Transcription
We had an alert today in in Dubai. Um, it gave me a didn't give me PTSD because it's not a big deal here, but freaked a lot of people out in Dubai. So they got an alert: seek shelter because of drone missile attack, and it turned out to be a false alarm. So that brought back memories back in the day. We'd be doing a show and we're talking about whether the desalination plants will be struck, etc. But it's uh calmer times now. But um, I don't know, the rhetoric is very concerning, and and I'm glad we can speak today because in the last 48 hours um there's been a lot of developments when it comes to Turkey. So Trump and we've spoken about Turkey before. You know Turkey very well, the Turkish military. We've discussed it even before this war. And Trump has been praising Erdogan, has been talking about the possibility of supplying F-35s to Turkey. Meanwhile, you've got Israel, and I'm actually glad we're speaking today, not yesterday, because today Israel um where's the statement here? You've got a statement from the minister of what? Okay, let me find it. Two seconds. There it is. The minister of science and technology. Uh, he go he says this: "I have no doubt that the Iranian regime will eventually fall." And then he says, "Once we move beyond the Iranian regime, there is the Ottoman Empire's ambition which will seek to expand and spread its influence. There is no doubt that Turkey with its ambitions to expand beyond its borders and to lead the region according to its own vision poses a real future threat to the citizens of the state of Israel. Israel is always always prepares for every threat and there is no doubt that Turkeykey's becoming a front that could indeed become a threat in the future." And then you've got foreign minister Gideon Saro also today requested the government to officially recognize the Armenian genocide in retaliation. So Netanyahu's already recognized it personally, but the country hasn't, and that's in retaliation to Trump weighing the possible sale of F-35 jets to Turkey. Um, people have been talking about the threat of these two countries clashing. I haven't. I probably should take it more seriously. I haven't because I know they do a lot of business together and I just thought was just rhetoric for political points. But it's really getting, you know, especially after what happened with Iran, which really shocked me, the war with Iran. Um, I don't know. Should we be worried about these two countries clashing, especially in Syria?
>> Oh my. First of all, it's astonishing to me that people think the war with Iran is over. I do not. I I encourage people in Dubai to think twice about their future. I don't think uh the fighting with Iran is over by any means. I mean, I think the Iranians would like it to end. I think President Trump would like it to end, but it's not over. You just had this massive missile assault by the Iranians against Israel in retaliation for Israeli attacks in northern Lebanon. So why would anybody assume then that the larger region is safe from any future war? I don't understand that. So that first point is: the war with Iran is not over. And with all
>> Turkey, can you stick to that point, please? Yeah.
>> Oh, I will absolutely. You know, uh, with all due respect to this minister in Israel, he's talking as though Iran is inevitably going to fall and and become the victim of Israeli and American military power. I don't see any evidence for that. So, first of all, let's get something straight. Iran is strong. It's more powerful today militarily, and I would argue politically, than it was at the beginning of the war. It's not going to go under for reasons of economics by any means. It's got powerful allies in the form of China and Russia and others. So let's just keep that in mind as a backdrop to the discussion about Turkey. The minister in Israel of science and technology is correct. I made these points in 2013 on the anniversary of the 73 war in Israel. I told an Israeli audience almost verbatim what he said and people thought I was crazy. "Oh no, that will never happen. That's an impossibility." And Turkey has always been the principal and most serious threat to the existence of the Israeli state, not Iran. The Israelis have unnecessarily provoked this war with Iran. Iran did not have to be at war with Israel. Israel could have made peace with the Shiites and the so-called Axis resistance a long time ago. That opportunity is missed. So his larger statement about the Turks is correct. All you have to do is ask the key question: who has dominated the Middle East over the last thousand years for most of that period? Either Turks or Persians. I don't know how many times I've spoken with Tur Turks and Iranians and they both have said to me, "Oh, everything that you see in terms of architecture that people call Islamic, it's Turkish." You know, they they call Islamic architecture, it's not. It's Iranian. You know, the Arabs are sideline, marginalized. "We are the true Islamic states." I mean, you you can hear these things in in casual conversation anytime you want. These are the two major powers. Now the question is not whether Israel should worry. They should worry. They have every reason to worry because now both powers, both of them are unambiguously anti-Israeli. There's no question about it. They now have the two most powerful nation states in the region generally speaking aligned against them. Now, President Trump has recently dangled various things in front of Mr. Erdogan because from the beginning he has tried to keep Erdogan out of the fight and he would like to drive a wedge between Iran and Turkey. There's no question about it. And he recently brought up this nonsensical idea of: let's invite the head chopping brigade from Syria, the Sunni Islamists who were part of ISIS, and send them to kill Hezbollah. Well, normally the Israelis would celebrate something like that because the Israelis love it when Muslims kill each other and they'll do everything they can to induce it. But there's a problem. You're introducing a Turkish subordinate element right into Lebanon. The Turks, you know, are sitting up there just behind the border watching everything that's happening in Lebanon, in Syria, in Iran, in Azerban, and they are preparing to do something. In other words, they are preparing to intervene at some point because the much larger issue for the Turks is Kurdistan and the Kurds. And if there's one thing the Iranians and the Turks can both agree upon, they don't want Kurdistan. And what have we and the Israelis been doing? Bending over backwards to essentially cultivate Kurdish opposition to Iran and Turkey. Now, this this head chopping brigade that President Trump thinks he wants to send up there and he says, "Well, you know, Mr. Erdogan's my friend. We get along really well." This is asinine talk that has no place in international relations. There is no friendship in international relations. There there are only interests. What is Turkeykey's interests? The Israeli description of the Turks is correct. He described their interests. Syria is viewed by the Turks as a Turkish province. So is northern Iraq. Northern Iraq is viewed as a Turkish area. Turkish generals have pointed to cities like Erbil and told American general officers during the long pointless stupid self-defeating occupation of Iraq: "Erbil is a Turkish city. Kirkuk is a Turkish city. Let there be no doubt about it." Yes. And who controlled most of the Arabian Peninsula until quite recently in the history of the region? The Ottomans. There's no doubt about it. We know that these are real ambitions, real aspirations, and the Turks are disgusted with the failure of the Arab states to present real resistance to Israel. And they're chafing at the idea that Iran has supplanted them as the leaders of Islam, as the champions of the Islamic world against Israel. Now, why am I saying all these things? First, I'm trying to get the point across that, you know, Turkeykey's membership in NATO is nice but irrelevant. Turkeykey's real foundations, its cultural heritage, everything is in the Middle East and Central Asia. They are looking to the future in the Middle East and Central Asia. They're not looking at Europe at all. So, we can just forget all this NATO nonsense. Secondly, the Turks are not fools. The last thing they want is a war with Russia. So, they're cultivating good relations with the Russians. And the Russians want good relations with the Turks. After all, they've only fought about 300 wars. The two of them have figured out there's nothing good about war between them. So, Turkey is now the the 600 pound gorilla in the corner. And here's Mr. Trump trying to put some crazy scheme together that he thinks is going to help his friends in Israel. The Israelis have looked at him and said, "You're inviting the Turks into northern Lebanon. Have you lost your mind?" The Iranians are sitting there looking at us and shaking their heads, saying, "What a bunch of fools these Americans are. They don't understand the region. They don't understand the people in it. They don't understand the interests." The Persians or the Iranians are correct. We don't know what the hell we're doing. That should be obvious. All you have to do is listen to these incoherent statements that come out of Trump, switch channels, go to Lousern, and listen to another set of incoherent statements from Vice President Vance. There is no strategy. Nobody knows what he's doing. Nobody knows what he's trying to achieve. All he knows right now in the White House is: I got to help Israel.
Do you think well I'll first what you're referring to is something when I first read it I'm like there is no way about Trump throwing a statement there that al-Shar should come clean up his—I just thought he's just talking whatever he's thinking and I didn't think there's any real thought being given to this I.D. And then I saw him mention it again. I'm like, why is he mentioning the same stupid idea again? And then I saw a report that alsh there's military buildup, a Syrian military buildup on the Lebanese border, and it accelerated after Trump's comments. That got me a bit worried. Now, there isn't much of a military in Syria. From what I understand, Israel just bombed the hell out of it after Assad fell. Um, now I'm not sure whether the military buildup. One of my guests told me, Mario, it's in case the pro-Assad forces in Lebanon make a move on Syria. So, it's precautionary. Another guest of mine said there's a big drug trade there. So, this is to have some sort of control of the border um and maybe also to control the flow of arms to Hezbollah through Syrian territory. It's like all these different theories. Um and then I saw Trump's comments um to the press about Erdogan, how he likes him, respects him as a leader, he's considering a big gift for him, referring to the F-35s. I think they're looking at the F-35s. And I'm like, hold on. Is there a conversation happening right now where Trump went to Erdogan like, "Hey, I'll give you the F-35s, but you get your puppet al-Shar to go into Lebanon and fight." And how much agency does Alshara have? Because Alsar also made it clear he does not want to fight his BA, and he also even told the Lebanese don't trust the Israis. So if it was up to Alshara, he wouldn't go into Lebanon. If it was up to Turkey, I don't think they'd do it. But if there's enough of an incentive, is it even possible that this could happen that Trump will pull it off? Would Erdogan Alshaw do it? An now knows that President Trump has approved a $700 million sale of General Electric jet engines for use by the Turks and their new fighter, the Khan. So, they have a new fighter that they want to complete building, but they need jet engines they can't produce domestically. President Trump has now approved that. There's no doubt in my mind that President Trump is is hoping that he can produce this outcome. And of course, he's also got some Israelis that he's known off off and on for years who've always said, "Let's let's pit these people against each other. The more they fight each other, the better." So, there's some of that in the background. But what he doesn't understand is the larger picture which was painted by the Israeli Minister of Science and Technology. I think if I were if I were Mr. Erdogan, I would take the $700 million sale and and put those new jet engines into my jets. I think I would say whatever is required to persuade President Trump to give me F-35s or access to the technology, but I don't think I'd do anything.
>> Yeah,
>> I would just take the money and run if I were Mr. Erdogan. And then Trump is going to sit there and say, "Well, what happened? I don't understand this."
>> Just like with the Kurds.
>> Yeah, sure. I mean, this listen listen this this is all nonsense. This is postponing the inevitable. There's only one way to end this this mess that we've created, and that is for us to unilaterally disengage. That's why I wrote the piece on the Substack and I said, you know, you just got to get out. President Trump knows he's got a mess on his hands. He's not happy about it. He was smart enough to make the point when somebody said, "Well, why are you signing this in Versailles? You know, that that really doesn't help you." And so forth. He said, "Look, we have got to open the straight of Hormoose." Correct. If we don't do that, the world could slide into a global depression. Correct. So, he understands that. But he's under duress. Mario, he is not an independent agent. He still has to report back to Mr. Netanyahu. And I'm sure that JD Vance is periodically talking to Mr. Netanyahu as well. And from the Israeli standpoint, the best thing that could happen to Lousern is to have a point. 08 or 0.9 uh or whatever it is, a massive earthquake and swallow Lousern and everybody in it and go away, because any agreement between the United States and Iran that ends the fighting is viewed as an existential threat to Israel. Israel wants to destroy Iran. We are the instrument of destruction. It's our job to go back in there and finish it. Everything the Israelis do is designed to induce us to do that. So, how do you how do you square this particular circle? You can't. And President Trump is trying to manipulate things. He can't. He thinks he can, but he cannot. He doesn't have that level of control and influence. So, he's he's thrown caution to the wind and he's going to try and buy Turkish support for the short-term goal that he thinks he has of helping Israel in Lebanon. Good luck. You know, um, so what do you make of the what seems like the early signs of disengagement in the last couple of weeks, JD Vance and Trump's rhetoric towards Israel, the talks about the F-35s to Turkey, even that they I don't think the the uh The JALIS don't like it. They've made it very clear they're not happy with with that potential deal between the two countries. Aren't we seeing early signs that maybe this administration is looking to disengage?
>> Oh, absolutely. I I think that there are numerous people inside who know we've got to get out. And what what are you going to do now? You've already demonstrated that your military establishment, which is the greatest military in the world, uh has been defeated by the Iranians. Not because the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines did anything wrong. It's because it's the wrong instrument for the war. No, you know, this goes back to what I tried to say in the article. If that fourstar general uh General Kaine was worth a dam, as soon as he was shown Iran, he would have brought in a map and said, "Let's look at Iran, Mr. President. Iran is a natural fortress. It's as large as Western Europe. There are 93 million people in it, maybe more. You have deserts in the south that are virtually impassible. And seizing seizing control of of a city on the southern end of Iran is of no value. Everything that's critical in Iran is to the north. The north is surrounded by mountains. There's no easy way to get in there. The question is, what do you bomb? You want to bomb them into subjugation. You want to bomb them until they submit to Israeli demands. Okay, what do we bomb? Show me the targets that are going to make make the Iranians change their minds and suddenly submit to Israel. That should never have happened. This whole thing should never have occurred." Somebody said, "This is nuts. Forget it. Negotiate. Talk. This can't be done." That didn't happen. Instead, General Kaine, an airman who believes in air power first and always will win, said, "Sir, we can bomb them and we can hit all these targets and they'll eventually give up. Just got to keep bombing, bombing, bombing." And then you had the secretary of of war; he says, "Sir, we got a bomb for Israel." And then you had the CIA director. He said, "We got a bomb for Israel. We bomb them, they'll fail. They'll fall apart. They they'll lose and we'll decapitate them. Their population will rise up and on." Okay, here we are. It's all crap. Okay. If he's serious, he fires all these people. Get rid of them. They gave you bad advice, Mr. President. Throw them out. Bring in a new crew. Start over. Has that happened yet, Mario?
>> No.
>> No. Until something like that happens, what's going to change?
>> Not much.
>> The um the article you're referring to, the new one on Substack, is that judgment day for Trump's war?
>> Yes.
>> I'll check it out. Um, so but when you say that you don't think the war is over, the reason I just I just find it difficult to believe that it could continue is that you've made the point that there is nothing left to bomb then. Like, I understand there wasn't much logic to start the war in the first place. But like there was some people, small number of people, did believe the regime was on the verge of collapse. You know, that was kind of the the rhetoric in the beginning of the year. There is nothing like it now. Now it's been proven Iran can close the straight home. It's been proven Iran has underground facilities that cannot be destroyed. It's been proven that Iran could strike the energy infrastructure in the Gulf. So there is no argument to argument to be made for war.
>> No, I I agree with you completely, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. The other thing is you still have people that are clinging to the notion that we're going to maintain bases in the region. And remember, President Trump is very sensitive to the argument that well, you're surrendering. You've been defeated. He doesn't like to be defeated, obviously. Well, are we going to go back in and build the bases back up again that we formerly occupied? I don't think so. We can't protect them. That's being demonstrated conclusively. So, now people are saying, "Well, maybe we need bases on the Red Sea as those are going as though those are going to end up being more easily protected than the ones on the Persian."
>> Let's let's double down on the strategy that just backfired.
>> Yes. Yeah. So these these stupid people are there, but remember they're not really stupid because these people also are going to make money as a result. There's always a contractor out there who is pocketing huge quantities of cash for going places and doing things. So you got a lot of people that have become billionaires as a result of our wars in the Middle East over the last 25 years. It's a big problem. And he's hearing all of these things. What is he hearing from his military adviserss? His military advisers need to tell him the truth. You know, why did we maintain 275,000 army troops, soldiers on the ground in Germany for almost 40 years? Because it was abundantly clear that we could never get to Germany in time to fight the Russians. Because, you know, the Russians have these things are called submarines. They sail up and down the Atlantic. If you try to cross the Atlantic on a ship, they're going to sink you. I mean this was Eisenhower's argument against NATO: says don't these people understand those that we can't we can't execute another Normandy if we try we'll lose we can't get there. So the solution was okay if we can't get there in time then we'll build a huge AR army in Germany. Well, that no longer works. Why? Because of missiles, all different kinds of missiles: tactical ballistic missiles, the ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles, unmanned systems, thousands of them, as demonstrated by the Iranians, that have space-based connectivity to persistent surveillance. So, if you put anything on the ground within range, they're going to be destroyed. So, today, could you put a big army into Poland or into Germany uh with the object of deterring Russians from attacking? No. The Russians would sit there if we went to war with them and they'd destroy everything that was on the ground before they ever moved, you know, five feet towards Poland. The same thing is true now in the Gulf. You want to move your bases further away. Okay, that means we build future missiles with a 1,000-mile range that carry 2,000lb warheads. It'll do the same damage. We none of this makes any sense. There is only one solution. That solution is apparent and obvious. Disengage. Get out. Americans go home. Now, that's what the Americans right now in Washington don't want. But that's what Americans inside the United States want.
>> Yeah.
>> They have no interest in this. And if you go back through the polling data for the last hundred years, Mario, nobody wanted to go into World War I. We didn't want anything to do with World War II. The only way they could get us into us was to provoke the Japanese into bombing us. And the Japanese made a huge mistake and bombed us on Sunday morning in in Hawaii. And the rest is history. My point is, excuse me, there's only one way out of this, and that is for us to say, look, you got it. It's yours. We're out of here. It's now up to the international community, the regional actors to sort out how they're going to handle the Persian Gulf. Uh, we want access. We're not going to obstruct anybody's access. We just want to do business. And if we say that to the Iranians and we get out, we're fine. We're off scot-free. Same thing's true with the Chinese. If we say we're out of this thing, we're not going to try anything with Taiwan. All we want to really do is business in the future. Same same outcome. Great. The the point is we're not there yet mentally in Washington. But the American people are there psychologically and mentally right now. The two, the gap between the two, has to be closed. And what President Trump needs to understand is that if he turns around and says what I just said, "We've done all we can. We're not going to do anymore. We've had it. We're leaving." Everybody on the United States side except for the people in Washington are going to cheer. He has the backing of the American people and he's going to say, "I'm going home. We're going to address the problems at home." Everybody goes, "Yay, Mr. President. Well done. Great." But nobody in Washington will like that because they've all benefited from all of these conflicts in very material terms. Um under due so I don't know what to ask first. Um actually I'll go through the comment when you said Trump is under due arrest because I've heard this from so many guests. Tucker, who I know you and him have spoken about it. Um Marie Taylor Green, um who else said it? Joe Kent a few times. Um and others. What do you mean when you say he could be under duress?
>> I think he's under threat. Look, there are several ways this can be approached. Everybody is assuming, well, the Epstein files have something on Donald Trump. I I have no idea. I've never seen the Epstein trials. I know there are thousands of people in those in the damn files. We know who some of them are. I'm sure they're very incriminating for many, many people. Whether or not Trump is in them in some sort of embarrassing way, I have no idea. So, let's set that aside for a minute and instead look at some practicalities. If you are Miriam Edlesen or Paul Singer or Larry Ellison or any number of the what we call Zionist billionaires, the people that really constitute the backbone of the Israel lobby, the Jewish lobby, and also our are our axe swingers and international Jewish financial power. They can turn around and say, "Well, look, Donald, we put you in the White House. You made a deal with us. We said, 'You must destroy Iran.' Okay? You haven't done that yet. Get back to work and destroy it." And he says, "Well, I've done all I can do. It's not going to work. I can't do that." Well, then, Donald, if you're not going to finish the job, we're going to pull our support from you. Now, what is what is their support? Well, everybody on the hill is receiving some sort of cash benefit from supporting the Israel lobby. Do they want to give up their cash benefits? Do they want suddenly their future ca future opponents in in elections in the fall or in the future to get money that they otherwise would get from the Israel lobby? Of course not. And by the way, what do most people on the hill really think about Donald Trump? They hate him. So if he he loses the support of the billionaires that put him there to begin with, there's a very high probability that he will face impeachment because people will gang up on him. In other words, he will lose his protection. I mean, ever have you ever watched any of these movies about gangsters? Best way to think about this is organized crime. Well, I with the Dawn has withdrawn his protection. So he loses his protection and then he's politically vulnerable. He's vulnerable in the courts. He's vulnerable all over the country. So he has to go back and say, "Well, wait a minute. I can't afford that. You know, that could that could jeopardize everything." So he keeps looking for some other way to go forward. In other words, he's looking for something in the middle. He's looking for a compromise that allows him to escape from the trap that he's set for himself. He can't do it. There is no easy way out. There's either completely out or eventually being drawn back in again. How many more attacks like the ones on northern Israel will the Israelis tolerate from Iran before the Israelis say, "Damn it, you've got to join us and help us." And then what do we do?
>> Say, "Can't we just say no? Can't the US just say no?"
>> Well, that's what Nancy Reagan told everybody. Just say no. I don't think so. I just explained to you why Donald Trump can't just say no. I've tried to explain to you why Congress can't just say no.