TRUMP STARTED A WAR HE CAN’T WIN | Scott Ritter

And so the notion that this war was foisted upon Donald Trump unwillingly is an absurdity in the extreme. This is a war that Donald Trump has been preparing for for some time and it's a war that represents the only policy option that he would embrace. Uh we now know that nuclear negotiations was never something Donald Trump seriously um you know considered when it came to Iran. the Iranians put the best deal possible on the table with their Omani interlocks prior to this conflict and Donald Trump um dismissed it in favor of war. Um so you know any notion that Donald Trump entered this conflict unwillingly is uh is absurd. This was a war that Donald Trump very much wanted, a war that Israel very much wanted. Um now what we're seeing is the uh the difficulty of taking desire and turning it into reality. um you know so we we we have a war now um one of the most important aspects of going to war is you should know your enemy and u clearly we don't know our enemy we don't know Iran we don't understand Iran all the preparation that we've been doing has been based upon superficial analysis u the the most you know obvious one of which is the notion of the rapidity or the possibility of rapid regime change inside Iran the level of ignorance about the political reality of Iran um you know we call it an Islamic republic because it is an Islamic republic but the republic implies that there's far more to Iran than simply the supreme leader that there's actually a constitution a constitutional form of government that is embedded deeply within Iranian society today and so we believe that by assassinating um Ali Kaman that this would lead to a series of events that would result in the people of the Iran in the streets and the Iranian government collapsed. We got half the equation correct. people of Iran are indeed in the streets by the millions, but they're not in the streets demanding the removal of the Islamic Republic. Uh they're in the streets uh expressing their um ardent support for the Islamic Republic. So the exact opposite has taken place. So we've already lost the war because this war is about regime change and we're not going to change this regime. Um now we come to the military aspect of it. Um and you know I think that you know we had anticipated and and actually it appears that we had factored into our military planning uh Iranian past practices of um engaging in escalatory behavior meaning you initiate a conflict Iran responds uh and then there's escalation management to until some point either you achieve your objectives or you can gracefully exit the stage or sometimes with lack of graces in the 12-day war. Uh but Iran has um you know thrown all of those calculations to the wind by engaging in massive retaliation across the board and it's something we weren't prepared for. Um and so you know as we seek to you know accomplish military objectives which are no longer attached to a viable political outcome. Remember war is an extension of politics by other means. We don't bomb targets for just the sake of bombing targets. the targets we are bombing in Iran are supposed to uh generate reactions that are conducive to regime change. We now know the regime isn't going to be changed. So there's no reason to be bombing Iran except that now we're stuck in a war where we have to bomb Iran. Uh to what conclusion? We don't know. But it's not going to be regime change. Um but the bombing is not going, you know, linked to uh Iran's retaliation. I think we we have a bombing campaign that's supposed to achieve political uh results and we have the Iranians retaliating um in a manner that we weren't predicting. So we we have military campaigns that are out of sync and we can see this in the how the United States has responded. uh after initially saying that this was a campaign that was going to go on for uh days or maybe a week or so uh within two days United States is talking about we have to change things because they conf were confronted the fact that Iran's massive retaliation put the um the uh ballistic missile interceptor stockpiles at risk and if you lose the ability to intercept missiles you lose the ability to survive in war and so now we had to you know readjust that campaign and now we're recognizing ing that an air campaign may not achieve the results we wanted and people are talking about a ground campaign. Um so it's the United States and Israel that seem to be um scrambling to come up with a military solution to the problem that they have created and so far they don't seem to have the solution. The Iranians on the other hands are committed to this existential war of survival. um you know the notion that having you know started off by trying to decapitate the Iranians and to destroy Iran and suddenly you have President Trump asking the Italians to make a phone call to see if there would be a ceasefire. Uh Iran will accept no ceasefire. Uh this war ends either with the total destruction of Iran or the total um uh elimination of the American presence in the Middle East. Well, in the fog of war, of course, propaganda plays a big part and on both sides, no doubt people are giving um you know, various uh figures. The latest figures I'm picking up in about Iran and that the the civilian casualties may well be up above 1,000 now already. Uh the Americans of course are not admitting as much and the Israelis never admit to casualties. Um but what we're actually seeing in real time of course is wave upon wave maybe 13 14 waves of Iranian missiles hypersonics which are uh clean getting through it seems as though the David sling and the the the Iron Dome and the THAD systems that were there in place first of all have uh have actually betrayed the Anglo Zionist well the Zoarabs the Arab monarchies but even when they're trying to protect Israel they don't seem to be that effective. What's your assessment of the the defense mechanisms that the the US deployed uh to protect their main uh their main asset there, Israel? >> Well, we already know that it's uh insufficient to the task. U we we know this because of Operation True Promise 1, Operation True Promise 2. We know this from the 12-day war, Operation True Promise 3. Um you know, and there's been no advance in technology that changes this reality. I mean, putting if you have a weapon system that's inadequate to the task, um, whether it's Israeli made or Americanmade, simply deploying more of these weapon systems doesn't change the fact that these weapon systems individually or collectively um are not capable of um preventing Iranian missiles from striking the targets that they are uh seeking to strike. And so, you know, this this campaign never hinged on the ability to uh intercept 100% of Iran's missiles. The hope was that uh you could intercept a certain percentage of them. Uh but that the uh air campaign would be able to suppress Iran's ballistic missile launch capability. Um and what we're seeing right now is that uh that hasn't been the case. We have seen a reduction in uh the number of missiles being fired, but that just may be Iran um adjusting to the realities of a long-term campaign. Um you know, pacing themselves, so to speak. But uh you know, so far the Israelis and the Americans have not shown um an ability to prevent Iran from launching. And then once Iran launches, of course, there is no defense capable of stopping 100% or even anywhere near close to that uh Iran's missiles from uh striking their desired targets. >> So the the the Israelis themselves continue their air sorties and they are still trying to knock out uh Iranian uh offensive capabilities, but that's clearly not working that well. What we seem to also be picking up is that the evaluation and assessment of munitions production by the US seems to be hugely flawed. There are some people who are saying that actually uh America can't produce mass weaponry the way perhaps Iran could. For instance, I think on ordinary uh bomb makers, the standard kind of bombs, they say there's one factory in Poland. So all this weapons making has been outsourced to corporate companies and the the actual uh Pentagon or the American military itself doesn't necessarily directly control how much they can produce and I think Trump called in uh some of these uh these uh weapons merchants to see if they could increase the production. So that that's another indicator that they've made some serious miscalculations there. I mean what if their their munitions run out basically? Well, the munitions will run out because we uh we haven't been producing the munitions to the uh the degree necessary to sustain a conflict like this. But, you know, this isn't the first time that this problem has emerged. We've run into this problem in the proxy war against Russia and Ukraine uh where Russia's engaged in a war of attrition uh with Ukraine and and Ukraine's allies. Russia has geared up its defense industry to be at a war level of production. Uh producing missiles, missiles, missiles, missiles, bombs, bombs, bombs. But um we in the west haven't done the same. Um you know, we we do everything on the cheap. Uh you know, it's not Donald Trump or the Pentagon that uh that builds bombs. It's uh defense industrial corporations and they build bombs not on a whim. They build bombs based upon contracts, >> right? Uh and you know when you're at you know they have a defense industry geared right now to a certain level of production meaning they have a finite number of production lines and and they have a you know a definite cap on production capacity to expand that. Uh you can't just say build more. You have to have them build more capacity. That means that you have to build new factories, new production lines. You have to hire new people. This is very expensive. And you know, we aren't thinking in the long term. For instance, when we provide weapons to Ukraine, we're thinking, you know, this contract is done. We think that every time we supply weapons, this will be the one that pushes Ukraine over. But we're in a war of attrition. So what we should have done from the very start is invest in the expansion of our defense industrial production cap capabilities. But we haven't done that. So now we've depleted our resources supporting Ukraine, especially when it comes to high-end items like u you know ballistic missile interceptors. Um and now we have this expansive conflict in the Middle East where we're just burning through uh capacity and we have no ability to regenerate this capacity. um you know there's a finite number of interceptors c that can be produced and we're consuming interceptors at a rate farther rate greater than we can uh build them even even when we talk about increasing capacity um you know the numbers aren't going to change until 2030 last time I looked at the calendar it's 2026 um and so we're we're not even going to begin to you know if we invested today we're not going to see the we're not going to reap the benefits of that till you know 3 to four years down the road, which is too late. >> Well, it also seems as though the the trajectory of this war, if it's not resolved by the the missile technique or the aerial battle, and no war is really won with with simply uh aerial dominance, whether it's through ballistic missiles or whether it's through air power. I I that's as a novice, I kind of know that. So and and we've you've clarified that actually regime change isn't possible because Iran has a very uh deep command and control structure with layers upon layers and very currently of course uh electing the new supreme leader which seems to be a process which is going to go on. So no matter how many supreme leaders you kill the the system and the the establishment will remain with exactly the same ideology and the same commitment to sovereignty. So the next part of the game plan, one would have thought I I guess from the the Israeli perspective especially would be ground operations. Now the Americans don't seem to have more than 25 or 30,000 troops around the the the the Zoarab monarchy monarchies or stationed around that region. Um the also they also uh do have what they do have of course is uh proxies. You and others have often pushed uh what I think is a fact that ISIS is their proxy. The likes of al-Qaeda ISIS and HTS and Jabat Nusra you know HTS Galani that fraternity are also moving. There was a release of a lot of ISIS prisoners up in the the northern Syrian areas in Kurdistan. And there's a there's a there's a temptation, isn't there, perhaps that they could commit these kinds of proxy forces. First of all, is there any chance of that kind of war kicking off? And what would be the impact of that in the region? >> Well, first of all, let's just break it down. Uh, Israel has an army. It's not very good. Um, we see that right now as they struggle in southern Lebanon against the Hezboll, the ground force that is chewing up the Israelis. I think six Merkova tanks have been destroyed so far. the Israelis are just being wiped out. Um, and so the notion of the Israeli army somehow breaking free of the uh southern Lebanon trap it's built for itself and being available for, you know, operations far removed from there. So, Israel can't support that. They logistically can't support that. Their troops aren't that good. Uh, they don't know how to fight that kind of war. So, we can eliminate Israel as a source of uh troops. the United States. Um, when you say 25,000 troops, these aren't troops. >> They're not combatants. I see. In traditional sense of the word, um, these are support personnel. These are communicators. These are logisticians. These are okay. >> Um, intelligence people, they're not frontline combatants. We don't have 25,000 troops that could go on the line with weapons and move. Um, those troops are far removed from the problem. we um you know we would have to massively reinforce um our our c our capacity in the Middle East by hundreds of thousands of combat troops that currently are sitting at their bases in the United States not prepared for deployment. Uh we've allowed our we being the United States have allowed our military capacity to project um serious military power to degrade. back in 1990 1991 we could deploy 750,000 troops because we were prepared to deploy 750,000 troops and by 2003 we could deploy 200,000 troops but that's all the capacity we had left uh today we we can't project more than 50 60,000 and that's just not enough and it would take forever for us to mobilize these sources so the United States isn't going to be providing boots on the ground so now we have to look to proxies um let's let's forget about ISIS because what we know about ISIS is that it's community- based. Um ISIS is strongest where they have communities where they are able to source uh their recruits. There's a reason why uh ISIS thrived in Syria and that's because in the eastern Syrian deserts uh you had u tribal groups that uh were susceptible to you know um radicalization by uh you know the the Wahhabists or the Salafists, right? Um but they're not able to, you know, we saw when they expanded into uh Iraq as they moved through Mosul and headed down through Tunit into Baghdad, uh they ran into population groups that just weren't um you know, primarily Shia population groups that cannot be radicalized by ISIS. And if ISIS can't take root in the community, ISIS has no chance of surviving. So I don't believe there's an ISIS threat to Iran. Um there is a Kurdish threat to Iran. There is a Beluch threat to Iran. There is a mujadin alulk threat to Iran. There is a limited monarchist threat to Iran. There's other the l the Azeris and others have uh groups but um these groups have never worked collectively and um individually they're not capable of anything other than being the localized u menace. And I believe as we see Iran is already taking preemptive action against the Kurds in uh in in northern Iraq uh to ensure that they won't be able to uh get up to any uh you know malfeasants. So um again this is just another aspect of the plan that is falling apart. Uh we're running out of options in terms of the trouble we can cause in the region. And uh turning my attention to the naval aspect, there was a lot of talk and a lot of visuals of uh the various warships, three in total that eventually ended up parked in and around the the Arabian Sea. Uh and uh it the latest reports, conflicting reports, uh indicate that Iran did have a go at one of these warships or at least the the battleships that surrounded it. and uh the Abraham Lincoln I believe it was and it pulled out it pulled back that what truth is is there on what's the reality about those warships are they involved directly in firing on on Iran or are they just simply uh allowing their aircraft to to launch from their on sources across across the Iranian uh air paths >> remember the uh the purpose of a carrier battle group is not to uh get in a hand up uh knockdown dragout fight. It's a >> it's a weapon system deped to deploy project power from the sea to the shore. Um one of the ways you defend an aircraft carrier is to keep it out of harm's way. Uh that's why you have aircraft that can launch at a distance. So um you know what did people want? The United States to sail the Abraham Lincoln right off the shore of Iran and say here we are sink us. Um no that's not how it works. We uh we carry battle groups of survival because we have um you know operational methodologies that take advantage of the fact that it can move in the open sea. We don't want the enemy to know where we are uh and we can surround it with ships that uh provide you know concrete rings of uh of protection from any ballistic missile attack etc. Um so the fact that the Abraham Lincoln keeps moving is just proof that that's what we do in a military operation. uh there's some uh reason to believe that uh because of Iran's uh you know uh area denial weaponry missiles and drones etc that Abraham Lincoln has been operating at the extreme range of its capability to make sure there's enough distance between it and Iran to provide an additional layer of security right >> um >> but you know so that's that but also remember carrier battle group isn't just about the embarked air wings on the aircraft carrier but the um the the the also the weaponry that exists on the um on the ships that are part of the battle group ships and submarines um you know that carry cruise missiles and uh the these ships have been launching uh their Tomahawk cruise missiles against targets in Iran as well right >> um I I don't see any evidence that um the Abraham Lincoln was struck or damaged or had their combat operations uh you know uh detrimentally impacted uh they have been attacked and you maneuver away from the attack. This is just what you do. Um >> the Iranians last night reported that they did hit an American destroyer in the Indian Ocean that was uh replenishing underway. Um so far I haven't seen any proof of this, but um you know it does indicate that the Iranians continue to actively target the American fleet. Um this is just the reality of war. And the other area probably that I haven't touched on of course is the neighbors. I mean the Islamic Republic of Iran specifically targeted US bases around Qatar, Kuwait, even I think uh Saudi Arabia and there have also been oil fields that have been hit uh deliberately or inadvertently and there's others who are saying there are false flags in Saudi Arabia certainly and now there are rumor rumors going around that Saudi Arabians are going to respond as well. That connection I mean Iran was loathed to to fight any of its neighbors. I think that tactically they didn't want to create that sort of bad blood. But once once the US is there with its bases and it uses those bases for attacking Iran, uh it's it's standard practice that you're going to get hit. And will do you think this drag in these these what I call Zoarab monarchies into direct warfare with Iran themselves? >> Well, first of all, uh this is a war of existential proportions. Um, we need to remind your audience, I guess, that uh the United States and Israel assassinated the supreme leader of Iran on the very first blows, Ali Kane. They attempted to take out the entire leadership. The goal and objective of this campaign is to eliminate the government of Iran, to eliminate the Islamic Republic. So, from the Islamic Republic standpoint, there's no reason to hold back. Uh, because this is a war of existential proportions. The last thing the Iranians will want to do is engage in a conflict that simply allows the United States and Israel to pummel Iran, then have a ceasefire, and then 5 months later, the conflict begins again with the other side able to replenish their resources. Iran continuing to be weak. Iran understands that this is it. This is the last conflict. Um, and so their goals and objectives are likewise existential for the United States and Israel. The Iranian leadership has said, "This is it for Israel. We finished them now." Um, and from the United States perspective, Iran is seeking to evict the United States from the region. How do you evict the United States? You destroy the bases from which they operate from, and you make it politically um unviable for these Zoabist entities to uh continue to have a strategic relationship with the United States. You do this by destroying the bases and by uh punishing the nations. And these nations almost get they all have something in common. They get the vast majority of their uh economic wealth from um oil and gas resources. And so Iran will be targeting those production. They've made it clear that not one barrel, not one um you know metric ton of uh of oil or gas will will leave the Middle East. um uh that they are going to strangle to death those nations who have supported the United States until those nations change the way they behave. Um this is the the war that we're in. And uh you know the goal here isn't to have a you know to to to bring an end to this conflict with America still in the Middle East. The goal here is to evict America from the Middle East. The goal here isn't to let Israel continue to labor under the pretense of somehow they're going to use the Abrams Accords and compliant subservient uh Gulf Arab states to create greater Israel. The goal here is to break the back of the Gulf Arab states to ensure that they never again embrace uh an alliance with Israel, to isolate Israel, to weaken Israel, to eliminate the greater Israeli project, to liberate the people of Palestine. Um, I mean, even as the Iranians are being pummeled, they've made it clear that they continue to believe and support the notion of a free and independent Palestine. So, Palestine's back on the burner. Everybody's ignoring it, but the Iranian goals and objectives of defeating greater Israel and the American uh imperialistic presence in the Middle East um includes concluding this conflict with a free and independent Palestine. So, this is truly a war of existential proportions. Now you mentioned the uh the Gulf Arab states maybe getting involved in uh military action. What a joke. What an absolute travesty of a joke. >> Saudi Arabia has been bombing on Ansella since 2014 and they've lost. United Arab Emirates has been attacking Ansella since 2014 and they've lost. So what now? These two nations who could not defeat Ansalla are suddenly going to turn their military might to Iran. Um they have nothing to offer. what more F-15s dropping more bombs on targets that aren't impacting the uh situation, bring it on because all Iran will do is then ratchet up the pressure. If Saudi Arabia wants to lose the totality of their oil production capacity, bomb Iran. If the United Arab Emirates wants to see every aspect of their energy production capa capability eliminated, bomb Iran. Um, and I think that's where we're at right now. The Iranians, uh, you know, there's the old meme of the honey badger. Um, you know, when they say the honeybger doesn't give a damn. Well, Iran is the honeybadger. It just doesn't give a damn anymore. If you want to fight, they'll fight. This is a war to the death. This is not a war of convenience, a war with limited uh, you know, goals and aspirations. This is literally a war of existentialism. Iran is fighting for its survival and it will take everybody down in this fight. Iran isn't fighting to lose. They're fighting to win. and they know what the weaknesses of their enemies are and they will continue to exploit those weaknesses. So again, I don't know what Saudi Arabia expects Iran to do. Quiver in fear. Um, no. Iran will destroy Saudi Arabia, destroy Saudi Arabia, and they will destroy the United Arab Emirates. Uh, and you do that by strangling them economically. And Iran has a plan. Saudi Arabia doesn't have a plan. Right now, they're making phone calls through intermediaries to the to the Iranians saying, "Please, please, please, just let us drop a couple bombs on Fish Island or we'll drop it off the coast of Chabahar or we'll pick an empty building. Let us do something to save face." And Iran said, "No, it's too late for that. Drop a bomb on us and we'll take it all out." >> Well, we remember from the Well, you'll remember and those who are seasoned uh military experts or those who lived out the time remember the 8-year war. We remember how Saddam Hussein was sponsored by the West and uh and the Arabs as well, the Zio Aarabs to attack Iran and over 8 years that war took the lives of at least a million Iranians and probably the same number of Iraqis. But Saddam used chemical weapons again made by German uh manufacturing companies and small and sanctioned by the West. they affected maybe some something like a 100,000 uh Iranian troops directly and I think the number goes into a million that were actually indirectly affected. That was a that was a sort of a a kind of horrific use of uh you know a weapon of mass destruction which is illegal. Do you think that this war, given that Israel also has a Samson option, that once it's clear that Iran can basically, you know, win the war, uh, through the tactics that you've described, uh, do you think there's with the psychopaths who are in charge over in Tel Aviv and with Trump being under the under the thumb of the the the Zionist lobby, one assumes, or being actually fundamentally part of it all, do you think that they'll go to that extreme? Are we looking at a situation where we could go that far? And and I I have to mention China which has been supportive of Iran, increasingly supportive practically I think. Uh where do you think what's your prediction in terms of how this could uh could could pan out regarding that bigger issue of nukes and weapons of mass destruction? Well, you know, when uh the Iranians started the negotiations with Witoff, uh they let him know that they have 400 kg of um uranium enriched to 60%. And the calculations are that they could produce up to 11 uh atomic bombs. Um and you know when you go back to the fall of 2024 um you know there were signals coming out of Iran that uh the there were influential elements of the Revolutionary Guard Command and even within the theocracy that were saying that Iran must produce a nuclear weapon that the only way to deter this kind of conflict is through the possession of a nuclear weapon. The one thing, the one thing, the only thing that stood in the way of Iran going nuclear at that time was Ali Kam and his two fatwas that said, "No, we will not do this." Um, when I spoke with the Iranian president in September about this very issue, he said two things. One, Iran doesn't want a bomb, doesn't need a bomb, doesn't desire a bomb because their conventional ballistic missiles provide sufficient deterrence to anybody attacking. But two, he said, "It's against our Islamic beliefs to possess a bomb." Well, they just killed him. Ali Kaman, the one man, the only man to say no. When they formed the threeperson committee to replace Ali Kame temporarily until they elected a new supreme leader. That committee consisted of the Iranian president, the head of judiciary and a theocrat uh appointed by the assembly of experts. Yes. >> Uh that theocrat um is somebody who believes that Iran should have a nuclear bomb. >> You see what just happened there? Now we have people in Iran. Now they've replaced Ali Kam with his son and his son is likewise someone who believes that the nuclear path is now open. So be careful about playing the Samson option. First of all, it's a work of fiction. There is no Samson option. There's no formal there's no plan called the Samson option. That's an in that's an invention of Seymour Hirs in his book, The Samson option where people talk about things like this. Iran has or Israel has a nuclear weapons program, but it's clearly linked to a standing agreement with the United States on uh plausible deniability. There are things Israel would have to do before using a nuclear weapon. Um because once they use a nuclear weapon, they go into total isolation mode. It's the end of Israel. Um you Israel can't use a nuclear weapon and expect to survive. They won't. So the weapon is a deterrence. Uh and there are measures that have to go into place before they could even consider using these weapons. Um, one thing though that we may very well see is that um, you know, back in again the fall of 2024, uh, senior Iranian revolutionary guard people let it be known that Iran has all the components of a nuclear weapon deliverable by ballistic missile minus the fizzile core. Meaning they have designed a warhead. They have all the electronics involved in, you know, detonating this warhead, the safety aspects of it. They've built these warheads. Um, all they need is the fizzile core. They have six 450 kgs of 60% enriched uranium. Um they uh have been able to set up 164 centuge cascades in a number of locations. These are advanced cascades. Uh they're able to rapidly complete the enrichment in a matter of days if not weeks from from 60% to 94% which is what is necessary. they have the metallurgical capability convert the uh uranium hexafflloride into metal and to form the metal into a crude gun-shaped device which could be placed on this. So um if we want to talk about playing the nuclear arm, understand this. The way the nuclear game ends is with the complete physical destruction of Israel. The complete physical destruction of Israel. So, I think people should stop talking about using nuclear weapons because yes, we may be able to use nuclear weapons against Iran, but I'm concerned now that one, Iran will build a nuclear weapon, and two, that if you push them too far, again, we're in the game of existential survival against a nation that embraces martyrdom. Ali Kam isn't dead. He's in heaven. He's a martyr sitting alongside Ali Hassan Hussein. Most Americans don't even know what I'm talking about. If I said the battle of Kbala, they wouldn't have a clue. Um, >> there's an ideological rootage within a divine kind of set of personalities with Kbal. The Shia ideology is rooted in martyrdom. You're absolutely right. Yes. >> And so now we have a nation that has millions of people in the street mourning the loss of Alame, but not just mourning the loss, but actually crying tears of joy because Alame is a martyr. He's in heaven seated next to Moses and Jesus waiting to come back down uh with the return of the body. Um and so if you think these people are worried about building a nuclear weapon and taking Israel off the face of the earth, think again. We are headed down the path of stupidity. U the you know and it's we had a chance to make sure that Iran never ever ever built a nuclear weapon. We had a chance and we blew it. And now we're creating the conditions where not only will Iran build the nuclear weapon, but if we push them, they will use the nuclear weapon. Three nukes against Israel eliminates Israel completely forever as a viable nation state. Five nukes kills everybody in Israel. Um, and this is probably going to happen if they continue to push this route. Um, you know, and and then once nukes are used, uh, you know, there there's no telling. You say, "What about China?" Um, if the United States or Israel is insane enough to use nuclear weapons, the Chinese and the Russians both have to factor that into everything they do to include their um their nuclear posture. Russia's already having an internal debate right now with very influential people like Sergey Kardaganov saying um we need to use nuclear weapons right now against Europe right now. today we need to nuke Poland and nuke Germany because they are operating under the belief >> they are operating under belief that the United States will not commit suicide on behalf of Europe and I think they're right I don't think the United States will retaliate with nuclear weapons against Russia because to do that means we all die said the United you know American political leadership is not uh will not sacrifice Boston for Posn um and he's made a calculation but you know the the Russians have always avoided that because we had a relationship premised upon decades of arms control, non-prololiferation, mutual respect. Donald Trump has thrown that all out the window. Donald Trump is the president of the United States who tried to assassinate Vladimir Putin while he was on the phone with Vladimir Putin using 91 Ukrainian drones directed to the target a residence of Putin by the CIA. >> No, >> this is this is fact based. This is reality. And the Russians are waking up to this fact that you can't trust the United States. uh Kushner and Witco were the pre principal u negotiating uh leads for the United States with Russia. These are the same men who committed perod against Iran. You can't trust them. >> Uh and so, you know, we're moving in a direction where all of the um all the infrastructure, all the framework of a civilized society has been destroyed by Donald Trump, by the United States, by Israel and their actions against Iran. And so, you know, the world has become an extraordinarily unpredictable place. And again, I'll just conclude with this. If Israel or the United States plays the nuclear card, Israel will cease to exist in its totality. And the likelihood of regional nuclear conflict uh with Russia and China using nuclear weapons to resolve the problem sets that the United States is creating uh becomes almost 100%. And then the question is, does Donald Trump want to commit global suicide by responding? And um we don't know what the answer is on that one. I personally believe that yes. I mean, I will give you my 10 cents. Um I think Sergey Keraganov is wrong and I'll say that right now. I like Sergey Kardanov. I respect Sergey, but you're wrong. Anybody who believes that Russia can launch a nuclear weapon against Europe and won't be immediately hit by the totality of America's nuclear arsenal, you're smoking dope. we um we we just that's just the way it's going to be. So, we'll all die. Um but this is why we shouldn't even consider this. This is why Israel's continued possession of nuclear weapons is an affront to civilized society. Iran is not the threat. Israel is the threat. And the world needs to be focusing not on how to resolve the issue of Iran's theocratic succession, but rather how to eliminate this grotesque entity in Israel today, this greater Israel fantasy that's supported by American Christian Zionists uh who believe in Armageddon. I mean, hell, we have American military commanders right now telling their troops, "This is the greatest thing, guys, because Armageddon is upon us." I mean, if that's your mindset, we're we're in trouble. If you have military people who believe that they are now uh involved in a process which leads to the rapture, we're done. Because when I was in the military, my job isn't to facilitate the coming of Jesus. My job is to close with and destroy the enemy through firepower maneuver, slaughter them on the battlefield, but not create the conditions for our collective demise. Our military's lost focus. They're led by this Christian pathetic uh lunatic named Pete Hegsf um who has now empowered similarly inclined generals to command our troops. Uh we've we're we we have inched up to the abyss and we actually may have actually stepped off the abyss. We're in that moment where we are falling and we are unaware of the fact that we're falling because you know it's a long way down. So it's this peaceful perception. For instance, if you if you've ever skydived, uh you know, you jump out of the airplane, but for a while there, you're just floating. You feel like you're floating. You're not. You're falling, right? >> And if you wait long enough, you'll hit the ground and bounce and die. Um but right now, we're in that mood where we're floating and we think, "This is great. This is wonderful. This can last forever." But it won't. We don't have a parachute. We're going to hit the ground and we're going to die. That's where we're at right now. I mean, this the world has gone insane. And anybody who supports the United States and Israel against their this illegal war of aggression against Iran is promoting collective suicide. >> Well, I'm riveted. I want to carry on uh you know, mining your extraordinary sort of forensic analysis and uh the kind of bold predictions and some real clarity there and uh some frightening stuff as well and some great warnings for those out there who are warhawks who seem to think this is a walk in the park. I think Scots just outlined exactly why the war needs to stop. It's a ridiculous war. It should never have started. It has begun. Now, we all, I think, need to rally around and put pressure on our establishments. We know they're oligarchies. We know they'll still try to carry on, but it's our duty actually to stop uh the war as soon as possible because the thing that we haven't perhaps touched on is that blowback is already beginning to happen. You know, what's happening with ICE and the methodologies and the techniques that are being used. Well, you know, it's invariable that when you create a a sort of um a kind of a a bloodthirsty psychopathic war mentality at every level of institutions, you're going to get that coming back and it's going to be the chicken that's going to come home to roost. That's the other aspect. I can't add any more to what Scott has said. An absolutely brilliant uh analysis and I'd love for you to be back again, Scott. And uh thank you very much for that. Lots of food for thought. Do like, share, and subscribe to Deep Dive Perspective. Scott, is there anywhere that people can see you more regularly on a consistent basis, your own your own channel that I should mention? >> Well, what you could do is go to uh scottrader.com. It leads you to my Substack page. And on that Substack page, you'll be able to access um not just podcasts that I uh originate. I'm very proud of my, for instance, my Russia House podcast, which seeks to talk about the reality of Russia. I do Ask the Inspector. Uh, but I'm also I appear on a variety of shows and uh people are kind enough to provide me with links and then I put those links in in my um my my Substack page and then the writing that I do is there. Um there's no payw wall. So um you're feel free to go in and uh and browse as you like. If you like what you see, of course you could subscribe. That's always an option. Or you can donate. Um I'm preparing to go on a trip. I'll just make this uh I'm preparing to go on a trip to Russia later this month. Um uh an important part of this trip is focused on uh an initiative that I put forward before this war on the role that Islam can play in um resolving um this this conflict that we you know right now we tend to ignore Islam or we demonize Islam. But the fact of the matter is Islam has played a very important role in resolving some of the major conflicts of our time. Um and so this project is geared towards that. And since this conflict began, uh the people that I'm coordinating with and myself have both realized that we're on to something here that uh we need to exploit this and follow through. Um I'm an independent journalist, which means that I pay for everything. I pay for my airfare, I pay for my hotels, my food, everything. And uh which means um you pay for it if you want it to happen. And what I mean by that is this only happens because of donations. So, if you like this work, feel free to go to scottrader.com, go to the Substack page, there's a donation page, and I can promise you this, anything you donate will be used effectively. I don't squander your resources. I don't disrespect your support. Um and um you know that's