EP:9 - Ukraine Chessboard : The Art of Losing Slowly - Special Guest Comic Dave Smith

Summary

---

Podcast Summary

EP:9 - Ukraine Chessboard: The Art of Losing Slowly – Special Guest Comic Dave Smith

Podcast: Provoked with Scott Horton and Dave Smith (filling in for Darryl Cooper)
Date: August 23, 2025

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, exploring the political motives, slow-motion nature of the war, prospects (or lack thereof) for peace, the role of extremist militias within Ukraine, and the broader implications for US foreign policy and the rightward shift in American discussion of Israel-Gaza. Scott Horton and guest co-host comic Dave Smith bring in-depth analysis with a tone that mixes sobering realism and wry commentary.

---

Major Discussion Points

1. The Stalled Peace Process and Endless Negotiations ([01:12]–[05:50])

• Scott recounts a recent interview with former CIA officer Larry Johnson who was skeptical about any chance for a negotiated settlement in Ukraine.
• Dave compares the Alaska talks to the failed Trump-era Iran negotiations, suggesting that “hawks” use negotiations to insert “poison pills” (like non-starter security guarantees) that ensure talks break down.
• Security guarantees (especially NATO Article 5) are discussed as unrealistic demands that poison the well for peace:

  “What's a security guarantee if it's not an Article 5 membership in NATO in the first place?” – Scott ([03:07])

• The expansion and misinterpretation of treaties (like the Budapest Memorandum) are highlighted as a factor prolonging war.

2. Russia’s Slow-Play War and Trump’s Blundering Diplomacy ([05:50]–[11:56])

• Scott notes Russia is “winning, but slowly,” with no incentive to stop:

  “It's just such bad timing on his [Trump’s] part when the Russians are winning, but slowly, they're not done winning yet. They have no real reason to quit.” ([04:22])

• The hosts discuss territory control, Russian aims beyond Donbass (including Zaporizhia, Kherson, Odessa, and Transnistria), and skepticism that Trump could offer Russia anything to halt their advance.
• Dave criticizes Trump’s grasp of the conflict:

  “He still fundamentally thinks the problem was that we gave Ukraine to the Russians and doesn’t realize that the problem is actually that we took Ukraine away from the Russians and that... Putin taking Crimea was his snap.” ([10:09])

3. The Logic and Cynicism of US and Western Policy ([12:02]–[16:53])

• Scott and Dave lambast the contradiction of the US asserting it won’t fight for Ukraine, yet promising future security guarantees.

  “...you're gonna give them a security guarantee after they're done losing, and then you promise to fight for them in the next one. What the hell is any of this? Makes no sense at all.” – Scott ([16:19])

• The pair argue that Ukraine’s suffering is largely irrelevant to Western planners; it's about bleeding Russia.

  “They're just extras in our movie. And their lives are worth no more to Washington than the lives of the Afghans in the 1980s. They're pawns.” – Scott ([16:53])

4. The Historical Drivers: NATO Expansion and Political Players ([17:11]–[22:29])

• A deep dive into the 2008 Bucharest summit and why “NATO membership” was dangled in front of Ukraine despite minimal intention to follow through.
• Internal US/EU political dynamics, public opinion campaigns in Ukraine, and the myth of "the will of the Ukrainian people" are dissected.
• The result: a perpetually divided, precarious Ukraine, more radicalized after Russia expropriates its Russophile population.

5. The Nazi Dilemma within Ukraine ([22:31]–[35:11])

• Scott discusses the historical evolution of Ukrainian far-right groups, from their WWII origins to the contemporary Azov movement and Right Sector.
• The “rehabilitation” of Azov figures like Andriy Biletsky in Western media is flagged as dangerous whitewashing:

  “There's just nothing like [the Ukrainian Nazi movement]... these guys are— they're like nationalists, but they're not Nazis. This literally is Nazism.” – Scott & Dave ([30:06])

Memorable Quote

“It's boilerplate Nazi fanaticism... the most dangerous of them—this guy Biletsky—is probably the most dangerous of them. And now, there's a bunch whose names I don’t know.” – Scott ([32:44])

• The episode warns that postwar, Ukraine’s future may be in the hands of these radicalized elements, who are consolidating military and political power.

6. The West’s Willing Use of Extremists—A Pattern ([43:25]–[47:17])

• Western military suppliers prefer dealing with Ukrainian ultra-nationalist groups for their efficiency—even if they are ideologically problematic:

  “It’s not that they hate Jews, it’s just that their trains run on time... No bribes, no kickbacks—great partners.” – Scott & Dave ([43:25])

• Comparison to US support for “moderate rebels” in Syria, noting it always ends up cycling back to hardliners and even jihadists.

7. Insurgents, Mercenaries, and the Normalization of International Conflict ([47:17]–[52:30])

• Globalized mercenary warriors and battle-hardened ideologues, from Chechnya to Ukraine, are the “ripple effect” of American and allied interventions.
• Young men circulate through wars—Ukraine is the new magnet, just as Syria was in the prior decade.
• War is alluring: the existential sense of purpose it gives to participants is noted (referencing Chris Hedges’ "War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning").

---

Pivot: Reflections on Gaza/Israel and Shifting Sentiment on the American Right ([61:48]–[74:40])

• Scott compares Israel’s Gaza war to “a Waco massacre a day” and contends the sheer brutality has put Israel in a permanent PR crisis.
• The war has caused a sea-change in US conservative media, with figures like Steve Bannon, Candace Owens, and even Megan Kelly now moving away from reflexive pro-Israel support:

  “It’s a new day, and I think it. Well, let’s. Let’s jot this down, right? It’s mid to late August of 2025. Let’s see how long it takes before Megyn Kelly is just... down with us and antiwar.com every day.” – Scott ([74:24])

Memorable Story

“I’ll never forget where I was when it happened to me... There I was, sitting in my airplane seat, and my phone went, ding, ding. ‘Geez, Candace, you better back down or, I don't know if I can protect you.’ The Zionist on my phone said.” – Candace Owens (paraphrased by Scott, [66:47])

• The censorship tactics and intimidation that once sufficed to maintain pro-Israel consensus are failing in the decentralized “de-platformed” media of 2025.
• The hosts predict a strengthening “America First” critique of Israel on the Right.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Ukraine negotiations:
  “The whole point was to not make the deal. The whole point was to put a poison pill in so that the deal... there is no option for a deal.” - Dave ([01:46])
• On media manipulation:
  “They’re just extras in our movie.” – Scott ([16:53])
• On the Ukrainian Nazi legacy:
  “I go on and on about that because of course it's the worst thing that you could say about the Ukrainians is that man, there really are Nazis of influence in their country in a way that we just don't have elsewhere.” – Scott ([23:01])
• On war’s psychological effects:
  “War is probably like... there's probably no better example of something that gives you immediate clarity... It's written a mission, you know, right here.” – Dave ([60:47])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Topic | |-----------|--------------------------------------------------| | 01:12 | Alaska talks & poison pill diplomacy | | 03:07 | Security guarantees & NATO expansion | | 05:50 | Russian advances, Trump’s “solution” | | 10:09 | Trump’s misconceptions on Crimea & conflict roots| | 16:19 | The logic and cynicism of guarantees | | 22:31 | Ukrainian Nazi/far-right history, Azov | | 30:06 | Comparing nationalist movements to Naziism | | 43:25 | Military-industrial partners & extremists | | 47:17 | The “mercenary effect” of endless wars | | 61:48 | Israel-Gaza: war, PR crisis, right-wing shift | | 66:47 | Candace Owens anecdote—breaking the taboo | | 74:24 | Forecasting a sea change in right-wing discourse |

---

Conclusion

This episode offers a somber, highly informed exploration of the Ukraine war’s glacial grind, the hopelessness of peace under current Western policy, and the likely outcomes—a fractured, unstable Ukraine menaced by radical elements. Parallels with US debacles elsewhere and the new skepticism on the American right about Israel fill out a bleak vision of contemporary geopolitics. The hosts’ tone is darkly humorous, unvarnished, and unflinching, consistent with the show’s ethos of “exploring the psychology of conflict and how ordinary people become participants in cycles of violence.”

---

Transcript

[A]

Sat. Welcome to Provoked. I'm Scott Horton from the Libertarian Institute. And filling in for Daryl Cooper tonight is Dave Smith. Hey, Dave.

[B]

What's going on, dude? Thank you for, for having me. It's cool to be on what has become my favorite new show.

[A]

Thank you very much.

[B]

Too bad Daryl's out this, this episode, but it's good to be here with you.

[A]

That's right. He has other obligations. And featuring tonight, Ruby. You can see her nose at the bottom of the screen there. Hopefully she won't be breathing heavily into the mic too badly this evening, but it's better than whimpering out in the hallway. So she's in here with us. But yeah. So I'm Scott and he's Dave, and we're gonna talk about some stuff for you as Per your Want.

[B]

Hey, let's hope so.

[A]

That's right. So lots of big news. It was funny. I did this interview with Larry Johnson, the former CIA officer who's a real expert on the Russia, Ukraine stuff. And I talked to him on the show last Thursday and no, it was Friday morning before the big meeting. So it was like, gee, Larry Johnson, you think I might be wrong? And they actually could make a deal? And he's like, no. And then they didn't.

[B]

Yeah, of course.

[A]

So anyway, what was your take on the talks there in Alaska?

[B]

Well, I don't know. I mean, it seemed like, you know, it kind of reminded me of the. When Trump was in the negotiating stage with Iran and all the hawks were flipping out about how there was any enrichment involved in. To be allowed in the negotiations and that Donald Trump's red line must be zero enrichment whatsoever. And Mark Levin and all these people are freaking out about it. And it is kind of this interesting dynamic. It's kind of like part of how the war hawks operate is through the peacemaking also. So in the negotiations. And it was obvious in that case, much more obvious. I think in that case, the whole point was to not make the deal. The whole point was to put a poison pill in so that the deal, there is no option for a deal. And it's hard, you know, when you hear Zelensky just harp on security guarantees. Security guarantees. Ok, you could kind of understand, like, ok, maybe that's genuine from his. But like, hey, I'll give up some territory. But when you hear all the Europeans harping on security guarantees, it's like this just feels like you're obviously trying to insert the thing that, you know, will guarantee that Putin, Putin won't make this deal, which. And Donald Trump doesn't seem to know enough to know that that's actually what the whole thing was about the whole time. And I have the advantage on of Donald Trump because I've read your book with the title of this show provoked, which really lays it out that this is what the whole thing was about to begin with.

[A]

Yeah. And you know, what's a security guarantee if it's not an Article 5 membership in NATO in the first place is. You know, people like to cite the Budapest memorandum of 1994, where everybody promises to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and they try to pretend that that's a treaty of alliance and that we promise to come to help them in case anyone violates. But that's not what it says.

[B]

Right, right.

[A]

People want to try to read it that expansively. In fact, even the NATO treaty, Article 5 says that if any member stays attacked, then the other nations will then have to decide what to do.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, right. Article five. A lot of people think Article five means we are at war if someone's at war with a NATO allied country, but that's not technically what it says. In fact, one of the things that's interesting. Right. And tell me if I'm wrong about this, but it's not clear at least, like, what we've done for Ukraine, you certainly could argue would have met Article 5 requirements. Like just doing what we're doing right now for Ukraine, like if they had done that Poland or Estonia or whatever. Yes. Then that we, what we done, you could say, hey, we aided in the defense. We didn't just allow it to happen. But anyway. But yes, it's a. It's a good point.

[A]

Yeah, man. So it is frustrating, though, because I know that I'm not exactly certain why, other than, you know, whatever Donald Trump's conception of the future development of the Arctic or whatever he has in mind here, trying to split Russia away from China as best he can, that he wants to see this thing over, and yet he just can't. It's just such bad timing on his part when the Russians are winning, but slowly, they're not done winning yet. They have no real reason to quit. They're saying, well, look, if the Ukrainians will just drop their guns and turn around and walk off of the territory they still control in Donetsk, Zaporozha and Kherson, well, then. And then declare their neutrality forever and kick all the Nazis out of the government, then that'd be fine. But otherwise, no, we're going to keep going. But then it's going to take them A while, apparently. I don't know how long it'll be. The skeptics keep saying the Ukrainian army is just. Their lines are going to break and it's going to fall apart. They're going to have to turn around and run at some point. I don't know when that point is, but at the rate they're going, it's going to take them a long time to finish. Taken Zaporozha and Kherson, which they've already officially annexed. I mean, they've made major gains in Provost in western Donetsk, which they say is, you know, a major strategic kind of hub there. So, you know, perhaps they'll finish consolidating all of done yet by the end of the year.

[B]

And what do they have? They have like 2/3 of it or something like that now or something?

[A]

Yeah, I'd say more than that. I think probably three quarters or more of done. Yes, now and then. But they only have about 2/3 of zaprosia and Kherson.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Those are my rough estimates. And including like major cities outside of their control in those areas. And then plus these are Kiva's right there and Odessa's right there. And once you got Odessa, Transnistria, which is this little strip of land, as you know, on the Moldovan side of the river, on the Moldovan Ukrainian border there, which is a strip of land controlled by Russia. So if now that they have Crimea, hell, they can see Transnistria from there anyway, proverbially speaking, especially for Modesta, it's just a hop, skip and a jump right there to take it. So it would take, I don't know what promises Trump could ever make to get Russia to stop short of their goals. And never even mind Odessa and Kharkiv, because maybe they haven't officially annexed those areas. Putin has said belligerent things about both before, about, you know, the potential for. Oh, yeah, you know, like somebody asked him because, ah, the weather in Odessa is very nice and this kind of thing, you know, so they could stop short of that. But are they going to stop short as a pro and see a solid third occurs on the part of it they don't control is on the other side of the river, on the right bank of the river, the western side. So. So they're not going to take that until they've smashed the Ukrainian army and they can just go there.

[B]

Right.

[A]

You know, and the Ukrainian Marines have tried to take and cross that river and have a beachhead on the Russian side and have gotten completely green and lost. Did Nothing but lose, guys, and finally give up on an attempt to wage an offensive down there. So, yeah, it's just, it's a, it's a really, it's a really bad time to be a president, try to end a war. It's, it's such a slow motion war the way that the Russians are fighting it. And, you know, they're not like seven sending in the heavy bombers, you know, I mean, they kind of are, but they're hitting them, you know, one at a time. Not like Richard Nixon, carpet bombing or whatever. And so, so I don't know what the hell. I think Trump, you know, assuming Trump and his guys have gamed this out, it makes sense that they would be saying that they essentially be setting Ukraine up and saying, look, we came up with a deal, they wouldn't take it, but we have other business to attend to, so we're going to go ahead and like, for example, I think we could all agree we would rather develop the Arctic trade routes with Russia rather than in some strategic competition with them that ends up like threatening violent conflict over freaking trade routes in the ark. Right, Forget that. Let's make a joint condominium up there with the Chinese too. What the hell? And all help each other trade, because this is a big deal. The Northwest Passage, which they were seeking, you know, coming here to the Americas back when, which they never found because there was Canada in the way. The thing is, it's open now, right? But the thing is there's another Northwest Passage that's also open now which is north of Asia, north of Russia, so that there's a trade route from China around north of Russia to Europe that way instead of having to go all the way around India and through Suez and. All right, mess, right? So, so it's a huge potential trade zone up there. So it could be that Trump is saying is setting himself up to argue, look, I did my best, but neither side wants to quit. And what the hell, we're not just going to put off getting along with Russia forever, even while they're fighting this war, which is, I don't know if he's going to be able to do that or not.

[B]

But I mean, that does sound, it sounds like the type of thing that might excite Donald Trump, you know, But I will say, I don't know. Did you see, I played this on my, on my last show, but I don't know if you saw Trump. Trump called into Fox News, I guess it was Fox and Friends or whatever, one of those shows where there's three of Them on a couch. I don't even know, like, who all the people at Cable News are. Like, I used to. I don't know, like, I used to.

[A]

Know kind of recognize their faces sometimes.

[B]

Yeah, yeah.

[A]

Oh, that lady from before. Yeah.

[B]

But, you know, you know, I know the thing with Donald Trump is always, you know, he says a million crazy things and everyone jumps on every latest crazy thing, and half of them he doesn't even mean or whatever, but I really don't think I'm doing that. But he's just. It's just him explaining the war, and he just has no idea what he's talking about, man. And it's just totally this, like. It's like a. A Sean Hannity, Rudy Giuliani -20 IQ points, like, way of, like, conceiving of the whole thing where he's explaining, like, he doesn't even get. He goes. He goes, this all started in 2014. And at first you're like, OK, he goes, Putin took Crimea and Obama just gave it to him. He just gave him Ukraine. That's what Obama did. Never would have happened under me, but Obama gave him Ukraine. And so he still fundamentally thinks the problem was that we gave Ukraine to the Russians and doesn't realize that the problem is actually that we took Ukraine away from the Russians and that that Putin taking Crimea was his snap, was the snapback to that. And so, like, when you don't even get that and you're talking about solving this war, which I think, you know, even as you're indicating now, solving this war right now is actually much tougher than just diagnosing what caused the war. You know, like, it's actually a much tougher challenge to solve it than it was to start it, which is also. Is quite often the case with catastrophes. Like, in your personal life in general, it's much easier to start one than it is to put it all back together. But, like, if you don't even understand the very first thing about how it started, what hope do you have to being up to this challenge?

[A]

Listen, don't worry, because Marco Rubio is there to revise him and explain.

[B]

Yeah, right, right.

[A]

This is why they say personnel is policy, you know, because it is like, all right, guys, tell me what's going on here, and then you're only going to get so good of a perspective, you know what I mean? So. And especially no president from either party. I mean, potentially Trump could, if. If he had his ducks in a row, blame it on the other guys, but when it comes to foreign policy, it's like, you know, they say politics stops at the water's edge, and we're all united against whoever. Foreign things. So, like, blaming Biden himself is one thing. Blaming policy for the last 25 years and all of this kind of thing, which he doesn't have to be that specific, but it would be nice if he understood it like, oh, there's a long train of abuses and usurpations here.

[B]

But, yeah, well, even if he just. Even if he just got the basics of it, the basics of what the beef is about, what led to the conflict, I mean. Cause that's. It's, you know, if you don't get that, then you're fundamentally gonna. You're kind of just feeling in the dark about what the potential solution might be. And then it's very easy to get. You know, it's like when. When Donald Trump, he instinctually, on some business level, knows all these wars are bad. And he does. And he does seem to not like people dying. Like, that seems to be part of it too, which is refreshing, you know, in a way that he's also like, yeah, they're dying. They should stop dying. But when you just go, look, this is bad business. You know, we're losing all this, then it's easy to pivot to, oh, well, like, since you don't actually understand the core of the issue, instead of coming to the conclusion that we shouldn't be in NATO anymore or that NATO shouldn't exist anymore, you go, oh, they're ponying up their money. Okay, so we solved it that way. Oh, we got some oil. Okay, well, then we solved it that way. Oh, we got a mineral deal. We solved it that way. So if the. When it's just a gut, you know, aversion to this is bad business, it's actually a lot easier to come to a really bad solution. Why are we even talking about security guarantees or mineral deals? This is the whole problem is that at best. How do you not come to at best? Ukraine has to just be neutral. That's like, that should at least be. Obviously, everyone should accept that at this point. And so now also, I got to think the other thing, because it was, look, I don't know. Obviously, dude, you know, you know the. A lot better than I do, and you wrote the book on it. But, you know, so I was reading, perhaps at your recommendation, but I was reading Aaron Matei had a piece about this on Substack a few days ago, which was very good. And, you know, he's talking about how, like, look, there have been some signals coming out of Moscow, you know, who knows? But there's some signals coming out that they're like, they might be open to. Like, all right, you get the out of Donetsk, like, you give us the 100% of the Donbass region, obviously Crimea, that's all annexed and has to be recognized as Russian territory. They wanted a corridor to Crimea from the south there. And that they might think about with no. And guarantees of no NATO or whatever, the few things that they might be open to that deal. So, like, look, who knows? Maybe that's not the case. And even if that they were offered that they wouldn't take it. But when you hear they might be open to that, and then you start saying literally what was reported in Axios, what they called it was Article 5, like, security guarantees is what they're sitting there, negotiation. So as soon as you broadcast, well, the rest of Ukraine is going to be in NATO essentially, which is. Right. With like, de facto, at least once you broadcast that, well, then that totally changes the incentives of Vladimir Putin to go, okay, so you're telling me whatever I don't take right now, right. Is part of NATO. Is that the threat now? So, okay, well, in that case, I was. So it just, it just seems like. So, you know, like, if it seems to me that a lot of their goal is not to end the war, it's to keep the going, as has been the goal for a while. And as you've done, you did some good reporting on this in the book, at least for some of them. They seem to not really give a if Ukraine collapsed and it was an insurgency. I think that was kind of the plan at the very beginning. So they don't actually really give a at all. They think it keeps bleeding Russia dry. And our Austrian economic training would tell us there probably is a lot of truth to that. And so they want to keep it going. But the problem is, if you're Donald Trump and you actually do want to end the thing, it's like now you don't even see that you're flying into these poison pills that are going to defeat the whole effort.

[A]

Well, and the logical inconsistency of it all just shows the cynicism of it all that, you know, and this was true during Biden, too. They made it very clear that we're not going to fight for Ukraine. We would never risk Russia fighting for Ukraine. So then, in other words, you would never bring them into NATO because that's what bringing them into NATO. NATO means, is that you would fight for him. So. Right, but you're saying now you're gonna end the war and then, but you're gonna give them a security guarantee after they're done losing, and then you promise to fight for him in the next one. What the hell is any of this? Makes no sense at all.

[B]

Right? Because.

[A]

And it's really what they're admitting is what you just said. They don't give a damn about Ukraine. They're just extras in our movie. And their, their lives are worth no more to Washington than the lives of the afghans in the 1980s. That their props. And they're here, they're, they're pawns on the board to be used to weaken the Russians.

[B]

Well, and this is where, this is where people on our side or people in our camp can at times get sloppy. And it's easy. It's easy to. Because it is like, you know, you tend to think of this thing of like, oh, this is the state's motivation, this is the regime's motivation. But actually like, there's different players and there's different periods. Right. So like, and you cover this very well in the book. It's very interesting, right, that when, so when in 2008 and George W. Bush's last year as president, at the Bucharest summit when they announced Ukraine and Georgia are coming into NATO, well, that was because George W. Bush really wanted them to be in NATO. He, for his own legacy building purposes, wanted to have these countries added to NATO. Then Merkel's giving him pushback, so he doesn't end up getting a full map, but he does get an announcement that they're. So at that point, I think the goal really was to bring Ukraine into NATO because this would be great for George W. Bush's legacy. After that point, none of them really seemed serious about bringing Ukraine into NATO. Like, they all kind of knew. Ah, you can't really do that. This is crazy. Like, and I mean before 2014, like after 2008, after the war in Georgia and all that, they're kind of like, but they just keep floating it out anyway. And then it does make you wonder, well, what the hell was the goal of that? Like, if you're not, if you're not serious about ever actually incorporating them, I.

[A]

Think it's, it really comes down to public choice between the different people involved.

[B]

Right.

[A]

I think like Newland was so heavily involved in pushing the Bucharest summit in the Vice President's office in the first place, and, and Cheney was involved in pushing that. And then I think you had probably in the Obama years. I mean, it was Newland again. Right. Although she came in later. But I think he may have had more reluctance in the beginning, although. So, like, you got to go back. I'm trying to remember the timeline and all the WikiLeaks, because there are a lot of WikiLeaks documents about this where they talk about the crisis. There's at least two or three different states documents about this. They talk about how the people of Ukraine don't support NATO membership. So we got to figure out how to wage campaign to get them on board and how to change the influence to get at least be able to claim that we have enough.

[B]

Yeah. And that was. And that was. Those were published in the Washington Post. I remember, actually, you sending me these articles about that. Yeah. Where they're literally going, the Ukrainian population, it's so unpopular to this idea of NATO membership.

[A]

Spent a lot of money on trying to change minds about it, which is funny, because then have a mandate.

[B]

You know, they talk about, of course, in. In the context of Maidan, they talk about, like, always, like, the will of the Ukrainian people.

[A]

By the way, for people listening to the podcast, I was not saying, shh, honey, to Dave. I have a dog in the room here. Sorry. Go ahead, dude. I didn't want people to take that out of context.

[B]

Thank you, honey. No, but so, like, they all talk about. When it comes to Maidan, which, again, I think it was never really demonstrated that it was actually popular. I think it was very closely split. Like, the whole. During the. All of Maidan, like, the opinion polling was, like, very. I think it was like, Yanukovych was unpopular, but he was still the most popular of the political figures or something like that. So, like, the country was very divided on the whole thing. Obviously, there are huge, huge crowds out in the streets, but they'll go, that's the will of the Ukrainian people. You're denying their agency. But the thing is, back just a few years before, when our State Department is finding out that their agency says they don't want to be a part of NATO, they go, okay, well, then we got to pump money in there to change what the will of the Ukrainian people is. So, you know, maybe it's. They were the ones who are denying their agency.

[A]

And meanwhile, like, imagine any other circumstance. Like, just say, for example, like, anyone listening? Like, it was people you disagreed with, and there was a big crowd of them, and they said, look, see, it's the will of the big crowd of people. Yeah, I. I saw, I don't know, 50 or 60,000 people march against the Iraq war in downtown Austin.

[B]

Right, right.

[A]

You think they're representative even of Travis County?

[B]

Yeah. Yeah, right.

[A]

I mean, maybe, but not Williamson and certainly not the rest of this state. Forget it. And sorry, folks, we were right about that one. Yeah, that was there. February and March 15th of oh three. By the way, thank you very much. My sign said no more UN wars because I thought it was all about empowering the UN still, because I was stupid. It's kind of funny, but I think there were pictures of that somewhere. The future. Yeah, we talked about that. I think Ukraine is really screwed, man. I think. I guess I'm kind of being redundant. I'm not sure like when and where. I keep repeating myself saying this, but I think the Russians really put themselves in a bind by. By doing this, by removing the Russian population out of Ukraine. They. I mean, they used to win elections. That's why we had to keep overthrowing the government there. Right.

[B]

So that's a really good point.

[A]

Yeah. So now they've got anybody who liked them, they've now drawn a line around them and they've left a country behind that is going to be run by right wing nationalists from the far west of the country and who absolutely despise Russia and who are the survivors of those who just fought and died in the war.

[B]

Hate him more than ever, I'm sure. Yeah.

[A]

And there's going to be no balance to it at all. And I want to highlight, you know, of course in the book I. Ruby, honey. Okay.

[B]

The Ukraine talk is exciting.

[A]

Like we just got home, you know. You just left the room for one minute, baby. We're still here. It's okay. Daniel, in the book I beat the dead horse about the Nazis. Because I mean, look, the book is obviously very thick.

[B]

It's pretty good.

[A]

It's. It. I don't really belabor any one point too much. It's just a lot of different subjects in there because it covers a long period of time. Right. But the two subjects I really beat a dead horse over the most would be the promises over NATO expansion and the Nazis. And I go back, I explain the commies in the holodomor and I explain the right wing reaction to that. And then the coming of the Germans in the war and then their defeat and then the CIA support forum and the rise of the Nazis. No, honey, we can't play ball now. I'm sorry. The rise of the Nazis again. With the fall of the Soviet Union. They came home from Canada and the United States where they'd been living in exile and they came home and built up these movements again and you know, with all their rewriting of history and all of this stuff. And so I go on and on about that because of course it's the worst thing that you could say about the Ukrainians is that man, there really are Nazis of influence in their country in a way that we just don't have elsewhere, certainly in Europe or really anywhere that you could think of. And, and so then of course, therefore the Russians like pointing that out and then the Americans like crying that that's not true. That's just something that the Russians say. So I'm not gonna tolerate anybody saying about me that I said something because it's something that the Russians say. I would only say something if it was true. And so I got plenty of sources, very few of them Russian on all of this story. And part of it is about the group Patriot of Ukraine, the national core. And this was the group that was one of the major facets of the revolution of dignity in 2014, the Maidan Revolution, where they were part of what became Right Sector, which was like the coalition of the Step and Banderas, Trident, White Hammer and the Patriot of Ukraine group. And then this other one called Ukrainian National Assembly, Ukrainian Self Defense, all of these are tied directly back to the Nazis of the second World War era through their fathers and even their mothers sometimes in some cases where the would be like the chairwoman of the board over the thing. So these are the groups that really spearheaded the overthrow. Svoboda is another one which was had been called the Social National Party. I saw a funny comment on Twitter where I had posted a thing about one of these Nazis. I said, yeah, he's from the Social National Party. And that guy goes, yeah, see that's the exact opposite of the National Socialist. Scott, what's your problem?

[B]

So the exact opposite.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Social nationalist, not to be confused.

[A]

Yeah, not at all the same thing. Which, you know, he was joshing around, having fun, which me too. And, and so. But here's the thing about it is after the revolution when the leader of Jabbat Al Nusra, John Brennan came to town and insisted that the acting President Turchnyov launched the anti terrorist operation that is the civil war in the east of the country, the military was severely unprepared and some of their best units were loyal to the other side and right. Defected to the other side, which is where the other side got all their military equipment. Not from the Russians, it was from the Soviets.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Who had left it behind back when. Right. And. And it was part of the Ukrainian national force that they got. Well, so when the Ukrainian military was so unprepared, the Azov battalion stepped into the breach and those were the guys who, who essentially were right sector. Now Beletsky himself, this guy, Andrew Beletsky, he had been in prison on. I thought it was kind of funny. The charge was a terrorist attack for blowing up a statue of Vladimir Lenin. And I'm like, I don't know, I could look the other way, but the guy is still a Hitler loving lunatic. And so they let him out of prison.

[B]

Well, that is the nice thing about Nazis. They don't like Lenin.

[A]

What are you going to do?

[B]

It's one of their only good qualities.

[A]

I remember years ago looking at Ukraine and seeing this story where gang of thugs beat up this old woman and I'm like, God, these Nazis over there, what in the world? And it's like, well, she did come to lay flowers at the feet of a statue of Joseph Stalin. So like these things do happen, you know. I don't know. But anyway, people are crazy over there. They're here, they call each other communazi over there they're commies and Nazis. You know, there's a lot of that.

[B]

Right, right.

[A]

But so this guy, Andrew Beletsky, he got out of prison and then like just pulled rank I guess and got the. Essentially the leaders of right sector and C14 which was another militia of the Svoboda Party or you know, the social nationalists renamed Svoboda Party. And they all joined together and they created what became called the Azov Battalion. And the first thing they did was not the first thing. There was assassinations, I think in. At a protest in Harv. I remember. Right. But then they ended up liberating very importantly. They liberated Marol and then Marup and drove the pro Russian rebels out of control of that town then. So that was their first big victory, cemented their legend and all of that. So then they went from a battalion to then by the. I guess November whatever late 14, they were officially integrated into the National Guard and called the Azov Regiment. And they were still called the Azov Regiment until I guess in sometime during the war they actually split and part of them became the 12th separate National Guard division and then the rest while Bilecki and became the 3rd separate infantry division and they've been fighting mostly in the north of the country for the last three years. He's now Colonel Beletsky and they've now promoted the group again and they're now called the 3rd Army Corps. That's the Azov Battalion. And the thing is about it is it's not just Azov Battalion, it's the Azov movement. And especially, you know, we haven't heard that much about it since the worst part of the war in 2022, except at the very start. And I may have just overlooked some things, but certainly from all through the Civil War, from 2014 through 22 and in the. Into the beginning of the start of the war, at least, is you have this massive neo Nazi movement unparalleled anywhere in Europe. There's just nothing like it. You look at like Geat Wielders or like Marine Le Pen or any of these guys. What was that guy in Austria that Justin Raimondo liked so much back years ago? Like, none of these guys. These guys are. They're like nationalists, but they're not Nazis. They're not. Yeah, and he's a real different.

[B]

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, look, right wing nationalism has been with humans for, you know, thousands of years. Nazism is a very particular thing. And this literally is Nazism. Yeah, yeah.

[A]

And it is. And they're recruiting white supremacists from all across Europe and from even, you know, America and Brazil and wherever, Italy, that's part of Europe, all over the place to come. And they had, you know, fight clubs and death metal concerts and big recruitment events and whatever all across Europe for years. And. And so then, I don't know how close we are to the end of the war, but I've been saying for a while and working on an article right now like this, because I want it on the record that I told you so about this, because I think that this guy Belitzky is probably the most dangerous of them. And now there's a bunch of them whose names I don't know. You know, I know Dimitri Yarash and Andrew Perubi. Andrew Perubi was, you know, one of the major leaders of the social national parties, Phoboda, who then became the speaker of the Parliament for like nine years or something. Seven, eight years. So. And a lot of these guys, you know, a guy named Troyan, became the deputy head of the National Police for a while. I think the Americans, maybe after 22, possibly the Biden government insisted that they get rid of some of these guys or demote them or whatever, but they're far from gone. And I think.

[B]

Well, yes, this was a bit of a PR problem. If people remember early in the war, they did have a little bit of an issue with Too many of these guys, swastikas were showing out of their military uniform or whatever. So they were trying to getting sent.

[A]

Home from Germany because they're like. One of them went, an official in the government went and laid flowers at the tomb of Stepan Bandera and the Germans kicked him out of the country. And then the Ukrainians promised we will have our guys remove all their swastika insignia from their uniforms before we send them to train in Germany from here on out. You know, we really are serious about that. Don't worry. And so listen, so if anybody's ever heard much of the, you know, the anti war argument on this stuff and, and are familiar with it at all and, and the accusations about the Ukrainian Nazis, the most familiar quote that you will hear is that this guy's saying that we must lead the white crusade against the Semitic led intermention. Right. That's the. And that means sub humans. Right? In the. To the German Nazis, we're the Uber mentioned they're the intervention. Right. So. And this was a speech that he gave. And it's funny because. Well, it's not funny. The thing is, it's your boilerplate, you know, typical Nazi fanaticism. You know, it's crazy stuff. It's essentially what you would think a Nazi would say about the, the single being that is the Ukrainian state and how all must serve it for the greater glory of the way things used to be and whatever, you know how it goes. And for, and for all the Aryan virtues, which I wasn't sure that included the Slavs, you know, but like, I don't know if that's what you're calling them now. I don't, I don't know how that's supposed to work really. The Aryans were Indians. I don't know how they can be white if they're from India. But I think if it's a bunch of made up crap then it's not supposed to really be consistent, you know.

[B]

Yeah, I don't think you can't get lost in the details there.

[A]

But, but yeah. So the thing is the good old London Times has a thing about Andrew Beletsky and who. Putin fears him and he's a tough guy. Look at him, everybody. And they're rehabilitating the guy, like turning Al Jelani into Alshara. They're like, yeah, we're turning this guy from stepping Bandera and I don't know, Benjamin Franklin or something. And so he's, he maybe went to the same like Turkish finishing school where they sent Al Jelani from Al Qaeda in Syria. And so he's like acting like a normal guy and he goes, man, I never said that Nazi stuff. Why? That's a Russian forgery. I immediately thought of Joy Reed. That's a Russian forgery, dude, I never said that stuff. And it's like. But that's funny because I got the source from the Wayback Machine archive of the AZOV regimen website and there it is. And yeah, and I, I published the whole thing on the anti war.com blog and I forgot I was going to email it to myself so I could show it to you here. But in fact, here. Ukrainian Radical Social Nationalism by Andrew Beletsky. And. And anybody can find [e-mail] blog. And again, it's your boilerplate Nazi lunacy. And so, but I think that, look, there's, it's almost certain this guy's going to be the future leader of this country. They'll probably call him El Presidente instead of Fuhrer or whatever because bad pr, like they told Jelan, stop people's heads off. Dude, there's cameras rolling. But otherwise you can have the power. Just don't do that. Right? Same thing here. Chill with the Seag. And then you can have your chair.

[B]

Yeah, I heard throughout the war, or maybe it was kind of earlier in the war, I mean, I remember hearing from a few of the hawks that were basically arguing and I never saw any of this substantiated anywhere, but they were arguing that, you know, because this would come up as a kind of black eye on their undying support for Ukraine. And if you remember of this, Chris, you do well, but you the listener, if you remember, you know, in 22 and 23 before, you know, when the initial wave of Ukraine propaganda came out, it was like, you know, change your profile to their flag and these guys are great. A beacon of democracy. What a hero. Ghost of Kiev. You know, we were in that, like, time and this was kind of a black eye on that. Like, well, there's a lot of Hitler loving Nazis in the middle of this wonderful country that you're describing. And I remember a bunch of the hawks used to say, yeah, but all those guys got sent to the front lines, you know, essentially like they all that problem took care of.

[A]

Cross your fingers, pal.

[B]

And I think a lot of them were the first to enlist. I mean, these are the toughest guys. But it's interesting that of course, just, you know, like with so many of these things, the wars that are supposed to eliminate these groups, then you see them Popping up. And you know, it's. It's a look you think about even say in America, we still have groups in this country who quite passionately defend the south in the Civil War and call it the War of Northern Aggression. Now, most. Your average Joe six pack may not know about this at all, but kooks like us in our world, we do know people who refer to the Civil War as the War of Northern Aggression and still have a. And they've. No, listen, they've got an argument like, I'm not and I honestly topic for another show. But I think me and you maybe would like split the difference with them and the other side on it. Like maybe wouldn't be. But there's an argument. I mean, there was like, you know, and as the case always with wars, right? I mean, like, if you're a Southerner, like, your perspective on this is like a whole bunch of innocent Southern people getting up and that's not fair. And that's, you know, and like, from your perspective, that's not wrong. No matter what the meta beef was, you were just living next to your aunt's place or whatever, right? But the point anyway, I was just making is that it's like these old. They don't die so easily, you know, and when you have something like. And I'm talking about a conflict in the 1860s, that there's still people today talk, you know, arguing about that and still very upset about it. And this is really much, much more recent than that. And so it's like there's. It's not easy. I remember Jeff Dice had a big speech about this where he was just like, banishing politically defeated groups is not as easy as you think. Like, there's still people, Russia who support Stalin. There's still people. And the other kind of forgotten chapter of the rest of Europe post World War II is that it's not like the Nazism just went away. Like it was forcefully suppressed and is still illegal in large parts of Europe. And so it does seem like the two points you're making there are pretty interesting. And for the first part of it, if anybody hasn't seen, there's that John Mearsheimer had the big lecture on this that went super, super viral and has like 20 million views on it. But when he actually starts breaking down, like, I think he goes through on a slide there, like the election results in 2010 and then in 20, whatever the years the elections were, whatever yanukovych was at 2012, he was 2010. 2010 was the one he was OK, so, but they go and I mean you can see it where essentially like Russia has now taken the balance of this country away. What's left there isn't, no matter what you call it, it's not neutral anymore. The country Ukraine was neutral because the kind of eastern half of it wanted to be pro Russian and the western half of it wanted to be pro Western. And so that gave you this neutral kind of political dance where Yanukovych is trying to be like, I'm cool with you, but I'm also cool with you. And we could kind of just be in the middle. That's gone now. And you have these guys as the most powerful fighting force and in many ways have a lot of energy. Yeah, this is, this could be the future.

[A]

Yeah. So that leaves the Russians, then they take the Donbass is a Persian curson. But they leave Kharkiv and Sumi and Dinapro Provost. And I think there's one more there east of the river where people still speak Russian, are basically culturally Russian from the Russian government's point of view. Well, those people need protection still. They're now a much smaller minority in.

[B]

A much more radicalized country.

[A]

Much more radicalized right wing nationalist country based out of what was never really part of Ukraine. It was part of the Austro Hungarian empire. And then Poland is what's, you know, Volunia and, and Galicia, you know, in far western Ukraine. And so only makes sense then that like. And then there's the other thing is you get to Kiev and I was thinking, well, and then Kiev's on the other side of the river. But no, I was just talking with Larry Johnson. He's like, no, Kiev is like Kansas City, Kansas and Kansas City, Missouri is right across the river. It's two things. So they're going to own half the city and then the other, and then the capital of the enemy countries now right there across the river, line of sight. And they absolutely hate you. And they're led by fanatical Nazis who say we got to keep dying or else the guys who already died died in vain and so get them everybody. And then kind of thing. And then it only makes sense that this war just keeps going for years until the Nazis are completely. Look, and I'm just extrapolating a slippery slope kind of. Yeah, yeah. Dirty snowball sort of argument here. I don't know, like I might be missing things. I'm assuming that, that Belitzky and his guys. Oh, I'm not just assuming. See, this is the other thing is there are A couple of more articles about, about Balitsky here. One of them is a Ukrainian news story and it's about him saying how the new Ukraine after the war is going to have to be like Israel, a militarized state ready for war at all times with Israel as the model. Which is funny to hear National Socialists, you know, talking.

[B]

Well, it's more, it's more politically correct than saying like Nazi Germany these days.

[A]

Yeah, our model is Germany, our model is Israel. That's just more or less nice substitute, you know, it works. There's a National Socialist too, so there was that. But in other words though, like, he's planning ahead for like this is going to be the shape of our economy and governance going forward kind of thing. He's just a colonel in the army. He's planning on being a boss. And there's this brand new thing, the article is in Intelligence Online, which is apparently very old and I've never heard of before. And I had to give them my email address to get free access to this great article. But it's really good article. I can tell that it's not bs. And I invited the guy on the show and it's called the Saga of the 3rd AOV Brigade. From the Trenches of Donbass to the Corridors of Power and then hell, the subhead reads, no longer content with just fighting, the 3rd Azov Brigade is shaping public opinion, uniting disaffected youth, attracting Western military firms and officers, and imposing its vision of a post war Ukraine behind the military unit. A planned rise to power is steadily taking shape. So some of the major points of the article are about the broader Azov movement that they've been cultivating, you know, the civilian side of this thing this whole time and the broad networks. And he cites a lot of people that I talk about in the book from pre 22 days of being leaders, including this lady, Ola Semenyaka and all of these kooks. I don't know, there's a bunch of them. And they also talk about, I thought it was really interesting. I was telling you there's a part in there where they're saying that I guess the reporter himself talked to the defense firms and the defense firms say they really like the Azov battalion not because they're Nazis, but just because they actually operate on an entire separate chain of command from the central military regime. So I've been. They have the official imprimatur or whatever of the Ukrainian state, but they're still an independent military force.

[B]

It's not that they hate Jews, it's just that their trains run on time. And so that's just really nice to work with.

[A]

Yeah, exactly. Right. And so these guys, when they order weapons, they don't demand a kickback, they don't demand a bribe. They give you feedback as to whether this weapon system is working for the intended use or whether there's more that they could do or what. And they're like great partners to work with, man. They don't. Well, this is tired of delays and kickbacks, man. You just want to kill some people, you know?

[B]

Well, when you were just mentioning before we started recording, what's his name, the C14 guy who said it would have been the gay pride parade and that talk, right? So he's saying that, but he kind of said almost like the same thing where he said something because he said something, I can't remember exactly.

[A]

Because they like us, because we have fun killing.

[B]

He was like. And he was like, first off, he was like, we don't like the West. The west doesn't like us. They like us because they know. And essentially, I mean, these are my words, not his. But he was like, they know you want to put pressure on Yanukovych. Well, who's gonna do that? I mean, who's actually gonna go kick ass for you here? And so it was like, it does. It becomes that type of thing, right? Where those. That's always, you know, it's Darryl, whose seat I guess I'm sitting in today. He made this point I thought was great in what was. It must have been in the Fear and Loathing series. Or maybe it was in the follow up to that. But where he was talking about. Yeah, yeah, it was in the follow up piece to that War all the Time, I think is what it was called where he's talking about.

[A]

That's a great Poison Idea album, by the way. Oh, yeah.

[B]

Well there. It's also a great follow up series to Fear and Loathing in the New Jerusalem. Highly recommend all of that, but I guess this audience doesn't need to hear that. But no, he's talking about the people, which kind of also applies to like the settlers in the west bank say today. But he was talking about right after the formation of Israel. So this is like when Gaza's still under Egyptian territory. You know, this is 48 to. At 67 somewhere in there. I was talking about like, hey, who do you think is going to go live in southern Israel? Keep in mind, back then, this is 1952. There's no wall, there's no, you Know what I mean? Facial recognition technology. There's no nothing. There's them right there and you right there. And you better have someone to go occupy this territory if you're Israel, because otherwise they'll just start seeping back in and you lose your. There's not lines on the ground. There's not a wall there. There's not this technology. You're just putting everything together. And so who do you get to go occupy that? The craziest mother who are looking for a fight in the same thing. Like, amongst Israeli society right now, who's volunteering to go be another settler on the West Bank? It's not just your average random Israeli. It's the most fanatical, most. Like, I'm on this mission because God promised us Judea and Samaria, and these people have nowhere and I'm willing to put myself at risk to go. So, like, it just when you get these situations, it ends up like it snowballs. Because of course, the most radical, craziest motherfuckers are always the ones who are going to be what you need in a situation like this. Like, if you're the west looking for someone to support here, well, who are you going to. You know, it's like the moderate rebels in Syria, as you say. Right.

[A]

Bunch of Chechens and Uyghurs willing to travel halfway across the border, blow themselves up.

[B]

Whatever you tell me. I mean, you say, you know, enough already. You cover this in real great detail. But it's like when you just sit there and you go, okay, so you're telling me you found a group who's gonna go into Syria in 2013, and they're gonna stand with, you know, Al Qaeda and ISIS on this side and Bashar Al Assad and the Russians on this side and defeat both of them out of their moderate nature for not making conflict with all of their de. Escalatory policies, they're going to defeat both. Like, no. Like, that's just not how this works, unfortunately.

[A]

Always was the bin Ladenites from the very beginning of that thing. Yep. Okay, so. Hey, guys, I just want to tell you a little bit more about Scott Horton brand coffee. I know I seem like a shill, but I paid my dues. Leave me alone. And this is really good coffee. It's made by Moon Doze Artisan Coffee. Get it? They hate Starbucks too, so it's Moon Dose, but it's really good. It's part Ethiopian blended with Sumatra. And I talked about it on the show last week and got a bunch of sales and already A bunch of great feedback. Also got rid of some at the Ron Paul birthday event down in Houston and already got a lot of great response from that in the email. Talking about, oh, great, now I can never drink any other coffee ever again. Yeah, welcome to my world. I'm enslaved to this guy, basically Phil Peppin and his wonderful coffee at Mundo's Artisan Coffee. And if you, what you do is you go scotthorton.org coffee and it'll forward you right on to the correct thing. Or just go to my website, scotthorton.org and there's a logo in the right hand margin. You click on that and you'll get this stuff and I'll get a kickback and it'll be great. So wake up in the morning by drinking this stuff. Thank you. It's funny because when you talk about, you know, Chechen jihadis and, and Kosovar jihadists and Uyghur jihadists all traveling to Syria to fight, you're like, okay, I mean, that makes sense, right? We've seen this before. That's how they do it. And all of this. And then you're like, wow. And then you really do have these jihadists going to Ukraine to help the Nazis fight the Russians there. And I don't want to say that because now that sounds silly, but no, I'm sorry, I got it from like a couple of different reports from the New York Times, plus a really in depth series by a guy at the Intercept, Marson Mammon, I believe was his name, who did like a three or four part thing about this. And then I have something too from like, was it the Telegraph or something where the CIA and the Ukrainians raided a jihadist who'd been hiding out in Kiev for a while, but he'd been there for a while. And then the expert people that they were talking to, like consultants to the police were saying that like, only the real committed ones get this far. It really raises questions like, how many more of these guys are there?

[B]

Right, right.

[A]

There have been reports of them out there fighting in the east. And then when there was that terrorist attack in Moscow and the Russians claimed that they were heading back to Ukraine before they nabbed him and that that was who was behind it. It was like, dude, that is possible. You know, like they said that they were ISIS K. I don't know who they were. And whoever gave them money and told them point your gun that way and shoot it probably lied to them about who they were anyway. And what, you know what? I mean, who knows who hired who hired the guy who hired the guy who hired the gun, you know, whatever. But like they could have come from Ukraine, like essentially straight there because we got multiple reports of jihadis because look, they got whooped in Syria. They're back on top now. For a while they were all holed up in the Idlib province with nothing to do and nowhere to go. And so they were going to Ukraine to fight.

[B]

Well, and you see this, you know, I guess all over the place. I mean, even, you know, you hear the story from our boys who are back home here where even the ones who, you know, by and large have turned against the mission and turned against, you know, wanting to fight in wars. One of the things you hear when you talk to like the soldiers, you know, the combat vets who are really struggling is that they do kind of wish they were back out there. And there, there is this thing even when they were like, don't they know they got conned into war and they're still like, there's just, you know, and like, obviously this is not something I've experienced or you have, but you hear it from these guys where they're like, yeah, but dude, just that you're, you'll never be at that again in your life. You know what I mean? Like, you were in this thing where it's like a life or death. You, your, but your life is in your buddy's hands. Your buddy's life is in your hand. The stakes are so goddamn high and that level of excitement is. And then you see this all throughout the world where it is. These guys, they get battle tested somewhere and then they're looking for the next battle. Like they're looking to not. This is the story of all the early Zionists, you know, where it's like, like all those guys were like fighting in Eastern Europe and then would come over to keep the fight going here. And then it's like you come home from battle and also, you know, you get these young men, for the most part, that's what you're talking about, are young men who, if you spent, let's say, you know, let's say you, you spent years fighting in Ukraine or something like that, or let's say the guys who, you know, you covered it enough already, who are fighting in the, you know, in Iraq and then went over to fight in Libya or then went over to fight in Syria or all of this. You're a 18 to 25 year old guy who spent a few years doing that. That is your skill now, right? Like, what is it you bring to the table. What is it that you can do? Well, yeah, like this is what I do and I'm pretty good at. I've gotten pretty good at it by this point. I've survived four years of war, you know. Yeah, they're looking for another one. It's like another ripple effect of the cost of starting these wars that don't need to be start or not de escalating them when you can. Then you got all these international mercenaries now which will. Will pop up in the next conflict.

[A]

Yeah. And look, there were only hundreds of these guys until Iraq War two.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And then there were thousands of them. But then the locals murder lady them all, which is like a magic wish came true. But then Barack Obama gave him $4 billion. Him and all of his allies, including Benjamin Netanyahu and of course reciprocal on and the rest. So that was what brought him back to life and created the caliphate. And so you think about, you know, a lot of those people, just regular racky schmucks who got, you know, rounded up and conscripted. Sure. The rest, but for the people who volunteered to be part of the bin Ladenite movement in Al Nusra and ISIS in those Syrian days, that's only 15 years ago. And there's a lot of guys left over from that. There's Bin Ladens we don't know of. Some of them are under the control of Saudi intelligence, some of them surely not. You know, and, and I'm. I am really concerned about that. I think I was even saying before maybe on your show that I really want Tulsi Gabbard to only I want her to declassify everything in the world on the Russiagate thing. And then I want her to go back to work with Joe Kent keeping Al Qaeda guys off our shores. Because I know Al Qaeda mostly works for America and in Israel again these days, that does come and go. And America was backing them in Chechnya during September 11 and 10 of those guys have fought in Chechnya or Bosnia and they came and hit us anyway. We're supporting the Saudis support for them at that time and hit us anyway. So I know people think, well, that was just shows that we were behind it all. Our government was behind it all along. But I don't think it's that simple.

[B]

No, it's not. It's not. Because look, I mean, and this is why people I. People really should read enough already. They should. Like if, if you want to believe in any of this shit, at least just like learn some of the facts of it. But like, look, the thing, I'll say this right, like, you just cannot convince me there is absolutely no way that it was their plan for ISIS to invade Iraq. That was not their plan. Their plan was to use ISIS to put pressure on Assad. Even John Kerry on that, that hot mic. He says it himself, he's like, and I, he's not lying when he says that he's not. Their plan wasn't to humiliate the army they had just been backing and then have to reinvade the country and have to like, that was not part of the plan. The thing is though, you could think ISIS is your little pet project, but they're not. They're isis and they don't. So, like, under the control of intelligence agencies isn't a magical spell where you're like puppeteering these people. These are still head choppers with Uzis running around a country and you don't know what they're going to do. And oftentimes if there's nothing else we've learned is that like the people in the intelligence agencies have just like this tremendous hubris about what they are capable of accomplishing without even, without even giving any thought to like the obvious other four possibilities here of what could happen right then. You see this all the time. I mean, freaking like it's happening right now even. Like, obviously, yes, Israel has some type of loose agreement worked out with Syrians right now, right? But they're still, they're still fighting them and they're still, they still have these radicals right next door to them. You don't know where that's going to go in the next few years, by the way.

[A]

Speaking of which, dude, we got to talk about this.

[B]

Oh yeah, I just got my copy.

[A]

Oh, good. Did you. Too much glare. Creative Chaos by William Van wagenen. It's our 17th book we published at the Libertarian Institute. I announced it two weeks ago show, but got the hard copy in my hand last week and have it here again to tell everybody about. So, you know, with 400 pages, it's good, man. It's, it's. This is the best guy. I've read a lot of books about the dirty war in Syria. This is the very best guy on it. He wrote these incredible long form, like 10,000 word articles for us at the Institute before, like a bunch of them on all different aspects of the thing. And this is not the entire dirty war there. It's the origins of it. But it's, you know, so like the first three years of it I guess maybe leading right up to the invasion of Iraq by the Islamic State. Don't quote me on that. It's not the entire thing, but what it is though is it's all about America, Saudi, Turkey, Israel and the rest all working together to support these kooks and knowing good and well, like how dangerous is to do so and doing it anyway. And, and how from the beginning the whole portrayal that this was, you know, Assad was cracking down on a protest movement and that's what turned it into a civil war. And all that is totally bide. He just shows that no, it was terrorist sniping cops from the beginning. That's the game plan. They did the same thing in, in Serbia in 99. Was the KLA sniping cops in order to provoke the National Guard to, or military to crack down. And then they go aha.

[B]

And then, and then they say, oh, there was an organic uprising and they crack down on it.

[A]

Right. So, and, and oh no, we're victims, save us Bill Clinton kind of thing, you know, so there's, there's, there's some to that. So anyways, and then yeah, it did grow up into the Caliphate and then Iraq War III to destroy it again and all of the rest of that horror show. And then, you know, we were sleeping on it. They were hole up in there in that Idlib province just like it was the Gaza Strip up there in northwest Syria all that time. Biden, their time at Biden, their time.

[B]

There you go. Yeah.

[A]

And then Biden was like, okay, activate plan Al Qaeda again. Or somebody informed him, that's what we're doing. And they, and they sacked Damascus. They sacked Hamaha's, Aleppo and Damascus in 10 days last December, late November, early December, and, and took over that country. And I don't know what the hell is going to happen there. I'm still predicting the worst. I don't know if eventually we're going to have to go to war there or what. I'm not advocating that, but I think it's a real problem. The population of Bin Ladenites who are being made ministers in police and military forces in what used to be Syria right now. Okay. Hey guys, this October 10th through 12th, Miguel Thorp is doing the expat money summit again. He's a really great guy. I actually went and toured Mayan pyramids with him down in Mexico when I was on the Tom woods cruise. He's a really great dude and he's a brilliant genius who's mastered the laws all over the world about citizenship and property ownership and how you can protect your wealth and from taxes, no cheating. It's all extremely legal. He's a brilliant guy, knows exactly what he's doing. The conference this year is about Latin America and how you could protect yourself with citizenship and property ownership and whatever things down there. And the, the actual conference itself is online and it's [e-mail] but if you use the promo code provoked, you get 20 off lifetime free replays of all the different seminars and all that. And it's really substantive stuff. It's not just, you know, some guy talking about things. It's concrete, step by step. Things that you can take a real education in if you have some wealth, how you can protect it before Uncle Sam's done destroying it all for you there. So that's expatmoneysummit.com oh, and by the way, I'm sorry, I was gonna say one thing about what you're saying about how exciting it is to go to war and all that. There's a book about that by a guy who you might think is a pencil neck geek, Chris Hedges, which he is like kind of a progressive liberal type and whatever. Everybody knows him as a New York Times reporter, but he covered 14 wars, right? He'd been shot at and dodged a bunch of bullets before a lot of times, seen a lot of dead bod and knows for real what he speaks about. Like covered the Balkan wars and all kinds of things. And so he wrote a book. It's kind of a clunky title, but you see why I call that. It's just called War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning. And it's all about how God dang exciting it is to go to war. For reporters and for fighting men and for the survivors of the atrocities and for everybody else, it's a level of endorphins and, and adrenaline and stress and brotherhood and kinship and fear and love and loathing and everywhere else.

[B]

Sorry, that's just. I was like, juices moving. You'll never have it. Well, isn't it like you feel. I, I think, you know, I've, I've thought this a lot of times. I've heard other people articulate this better than I could, but it's something about having kids that I felt like. There's one of the best things about having kids is that it immediately gives your life purpose. You don't really have to wait too long to go, wait, what am I doing here? It's like, oh, okay, well this, this is the thing. And whether that's gainful employment or having kids or having a marriage or having friendships, it's like, men really need that. They need this feeling of, like, what's my purpose? What's my role? What am I doing? And, you know, war is probably like. There's probably no better example of something that gives you immediate clarity. It's like, here's your purpose. In fact, it's written a mission, you know, right here. This is what you do. And it's a. You know, we're kind of made to respond to that stuff.

[A]

Essentially, all of us descended from successful warriors.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Otherwise we wouldn't be here. So, yeah, it's. It's part of how it goes. And so, yeah, speaking of barbarianism, let's wrap up here with a little bit of Israel. I wanted to. I wanted to point out that maybe I say this every week or what, I don't know, but it's like somewhere right around, I don't do, like, the mean and medium and average. I just look at the front headlines on antiwar.com every day. But it's like a bare minimum of 70 people are killed every day, and then usually it's like 120. So I don't know. I measure these in Waco massacres is. That's how I count them.

[B]

Fair enough.

[A]

Right? So it's like, that's a Waco massacre. A day, sometimes two every day. But, Dave, I'm still pissed off about that. That was 32 years ago. And. And then I think of them doing that every day for three years, and. And then I see some of the pictures, too. I try not to look at them too much, but I think that it really. It's. Raimondo would say it's the great Clarifier where it really goes to show who's on whose side and what they really care about and. And what really matters. And it makes people change sides very quickly when they realize things that they thought were true aren't, after all. And. And all kinds of stuff, you know, comes into play. It all gets tossed up in the air kind of. So obviously, like a major facet of that is the absolute. I'm not saying this is what's important about it. I'm just saying it's an interesting, important facet is the absolute hasbara catastrophe that is this war for Israel and from now on. So, like, another example, another little Waco of mine is Iraq War two. And I carry that chip on my shoulder, even though that was 20 years ago. I'm never getting over that either. And particularly the role that Israel played in lying us into the thing and having their agents in America lie us into that war. Most people don't know about that. So I got to be angry enough for everybody just for that one thing kind of thing. But this thing, man, everybody can see what's going on, right? It's not that they tricked America into doing it. It's the Israelis slaughtering the Gazans. But everybody knows it's on our dime and in our name with our weapons. And same thing for the Iran thing, heightening the risk, dragging us into a war that they know they can't win without us to finish it for them. Launching a war potentially without permission to drag us into a thing like that gets real dangerous. And it's so obvious and so abrupt. And especially it's Gaza more than Iran. Well, I don't know, maybe it's Iran, because that really is where it involves us a lot. But in Gazi, see, just the abject cruelty and the relishing in the cruelty. You know, murdering some woman and then dressing up in her underwear and parading around and all of this stuff and, like, killing all these kids. There was a new thing that just came out that supposedly is a leak from Israeli intelligence where they say, they say They've only killed 8,000 members of Hamas this whole time, leaving 52,000 civilians, plus all the missing bodies that aren't counted, that everyone knows they're dead but can't find them because they got buried alive in the thing or just crushed to death if they're lucky. And so, like, whatever that ratio is, is completely insane. And thousands of minors, I mean, children under 12 and thousands of minors under 18 as well, and it's just the ugliest damn thing in the world. So then what happens is what used to just kind of be the Minority Report, where you would have anti war folk all know this, we'll talk about this. The Israel lobby and the wars and the occupation of Palestine and all this, mostly that's been considered in American politics to be a hippie issue, right? That's something left wingers care about, college kids care about, whatever. But more and more, you have important people of influence on the right washing their hands of this thing. Like, for example, Stephen Bannon, right? Like, that's a guy who, yeah, he was very pro Israel up until he wasn't anymore. And, you know, I don't know how to measure exactly his power and influence, but I know he really played a major role in stopping the war in Syria in 2013. Remember that? It was Breitbart.com said, hey, talk radio, we're all against this. And they were like, yeah, everybody, we're all against this big time. And. And, like, I'm sure played the. The major role probably in stopping that. So you got Candace Owens talking about she rather saw her own foot off than support Israel ever again.

[B]

And she might do it.

[A]

And yeah, she's. She means it when she says that, so hopefully they won't make her choose. But. So then I actually saw a short of Candace Owens talking about Megyn Kelly. And Megyn Kelly was interviewing Margaret Taylor Greene and going, well, it's okay to talk about this, right? A little bit now. Megyn Kelly is the lady from Fox News, dude. She's. I don't want to say she's Bill O'Reilly or whatever. Like, she's not that bad, but she's just very conventional. Roger Ailes wants you to say this today type of a lady. That's what her character is like. Pretty Republican lady, right? That's her whole shtick, the entirety of it. So she goes, well, I don't know, like, whatever it was, somebody said Israel in the wrong tone of voice or something. And then she got all this pressure on her. And so Candace Owens was like, ah. She was, like, being sarcastic. That's right. We love you, Megyn Kelly. We're your best friends. We care so much about you, and that's why we will absolutely destroy you if you don't fall in line right now. You're gonna go to Al Schwitz and pose for the picture. You're gonna go pray at the wall and. And do the thing and like. Or you're. And. And then Candace goes, I'll never forget where I was when it happened to me. And she says, there I was, sitting on an airplane. You could tell. It's like when you. When you, like, smell the smell or hear a song and you remember where you were or whatever. Candace is like, there I was, sitting in my airplane seat, and my phone went, ding, ding. Geez, Candace, you better back down or, I don't know if I can protect you. The Zionist on my phone said. And I was like, wait, what? Protect me. Like, I'm not afraid of you. And then she says, the next morning, I woke up and hell was raining down. It was on. And, like, that's what it's like. So get ready. You're either gonna get on your plane straight to the Wailing Wall, or welcome to the club of. You know, this is not me talking. Candace Ex Israel supporters who are now, you kind of have no choice but to be with us now because they won't have you. And then within a day, of course, they're already attacking her. And there's this guy. It sounds stupid, but this, there's apparently some real influence with this stupid Twitter account. Awesome Jew that goes around picking fights with people, smearing people and getting retweets and getting, you know, making headway in smearing people's reputations and stuff.

[B]

Yeah, I saw just posting that Megan Kelly is taking money from the terror. Megyn Kelly is run by the terrorists. Like that's where we are. That's terrorists. That's where you guys are?

[A]

Yes, that's Protocols of the Learned Elders of Mecca. You know, where they are like they control everything, dude.

[B]

Yeah, right. Oh man, it's so funny. But you know, right. It's like you guys are, you're the caricature of the most deranged the Jews did it guy. Except he at least, least has a plausible theory. Like yours is just too ridiculous. But no, there is, you know, there's something really interesting, it's been interesting to be in this world as it's happening. Both of us have been. And there's a snowball effect, right? Yeah, there's like this thing where so you have. First of all, right, so let's say the old media apparatus, like the old mainstream media, whatever that consists of the New York Times and the Washington Post and then networks and some cable networks or whatever. And okay, so it's like it's the most controlled environment and then this is the most controlled issue in the most controlled environment. Like this was the issue that like, you know, there were always a few little cracks. There were people like Pat Buchanan or Francis or guys like this, you know, who like made a comment here or there about like, you know, Pat Buchanan made one joke, if you remember, on the McLaughlin group one time about Capitol Hill being Israeli occupied territory and they all flip out about that. So there'd be one. If you remember, there was a, there was that guy, Rick Sanchez, who was at cnn.

[A]

I'm going to do his show soon.

[B]

Oh yeah, you know, he, I think reached out to, I think we had emailed back and forth. That's great that you're doing it. But so he had, if you remember what he said, he was talking about, they were saying something about, he was talking about minorities because, you know, he's Sanchez, he's a Hispanic guy. He was talking about the minorities or something. And they went, well, Jon Stewart is A minority too. And he goes, yeah, yeah, being a Jew is a real minority or something. And then he went like, he goes, yeah, I'm sure all the people who own CNN are all minorities. So he said that and he was fired the next day, but he was just gone. So there was, this was like the thing that you could never. So now, right. They had. So the support for Israel relied on this control. Because if you had this control, then most people can never really see what was going on. And the mechanism for control was like ruining people or threatening to ruin people, right? So then you lose your control. The thing's decentralized now all of a sudden you don't have the control. People aren't supporting Israel because you needed control. Now they can look at this, and once you look at it, you can't unsee it. Like, no matter what angle you look at, you go, what? The relationship.

[A]

They can't adapt. Their, their model is.

[B]

So they're still going just keep cracking down. But there's the snowball effect, is that now you, you're threatening to ruin people, but it's not working. It's missing. And then those same people are going, hey, you just tried to ruin my life. And like, that's kind of personal. You know, it's hard to not, like, take that. And so now it's this thing where they're literally. I mean, I saw it both with Charlie Kirk, with Megyn Kelly, with the people who are there, and they're going, now they have an audience where, where. Look, I'm just saying, I'm not even trying to. I, I'm really grateful to Charlie Kirk for having me at that event and hosting me and stuff. And he didn't back down or apologize for it when he was getting a lot of. For it. I give him credit for that. But at the same time, I also recognize it's like Charlie Kirk's not having me there out of the kindness of his heart. He's having me there because he's got an audience he's got to keep too. And your audience at this point, a right wing audience, you got to have someone representing the America first critic of Israel side, otherwise they just don't buy it. And so, like, now these guys are in a situation where they're like, look, this is the day after the debate, everyone noticing that Joe Biden is old. I can't go to my audience and tell them we don't notice this anymore. Even MSNBC had to go to their audience after that and say, yes, we need a new candidate. We're all for Kamala Harris now, right? Like Megan Kelly and Charlie Kirk. They're like, what am I supposed to say? I'm getting killed out here with your Hasbro bull. That doesn't work anymore. So what am I going to do? And now, because they're just going like, yeah, okay.

[A]

And then look how easy it's going to be for Megyn Kelly to just make the shift and say, you know what? Tucker Carlson's still plenty successful. They haven't been able to ice him out. They haven't been able to destroy Candy Owens. And so maybe it's in Megyn Kelly's interest to just finally figure out. Out and say that, well, maybe I just need to learn about Israel and what's all the controversy about anyway? You know what I mean? She'll be just one of us in no time. You know, it's just like I always say about Donald Trump, once you figure out that it makes no sense to pacify Afghanistan, you're never going to get that wrong anymore. Same thing here, man. You. Same thing with Joe Biden being too old or Israel being this criminal, degenerate regime that our politicians all day long.

[B]

That our politicians must praise above their own country. It's just too crazy.

[A]

Go pray at their special wall and all this crap. Yeah, all of it.

[B]

Yeah. No, I said to you on the phone the other day, it's as if we lost a war that Israel won, and now we're living under their rule, like, but we didn't. But we're the superpower. They're the ones who need us. It's too crazy.

[A]

That's it. So it is. It's a new day, and I think it. Well, let's. Let's jot this down, right? It's mid to late August of 2025. Let's see how long it takes before Megyn Kelly is just. Just down with us and multiware.com every day.

[B]

There you go.

[A]

All right, we should wrap. That's been our time. I'm Scott. I do a show and I wrote some books and I'm the director, most importantly, of Libertarian Institute. I got a new project called the Scott Horton Academy coming out. You might want to look into that. He's Dave Smith. He hosts Part of the Problem. And it's too late for you to buy tickets, but he's doing standup comedy here in town this weekend, so maybe next time.

[B]

Absolutely.

[A]

And that's it for provoked it, Sam.