← Kibbe on Liberty
Kibbe on Liberty
Ep 380 | How Do We Get Out of Iran? | Guest: Dave DeCamp
01:07:32
Matt Kibbe and Dave DeCamp, news editor at Antiwar.com, discuss the recent developments in the Iran war.
Loading summary
Transcript72 lines
- [00:00]
A
Welcome to Kibbe on Liberty. I'm Talking to Dave DeCamp, the news editor@antiwar.com about the ongoing saga, the war in Iran, the wild last 48 hours where we're on the verge of nuclear war and civilization ending events to apparently some sort of deal. And now the Strait of Hormuz is closed again. I don't know what's going on, but you need to keep up with this. Check it out. Welcome to kibbe on liberty. Dave, how's it going?
- [01:04]
B
Good, Matt. Thanks for having me on.
- [01:06]
A
Yeah. I feel like our timing, because of my scheduling screw up, we didn't have this conversation last week, but I feel like our timing's pretty good this week because I feel like there's some news to report or at least analyze in the last 48 hours. And I definitely want to talk about the Trump tweet about ending civilization and the deal. And now it looks like the deal's falling apart. But for people that don't know either your work or antiwar.com, just tell us a little bit about what you do, and at the end of the show, we'll talk about where people can find you, but just give people a little bit of sense for your work.
- [01:47]
B
Yeah. So antiwar.com is a website that's been around since 1995. It was founded by my boss, Eric Garris, and his friend Justin Raimondo, who was the columnist for many years, kind of the voice of the website. He passed away back in 2019. But we have carried on and it's really become kind of a source, a news source for people. And we cover U.S. foreign policy from our anti war, non interventionist perspective. And that, that's what I do specifically is, is the news. I write short news articles every day. Kind of the things that I think are important for Americans to be aware of, of what their government is up to overseas. And we also run opinion pieces and stuff from people across the political spectrum. We're like a single issue, nonpartisan project. And so, yeah, my job is to follow the, the wars and the, the U.S. foreign Policy News. And of course, we've been very, very busy lately. One thing Trump does which I think is intentional is that you just never know what he's gonna do next. He'll tweet something out or say something that'll completely change a story. So, yeah, we've really been on our toes a lot lately.
- [03:03]
A
Yeah. And not just when it comes to foreign policy, but clearly a core part of his strategy is to keep us distracted and Sort of trying to figure out which way we're going. And it's actually hard to sort of engage in a rational policy debate with Trump because he's constantly changing the conversation with a new truth post or something like that.
- [03:26]
B
Yeah, and it's definitely deliberate. I mean, he said this at the press conference the other day. I forget exactly. It was about the Iran war. And someone asked him, so what are you going to do? You're saying there's negotiations, but you're also threatening to destroy the whole country. And he says, I don't know what I'm gonna do. You don't know what I'm gonna do. And that's. I forgot exactly what he said. But he said, that's the point. I'm not telling you what I'm gonna do.
- [03:48]
A
So I wanna start with. And I know most of the people watching this, know this post from Trump anyway, and this was. When did he post this?
- [04:03]
B
The Tuesday morning, the civilization threat.
- [04:07]
A
So Tuesday morning. And by the way, for people watching this, it's Wednesday. And I'm actually going to go ahead and publish this tomorrow because I'm afraid that the news on this moves so fast, it doesn't make sense to publish it on our normal schedule. So to give everybody watching this context, this stuff just happened yesterday and today, and everything we're talking about is sort of that. But here's the. I'm going to call it a tweet, because that's what I want to do. A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have complete and total regime change, where different, smarter and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen. Who knows? We will find out tonight. One of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the world. 47 years of extortion, corruption and death will finally end. God bless the great people of Iran. There was a second tweet where he praised Allah. So maybe I copied the wrong tweet. Which one is this?
- [05:23]
B
So that was the Easter morning one was when he praised Allah and he said, open the effing straight or else he's gonna. I forget exactly the wording, but unleash hell on. On Iran. That was his Easter morning message. So we had a lot of messages like this. And then there was a. At that press conference I. I referenced before, he said, oh, we can take out the entire country in a night, and we're probably going to do that tomorrow night. And you know, these are threats that are happening as there's a horrific bombing campaign, you know, underway. A lot of people that wanted to downplay this type of rhetoric were pointing back to 2017 and the fire and fury threat with North Korea. But again, this is a very different situation. You're in, in a hot war, actively bombing a country, lots of civilian targets being hit, lots of civilians being killed. So these, these are not idle threats. And, you know, the real threat, a lot of people took this as a nuke, a threat to use a nuclear weapon, which I don't blame them for, for getting that from this. But the real threat that appeared to be on the table was massive, a massive bombing of all the energy infrastructure in the country, power plants sinking the country into darkness. And also bridges. You know, he blew up the biggest bridge in Iran the other, the other day. So again, these were very real threats that, that he was making. And of course, all this stuff just have a. Would just have a horrific impact on the civilians of Iran. So I think all the outrage was, was certainly warranted from this, and maybe it played a role in him ultimately backing down. Because there were some Republicans who, who, you know, came out against it and, you know, people did not take it well.
- [07:14]
A
There, there are still Republicans other than Rand Paul and Thomas Massie who will speak out.
- [07:19]
B
There were. I mean, I wish I remember their names. It was people I actually haven't heard of in Congress. There was at least two of them. And they said, hey, maybe this is a little too far, but they support the war ultimately.
- [07:31]
A
Sure, I'll have to find out who that is, because it's always interesting to see someone that's willing to speak out. But I think a lot of people that sort of instinctually, habitually and knee jerk defend the president no matter what he does, we're defending this as sort of an art of the deal bluff. That's quite typical for Trump. But it strikes me that this one is fundamentally different. And on his face, it's morally repugnant because he is openly saying, I'm going to kill a lot of innocent people in the name of teaching this regime a lesson. And I don't see how you get around that. That's just disgusting. But practically speaking, the rationale, one of the key rationales according to the Trump administration for engaging in regime change in Iran was to liberate the Iranian people. And it strikes me that this is not particularly liberating, even as a threat.
- [08:37]
B
Yeah, yeah, no, it went from liberating them to destroying their country, became the Next threat. I mean, you see him contradict himself there in that tweet. He said, tonight an entire civilization will die. And at the end he says, God bless the people of Iran. Unless that meant that they were going to meet God soon. Unless it was part of the threat. But yeah, I mean, we saw a lot of people who supported, know, the idea of regime change in Iran after seeing this bombing campaign, realized that they were mistaken in, in wanting the US And Israel to try to do this. You know, it's just like I said, I mean, this war started, the opening hours of it started with what all evidence indicates was a US Tomahawk missile strike on an elementary school, killing over a hundred little kids. I mean, as it in my time working for Antiwar.com and I believe in this century that was the worst massacre of civilians committed by the US Military in recent, you know, in recent decades. And that's how it started. So, you know, and he mentions in that tweet, he's saying, and they all said this today, you know, Hegseth, and leave it at the White House for saying, oh, there's been regime change in Iran, saying that they're more reasonable people now that are in charge. But who's in charge now? The, the son of the ayatollah who was killed, and he didn't just lose his father in that airstrike. Also his wife, his mother, children, his sister were all killed. And this is who's leading the country now. So we have a hardened Islamic regime and more people supporting them now in the country, because you start bombing people and they're going to rally around their government, rally around the flag, and this is what we're left with. Something very different than liberation.
- [10:35]
A
Yeah. And I definitely want to get to exit strategies, good, bad or ugly in this conversation. So Trump makes this bombastic threat and the clock is ticking. And kind of at the 11th hour, he announces that he has the framework of a deal. And I guess there were Pakistani intermediaries sort of facilitating this negotiation. Tell us what Trump claimed that deal was, and it does seem like it's already unraveled. But remind people what it was.
- [11:13]
B
Yeah. So Trump, you know, in his first announcement there, he wasn't too specific, really. The only thing that he said was that Iran would fully open the Strait of Hormuz, will stop bombing them for two weeks. He said that Iran's 10 point proposal was a good basis for negotiations. One thing that I think is very important is that Pakistan's prime minister, he was the mediator, he said in his announcement that the ceasefire includes a ceasefire in Lebanon as part of the deal. And we've seen Israel escalate their bombing campaign in Lebanon, I mean, to a horrific level. They've, they killed hundreds of people just today. And they announced a new military operation called Operation Eternal Darkness. That's, that does not sound like peace. And, and the numbers from the Lebanese health ministry, at least 250 people have been killed. I mean, Lebanon's a small country. That's a lot of people to be killed in, in a few hours. So, and, and that was something that Iran was demanding, you know, throughout this thing, was that if there's a ceasefire, Israel's attack on Lebanon has to stop as well. It has to be included. But then Israel and, and now Trump have said, oh no, it doesn't include Lebanon. That, that's something different. But, but Iran seems to be sticking to that. And then, so I mentioned the 10 points. Now this is another thing. So there was a 10 point ceasefire proposal that Iran made. I believe the first time they presented it was a few weeks ago. And this was kind of reiterated a few days earlier when the US was apparently asking for a 45 day ceasefire. Iran submitted its 10 points again. And according to Iranian media, those points include things like all sanctions being lifted on Iran, Iran being able to enrich uranium, you know, at low levels, that there wouldn't be any threat of a nuclear weapon. But that, that is a demand of the Trump administration has been zero enrichment. According to Iran, this proposal allows enrichment. What are some of the other things are Iran charging a fee for ships going through the Strait of Hormuz and splitting it with Oman, and then that money would go toward the reconstruction. And there's other things like this that if Iran gets, you know, they can claim victory. So anyway, so Trump announced this deal. The ten points was published in Iranian media. And then Trump says, well, that's not what we agreed to. And then the White House press secretary today said, oh yeah, Iran gave us a 10 point proposal, but we threw it in the trash, we threw it in the garbage. Then they made a new one that's much closer to what we want. But I don't know if that's true. I mean, it's hard for me to believe anything that this administration says at this point because everything Iran's messaging is, you know, this is our, our plan. If you don't like it, too bad. We're going to keep fighting. So, yeah, it's very, very different. You know, it's, Trump is going to have a hard Time trying to claim that this is some kind of victory at the moment.
- [14:17]
A
Thank you for joining me today on
- [14:19]
C
Kibbe on Liberty and for being part of our fiercely independent audience. Every week, my organization, Free the People, partners with Blaze TV to bring you this show. My guests bring smart perspectives on everything from current events to timeless philosophical debates. If you like what you hear, go to freethepeople.org kol and support Kibbe on Liberty so we can continue to produce these honest conversations with interesting people. Now, let's get back to it.
- [14:48]
A
I want to go back to Israel launching this brutal new bombing campaign in Lebanon because it seems like we've seen this dynamic before where again and again, Trump is looking for a more peaceful resolution. And even leading up to the bombing, the initial bombing of Iran, it seems like Trump is always looking for a more peaceful. Not always, but Trump is looking for a peaceful solution. And then Israel jumps the reservation and starts a bombing campaign, and then we go back to ground zero. Is that an accurate description of the pattern?
- [15:31]
B
Yeah, I mean, I think in the lead up to the Iran war, I think Trump and Israel, Trump and Netanyahu were on the same page. I think a lot of Trump's talk about negotiations and diplomacy was just really meant to buy time as they built up in the region. But I do think in general, you know, we have seen that pattern when it comes to things like in Gaza, I remember Trump. I forget at what point this was during the negotiations, but Trump put out a post ordering Israel saying a deal has been reached. You know, Israel should stop the bombing. And they didn't stop the bombing that that weekend. They increased it, and then they eventually winded it down. So it's actually a pattern that we've seen with Israel. When a ceasefire deal is reached, they ramp up the attacks as much as they can before actually having to adhere to the ceasefire. So there is a chance that that could be what's happening here in Lebanon. But on the other hand, the rhetoric that we've seen from top Israeli officials is that they want to occupy southern Lebanon. Some have even said they want to annex it. So they're not giving us any indication that they want to stop. And that is kind of the message that Joe Kent, the who resigned as the head of the National Counterterrorism center, is that if you want to deal here, you've got to rein in the Israelis. And at the moment, you know, we're seeing Trump, he's just saying, oh, yeah, you know, Lebanon. It doesn't look like he's trying to get them to stop. Which is not a good sign for the prospect of this actually turning into a ceasefire deal.
- [17:02]
A
And Joe Kent, I think, has talked about this, but certainly guys like Tucker Carlson have made what I think is an obvious point that the interests of Israel in this conflict and their position in the Middle east and what they hope to accomplish is ultimately fundamentally different than what America's interests should be. And you can't partner with somebody who has fundamentally different goals than you do. And Trump either doesn't care about that conflict or doesn't realize that it's true. Do you think he knows that? And do you think he's just along for the ride?
- [17:41]
B
Yeah. So there was an interesting report in the New York Times yesterday about kind of the lead up to the war. And I think it seemed like it was kind of some deliberate leaks from the administration to kind of build a narrative to distance some of themselves from this war, because it had all these top level, you know, Trump's top advisers saying that they were warning against this war going as Netanyahu was saying. Essentially what the report said was that the last time Netanyahu was at the White House in February, he gave Trump an intelligence briefing. And it basically said, we're going to launch this war. Everything's going to go great. Iran's ripe for regime change. They're, they're not going to be able to close the straight of Hormuz, going to take care of their missiles and drones. In a few weeks, there's going to be a big uprising. So basically, all these things that didn't happen, and I'm sure that that was the story that Netanyahu was, was telling Trump. And now we saw when the war started. And Trump has said similar things in this report, said similar things, that basically the message that Trump's advisors were telling him is that, yeah, we could probably, you know, really hurt Iran, take out some of their capabilities, but regime change is unlikely. And according to that report, Trump said, ah, well, they can worry about regime change like the Israelis can worry about regime change. And then we saw in the, during the war, they, after they killed the Ayatollah, you had some U.S. officials say, oh, that was Israel. You know, these aren't our goals. We don't want regime change. It's like, wait, but you started the war with them, like how you can't really distance yourselves from, from what they're doing. So I think that could have been part of Trump's thinking, like, oh, I'll put a hurt on them, take out their missile capability. But, you know, regime change isn't really our problem. But the thing is, is that the missile capability is also not the US's problem either. I mean, that those missiles are a regional threat. You know, they can reach Israel, they can't reach the United States. And that was what the negotiations became about. That was the demand for a deal to include, you know, restrictions on Iran's missiles, which there's just no way they're going to agree to that, especially after the, the war last year in June 2025. And that, that's another point Kent has made, is that, you know, there is a very workable deal on the table between the US and Iran, but it was something Israel would never, would never want or would never accept.
- [20:07]
A
Yeah. So this New York Times piece that you're referring to was fascinating to me because it. When people start leaking to the New York Times, you always have to try to imagine, okay, what are the real motives here? What's the real agenda for telling this version of the story? And the story as they tell it, as you just summarized, is that Marco Rubio, even, and certainly J.D. vance were strongly advising against this. And they come out in this article at least, as the good guys. And Trump is sort of enamored of Netanyahu's advice, but Trump himself was like a dog with a bone. He just wanted to do this regardless of advice. Otherwise. We love to call the New York Times the regime paper of record. So I've always predicted that the Lindsey Grahams and the Ted Cruzes and the Mark Levins of the world will be the very first to throw Trump under the bus when this thing blows up in his face. So what are the tea leaves telling us here? Whose agenda was it to leak this story to the New York Times?
- [21:21]
B
Well, it looked like, I mean, some of those officials that you mentioned, but I think it said that the person within the administration most outspoken against the war was J.D. vance. And we've seen a lot of leaks like this about how J.D. vance was, like, against it, even though publicly he hasn't really put that on at all. You know, he's repeated some of kind of the most absurd propaganda. He was claiming there was evidence that Iran was building a nuclear weapon. He recently suggested that a suicide bomber, you know, if we didn't attack Iran, there could be, like, a suicide bomber with a nuclear suicide vest. So that's what he's been saying publicly. But we've seen these leaks that he's, you know, like, oh, quietly, he's, he's against it. And then he warned the President against it. But what's interesting, as you mentioned, I mean, it's also Marco Rubio, John Ratcliffe, the head of the CIA, who, as I understand it, before the June, last year's war, the 12 day war, you know, we knew that what US intelligence said, what Tulsi Gabbard said, that there was no evidence Iran was building a nuclear weapon or made the decision to do so. And that's what the US Intelligence Agency said. But then the Mossad fed intelligence to the administration, and John Ratcliffe, you know, went with that, you know, and made it seem like it had the CIA. That that's what the CIA was saying as well. So even he is on, is in this story saying the, the wording that he used was farcical when it came to Netanyahu's claims about regime change. But the one official, the one advisor, top level Trump advisor, who does not look good in that story is Pete Hegseth. It says that he was basically all in. And I mean, his behavior has just been like. I mean, it's been crazy the way he's carried himself in this war. I mean, again, as I said, they bombed in elementary school. And he's giving these Pentagon press briefings saying, oh, we're operating with no mercy, no quarter. We're reigning death and destruction down on them. I mean, really sick stuff. So I think that if there's going to be, you know, there's a chance of him kind of being the fall guy for this, you know, depending on how. It's hard to imagine how things are going to kind of play out. But if this war really ends and it's like, man, that was a disaster and they want to make some changes, I, I think Hegseth would be the one who falls on the sword.
- [23:47]
A
Yeah, I remember early on, Pete Hegseth was sold as the guy that would be more restrained and realist when it came to foreign policy. And obviously that's sort of comical to say now, but it does strike me as interesting that the fall guys in that story, Hegseth comes first and he can get thrown under the bus. And then Trump himself, I think, takes the hit. And who's left? The neocons and the administration. So I'm trying to play 5D chess here and figure out what they're actually up to, but obviously, I have no idea. But when top administration officials start leaking to the New York Times, something is afoot.
- [24:35]
B
Yeah, yeah, they want to get a narrative out there. I do think there's truth to Netanyahu's briefing. I mean, that's basically what he was saying publicly as well. But yeah, you know, and I think within the administration, you know, there's been talks of, of J.D. vance running in, in for president next, but also Marco Rubio. That's the other rumor. And yeah, they, and they both look, look better, much better in this story than, than Hegseth or Trump.
- [25:04]
A
So, so, so that, that article, when did that article drop? It dropped like a day or two ago, right?
- [25:09]
B
I think it was yesterday. I think it was Tuesday.
- [25:10]
A
Yeah, there's so much going on.
- [25:13]
B
Yeah, the same day that Trump announced that ceasefire. It's kind of interesting.
- [25:17]
A
So Trump announces a ceasefire. Apparently bombs were flying from Iran and certainly from Israel into Lebanon as that was announced. And everything I'll say is with a grain of salt because I don't know who's actually reporting this factually, but it seems like the deal almost immediately unraveled within 12 hours.
- [25:48]
B
Yeah. And I mean, right now, like, it's tough to say where it's at because you mentioned that bombs were flying from Iran. There were, you know, he announced a deal and there was kind of ongoing attacks happening. Israel was getting hit and then overnight there was, was strikes in the Gulf Arab countries. And then the irgc, Iran announced that they launched all these attacks and, but they also, some strikes hit Iran. An oil facility was hit in Iran and they were saying that was why they launched the strikes on energy infrastructure in the Arab countries. But so that, and that. I don't. The problem is that this isn't confirmed at the moment, but there's reporting that the US And Israel both denied that they bombed that oil facility in Iran and that it was potentially the UAE that like UAE fighter jets were involved. And I do think that's possible because I could see Trump saying, because as things stand, Saudi Arabia, the uae, Bahrain and Kuwait, they didn't seem like they were really into the idea of this war being started. But since it's been started and they've taken a lot of hits, they want the US to finish the job. And I think they've been pushing for that. And I could see Trump saying, well, why don't, why don't we take a break and you guys, you guys get some hits on them. Of course, they don't really have, I mean, you know, they have, Saudi Arabia especially has, has an air force. It's, you know, a U. S made air force that's, that's maintained by the US So they could launch some airstrikes, but you know, if they if they end up in like a real shooting war, just them and Iran, they would need the US So but I just thought that was interesting. And then obviously Israel hasn't stopped on Lebanon. As far as I've seen there was reports of drones flying over Iran and Iran said that was a violation of the deal. But besides that oil facility being hit, have not seen any reports of U. S and Israeli airstrikes. But you know, right before we started recording I saw there was a statement from the, the speaker of Iran's parliament who said that the US is violating three tenants of the 10 point ceasefire deal, including the, the Israeli attacks in Lebanon, a drone, drones being flown over Iranian territory. I'm forgetting what the third one was, but those were basically the, the two main. Oh, the uranium enrichment. Because apparently Iran's ten point plan says that they will enrich uranium and Trump said that they can't. He actually had a truth social post about that. And then at the end of his statement, this is the Iranian parliament speaker, he said that, you know, this is no way. There's basically the, the ceasefire negotiations and, and even maintaining the ceasefire, it's pointless right now at this point. And this is the guy who is supposedly going to meet with JD Vance in Pakistan this weekend. So I mean that, that, that, that statement to me made it sound like he's saying the talks are off. So I don't know, I mean who knows what's going to happen. And, and the foreign minister, Abbas Araki, the Iranian foreign minister, he also just put out a statement saying that the US has to make a decision. Either stop Israel's attacks on Lebanon or the war will continue. So you know, I mean things could really change today.
- [29:11]
A
Yeah, and I don't know if this, the Strait of Hormuz was ever open, but it's closed again. Is that your understanding?
- [29:20]
B
That's what Iranian media reported. But yeah, and then I saw there was some ship trackers that said three ships left which is like lower than, you know, a lower number than have been transiting the strait in the past few weeks. So yeah, as far as I can tell it hasn't been, you know, opened fully opened or anything like that.
- [29:42]
A
Yeah, if you made it this far into the show, it means I must
- [29:46]
C
be doing something right. Key Beyond Liberty is just one of the amazing products we create at Free the People. We tell emotionally compelling stories and produce educational videos for the Liberty Curious. Our award winning documentaries personalize all things liberty, independence, creativity, hard work and integrity and perseverance. After the show, check out our work@freethepeople.org and if you like what you see, donate to support what we do. That's freethepeople.org now back to the show.
- [30:20]
A
So the question is, so the good news is we apparently dodged a civilization ending event which might have implied nuclear weapons. And I read from that, to the extent that anyone's capable of doing this, that Trump is, in fact looking for an exit strategy, that this is not turning out the way that he thought it would turn out. It's not turning out the way that Netanyahu promised it would turn out. The Iranian people haven't risen up and overthrown the authoritarian theocracy in Tehran. So how does he get out? And the context for this, and you know this history better than I do, I feel like there's never been a pretty exit from a bad war that we've entangled ourselves in in the Middle East. Certainly Afghanistan and Iraq were hardly anything we could call victories, as American as the American administration would claim. So how does Trump get out?
- [31:33]
B
Well, that's the big question. And, you know, he's going to need to really put some effort into this. He's going to really want this. He has to really want this. And to take, you know, it's going to be hard for him to do it and frame it as a victory. I mean, the big thing that he needs to do, which is very clear today based on what's happening in Lebanon, is make the Israelis stop. And to do that, the US has the ability to do that because the US Gives them basically all their weapons. And it's not just about, you know, shipping them the bombs. It's the big thing is their air force. Israel is its whole war effort is based on bombing places. And they use mostly US Made fighter jets that need to be maintained by the US and this is, you know, without that or the threat of losing that would make them change their behavior very quickly. And Trump needs to be willing to take that step to threaten those things, to leverage that relationship. And the 10 points, I mean, he's going to have to live with some kind of Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz for the moment and even potentially them getting money for ships going through there. Because I do know that there was a revision to at least one of Iran's points. One of their initial demands was that the US Pay them reparations for so they can rebuild what has been destroyed. But now they're saying we'll use the Strait of Hormuz money for that. And, you know, I think the way you get things, things done like that is try to foster cooperation. Right now, Iran's proposal would include them splitting the fee with Oman. And so I mentioned that the Saudis, the uae, Kuwait, Bahrain kind of want the war to go on. Oman and Qatar don't. They've been hoping, you know, working to help end this thing. So I think kind of fostering that kind of cooperation between Iran, Oman, and then whoever else will kind of get on board with these types, types of things will help. And, you know, I mean, it's the real. The reality is like a real peace deal here. I mean, I know Iran's initial demands was for the US to leave the region, pull out of all these. These countries where it has these military bases. But you look at them, I mean, I know at least in Bahrain and Kuwait, the US Bases there are basically destroyed, and they've evacuated most of them in the region. And you have US Troops working out of hotels and stuff. So, you know, Trump, at the beginning of his term, he was talking about getting the US out of the Middle East. Seems like a pretty good opportunity to do that again. I don't know how you're going to present that as a victory. It would. It would be good for the American people. But so it's going to take, you know, some radical things that Trump is going to have to do and accept if he really wants peace, if he really wants to get out of this mess. And there is kind of a precedent. You know, this is on a much lower scale. But last year in March, the US Started bombing Yemen. Do you remember the signal gate thing? Like, Mike Waltz was included, a Atlantic reporter in their signal thread, where they were apparently doing, you know, planning a war that was against the Houthis in Yemen because they announced that they were going to reimpose a blockade on Israeli shipping in response to Israel breaking the initial Gaza ceasefire deal and imposing a blockade on Gaza. So the US Started bombing the Houthis in Yemen right after that, claiming that they were going to try to get them to stop attacking US Ships. But they weren't attacking US Ships before the war. That was just kind of their pretext. But they were. What they were trying to do was get them to stop attacking Israel and not blockade Israeli ships. So that went on for about a month and a half, a very heavy bombing campaign throughout the whole thing. The Houthis were firing missiles and drones at Israel and at US Warships and at commercial ships. They couldn't get them to stop, but. And Trump decided to just cut and run, basically declare victory Agree to a deal where the Houthis don't shoot at the us, The US doesn't shoot at them, which was on the table before the bombing campaign. But, you know, he, he framed it like a victory. And, and the thing is, is that, like, people were barely even aware that this bombing campaign was happening. They don't know the situation. So it was kind of easy for him to do that. But with this, it's going to be much more difficult. You know, like I said, he's gonna have to really want it and take the political hit that that's gonna, that that's gonna bring. I mean, it might take, you know, firing a bunch of people and rearranging things there. So, you know, that that is the, the potential exit. It's going to be, it's really, I think, based on how he's going to handle Israel and Netanyahu, what he's really willing to do there.
- [36:47]
A
Yeah. I wonder if, I mean, this probably sounds fantastical because he probably won't do it. But, you know, one way politically to manage this is to actually throw Netanyahu under the bus. He sold me a bill of goods. This was a bad idea. This is their problem now. And if they don't straighten up, they're cut off. There is. Remind me that you probably remember the history. Was it Ronald Reagan that successfully told the Israelis to cut it out during some, some aggression campaign?
- [37:26]
B
Yeah. In Lebanon. Yeah. And I think that I want to say 82, when Israel was really bombing Beirut. Yeah, There's a precedent for that. And, and it's, I think it was in a memoir or something or his, like, Daily Journal that he wrote. There's a great, great quote from him of what he told the Israeli prime minister at the time. And. Yeah, that's something. That's a good, yeah, that's a, that's a good idea. I mean, you could, you can make it about that and kind of come out with this stuff that we saw in that New York Times report that, you know, he said all this stuff, it was going to go great. It hasn't. But that would, the thing is, is that that would admit, that would involve Trump kind of admitting failure, that the war, you know, he, because he's going out there and Hegseth is going out there saying, oh, we, we've obliterated their missiles. You know, they can't even build missiles or drones anymore. Which, I mean, there's just no basis for that. If anything, it's probably pushed that stuff further underground more out of the US's reach. So he's going to have to say, you know, look, the regime is still in place this, this and that. And Netanyahu told us it would be great. So, you know, we're going to cut him off unless he gets it together. But, I mean, can you really imagine that happening, though? Like, I can't.
- [38:40]
A
Well, it, I mean, obviously Trump has no problem throwing his closest allies under the bus.
- [38:47]
B
That's true.
- [38:48]
A
And, you know, we've all sort of watched in horror the way he turned on Marjorie Taylor Greene. And, you know, obviously Pete turned on Thomas Massie as well. But Thomas was always more of a libertarian leaning, anti war Republican, whereas Marjorie was the personification of MAGA in America first. So the question is, is he desperate enough about his political future? And I think I try to say this on every show so that people understand what's going to happen in November if the Republicans don't sort of straighten up their political situation, they're going to get wiped out in the House. And the Senate is now looking more and more like it could flip to Democratic control. And that means that Trump will spend the last two years of his presidency dodging impeachment hearings and perhaps even conviction if this war gets unpopular enough. And gas prices and inflation and all the things that have come together as a perfect storm. So if he's going to do something, he has to do it quick. And if he cares about his legacy, he's going to have to figure out a way, as Joe Kent has proposed, to disconnect himself from Netanyahu's hip. But that sort of asks the bigger question, as you know,
- [40:27]
C
All of these
- [40:27]
A
folks that are spending money on Thomas Massie. Miriam Adelson, that's the name I was trying to come up with. Six to $10 million to blast out one Republican member of Congress. Is the Republican Party and the Trump administration actually capable of separating themselves from all this pro Israeli money? I don't know.
- [40:51]
B
Yeah, I mean, especially you mentioned with the elections and everything. You know, he's going to want his big donors. They're all going to want their big donors on, on their side and everything. And you know, you mentioned Miriam Adelson. It's the thing about Trump is how he just says, he just comes out and says things that they're not supposed to say. I mean, do you remember that speech in the Israeli Knesset when Miriam Adelson was there and he basically said that she cares more about Israel than the US And I know a few other times when he was on the campaign trail, he did these Events, these pro Israel events. And he said, oh, Miriam and Sheldon, they used to be in my office talking about the first term all the time, just asking me for things for Israel. I moved the embassy to Jerusalem and they say, okay, now we want this, now we want that. So he's just openly says that his biggest donors, you know, want him to do these things for a foreign power, a foreign state. Um, so, and, and it is like the people he's kind of surrounded himself with that, that have key roles in this administration, including Steve Witkoff and, and Jared Kushner, I mean, Jared Kushner, the fact that he's, you know, once he started getting involved in this, these so called deals in the Middle east, that's when I had a feeling that this was not serious diplomacy, that that was going to happen here. You know, I remember in 2024 and when Israel escalated in Lebanon, they killed Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, and they carried out the pager attack and they took out a lot of Hezbollah guys. Jared Kushner had this whole long thread on Twitter saying, you know, this is it, this is it. Israel can finally take out Hezbollah and the US should do everything it can to support it and, and not stop it, not get in its way. So I believe Kushner has the same feeling about Iran, that if we can finally take Iran off the table, then Israel, you know, they can do much more of what they want in the region. And this is someone who's been, you know, he doesn't even have a position in the, technically in the administration, but he's been involved in the, the Gaza deal, which is just not panned out to anything good so far. And he was also involved in the Russia, Ukraine talks, but he's been like front and center with, with this Iran stuff. So, you know, and Trump saying that's who he's going to send to Pakistan. JD Vance is going, but also Kushner. So, you know, there should be a change in personnel. You know, if we're going to see some real changes here, you know, actually maybe the Vance thing could be a good sign that he's apparently going to be involved in these negotiations, if they even happen. I think there's a chance. It's looking like they're not going to happen. But, you know, I don't think Kushner should be anywhere near it at Kibbe on Liberty.
- [43:35]
C
Freedom is a lifestyle 24 7, something
- [43:38]
A
you live and breathe and wear every day.
- [43:42]
C
If that describes you, you need the very best Liberty swag in the market today. Just like this shirt I happen to be wearing. Go to freethepeople.org kol and check out our exciting merchant. You, too, can love liberty and look cool.
- [43:58]
A
I'm trying to figure out other plausible paths for an exit strategy because, of course, the history of these quagmire wars in the Middle east is that they go on forever. A lot of Americans die. Even more folks in the Middle east are slaughtered in the crossfire. And I just hope that there's. There's some pressure that comes to bear on him. I'll have to see if other Republicans are willing to speak up on this. But obviously, the voices like Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene, even guys like Joe Rogan who had endorsed Trump, they are speaking up. And that is very much having an impact on public opinion. The question is, is Trump in a bubble that he's not actually being told just how unpopular this thing is?
- [44:52]
B
Yeah, I mean, I wonder if that made a difference, you know, that day that he threatened the civilization, if that, you know, all those people speaking out could have made a difference and could have made him back down there because, you know, I mean, he sounded pretty serious about it. And he also, like, you know, as I said, that these weren't idle threats. He even said, so if you remember a few days ago, I forget exactly what day, maybe last week, a big bridge in Iran was bombed. And they say it was the tallest bridge, bridge in Iran. And there's like these leaks to the media that, oh, it was this bridge was being used to, to move missiles or something in the country. Turns out it wasn't even in use. It was under construction. And then Trump says the other day at one of these press briefings or something, he's like, oh, I, I ordered for the biggest bridge in the country to be blown up. So he's admitting that this isn't an attack with a military purpose. He's just saying, you know, this is psychological. This is, you know, trying to destroy the civilian infrastructure of the country. So, you know, the fact that he was basically threatening to do that on, like, a huge scale, and, you know, I think based on what he's done in Iran, his behavior, lying about the school bombing, claiming that Iran has Tomahawk missiles, which is just completely absurd, you know, that, that, that I think he was probably willing to take that next step up the escalation ladder, and maybe the kind of outrage about his conduct and everything made him think twice about it and also just blatantly threatening war crimes. I mean, I don't, you know, like, you mentioned he could really face some blowback for this in the future when the Democrats take power. Not just when he's still president, but after the fact.
- [46:48]
A
Yeah, I see even Bernie Sanders is rediscovering his anti war instincts, which unfortunately are probably partisan. As you know, the Republicans are quite good about criticizing regime change wars when the other guy's in charge. And it cuts both ways. But there are guys like Thomas Massie's obviously being consistent, and I feel like Ro Khanna has been fairly consistent and willing to speak up against President Obama. But the American people are ahead of them. And I think that's the only hope we have is that public opinion continues to drive us in a more rational direction, because I feel like DC Is captured. And maybe you have an opinion about this. The insanely outsized influence that the government of Israel and its allies in the United States have on American policy. It feels unprecedented. And I don't think the story is just about money. It can't just be about money. And certainly they just bought aipac, just bought Marjorie Taylor Greene seed. I forget the new guy's name, but they were gloating about that. So certainly money matters, particularly in congressional primaries, because you can sort of blow your competition out of the water. But what's your, what's your take on why we're so wedded to doing the things that the Israeli government wants us to do?
- [48:29]
B
Well, it's a combination of things. The Israel lobby is obviously a big part of it, and it is money. It's also ideological. There's a lot of ideological Zionists in our government, including Jewish Zionists and Christian Zionists. And that is, is a big factor here. I mean, you actually have the US Ambassador to Israel openly say that God has given Israel the right to all this, this huge swath of land in the Middle East. And if people are on it, too bad they got to get moved out of the way. And we've seen people with this theological view in very high positions of power in the government. It appears that Pete Hegseth holds these views as well. You know, he was on a trip to Israel a few years ago calling for the Third Temple to be rebuilt, which would involve destroying the Al Aqsa Mosque. And so that, you know, and those groups, those Christian Zionist groups are also very good at lobbying the government. You know, they have kind of an outsized influence for, because there's a lot of evangelical Christians who don't have that, who aren't Zionists. But they, they, they have a lot of sway. And then so you Know, I think that's, that's a big part of it is that we have this, both the lobby and the money going in and the ideological nature of it. So. And Trump laments this once in a while. He says, oh, you know, a few years ago the Israel lobby controlled all the, you know, the entire Congress. Now you have AOC and the squad, even though they're not even really that great about, especially AOC now aren't even really that outspoken about this.
- [50:15]
A
But she talks a good game, but she doesn't really vote that way.
- [50:19]
B
Yeah, yeah, yeah. She's been getting a lot of heat from some like left wing groups about her stance on Israel lately. But you know, it is, you know, and as we talk, you say public opinion, you know, hopefully this sways things. But still at the moment, I mean, at the federal level, especially in the Republican side, like you mentioned Thomas Massie, I mean he's really like the only one on the Republican side, Rand Paul, sometimes who will vote against, you know, all this, these pro Israel bills and legislation. And that was actually when Massie first started getting targeted. A lot of people are kind of portraying it like they're going after him because of the Epstein files. And obviously that has something to do with it now, but they really went after him when, after October 7. And the Congress was just passing like dozens of bills like declaring that Israel is great or whatever. You know, some of them were like anti Semitism bills that, you know, whatever it was. And Massey was just consistently voting against this stuff. And that was when we started seeing the money, money pour in against him. So. And we also saw, you know, because it's not just Congress, it's also our media. And obviously that's changed with the Internet. You know, I mean, I'll speak as my, from my own experience, like when I was a kid, through high school, through college, I didn't really go to like a regular college. So I didn't learn much history. But you know, I just assumed Israel was like always there. Like, I didn't realize that, that it was like a modern country that was founded by moving all of these people out of there, that they were, you know, and that that's why the occupation, you know, that was the situation with the occupation in the West Bank. Like, I just had no idea. I was very ignorant of this stuff until I was like in my early 20s and I started reading about it. And that is just completely. Has completely changed. But that was also a big part of it was just the people weren't educated on it. They Watched the news about it and everything's like, oh, the Palestinians did something crazy again. Israel's bombing them. You know, those people will never, never be happy over there. That was kind of the attitude. And, and we've really seen this in polling that over the past two, or however long it's been since October 7th, now the, the polling has showed that Americans used to be overwhelmingly more sympathetic with Israelis. Well, that's changed that now that like the majority of Americans sympathize more with Palestinians. And that's just a radical shift in public opinion. So I think that has also been a big part of it and another sign that this is gonna change in the future. It's still gonna take some time for it to change at the federal level, but like, I don't know how the Democrats are going to ignore this in the primaries. You know, this is, they're, they're gonna have to face it. Kamala Harris tried to ignore it and just kind of go along with Biden's line on Gaza and that was a big reason why she failed. So, yeah, it's kind of that combination of things. The information, the money, the Zionism, the ideological Zionists and stuff.
- [53:29]
A
Yeah. I should point out that dramatic shift in American public opinion away from the state of Israel feels like a self inflicted wound and a combination of Israel's behavior, but also this sort of demonization campaign that anybody that ever questions the foreign policy decisions of the government of Israel is immediately labeled anti Semitic or worse. And I think normal folks just get fed up with that. And when you get fed up with it, you start digging a little bit deeper and you learn a little bit more and things that you hadn't like you're describing your sort of awakening to some of these facts. I think people are starting to dig into it for themselves because they don't trust the corporate media who sort of had that parroting of the official party line thing for all those years when they had a monopoly on information.
- [54:29]
B
Yeah, yeah. And that's why we've seen, you know, there has been an effort to clamp down on it. Like Larry Ellison buying Tick Tock and CBS News and stuff. They're trying to control the narrative again, but I think there's no putting a lid on what has kind of started here. And you mentioned the demonization. And I've seen this with a few people, especially Tucker Carlson, because he kind of had a big shift in his kind of political views, you know, like becoming anti war over the years. And I remember when he started his show that he's doing now. After he got fired, he would kind of reference Israel indirectly. He wouldn't really talk about it. And. But then when he started doing it ever so mildly, he got all this pushback. And then I could kind of tell that it was the pushback. Like it was just making him kind of do it more like saying, wait, what, what's going on here? Why is everyone, you know, losing their minds about this? And he actually said it in a recent one of his shows, basically, like, admitted that he didn't talk about Israel for a long time because he didn't want to worry about the. The backlash. And then when he did, and, you know, so, you know, it's like, as you said, it is a point problem of their own making. And you see this all the time. People that are like, completely on board with everything Israel does, then this war with Iran starts and they say, well, I don't know if this war was really necessary. Then they get attacked as anti Semitic or whatever. The people just have no patience for that stuff these days.
- [55:57]
A
Yeah, I mean, it definitely happened to Tucker. But probably a more stark example was Megan Kelly, who, when she was at Fox, she just towed the party. In her own words, she was towing the party line. And she hadn't really thought much about it. And once she even asked a couple questions about the wisdom of something that Israel had done or Netanyahu had done, she immediately was attacked from all sides. I guess it probably started at that turning point event when Charlie Kirk was still alive. And she just gets more and more radical on this subject because once you've shot the anti Semitic arrow, that's it. That's all you got. And if you didn't scare the person into submission, you've created someone that's going to start telling a different story.
- [57:00]
B
Yeah.
- [57:01]
A
So one last thing I want to mention, and I know nobody cares about this anymore, but regime change, wars are really expensive. And I don't know what the number is right now. We just lost a lot of aircraft in the rescue of this pilot. But I got to suspect that the official number of 50 billion is probably about half of what we spent so far. And we don't have that kind of money. And that money is only possible because we print it. And when we print money, it just comes out of the pockets of working Americans who still can't fill their grocery carts. There has to be some practical limit on how much money we can spend on forever wars. And this, of course, was one of Ron Paul's key messages when he told us that Empires die and republics can thrive if only they sort of live within their means. Why doesn't anyone care about spending money? Oh, and you know, the final point, and it seems so politically stupid. Trump the other day said, we don't have money for daycare, we don't have money for Medicare, we don't have money for health care. And I don't think I'm really misquoting him because we got this war to fight in Iran. Like, is that a politically winning message? Do you think people are on board with that?
- [58:28]
B
Yeah, no, I saw that too. I couldn't believe that. And there was this report in Bloomberg that apparently the Trump administration's strategy for the midterms is going to be like, based around a major military buildup that requires domestic cuts. Like, I don't know how that that's to be politically popular, but it's un, it really looks like Trump is doubling down on this whole, like, empire and just printing money and, you know, out of thin air to, to pay for it, because he has now, he's actually requested for next year a $1.5 trillion military budget, up about $500 billion from this year. And, and I think, you know, we talk about the interest that led to this war. That's another one, is just, you know, the military industrial complex. And Trump wants these huge spending bills for the military. And here's a way you could get that is use all this expensive, these interceptors and munitions and air defenses and oh, now we gotta re replenish this stuff and ramp up production. So it kind of justifies that major increase in, in military spending. And yeah, this is something, you know, that, and, and it, it gets people thinking and, and saying, you know, I know I have friends on the left who are like, well, you know, all that money could go to something else. And, you know, and they don't want to hear the argument that, well, actually, you know, this is creating inflation, this is destroying our currency. This is probably going to eventually lead to our collapse as a country. No, they just want to say, well, why can't we just print money for everything we want? So it's kind of, you know, it's, it's, it's lending credence to those kinds of arguments and it's just going to create more spending and everything. But yeah, I mean, that's big money. It's a 50% increase about, in the military budget year over year. I mean, this is huge.
- [60:26]
A
A final point, and this is my economics dorkiness coming out like John Maynard Keynes and the General Theory of Money and Credit argued that it would be an economic stimulus, a macroeconomic stimulus, if we paid government workers to dig holes and fill them back in. And then you might remember Paul Krugman, it was in the last decade or so, made a more retarded version of the same argument, saying that it would be an incredible economic stimps stimulus if aliens invaded America so that we could ramp up military production and that would grow the economy. And I think Trump actually believes that. He thinks that blowing up more stuff forces us to make more bombs and planes and that's somehow good for America. And. It's a dangerous argument, not just because of the military consequences, but the economic consequences as well.
- [61:32]
B
Yeah, yeah. And you know, you mentioned space there. It's kind of, he's. Have you heard of this golden dome thing, the missile defense system that he wants here for the, like all to cover all of the United States. It's like you talk about like a boondoggle. I mean, but this is going to involve all these like, satellites and things and just hundreds of billions of dollars. And we're seeing right now in the Middle east that air defense doesn't really work that well. But he's going to go ahead with all this anyway.
- [62:04]
A
Well, by the time we run this tomorrow, things will have changed dramatically once again. So tell people how they can keep up with your work and your colleagues work@antiwar.com, because one of the biggest challenges in the middle of a war is getting actual factual information about what's actually happening.
- [62:27]
B
Yeah. So all the content is@antiwar.com and I am the news editor and, you know, I cover the news. And we're very careful. You know, like, the one way we compete with just scrolling X for your news is the fact that the stuff we publish, you know, we're very careful making sure it's, it's, it's real or, you know, if things are still not confirmed, we make it clear, you know, where the source is from, who's reporting it or where exactly it's coming from to give people a good picture. So you could read my news stories there. You go to news that Anti War.com and I also do a show about five days a week, so a daily show, kind of a roundup of the news that I cover that day. It's called Anti War News with Dave DeCamp. It's on YouTube or you could listen to the podcast. A lot of people listen to it on their way to work. It's kind of depressing news, you know, it's, it's the nature of it. It's war news. It's US Foreign policy, but it's what, it's what, what we do. I know there's a lot of crossover between your audience and Antiwar.com readers because we're on the libertarian side of things. So I'm sure some of your people are familiar with us.
- [63:35]
A
Yeah. I'm a big fan of your show as just like sort of a news download without the, the typical propaganda filter that you get from not all sources, but most sources. So I highly endorse that and I hope to have you back when Trump actually finds an exit strategy and we can actually say something nice about the fact that we have an American president who, for all of the mistakes he may have made, had the wisdom to get out early instead of let it drag on for 20 years.
- [64:04]
B
Yeah. Yeah. Hopefully we'll have that conversation.
- [64:07]
A
Fingers crossed. Okay. Thank you, Dave.
- [64:10]
B
Thanks, Matt.
- [64:11]
C
Thanks for watching.
- [64:12]
A
If you liked the conversation, make sure to like the video, subscribe and also
- [64:18]
C
ring the bell for notifications. And if you want to know more about Free the people, go to freethepeople.org.