Matt: In case you have not heard this already, and it's been going around, so you probably have, but in case you haven't, you should. This is the President of the United States on Air Force One, day 17 of the war that he started. Take a listen. If there's one thing that we can say about the Trump administration, it's that they are prone to admitting the obvious, but often said reasons politicians do what they do. And then just moving on like they didn't say it. yeah, President Trump, can make the case. A lot of us did make that case before the bombs dropped. Before now, 13 service members were killed, maybe more before ⁓ oil skyrocketed, jeopardizing global commerce before a thousand ships got stranded in the Strait of Hormuz before we spent somewhere north of $15 billion in two and a half weeks. I made the case. mean, you know, I have a small following, so no one listens to me, but many others with much bigger followings and many folks who were closer to the president did this and everybody was ignored. Starting last June, June 25th, June 2025, when we had the 12 day war, many people said, do not escalate this or asked President Trump not to escalate this, but he did. We were ignored. But it gets better because he doesn't stop there. He says that the US doesn't need the straight of Hormuz that we have our own oil. He says that we do this, the bombing, quote, almost like we do it for habit. And then he goes on to say the line quote, but we also do it for some very good allies that we have in the Middle East. that's of course the confession. He admitted who the war was for. It's not a bombshell though, because it's not the first time and he's not the only one famously Rubio said the same thing. You know, I've said it over and over again and so as many so have many other people but we never should have been in this war in the first place. And I'll likely repeat some of those reasons again today and it needs to stop. But the question is, can it stop? What is the off ramp? How does this war end? Because now about almost three weeks in the guy who started it can't even answer that his own administration can't answer that. The objectives have changed at least five or six times. Our allies won't send ships to help us. The Arab states are furious. Iran says that they never asked for a ceasefire and won't negotiate. ⁓ And American people by every legitimate poll available, didn't want this war in the first place. And now they at 66 % oppose the war in Iran. And that's gone up since the war started. Before the war, it was 20 % for roughly 50 % against and 30 % unsure. Well, the unsure are rapidly becoming sure and they are against it. 66 % now against. So we want to send the American people wanted to end. So in this episode, we're going to walk through it. We're going to talk about what the objectives could be. US objectives could be the Iranian objectives, what they could be and, ⁓ know, no one will help why the Arab world is, you know, they're thinking, what Israel's doing, and ⁓ what the actual off are. So how does this thing plausibly And because someone should have a plan and it clearly isn't the people running this thing. So let's first start with the objectives. And some of this is things that we've talked about before, but some have we've gotten more clarity on now that Joe Kent has resigned. So what are we doing in Iran? What's the mission? What are we trying to achieve? These questions keep getting answered in different ways from different parts of the administration, depending on the day. And if you can answer that clearly, You're doing better than the Secretary of Defense or war actually sorry the Secretary of State the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the President himself because It's been like six different answers almost three weeks and they sometimes contradict each other on the same day. So Let's walk through them. What what are the objectives here? So on day one February 28th Trump posted video on true social and says the law says this our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime Imminent threats is very specific language. means something is about to happen to us and we have to act now. Except it wasn't. Pentagon briefers told congressional staff of the Iran that Iran was not planning to strike U.S. forces or bases in the Middle East, not unless Israel attacked first. So the imminent threat wasn't imminent and it wasn't directed at us. It was a hypothetical response to a hypothetical Israeli attack. And as we know from Joe Kent and also Tulsa Gabbard who who testified before Congress yesterday And I think again today, although I didn't see it today also said they all agreed. There was no imminent threat So here's the second objective and that is preempt Iranian retaliation against Israeli strikes and this is you know something that happened This is Rubio, you know admitting to it as we talked about before as well. He said We knew there was going to be an Israeli action. knew that that would precipitate in an attack against American forces. And we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties. So that's not really an objective though. Like that's already been done, satisfied. We attacked them first. That was the objective. So nothing we can do about that one. but now of course we have confirmation from inside the administration about this. ⁓ To this is from Joe Kent who who resigned ⁓ days ago. So this is Trump's own director of the National Counterterrorism Center He is a man. He's been all over the news So you probably know this but he's a man with 11 combat deployments. It's green beret I believe confirmed by the Senate resigned Two days ago and he went on Tucker Carlson yesterday. That was a crazy interview Tucker Carlson keeps having the ⁓ most conversations in the country right now at great risk to himself But this what he said on on on a Tucker show yesterday, quote, there was no intelligence that said the Iranians were going to launch some big sneak attack, some kind of nine 11 or Pearl Harbor. There was none of that intelligence. And he said, if you looked at the classified intelligence, it didn't match what was being said publicly. And then when Tucker asked him directly, quote, so the imminent threat the secretary of state is describing is not from Iran, it's from Israel, Kent said exactly. So, we're aligned, right? I mean, Rubio and, and now Kent confirms unbelievable they talk, I mean, that Rubio talked about this out loud. And it's unbelievable that this is where we are. But no, Israel was going to attack. So we got dragged ⁓ into Great. Can also said something that every everyone should know. And that is that the lead up to the war, and this was really hard to hear, but a good deal he said of the key decision makers are the people who were most read in to the intelligence. They were not allowed to come in and express their opinion to the president. There was a very walled off close circle of people who were advising the president at that time. I'm sure it was Kushner and it was Witkoff. I don't know who else probably is chief of staff, but he said that there was a robust debate before the June 2025 strikes. The 12 day war, but not this time. Dissent was completely shut out of the room. That's scary. Like Trump wouldn't even hear it. So he has this echo chamber of, of folks who who operate on behalf of Israel, basically. So, okay, so then the let's talk about next goal that ⁓ the administration has has has talked about objective. And one's maybe the most maybe is the most cogent. I mean, Not a good idea for getting into the war in the first place, but at least it kind of makes sense. There's objectives here that you could potentially hit. So the third one is destroy military capabilities, no regime change. So March 2nd, Hegseth at the Pentagon said, this is not a so-called regime change war. And then he actually laid out what the military objectives are. It's destroy the missile threat, destroy the Navy and no nukes. No nukes seems to be already, you know, mission accomplished. As of the 12 day war, which Trump admitted several times, we obliterated their nuclear program. So, there's objectives, destroy the missile threat, destroy the Navy, no nukes. And the Joint Chiefs Chair backs them up, says, prevent Iran from projecting power outside of its borders. Okay, it's defined, limited military missions, you can measure it, you can complete it, and then you can leave. Okay, don't like it. not a good idea to start a war of aggression, a war of choice against Iran, but now that we're in it, if those are the objectives, you can kind of, it sucks, but you can kind of live with it. At least there's an out there. Except on the same fucking day, Trump urged Iranian citizens to overthrow their government. And he said this, quote, to the great people of Iran, the hour of freedom is at hand. When we are finished, take over your government. So March 2nd, same day, the Secretary of War, I always say defense secretary. I like that better than secretary of war, but March 2nd, secretary of war says this is not a regime change. And then the president calls for regime change same day. like pick one, know, pick one. Okay. so the fourth objective has come to light and, this really, I don't know. It's an, it's not more of an, it's a reason, I guess it's not really an object. guess the objective would be have talks, but it's, it's too late for talks. So this was the day after March 3rd, I don't know if this is legitimate or not. The Trump administration says it is, the Iranians say it isn't. But anyway, March 3rd, presumably Iran has signaled through back channels, like to the CIA that we're open to discussing how to end this war. Trump responded to that. He said this, quote, their air defense, Air Force, Navy and leadership is gone. They want to talk. And I said, too late. It's like, And the obvious question to that is too late for what? You already were in negotiations presumably like were going your way. You know, you're in the middle of them and then you getting everything you asked for is what I've heard and you bond them. So what do mean it's too late? You were in negotiations. They wanted to negotiate. They were giving you everything you wanted. You stopped it and started bombing them. What do you mean too late? That makes no sense. the days, the day before the bombs fell, it February 27th. ⁓ Oman's foreign minister announced that a breakthrough had been reached. Iran had agreed to these things. Never stockpile enriched uranium. Iran had agreed to full IAEA verification and agreed to irreversibly downgrade its enriched uranium to the lowest level possible. They agreed to those three things. That's better than Obama ever got from Iran. And they agreed to all three. And the mediator said peace is within reach. And they had talks scheduled for March Second and then the US bond them on the 28th. So what do mean too late? We were in the middle of negotiations You where that no sense Trump Okay, so then the next I guess you could say is unconditional surrender. And this is ridiculous, of course. So March 7th, this happens. ⁓ in the course of like three days, we've gone from limited military objectives to demanding that the Iranian regime unconditionally surrender. And Trump says regime change will happen maybe not immediately, and that he will play a role in shaping what comes next. are we doing? Like three days later, we go from, you know, strategic military targets, we're going to take out their their Air Force, their their Navy, we're going to make sure their missiles can't hit their neighbors, and then no nukes and we're done to know we're going to overturn the country 90 million person country, we're going to destroy we're going to make sure sure their government is is is gone. regime change. What comes after that? Nobody's thought through that, of course, no one cares. In Trump administration or in Israel, of course. They would love to see chaos in Iran, because it just means they won't be a regional rival if there's chaos. anyway, unconditional surrender. then Trump, another objective, I guess, is a deal. Trump wants a deal, but so far the terms aren't good enough, which again doesn't make sense, because I don't understand how you turn down. they're not going to enrich anymore, they're going to downgrade their enrich uranium, and they'll submit like, it's testers coming in ⁓ to, to overseers coming in IEA. like, what, what? What do you mean not good enough? is March 15. So Trump tells Iran, NBC that Iran has been defeated militarily and is ready to make a deal, but the terms aren't good enough yet. Of course, he won't say what the terms are. Meanwhile, on the same day, This is where Iran refutes what the Trump administration said says, the foreign minister goes on CBS and says, no, we never asked for a ceasefire and we never even asked for negotiations. We're ready to defend ourselves as long as it takes. So who even knows who's telling the truth here? Trump says, Iran wants a deal. says they never asked her once someone's lying and given the track record. I mean, ⁓ not that the Iranian regime is like trustworthy or anything, but I do know that my country's lied to me a lot. I'm kind of putting my money on the liars being the ones who started this war of aggression, war of choice. you think about too, it's like, why would Iran start negotiating without some really strong guarantees in place now that The Trump administration has bombed them twice during negotiations. So any rational actor would believe that talks with the U S or a theater. Right. So, meanwhile you've got Senator Mark Warner, who is like documenting this in real time after being briefed by Rubio. told reporters, we have seen the goals for this operation change. Now, I believe four or five times it was nuclear capacity. It was then ballistic missiles. I forgot about that one. ⁓ they've got ballistic missiles that can't ⁓ a couple hundred miles or something. Then regime change, then something else. was protesters, it was humanitarian, all of these different reasons and objectives. They can't keep their story straight. Day to day, they can't keep their story straight. It's only been, it's been less than three weeks and the story, the objectives keep changing, the reasons keep changing over and over from Levitt to Trump to Hegstead, to all of them, all of them, to Speaker Johnson. They're all just ridiculous people. So Trump can't clearly define what we want. Right? mean, you want an end to a war, you're gonna need to know what you want to achieve. We can't do that. What does Iran want? What do we know about what they want? Especially now that they said that they're not interested in reopening negotiations, what would allow them to reopen negotiations? Again, we need to know what the objectives are if we're gonna get out of this thing, which every, I gotta believe that Trump at this point believes we gotta get the hell out of this thing. can't think otherwise. I don't think he ever really wanted to go in, I don't know, easy. I've just heard such conflicting things. I I think partially is captured. It's probably threatened. And he's in an echo chamber, people are just telling him what he wants to hear. So he'll do it. But he sees what's happening. He sees American soldiers that he went he goes to welcome our killed soldiers home like he goes he knows what's happening. He's briefed on it. He's, you know, he's probably not looking at social media like we are and seeing all the clips and but he's a smart enough guy, like he's got to know we got to get out of this. But anyway, to get out, you got to know what you want. We don't. We also need to know what Iran wants. And if you listen to like corporate media, they're just gonna, they're not gonna tell us. They're sort of, ⁓ they'll frame it like Iran is refusing to negotiate. And so they're stubborn or they're unreasonable. They're barbarians, whatever, which is completely dishonest. ⁓ so let let's just like see what they're saying. So iran's foreign minister abbas argachi I think is how you pronounce his name. Sorry if I butcher that but on cbs on march 15th said no, we never asked for seafire ceasefire and we never asked even for a negotiation We're ready to defend ourselves as long as it takes that's the end of that statement that I read before we're ready to defend ourselves as long as it takes It doesn't sound like quit then iran's president on march 12th ⁓ laid out three conditions to end the war. recognize Iran's legitimate rights. Two, payment of reparations. They want money from the US to pay for all the stuff that's been destroyed. And three, firm international guarantees against future aggression. I don't think they're gonna take the US's word for it. I think it's gonna have to be a coalition of I don't know, maybe they probably have to have, it's gonna hurt. Because what's going to, what they're going to want is Russia, China to help guarantee the U S is a good actor. Of course, we're in a cold war with Russia right now and China ⁓ is surrounding Taiwan. So, you know, that's going to chafe, but makes sense. mean, how can you trust the United States? So reparations ⁓ recognize legitimate rights and international guarantees against future aggression. Maybe that means leave some of the bases in the Middle East. I could see them asking for that. ⁓ policy advisor to the Supreme Leader's office, Kamal Karazi, gave an interview to CNN from Toronto on day 10 of the war. And he said, I don't see any room for diplomacy anymore because Donald Trump ⁓ been deceiving others and not keeping with his promises. And we experienced this in two times of negotiations. While we were engaged in negotiation, they struck us. And their deputy foreign minister, ⁓ In an interview with Dropsite News said plainly, are killing our citizens, municipalities, schools, hospitals, medical centers, sports clubs, everywhere is being bombarded. Do you think any Iranian with common sense would be really in a position to reach out to the United States under these circumstances? lot of Iranian foreman leaders are calling the negotiations that we had before pretext. It's hard to blame them for saying that it wasn't diplomacy, obviously, because we bombed them during the middle of it. And they said, we tried our best. We tried to remove all the excuses that they provided. And they did. it seems they did because Oman's mediator confirmed that they did that the deal was within reach. So Iran agreed to key demands. They felt like they, they were holding up their end of the bargain and United States bombed them. it's also like a little bit of a tangent, but it's the some more news has come to light about why these negotiations fail. I mean, they were they seem like theater anyway. I mean, you don't as States is it's all that inertia moving all that that ⁓ that weaponry into the into the Gulf. It's like you got two carrier groups there. They get inertia of it's like it seemed a fated completely that it was there was going to be a strike but but There were other problems and I don't know if this is on purpose or not, but the Arms Control Association said that they obtained recordings of background briefings given by Steve Witkoff. This is of course Trump's envoy who led the talks. And their conclusion was that Witkoff did not have sufficient technical expertise or diplomatic experience to engage in effective diplomacy. They said he mischaracterized Iran's positions he misunderstood ⁓ elements of the nuclear file. So ⁓ Did they send him in like was he qualified did they send in an unqualified guy in there because they the Trump administration never wanted to get this deal done, I mean Tucker says that he knows Witkof is a smart guy I don't know but the whole thing screams of it was negotiation theater anyway So ⁓ send in there who's maybe on who's on your side who could report back who has dual ties, of course Israel as well and you know, he can do his best, but doesn't even matter how good he does anyway, because we're going to strike no matter what. don't know. But his mischaracterizations of other thing is, I don't know how much ⁓ Trump Witkoff, but who knows? I don't know how the close they are. ⁓ I look into that. but if he's part of the echo chamber, his mischaracterizations of what Iran wanted probably fed, you know, Trump's assessment that Iran wasn't serious. Like he could have come back to Trump and said, look, they're not serious. They don't know what, they're not serious. They're gonna keep doing what they're doing. They're bad actors. But as I mentioned, the Omani mediator, the person actually in the room said the opposite. said the talks, you know, were going great and they may have been torpedoed by a guy who didn't understand what he was negotiating. Maybe he did understand it, but maybe he was there to make it fail. I don't know. So ⁓ other thing that Kent confirmed when he was, being interviewed by Tucker yesterday it's something that makes Iran's position even more rational. He said that ⁓ Khamenei, the supreme leader ⁓ was killed on day one ⁓ actually moderating Iran's nuclear program. We knew this. And Kent said this that quote, he was preventing them from getting nuclear weapons and said that there was no intelligence indicating that Iran was on the cusp of building a bomb. So what we actually did was killed the guy who was holding the program back. We knew he said it was against that against ⁓ their religion. to build a weapon. So we said, no, we're not gonna do that. So about that, we kill the guy. If the stated justification was preventing a nuclear in the beginning, was preventing a nuclear Iran, then the action that we removed the who was preventing a nuclear Iran. Great job guys. So when you I think it's pretty clear what their objectives are, know, stated by their president. But when you hear Iran refuses to negotiate, the honest framing is that Iran was negotiating twice, they got bombed, and they're not gonna believe the US word for it that they're gonna cease fire, they want some international guarantees. And how can you blame them? And so, well then what ends this for them? So think about their strategy, how can they hold out against the mighty American military? And this is where it kind of gets strategically interesting. They know that they can't beat the U S militarily. Um, they know that the U S and Israel have air superiority. Iran's Navy is largely destroyed. That's what the reports are. I think they have a bunch of boats left, but not military vessels. They can still do a lot of damage with, with drones and things, of course, but it's degraded. Their air defenses are degraded on paper that are losing. Um, but when you think about it, they're not really trying. to win a military victory. They wouldn't be able to do that. What they're trying to do is win through exhausting their enemy, Israel and the United States, and win through inflicting economic pain. That's their strategy, economic pain, which they've been doing, close, which we knew they were going to do, to pretend otherwise that they wouldn't. that one of their first goals wouldn't be to close the Strait of Hormuz. Like that's their big leverage point. Of course they're gonna try to do it. So they want, that's their strategy. Inflict economic pain, close the Strait of Hormuz, attack Gulf oil infrastructure, drive oil north of a hundred dollars a barrel, make the global economy scream loud enough that other countries pressure the United States to stop. They said this explicitly, the war doesn't end unless the economic pressure would be. built up to the extent that other countries would intervene to guarantee the termination of aggression. That's the play and it makes complete sense. Can't beat the US Air Force, but they can make this war so expensive for us, for Europe, for Asia, that the world tells Trump to knock it off. And you can see that the world is already kind of doing that. We'll talk about that in a second. But the economic thing is working. Oil went from $65 a barrel to over a hundred. I don't know what it is today, but I saw that. Gas is up. 25, 35 % across the country. There's something like a thousand tankers stranded. The IEA announced the largest emergency oil reserve release in history. It 412 million barrels. It's not enough. The price of gas keeps going up. And Iran also has a card that they're starting to play as well. They're selectively allowing ships through Hormuz. Turkey got a ship through, India negotiated safe passage through. And, you know, they're going to let ships through just not to the US and its allies. They're also saying that Iran is allowing tankers through if the oil is traded in Chinese yuan instead of the US dollar. that is a huge problem to the United States because it becomes a direct challenge to the dollars like hegemony, ⁓ role ⁓ in global energy markets. ⁓ you know, that's kind of a that's a bigger story than even this than than a regional conflict with no US soldiers on the ground. Like that becomes a direct threat to the US economy and the US power, soft power abroad. So Iran's position is actually like really coherent. They do have objectives, some guarantees, some restitution ⁓ international pressure to make sure that United States keeps its promises. Pretty coherent position and a coherent. Objective to their war like inflict economic pain until the world is like that's enough It's way more coherent than ours. Frankly women are honest than ours Yeah, they're good, you know, ⁓ they're they're just that's their leverage that they can apply and Iran's top security official which is Ali Larijani ⁓ who was actually killed yesterday to seem like a one of the reasonable people deal with there he was killed and in a strike yesterday. He put the whole thing in a sentence on on X he said that Trump turned his self made America first slogan into Israel first and sacrificed American soldiers for Israel's power hungry ambitions. They know this they're gonna have they're trying to make us make a choice. And don't have to like Iran you don't have to agree with their government. I don't. But if you can't understand why they won't come to the table right now you're not paying attention to what we did to that table. ⁓ So So Iran's strategy, economic pain, it's working, which means the US in order to lessen international pressure for this ⁓ clearly unpopular war, needs to reopen and the Strait of Hormuz and basically control the That's what we need to do. US needs to do. That's kind of the ball game right now, right? Because if the strait opens, Iran loses its leverage. If it stays closed, the economic pressure builds on us on them. So it's kind of a race to that. sort of less stated goal for the United States, but a coherent one is to keep that thing open. Well, Trump is trying ⁓ solution to this. It's a great one because it's not really working, but he's been asking other countries to send warships. On March 14th, Trump posted on True Social calling on China, France, Japan, South Korea, and the UK to deploy naval forces so that the straight quote, will no longer be a threat by a nation has been totally decapitated. He followed that up on Air Force one saying he's talking to about seven countries He won't say which ones but we know based on the results that have come in so far France was one of them They said no, they won't do it Armed Forces minister said France would maintain a defensive and protected protective posture and would not be drawn to a war Lebanon by the United States and Israel the McCrone ⁓ later a quote purely defensive ⁓ EU mission, but only when fighting some sides well if fighting societies don't really need that anyway, so he's basically saying no. In the UK, Starmer rejected the request, said reopening Hormuz is not a simple task and Britain would not be drawn into a wider war. And the UK's energy secretary says the best and surest way to reopen the strait is to end the war. I mean, true. In Japan, the Minister Takachi said we have not made any decisions whatsoever about dispatching escort ships. And that they said the threshold for sending ships is extremely high. Germany, foreign minister said they're very skeptical about extending the ⁓ existing naval mission to Hormuz. Australia says no. South Korea says no. And China called for all parties to stop military operations. Doesn't make sense for them ⁓ to militarily. We'll talk about that in a second. They're not sending ships. Because basically like they're still getting ships through is the reason. And if it weakens us, actually helps them. So they're not gonna do that. So as of today, as far as I know, not a single country has formally committed descending warships, zero. The Wall Street Journal reported the administration plans to announce a coalition as early as the end of this week. That's tomorrow, tomorrow's Friday. We'll see, but right now it's a coalition of no one. it... is predictable because like it's obvious like the Trump administration didn't consult any of these allies before launching strikes. Europe and Asia are far more dependent on Gulf oil than the US is. They're feeling the economic pain more acutely than we are. And now Trump is asking them to risk their ships and their people in a war they had no say in starting, weren't even consulted on and mostly oppose. So You know, why would they help? And Trump's response to their refusal threats. Of course, he told the Financial Times that NATO faces a very bad future of allies don't sell send help. said we will remember he also floated delaying his China summit, which is scheduled for the end of this month. But then he walked that back. He's not gonna do that. Trump no, I mean, he campaigned on exactly why this is a horrible idea. And it's been going horribly. He's so he has to know it. But now he's furious that other countries won't volunteer to police a waterway on our behalf in a war we started without asking them. So no one's coming and let's check in on the Arab States. Are they going to help? No, they're not going to help. And this is where the story gets really ugly because the Gulf countries who've been like pretty good allies to us, it seems like we got our bases, know, throughout their countries, we trade with them. We, very good. diplomatic terms with them. they've been put in a really bad position because they're getting bombed and it's not their fault. Iran, Iran launched over 2000 projectiles at Gulf States since the war started. The IRG, Iran's Revolutionary Guard acknowledged that about 40 % of their firepower has been directed at Israel, but 60%, the majority has been aimed at Arab neighbors and US bases, which live in those countries. The UAE alone has intercepted over 270 ballistic missiles and drones. Amazon data center was hit Dubai international airport had to suspend flights because a fuel tank was hit nearby. Something like 16 people are dead across Gulf states. have Saudi Arabia was hit Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan, they were all they've all been hit by by missiles. And it take much thought. To realize why this is happening the US keeps bases all over the gulf Iran isn't hitting these countries because of some ancient rivalry They're they're hitting them because the US is operating from their soil Again from Iran's IRGC. It said they said it explicitly they considered it a legitimate right to target the origin of American missile launches in UAE ports and military facilities And after the karg island strike, I think we'll get to more of that a little bit later to Iran's foreign minister said the US attacked from two locations inside the UAE. Karg Island strike was horrible and we'll talk that a second, sorry. And these countries are ⁓ taking fire, he's saying these countries are taking fire because they're hosting ⁓ US bases. though they didn't start the war, they're collateral damage because again, US is operating and launching ⁓ missiles and strikes from them. ⁓ Imagine how these countries feel about it. You know, I don't want to lose people. They don't want to lose infrastructure. what makes it worse. ⁓ So the Gulf states are absorbing Iranian missile strikes, the US is pulling Patriot missiles from other theaters like, like Ukraine, and South Korea, and bringing them protect Israel, not protect the Gulf states that are taking enemy fire because US bases are there no protecting Israel. So if you're Saudi Arabia and UAE right now, the math is you're getting bombed because America launched attacks from your territory and the missile defense system that could protect you is instead being redirected to protect the country this war was actually fought for. So crazy. Can't imagine how they'd feel about it. A Dubai billionaire named Khalif al-Habtour posted something on X, he then deleted it, but internet's forever. He said, we know full well why we are under attack and we also know who dragged the entire region into this dangerous escalation without consulting those he calls as allies in the region. analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies described the mood ⁓ three layers from the Gulf States. Layer one, rage at Iran. Makes sense, stop hitting us with your missiles. Of course they're pissed at Iran. Layer two though, dismay with Washington. Layer three, ⁓ Profound suspicion about Israel's regional agenda. So three layers only one of them is directed at the people actually firing the missiles at them UAE official told CNN something that illustrates this point Well, he said quote at the end of the day your neighbors he's talking about Iran Of course relations with Tehran would eventually have to normalize. He said even if it takes decades Because American forces will eventually pack up and leave they always do they left Afghanistan. They'll leave here to Iran will still be across the water, their neighbors. So what's the Trump administration doing? threatened allies in ⁓ Europe Asia. Is he happy with what's going on with the Gulf States? No, threatening them as well. Yet Lindsey Graham, who went to Israel and then came back and publicly warned Saudi Arabia that if they don't join the fight, consequences will follow. It's like, Lindsey Graham's trying to, he's such a trying to fights he'll never have to be in. all over the world. And the Gulf States know the score. Joining an offensive war against their permanent neighbor on behalf of temporary American president to advance Israel's security objectives, that's not in their interest. It never was. And they know it. What the Gulf States actually want, no brainer, is for it to stop. The UAE and Qatar started lobbying allies to pressure Trump towards an off-ramp within days of the war starting. Mansalman called Iran's president to push for dialogue the Gulf Cooperation Council the GCC is United on this one thing and the fighting they have skirmishes amongst themselves, but they're all like this is It's hurting us all let's stop this so What we've seen is they'll they'll provide defensive air support. They'll let us use their airspace for now But they're not gonna go on offensive against Iran not for Trump not for Netanyahu. No way There's a peace and foreign policy that nails why this matters beyond the immediate war. For decades, the neoconservatives dream has been Arab-Israeli cooperation against Iran without having to resolve the Palestinian issue first. That's a big one. So get Arabs, get together against the Persians in Iran without resolving the Palestinian issue first because that's a huge barrier between the relations between the countries. And now it's sort of happening in a funny way not funny. Haha, but like in a weird way technically Israel and the Arab states are on the same side, right? They kind of are By connective tissue of the United States, but it's not because the Arab states choose this ⁓ They're this alliance because they're caught US bases are on their soil are launching attacks in Iran So Iran is hitting them back. So now they need us and Israeli missile defense to survive It's this cooperation by coercion, not by choice. They're not going on offense. They're not joining the war. They're just trying not to get killed in someone else's. But here's the irony that the neocons short side, these are not, once you dig into this, the more you dig into this, these are not impressive people. These are just bloodthirsty, horrible, horrible, demonic people, but they're not impressive people. So here's the irony that the neocons in plain for their force alliance might be the thing. that permanently destroys American credibility in the Gulf. Because every leader in every Gulf capital can now see with perfect clarity that the United States will sacrifice their security for Israel's objectives, their cities, their infrastructure, their airports burning, so Israel's enemies can get weaker. So the next time Washington comes asking for a favor, the answer is probably going to be different. I wonder, I mean, if to end this conflict, Iran insists that US closes some bases around the Gulf. And we might, I'm not, we might have to. We don't have the munitions to sustain this thing very long either. That's the other thing. So we might have to do some stuff and part of it might be to close some bases. you gotta think that the ⁓ States would actually would that. would appreciate that too. And so we might get pressure applied, not only from Iran, but also our Gulf partners to do just that because it's a for them. They don't want to get destroyed. They don't want to get bombed for a war that they don't that they don't wish. So on top of all this, just like a kind of as an aside is Israel has used this war to open a full second front in Lebanon. They're starting a second war. I mean, it's been ⁓ kind of a semi warm war for the last couple of years, even through a ceasefire, but, but now they've opened up like really aggressive war in Lebanon's southern border. So since Hezbollah launched rockets at Israel after a community was killed, Israel has responded with a massive bombing campaign and ground invasion. So far, I think it's over 1400 people that I've seen, that's the reports, ⁓ dead in Lebanon. Something like 800,000 are displaced and as of March 16th the IDF has announced a new targeted ground operation to expand the buffer zone in southern Lebanon Defense minister Katz from Israel said the operation will continue until Hezbollah no longer poses a threat to northern Excuse me to northern Israel a Lacud lawmaker said this Said that the Latani River must become the new northern border. Take a look at where that is on the map. That's well into Lebanon territory. So this is annexation language. This is physical expansion of the state of Israel. Even ⁓ war against Iran wasn't ⁓ It was about hegemony in the region. They wanted to be the most powerful in the region, but they weren't going to expand their territory. This is expansion their territory into Lebanon. And here's some further context into that Hezbollah had actually promised the Lebanese government that it would not retaliate against Israel for strikes in Iran. The Lebanese government had approved a plan to disarm Hezbollah. And there's been the ceasefire in place since November 2024. So it's a year and a half. And this is ceasefire that the US helped broker. It was fragile. Sure, both parties were violating it, but it was holding. Hezbollah was mostly standing down, but then we killed community. you got to understand who this guy is like this is Haswell as primary backer and religious leader. He's a major he was a ⁓ religious figure hundreds of millions of ⁓ ⁓ of Shia look to this man as their religious principle. And so and he's has was primary backer. And he's the religious leader and de facto leader of the was the de facto leader of the country that funded Hezbollah armed Hezbollah gave them strategic direction. I mean, Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, but just like put yourself in your shoes in their shoes. This is their primary backer and us and Israel killed him first day. So has blood did what everybody predicted that they would do if this would happen. They started firing, on Israel and ⁓ You know gave them exactly the justification that they needed to do what it was already apparently planning on doing CNN reported that Israel was quietly finalizing plans for a large-scale operation on its northern border Lebanon as early as January before the war even started the Iran war didn't create Israel ⁓ Israel's Lebanon campaign it provided the cover for it. So zoom out a little bit. You got Rubio told us that US struck Iran preemptively because we knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. So Israel says we're gonna strike Iran. So we're gonna go and Rubio and the Trump administration is like, okay, well, we drags the United States in Israel knows this, it's gonna drag the United States in. And what does that do? Provides cover for them to expand territorially, territorially into Lebanon. So, you know, Israel drags the US into a war that degrades their only regional rival and provides them cover to expand their territory. Great. Good job. unintended consequence, which also infuriate ⁓ our partners in the Israel's defense minister is comparing the Lebanon operation to the two-year war in Gaza. Great. I mean, that's not scary. killed upward ⁓ 100,000 people in Gaza, mostly civilians. We're do that again? They're gonna do that again in Lebanon? And Washington has signaled it will not press Israel to stop. So even after this war ends, whenever that is, hopefully it's soon, Israel's war continues, of course, on our tab with our blessing, without congressional vote, without any public debate or any honest accounting of what we're getting in return, which is nothing. The honest accounting is nothing. Probably more terrorists. We're making more terrorists is what it is. So, okay, we've talked about objectives from both sides and some of the other contributing factors and tangents. How does this thing end? You know, it's a mess. There's a lot of factions and in and out, in and outs, ins and outs. Sorry, losing my voice, I guess, a little bit. Let's walk through the realistic scenarios. So scenario one is quickest, in some ways the best, but in other ways challenging. But that is declare victory and leave. And you this can happen right away. It's probably what Trump wants. If he really doesn't want to be there, I want to believe that he doesn't want to be there and he's either he's coerced. He's probably I don't like the fact that he's coerced, but I believe he is. I he believes he's in he's him and his family are in imminent danger. so there's some coercion there. That's what I believe. You can believe what you want, but two threats on his life ⁓ and know, he loves his family. And, you know, the the payoff from Adelson, $250 million. Trump doesn't need the money, but it's kind of like, ⁓ hey, carrot and the stick. you don't do what we want, we'll take you out, we'll give you $250 million. ⁓ I've floated this idea before that maybe they would, maybe Trump wants a dynasty and wants Barron to be president in 20 years or something. And so maybe they're saying, well, we'll guarantee that too. We'll get him there as well. Trump can have a dynasty like the Bushes did, know, the Clintons kind of do, I guess, I don't know. But I want to believe that Trump does not want to be there. it's some combination of coercion and, and being in this echo chamber, it's like the powers that be got enough of the reasonable people out of the room, shot one of them, Charlie Kirk, and then, you know, made Tucker sort of persona non grata. Kent wasn't in the room. I don't know if Tulsi was, but it was a really close knit. Sounds like just a few people sort of made this decision. So coercion and Kind of an echo chamber that did it so I'm hoping that Trump actually does not want to be here because ten years ago we didn't and He knows he's got to know it's not popular. I mean he won this election probably the first election and this election largely in part To you know him criticizing the Iraq war so anyway Declare victory and leave and he's already sort of laying the groundwork He's already said like we've obliterated their nuclear capability, they have no more Navy, they have no more Air Force, they've been militarily defeated, we've won, but we haven't won enough, he said. We gotta win more, win bigly, I guess. But, you know, he can stop and that the mission is accomplished if his handlers let him. I mean, at some point, his handlers who are clearly beholden to the country of Israel and not the United States. At some point, this has become so unpopular that they like in sentiment against Israel is so bad, like they have to, ⁓ some point they have to relent and say, okay, we did what we can do here. ⁓ would think, but in this scenario, Trump says all the military objectives have been met. They can already say that. I mean, that's what Hexeth is saying, but He can say that they've been met, Iran's Navy's destroyed, air defenses degraded, nuclear program gone, Khamenei's dead. Historic victory, he can say, and then just stop the bombing. And then hopefully Hormuz gradually reopens because, well, the fact is Iran needs oil revenue too, so it benefits them to open it. So everyone moves on. But the problem with this is, so that's probably the best, quickest thing. hope it, if it happened now, I'd say, thank God. problem with it is nothing actually gets resolved. If there's no deal, no political sentiment, Iran's government is still intact. We're not gonna stop that. There's not gonna be a regime change. Although we'll talk about that too. But if it's intact, it's gonna be angry and now led by a new Supreme Leader who just had his dad killed and his family killed too, he's gonna, you know, he's gonna be the easiest person to negotiate with. And the has already pledged allegiance to him. And if there's political solution, then the cycle resets, right? Because they rebuild, they rebuild their military capabilities, maybe they start their nukes again, or they pay a lot but acquire one from Pakistan that could happen. And Kent confirmed this too. I said this earlier, but he can he confirmed that community was the one who's moderating the nuclear program. So may have guaranteed the nuclear program by killing him. And yeah, maybe his son feels like there's no other way. I mean, if you're if you keep being getting threatened ⁓ over over, it's an existential threat for you at some point to not have the biggest weapon that you possibly can. But This would be the Venezuela playbook go playbook kind of right you go in you take out the leader do some bombing We didn't bomb Venezuela. Thank God And then just get the hell out but the problem is Iran is four times the size of Venezuela It has a military that's still firing missiles. It's saying it won't negotiate You know, so even if we do stop stop bombing they're saying they won't negotiate then there's no pressure for them to negotiate if we're just done I guess maybe with the straight-up hormones, but then they would have to enforce that so it's still military action. I don't know or we just let them have that that can't happen either. So it's just there's a lot of problems with this method. I hope that that's the scenario that works out, we just get out of there and achieve a political sentiment, a settlement, but but who knows, but that's really the second scenario is there is a negotiated settlement. And this is really the most responsible way we can't just like get out and not politically have a conversation and and give a little get a little. The problem is obvious though. I mean, who are we going to negotiate with? We just killed Larjani yesterday and, know, their, their leadership was, who was, more sympathetic to, to standing down is gone. So who we negotiate with? and not only that for this to work, you need a credible third party mediator. Amman was doing this Maybe they could it again. But Iran's going to need actual guarantees that the U S won't strike them. How, how is that going to happen? So you probably have to bring in Russia or China or something. And then the other problem is Trump won't say what he wants. Um, so the path exists, but no one, what no one really seems willing to take it yet. Yeah. Scenario three regime change. just said this before. It's not going to happen. It's a fantasy scenario. Netanyahu framed the strikes as creating conditions for Iranians to take their destiny into their own hands. And Trump told Ronnie and see our for freedom is at hand, but the reality is, in January, you saw Iran had its largest protests against the regime since the 1979 resolution. And then the government crushed it. It was put down. the opposition really doesn't have a unified leader. The exiled crown prince raise up a lobby, hasn't set foot in Iran in nearly 50 years. Trump himself called him not credible. And now the sentiment has turned in Iran. Once you bomb. the country, the sentiment turns. So now we're seeing hundreds of thousands of pro-regime protesters in the street of Tehran. And think about where this is Tehran. This is the most liberal section of the country where regime change could potentially come from. ⁓ of course, when your country is getting bombed, you rally behind it and its government. The will of the people seems clearly with the regime now. So regime change is not going to happen. So that's out. And then scenario four. ⁓ is not an off ramp. is escalate escalation. And the most immediate trigger for this is cargo island like this is a that's a scary place. So the US already struck military targets there on March 14, but deliberately spared the oil infrastructure. can't believe they actually came that close though. And then Trump warned that he might go back in and hit it again, just for fun, just for fun. He But the problem is Karg Island handles 90 % of Iran's oil exports. So if the US destroys that infrastructure, it would take years to rebuild. Iran would lose its primary revenue source. And Iran has said explicitly that if their oil facilities are hit, they will reduce US linked oil facilities in the Gulf to a pile of ashes, which means the global economy enters genuine crisis territory. So that would definitely escalate things. I hope that the Trump administration is smart enough and that they restrained the Israel, they can restrain the Israelis enough to not do that. There was some, we saw a little peek into that today where I didn't see the full report, but it looked like Israel hit some oil infrastructure and Trump admonished them on true social. I haven't read into the full story of that, but That's, at least a positive ⁓ lining on this right now is that it like there is a line that the Trump administration will not allow them to, to cross, beyond cargo, ⁓ there's the Russian China dimension. So neither one of them is intervening militarily. Thank God. Russia is stretched in Ukraine and China, China doesn't want to blow up the summit. That's going to happen at the end of the month, but They're not doing nothing. mean, Russia has reportedly provided Iran with intelligence on US military positions, tit for tat there. I mean, we the same thing, provided money, arms, and intelligence, and probably some special forces on the ground in Ukraine. So can't blame Russia too much for doing this, but they're providing and satellite warship locations, that type of thing. And China has provided spare parts for missiles, ⁓ radar navigation technology. ⁓ That's all embedded into Iran's electronic warfare capabilities So the realistic like worst case isn't really a Hollywood scenario where Russian jets scrambled to defend Tehran It's a slow deepening. It's more intelligence. It's more parts more cyber capabilities. It's Iran's resistance getting quietly sustained by two nuclear powers who can't afford to let it collapse because an Iranian collapse and this is super important Iranian collapse would be a huge blow against the Eurasian land bridge. So Russia and China, their trade corridors, their belt and road investments, their entire vision of a multipolar world, there's a nexus point through Iran. So the worst case probably isn't World War Three, we hope. But it's that this conflict becomes a permanent feature for ⁓ years decades. This ⁓ Middle Ukraine where great powers kind of feed the fire without fighting it directly. And the people who actually live there pay the price. Indefinitely in that region just maintains instability spent in unstable for so many so many decades And the United States has a lot to do with that And then of course, ⁓ know, yes ⁓ nuclear weapons Any scenario where a nuclear armed state is fighting an existential multi-front war should concern everyone. I'll leave it there. I mean How badly do you want Israel to get to get beat up? You know if their backs to the wall And they have nuclear, so you just want this thing to stop. So the simplest off-ramp is we can stop bombing, show some goodwill, withdraw some forces, and hopefully encourage, that encourages Iran, get some other players involved, and encourage Iran to get back to the table. And then let Iran and Israel sort out their bilateral issues without American blood and treasure subsidizing one side. So. ⁓ that would be the solution and at least it seems like Trump had there's some willingness on the Trump administration from Trump I don't know about his administration but they parrot him but there's some indication that he would be willing to do something like this and maybe he's ⁓ enough to do it I don't know maybe he's not captured enough to do it but we spent this weekend it'll be three weeks bombing a country of 90 million people hitting schools, hospitals, civilian infrastructure. over last I saw 1400 Iranians dead 18,000 to 20,000 injured and every single one of them has a family has kids, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers who watched their neighborhood get leveled by American munitions. You've got parents who've ⁓ pulled children out of rubble. You've got a little girl school getting ⁓ bombed a U S Tomahawk. missile killing 160, 170 kids. We know how this works. spent 20 years after 911 learning that you can't bomb your way to safety that the next generation remembers that every school you hit every wedding you destroy every father you kill that's recruitment material for the people who actually do want to hurt Americans. We created ISIS by destroying Iraq. We fueled a generation of extremism. across the Middle East by treating Muslim countries as target practice for two decades. And now we're doing it again, more brazen with less justification. mean, the actual justification for invading Iraq was a lie. But if it were true, at least it'd be some justification. This has none. There's no justification at all. If you're worried about terrorist threats to the homeland, and you should be, there's been three already, small, but took American lives, if you're worried about that, then you should be furious about this war because this is how you create them, not by being too soft, by being too stupid, by bombing people who never threatened you. Again, it's a war that offers America no upside, only downside. Trump promised no new wars. started the biggest one in the generation. He said it wouldn't last days. We're on day 20. He says Iran is defeated. Iran says they're just getting started. He's asking China for help. Nobody's coming. We never should have been there in the first place. He knows it. And he said it on camera the other day on Air Force One.