Transcription
I've I've made this statement many times that Iran doesn't want to end this war until they inflict enough damage to deter any future war. Um, but it's hard to really tell how much success though the US is having.
Obviously, Sentcom will put out reports that they've destroyed or especially Israel, >> 70 80% of the missile launchers. Iran would say no, that's not the case because they have them underground. um seeing the amount of of of bombs that were dropped on the country, the amount of targets that were hit as well, and how the missiles, the amount of missiles being fired have dropped significantly, even more than the 12-day war, about 95% drop.
Um, is it fair to say that their missile launching capabilities have been degraded, but their drone manufacturing capabilities are still there, and that is their best bet to keep the straight of Homos shut, to keep striking the Gulf as we're seeing right now with the alert I just got. We saw the Oman, one of the um the port in Oman that was burning today. I'm sure you've seen that. The these um you know the type of scenes you don't expect to see in the Gulf and they continue to achieve that through their drones. They don't really need their missiles in today's age.
>> No, I don't agree with that. Uh I think that they have they have undoubtedly lost launchers. uh the dramatic degradation that you're talking about I question because every time somebody talks about the degradation they launch uh Korumshar 2 or three missiles with thousand pound warheads that then devastate the target wherever it is. I think what you're seeing today is that they have very precise weapons. If they fire at something, they're going to hit it. It's exact opposite of what President Trump said the other day when he said, "Well, they're not very accurate." Nothing could be further from the truth. They're extremely accurate and they don't have to fire as many missiles as they previously did to reach the target. And remember, they also fired a lot of missiles at the beginning of this thing in order to deplete uh the arsenal of anti-missile missiles which were in Israel and the Gulf uh Emirates and states as well as with the Navy at sea. And I think they've succeeded. I mean our I'm sure that we are getting close to the bottom. Uh this is before we reload in great numbers. Uh we started I think with roughly 8,000 missiles. Uh I don't know where we are now. Uh the Iranians started with 45,000 missiles. There's no evidence that they're about to run out. But what we're seeing are the the best the most accurate and devastating weapons. And I got to tell you that the engineers that I've spoken to here, and I've spoken previously to engineers in Israel that warned about this, I didn't understand at the time. This is back in 2020. But the engineers are saying that the the achievements of the Iranians and missile technology are are dramatic. They're they're impressive as hell. And everything they hit, they've devastated.
Now, we're shipping, as you know, a THAAD radar and I presume more THAAD missiles and launchers to Israel. I wonder what >> what >> from South Korea. You're talking about the ones they pulled out of South Korea. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I I think our position is a little less robust than President Trump and his administration would like us to believe. And I think the Iranians are being very careful now. They're looking at at battle damage. They're examining it with drone footage, but also with satellite imagery, and they are now hitting things with a very specific purpose to fundamentally eliminate capabilities. I think they're also holding back to see what will happen in the near future. In other words, if we are stupid enough to attack Car Island, which we've threatened to do, then they will launch, I think, everything that you can imagine against the oil infrastructure in the Gulf. that will of course uh push back any sort of restoration of the oil infrastructure for years. So I I don't I I don't think that Iran is in a particularly bad shape. I think they've lost a lot of hospitals. They've lost schools. We've done a horrendous damage to Tyrron. There's no question about it. But again, you know, this is Persia. This this country's been around for 2,700 years. It's not going anywhere. It has no intention of surrendering or capitulating. Anybody who thinks so is crazy. And I think we bet very heavily on this business of internal uprising and revolt and readiness to throw out whoever is in charge. I I think if we had stayed out and not bombed, perhaps by the fall of this year, we would have seen a different government. I think the Iranians are ready to move beyond the old Islamic Republic. All we've done is slow it down. We've we've that development. I think it'll still happen at some point, but we've made it harder on on the country to do what it would have done naturally without our interference. But here's the key. No matter who comes to power now, Mario will hate us. We've done enormous damage. We are not going to have a friend in that country for a very, very long time.
>> [sighs] >> So then we're kind of at a crossroad right now. It seems that we're at a fork or Trump is at a fork right now. It either he seeks an offramp which I think he based on his speech based on the way I've seen him think and act in and you know with Venezuela and and um you know tacoing in other instances China Greenland I think he's wise enough to seek an offramp and not admit defeat but also you know twist it into a victory somehow. We've destroyed their nuclear program. we've destroyed their missile capabilities. But I've been the optimist for a while. Even when we had a discussion after the 12- day war, and I'm like, "This is not going to happen again. You told me it will." And I've been wrong time and time again. I never thought we'd be here. Um, and the alternative that's being talked about is boots on the ground with a focus on Kag Island, which is where 90 plus% of the refining of Iranian oil happens. Um, it just sounds disastrous to me with my limited experience. How would it look like if that does move ahead? Is there any scenario where boots on the ground make sense in any way whatsoever?
>> No, not for us. Not for the United States. Absolutely not. And Mario, we haven't got the so-called boots to send. Today's United States Army is a fraction of its former self. If you go back 30 years, 32, 33 years, we had 800,000 men in the army. We were able to put 300,000 on the ground in uh Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. We can't do that now. We don't have those forces. And remember, those forces also included Marines. And the Marines are very lightly equipped now. At least at that point, they could fight on land because they had a lot of artillery and tanks and other things. And then finally, you got to remember that we're not really equipped, trained, or prepared for the kind of warfare that we would confront. All you have to do is take a look at eastern Ukraine and see how warfare is profoundly changed to understand that any ground force is likely to be paralyzed unless it can gain control of the space above it. And that's that's a very difficult process. How do you annihilate, stop, and neutralize all of these drones that fly all over the place all the time from from the very smallest that carries perhaps a grenade to the very largest. We're not prepared for that. So if we were trying to do something like this, it it probably wouldn't work out very well for us. I I keep trying to get people to understand something else. We they just don't get it. Today's satellite-based intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance capabilities together with the collection devices that we have that are in the sort of terrestrial environment mean that your opponent has pretty much persistent surveillance of everything on the ground that you do. That's very important. And what it means that let us say we decided, well, we're very clever. will land on the Syrian coast uh because that's closer to say uh Iran. We don't have as far to march and move and so forth. Well, by the time you picked the harbor and started to bring in ships with equipment and brought in troops, you would be targeted with these missiles. They would do enormous damage. They'd kill thousands of men. In other words, how do you get out of the gate? You can't repeat what you did in 1990 and 911, this slow, ponderous buildup. It's not going to work. And then despite the fact that I'm going to sound like a broken record because I'm sure everybody else has said this, the notion of depending exclusively on air and naval power to to achieve enduring strategic outcomes is absurd. I mean, we've been through this so many times. It doesn't work. All you do is normally make things worse. And I think that's what we've done.
Now the the key thing though for you and for me and for everybody else to understand is something that professor Morandi said recently. He said we do not support the status quo. We are not going to live with the status quo. We will not live with an existential threat from Israel. We will not put up with countries across the Persian Gulf who are providing access, support and assistance to our enemies. This is unacceptable. We need to understand that because what he's effectively saying, Mario, is when this war ends, people like me who are Americans are out. We are not going to be allowed to reset bases in the Middle East. We're not going to be allowed to stage military power in the Middle East directed at Iran or anybody else. It's not going to happen. How can we accept that? I think we can accept it very easily because I have a different perspective. I think the world is better off when we're not basing troops on foreign soil. I've never liked it. I think it's a bad idea. Uh I'm I'm happy to get out. But in Washington, where everything is mortgaged to vanity, especially with the president, how does he accept that without saying, "Well, we've been defeated." I just don't see a scenario where American troops were pulled out of the Gulf. like things must go so wrong for the US. I know they're already going wrong to an extent, but I mean significant more damage being caused because I think while it's not going well for the US, Iran's being pummeled as well. You know, we're seeing 5 over 5,500 takers struck and Israel's kind of taken it to another level. They've struck uh their oil facilities. You've saw the acid oil rain which is just uh I don't know how anyone in the world's okay with this, but there's something that Israel did, Colonel. I want to get your thoughts on. and they struck an Iranian desalination plant, a p water purification plant.
>> That was very bizarre for me because Iran doesn't really need it. They've got over 30 of them. They've also got a lot of rivers. They've got a lot of sources for water. The Gulf need those desalination plants. And if is if Iran responds in kind, which they've done previously, and they've already struck, I think one in Bahrain or Qatar, if they strike desalination plants in the Gulf, then [clears throat] we're in a pretty scary situation where they could start to choke off the Gulf from a necessity, not a nice to have, but a necessity for the people there. Um, my question to you is why did Israel strike the oil depots? Why did without American approval according to reports? Why did they strike a desalination plant in Iran? And why did the Jerusalem Post put out a false story and piss off the Emirates by saying the UAE striking Iranian targets when the UAE was not doing so and there was no reports of them doing so? Um, is it the obvious, and I'm asking kind of a rhetorical question, is is just trying to drag the US in a prolonged war and to what extent?
>> Oh, I think that's very true. I think they would like to have us in a state of perpetual warfare with the enemies of Israel. That's their view. But you need to come to terms with the reality. The Israelis don't care about anybody in the Gulf. They could care less. They don't care about anybody who is not a Jew. Let's be frank. This is the state of Jewish supremacy. This is a war of Jewish supremacy. How many times do you have to listen to someone like Netanyahu or Ben Gavir or a host of other people tell you that at some point you have to take people at their word, believe what they are saying, and they don't give a damn about us. We are only useful in so far as that they can employ our military power at will in support of their goals. Is it in our interest to destroy the Iranian nation state? No, we had no interest in that. Why would we be interested in doing a thing like that? We want to trade. Trade is the lifeblood of our nation. We are commercial state. We're not some sort of totalitarian Soviet Union that walls itself off and then tries to impose new communist regimes on other states. That's all nonsense. Israel is interested in one thing, Israel. And if Israel has to sacrifice millions of people in order for it to feel safe, in in order for it to dominate the region, that is exactly what Israel will do. Now, inside the United States, this truth is finally beginning to be felt. People are beginning to figure this out, and they're asking the question, what are we doing? What is this for? Why would we implement a draft and raise a million men and then move them 6,000 miles from the United States to attack people in Iran? People are asking that. [clears throat] What's the reason? What's the strategic purpose? Was Iran a threat to us? And people know that's not true. We've been listening to all of these lies for years. Oh, the Iranians are two weeks from a nuclear weapon. Iran's been two weeks from a nuclear weapon for at least 30 years. And by the way, if they get a nuclear weapon, they're going to nuke America. What? Why? Is there a particular reason for that? No. And remember, historically, when we went into the Gulf, we said our purpose there was to permit commercial traffic. In other words, to facilitate it, to protect it, to encourage it, not to stop it. But then under tremendous pressure from the Israeli lobby in the United States and the Zionist billionaires that back it and Israel itself, we finally decided, all right, you know, we'll we'll we'll go to war and we'll get the deal that you want. We'll emasculate Iran. We'll make them bow to your interests and what you want. After all, that's happened in the Gulf. That's what the Gulf States have done. Effectively, Saudi Arabia has done that. Has anyone ridden to the rescue of the Palestinians who are being murdered or expelled from their homes? Has the Egyptian army said, "We have a moral obligation to our brothers to cross Israel's border and protect all of these people who are being driven from their homes and killed." No. What about the Turks? What about the Turks? There's the 500 lb gorilla in the room. The largest army in NATO, a powerful state, supposedly Muslim, supposedly feeling solidarity with Muslims everywhere. And what have they done? Nothing. And Syria, what's happened in Syria? We removed the moderate who actually ran the country and essentially tolerated Shiites, Jews, Armenians, Christians. We got rid of him. We've replaced him with a an ISIS Alqaaida alumnus. That suits Mr. Netanyahu. That seems to suit Mr. Erdogan. But now we see the Israelis moving north in Lebanon. Eventually the Israelis are going to move north in Syria. What will the Turks do at that point? The only nation state in the region that has said no thank you to Israel is Iran. And so it had to be attacked. It had to be destroyed only. It refuses to be destroyed and it refuses to capitulate. That's the stark truth.
>> What happens if Trump seeks an offramp and Iran refuses that?
>> They want to continue the war. As we said, >> Iran has already said, "We are not going to negotiate. Forget it. You You've had it."
>> So, what happens if they keep bombing Israel? What happens if their capabilities don't get eroded and the US pulls out and they keep bombing Israel to ensure it never happens again? What could Israel do next?
>> It presupposes that we can disengage. See, I don't think Mr. Trump has had this conversation with Mr. Netanyahu because without us, Israel is going to have a tough time surviving. This is a this is a worldchanging event in the Gulf. Sykes Pico is over. Everyone's had it. And the Muslim people who live in all of these countries have had it. Even if they're elites who are wealthy and enjoying the good life don't necessarily agree with them. The truth is the vast majority of Muslims, Arab, Turks, and Persians have had it. So the old Sykes Pico arrangement is dead. So what's going to happen? I don't think we can just arbitrarily disengage. We're going to have to come to terms of some kind. And I think we know what those terms are. Iran is going to say America out of the Gulf. And I don't think that the people that are living in the Gulf by the time this happens will object to that because they now know we cannot protect them. Have you been protected by the United States armed forces? No, we can't do it. We cannot protect them. We can't even protect Israel. Although we're doubling down on trying to do that with everything that we've got. By the way, if you're in the GCC, you're watching where all the missiles are going, where all the radars are going and the assistance. It's all going to Israel. It's not going to them. So, [clears throat] what are we going to what are we going to say? Are we going to say no, we're going to stay in Israel or excuse me, we're going to stay in the Gulf in perpetuity and you just keep on bombing? I don't think so. Remember, there is this entity out there called the American people, the American electorate. They're not interested.
>> Yeah. >> They don't want to stay there. They don't buy into this. What about the rest of the world? I mean, even if we even if everything stopped right now, how long would it take to get the oil back online? Yeah, that's a very good point. Very important.
>> This is going to take a long time. We we've done in many cases not just months of damage, but years to years of damage to our friends and to the Iranians. So, I I think we're going to have to face something. We're going to get a term like that. Get out of the Gulf. So, who's going to who's going to preserve access to the Persian Gulf? Well, the United States Navy hasn't done that. Do you think the United States Navy's going to sail into the Gulf right now with precisiong guided missiles and drones and everything else? They'd be foolish and stupid to do so. Every time it looks like they're threatened, what do we do with the Navy? We sail away hopefully out of range. I mean, naval forces are vulnerable. We're not stupid. We know that. So, how do you handle the the Persian Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz? I think you eventually have to settle on [clears throat] an international treaty that is guaranteed by China and Russia and India and Japan and Korea and the United States. In other words, we all agree that this is an international waterway. No one can block it. No one will block it. Eventually, we'll have to do something like that. So, [clears throat] what else are we going to have to do? What about Mr. Netanyahu and his government. Is Iran going to stop fighting just because we tell them we don't want to fight anymore? Or are they going to say we're not going to live with an Israel that's governed by this man Netanyahu and his party? We want regime change in Israel. What are we going to do about that? I mean, listen, this is where we're headed right now, Mario. People need to understand this because it's it's as we say in America, put up or shut up. Either you commit all the military power of the United States against Iran and its current position in the Persian Gulf, and that includes the use of ground forces or get out. I think we're going to shut up. Now, here's the thing we haven't talked about. That's a nuclear weapon. we're not going to use a nuclear weapon. [clears throat] I can tell you a lot of things about President Trump. He's not going to do that. He is he is justifiably opposed to that. He sees that as the worst thing that could happen. And he's right. It is because once you use it, it normalizes the use of the weapon. [clears throat and cough] The Russians, the Chinese, the Pakistanis, the Indians, all of the nuclear powers will not respond positively to that development. that could have terrible consequences for Israel. Terrible consequences. They're the ones that are most likely to turn to the use of a nuclear weapon, not us. And my concern from the very beginning [clears throat] and still is that Mr. Netanyahu has more authority over us than President Trump has over him and Israel. And that's because the Congress and the White House and the financial sector and media are all ultimately tied to him. The Zionist billionaires that support him, bankroll him, are going to keep him in a position of power over us if we allow it. And Mr. Trump is in office because of them. And there [clears throat] are people on the hill that are there because of them. So, how do you disengage from this war?
>> [clears throat] >> excuse me, without risking risking a serious breach with Israel and what that could mean here inside the United States for the political leader who does that. I I don't know. I don't know the answer to the question, but I don't see any evidence that the Iranians are going to change their views and their demands. If anything, this war and the damage we've done has reinforced it and stiffened their spines to the point where they will not bow.
>> Ironically, while we're speaking, there's a barrage of 100 rockets, [clears throat] according to Israeli outlets, fired by Hezbollah. I remember the first time we chatted, it was during the war between Israel and Hzbollah. We met in Washington and and we're talking about Hezbollah being completely destroyed back then. Well, they just fired 100 rockets now while you're speaking. And that comes after [clears throat] I got the alert of an attack on the UAE. Now, the FBI also warned, according to ABC, that the Iran could retaliate by launching drones to the West Coast. Not sure how much truth there is to this or whether that's within their capabilities militarily.
>> Um, [clears throat and cough] >> I don't think so. >> I don't think so because I think the Iranians know that the American people are not necessarily supportive of this war. And if you know that, why would you provoke them and cause casualties and injuries to us in the United States? So, I don't think so.
>> Could um we're talking about Israel using a nuclear weapon, the whole Sansson protocol >> as a way to keep, you know, to maintain the survival. But there's also fears that now Iran is more driven than ever to develop their own nuclear weapon. The leader that had a fatwa against developing nuclear weapons is dead. his son who lost his um Mushaba lost his father, his mother, his wife, his son, his niece, his I think brother-in-law, his multiple family members that he lost. Plus, he was injured in this attack. Plus, he was already considered more radical or more critical of the US before all this happened. And now he's the new supreme leader. Isn't Iran wouldn't Iran be more committed to develop a nuclear weapon now as a the only possible deterrence from this happening again? And then wouldn't you have first is that a scenario that's possible? Wouldn't that make the Middle East even more dangerous because now Saudi would want one and then the dominoes will start falling with other countries want to to to arm up. I I think uh the lesson of this war is very important and that is that if you do not have a nuclear weapon, you are always vulnerable to attack by the United States of America. That if the America doesn't like your country, doesn't like your regime, doesn't like your society, and feels that it wants something different, then you can be invaded and destroyed. Now, you can't invade Iran at this point. That's nonsense. You just look at the thousand miles from one end of uh Iran to the other. Look at the terrible terrain that you'd have to cross. That's not going to happen. But I think everybody is now going to turn around and think twice before they do not invest in a nuclear weapon. I think the tendency will be to do that. And I agree with you. I think there are probably voices in Iran who are now saying, "Damn it, this would not have happened to us had we had nuclear weapons." But that's a that's a question they have to address. I mean, personally, I hate the whole idea of nuclear weapons and always have. I mean, this Stalin is not one of my favorite people. He's probably the worst criminal in the world. Right behind Bao and just above Hitler. And Stalin is responsible for millions and millions of his own countrymen being killed and others. But Stalin was right about nuclear weapons after it was used. He said, "Yes, nuclear weapons are political weapons. They're not military weapons because they destroy everything. There's no real military value to them, but they are politically useful in so far as they guarantee your territorial integrity." And Stalin was right. Yeah.
Um, there's another report that came out yesterday. Multiple reports. I'm going to play the video in the meantime of the barrage rockets that's flying towards Israel. Just flew towards Israel just now from Hisbala which were meant to be completely eradicated. You can see the barrage there. Um, there is reports from initially CBS and then CNN and today ABC put out a report that the that Iran began mining the shre. Now, for people that are not keeping close track of this, there's multiple ways for Iran. You could remove the video. There's multiple ways for Iran to close the straight. They could do it just with drones and missiles, which is sufficient really, and they would allow just the Chinese ships and Iranian cargo ships or cargo ships heading to China to pass through. Um, then they've got their sea drones as a way to target the ships. Now, how capable they are depends who you ask. They've got the diesel submarines as well, a handful of them. I think a couple of dozen, about 30 of them. And then the most extreme um card that Iran could play and something they've threatened multiple times in the last two decades and that's mining the trader homes. Now that's pretty significant because that essentially makes it impossible for any cargo ship to go through. Um and for a long time demining I don't know how capable
>> Mario do we know if that's true.
>> Depends who you want to believe. So CNN, CBS, ABC said yes. Mron said he has no evidence about two hours ago. He has no evidence that that has happened. and experts and analysts I've spoken to and and I agree with that analysis is that there's no point in doing that because the straight is already closed. So what's the point of mining it unless they put maybe uh ABC said today there's a dozen mines that was that were laid there and the only explanation that I would have logical explanation is it's a threat. It's like, look, stop whatever it is that you're doing. Don't strike our old depots or don't strike whatever or we're going to mine the straight and destroy the global energy industry um energy market. So, that's that's my only assumption on why it would make sense. Um but what would it mean to mine the Australian? Do you think Iran would do it or is there any reason they would do it?
>> Well, I [clears throat] I'm not convinced at this point that they've done that. Uh we had two reports this morning. One was from the secretary of energy in the Trump cabinet and he had said that US naval ships had escorted tankers >> through the Persian Gulf. Just another lie from the Trump administration that made no sense. That was withdrawn. The tweet was deleted. Then there came a report that a m a ship that was preparing to mine the straits was sunk somewhere is off the coast of Aman or something. Again, I don't know. We've sunk lots of little vessels. Whether we sank a a mining ship, I have no idea. I just don't know. I do know that it's not just Chinese ships that have been released through the Persian Gulf. They also or excuse me, the Straits of Vormuz, they also allowed ships headed to India to go through uh the Straits of Hormuz. I think over time they'll be willing to release more ships to go through there, particularly if the ownership uh is either neutral or refuses to help or assist us in any way. And right now I know that Japan that draws about 72% of its oil from the Gulf and South Korea somewhere is about 65 66%. I think they're very very upset and very disappointed in us because they are our allies and we've harmed them.
>> See this >> Europe, Asia, Gulf, >> course >> who's left >> monumental stupidity. And somebody sent me this the other day and said, "Well, uh, the recent surge in oil and liquid, you know, LG and so forth is about 6 to 10% here, but in Europe it's 70 to 90%. and in Asia 50 to 100%. But it was pointed out electricity costs, industrial goods, monetary policy, all of these things are going to hit us here at home. And we have a very fragile economy and and financial system. And and really we're turning the rest of the world into impoverished states with no energy and currency volatil volatility is off the charts. So I, you [clears throat] know, the point is we've done enormous damage to all of these states that are normally friendly to us. In fact, somebody came on this morning and said, probably true, the only two states that have benefited from this in terms of income from oil are Russia >> obviously >> and the United States.
>> Yeah. >> So I don't >> especially especially when it comes to gas, Europe Europe is screwed the most again. And I I really think this is more evidence for the absence of any strategy. I wrote something, it's on my Substack where I insisted when war without strategy is war without end. That's our problem. We had no real strategy and we established what were really unattainable objectives. In other words, regime change based on the summary execution of people in charge. we didn't like. That does not necessarily change regimes. What happens when a CEO is fired? They get a new one. You know, this is not rocket science.
>> Again, incredibly stupid assumptions that got us into trouble. Mirror imaging and then saying, "Well, we would never accept this kind of damage in the United States. Surely the Iranians won't." Well, we never thought the Germans and the Japanese would withstand the damage. How many times do we have to go down this stupid road and discover that we're wrong? So, I think Mario, we're headed towards some sort of arrangement that we're not going to like to end this war. And that arrangement will, whether we like it or not, probably reward Iran for withstanding us literally. All right, Colonel. Um, always a pleasure to speak to you. Thank you again for your time. And I don't know how much >> say that. I don't know if that's really true. [laughter] >> I don't know how every time we see each other if the world gets worse. So, if we when we talk again, let's see where we'll be at because uh people have forgotten the Ukraine war hasn't ended. If anything, it boldered Russia. It boosted their coffers and Russia's in a better position than ever to continue the war. And Europe is in a worse position than ever in leading Russia and Russian gas. I think what you described in Europe is going to cause change in European governments and that change will benefit Russia because the vast majority of Europeans want to end this Ukrainian war and they don't buy the argument that Russia wants to invade them. Of course not. Russia's not interested in that at all. So I think we're going to see what's left of Ukraine turned into a rump state with no outlet to the sea. I predict this year the Russians will take Odessa >> and they will probably take De facto Karov. Then the question is do they move on Kief and just just end it before that happens I would hope the Germans have a new government. Uh the French either wise up or have a new government and certainly we need a new government in London. If those things happen, then perhaps we could see some rationality return to international relations so that we can get that war over with.
>> Yeah, I I think the uh the unintended consequences of the war in Iran could end up happening in Ukraine. Um >> well, remember what were the unintended consequences of World War II? Half the world was turned over to communism. Oh, >> we didn't fight for that. We were so busy fighting for one thing, we lost the larger picture. And it took us 50 years to pay for that.