of the American people. Here's student ends, Harry Enton.
Speaker 3: We got to tell everybody the truth. The truth is
Speaker 3: is that if Trump does decide to strike Iran, it
Speaker 3: will probably be pretty popular.
Speaker 1: Let's take a.
Speaker 8: Listen, and overall, I feel like there's more support for
Speaker 8: Donald Trump's positions than is comically acknowledged opposer Ran getting
Speaker 8: a nuclear weapon. I mean, look at this, seventy nine
Speaker 8: percent of adults agree on that they agree with Donald Trump,
Speaker 8: but Ron cannot get a nuclear weapon, eighty three percent
Speaker 8: of Republicans, seventy nine percent of Independence, seventy nine percent
Speaker 8: of Democrats. When you get seventy nine percent of Democrats
Speaker 8: and eighty three percent of Republicans agreeing on anything. You
Speaker 8: know that that position is the very clear majority in
Speaker 8: this country. And so the American public is with Donald Trump.
Speaker 8: They definitely opposed I Ron getting nuclear weapons for Ranch
Speaker 8: trying to make a nuclear weapon. Look at this overall,
Speaker 8: you get the slight plurality. I mean it's within the
Speaker 8: margin I remember, but the slight plurality of Americans actually
Speaker 8: favor US air stripes compared to forty seven percent of
Speaker 8: posing it.
Speaker 2: There you go, yeah, there.
Speaker 3: Republican number is seventy percent. I mean, I guess I
Speaker 3: can take it to the bank that there's thirty percent
Speaker 3: of people out there. But let's all be honest at
Speaker 3: the same look, there is some confounding stuff. And I'll
Speaker 3: also say this about America. Americans are fickle, right, So
Speaker 3: at the very beginning, do you remember what the numbers
Speaker 3: were on Ukraine? It was like ninety ten.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it was literally ninety.
Speaker 6: I will suffer.
Speaker 1: I will say, yeah, how'd that work out for you?
Speaker 1: Huh huh. Yeah.
Speaker 3: I didn't want to say I told you so, but
Speaker 3: I guess I'm going to run do it. But that's
Speaker 3: part of what I guess. You know, reading a book
Speaker 3: can get you.
Speaker 1: This is the problem.
Speaker 3: Though I've read enough to say the vast majority of
Speaker 3: the American people supported the war in Vietnam. Eventually, everybody
Speaker 3: always has retrograde amnesia. Though no, I never spoorned that bullshit. Okay,
Speaker 3: the vast majority of the American people supported the war
Speaker 3: in Vietnam up until nineteen sixty eight, and actually even
Speaker 3: well into the nineteen seventies. Well, the vast majority of
Speaker 3: the American people supported the war in Iraq. The vast
Speaker 3: majority of the American people supported the Libyan intervention in
Speaker 3: twenty eleven.
Speaker 1: The vast majority of.
Speaker 3: The American people wanted to pick a good side in Syria.
Speaker 3: They supported the strikes, you know, on the Asid regime.
Speaker 3: If you were to pull people and be like, hey,
Speaker 3: do you think it's worth taking out North Korea's nuclear
Speaker 3: weapon in twenty seventeen, most people are going to say yes. Now,
Speaker 3: what I always say is that if you ask them
Speaker 3: to consider the consequences, that's when things usually change a
Speaker 3: little bit.
Speaker 1: But even then, let's all be honest.
Speaker 2: We're bad at projecting the consequence, like people are bad
Speaker 2: at projecting in the future.
Speaker 6: Oh, ten steps down the road, this is going to
Speaker 6: go poor.
Speaker 1: And look, I get it.
Speaker 3: It's difficult because it requires, you know, like a level
Speaker 3: of critical thinking that the vast majority of people don't want.
Speaker 1: And I'm not putting people down.
Speaker 3: Most people are living their lives and they don't want
Speaker 3: to think very much about the news.
Speaker 1: Or war or whatever.
Speaker 3: Now I would ask you to because does of course,
Speaker 3: you know, affect your gas prices and you know, oh,
Speaker 3: the national debt and whether we have the social programs
Speaker 3: and ability as we all learn from the war in Iraq,
Speaker 3: But you know, you.
Speaker 1: Do continue to live your life.
Speaker 3: Let's go to put the Economist poll up here at
Speaker 3: least some good news. I think for me, most Americans
Speaker 3: think that the US military quote should not get involved
Speaker 3: in the conflict.
Speaker 1: Between Israelity Iran.
Speaker 3: So here they say, do you think the US military
Speaker 3: should get involved in the conflict. The reason why I
Speaker 3: think that's really important is that doesn't just say strike,
Speaker 3: it says involved.
Speaker 5: Here.
Speaker 2: Here's what I noticed. It doesn't say anything about nuclear weapons.
Speaker 6: Yes, And this is why, this is why.
Speaker 2: The most important thing that you can impress upon people
Speaker 2: is this is not about nuclear weapons. Because the moment,
Speaker 2: let's say we asked the public, do you support a
Speaker 2: regime change war in Iran, I guarantee you the results
Speaker 2: of that would be overwhelmingly know. But let me tell you,
Speaker 2: if you were listening to any cable news network, if
Speaker 2: you are listening to you Know, and some in the
Speaker 2: media too, the question is, and this is what Trump
Speaker 2: wants it to be, should Iran have a nuke or not?
Speaker 2: That is not the question. That is not the appropriate framing,
Speaker 2: That is not what this is about. Iran was not
Speaker 2: pursuing a nuclear weapon. In fact, if you don't want
Speaker 2: Iran to have a nuclear weapon, you should be outraged
Speaker 2: that this bombing blew up the potential for successful diplomatic
Speaker 2: negotiations to make sure that Iran does not get a
Speaker 2: nuclear weapon, because the logic is much more straightforward now
Speaker 2: for Iran to race to a bomb as we were
Speaker 2: discussing before. So these polls that have come out so
Speaker 2: far are all over the place, and it is the
Speaker 2: most significant indicator I have ever seen of how important
Speaker 2: is to get the narrative and the information right and
Speaker 2: for people to understand what is really going on here.
Speaker 2: Because yes, if you ask the American people, hey, should
Speaker 2: we do some limited strikes to make sure Iran doesn't
Speaker 2: have a bomb. Yeah, a majority is going to say yes,
Speaker 2: I agree, which is why Trump is consistently saying they
Speaker 2: can't have a bomb.
Speaker 6: They can't have a bomb, they can't have a bomb.
Speaker 2: That's that's why that's his line, because he knows that
Speaker 2: is solid political ground. The moment people realize that's not
Speaker 2: what this is about, this is about another like disastrous
Speaker 2: or game change war, then the politics completely change and
Speaker 2: completely shift. And so again that's why the most important
Speaker 2: thing that you can impress upon people is what this
Speaker 2: is really about, and that the idea of the nukes
Speaker 2: is fake, invented, there is no evidence to support it,
Speaker 2: and that is a pretext to obscure the real goal
Speaker 2: of what's.
Speaker 6: Going on here.
Speaker 3: Let's also put this Washington Post stuff on the screen,
Speaker 3: because this gives you a very very clear picture about
Speaker 3: how this all looks as well in terms of the
Speaker 3: propaganda and in terms of the framing. Can we put
Speaker 3: that up please, guys, this new Washington Post element that
Speaker 3: we have. They ask at this time, would you support
Speaker 3: or oppose the US military launching air strikes against Iran
Speaker 3: over its nuclear program. You've got twenty five percent support,
Speaker 3: thirty percent unsure, forty five percent oppose.
Speaker 1: But you can still see that that unsure number is
Speaker 1: pretty big.
Speaker 3: So they say forty seven percent of Republicans they already
Speaker 3: support it, Okay, twenty nine percent unsure, so that's a
Speaker 3: vast majority or the support are unsure only twenty four
Speaker 3: percent oppose. Democrats kind of the opposite, since a more partisan.
Speaker 3: But this gives me a little hope here with the
Speaker 3: independent figure twenty percent support, thirty six percent unsure, forty
Speaker 3: four percent say that they oppose military and veteran household.
Speaker 3: It's actually a little bit higher there for support. There's
Speaker 3: still some strong opposed numbers, and same with non military.
Speaker 3: But the point is is that you can still see
Speaker 3: a significant amount of support here amongst the Republican Party
Speaker 3: already as long as you sell it to them about nukes.
Speaker 3: And this is a why people who want nuance will
Speaker 3: have warnings always lose is because we have to start
Speaker 3: from disproving the allegation and then warning about fortieth order consequences.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: I wish, though, that we would have enough experience at
Speaker 3: this point that I could just say Libya and someone
Speaker 3: would be like, oh, yeah, that's a good point, right,
Speaker 3: you know.
Speaker 1: Oh, it's just.
Speaker 3: About striking air defense in Libya. Nothing else, guys, no
Speaker 3: boots on the ground. Oh except what over one million
Speaker 3: people flooded Europe and caused massive demographic crisis. Oh, Siria,
Speaker 3: not a single American stepped on the ground. Oh wait,
Speaker 3: except until Isis accepted a caliphate and a bunch of
Speaker 3: more slaughtered in the Bata Klan. And actually it's twenty
Speaker 3: twenty five and they're still over a thousand troops that
Speaker 3: are on the ground in Syria today. You know, it's
Speaker 3: like having to warn about all these consequences. Same with Iraq.
Speaker 3: You know, the Iraq question was about nuclear weapons. Now
Speaker 3: if I had if they had correctly posed to the
Speaker 3: American people, do you support nation building in Iraq?
Speaker 1: I do not think that the vast majority would have
Speaker 1: supported it.
Speaker 3: But the point is is, once you're in, you're in,
Speaker 3: and you just slowly get bought in and next thing,
Speaker 3: you know, Oh, we have to bring peace between the
Speaker 3: Sunni and the Shia, because Americans are super qualified for
Speaker 3: that one, right.
Speaker 1: Right, And then oh, actually no, it's a civil war.
Speaker 1: We got to get involved here.
Speaker 6: We've got to make sure girls can go to school.
Speaker 1: Right now, exactly right.
Speaker 6: We went committing that. By the way, in regard to
Speaker 6: a rod.
Speaker 1: Yeah, like oh yeah, oh, oh my god.
Speaker 3: I'm reading this book right now about I told you about.
Speaker 3: It's called Revolutionary Iran. Fantastic book. I highly recommended this hole.
Speaker 3: Oh they wore mini skirts into Yeah, that was in
Speaker 3: like one neighborhood in Tehran.
Speaker 1: Okay, as usual, it's always the same.
Speaker 2: Well, that also misrepresents the reality for women in Iran
Speaker 2: right now. I'm not saying that they don't discriminate and
Speaker 2: it's not oppressive, et cetera. But you have like a
Speaker 2: huge number of women who are preponderance of the STEM graduates,
Speaker 2: et cetera. I mean, the whole thing is just like
Speaker 2: distorted all the way.
Speaker 1: But what point is that it's nuanced. It's a difficult picture. Okay.
Speaker 3: You had another Islamic nation called Turkey, which basically tried
Speaker 3: to eradicate the religion and all of religiosity from society.
Speaker 3: Want to ask how that worked out. There's a guy
Speaker 3: named Aridiwan who's in charge. Basically came on the back
Speaker 3: of a rebellion against that despite what years decades of
Speaker 3: propaganda against the religion of Islam. It turns out they're
Speaker 3: not very good at it. My only point is that, look,
Speaker 3: whether things should be or should not be is not
Speaker 3: my decision.
Speaker 1: That's for the people of Iran, that's for the people
Speaker 1: of Turkey.
Speaker 3: You live how you want to live, and I'll live
Speaker 3: how the way I want to. But to transpose like
Speaker 3: these like western neighborhoods onto the.
Speaker 1: Entire society is ridiculous.
Speaker 3: Like I'm thinking, in Jordan, anybody's ever been to Jordan,
Speaker 3: there's like this one neighborhood where all the Americans hang
Speaker 3: out and there's like a gay bar there, and people
Speaker 3: will be like, oh, so he's such a progressive society, and.
Speaker 1: I'm like, yeah, there's one, okay.
Speaker 3: And the reason they all go there is because they
Speaker 3: can like drink or whatever, go and pull the vast
Speaker 3: majority of the city I have. I'm on and be like, hey,
Speaker 3: what do you think about this? They probably outraged or
Speaker 3: they digitous. Let live and let live and they make
Speaker 3: exist in one place. This is not to denigrate. They
Speaker 3: can live how they would like.
Speaker 6: And I'm on it maybe the most western.
Speaker 1: Yeah, one of the most western places.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's there's so much to say about it. And
Speaker 2: here's the bottom line too, It's not that I don't
Speaker 2: care about the fate of women and girls, but I
Speaker 2: know a regime collapse in Iran is going to be
Speaker 2: devastating for everyone. That is the most devastating thing you
Speaker 2: can imagine, right, So, yeah, the justifications that were already
Speaker 2: running through for why this would be great idea. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's like a speed run through what we saw throughout
Speaker 2: all of these failed regime change operations. I want to
Speaker 2: read a few of the comments from because what Washington
Speaker 2: Post does is they do the poll, but they also
Speaker 2: talk to the voters about their justifications, which are kind
Speaker 2: of interesting. So they have a Nevada woman, sixty two Republican,
Speaker 2: voted for Trump. She says, the US cannot allow Ran
Speaker 2: to have nukes. Israel is our friend, Iran is the
Speaker 2: main sponsor of terrorism. So that is a Fox News
Speaker 2: watcher through and through watching the same content as the
Speaker 2: president of the United States. You have another Republican, though,
Speaker 2: who voted for Trump, seventy four year old woman. She says,
Speaker 2: I think Trump in the US need to continue negotiations
Speaker 2: and alternatives before the US bombs Iran and starts World
Speaker 2: War three.
Speaker 6: Okay, that's good. I like that one.
Speaker 2: You've got a Democrat who didn't vote says Roan is
Speaker 2: not an imminent threat to the US. You've got an
Speaker 2: independent who voted for Trump, forty four year old man
Speaker 2: who says, I'm not convinced they have nuclear weapons.
Speaker 6: We need proof.
Speaker 2: But I'll tell you if you look further into this
Speaker 2: poll and the results that they got, and this again
Speaker 2: is why Trump is saying over and over again they
Speaker 2: can have a nuke.
Speaker 6: They can't have a nuke.
Speaker 2: They can have a nuke because a eighty two percent
Speaker 2: of respondents to this poll, Democrats, Republicans, independence, eighty two
Speaker 2: percent said they are concerned about Iran getting a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 2: So you know that's why they feel like the firmest
Speaker 2: ground is when they're trying to convince you that they
Speaker 2: were right on the edge of getting this nuclear web
Speaker 2: and we have to act now. And if they're able
Speaker 2: to persuade the public of that for some time, they
Speaker 2: will enjoy some level of support. Now I will tell
Speaker 2: you I had I won't say who exactly, but I
Speaker 2: had a young man nineteen years old who is, you know,
Speaker 2: not a newswatcher. He is very much your like nor me,
Speaker 2: not super He works in the trades.
Speaker 6: He's not focused on any of this stuff.
Speaker 2: Who was deeply concerned about this actually, like this broke
Speaker 2: through to him, and he is the tie. He's the
Speaker 2: theolon watcher, Like that's that's where he falls. And so
Speaker 2: I think in terms of independence, I think you have
Speaker 2: a real chance to make the case when I look
Speaker 2: at those Republican numbers who already support it, and then
Speaker 2: you've got a whole bunch of them who are unsure.
Speaker 2: You know, I just look at that, and I know
Speaker 2: the minute Donald Trump makes the decision, they're all going
Speaker 2: to walk in and like Trump says, it's good, so
Speaker 2: it must be good.
Speaker 6: That's what we're doing.
Speaker 3: So if you guys want to know what they're watching
Speaker 3: over on Fox, I tweeted this, but literally they had
Speaker 3: on the sun of Elie Wisel, the guy who wrote
Speaker 3: Night to the Holocaust Survivor, to come on and to
Speaker 3: compare striking Iranian nuclear facilities to bombing Auschwitz during World
Speaker 3: War Two at the height of the Holk that's the
Speaker 3: level of shit that these people are imbibing into their brains.
Speaker 3: And there's not a single element of skepticism of anything
Speaker 3: that you're hearing. Usually The way that they frame the
Speaker 3: question is, but like there is a risk of foreign entanglement,
Speaker 3: why don't you tell us why that's not true. That's
Speaker 3: the closest that they'll come to even presenting the risk.
Speaker 3: It's just so so bad. It's honestly, it might even
Speaker 3: be worse than two thousand and three. The only like
Speaker 3: shining thing that I saw is that that Tucker interview
Speaker 3: went so massive, viral like viral into the sense that,
Speaker 3: like you said, the nineteen year olds are listening like
Speaker 3: on liberal, on conservative wherever, like it was all over TikTok,
Speaker 3: and it was framed it was exactly the right bite
Speaker 3: sized moment, you know, and all that, and that really
Speaker 3: did break through.
Speaker 1: Now we didn't have that, No.
Speaker 3: Three, and there's probably not enough to stop what's coming,
Speaker 3: but at the very least it exists in the historical record.
Speaker 2: Real quick after grec myself, it's seventy percent who are
Speaker 2: concerned about the Iranian nuclear program.
Speaker 6: So still high, still very high.
Speaker 3: All right, Well, next we have a very special guest,
Speaker 3: Soraba Marii. Sorab is an expert both on Iran. He's
Speaker 3: a former neo Khon who wanted regime change he's now
Speaker 3: a realist who opposes regime change. He can tell us
Speaker 3: in exact like exactitude, why a regime change operation in
Speaker 3: Iran would be a total disaster.
Speaker 6: For critically, she knows how many people live in Iran,
Speaker 6: and he.
Speaker 1: Also knows how. Let's get to it.
Speaker 3: Very excited now to be joined by Soraba Marii. He's
Speaker 3: the US editor for Unheard, great friend.
Speaker 1: Of the show. It's good to see you man, Thank
Speaker 1: you for joining us, Thank you both for having me.
Speaker 3: So so we gave you a fantastic introduction already, and
Speaker 3: so let's just get down to it. About the population
Speaker 3: of Iran. Whether you can tell us, because certainly Ted
Speaker 3: Cruz can't. Let's take a listen, and most importantly, let's
Speaker 3: dissect why that matters for US regime change attempts.
Speaker 1: Here, let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: How many people living around? By the way, I don't
Speaker 5: know the population at all. No, I don't know the population.
Speaker 5: You don't know the population of the country you seek
Speaker 5: to topple. How many people living around? Ninety two million? Okay, yeah,
Speaker 5: how could you not know that? I don't sit around
Speaker 5: memorizing population tables.
Speaker 4: Well, it's kind of relevant because you're calling for the
Speaker 4: overthrow of the government.
Speaker 5: Why is it relevant whether it's will because ninety million
Speaker 5: or eighty million or a hundred million.
Speaker 4: Why because if you don't know anything about the country.
Speaker 4: I didn't say I don't know anything about Okay, what's
Speaker 4: the ethnic mix of wrong? They are Persians and well
Speaker 4: presuminantly Shia.
Speaker 5: Okay, you don't know thing about Iran. So okay, I'm
Speaker 5: not the Tucker Carlson bird on Iran.
Speaker 4: You're a senator who's calling there the one the government
Speaker 4: at the country.
Speaker 5: Eight. No, you don't know anything about the country. You're
Speaker 5: the one who claims they're not trying to murder Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: I'm not saying that. Who can't figure out General SOLMONI
Speaker 5: you believe they're trying to murder Trump?
Speaker 4: Yes, because you're not calling for military strikes against them
Speaker 4: in retaliation.
Speaker 5: And if they really believe that carrying out military strikes today?
Speaker 5: Who said Israel was right with our help? I've said
Speaker 5: we Israel is leading them, but we're supporting them.
Speaker 4: Well, this you're breaking news here because the US government
Speaker 4: last night denied the National Security Council spokesman Alex Fifer
Speaker 4: denied on behalf of Trump that we were acting on
Speaker 4: Israel's behalf in any offensive capacity.
Speaker 5: We're not bombing, then Israel's bombing. Then you just said
Speaker 5: we were. We are supporting as you're a senator. If
Speaker 5: you're saying the United States government is now, we're with
Speaker 5: I run right now. People are listening.
Speaker 3: So so why does it matter that somebody who wants
Speaker 3: to overthrow the regime in Iran doesn't know the population
Speaker 3: or the ethnic makeup of Iran?
Speaker 9: First of all, like kudos to Tucker for that interview.
Speaker 9: It reminded me of a kind of journalism you see
Speaker 9: on UK broadcast. Tell us journalism, you know where you
Speaker 9: really probe, and too often we don't in the United States,
Speaker 9: where it's just so deferential to anyone in power. But
Speaker 9: it matters because Iran is a large and extremely complex society,
Speaker 9: vaster and more sensitive than Iraq, where the last time
Speaker 9: we attempted a real kind of regime change, direct occupation
Speaker 9: and nation building. So yes, it really it matters for
Speaker 9: many reasons. One is, first of all, just the sheer
Speaker 9: size of the country tells you something about how difficult
Speaker 9: the kind of post regime collapse scenario would be. And second,
Speaker 9: of all, you know, it also goes into how much
Speaker 9: the Iranians, how many people, for example, they can recruit
Speaker 9: if the United States is forced into a ground operation
Speaker 9: and there's a kind of war of attrition between the regime,
Speaker 9: whatever regime we would install, and where the regime remnants,
Speaker 9: the older regimes remnants home, they could recruit, how many
Speaker 9: people they could recruit. So it's just I mean, it's
Speaker 9: just appalling. And I admire Senator Cruz on some issues,
Speaker 9: but it's just appalling that he doesn't know. And the
Speaker 9: excuse making for it side wall is he supposed to
Speaker 9: look up Wikipedia?
Speaker 2: Yes, you know, yes, actually read up briefing.
Speaker 9: You have access to, you know, information that the rest
Speaker 9: of us don't like read.
Speaker 6: Read your article. Yeah, we could put it eat you
Speaker 6: up mama's screen.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is so I knew the population number
Speaker 2: because Soccer and I one of the first things we
Speaker 2: did when we knew that this was being contemplated, when
Speaker 2: we knew we were backing this war in Iran. It
Speaker 2: is okay, Well, how does this compare it to see her?
Speaker 2: How does this compare it to a rock? What is
Speaker 2: the population of Iran versus Israel? Like this is the
Speaker 2: most surface level that you could possibly know about this conflict.
Speaker 2: And yes, it's incredibly significant, but I would love you
Speaker 2: to lay on a little bit of what you do
Speaker 2: in this piece of like, Okay, let's say you get
Speaker 2: your wish. Let's say the current regime collapses. How do
Speaker 2: you see that unfolding? Given the fact, as you just
Speaker 2: stated that Iran is a complex, multi ethnic society.
Speaker 9: Yep, So, first of all, the biggest problem will be
Speaker 9: the question of political authority, a national authority that can
Speaker 9: keep the country together and govern minimally. And given Iran's
Speaker 9: political culture. Iran's political culture is defined by a term
Speaker 9: in Persian and Arabic stebdad, which means an arbitrary rule. Unfortunately,
Speaker 9: the way that it's developed, everything goes through a central authority,
Speaker 9: whether it's whether you call it a shah meaning a king,
Speaker 9: or whether it's an ayatola who is basically a king
Speaker 9: under a different aspect, he's just instead of a crown,
Speaker 9: he wears a turban. That degree of central authority and
Speaker 9: a tradition of of centralized rule that has forestalled the
Speaker 9: development of a sense of different social classes being able
Speaker 9: to resolve differences through civil society. Through well defined legal
Speaker 9: rights and duties, etc.
Speaker 1: Et cetera.
Speaker 9: Is underdeveloped. We've had attempts at trying to build those
Speaker 9: up in our twentieth we I mean Iranians. I'm Iranian American,
Speaker 9: but the Iranians have attempted to build it up. In
Speaker 9: some cases those attempts have been short circuited by foreign imperialists.
Speaker 9: There was a constitutional revolution in nineteen oh five, and
Speaker 9: the Brits and the Russians basically in part set out
Speaker 9: to scuttle that because they treated Iran as a prize
Speaker 9: in the so called Great Game. There was a parliamentary
Speaker 9: democracy for a while after World War Two, and the
Speaker 9: leader of that movement was toppled in parts through It's complicated.
Speaker 9: It's not just in a leftist kind of talking point.
Speaker 9: It's like we toppled our democratic government. The story is
Speaker 9: more complicated. But at any rate, it hasn't developed that
Speaker 9: political culture that would easily be able to stand up
Speaker 9: a new order. So that's the main problem. And so
Speaker 9: who would you install. They floated the Shah of the Sun,
Speaker 9: and monarchy is has some attractive things about it. He
Speaker 9: represents a kind of continuity, a link to the path
Speaker 9: to the Iranian past. There are problems with it, though
Speaker 9: everyone I know who's taught who's worked with Reza Pahlavi,
Speaker 9: the heir to the Pahlavi dynasty, describes him as basically
Speaker 9: like indolent and curious, et cetera. Second, he's become like
Speaker 9: a quasi spokesman for the idea of He didn't act
Speaker 9: in a kingly way, which is when that happened.
Speaker 1: He should.
Speaker 9: He should have said something like, I feel my compatriot's pain,
Speaker 9: I'm doing I'm using all my influence to bring it
Speaker 9: to an end, and uh, you.
Speaker 1: Know that sort of thing.
Speaker 9: What he said instead was you know, this is all
Speaker 9: Iran's fault, which there of course, I mean, the Iranian
Speaker 9: regime has shouted this nasty slogan death to Israel, death
Speaker 9: to America.
Speaker 1: I don't deny that.
Speaker 9: But he said it's a Ronswald and rise up and
Speaker 9: you know, overthrow the regime. Well, meanwhile, you know, you
Speaker 9: see footage of fathers holding their infants with bloody diapers
Speaker 9: because of the bombings. How is that guy going to
Speaker 9: rise up? And you know, mounted small de democratic revolution.
Speaker 9: So but sorry, just to clean up this point. Even
Speaker 9: if he were the second coming of Cyrus the Great,
Speaker 9: you know, the biblical emperor, the Persian emperor who's mentioned
Speaker 9: in the Bible at various points. Even if you were
Speaker 9: second coming of Cyrus, he needs to be able to
Speaker 9: assert control over this far flung, sprawling country of ninety
Speaker 9: million with a fractious ethnic makeup, and he couldn't do
Speaker 9: that without a prolonged US intervention, right, in other words,
Speaker 9: that you would have to help him do that. Otherwise
Speaker 9: it would be just like Afghanistan, where there's a government
Speaker 9: a rump state that can only control the capital and
Speaker 9: its surrounding environment, and the rest of the country becomes
Speaker 9: like Libyanized and Syrianized, and is you know, spreading instability
Speaker 9: all over the place. So, for all these reasons, Senator Cruz,
Speaker 9: if you're listening to this, buy a book.
Speaker 1: Genesis is great.
Speaker 9: I revere the Book of Genesis, but it's not enough
Speaker 9: for understanding them.
Speaker 6: I'm sure you would be happy to speak with that.
Speaker 1: That's right.
Speaker 6: Yeah, ask you some.
Speaker 1: Question, Senator Cruz. Listen, he's a curious guy. He should
Speaker 1: call you.
Speaker 3: So one of the things I won't really want to
Speaker 3: dive into here, like you just said, is about this
Speaker 3: necessity for authority and how in the vacuum of authority
Speaker 3: the United States must step in. And I saw that
Speaker 3: this was kind of a controversial point, but it just
Speaker 3: seems very obvious to me. Israel is a country of
Speaker 3: nine million. What they're going to impose regime change in
Speaker 3: a country of ninety million. There's no occupation force that
Speaker 3: is capable of that. And what would it involve, you know,
Speaker 3: basically a fall of the Iranian regime? Like do you
Speaker 3: think it is even possible for the Iranian regime to
Speaker 3: survive at this point even if the United States does
Speaker 3: not get involved? Given Israel's statement, their defense minister just
Speaker 3: today threatened the Ayatola Homanium basically compared him to Hitler
Speaker 3: and to a Nazi, and was like, yeah, we're going
Speaker 3: to kill him, I mean effectively saying that. So is
Speaker 3: there even a scenario at this point where they can
Speaker 3: survive in their current form, if not dramatically weakened, And
Speaker 3: what will come as a result of that?
Speaker 9: You know, if you had asked me that forty eight
Speaker 9: hours ago, I would have said, no, that the pounding
Speaker 9: that they're getting from the Israelis will lead to collapse. However,
Speaker 9: looking at it from the perspective this morning, I think
Speaker 9: that that will be a long term proposition. That is,
Speaker 9: I don't think the Israelis have it in them alone
Speaker 9: to be able to achieve that. What I've heard and
Speaker 9: gathered from open source open sources and talking to people
Speaker 9: on the inside, et cetera, is that the regime has
Speaker 9: kind of like gotten reconsolidated itself. Let's say, in recent
Speaker 9: recent days they claim to have taken care of the
Speaker 9: Mossad infiltration that wrecks such havoc in the early stages
Speaker 9: of the conflict. They are getting better at their kind
Speaker 9: of very experimental people so they just like were like,
Speaker 9: let's try different things with with Iron Dome and with
Speaker 9: David slaying, and they're getting their kind of learning and
Speaker 9: adjusting tactics as they go on. As I understand it,
Speaker 9: and here, I, you know, take this with a grain
Speaker 9: of salt, because I'm not like the kind of military expert,
Speaker 9: but as I understand it, there miss they're like missile
Speaker 9: launch structure is very automated and and hard to get at,
Speaker 9: more so than than Israelis have claimed or did claim
Speaker 9: in the triumphant early days. And so with all that
Speaker 9: in mind, I think that what they want to do
Speaker 9: is to make this a kind of long war of
Speaker 9: attrition that goes on for a long time. I just so,
Speaker 9: in other words, I'm saying is like the risks of
Speaker 9: regime collapse have somewhat been reduced to my mind over
Speaker 9: the past forty eight hours. However, that doesn't mean that
Speaker 9: if it happens, it's a good thing for all the
Speaker 9: early reasons I mentioned, or that the war of attrition
Speaker 9: model is good for anyone in the region, you know,
Speaker 9: whether it's US troops who are vulnerable and don't have
Speaker 9: an iron dome sitting in Iraq and elsewhere, whether it's
Speaker 9: Israel itself. I mean, I love the city of Tel Aviv,
Speaker 9: and it really breaks my heart to see what the
Speaker 9: Iranian ballistic systems have done. I mean, this has to
Speaker 9: be put to a stop through a negotiated settlement.
Speaker 2: So so, what I hear from people who are supportive
Speaker 2: of US getting offensively directly involved is basically like, well,
Speaker 2: we can just go in, drop some mongerbusters on four
Speaker 2: dough get out, and I don't know what you people
Speaker 2: are so concerned about, Like this will be quick, it'll
Speaker 2: be easy. It doesn't require us to be boots on
Speaker 2: the ground and this long sal scale, you know, involvement.
Speaker 6: How do you see that?
Speaker 9: Yeah, so basically, okay, the way I think about it
Speaker 9: is actually, this is an analogy from a friend of mine,
Speaker 9: Kurt Mills, who said, you know, there are two houses.
Speaker 9: One is a mansion and one is like a fixer upper.
Speaker 9: The mansion is a negotiated settlement. The fixer upper is
Speaker 9: the quick hit, and it looks more attractive, it looks
Speaker 9: cheaper upfront, it's easier to sign the deal, meaning of
Speaker 9: buying the house or in this case striking four dough.
Speaker 9: But the house is actually termite ridden and collapses, you know,
Speaker 9: when it's exposed to the lightest storm. So what I
Speaker 9: mean by that is that this idea that you can
Speaker 9: go in very quickly, hit four dough and get out,
Speaker 9: you have to take it with a big chunk of salt,
Speaker 9: not a grain of salt. Because Iran has only so
Speaker 9: far used it's long range ballistics against Israel, that makes
Speaker 9: sense because of the distance. It has a whole bunch
Speaker 9: of short and medium range missiles that can reach US
Speaker 9: bases which are vulnerable. As I said, it can try
Speaker 9: to close the Strait of Hormuz through which twenty percent
Speaker 9: of the world's energy supplies traverse and if they do
Speaker 9: either or both of those things, and the United States
Speaker 9: will inevitably right be forced to respond in a bigger way.
Speaker 9: And we're in that bigger war. So the mansion, which
Speaker 9: looks expensive and difficult and daunting to get of a deal,
Speaker 9: is actually the more realistic option than the fixer upper
Speaker 9: of just go in, strike and get out.
Speaker 2: And lastly so rob and by the way, we should
Speaker 2: mention to people who are concerned about things, you have
Speaker 2: been there, so you are eminently qualified on every level
Speaker 2: to speak of such things. But the other thing that
Speaker 2: Trump has posited is that American strikes Asraeli strikes, and
Speaker 2: then you know, ultimately potentially American strikes on Iran will
Speaker 2: soften them up so that that mansion will be more
Speaker 2: easily acquired.
Speaker 6: What do you make of that logic?
Speaker 9: I just think at that point their incentives is you
Speaker 9: basically have someone in a hole who's like firing at you,
Speaker 9: and you fire even more, and you're telling him, but
Speaker 9: come out, and his mentality is, well, if I come
Speaker 9: out with my arms up, you're gonna shoot me.
Speaker 5: So the only the only.
Speaker 9: Rational thing from my point of view is to just
Speaker 9: hole up and keep firing and maybe I'll die in
Speaker 9: a flash of you know, heat, or I won't. But
Speaker 9: I just don't see I don't see Iranians being able
Speaker 9: to uh, the Iranian leaderships as we know known it historically.
Speaker 9: You know, at that point, once that has happened, they think, well,
Speaker 9: you're out to kill me, and I'm just gonna I'm gonna,
Speaker 9: I'm gonna take my chances with firing rockets and closing
Speaker 9: hor moves and you know, potentially setting off terrorist proxies
Speaker 9: elsewhere in western heartlands, et cetera, et cetera. I just
Speaker 9: I'm trying to think through that, and I just don't
Speaker 9: see them being softened up. I'm seeing that just feeling
Speaker 9: so cornered that.
Speaker 1: I don't see any historical evidence for it. I see none.
Speaker 3: You know, nations that are under the gun and ask
Speaker 3: for unconditional surrender very rarely do it until they suffer
Speaker 3: immense and mass death, and usually the population allis to
Speaker 3: the flag because they don't want to deal with it either,
Speaker 3: as bad as it is, They're willing to fight to
Speaker 3: the death. And that's a very bad scenario I think
Speaker 3: for all of us so up. Your commentary, your pieces
Speaker 3: and all that have been so so helpful for all
Speaker 3: of us, and I know they've been circulating wide part
Speaker 3: of the reason we wanted to have you on the show.
Speaker 3: I encourage everybody to read it and please keep up
Speaker 3: the good work. Man.
Speaker 1: Thank you for joining us.
Speaker 6: Great to see it sarth bad news.
Speaker 2: Guys, You're going to have to wait until tomorrow the
Speaker 2: Friday Show to find out what our dear leader Obama
Speaker 2: had to say about the present situation. So I'm sure
Speaker 2: you'll be waiting with baited bread. Just went too long,
Speaker 2: as we often do in the rest of the show.
Speaker 6: We got to get it wrapped to get badlines, get
Speaker 6: it out.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for sticking with us this week
Speaker 2: for all of the coverage. I think we're going to
Speaker 2: have all four hosts for the Friday show. To Mario,
Speaker 2: I'll make it work, so we're going to have extensive
Speaker 2: coverage there. And Rocana is actually going to join us.
Speaker 2: He's one of the Democrats who's been pushing the War
Speaker 2: Powers resolution fight in Congress, so really important to talk
Speaker 2: to him right now.
Speaker 1: All right, we'll see you guys tomorrow.
Speaker 9: Then