Loading summary
Transcript85 lines
- [00:04]
A
This is an advertisement for BetterHelp in politics.
- [00:07]
B
Anthony and I are always talking about power, who's got it, who hasn't. But the systems that function best are often the ones that aren't seen at all.
- [00:14]
A
It's the organizing, the remembering, the emotional temperature control. A lot of women carry that weight quietly.
- [00:22]
B
March brings International Women's Day, a celebration of progress and a reminder that progress doesn't cancel expectation or reduce the demands that are placed on so many women.
- [00:32]
A
You know, Catty, when you're the dependable one, competence can quietly turn into obligation.
- [00:38]
B
Yeah, women do so much of all of that emotional labor and all of the labor that goes on behind the scenes. When everything runs smoothly, we rarely ask what the cost is. Therapy gives you room to step back from that role and ask what feels heavy and where boundaries might need to be drawn.
- [00:52]
A
BetterHelp matches you with qualified therapists through a short questionnaire. And if the fit isn't right, you can switch at any time.
- [00:59]
B
Your emotional well being matters to you, but it also matters to everyone. Everybody else in your life. Find support and feel lighter in therapy. Sign up and get 10% off@betterhelp.com Tripus that's better.
- [01:12]
A
H lp.com Tripus.
- [01:23]
B
Hello and welcome to the rest is politics.
- [01:25]
A
U.S. i'm Katty K. And I'm Anthony Scaramucci. Caddy Good morning.
- [01:29]
B
Good morning. Monday morning.
- [01:31]
A
Are you trading the market like the Trump administration?
- [01:34]
B
Caddy that what I am doing.
- [01:35]
A
Did you get short the market on Saturday, long the market last night?
- [01:39]
B
I think you trade the market and of course in the meantime you show everybody your hand, which is maybe not the best way to conduct global affairs. But there we go. Today we're recording this just as Donald Trump has postponed his threatened strikes on Iranian power plants, which everybody thought could then escalate into a big major new phase of the conflict. He was going to strike Iran if it didn't open the Strait of Hormuz in 48 hours. Anthony. 48 hours. He likes a timeline, he likes a deadline. But after what he called productive talks that the Iranians say never actually happened, he has extended his deadline. We also want to talk about the attack on Diego Garcia, the UK US military base, what that means for Europe.
- [02:20]
A
Before we get there, Kat, I have to interrupt you. So your experienced journalist, do you think those talks happened?
- [02:26]
B
No, I actually don't think those talks happened.
- [02:29]
A
Of course not. Of course. Of course the talks didn't happen.
- [02:31]
B
I mean, I think it's kind of amazing that you would have an all caps Truth social post from the President of the United States, effectively saying, because of very conductive talks, we have decided to postpone our strikes. And within minutes the Iranians come out and say, actually, those talks haven't happened.
- [02:51]
A
Katie. You know, there's two ways to spell which Katty. There's W, I, T, C, H and then there's W, H, I, C, H. Sorry to interrupt, but I have to point out that I'm, you know, I'm the chairman of the restless politics US Spelling Bee.
- [03:04]
B
Ah, you're the spelling be, I see. Yeah.
- [03:06]
A
So just letting people know that you probably don't use which in that sentence,
- [03:11]
B
in which case you are also going to say, I am pleased to announce. And then the White House cleans it up in their version of Trump's truth social post says, I am pleased to announce. So they need a spell checker and they also need a grammar checker to clean up Donald Trump's post before they put them out. So Donald Trump puts out a post, says, yep, we've had these major negotiations and now because of that, they've been so successful, we've delayed this for five days. This threat that if they don't open the Straits of Hormuz, which was meant to be by 7 o' clock this evening, we'd strike their energy plants. The trouble is the Iranians have said no, those talks didn't actually take place. Now, there are regional talks, I've been told, Anthony, there are regional talks taking place. The Qataris and the Omanis were conducting talks until about a week ago, and then in the last few days, the Turks have been managing some negotiations with the Iranians, but there have been no direct conversations, as the President suggested in his true social post, that would result in this pause. So I think, Anthony, I think it's Taco Monday. What do you reckon?
- [04:19]
A
Yes, it's definitely Taco Monday, but there's no end in sight here. So that's the thing that everybody should be concerned about, because he can't de escalate because he'll look like an absolute fool. It'll also hurt our standing in the Middle east with our allies, our existing allies. If he escalates, he's going to put us in a quagmire. So go ahead, Kattyou're in the Situation Room with him. So what would you do?
- [04:46]
B
Well, Mr. President, first of all, I would suggest to you which other members of the White House team, by the way, did over the weekend, please do not attach the deadlines to things because they are not helpful. Part of what Trump likes. He has this kind of feeling that he has the superpower of leverage. We saw it with the tariffs, we've seen it when he's interacted over Greenland. He thinks he has a lot of leverage. And the way, if you are a kind of, I don't know, I've never been in the Mafia, but let's say you were in the Mafia from the movies. The way you maximize your leverage is by saying, if you don't do this, I'm going to do this to you and I'm going to put a time frame on this, right? I'm going to put 48 hours on this, because that makes your leverage feel even, even more important. And people in the White House had told Donald Trump, please don't put a timetable on this, because then you've got set a red line. And over the last 24 hours, the markets went crazy. We saw the European and Asian markets fall down. And he woke up this morning and thought, oh, actually, maybe a deadline isn't very good. So what are you going to say to Donald Trump to do? Take a pause. As he's done, he's given himself five days to see if there is a way to get the Straits of Hormuz open. Because this is now basically what I have been told by somebody in Israel. This has gone from being a battle, a war to find uranium, to being a war to stop oil prices going to $150 a barrel. So let's see what our options are that don't involve putting American troops on the ground, but that satisfy, as you just suggested, people in the Middle east are regional allies, demand saying, listen, we didn't want this, but now you've started. Don't leave us with an angry, wounded Iran that can reconstitute itself and come back and attack us. That is the last thing we want. So now you've started it, you've got to finish it. I think he's got to actually do some listening to what the various options are that minimize the downside, because at the moment, there are no good off ramps for him. He's blown up the off ramps. So the best off ramp was a couple of weeks ago after the first few days of bombing. That's gone. And now I think he has to do some actual thinking. And. And I haven't heard a single person come up with a very good solution to this that doesn't involve the kind of messy compromise that Donald Trump has, hates having to make and having to back down and basically say, okay, we're going to do a deal with the Iranians. That doesn't get us most of what we wanted from the beginning, the regime change and the uranium, but gets us a diminishment of their ballistic missiles. I mean, I don't know, what would you be saying to him at this point? What would be your brilliant 11 day advice be?
- [07:24]
A
Well, first of all, he's not going to listen. So.
- [07:26]
B
But he's listening to something. Anthony's listening to markets.
- [07:29]
A
Well, he's trading the markets. So him and his buddies that are making money off the markets to say, hey, throw this out there, get everybody scared and then let's, let's do this other thing. And so he's manipulating the markets. And so, you know, his team will deny that, of course, but that's what he's doing. But if I did have a chance to talk to him, I would say that the Persian cultural identity is different than the American cultural identity. We're talking about a 250-year-old country versus a 5,000, 4,000 year old civilization and the eye for an eye compensation framework and structure of the way they think. I said last week that they understand him better than he understands them. And so if I did have a few minutes with them, I would tell him, listen, they're dug in, they're going to want reparations. They're dug in, they're going to want to have a toll road called the Strait of Hormuz. You've done at least a half a trillion to a trillion dollars worth of damage to their infrastructure. They're going to want to get compensated for it. Of course he's going to say that's nonsense and so on and so forth. But something has to happen. There has to be a realignment. And if we're talking very, very practically, what is that realignment? That is a de escalation. And the Gulf states working with the Iranians to, to rebuild Iran and to try to bring Iran back into the family of nations after 47 years. And so the problem with everything I just said, and this is why, you know, my heart goes out to the Israelis. You've got in the Constitution, we're going to destroy Israel. You got in the constitution, which really upsets the Gulf states. We're going to project our fanaticism and our radical Islamic behavior into your countries. And if you were sitting there with somebody that really understands that area of the world, they say, hey, these guys have been running proxy militias all over the place last 47 years, disrupting all of us. And one thing that our national Security guys here in the United States really don't like is the truth. Gatti. So let me tell the truth to the people listening. We spent trillions of dollars in Iraq, decimated Iraq and Iraq became a satellite country to Iran. And we increased the Iranian influence in the region after two decades of war. But I want to talk about something else, if you don't mind, cuz I'm a little bit of a scatterbrain. I got a call from Mark Rutte's trainer. You know Mark Rutte? Yeah. So his trainer called me over the weekend.
- [10:04]
B
I imagine he's in good. Mark Ruta's in good shape, right?
- [10:06]
A
Yeah, Mark looks like he's in good shape. But the train just letting me know that the squats are going to continue. KATTY K. Okay, so the heavyweight squats.
- [10:15]
B
Yeah.
- [10:16]
A
Because the ass kissing of Donald Trump has absolutely no bounds.
- [10:20]
B
Right. Just keep going. So he's got to be strong. You mean he's got a good, very good glutes and quads.
- [10:26]
A
He's like, he's like an American baseball catcher. He can get down there.
- [10:29]
B
Okay, so this is getting disgusting. But anyway, Monday morning, it's 9:30. Do we have to do this at 9:30?
- [10:36]
A
I have seen bullshit in my life, but I am calling a flag on this dude, okay. Because he's ridiculous. Caddy. I watched him on the CBS Morning show yesterday and then I got the call from the trainer afterwards saying, yes, the ass kissing is going to continue on the de.
- [10:54]
B
Escalation. Escalation. What are the options? Okay, so the options now are that the Iranians agree to open the Straits of Hormuz, but they're going to try to maximize what they can get from that. Right. They're going to say we want compensation, we want no more strikes against us. Obviously there's a whole list of things that they would like to be able to have in exchange for allowing global traffic and oil through. I think the question if I was sitting in the Situation Room and maybe this is a kind of rear view mirror question, but one of the questions I would have for the President is how did we get this so wrong? Once again, America has waded into a conflict in the Middle east thinking a bit like Vladimir Putin thought going into Ukraine, that it would all be done and dusted in three days and that this was going to be exactly the same situation as Venezuela. You were going to give them total immunity or total bombardments and thinking that that would work and it didn't. And there are some things they got very right. The Military operation appears to have been successful purely from a target operation Mossad. There's a very good article, guys. We'll put it in the newsletter, in the New York Times about how the head of Mossad convinced Netanyahu and the White House that there would be an uprising within days if they went and attacked Iran, which obviously here we are three weeks into it and hasn't materialize. So how do we have this incredible technological intelligence where Israelis say they have the whole of Tehran wired, but they massively fail to understand the politics of the country and the people's appetite for an uprising after they've lost up to 30,000 people in the uprisings in January. So I would say to President Trump, you have to do a lot of thinking about what you know, but more importantly about what you don't know about Iran.
- [12:58]
A
See, Katty, I'm going to push back for a second and ask you the following question. The Israelis are very smart. The Mossad is very smart. Did they though, or was that a big fib to the Americans and that was a big buy in for Trump? I mean, in other words, they probably can't revolt. They don't have the arms. You can't smuggle the arms into a surveillance state like that. And even though 80, 85% of the people don't like the regime, you're really not going to be able to go after the RGC who's killing tens of thousands of protesters at whim. And you and I know, and we've reported on this, they were hiring Iraqi mercenaries to come in because some of the army officials didn't want to kill their own citizens. So the Israelis knew this. I mean, I'm wondering if there was some misinformation.
- [13:42]
B
I've been told that that reporting is very accurate from people in Israel who were formerly in Israeli intelligence, that actually it is likely that the head of Mossad went to Bibi and said, we think that the regime is close to collapse and we need to give it a nudge.
- [13:58]
A
Okay, so they got it wrong. You think they got it flat out wrong?
- [14:01]
B
I think they got it wrong, but I think they got a whole load of other things wrong. I remember a conversation I had recently with Senator Angus King, actually in the context of Ukraine. But how America, the American military is formidable. We've seen that. And American intelligence can be very good, but it's not very good on analysis around a country's will to fight. They got it wrong in Afghanistan. They overestimated the Afghan army's will to fight. They got it Wrong. In Ukraine, they underestimated the Ukrainians will to fight. And now they've got it wrong again in Iran, where they've underestimated the Iranian government's will and ability to carry on inflicting pain on two great militaries. And where is the supreme Leader? How much do we know about the state of his health? How are they managing to launch these missiles? How much more drone capacity do they have? How deep is the uranium? If they went on to, if the Americans went on to Kharg, how much planning has there been for oil smoke attacks that would harm American soldiers? The ability of the Iranian regime to respond for three weeks? The fact that the Iranian people have not risen up for the last three weeks and look unlikely to do so, I think also generates a whole load of other questions about how good American and Israeli intelligence really is. You can have the city wide. It doesn't mean you necessarily understand everything. And that if I was sitting with Donald Trump in the Situation Room as he game plans the next three weeks, I think that would be a big factor. He's got to know what he knows, but he also has to know what he doesn't know. And I'm not sure he knows that. Maybe because he's not interested, Anthony. But at some point he has to have a come to Jesus moment about what he doesn't know in order to get the best possible off ramp that there is. Right.
- [15:50]
A
Let me just chime in here from a Wall street perspective because when I was calling around and just so you know, I didn't really talk to Mark Rutter's trainer, but.
- [15:59]
B
Oh, didn't you. I thought he had your own speed dial.
- [16:02]
A
No, that was a little bit of fake news on our podcast. But I did call around, talk to a lot of my buddies on Wal. And so the most probable, this is how Wall Street's reading the situation. The most probable outcome is a mild taco situation where we retreat, we de escalate and we declare this a cosmetic victory, that the Iranians have been degraded, et cetera. I think he's gonna say that the nuclear program was set back, the Navy eliminated, all of that stuff.
- [16:33]
B
The kinds of things he said over the weekend.
- [16:36]
A
Yeah, exactly. But I think what's going to happen, which is something I want you to react to, and this is what my buddies on Wall street think, is that the Saudis are going to lead a regional reconstruction initiative with capital flowing back into Iran. No one's going to call it reparations, but the Saudis are going to say, okay, we're going to use our infrastructure funds and our investment funds to help rebuild. We've got to get the straight open. It maybe doesn't fully reopen on dollar terms, which is a weakness for the Americans. Okay. They've been selling oil through the strait using yuan denominated transactions. But I think that there's a moment here, Katty, and I hate to say this, and I want you to react to it, where America's standing in the region has been weakened on a number of different fronts. And so I'm not saying we're a paper tiger because obviously we got the strongest military. But in terms of how we can use the military in the region, once again, we're not getting to the exact mission objectives that we would like. And you say what?
- [17:45]
B
Well, I think at the moment, Anthony, here we are, whatever it is, three weeks in, right. It's certainly the case that you have to distinguish between battles and wars. And America can win battles, but it hasn't won the war. And this is where I think it's interesting what you and I are both hearing from the region, which is a fear that America will start this but not finish it. They didn't want them to start it, but now they're worried they won't finish it because of America's own pain points. And when I say that Donald Trump has revealed his hand, I mean, maybe he's just playing the markets, but he's certainly shown the Iranians something. He's given the Iranians information about where his pain point is, and they now have leverage over that. And the region recognizes that. I mean, the asymmetry of how much damage Iran is able to cause given how degraded its military is compared to the might of the American and the Israeli militaries and how little pain both the White House and the American public are prepared to suffer. And this is something, you know, other countries have known since Vietnam, right. That there's not much tolerance here for that. And that is why America looks diminished. I mean, that was why for so long after Vietnam, America didn't want to go into other conflicts because it didn't want to look diminished around the world in the way that it had been. And I think if Donald Trump does what you're suggesting, which is some sort of fudge now and calls it a victory in all caps with bad punctuation and bad grammar and bad spelling on his truth social, how many people, Anthony, are going to believe that it's a victory just because it's in all caps? Zero.
- [19:32]
A
Oh, yeah, of course. I mean, 90% of the Republicans are with him. I mean, it's a fascinating time in America where he can do whatever he wants and they're with him. We're for forever wars now. We're not for forever wars. He's the man that can move the goalposts on a lot of people.
- [19:47]
B
But no one's gonna believe that he's won. Nobody. The Republican Party's not gonna believe he's won. The American public isn't going to believe he's won just because he says it. He's used to being able to say things and people buy it as true, but I don't think in this case he's gonna be able to do that anymore.
- [20:03]
A
In September of 2024, he lost the debate to Kamala Harris. He came out of the debate, he went on Fox News and said he crushed her. Right.
- [20:11]
B
And you and I have found that in our series. Right. All through his history, he takes a loss and he turns it into a win. I'm just not, I think it will be harder this time around. Yeah, don't you? I mean, do you think people are gonna be sitting there saying, okay, he says it's a win and so it is a win.
- [20:24]
A
So here's something I'm worried about. And again, I would like you to react to this. There was a great article in the New York Times, front page Sunday paper about the divergence of goals between the Americans and the Israelis. And we'll put that, of course, in our newsletter. Put a link to that in our newsletter. But the scenario that I'm the most worried about is where Netanyahu decides that the US Drawdown window is closing and therefore he's got to move unilaterally and perhaps existentially and perhaps they strike infrastructure, civilian infrastructure, they go super hard at the regime and this leads to a accidental or maybe premeditated escalation of the situation. And so then the hardliners really get entrenched. Oil goes to 150. And this is out of the hands of Donald Trump. And so meaning Trump wants the taco, but Bibi Netanyahu does not want a taco. He wants to hit them harder. What do you think of that scenario, Katty? Is that likely or is that possible?
- [21:25]
B
I've been skeptical of the idea that Donald Trump somehow surrendered agency over this at the start of the war to Bibi Netanyahu and that Netanyahu came into the White House, what, and strong armed Donald Trump? I don't really buy that. I do think that the, as far as I know. And I'm told the New York Times reporting that Mossad presented an option which was attractive to Netanyahu and Trump of regime change being possible. I think that's true. But in the end, Trump decided to do this. And Trump has shown, I mean, he is the one that said to Netanyahu, okay, you know, no mass on some of the strikes that you're doing around energy installations both in Iran and on South Pas. Now, he says he didn't know about the attack on South Pas. He did, but he has said to them, you don't do it anymore. And then. And the Israelis have listened. Do the Israelis and the Americans have different objectives here? Does Netanyahu and Trump have different objectives? Yes, they have different objectives. But I do think that Trump still has. If he wants to exercise it as he showed over Gaza in a way that Joe Biden didn't show, he has clout there. And if I was sitting in Israel, I would be very worried about the fact that Joe Kent, the official from the National Intelligence Agency who stepped down, is on a PR tour of MAGA World, and not even just MAGA World of the Washington Post and is being interviewed everywhere with a message that is very anti Israeli. If I was in the Israeli government, I would think that would concern me that he is getting so much traction in the country and that Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens and Megyn Kelly are just waiting to blame Bibi Netanyahu. Are already blaming Bibi Netanyahu for this war because they don't want to blame Donald Trump. But I don't see a world where Donald Trump couldn't control or contain Israel if he wanted to. You think he could be in a position where he says, no, we are stopping now. We are de escalating. The military campaign is over. We've done a deal to get the Straits of Hormuz open and Israel carries on with its military campaign.
- [23:41]
A
Yeah, I think it's a risk. I think Netanyahu wants to stay out of jail. He knows that the war keeps him in power. I think he's played a hand very aggressively in Gaza as it related to Hamas. And I think he feels like this could be his last opportunity to do systemic damage to the Republic of Iran. And so I think it's a risk. I don't think if you're sitting in the Situation Room with Donald Trump, you can't say that that is not a risk. And someone's got to get to the Israelis and say, hey, calm down. You know, there's another super nuanced opportunity here, Katty, that I just want to address for people. It would require a lot of diplomatic sophistication and perhaps even some domestic political courage by the president and that would be to acknowledge even indirectly that the straight access is both a financial and a military issue and that, guess what, we're better off with a diplomatic solution. Okay. Now this would also make the Democrats laugh because they would say, well, that's exactly what Obama was providing for the world in 2015 and 16. And oh, by the way, you're making fun of the pallets of cash, 1.3 billion, but you just gave them a $14 billion benefit by unsanctioning their oil.
- [25:03]
B
The irony is not lost on any Democrats.
- [25:05]
A
But I want to say this to people because I want them to really listen to how important it would be to have the right type of leadership in America. Because if you could get to the table and somebody like Donald Trump, who was a deal maker could decide that a negotiated settlement is a better political story than a military withdrawal. Okay. Which again, is not impossible. And you got the Saudis involved and you said, okay, we're going to have a financial agreement, not going to call it reparations. We're going to open the strait. We're going to sideline the militarism of the Israelis because we're going to get access to the uranium in exchange for all of this, your regime is going to stay. We're going to get access to the uranium because it's in your constitution that you want to kill people and we can't let you do that. And we'll bring you, you're bringing your oil back onto the markets. And again, I'm not saying that that's going to happen, Katty, because of the way Trump's ego is and his behavior. But I'm saying, well, and also you've
- [26:07]
B
got another factor there, which is do the Iranians agree to this? Right. How much can the Iranians extract for doing that deal? Because they feel they're winning this at the moment just by the fact that it's still going on.
- [26:18]
A
Yeah. And also, don't underestimate the Russians here. The Russian variable is underappreciated by many. Russians are currently benefiting enormously caddy from the elevated oil prices. And guess what? They have every incentive to keep the current temperature up because it's distracting people from the Ukrainian war and it's also giving them a lot of money and bolstering their treasury. So, you know, Russia and China are involved here. I think China, frankly, has been the most disciplined actor. If we were just looking at this, they've got the maximum benefit and they're maintaining maximum deniability.
- [26:54]
B
Okay, we're going to take a break and come back and talk about the attack on Diego Garcia. Anthony and I have slightly different points of view on this about how significant it is. And is this the thing as the Israelis are suggesting that is a game changer and could get Europe more involved in this conflict.
- [27:14]
A
Welcome back. So, Caddy, let's talk about Diego Garcia. And I'd like you to tell people what's going on there, what your opinion is, and then I'd like to give my opinion.
- [27:25]
B
Okay, so there was an attempted targeting of Diego Garcia. It's a joint US UK military base, long way away down in the Pacific. Two ballistic missiles were fired towards the base. One of the missiles failed mid flight. The other one was intercepted by American interceptors. It's a target because it is home to almost 2,500American personnel. It has supported US military operations right from the Vietnam War all the way through Iraq and Afghanistan. It's incredibly well located. So the question is, the two things that I think we should talk about in terms of this attack is one, it shows that Iran has missiles that can travel a long way. Diego Garcia is 4,000km. For those of you still living in miles time, that is two and a half thousand miles in America from Iran. Iran had only ever fessed up to having missiles that would go half that distance. 4,000 kilometers puts Paris, London, Berlin, you name it, Vienna, all in reach of a missile attack from Tehran. And that's why people were interested in this. Since the attack on Diego Garcia, Keir Starmer has said that there would be more access to UK bases to support this operation. But they're not getting more involved than that. It's just a question of having some more access to bases. And the Israelis have come out and said basically that this makes Europe much more vulnerable and Europe needs to wake up to the threat from Iran. That is where we are today. This attack happened on Friday, by the way. Overnight. Friday. But you were texting me over the weekend to say that you thought this was very important.
- [29:19]
A
I do, but I want to go to your thoughts and your reporting. So the Europeans are like, that's not a big deal. It may not even have been the Iranians. Rudda said he wasn't sure if that was Iranian missiles.
- [29:30]
B
Rudder's trainer is not happy with it. Okay, so after you texted me, I reached out to a few people in Israel and in Europe, I reached out to the Brits, too, but I didn't get much from them.
- [29:43]
A
And, Katie, not to interrupt, but the Israelis say it happened. The Iranians say that it was a false flag and it came from Israel. So there's a lot of disinformation.
- [29:52]
B
Yes, there is some confusion. Most people seem to think these were Iranian missiles, but there's some confusion about how old they were and whether they were modified missiles that actually would not have much chance of ever reaching a target. So military people are still trying to assess what the actual missiles are. What I've heard from Europeans is that there are a lot of questions about the age and the qualities of these particular missiles and that it does add energy to a debate about procurement, defense procurement in Europe, that Europe is weak on air defense systems, and that this will increase demand for air defense systems because they have to wake up to the idea that there could be a threat. But I was told pretty firmly by, I spoke to about three or four people who understand Europe and Iran and the US who told me that this single event won't change the European calculus on how much more to get involved or not in this war, because it's only a single event and because the domestic politics of getting involved in this war are just too toxic. And this one attack is not going to change that. So the one thing I do think we should look at is it was that tweet from Eyal Zamir, Israel's military chief, claimed these missiles were not intended to hit Israel. Their range reaches the capitals of Europe. Berlin, Paris, Rome are all within direct threat range. So are the Israelis trying to say to the Europeans, guys, you need to wake up, because the Israelis would like to have more European involvement because they want this war to be expanded. They want it to go on. They want more support for Israel. They don't want to be the one shouldering the burden, but also they want this to continue. So I think there's a lot of questions about why the Israelis said that. I don't think there are many questions about whether this is going to be the thing that suddenly makes the French and the Germans and the Brits say, oh, my God, we had a massive intelligence failure. We're terrified that they might strike us next, and so we're going to get involved in this war in a more substantial way. But are you hearing something different?
- [32:08]
A
Well, no, it's not that I'm hearing something. I just. If I were them. So George Kennan, who was a very famous diplomat, he was the deputy ambassador in The Soviet Union during the Second World War.
- [32:20]
B
Shortly right after it, the architect of containment.
- [32:23]
A
He was the architect of containment and he wrote a 10,000 word cable. He signed it Mr. X. He said, we got a huge problem. These people are aggressive. They want to expand. This is the precursor to the Iron Curtain and the collapse of Eastern Europe into Soviet satellites, etc. And it was a big alarm bell that went off. I think that people will think I'm exaggerating, but I don't think I'm exaggerating. This is an alarm bell that has to go off in NATO because NATO was originally designed to protect against Soviet aggression. And then in the 1990s, NATO was like, okay, this is great. Poland's now in NATO. It'll stop Russian tanks from rolling into Poland and we're going to have some of the Baltic states, et cetera, be part of NATO and we're going to sort of contain the, the Russian Empire from re emerging again. But this is different now. Now you're fighting a potential theocracy in the Middle east that again is your sworn enemy. And even if those missiles can't hit London, if I were in London and part of NATO, I'd be like, okay, one, how am I going to close this missile gap immediately? Number two, how are we going to harden the southern flank which includes Turkey, Cyprus and Italy? And then I would be like, we got to have an intelligence review of what we're doing because we're missing a lot. Gatti, because if you're right about the Mossad, and the Mossad got this wrong, they told Bibi and Trump they're going to collapse and there's going to be 85% of the country is going to revolt and you're going to have full on regime change. I think we're getting a lot wrong.
- [34:00]
B
The previous head of Mossad said the regime will not fall because of an outside strike. So there had even been a dispute between the heads of Mossad about the likelihood of this happening. I think you're right that this is going to prompt a look at procurement, but I don't think this is going to suddenly do perhaps what you had suggested, which is get suddenly all of the Europeans to think they have to be more involved in this particular war. I'm not seeing that at all.
- [34:34]
A
Right, yeah, well, no, I accept that. I accept that the Europeans after being excoriated by Trump, Greenland being threatened.
- [34:42]
B
Not just that they don't see. I think even aside from that, yes, I think those things have pissed them off. But I think even Aside from that, they would not be interested in getting involved in this war.
- [34:54]
A
I just think that this is a big deal. Katty. It's not. You know, Article 5 was for Poland and Eastern Europe. We ended up using it as it related to the war in Afghanistan. But I think the narrative has to change as it relates to what is going on in the Middle East. And he's not going to get NATO's assistance and he doesn't deserve NATO's assistance. And I have said this publicly, even though I'm an American, I don't want NATO involved with this because I don't want this level of escalation because you're going to then bring in the Russians and the Chinese and we're going to get the full on World War Three. And I don't want my young children to have to go through World War iii. I think we've got to be smarter and more diplomatic and more nuanced than that. But I'm just saying if I were in NATO, if I were Mark Rutta, I'd be like, hey, we got to figure this out because they can reach us now. And we've also learned that some of the THAAD technology, the Patriot technology, the ABM technology with the cluster bombing and the hypersonic missiles, some of it is behind the curve. And also, you know, guess what, the Ukrainians may have better anti drone technology than we do. And so a lot has been learned from this conflict and I'm just worried that we don't be nonchalant about this or negligent about what we've learned and start to take measures to be more defensive.
- [36:26]
B
Okay, before we go, Anthony, I wanted to get your latest thinking on this Monday of where Donald Trump's head is because I do think this is a consequential moment and I've been told that this is a kind of pivot point in the war. Yes, he's delayed for five days, but really all he's done is put us back to where we were on Saturday. Do you think he is seriously contemplating putting American troops into Carg island or the other three islands in the strait or onto that northern shore? Or do you think he is now definitely looking for a route out that involves some sort of messy compromise with the Iranians and that he can still call victory and that he wants to do that within this five day timeframe? Is this the last week of the military campaign or do you think this still has a chance to escalate?
- [37:23]
A
So I don't even think there's one of the Best memes ever on the Internet. You know, Sun Tzu, the Art of War, they had Trump in, like, the garb and said, son, Trump, if I don't know what I'm doing, then the enemy doesn't know what I'm doing either. And it's true. He has no idea. And that's the flummoxing part for the Pentagon and the diplomats and everything, is that he's such a narcissist that he's going one way and then he'll flip the script and go the other way, because he wants everybody on their back heels like this. He wants everybody like this, and. And he wants to be the guy that makes these decisions. So I don't even think he knows directly where he's going. What I don't like is what I said to you a few weeks back. I said, you know, the aircraft carriers are heading that way. He's gonna strike Iran. Well, if you've got 4400 Marines in the Marine expeditionary forces from two different assault carriers heading that way, he's likely gonna use them. I would say it's 60% chance Marines
- [38:27]
B
are a fighting force. They're not a peacekeeping force.
- [38:30]
A
Yeah. And I would say there's 60% chance that he uses them just to flex and show people that he can use them, because that's his personality. Now, the flip side is he's under pressure and he loves money, and God only knows what's going on behind the scenes. Who's calling Wyckoff and Kushner and saying, hey, we got a huge gravy train coming here. We set you $400 million plane. Billions of dollars are going into your coffers from different things. We put a half a billion dollars into World Liberty Financial, and we're building gigantic skyscrapers that no one needs. Putting Trump's name on it. Knock it off. Because, you know, you like money more than you like serving the American people, so. So we'll have to see how all of that unfolds.
- [39:14]
B
That's the dilemma.
- [39:15]
A
Yeah, we have to see how all of that unfolds before we figure this out.
- [39:18]
B
The two forces that are weighing on him is such a good way of putting it. And the great thing about Donald Trump is if you don't like what he's saying now, go and take a nap, chill out, come back in half an hour, because he'd have said something completely different. And that's the other thing we're learning during the course of this war. He is literally capable of saying two opposite things in an hour.
- [39:36]
A
He loves money caddy more than he loves war. And these are some very smart people in the Gulf and I guarantee they're fighting a way to line his pocket right now, okay, to get him off of the target of too much of an escalation right now.
- [39:52]
B
Except those. I'm also hearing those same people in the Gulf want this job done properly. Having started it, they want it done properly, whatever that means.
- [40:00]
A
But what does that mean, Kadi? Because you have a 5,000 year old civilization. These countries in the Gulf are 50 to 60 years old in terms of their sovereignty and The Americans are 250 years old. And you're fighting people that believe in Hammurabi's code, okay? So to me, I wouldn't have done it. You're in it. Find a negotiated peace to get out of it and de escalate the situation. Because there's a tremendous amount of opportunity in the world for peace and prosperity and we gotta be way more nuanced than we have been. But the problem again is, remember the narcissist in chief, he is running things. He's going to take people in lots of different directions before this is over.
- [40:48]
B
Nuance. Donald Trump's superpower. Okay, we're going to leave it there, guys. We are back for our founding members. I hope you really hope you enjoyed our series on what made Trump Trump. We're going to have a question and answer session for our founding members this week which will release on Wednesday. But it's all going to be focused on Trump and his relationship with, with the Clintons and the Trump money machine. And we're going to do a deep dive into some of Trump's relationships. So join us for that. If you'd like to become a founding member, you can sign up@therestispoliticsus.com and we'll be back with more news and updates on the war later this week. Thanks for joining us, everyone.
- [41:34]
A
Thank you, guys. See you next week.