Ibaitik Itsasora
******
Gaza BEFORE Israel showed up
Israel is a criminal state
Bideoa: https://x.com/i/status/1887980771178070396
******
******
Zionists in 2025… “Palestine never existed”
Zionists in 1899… “We will colonise Palestine”
Scott Ritter “I Don’t APOLOGIZE For Anything” (Interview)
youtube.com
Scott Ritter “I Don’t APOLOGIZE For Anything” (Interview)
Find More Sabby Clips Here: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2s9
ooo
Scott Ritter “I Don’t APOLOGIZE For Anything” (Interview)
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LykGQxMSpmk)
Transkripzioa:
0:00
[Music] all right guys welcome back to the show you’ve seen him here before Scott
0:07
Ritter welcome back Scott what’s going on why are you surprised that I was on
0:13
time people aren’t usually on time people aren usually on
0:20
time I’m doing well thank you yourself doing good doing good it’s been a lot of
0:26
uh a lot of news um that we’ve been kind of going through but for those who are not aware if you’ve never seen Scott
0:32
here Scott is um was a former un special weapons uh inspector so Scott the first
0:38
thing I want to ask you about um with Russia there was this announcement from
0:44
the EU and it said they said the EU wants to
0:50
arm itself for a possible major war in
0:55
Europe and from what I read about this it goes on to say according to the European commission the
1:02
EU must immediately prepare for the real possibility of a large scale war with
1:08
Russia and it almost kind of sounds like they do not want to depend on the west
1:13
anymore they want to arm themselves why do you think they they
1:18
think this is a good idea well I don’t know I mean because it’s not a good idea so it’s uh it’s
1:25
impossible really to you know
1:31
I let’s put it this way Europe has been beholden to the United States for nearly
1:37
eight decades now since the end of the second world war the United States has been the Big Brother um you know
1:46
we NATO was a vehicle um for America to
1:52
maintain a permanent military presence in Europe ostensibly to sh serve as a
1:58
shield against the Soviet Union during the Cold War and then later um to
2:04
continue to assert American hegemony over Europe to transform NATO into not something more
2:13
than a transatlantic um defensive Alliance but into a vehicle of global
2:19
Military domination if you take a look at you know what NATO’s been talking about you know moving to the Pacific
2:25
it’s always curious how a North Atlantic Treaty Organization justifies a Pacific Mission but you know
2:33
that’s what NATO was doing I remember in the um there was a period time I I I attended a conference in uh in Abu Dhabi
2:42
uh hosted by NATO uh about a NATO mission to the Persian Gulf NATO setting
2:49
up permanent military um facilities in the Persian Gulf for a NATO presence to
2:55
expand into the Persian Gulf NATO has um you know talked about about dominating
3:00
North Africa um NATO has become an expansive um tool
3:07
because what NATO was was an extension of American foreign policy and national
3:13
security policy um and during this entire transformation you have European
3:19
political and economic Elites that are profiting from this uh their entire careers are built upon rubber stamping
3:27
this American Vision of um using NATO as the enforcement arm of the
3:33
rules-based international order you know this is straight up Biden Administration
3:39
nonsense uh when you know the Biden Administration published a national security strategy document that said it
3:46
is that the purpose of the United States the the foremost purpose is to defend
3:52
the rules-based international order I always thought it was you know to defend democracy or to defend freedom but
3:58
apparently uh it’s the rules-based international order um and these people
4:04
that we see the urilla Vons and others they are um the European bureaucratic
4:11
class these are the people who uh the rules-based international order has given birth to and so now having come
4:19
into power they are threatened by a trump Administration that is saying
4:25
we’re not playing this game anymore I mean Donald Trump literally ran on a platform that said that the rules-based
4:31
international order is the greatest threat to International Peace and security When Donald Trump spoke last
4:36
September and said that the the number one threat to America in the world is
4:41
America itself because of the rules-based international order you know all these Europeans stood up and went
4:48
wait a minute that’s us um and and again I just want to remind people you know it
4:54
wasn’t just a throwaway comment that JD Vance made to zalinsky in the white house the other day where he said you
5:00
you campaigned against us yes he did and so did all of Europe people need to
5:06
understand that I don’t care if you hate Donald Trump feel free get in line uh I don’t
5:13
care how you feel about understand that American elections you remember when they accused Donald Trump of being
5:19
Russia Russia Russia that Russia was tipping the scale on that and that all turned out to be a Lie by the way um you
5:25
know what isn’t a lie Europe tipping the scale on behalf of Joe Biden and kamla
5:31
Harris um that’s what they did and then when because they didn’t want Trump to
5:37
be president because they are afraid of trump because Trump is threatening to shake everything up and then once Trump
5:42
got elected I just want to remind people it’s Europe that worked with the Biden Administration you know the
5:48
administration that lost the election that’s outgoing to be replaced by an Administration that w a mandate maybe
5:54
not as big as Trump says but it’s still a mandate to govern nonetheless of change and they worked with Biden to
6:01
Trump proof Trump proof are the words they used American policy in Europe so
6:08
that Donald Trump would not have any latitude to maneuver VV Russia stopping
6:13
the war in Ukraine now they failed on this but now Trump comes in these are
6:19
three-time losers these are people who are part of a rules-based international
6:25
order that is on its way out for the better I think of the world these are people who tried to tip the scale
6:31
against Donald Trump and again Donald Trump is a thin skinned narcissistic
6:36
egomaniac who is vindictive as hell I mean when you if you poke Donald Trump
6:42
in the eye you’re getting poked back that’s just I’m not saying that’s right I’m saying that’s a fact and they tried
6:49
to steal the election from him and then they tried to tie his hands and now Donald Trump is taking action Europe is
6:55
in a panic and now why are they doing what they’re doing well you know this isn’t their first rodeo with Donald
7:02
Trump remember 2016 oh yes he won an election back then too that nobody
7:07
thought he was going to win and he ran on a campaign that said he’s gonna tie up NATO and he’s gonna do all this kind
7:12
of stuff what they did back then was to conspire with a democratic control
7:19
Congress to conspire with the Deep state to tie up Donald Trump to bind him to
7:24
prevent him from doing anything crazy while they just rode him out for four years
7:30
years and then Biden came in and everybody was happy Biden came in and said you know we have a sacred trust to
7:36
Europe those are words that those European power Elites love to hear a sacred Duty for Americans to die for
7:42
Europe well Trump isn’t going to let Americans die for Europe and now the Europeans are trying to play the same
7:48
game they are trying to create a situation to complicate to disrupt
7:53
Trump’s policy prerogatives um and write them out for four years in hopes that somewhow and two years the Democrats can
8:01
reestablish some sort of control over Congress so they can further tie their hands because if they don’t tie Donald
8:07
Trump’s hands up policy-wise it’s over for them Sabby they can’t afford to do
8:13
what they’re saying they’re going to try to do I I was I was wondering that I was like
8:18
how are they gonna afford to but whatever 800 800 billion euro is what they’re talking about I can first of all
8:25
I can guarantee you that by the time if they were serious about doing this this is going to end up costing about 3.2
8:32
trillion Euro and they’re still not going to be able to do it you know let’s just put this in a proper
8:39
perspective NATO the military arm of NATO is atrophied muscle it’s not out of
8:47
shape muscle it’s atrophied muscle it’s equivalent let’s say you have a home let’s say you want
8:54
to buy a home or or you own a home I own a home it’s 50 years old um it needs
9:00
some help it really does so if you view NATO as a you know 80-year-old home that
9:06
just basically you need to go get a home equity loan let’s call it an 800 billion Euro home equity loan that’s what
9:11
they’re talking about and you’re going to borrow this money and you’re going to put a new roof on the house put a new heater in there um get some siding in
9:18
make everything look good and all that stuff but the problem is this is the
9:23
kind of home equity loan that doesn’t just hang out there for 10 years you got to start paying it back immediately
9:29
medely so you borrow the money and within the first month payments doe at
9:34
14% because that’s what they’re borrowing at but now in a home equity loan it’s not as though you get the roof
9:40
right now let’s say they say well you’re G to order the roof but we’re not going to be able to get the roof in for another two years well wait a minute in
9:48
that two year time before I get my roof I gotta be paying this money back oh it’s not 800 billion anymore is it it’s
9:55
probably down to about 650 billion before you even got anything done you’ve already had to put money out there and
10:01
then the same thing with the basement and what you realize is before you can put the roof on all the beams are rotten
10:07
you got to replace the beams we didn’t budget for that that’s going to be even more money that’s gon to take you more and the lead time and everything is
10:13
you’re going to run out of money before you had anything done and the house is a wreck anyways you might as well tear it down NATO is a rotten edifice the
10:21
militaries in NATO are so broken they can’t be fixed literally the only thing that propped them up was the United
10:28
States military the promise of American Military intervention the stiffening of
10:33
their spine but you take America out of the equation and Europe literally has
10:39
nothing they have no defense industry worthy of the name they’ve got no ability to build a defense industry
10:44
because they’ve been going in the opposite direction um they’ve been de-industrializing instead of building a
10:50
solid industrial base and their militaries are they’re corrupt and I don’t mean corrupt in terms of you know
10:57
uh the kind of corruption about money they’re corrupt in the sense that they they don’t let’s just be frank what does
11:04
the military exist for is it a parade ground force is it something that you
11:09
put in the barracks so it looks good on paper no a military to be effective has to be a killing machine I mean I don’t
11:17
mean to be blunt here but I’m just telling you the truth if you want to say you have a military that means that the people that you put in the military you
11:24
got to be trained killers that means you got to put the time and effort into to organize them equip them and train them
11:29
to do this awful job Europe has not been in the business of being trained Killers for 80 years well I could shouldn’t say
11:37
that I would say during the Cold War they were ready to do the fight but since 1991 when the Cold War ended Europe’s
11:44
been the business of eating schnitzel drinking beer and getting fat they don’t
11:49
fight and they don’t know how to fight they don’t know what fighting is and if they ever went into combat they would
11:55
all die I’m not talking about sending a handful of Europeans off to Afghanistan
12:00
where they engag in low intensity conflict I’m talking about high-intensity conflict like being waged
12:06
between the ukrainians and the Russians there’s not a single European military that can survive in that environment
12:13
there’s not one and the reason is they haven’t been investing in the military
12:18
you can’t just turn this around overnight it’s like me you know let’s say I was a bodybuilder at some point in
12:24
time and I was you know competitive trust me that never happened um but
12:29
Then I then I went on the couch for for a long time and all I did is eat Doritos
12:35
and uh you know drink you know high fructose corn syrup infused soda pop and
12:42
my only exercise was getting up from the couch to the refrigerator and back to the couch and then about 40 years later
12:49
I say I wanna I want to go box or I want to go lift I’m going to go to the gym
12:55
for one week and get it done what do you think the odds of that happening are what do you think the odds of me getting
13:01
this the decrepit body in shape at all it’s going to be hard work that’s what Europe is they’ve been on the couch for
13:07
so long they don’t know how to do anything they can’t even open the door to the gym let alone get in the gym and
13:13
lift the British right now are talking just I mean thank goodness for the British military because starmer the the
13:20
Prime Minister has been saying we’re gonna be the lead we’re going to put boots on the ground we’re gonna have planes in the air we’re going to do this
13:26
we’re going to do that we’re going to do this that do this do that do this that the military went we can’t do any of
13:31
that at least the British military is honest you know if you took the entire British Military and put them in um you
13:38
know a large British soccer stadium you’d have 30 to 40 unsold
13:46
seats the British military is diminished and is shrinking they can’t fight I
13:52
think they have uh they’re able to field you know maybe 40 tanks and I don’t know
13:58
how many of those would be op 40 tanks saby 40 tanks that’s nothing and they’re talking
14:04
about taking on Russia and now you have or Sil of underline remember when she was the Minister of Defense of Germany
14:10
she broke the German military that’s how bad she is these people don’t know what they’re talking about what they’re doing
14:16
is posturing they’re making noise they’re posturing they’re bluffing they’re trying to convince America not
14:23
to leave they want to keep America in so they’re saying this is what we’re willing to do if you leave please don’t
14:29
go uh but the reality is they can’t do any of that and the good news is the
14:35
Russians know this the only thing that bothers the Russians is when the French start talking about flexing their
14:40
nuclear muscles that’s when the Russians get a little concerned but when it comes to the conventional aspect of European
14:46
military power Russia’s not worried at all a Russia’s not planning on invading Europe it’s just not in the works and B
14:54
Russia’s not worried about Europe building up a military that capable of fighting the Russians so there’s just a lot of talk a lot of
15:03
hot air but Europe can’t afford it I’ll just leave you this Germany tried this you know in 2022 Olaf Schultz the former
15:10
chancellor of Germany tried that hundred billion dollar infusion into the German military to make German military great
15:16
again never a good idea but um he wanted to make the German military great again a 100 billion Euro and they got the
15:23
money they borrowed the money and exactly what I told you was going to happen 100 billion happened to the 100
15:28
billion they started to invest and they realized these are all long lead projects that they want so they they
15:34
have to put the money down but they have to start paying the money back literally within the first year
15:39
that 100 billion became 60 billion then it turned into 40 billion then they ran out of money and nothing was done last
15:46
year the German defense minister Pistorius went to the Parliament and said I need you to increase the defense
15:52
budget so we can um keep this going and they went nah you’re getting 1.7
16:00
% I think inflation was like 2.3% what does that mean that means that
16:05
the German military instead of growing as the 100 billion do Euros were supposed to do shrunk because they
16:12
didn’t have enough money they only had enough money they couldn’t keep ahead of inflation so the Germans instead of
16:17
growing the military had to cut it back further so that 100 billion Euro that they invested to grow their military
16:23
made their military smaller weaker worse if they spend this 800 billion if they
16:30
if they budget for this what I can guarantee is this the European militaries the collective military will
16:36
be weaker smaller and Europe will be bankrupt even further this is the
16:41
dumbest thing Europe’s ever thought of doing interesting interesting yeah when
16:47
I saw that I was just like uh where are you gonna get the money to do that but whatever okay um borrow it from
16:54
themselves yeah it’s just that’s that that would that would just be insane but I want to pivot to um I’m sure you heard
17:00
about what happened to the two uh journals I want to show this to everybody here um another thing that
17:06
happened uh over the weekend there were two journalists that were killed in Israel and shows to everybody
17:12
developments out of Gaza today where two Palestinian journalists Muhammad Mansour
17:18
and husan Shabbat were killed by the Israelis last year 24 journalists were
17:24
killed around the world 2third of them inside Gaza Bill more come unfortunately
17:29
Trey yings thank you live and right so for those who were not aware um I did see the segment earlier
17:36
this morning that Ryan Grim covered about those two journalists that were uh killed in Gaza apparently I guess uh
17:43
Ryan uh may have known one of them as as like a work colleague um but it’s it’s
17:49
very apparent um what is continuing to happen uh in in Gaza which I didn’t I
17:57
did not expect uh there to be like real peace like I knew we talked about this before that
18:03
the ceasefire was like a temporary thing Etc um but there have been uh over 600
18:10
people now that have been killed in Gaza since uh Israel broke the ceasefire uh
18:15
recently last time that you were here you said that Trump was playing a a
18:21
different game and you didn’t think that this was it didn’t sound like you were thinking that it was going to go in this
18:28
direction but the money that Donald Trump took for his campaign says the exact opposite so
18:35
it’s like now we’re seeing you know obviously once again Israel is still killing people in in Gaza uh again a lot
18:42
of civilians a lot of children and they’re back to targeting journalists one of the things that they said on breaking points this morning is that
18:48
those particular journalists were targeted they just it wasn’t that I want people to understand that it wasn’t that
18:55
they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time they were directly targeted so I’m curious to hear
19:02
what is your opinion about that now what do you mean what is my opinion
19:09
I condemn the murder of journalists uh clearly truth is not the friend of Israel or the friend of the United
19:15
States uh remember whatever Israel is doing in Gaza is a policy that’s been
19:21
green lit by the United States supported by the United States um I don’t
19:26
understand what Trump is doing uh here um you know I take a look at his Russia
19:33
policy and I see a man who is dedicated to Bringing about peace and therefore I take him seriously or I took him serious
19:39
I took him at face value when I extended that um that Embrace of peace and
19:44
peaceful outcomes uh to the Middle East and you know why not he sent Steve W
19:49
witkoff in there and um and got a ceasefire when when Biden was unable to get a ceasefire and so I was you know
19:58
convinced that he was promoting peace uh this seems to have gone off the grid um
20:03
not only is Israel doing whatever the hell they want to do in Gaza which is equivalent you know basically continuing
20:09
their genocidal policies of the past and it is genocide um and you know one of
20:15
the reasons why they kill journalists who are on the ground in Gaza is because they want deny uh the rest of the world
20:20
access to Accurate reporting about the crimes that are being committed on a daily basis by the Israelis but you know
20:27
then he goes off and he doubles down um remember Donald Trump in 2019 said that uh he condemned people for getting us
20:33
involved in Endless wars in the Middle East and uh Wars to take American treasure and cost American lives um and
20:40
then he gets us uh involved in a shooting war in Yemen where we have American bombers flying multiple sorties
20:45
over Yemen a day every day um killing hundreds of uh Yemen civilians many of
20:52
them children bombing hospitals doing to Yemen what Israel does to Gaza um you
20:57
know so that’s not a man of peace and now we’re being told that he’s U he’s dispatched a number of B2 bombers and U
21:05
you know tankers to Diego Garcia uh to begin an air campaign at least threatening to be an air campaign
21:11
against Iran um literally Gonna Get Us involved in that that war that he claimed that he didn’t want us to get in
21:17
I thought when Donald Trump um posted on his social media the video clips of
21:23
Jeffrey Sachs condemning Benjamin Netanyahu uh for getting America tied down Wars in Iraq and elsewhere that
21:30
that was Donald Trump’s way of saying I’m not going to make that same mistake but it looks like he’s making that same
21:36
mistake um I had thought that maybe if he had surrounded himself with the
21:41
zionists that it was sort of a Take On The Godfather keep your enemies clo your friends close but your enemy closer uh
21:47
but no it turns out that the zionists are calling the shots on Middle East policy and um you know I was wrong what
21:55
what can I say um you know the the facts speak for themselves I was hopeful I I
22:00
wanted to believe that uh Trump was serious about giving peace a chance
22:06
um but actions speak louder than words and right now we have American aircraft
22:11
bombing Yemen civilians we have Mor aircraft U massing he sent a threatening
22:16
letter to the Iranian leadership that foreclosed any opportunity or any potential of direct negotiations between
22:23
the United States and uh and and Iran and unless there’s some you know big
22:29
game being played here um that you know in the end he pulls a rabbit out of the hat or something like that it looks like
22:35
we’re headed for a major Middle Eastern conflict and the one that Donald Trump said he campaigned on saying he didn’t
22:40
want to uh get involved in well I’m GL I’m glad that you you
22:45
admit that Scott because I think um well just just say I don’t admit anything see
22:51
I’m an analyst Sabrina I’m a professional analyst this what I did my entire life this isn’t about admitting
22:57
you were wrong you you know what analysts do they make assessments based upon the available facts when I made the
23:03
facts to you last time we weren’t bombing Yemen when I made the facts to you la the last time we didn’t have
23:08
airplanes uh you know gathering in Diego Garcia what I do and what I did for a
23:14
living remember I used to brief you know the White House secretary generals commanders and chief uh I wasn’t some
23:21
amateur what you do though is things happen you brief based upon the situation and then data comes in and you
23:28
look at D and you go hey things have changed you know uh it’s not that I was
23:33
wrong I mean I was wrong in my prediction predictive analysis is always a tricky game it’s like being a
23:39
weatherman you don’t know exactly what the weather’s gonna do but I it’s I’m not going to sit here and play the game
23:45
that I was wrong I was right at the time I was right at the time because we weren’t at War I was right at the time
23:51
because he did have a policy that said he wanted peace I put certain emphasis on certain things but you know analysts
23:58
always have to reassess situations and the good analysts do so without fear but
24:04
I what I don’t want to do is open the door for people going Scot rter was wrong I’ll tell you what why don’t you
24:09
come and do this for a while all you people out there to take the cheap shots go to the White House and see how you
24:16
stand up giving predictive analysis to The Situation Room stand in front of that audience and do I’ve done it twice
24:23
all right guys this is what happens things happen what you have to do is
24:28
call it as you see it and right now I’m calling it as I see it you know we may find out that Donald Trump isn’t going
24:34
to bomb Iran and now we have to come around and when that happens I have to you breed me on your show I’ll say looks
24:40
like Donald Trump didn’t bomb Iran so now what is the game and then you have to do that all over again it’s not it’s
24:46
not a mark of shame to get it wrong it’s a mark of Shame not to absorb the new
24:54
information and put out and anybody can sit there and say oh I knew this then God do the job don’t rely on me if you
25:03
can do this if you’ve got the crystal ball then you come out and do this for a living all right it’s a tough thing to
25:10
do um but no I’m not going to sit here and say oh I was wrong and I I don’t apologize for anything I gave you honest
25:17
assessment then and I’m giving you honest assessment now and uh that’s just the way it goes um in the world of you
25:24
know highlevel analysis you got to change your assessment every day that’s why they
25:31
call certain events gamechanging events that means it you know you could be a
25:36
sport analyst I think the Patriots are gonna do great this year and they are
25:41
they’re moving Tom Brady breaks his leg I don’t think the Patriots are going to do as well as I thought they were
25:47
going to do why there was a game-changing event Tom Brady broke his leg oh so you had to change things do
25:54
you admit you were wrong no when I made my initial assessment Tom Brady’s leg wasn’t broken but now it is broken it’s
26:03
uh you know I and I don’t mean to come off on you I don’t I’m not picking on you it’s just a I’m fed up with um you
26:11
know the the the long range snipers from you know the people in the cheap seats who thinks that this is an easy thing to
26:17
do um give it a shot try it you talking about social media oh I
26:24
hate social media with a passion right now yeah I I I just it’s I’m I’m I’m I’m
26:31
fed up because the other thing that happens I mean you’ve get you get the the moralizers out there um you know for
26:39
instance I’ll say uh Iran is a signatory to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty
26:44
statement of fact uh Iran is obliged under nuclear nonproliferation treaty not to have nuclear weapons statement of
26:51
fact um Iran has behaved in a way which has caused concern for the international
26:56
atomic energy agency about its nuclear program statement of fact um and if Iran
27:02
does produce nuclear weapons it would by definition constitute a threat to International Peace and security
27:08
statement of fact that the security Council of the United Nations statement of fact might authorize military force
27:14
to be used against it and if I say all that they go Scott no Iran has a moral
27:19
right to have nuclear weapons well you know what happens when you say that you
27:25
just disinvited yourself from any real world table where this issue could be
27:30
resolved I have no problem with people saying we shouldn’t bomb Iran and we should be seeking alternative methods to
27:36
deal with you I’m all on board with that but when people are lecturing me an arms control specialist has been doing this
27:42
at the tippy tippy tippy end of the spear for a long time and they say no Scott forget the npt forget treaties
27:49
forget all that Iran has a moral obligation to have nuclear weapons I say
27:55
you’re literally insane you don’t know who you’re talking about but you can say this on social media and get away with
28:01
it but you know where you can’t say it in the halls of power in the places in
28:06
the world where real things happen well do you do you think anyone should have nuclear
28:12
weapons I think that when the nuclear nonproliferation treaty was signed there were five declared nuclear weapon States
28:18
so they are allowed to have nuclear weapons but they also agreed as part of the npt to work towards getting rid of
28:25
these weapons that is their moral obligation to build a nuclear-free world so I believe there are nations that are
28:32
legally permitted to have nuclear weapons and I also believe that these nations have a moral duty to live up to
28:38
the promises that were made when the npt was signed to get rid of nuclear weapons but since that time we’ve seen the
28:44
proliferation of nuclear weapons and we’ve gone from the five original members who were the five permanent
28:50
members of the security Council and we’ve added India Pakistan North Korea has been brought in Israel has been
28:56
brought in they’re not a Ator neither is North Korea anymore it’s become a very complicated situation and what I don’t
29:03
want to do is see it become even more complicated what I’d like to do is to see a situation where we can wrap our
29:11
hands around this and begin the process of you know nuclear disarmament creating a denuclearized world that’s responsible
29:18
talk when but there’s people out there saying no no I mean the other one I like is everybody should have nuclear
29:24
weapons again you you’re not going to get this fly on social media where you have a bunch of ill-informed
29:30
well-meaning people who are saying all this I can guarantee you that’s never
29:36
spoken where real decisions are made and that’s the problem with social media is
29:41
that exists an environment where no real decisions are made it’s it’s a free flow which is fine I I think it’s great to
29:48
have the free flow of information but to pretend that you your voice matters when
29:54
you say Iran should have nuclear weapons not even Iran R will agree you with you on this one and I can certainly tell you
30:02
that the rest of the world would never agree with this uh but that’s that’s the problem with social media is that you’ve
30:08
get just a lot of unrealistic moralizing from people who Frankly Speaking don’t have the resume that um that would
30:16
normally allow them to be present to make such a case uh but social media
30:22
anybody can become the expert of the day and that’s what happens they all become Experts of the day
30:28
well I well I I don’t think you should have to have a resume but but I will say
30:33
that um I I don’t agree with nuclear weapons at all I don’t think any country
30:39
should have nule I’m on board with you I’m I’m I’m a big uh Global zero guy I I
30:45
believe that all nuclear weapon but now the question I have for you Sabrina is how do we get
30:51
there how where we are today to there there has to be a demand
30:58
the powers that be to dearm right but how but how do we create the confidence for instance when you’re
31:04
the Russians and you have this nuclear Arsenal and the United States has been saying their SE for the last several
31:09
decades that together with NATO we’re seeking the Strategic defeat of Russia and the only thing that prevents them
31:15
from acting on that decisively is Russia’s nuclear deterrence and so now you’re to the Russians and Sabrina and
31:21
Scott are going you got to get rid of the nuclear weapons and they’re going that ain’t going to happen how about the Chinese they wa wake up one morning
31:28
found out that America is getting ready prepared to launch a nuclear preemptive attack regarding Taiwan the Chinese go H
31:35
that’s not a good thing we’re going to modernize our nuclear force we’re going to make it complicated build silos put
31:40
things in the ground so they just expanded it and now they’ve created genuine nuclear deterrence and now
31:46
Sabrina and Scott go but you gotta get rid of your nuclear weapons and they’re gonna go ain’t gonna happen North Korea
31:51
there’s going to go hey uh let me mention two names to you Saddam Hussein and muar Gaddafi and there’s a reason
31:58
why Kim Jong-un ain’t going to give up his nuclear weapons because regime changes the American
32:04
policy you see we live in a real world and while I agree that we have to we
32:09
should be getting rid of these how do we get there is the question and the best way to get there is not to allow anybody
32:17
else to build nuclear weapons capability which is why I’m adamantly Drawing the Line at you know with Iran you because
32:25
the second you say well it’s okay for Iran to have it then Saudi Arabia is going to want them turkey may want them
32:31
um it’s a dangerous situation so we should be this is why I supported Donald Trump in his first term in his
32:37
denuclearization effort with North Korea you know the one that everybody mocked how dare he meet with Kim Jong-un well
32:44
my God how do you expect North Korea to get rid of their nuclear weapons if you don’t have these meetings and build
32:50
confidence trust you know so that they can believe that they will be safeguarded if they get rid of these
32:56
weapons we have to start talking about how we build a universe in America in in the
33:04
world where people can be comfortable getting rid of nuclear weapons um but that can’t happen when you have a
33:10
screaming mass of people out there saying no no no the global South must create their own nuclear deterrence
33:17
against the imperialist forces of the United States well Sabrina if that’s their thinking we’re never going to get rid of
33:23
nuclear weapons because all we’re going to see is proliferation then one day they’re going to be used
33:29
and Chain Reaction we all die this is why you know nuclear disarm is such a
33:36
very it’s just extremely difficult thing to do I’ve done it I’m one of the few people that actually did it um and I can
33:43
tell you how difficult it is to get that that job done to to build up a treaty framework for that you know all these
33:49
people out there screaming you can’t have treaties with America well you know what guys the intermediate nuclear forces treaty when it was in operation
33:57
was an American treaty and we got rid of an entire class of nuclear weapons weapons that threatened International
34:03
Peace and security and could have brought the end of Europe we got rid of them that’s America did that you know we
34:09
gosh Imagine That America doing something good Americans doing something good because it was American inspectors
34:15
going over to to the Soviet Union to implement it and the Soviet inspectors Coming to America to implement that you
34:21
we are capable of doing good things and um I’d like to believe that we could do good things again in the future and
34:26
that’s why I push back back against people who keep screaming how bad America is how evil America is you know
34:32
I’m not going to sit here and say that everything America does is good I’m not even going to say most of the things we do is good we got a lot of problems but
34:38
you know what we’re big we’re powerful you can’t ignore us and the best thing
34:44
to do is to try and get the American people to facilitate change from within so our government reflects the values
34:50
that we claim to do so we are better Global neighbors but um I don’t know how
34:56
you feel about this but you know I uh I’d like to believe that Americans can can um can solve the problems of
35:03
America um and uh and we don’t need you know all the the others in the world you
35:10
know trying to chop us down while we’re doing it because it’s difficult to try and solve the many problems we Face uh
35:17
you know having people come at and try and take your knees out so yeah I push back against anybody that pushes up
35:22
against America because I believe that America is a is is
35:28
the most powerful Nation on the planet today uh and we have the the greatest
35:33
capacity to to do good if we just give our chance ourselves a chance to do that
35:39
um and I’m not going to sit back idly while people try to diminish um diminish
35:44
America I know our history I know our history very well and I’m not proud of our history we’ve done many things wrong
35:49
but like I said I’m a living example of a time when we did things right and what we did is we saved the world from
35:55
nuclear Annihilation that’s sort of a big big one so um I’ll take that ledger any day of the week who’s trying to take
36:02
our knees out again you you you you get the uh the
36:07
you get the voices from uh from the the global South I’m not going to empower them by naming them here on your show uh
36:14
but there’s a number of um you know people out there that um that promote
36:20
anti-imperialism okay I’m I’m all for that but anti-imperialism means anti-americanism it means that they are
36:26
against America that they wish America harm saby you you can go on X and see it all day long the people that say America
36:32
is evil America must be brought down Etc and that um the reason why I’m bringing
36:38
this is up is that you know we speak of trying to build up alternative media and
36:44
social media as a as an alternative to mainstream media I think we could be in agreement that mainstream media is
36:49
fundamentally broken and corrupt and is incapable of putting the real truth out there and so if we’re trying to take
36:56
fact-based arguments and transfer it from mainstream media to Alternative media and to social media
37:02
platforms to engage in the kind of debate discussion and dialogue that’s necessary to solve these problems to
37:08
empower people with knowledge and information um then only to find that as you try to speak out you get drowned out
37:16
by the voices that hate America want to bring America down and all that stuff that that sort of negates the value of
37:22
alternative media and social media uh instead of having the clarity of of of
37:28
of purpose um and then what happens is we drown ourselves out with the caffy of
37:33
noise and mainstream media reemerges as the dominant source of news because uh
37:38
it they’re able to do that unchallenged they don’t have people trying to contradict them I’m still stuck on the
37:45
anti-imperialism piece anti-imperialism doesn’t mean that you hate America it means that you want the US you want this
37:51
country to stop stealing resources from other countries and impoverishing those countries in doing so that doesn’t mean
37:57
that you hate the United States it means well actually Sabrina if you read their post they want America to
38:04
collapse means you hate America that means they hate you by the way they want they want your economy to collapse they
38:10
want you to lose your job they want our society to fall apart and I’m not in
38:16
favor of that and I will never support that I I think you might be taking the opinion of a couple of people on on
38:23
social media as what anti-imperial anti-imperialism is and I I highly uh I highly recommend
38:32
that you don’t do that it’s like I mean these you know you don’t even know who
38:37
some of these people are right like sometimes these are just accounts so I highly recommend that you’re not taking
38:42
their word for what anti-imperialism means anti-imperialism means that you just really don’t think that the US this
38:49
country which has been doing so for so long should not be stealing resources from other
38:55
countries it it doesn’t mean it means saby I I I I know exactly what it means
39:00
and I know what our country has done the good and the bad um what I’ve chosen to
39:06
do and this what is what irritates so many people is I’ve chosen to draw a line between um and and people are like
39:14
oh you jumped on the Trump bandwagon what I did do is I I I I said that I and
39:19
I accept this that Trump is fundamentally different from the past if if you’ve been studying me at all you
39:26
know that I was very anti an Biden I was anti-trump the first time around I was anti- Obama I was anti- Bush I was anti-
39:34
Clinton why very things you’re talking about the imperialistic uh hegemonic
39:39
policies of the United States and one of the big problems I I I
39:44
had with these policies that they were leading us towards unsustainable Global confrontation that would ultimately lead
39:51
to nuclear war and we’d all die U and we came so very dangerously close to that
39:56
last all I don’t think Americans realize how close we came twice in September and November of having a nuclear war with
40:02
Russia only now people are starting to recognize just how dangerous that was we have a president now that’s trying to
40:09
change that move us in a different direction is he perfect not even close um are does America still have you what
40:16
we call imperialist policies around of course we do we we still do bad things around the world but the big picture is
40:23
we’re moving we’re trying to move in a way that prevents nuclear war that means that I need to be supportive of these
40:30
policies um and it’s very difficult to say that you support these policies while you’re uh attacking um you know
40:39
the the the foundational aspects of the government or the nation that that this this
40:45
President represents when you have a president commit that the rules-based international order is the enemy why
40:51
don’t we give them a chance to actually follow through on policies to to dismantle because you know what the key to American imperialism is you know the
40:58
facilitating vehicle for that the vectors it’s the rules based International order we steal from people
41:04
in so many ways the international monetary fund the World Bank and all this stuff these are the things that this President’s trying to
41:10
dismantle and uh so I’m in favor of giving him a shot I know he does bad things I know I’m not sitting here gonna
41:16
sing the Praises of Yemen or Gaza or Iran um and and those policies but I
41:23
think that you know we have to understand that there has to be balance here that he’s trying to do things to uh
41:30
to alter the way America interfaces with the world and there’s just people out there that don’t want to give him a
41:35
chance don’t in in my and my con my response is what are the Alternatives what are the Alternatives
41:41
if you’re going to say you’re going to oppose this President you want him to do what continue the rules-based international order continue using the
41:49
IMF and the World Bank to hold third world uh Global South economies Hostage
41:55
to the whim of American policy
42:01
I think that those things would happen regardless if the president was a Democrat or or republican if it was
42:06
Trump or Biden because the reality is you can’t continue to steal from these countries and then say things like I
42:14
don’t want the people to leave those countries and try to go somewhere else or I don’t want any type of Revenge from
42:21
those people and if you look at some of the countries that the US government has uh just
42:28
completely demolished in my opinion like Haiti if if you look at Haiti if you
42:33
look at Yemen if you look at Somali you look at all these countries that the US government is it’s not just the us but
42:39
it’s mainly the US that the US has destroyed and then just leave the people
42:44
there and say live in that
42:50
so this type of behavior that we put out into the world it comes back home
42:58
when people ask like why can’t we respect each other here in the United States we don’t even respect we have no
43:03
respect so how are we going to treat each other with some type of dignity how are we going to support our neighbor and
43:10
lift each other up when we’re destroying the world I I I don’t I don’t disagree with
43:16
you at all my question is how do we get out of that and I start with the basic premise
43:23
of we have to be alive to get out of that that we can’t solve anything if we’re dead because then the the problem
43:30
solved itself and to me the number one threat to the United States of America in terms of its existential survival is
43:35
nuclear war U and as I said Haiti didn’t almost kill all all Americans last year
43:42
Russia did the the our policies towards Russia and so I have decided that I am
43:48
going to prioritize my attention on saving America and the world from
43:54
nuclear war by focusing my efforts on what Trump is trying to do um with
44:00
Ukraine um and by extension what he’s doing with NATO you and I talked about the danger you know NATO is an
44:06
organization that was pushing us towards Global confrontation so if Trump is trying to disentangle America from NATO
44:14
isn’t that a good thing would shouldn’t we view that as a good thing right right that’s a good thing but still I know you
44:20
I know obviously you know you’re against like nuclear war I think the majority of of people are none of us really want
44:26
that to happened but it’s not just Russia there’s also the Middle East so
44:32
if we are heading towards some type of conflict with Iran which it seems like that’s what Israel wants to happen that
44:38
threat is still there so to answer your question when you said how do we fix this obviously this is a more long-term
44:44
project but the real answer is you have to get corporate money out of electoral politics how do we but but but how do
44:51
you and I do that Congress won’t even touch that issue with a 10- foot pole because
44:57
Cong you know I mean how do we get Congress to to pass laws that that do that um you have to stop voting for
45:04
people that take corporate money right but we don’t have another election for two years that’s well I mean look you
45:11
can start like you’re right you don’t have another one for another two years but this doesn’t just apply with Congress this applies on the local level
45:18
as well this is why I said like the root of the root of all of this is money like
45:24
that’s why we have these wars that’s why like the government they have these they have this connection with the military
45:29
industrial complex so there’s that and then they have the connection with Wall Street so as long as you have big money
45:35
interest and you have Lobby interest groups that are writing legislation in Congress yeah that’s why these things
45:42
don’t change speaking the same language I’m 100% behind that I I’ve been saying this forever I mean I I get in you know
45:49
I I get in big debates with people about um citizens united um you know and and
45:56
in in the con you know the the consequences of that legislation when you start calling corporations the
46:03
equivalent of people when it comes to free speech and money you’ve just destroyed you and me because you and I
46:09
maybe you someday because you know you you’ve got it in you but I’m never going to be successful enough to where I can
46:15
write checks that can balance out a corporation’s ability to influence politics and and the bottom line even if
46:21
I could I wouldn’t because that’s wrong it you got to take money out of politics
46:27
we have to find a way to let ideas be what drives to make sure that when we vote for people it’s not because they
46:32
have the best advertisement and able to buy off of you know this that and the other thing that it’s the person that
46:38
can stand in front of an audience and articulate uh ideas about issues that matter um that get voted in um so we’re
46:47
on the we’re on the same we’re on the same page on that one but I keep you know I also have to operate within my um
46:55
you know parameters of my expertise and so my primary expertise is nuclear
47:00
nonproliferation disarmament um and you know military issues um
47:06
I I’ll be the concerned citizen about everything else but you know my my voice will be louder in the areas where I
47:13
actually have a certain amount of um of expertise um and so I’ve made a decision
47:19
to prioritize um you know these issues over other issues first of all none of
47:25
us can do everything and what happens if you try to become a master of all trades you know was a jack of all trades but a
47:32
master of none um and then we get beat um we we really do have to become a
47:37
collective of self-supporting expertise um where we support each other
47:45
as we move towards this common goal this common objective you know
47:51
I sebie I get depressed every day when I read the news because the news is
47:56
horrible the world we live in is a horrible place and there’s things happening that we don’t even I mean you
48:02
know Gaza is just you know mind numbing but you know what else is mind- numbing
48:08
the situation in East in in eastern Democratic repu Republic of Congo where
48:13
you have 30 to 40,000 children slave labors in these open pit Minds where
48:21
they actually carve the Cobalt out of the soil with their hands poisoning their young bodies while they’re doing
48:27
it and we Americans do it so we can have this and we don’t say a damn word about
48:33
it we just ignore it so that we can have this and have this computer that you and
48:38
I are talking over and all this stuff and you know that sickens me um and
48:43
that’s happening a lot of people don’t know about it too by the way yeah but but then you go around the world as you
48:50
expand and you just realize the amount of harm that it’s not just America
48:55
that’s the other reason why I take I take offense at the look I know America’s sined a lot yes and we should
49:04
we should work to fix this and we must work to fix this but we’re not the only
49:10
ones that have these little shiny phones the whole world has them this is a
49:15
global problem um and Global greed is an issue as well uh China gets a pass on
49:23
just about everything because you know of course China’s just simply the you know economic counter to the American
49:29
imperialism and all that well China does a lot of things around the world that um
49:34
that that they need a lot of the Cobalt as well um we all every there all nations
49:41
are guilty of this and so the the question now is how do we collectively you know move in the right direction and
49:49
again my premise is we got to be alive to do that so that’s why I put a heavy emphasis on trying to stop nuclear Wars
49:56
and trying to stop nuclear nonproliferation it’s not because I don’t think everything else is important but the last time I checked there’s 24
50:03
hours in a day doctor tells me I’m supposed to sleep for eight of those hours I go to sleep for about four of
50:09
those hours um it ain’t enough um and then you know I’ve got to eat um I’ve
50:15
got to work I gotta write the but I’m supposed to absorb information too that and as you know today we it’s a fire
50:23
hose of information coming at us on this this internet thing and and it’s not just reading information but it’s also
50:29
Discerning what’s good information from bad information it all takes time and so you have to prioritize what the stories
50:36
are that you feel are the ones that you can dig it because as you know if you if
50:42
you start attacking an issue and you haven’t done your job right you’re gonna get slaughtered with the people coming
50:48
at you because when you when you have a profile like you have or like I have um people watch and believe it or not not
50:55
everybody’s out there to applaud you and thank you for what you’re doing uh there’s people out there that just get
51:00
the kicks off of ripping you apart and you the trolls yes and again Mo you
51:07
know it maybe you’re right I mean you’re right my wife has said the same thing I I spent too much time but the problem is
51:15
when you pour yourself into something when you think you’re trying to do the right thing um and you are literally
51:22
exhausting yourself trying to do the right thing um and then you know it’s
51:27
just it just overwhelms you I mean that’s why for instance I I’ve turned off comments I I used to like to read
51:33
the comments just you know because it’s sort of like sort of like a getting a EKG of how you’re uh how the interview
51:39
is going you know I I’ve stopped reading comments a long time ago and um you know but the
51:45
problem is with um like Twitter you or I guess X we call it now um that’s how you
51:52
get that’s how I get that’s how I get my news and so I’m going to be exposed to
51:57
things and I’m only human I read everything I’m I’m stupid I I should have the filter that says don’t read this don’t read this don’t read this
52:03
don’t read but I read everything just like I don’t know I can’t speak for you but most people do and it just gets down
52:09
it just after a while you’re just like why do I even bother why do I even do this you know it’s I mean I really could
52:16
get up in the morning and go fishing and that would be a lot of fun the problem is one morning I’d go fishing I’d be
52:21
casting my line out there and I’d get two sunsets because the world just ended
52:28
and um I’d like to believe that I can still contribute to processes that can
52:35
prevent that from ever happening so that’s why I get up in the morning that’s what I do what I do and I you
52:41
know I do it with a a pure heart and uh you know trying to accomplish the a
52:47
mission that I think is beneficial to all do I step on toes sure why not um
52:52
you know the shirt says Marines it does doesn’t say you
52:58
know Mr you you know that’s the soft touch I
53:03
have the opposite of the soft touch and sometimes I I rub people the wrong way but uh it’s not because I’m trying to be
53:10
a counter troll or whatever I’m just Mission focused I’m Mission focused on the job I’m trying to accomplish which
53:17
is literally at this point in time to help prevent a nuclear war and you know just just so people know that it’s not a
53:23
an issue of ego meaning you know oh I’m trying to promote we
53:29
actually had a great success last year where the projects that I were involved
53:34
in helped inject uh the the the fear of nuclear
53:40
war into mainstream politics and to get policies changed that actually helped
53:46
take us off the path towards nuclear war I’m not going to take sole credit for this but I’d like to believe that I was
53:53
part of the force that was put to you know on a vector to help shift that
53:59
policy away and maybe what I was doing was just enough to to get that finally
54:05
to change direction so this isn’t a feudal effort this isn’t about narcissism this isn’t about you know stroking
54:12
egos it’s about real change and I would also say that if the government hadn’t
54:17
seized my passport last June and I’d been able to do some of the things that that this this progress would be even
54:24
more manifest um and you know I’ll get my passport back I’ll get back on the road and I’ll continue to do what needs
54:30
to be done will I step on toes along the way yeah it’s going to happen and I
54:35
apologize to anybody whose feelings I hurt when I do step on your toes it’s not done
54:40
deliberately I try not to spend uh just a little tip for me I try not to spend a
54:45
lot of time um on social media um even even Twitter and I I I get a lot of my
54:51
news from there too but I try not to spend as much time on there and I I try my best not to be on there too late also
54:57
at night um I just don’t think it’s it’s it’s healthy for your sleep I don’t
55:03
think it’s it’s the best for mental health uh to spend a lot of time on social media so oftentimes people would
55:09
be like well I I tagged you in this I tagged you in that I’m like yeah is it like I I just I just
55:15
don’t I I’m not old school old school but I’m also
55:20
not like I’m I’m a millennial I’m an older Millennial so I remember what it was like to not have social media
55:26
so for me it’s just I’d rather spend more of that time with people like face to face instead of like on social media
55:33
all the time sometimes it’s good to take breaks and I I tell this to everybody sometimes it’s good to take breaks from social media especially it’s more so
55:40
Twitter um to take those kind of breaks because it can be toxic you know it’s
55:46
extraordin my problem is my dogs wake me up every day around 3:30 or 4:00 and
55:53
then I let them out and then the cats want to come in so the point is around that time if you if the funny thing is
55:59
if you go check when I post my B all my ex post take place in a span in the
56:06
morning because I’m literally waiting for the dogs and the cats to do something so I’m I’m on the phone just
56:11
ah and it’s in the morning so my judgment may not be the best and so I’m like ah you said this and next thing you
56:18
know you’re involved in one of these stupid um Twitter Wars and my wife wakes up what did you do stop it put the phone
56:25
down grow up it C it can be that I hear you it can be
56:31
that well well Scott thank you so much for coming on anything you got coming up uh next you want to let everyone know
56:37
about no I mean um I I will if you allow me uh just toh say a word about a new
56:43
project that I’ve been involved in this last month is so called the Russia House it’s a uh it’s on telegram it’s a uh
56:48
it’s a subscription based service just because of the political realities right now it’s uh it’s run out of Russia I
56:55
make no money but we uh we have to pay the project has to pay for interpreters we have professional editing uh but
57:02
basically it’s the counter to russophobia where’re bringing Russian voices uh to an American audience um
57:09
we’ve had a number of really great interviews I just did an interview with Maria zacharova the the spokesperson of
57:15
the foreign Ministry that started as an interview and ended up as a fascinating conversation as she put down her notes
57:21
and started talking from the heart and every conversation I have with the Russians always ends up way with a
57:26
conversation from the heart so the Russia house if you guys have uh the ability to uh if anybody is interested
57:33
in empowering themselves with um the Russian point of view um the Russia
57:38
House on Telegram and you can go to Scot r.com and you can see how to how to get to that all right Scott Ritter thank you
57:46
so much for your time thank you have a good night bye hey guys this was a savy
57:52
clip if you like what you saw hit that like button and subscribe what
oooooo
Scott Ritter: Will Trump bring peace or chaos to Middle East?
ooo
Scott Ritter: Will Trump bring peace or chaos to Middle East? In this interview, Scott Ritter discusses whether Trump’s policies will bring peace or chaos to the Middle East. Trump seems more willing to settle for peace in Ukraine than in the Middle East. Is it because of Israel? Scott Ritter discusses from Iran to Gaza, Yemen to Ukraine, and Ritter provides insight on the current state of affairs in the region. We also posed questions on Iran’s nuclear weapons and the nuclear deal with the JCPOA.
Chapter
00:00 introduction
01:11 Does Trump want peace in the Middle East?
11:27 Is peace possible in Gaza?
21:52 Who is responsible in Gaza?
27:57 Is Iran responsible?
44:56 Will the US find an excuse to attack Iran?
54:16 Are Europe and Ukraine impediments to peace?
Transkripzioa:
introduction
0:00
event of escalation of the United States doing a nuclear strike on Iran?
0:06
Well, let me just start by saying that I disagree with your premise But Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons.
0:13
That’s just a second. You’re getting ahead of myself.
0:49
Hello and welcome to another episode of India and Global Left. If you are new to the show, please smash the subscribe
0:54
button. Also consider being a YouTube member, a patriot or a patreon
1:00
small amounts in the link given in the description box. We rely on you. Without further ado, let me welcome Scott Ritter.
1:07
Scott Ritter is a former United States Marine Corps intelligence officer, former United Nations Special Commission weapons
1:14
inspector, author and commentator. Scott, welcome back to India and Global Left.
1:20
Thank you very much for having me. I want to focus on Ukraine and the Middle
1:25
East, but I think my first question kind of connects both,
1:31
given Jeffrey Sachs was recently asked if he thinks Trump is sincere
1:36
about having peace in Ukraine, and he categorically said that he thinks that
1:41
Trump is sincere in having peace in Ukraine. I suspect you have
1:47
similar views, but correct me if I’m wrong. On on the other hand, the Middle East policy of Trump can be
1:54
defined as giving green signal to genocide in in Gaza and
1:59
full of war plans on Yemen and Iran. So my question to you is how how do you
2:05
connect the two? Well, first of all, I’m not going to
2:11
connect the two in terms of. saying anything that implies that I
2:16
support umm the Trump administration’s
2:23
current policies as being implemented in the Middle East. But there is a
2:29
logical connection between the two. I think he’s sincere in both regards.
2:37
In terms of Ukraine, Russia, understand that what Trump has done has made
2:44
Decisions based upon the reality on the ground in Ukraine. These are decisions that are washed in blood.
2:52
We can call it a peace initiative, but it’s based upon the success of the Russian military in a war of attrition
2:59
against Ukrainians. It has killed, by some estimations, over a million Ukrainians and over 100,000 Russians.
3:07
So let’s not pretend for a moment that Donald Trump’s policies. In Ukraine
3:13
are policies that are based upon, you know, purely peaceful, nonviolent
3:19
solutions. Every aspect of the negotiation is based upon
3:25
seeking to restrict violence, but using that as leverage, meaning that if you don’t do this, then this will happen to
3:33
include with Russia. If you don’t work with us here, we will continue to flow weapons into Ukraine that will end up
3:39
killing Russians. So let’s stop pretending that Donald
3:44
Trump is about butterflies and music and rainbows when it comes to Ukraine. And
3:50
he’s an evil blood sucking, you know, bastard when it comes to the Middle East.
3:57
When we’re talking about ongoing acts of war in
4:03
both the Ukraine situation and the situation in the Middle East where ongoing acts of war. That were
4:10
inherited by the Trump administration. Do we have agreement on that?I The
4:15
answer, of course, is yes. Trump didn’t start any of this. People said, well, no, he’s bombing the hoodie. Oh, Biden
4:22
started bombing the hoodie. And you know, the hoodie unilaterally stopped
4:28
doing things that brought an end to that conflict. But now they’re doing it again, thereby triggering an American response.
4:35
Again, this doesn’t mean that I approve of what the Americans are doing. If you actually have gone back and I reject
4:41
this, I think it’s stupid policy. I think it’s doomed to fail. But the concept that Donald Trump has invented the war with
4:49
Yemen is stupid. It’s asinine. It’s ridiculous. It’s it. It’s
4:55
counterintuitive and counterproductive when we want to talk about
5:00
defining their situation as it really is. Because I’ve always said. You can’t solve a problem unless it’s first accurately
5:07
defined. And I will tell you right now that across the board in the Middle East, nobody is accurately defining the problem
5:14
when it comes to Trump’s policies. Trump wants peace, but this isn’t peace
5:19
that is going to be on the terms of other people. Just like the peace that will occur in Ukraine will not be peace that
5:26
are on terms of anything that’s unacceptable to the United States. We’ve made certain concessions almost
5:33
unilaterally in favor of Russia. So why are you surprised when we make
5:38
certain concessions almost unilaterally in favor of Israel when it comes to the Middle East?Why are people shocked?Why do
5:45
they say that there’s a difference of tone, of approach, et cetera?There is no difference. the United States of America
5:52
acts in the interest of the United States of America. There is no, oh, they’re doing the right thing in Russia, but
5:57
they’re doing the wrong thing in the Middle East. They’re doing what’s in the interests of the United States of
6:03
America as defined by the Trump administration. And so
6:10
I do believe that Donald Trump is sincere in pursuing peace in the Middle East, but
6:16
it is peace on his terms. And those terms may be unacceptable to the people
6:21
he’s seeking to, you know, have to to to to stop the ongoing violence
6:27
and. Hopefully not start new violence, but there is no difference between the
6:33
two. That’s totally consistent policy.
6:38
Following up on on this idea that in both the cases the United States is pursuing
6:43
its self-interest and in in one case it is making peace with Russia and in the
6:49
other case, which I think is a bit confusing given if as
6:55
many have suggested and argued that Israel. Hold so much power
7:00
in the United States foreign policy in the Middle East. And given what we have seen from the signal gate, the war plans
7:07
and war mongerings, if that represents the self-interest of the United States in the Middle East, then
7:14
how does it relate to being a peace plan at the same time?
7:21
It’s a war plan. Then how is it a peace plan?Because when you win a
7:27
war, there’s peace. So you can win a war either by applying
7:33
military power or the threat of military power that coerces
7:38
reactions on the other part that make military power unnecessary.
7:44
Again, I’m not supporting America’s policy objectives
7:49
in the Middle East. I’m simply stating the hard reality. And
7:55
I also I’m I’mWe we we need to be careful how we frame issues
8:04
because the terms you use are they they imply prejudice.
8:11
Now maybe the United States is rightfully deserves to be condemned for the actions it does, but putting a bomb on target in
8:19
Yemen is not inherently war mongering or a war crime. There are military objectives attached to this.
8:26
Just like the Hootie putting a missile into Ben Gurion is not necessarily war
8:31
mongering and work. There are military objectives attached to that what they do or putting a missile into a ship.
8:39
You know, we we we need to be careful about how we
8:44
define things and we discuss things because what comes from that then is war crimes. One side is committing a war
8:51
crime and the other isn’t again. The people that make this argument probably don’t know much about international
8:59
humanitarian law and the laws of war, because a lot of what they call a war crime, while reprehensible, while
9:06
deadly, while one would not want to happen, they’re not a war crime. War crimes require very specific
9:14
things to happen to become a war crime. And again, you can’t solve a problem unless you. Accurately
9:22
define the problem. So if you’re going to start by saying everything the United States does is a war crime, is war
9:28
mongering, is this that’s that’s absurd in the extreme. Cause my response would be when it comes to international
9:35
sea lanes, what responsibility does the United States have to keep them open?
9:41
Does any sovereign nation allow the the Hootie to have unilateral prerogative to shut down international sea lanes because
9:48
they disagree with Israeli policy? One could make the argument that the Houthi have no right to do this. They may
9:54
have a moral right, a moral argument, but under international law they have no
9:59
right, and that the United States is actually justified in carrying out military operations that are designed to
10:06
deter the Houthi from continuing such operations. That’s a counter argument
10:12
that isn’t wrong, by the way. It doesn’t mean that I support what the United States is doing. And it doesn’t
10:19
mean that I think the United States can succeed into what it’s doing. But the idea that you unilaterally fall on the
10:25
side of one party and totally discredit the actions of the other, it just
10:30
it it leads you down a path where you’re creating definitions that have
10:35
nothing to do with the potential solution. At the end of the day, the hoodie needs to stop interdicting
10:41
shipping. They have to. It’s inconsistent with international law and the way the world runs. And the
10:47
United States has to stop bombing Yemen. They have to. How do we achieve that?
10:52
That’s the question. And the answer is simple. Israel simply stops its ongoing aggression in Gaza, as they
11:00
did before with the cease-fire that Donald Trump helped broker. And once humanitarian goods flowed back
11:06
in, once the genocide stopped, the Houdi stopped firing the missiles. We stopped bombing Yemen. And there’s the answer.
11:14
There’s the answer. But if we get caught up in war mongering, war crimes and all this, we’re heading down the wrong path.
11:22
We need to focus on what the problem is and what the solution is. Yeah, then
11:27
I I think my next question is on the problem. If as you have pointed out, and I agree with you that the main problem is
11:34
the ongoing genocide in. In Gaza and Israel need to stop that. Then then
11:40
the question is that do you think there is anyone at this moment and by anyone?
11:45
Arguably it has to be the United States which can possibly put pressure on Israel. Do you see
11:53
any movement along that direction?Because to many it would
11:58
seem that the United States has given a green signal. To Israel in
12:05
resuming its genocide in Gaza.
12:13
There’s no denying that. I mean, what you say is 100% correct. But here I’m going
12:18
to throw this back at you. If all we do at this juncture
12:26
is condemn Israel as Israel deserves to be condemned, condemn the United States as the United States deserves to be
12:33
condemned for their foreign policy and. And we limited that. You do
12:39
recognize that that will achieve nothing. I mean it it’ll play great in the in the echo chamber of digital mass media. I
12:46
mean, I there’s going to be so many morally correct and and and wonderful human beings that are I hate America. I
12:53
hate Israel. Kill all the Zionists. Death to America. Yay. And you know what happens?The Gazans continue to be
13:00
slaughtered and nothing is going to happen to stop the slaughter. So now.
13:05
Is your question about do I take a morally correct position to jump on the bandwagon, or
13:13
as I am want to do, do I seek to find a solution to the problem?You see, one of
13:19
the things that gets me in trouble a lot is that I seek to find solutions to
13:25
problems, very difficult problems which require very difficult solutions. And oftentimes require people who have taken
13:31
a moral stance to look in the mirror and understand that the morality that they claim to embrace is actually resulting in
13:36
nothing but dead people and will do nothing to stop the killing of those people. So now
13:44
my question to you is what role does Hamas play in this?What, what, what
13:49
burden does Hamas shoulder on this?You see, I was all on board with what
13:55
Hamas did on October 7th. That’s gotten me in a lot of trouble. But I recognized
14:01
that it was a necessary action that had to disrupt,
14:07
you know, policy prerogatives that were being put into place, solidified,
14:13
calcified under the Abrams Accords that would have
14:18
normalized relations between Israel and the Gulf Arab states, including Saudi
14:23
Arabia. And therefore, permanently, and I want to emphasize that permanently disenfranchised the Palestinian people
14:31
permanently. They were literally days away from never, ever,
14:36
ever again having the potential of having a Palestinian state. And what Hamas
14:41
did is breathe life back in to that potential, to horrible acts of
14:46
violence, and both in terms of what Hamas did and what has happened to the
14:52
Palestinian people. But because of that, a process was created, which is the great
14:58
success of Al Aqsa Flood. The process was created that brought the
15:04
issue of Palestinian statehood back to the front burner of international discourse. And people were now talking
15:11
about it and say what you will about, you know, Donald Trump’s vision. I know, you know, he’s heavily criticized for
15:19
a a plan which is so ridiculous. That, you know, it’s
15:24
hard, hard, hard to give it any seriousness, except it was said by the President of the United States. And you know what plan I’m talking about, his
15:30
Gaza depopulation plan and et cetera. But I said at the time,
15:37
and I was proven right, that it was not a real plan, that it was an
15:43
opening gambit designed to. Coerce a counter proposal from people who
15:49
otherwise would not put a counter proposal on the table. Egypt, Jordan and the Gulf Arab states. And when Egypt and
15:56
Jordan did put something on, you know who agreed with me?Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, he said. Trump put out a
16:03
proposal. We now have a counter proposal and we’re beginning to review it. That’s called a process of negotiation.
16:10
And so that process of negotiation now creates the. Not just
16:16
possibility, but probability of a Palestinian state, because that is the end game of this negotiation. And it
16:23
wouldn’t have happened unless Hamas did what Hamas did. So three cheers for Hamas. But now we’re
16:30
in a situation where what is Hamas doing? My question to Hamas is why are you
16:36
holding on to 53 hostages? What possible game can you get out of this?You’re.
16:44
There’s no justification for it. None. Hamas. Hamas said that as part of the agreement was for the
16:51
Israeli military to leave the Philadelphia Corridor in
16:56
the border between Egypt and Palestine, and and they didn’t. And on the other hand, they were constantly killing people
17:03
in Gaza over and above a de facto seize of the West Bank in in in
17:09
North. I know, I know, I know Hamas. I know the Hamas thing. But here’s the thing. If Hamas thinks that they alone
17:16
get to dictate the outcome, they’re wrong. Hamas gets great applause for creating a process of
17:24
violence that led to negotiations that bring in people that
17:29
otherwise wouldn’t have been brought in towards a conclusion that could lead to a Palestinian state.
17:37
Hamas doesn’t get to play holier than now. Hamas doesn’t get to sit there and say, well, you didn’t do this, therefore
17:43
we’re going to do that. Hamas has no cards in this game. The cards, the game have been transferred away from
17:49
Hamas because the sad reality is this negotiation was taking place would disenfranchise Hamas as Hamas is
17:57
organized. Hamas will never be the government of Gaza. Hamas may be part of the government of Gaza, but Hamas
18:04
will never be the government of Gaza. Everybody knows this, including Hamas,
18:09
which is why they participated in the discussions in Moscow and Beijing about what the future governing authority of a
18:16
Gaza of Palestine would be. And so Hamas must
18:22
adjust to realities. And the reality is that Hamas
18:28
can’t get the Israelis out of the Philadelphia corner, but the negotiation with the Jordanians and the
18:35
Egyptians and the others. Can’t that larger negotiation create can create a
18:40
framework of confidence on the part of the United States where they can then put more pressure on Israel to get out.
18:46
That’s a solution. You know what’s not a solution?Insisting that Israel
18:52
withdraw from the Philadelphia border and then creating a situation where the ceasefires ended, Palestinians are dying
18:59
and what Hamas could solve many of these problems today by releasing the 53 hostages. There is no legitimate
19:07
reason for Hamas to be holding on to these people. The purpose of the hostages has been served. They played a role in
19:14
the first in bringing an end to the first thing and bringing the ceasefire. But today, holding on to those 53
19:20
hostages accomplishes nothing except killing hundreds, thousands
19:25
of Palestinian civilians. Now you say, well, Israel’s killing them. Yes, Israel’s killing them because of a
19:31
process. That could be terminated if Hamas released 53 hostages.
19:37
So I condemn the United States for green lighting Israel’s ongoing aggression and
19:42
genocide. I condemn Israel doing. I condemn Hamas for holding on to 53 hostages too. It the the the sword
19:50
cuts both ways. There’s no legitimate reason for Hamas to be holding on to those people. Those people should be
19:56
released now. And if Hamas did it properly, it could signal good faith. It could a gesture that then could lead to a
20:03
termination of conflict, which is killing the people that Hamas claims to be that it cares about. See, Hamas has taken this
20:10
too far now. They had that 15 month stretch of resistance and I
20:15
applaud them for that, as horrible as that was. But there there is no outcome, similar outcome going to come
20:23
out of this because the Trump administration is not the Biden administration. The Trump administration
20:29
will green light the genocide of the Gazan people. Do you?I’m not
20:35
supporting that. I’m just saying that that is a reality and therefore Hamas
20:40
must learn to adapt to the reality. And the other thing that’s happening is there is a global exhaustion over this
20:47
issue. You you can only ride this so much. They got great victories that the Palestinian cause got great victories
20:53
with the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, great moral victories, etcetera. But the longer
20:59
this drags out, exhaustion will set in and people are going to lose interest. That’s and and you know what
21:06
else will happen is that the Egyptians and Jordanians, that initiative that they were trying to push will lose its momentum and will dissipate and be gone.
21:16
There was a process in play, and Hamas should have been smart enough to let that process play out. And they
21:23
weren’t. They have every right to do what they’re doing. Yes, legally, they can say Israel didn’t do this, Israel didn’t do
21:29
that. But it’s a new reality. This is not the Biden administration. And at some point in time, Hamas has to put on their
21:36
intelligent hat, you know, and say we got to deal with reality here. How do we
21:41
maintain the momentum that leads to the strategic objective we claim to want, which is a Palestinian state
21:48
and not commit suicide over 53 hostages? I don’t want to get stuck on Gaza. This
21:55
is my final follow up and then I have a few other questions on. I I wonder if you think if Hamas
22:01
released the hostage, I mean it was. There was an
22:07
ongoing exchange of prisoners. There were 8 rounds of exchanges in the two rounds and and and the process got disrupted.
22:14
And the argument on the other side is that given all the talks about move transferring millions of people to, you
22:20
know, from Africa to Asia to what not and given the things that we have discussed, killing and all the rhetorical
22:28
statement coming out of the UnitedStates, Hamas and many others were very, very
22:34
skeptical that if. That if the rest of the hostages are released, I am not
22:40
supporting that. I’m not. I I think all the exchange of prisoners should happen on both sides. But they were
22:47
apprehensive that that is the last negotiating bit, if you like, that they
22:54
had. And given all the signals are going on the other direction, how can
23:00
one be even hopeful that? They would get something if they released
23:05
the rest of the 53 prisoners. Well, again,
23:11
that’s a that’s a legitimate way of thinking. But then you have to
23:17
take a look at who you’re dealing with when you’re dealing with a nation that
23:23
has, as one of its principle doctrines, the Hannibal Directive, which says
23:28
kill people before they’re taken hostage. You’re dealing with a nation that deliberately targeted hostages while
23:34
they’re being held hostage to kill them. See, Hamas
23:40
is operating under the premise that Israel actually values the lives of these 53 people. If the Israeli government had
23:47
its way, it would have killed these 53 people before they were taken hostage. The Israeli government doesn’t value
23:53
their life. The Israeli government is embarrassed by their existence.
23:59
And I think Hamas needs to understand that the longer they hold on
24:04
to them, the more likely it is they’re going to die at the hands of Israel, who will then blame Hamas. And Hamas will
24:11
have to accept some of the blame because, of course, they’re in their custody. If Hamas showed that they cared more about
24:18
the lives of these 53 people than the Israelis did, if Hamas
24:23
took advantage of the concern the United States is attached to these 53.
24:29
And carried out direct negotiations with the United States, which they were underway, why they didn’t exploit that
24:35
advantage and use the United States as a broker to get the 53 out to
24:40
tell the Americans we trust you, we empower you with this responsibility.
24:47
You then create the potential of. Leverage that can be applied by the United States on Israel. And if
24:54
Hamas did this in conjunction with Jordan and yen and and Egypt and the others who
24:59
were negotiating the future of the reconstruction, that you could actually flip the script and put Israel
25:06
in a very difficult position. See, this is called problem solving. It’s problem solving 101, but you have to break things
25:14
down into their their various parts and you have to assess. The value attached to each one and what outcomes are attached
25:20
to each one, et cetera. Hamas is committing suicide by holding on to these 53 hostages. This will not end well for
25:27
Hamas. The world is getting tired. America will double down. And at this
25:32
point in time, you know, look at the United States. If if if Hamas thought that they were going to generate
25:39
student unrest and get America broiling, the Trump administration’s
25:44
nipping that in the bud with very extreme. Unconstitutional actions which are attacking free speech,
25:51
not just of foreign visa holders, but of Americans themselves.
25:57
America will not rise up in support of Gaza. It’s over. That’s been cut off.
26:03
And so any fault, any hope that that the the pressure, political pressure could continue to be emerged from the
26:10
domestic American political scene, it’s it’s done the the people.
26:17
You know, we we now literally in the United States have hooded, jackbooted thugs grabbing people off the street,
26:22
making them disappear. That’s where the United States has. That’s where we are today. It’s disgusting, but it’s a
26:29
reality. And so if you’re Hamas, you you’ve lost
26:34
that that weapon and you’re going to lose everything else too, because it’s going to become about the 53 hostages and
26:42
you’re letting the Israelis dictate the narrative. So Hamas says one last chance before this gets too far to flip the
26:48
script and reach out and get rid of these fifty-three hostages in
26:54
a way that accrues to them a political advantage that they otherwise wouldn’t have. Now people will say what guarantees
27:01
does Hamas have?And the answer is none. There are no guarantees in this situation, you know. But right
27:08
now Hamas is literally a person afloat in the ocean with. All
27:14
the rescue boats leaving and the, you know, and the guarantee is that Hamas
27:19
is going to drown and they’re going to take Gaza with them. Hamas’s only hope is to gesture to a rescue boat, have them
27:26
come over, throw a life ring, and pray that they’re serious about rescuing
27:31
them. That way brings us back to our original question. Is Donald Trump serious about peace in the Middle East?
27:39
You’re damn right he’s serious about it, but it’s going to be on his terms. And Hamas would do well to recognize that
27:46
in one of the terms is the release of these 53 hostages. And if Hamas could do anything to exploit
27:53
that to their advantage, that would be my recommendation.
27:59
My final question on the Middle East before I switch gear to Ukraine is on Iran and I
28:07
recently heard you discussing possibilities, legal possibilities
28:14
about US nuclear first strike on on Iran.
28:21
A lot of us, to a lot of us, it’s very counter-intuitive given in this day and
28:26
age, if the United States goes for a first nuclear strike on Iran, they wouldbe
28:34
they they would lose any kind of legitimacy within the international community and maybe there would be, I
28:40
hope that there would be a domestic backlash as well. Can you talk about whether you think that
28:48
there is a possibility at the event of escalation of the United States doing a
28:53
nuclear strike on Iran? Well, let me just start by saying that I
28:59
disagree with your premise altogether. I mean, first of all, I I’m 100% against nuclear weapons. I’m a big.
29:06
Nuclear Zero guy. I’m a nuclear arms control guy. I actually got rid of nuclear weapons back in the day. So what
29:12
I’m about to say is not reflective of how I would like the world to be, but as the world is, and I will
29:19
have a hard time standing by. I don’t blame you on this, but are you telling me right now that India doesn’t have a
29:25
nuclear preemption of attack plan option out for Pakistan?India doesn’t have a
29:30
first first strike doctrine. You’re telling me that Pakistan was
29:36
loading up nuclear weapons and saying that they’re gonna fire them against India, that India will absorb Pakistan’s
29:41
attack without carrying out any preemption.
29:47
I don’t know that. But India, you don’t know that. I I will tell you right now that India has a preemptive strike. You
29:52
don’t have nuclear weapons. You don’t have the weapon systems that India has. Pakistan has a first strike policy too.
30:00
It’s not declared, it’s not announced. But if Pakistan saw India. Putting its nuclear forces on full alert, making
30:06
preparations, the intelligence where India is going to launch tomorrow. But Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons.
30:12
That’s just a second. You’re getting ahead of myself. OK, that’s that’s what the intelligence
30:19
committee in in the Senate suggested recently. No, they didn’t suggest. I’ll tell you exactly what they said, cause I
30:25
know what they said. I’m intimately familiar with this problem. All right. But I’m just starting off with the notion
30:31
that if the United States did something, the whole world be against it.
30:37
There would be backlash, but not as much as you think. And now I’m going to tell you why. Because
30:43
Iran is not allowed to have nuclear weapons. Now you’re going to say, but Scott, didn’t the National Threat
30:49
Assessment recently briefed by Tulsi Gabbard’s department or Director of National Intelligence, the United States
30:55
Senate, make this case?What they said is this.
31:00
That there is no evidence that Iran is assembling a nuclear weapon or pursuing the assembly of a nuclear weapon. And
31:07
there’s no evidence that the Iranian leadership has given orders for such a weapon to be assembled.
31:15
Do we concur that’s what they said?Yes. OK, so now I’ve been
31:21
saying that forever. I agree with that statement. I think everybody, the Iranians agree with that statement. But
31:28
that’s not the issue. Let’s get back to why the JCOA was. negotiated.
31:34
OK, before we get into the whole viability of the JCPOA, the purpose of the JCPOA was to create a one year
31:41
breakout window so that if Iran decided to violate the terms of the
31:47
JCPOA and kick out inspectors, that the international community will have one year to
31:54
respond before Iran could build a nuclear weapon.
32:00
That one year was deemed to be the the acceptable window. I just want to remind
32:05
everybody I can think we go back to the JCPO, go back to the JCPO. One year window guys, breakout window, one year.
32:13
Iran today is literally one week, one week.
32:20
That is unacceptable now. If Iran could articulate that that
32:27
one week was simply because they’re pursuing peaceful nuclear energy,
32:32
and you know the JCPOA allowed for the expiration of sunset clauses that would
32:37
give Iran the opportunity to put in very thorough, capable centrifuges as opposed
32:44
to the old IR ones and twos, which are very inefficient high efficiency centrifuges that could produce. Lots of
32:50
uranium enrichment enriched to 3.5% by the way, 3.5%
32:55
for usage conversion to fuel rods, which will go into the expansive Iranian
33:00
nuclear energy program manifested by reactors built all over the country.
33:06
You can say, OK, I get it. Now you can make an argument that
33:12
Iran needs a a a minimal amount of 20% enriched uranium. Because they have the Tehran research
33:19
reactor and the United States and others have made it impossible for Iran to get that. So you say, OK, produce
33:25
enough 20% enriched uranium so that you can produce the fuel plates necessary to operate that reactor. But
33:32
that’s a like A1 centrifuge cascade operation that only has to operate for a
33:37
limited period of time and then never operate again for many, many years because you don’t need that much 20%
33:43
uranium. Do you need the ability to convert?Uranium hexafluoride into
33:49
uranium metal. Yes, I just said you need you need the metal plates to be produced. So you have a limited capability to do
33:55
that. What need does Iran have for 60%
34:01
enriched uranium? And there’s none. And yet Iran has gone
34:06
down the road of producing sufficient 60% enriched uranium, which is literally one
34:11
step away from becoming weapons-grade. One step away being fed into a cascade
34:17
that has been purpose built in the underground facility in Fierlo.
34:22
So you jam that in there, you now get your 90 plus percent enriched uranium
34:27
that you turn into uranium metal and then you have a cheap gun design that can be
34:32
loaded onto any missile you want that gun design. You know, it’s a theoretical now, but it’s it’s it’s there. But so you see
34:40
what I’m saying?The Iranian program as it currently exists is a weapons preparation program. There’s no other way to describe
34:47
it, no other way to describe it. Why does Iran
34:52
have 60% enriched uranium? There’s no other reason to describe it.
34:59
Now that still comports with what the Senate said. There’s no evidence that Iran is seeking to create a weapon,
35:06
and the political leadership continues to say they don’t want to have this. They haven’t given the political green light.
35:12
But now it’s complicated further because yes, those two statements are true. But
35:18
then why did the former head of the Iranian nuclear program, the military side, say that Iran
35:26
could build a weapon very easily and it was backed by similar statements made by senior civilians?These are statements
35:32
made last year, February, March, April, May. Why did the Iranian
35:37
parliament say that we have to put together a committee to go to the Supreme Leader to get him to reverse the fatwa so
35:43
that we can do it?And why did the Expedience Discernment Council, one of the senior advisory bodies to the
35:51
Supreme Leader, talk about the religious conditions that it would have to be met in order to reverse the fatwa and that
35:58
those religious conditions have been met? So let’s go and reverse engineer
36:05
now the intelligence program that’s been the intelligence since been given to United States Senate. Yes, the
36:11
Iranian leader has not made a decision, but according to the Iranians themselves, that decision can take place at any time
36:19
and the preparatory work has already occurred that all that has to happen is the Supreme Leader wakes up one morning
36:25
and goes go now. We go to the next issue. They haven’t
36:32
assembled a bomb, etcetera. The gun design is one of the easiest designs out there. It’s it’s not a
36:39
difficult design. All you need is the fissile material. It’s literally a certain amount of uranium metal,
36:47
a slug taken out, a tube, high explosive, jam it in and you
36:53
go critical and it blows up and it can be loaded onto delivery
36:58
systems. Of not great sophistication. I would say that some of the
37:04
warheads that Iran’s using today that they have used against Israel have more sophistication in terms of the
37:11
potential of, you know, acceleration and heat to disrupt their operation than the
37:17
gun design, meaning that you don’t even have to test this. And the
37:22
Iranians have said we are there. When I have an Iranian general tell me we have assembled all the components necessary
37:29
except the fissile material, I believe him. Now they haven’t assembled it,
37:34
but it can happen literally within the space of a week. By the time they finish enriching the 60% uranium hexafluoride
37:41
into the weapons grade and they convert that to metal, they will have functioning weapons ready to be loaded up with
37:47
uranium slugs loaded on the missiles deployed. That’s a nuclear
37:53
weapons capability potential that Iran claims it doesn’t want doesn’t
37:59
want to pursue, but they are there. And if you’re in the United States of America, whose close ally is Israel, this
38:06
is an existential threat to the existence of Israel. Now we can sit here and play all the games. Well, and
38:12
the United States shouldn’t support Israel. Maybe not. Israel is an evil Zionist identity. I agree.
38:19
But it doesn’t matter what you and I think. It doesn’t matter what we tweet, the morally righteous positions that we
38:25
throw in to the digital universe to have an echo chamber, and everybody loves us because we’re saying the right things.
38:32
The reality is Iran has a nuclear weapons potential admitted by Iran that’s
38:38
represents an existential threat to the existence of a close American ally, whether we want them to be close or not.
38:44
And the Trump administration, which has stacked itself with more Zionists per square inch than any other
38:49
administration. Is going to defend Israel. And now that we’ve
38:55
defined it as a nuclear threat, because it is a nuclear threat,
39:00
you can’t describe it as anything other than a nuclear threat. Then the United States has the exact
39:08
same preemptive strike plans that India has for Pakistan,
39:13
Pakistan has for India, and anybody has in the world today when it comes to nuclear weapons. But we’ve been honest about it. You see, we actually have put
39:20
forward nuclear postures for many decades now that say that we can use nuclear weapons preemptively in a WMD environment
39:27
and a non WMD environment. And we’ve taken this posture. We’ve actually turned it into employment plans. You know who
39:35
did that?Donald Trump. Donald Trump actually built an employment plan to launch preemptive nuclear strike
39:42
against Iran. We built weapons especially for this purpose
39:48
now. You’ll say, well, but isn’t that extreme?Again, look at the
39:53
sometimes people need to be careful what they brag about because apparently B2 bombers flew over Yemen and dropped these
40:00
massive bombs against, you know, underground facilities and everybody’s going, they didn’t work. They
40:07
collapsed the entrance, but the facility lives and the Yemeni came in through another one. Your big bombs didn’t work,
40:13
which is exactly why Donald Trump has made low yield. Ground penetrating nuclear weapons that do work.
40:22
So when people say why would the United States use nuclear weapons preemptively?I just told you because the conventional
40:27
weapons can’t do it. They can’t do it. And if we’re going to say
40:33
we’re going to take out the Iranian nuclear capability, then we will take it out using the weapons that are designed
40:38
for that purpose. And then the other thing people need to understand is that.
40:45
People are used to pointing a finger at America going, well, you can’t really win wars anymore, can you?Because
40:52
guys, you go in and you bomb people and then it’s done. I I want to remind people that we’re not waging a war of national
40:58
termination against Yemen. It’s a very limited attack against very limited targets. You want to look at what a war
41:06
of national termination looks like. Look at the strategic air campaign that we launched against Iraq in Desert Storm
41:13
sustained. And I was one of the planners for that. So I’ll just tell you that it was designed to collapse the
41:20
Iraqi society. That’s what it was designed to do. The weapons we have today are much better. We have a lot more of
41:26
them, so we can collapse societies much quicker. And if Iran
41:31
thinks that the initial attack against it is going to be a very limited strike, they’re wrong. If the decision’s made to
41:38
take out Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, then we will also take out the political component of that nuclear. Program the
41:45
weaponization aspect of it, which is a regime we believe is prepared to either issue the order or has already issued the
41:51
order to create nuclear weapons. This will be a regime change operation.
41:57
It will be horrible to behold. It will end Iran as we know it.
42:03
Now Iran may, I mean, you know, again, the Twitter spheres are they’ve got 5000 missiles, none of which can hit the
42:10
United States. We could destroy Israel. Possibly.
42:16
I can see that secretly. I’m not unhappy with that, but I can’t
42:22
really say that. You know, I’m not here to defend Israel. Whether Iran could destroy Israel or not is beyond the
42:28
point. Whether they could destroy a handful of American military bases is beyond the point. Because if it
42:35
gets to the point where Iran does this or attempts to do this, Iran will no longer exist. And
42:43
that’s what I’m trying to stop. I’m trying to stop the termination of a nation. It’s very difficult because
42:50
there’s a lot of Iranians out there who have a lot of pride, as they should, and they should be heavily insulted by
42:57
the policy positions the United States of America has taken, as they should. Is it fair for America to make the demands that
43:03
it’s making?No, it’s not fair at all. Not fair at all. Iran is on the right side of
43:09
history, with one exception. You’re building a nuclear weapons program
43:14
and you’re trying to pretend you’re not. You’re getting too cute. You’re saying we
43:20
don’t have one, but secretly we could. But it’s no longer secretly because your officials said we could. You’ve crossed
43:26
the line and there’s no defending that. Not at all.
43:32
It’s indefensible. Why?Because Iran signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. Iran agreed to safeguards and
43:40
inspections. Iran agreed that it will not be a nuclear weapons state. These are all things Iran agreed to, and Iran currently
43:47
is a member of the NPT. Iran claims it’s adhering to the NPT. So
43:53
far it appears it has, because even the things that we’ve spoken about minus
43:58
maybe the secret preparation of a nuclear weapon. 60% uranium. It’s not against the law.
44:04
Article 4 of the the NPT allows Iran to have control control of the of the
44:10
nuclear cycle. And 60% uranium is still considered to be low
44:17
enriched uranium. You can’t make a weapon out of it. It’s not weapons grade. So you know, Iran has all this going for
44:23
it. Except why did they allow their people to say these stupid things?
44:29
These are confessions. These are confessions made by very senior people, by policymakers, by decision makers, by
44:36
members of the Iranian government. And it is condemned Iran because
44:42
now the United States has every justification under international law to take a hardline
44:49
stance against the Iranian nuclear program. Umm And that’s that’s where I stand on this.
44:56
If I can have a follow up on this,
45:03
I hear you. I I think there is anyone hearing you with open ears
45:08
can see that you are talking about the possibility of reality rather than
45:13
your own moral position on that and you’re also trying to avoid.
45:19
The catastrophe as we all are politically committed to that. I I think my my only problem in in what you just said is
45:27
it kind of shifts the conversation to actual political decision on
45:32
nuclear weapons program to technological capabilities about development of nuclear programs. And and
45:40
why I’m asking this is when I was doing my engineering courses in India, we
45:45
were taught by our professors. That at this moment,
45:52
nuclear weapons is not a sophisticated technology in
45:57
terms of its in terms of its difficulty,
46:02
whether you talk about the enrichment program, whether you talk about delivery, I mean you can talk about levels of
46:08
sophistications of delivery devices. But in terms of
46:14
enrichment, in terms of putting it into a device and then delivering, we are
46:19
taught that it’s not a very technologically sophisticated thing. So the reason why Germany or Japan or
46:26
others don’t have nuclear weapons is not because they are technologically not
46:32
equipped, but because there is a political will not to do that and that’s why. Low technology countries like India
46:38
and Pakistan has it. So my my question to you is that all of what you said
46:44
is, is there a danger of shifting the conversation away from what actual
46:50
political decisions are to what the capabilities are?And then as you
46:55
said, the United States could then use that as a justification to do its
47:03
nation terminating operation. So basically the question is, could the
47:10
United States manipulate an argument such as the one that I’ve
47:15
made to to use it as justification for regime change?Yes, of
47:21
course. Of course that can happen. And maybe it is happening, except
47:26
for the fact that I didn’t just make up this argument. I didn’t pull out of thin air. This isn’t an Iraqi WMD thing where
47:34
we have to falsify intelligence and manufacture statements. I’m condemning Iran based upon its own works, words and
47:40
its own actions that Iran itself doesn’t deny.
47:46
That’s the difference. Why aren’t we going after the Japanese or the Germans?
47:51
Because I don’t think there’s a debate on going in the Japanese parliament about giving the the Prime Minister permission
47:57
to to create a weapon. Germany hasn’t quite crossed that line either, although there’s some talk going on in Europe now
48:03
about an independent European nuclear deterrent, which would be a violation of the NPT. And I think the United States
48:08
would take a very harsh, a harsh line on that. You know, the same thing. We would
48:14
take a harsh line if Saudi Arabia decided they wanted to have a nuclear weapon.
48:19
But it’s a dangerous game. I agree with you. We shouldn’t be politicizing this. I I’m. I’m in favor of sending the team
48:27
to Iran saying guys just back off, back off, get rid of the 60%
48:34
and you know come out with a clear statement that we we are not doing this.
48:40
This is not in our in in in our interests you know and and maybe even have some
48:45
confidence building measures. That that can be done in terms of inspections of warheads or warhead production capability
48:52
to make sure that there isn’t a secret program. And if there is one, declare it and have it dismantled, whatever
48:58
things that can be done like that to diffuse the situation. Because Iran has put itself in this position.
49:06
They’re not an innocent party here. They’re on the right side of history. Don’t get me wrong. I’m defending Iran
49:12
ability to resist against what?But. If Iran is chosen to have as part of its
49:18
arsenal of resistance, a nuclear weapon, that is a suicide pill. That’s
49:23
all I’m saying. And I, you know, as I said in a I put out a response today, you
49:29
know, I can’t be more Iranian than the Iranians. I can’t care about the Iranian people more than the Iranian people care
49:35
about. And free will is a double-edged sword. Iranians are fully capable of
49:41
free will. They can make the decisions they make. And whether I like it or
49:46
not, there will be ramifications. There’ll be, you know, consequences. I’m trying to be honest about what these
49:52
consequences will be. And in in in in the process, maybe
49:58
people would wake up and say, you’re right, these are harsh consequences. How do we find a way out of this
50:04
mess?What is the path we need to take to prevent an outcome that will 100%
50:11
lead to?The annihilation of Iran is a modern nation state. Again, I
50:16
just want to remind people that they forget that the United States has the capacity to terminate the existence of
50:22
nations. The fact that we that that nations that we’ve gone to war with haven’t been terminated is
50:30
just because of political will. You know,
50:37
we don’t have to lose wars. We lose wars because we opt not to finish the war, because the consequences of
50:44
finishing the war are deemed to be politically incompatible and unsustainable. Vietnam.
50:50
I’ve had an interesting exchange about the Vietnam War. You know, we could have ended that instantly, and there
50:56
was plans to do so. New Kaifong, new Connoy war’s over.
51:05
Ends instantly. We didn’t. Because we made a decision
51:10
that that’s not in our best interest, if that’s not the right direction to go. But we didn’t not do that because we were
51:17
afraid of of of of anything. We made it because it was the right decision. But
51:22
you can’t always count upon us making the right decision. I’d like to believe that the United States would never consider
51:28
using nuclear weapons preemptively against an Iranian nation that hasn’t developed nuclear weapons. I’d like to
51:35
believe that before we even considered using nuclear weapons, that we would wait until Iran crossed that threshold and
51:40
showed itself to be an outlaw nation, a nation that has violated the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. And I’d like to
51:46
believe that we would go to the United Nations and seek international condemnation of Iran and justification
51:53
for the implementation of military action using the Chapter 7 resolution under the Charter of the United Nations. And if the
52:00
United Nations refused to give us that Chapter 7 resolution, then the United States Congress would then give the President of the United States the
52:06
authority, constitutional authority to wage war against Iran. And then and only
52:11
then would we use the mechanisms necessary to defeat Iran as a nation state. Because we are now at war with
52:17
Iran. Iran has allowed itself to self-identify as an existential threat to the United States of America. But
52:25
that’s not what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about taking shortcuts. And things like that. And and we’re also
52:31
talking about a situation where the president is irresponsibly threatening violence as a means of trying to coerce
52:39
negotiated outcomes. That doesn’t work against the people as proud as the Iranians. They’re they’re their
52:48
danger is going to get up, they’re going to get their backs against the wall, and they’re going to fight it. It’s achieving the exact opposite outcome than the one
52:55
that we should. We should be offering them a a way out of this problem. A face-saving way out of this problem, a
53:02
way that not just saves face but also creates opportunities for Iran. The lifting of sanctions is a tremendous
53:08
thing that could be brought to bear here. I think Donald Trump is missing a huge opportunity to take advantage of the
53:15
leverage that Russia and China have over Iran to use diplomatic indirect
53:21
approach to, you know, to to to have a multilateral approach to resolving this issue as opposed to universal dictate by
53:28
the United States. These, but these are all wannabes, could be, should be.
53:33
We have to deal with the reality. The reality is we have 7B2 bombers assembled in Diego Garcia right now. The reality is
53:40
that we have not just an Ohio class ballistic missile submarine, but we have other cruise missile
53:47
submarines that are in the region that we are assembling a nation killing force
53:54
that our doctrine says we can use. Proactively, preemptively, in an
54:00
environment where we feel a threat is prepared to manifest itself of an existential nature. And Iran,
54:07
unfortunately, because of its own actions, has created the ability of people to articulate such a threat.
54:14
Scott, my final question very quickly about taking an update on the situation in Ukraine and Russia. I
54:22
think as I read it, the question now is about the. Speed of a comprehensive cease-fire. We have had a
54:29
few partial cease-fire as I read from the mainstream media, one on infrastructure on the and the other on the freedom of
54:36
navigation in the Black Sea on conditions that Russia would be given the access to world market in agriculture, fertilizers
54:43
and so on by above all lifting its sanctions on the payment systems and
54:49
agriculture banks, I think. The question is, would Donald, do you
54:55
think it is heading towards the April 20 deadline that Donald Trump is
55:00
personally committed to or is it will it take longer time as his intelligence
55:07
people have said?I think this is a very complicated
55:14
issue, complicated problem.
55:21
The April 20th deadline is there’s not going to be a comprehensive piece by April 20th. I don’t believe so.
55:28
But I do believe that on April 20th, Donald Trump will be confronted with three distinct
55:35
conclusions. One, that the Russians are dead serious about pursuing
55:40
peace and that Russia will do what it takes to to to achieve that outcome that Donald Trump wants, that Russia is not
55:47
the problem. The problem are the other two, Ukraine and in particular
55:52
Zelensky and Europe. And after April 20th, Donald Trump will
55:59
have to make a political decision on whether he steps back and lets Russia
56:04
just go on to the inevitable victory, even though it’s going to cost lives.
56:09
Or does he recognize that Russia is a serious partner and.
56:17
Take the moves necessary to terminate Zelensky as the political leadership of Ukraine, to replace him with with the
56:23
leadership that is more conducive to accepting the terms of conflict
56:29
termination and also confronting Europe on the consequences of its continued disruption of American
56:35
plans regarding Ukraine. And we have all the leverage in the world, you know, and Europe actually
56:43
makes it easy for us. You know, in the short term and the long term, we can collapse the European economy almost
56:49
instantaneously. We can destroy European political unity by
56:54
precipitously withdrawing from NATO. There’s a number of options available to us that right now are politically
57:00
difficult to make, but will become easier to make after April 20th if Europe
57:05
continues to identify itself as a problem, not a solution.
57:10
So that’s what I think is going on here. I don’t think it’s as simple as, you know, only one issue needs to be resolved
57:16
by April 20th. I think actually what’s happening is a series of parallel,
57:22
you know, processes going forward that are designed to
57:28
better define, you know, what their limits are, what, what, what
57:34
you can expect from them. I think Russia will show that it is ready for peace and is ready to work with the United States,
57:40
not only about Ukraine, but a larger framework of peace. This is why we have a Russian ambassador returning to the
57:45
United States for the first time in five months. And we have the Russians and Americans meeting on a whole bunch of different issues. The normalization of
57:52
diplomatic relations is a important building block towards, you know, moving
57:58
forward in a in a manner that far exceeds simply the scope and scale of the Ukraine conflict. But I also
58:05
think we’re going to see that the Ukrainian government will be identified as fundamental roadblock to
58:12
any progress, and that that Zelenskyy is is a delusional madman who,
58:18
if he continues to stay in power, will just guarantee that this conflict continues to the point where Ukraine will
58:23
be eliminated as a modern nation state. And if that is indeed an undesirable outcome, then Zelenskyy is a problem that
58:29
needs to be eliminated, not Ukraine. And I think he will be eliminated one way
58:35
or the other. Zelinsky’s time on this earth as president of Ukraine is is very limited in Europe.
58:42
You know, it’s it’s interesting. Europe’s trying to posture itself as this, as this big power. But even as they posture the
58:50
various pillars upon which you’re constructing this artifice are collapsing. When Keir
58:56
Starmer keeps talking about how Britain is going to take the lead in deploying a ground force into Ukraine and the British
59:01
Army has to come out and say. We don’t have to. We can’t do it. We don’t have the ability to do it. It just shows how
59:07
empty this is when Macron says the same thing. But the French military is like, wow, we we can’t do it. And then I asked
59:13
the British and French this. You guys know that your only, your only vector into doing this is Romania. But in
59:20
Romania we have a political problem. You see, there’s a political party that has actually positioned itself to win the
59:26
upcoming election in May that will terminate all NATO involvement. And if you lose Romania, you have no ability to
59:31
go into Ukraine. Because you can’t go through Poland because that means you go through the American force here and America will never allow itself to be
59:37
turned into a tripwire for NATO, you know, direct conflict with Russia. So
59:42
all this European posture. And then we throw up on that the the Poles, we’re going to build the biggest army in
59:48
Europe. We’re going to be able to beat the Russians. The Poles show we run out of ammo in 14 days. Oh, I guess we’re
59:55
not going to build the biggest army in Europe and we’re not going to because we don’t have Europe has no capabilities
1:00:00
whatsoever. None. And then they commit, again, diary of the mouth
1:00:05
of the French and the British talking about their nuclear weapons. All they guarantee is now that Russia will take
1:00:12
targeting of the French and the British very seriously, and they’ve guaranteed the destruction of their nations and all
1:00:17
of Europe in case of a conflict with Russia. That’s the stupidity of flexing a nuclear muscle against the
1:00:24
super nuclear armed superpower and Iran and. Whatever you think of the
1:00:29
United States, we are a nuclear armed superpower. And whatever Europe, the French and the British think of Russia,
1:00:35
they are a nuclear armed superpower. Everything Europe is doing is unsustainable. The 800 billion euro that
1:00:42
von der Leyen keeps talking about, they can’t afford that. Where’s that going to come from?What is it going to buy?How is
1:00:47
it going to buy?You know, it’s like me talking about buying the, you know,
1:00:54
the the new model, the newest model of car that hasn’t been built yet. You know, I’m gonna buy it. I’m gonna go borrow the
1:01:00
money from the bank right now at 14% interest. Well, great, Scott. So now I got the money. Did I buy the car?Nope.
1:01:07
Car’s not gonna be ready for 3-4 years. Meanwhile, the bank goes, you owe me
1:01:12
interest and you got to start repaying the loan. So all the money I took out to buy that car, I’m not even getting the
1:01:19
equity off the car. I have to start repaying the loan. So by the time the car comes on market for me to buy it, my money’s shrunk down. That’s how stupid
1:01:25
the Europeans are right now. That’s how stupid they would be to talk about 800 billion euro in in
1:01:32
in doing so. So I I I think by April 20th the stupidity of Europe
1:01:38
will be exposed and also the nefarious nature of their policy. It’s very anti American, very anti
1:01:45
Trump and Trump is a very vindictive man and Europe will
1:01:51
pay a heavy price and so will Zelinsky. Trump is also a man who believes in.
1:01:57
Honoring business commitments. I know people are going to laugh at that. No, he doesn’t. He backed out everything.
1:02:03
At the end of the day, he’s a businessman. And with Russia, I think Trump will.
1:02:10
As long as Russia maintains this good faith effort it has towards normalizing relations and working with the United
1:02:15
States constructively on a variety of of issues, including economic
1:02:21
cooperation, I think Trump will respect that and will seek to pursue that so.
1:02:26
That’s what I think is gonna happen after 8 or 12 years. Scott Ritter, thank you so much for an insightful, sensible,
1:02:33
cautious and frank conversation. Thank you so much. Thanks for having me. Hi, my name is Ayushman. I,
1:02:41
along with Jyotishman, have started this platform. The last two years we have
1:02:46
tried to build content for the left and progressive forces. We have interviewed
1:02:51
economists, historians, political commentators and activists so far.
1:02:58
If you have liked our content so far and want us to build an archive for the
1:03:03
left, I have two requests for you. Please do consider donating for the
1:03:09
cause. Link is in the description below. Also, if you are not able to do so, don’t
1:03:14
feel sad. You can always like our videos and share our videos to your comrades.
1:03:20
Finally, don’t forget to hit the subscribe button.
oooooo
Geure herriari, Euskal Herriari dagokionez, hona hemen gure apustu bakarra:
We Basques do need a real Basque independent State in the Western Pyrenees, just a democratic lay or secular state, with all the formal characteristics of any independent State: Central Bank, Treasury, proper currency1, out of the European Distopia and faraway from NATO, maybe being a BRICS partner…
Ikus Euskal Herriaren independentzia eta Mikel Torka
ooooo
1 This way, our new Basque government will have infinite money to deal with. (Gogoratzekoa: Moneta jaulkitzaileko kasu guztietan, Gobernuak infinitu diru dauka.)