0:53

All units repeat your post

0:55

assignment. Yeah,

1:40

baby. It's episode 258

1:43

of Ask the Inspector

1:45

on April 25th, 2025. Jeff

1:48

Norman in Wilmington,

1:50

North Carolina, along with Larry

1:52

C. Johnson in Del Mar, New York. How

1:54

are you tonight, Larry? Nice shirt.

1:57

Yeah. You know, Larry doesn't have a

1:59

corner on the

2:02

Tommy Bahama

2:04

shirts. I agree with Scott. He

2:08

probably does have a corner on

2:10

the on the shirts, but I I'm

2:12

stealing his style today. So Why not

2:14

why not? You

2:17

had a rough day today. Let's tell

2:19

the audience you drove from New York

2:21

City where the area code is two

2:23

one two To Delmar where the area code

2:25

is five one eight in rush hour

2:28

traffic on a Friday You must be stressed

2:30

out. No wonder you had to wear

2:32

a shirt to kind of put you in

2:34

a relaxed mood Yeah, I

2:36

had to I had

2:38

to listen to Oh gosh,

2:40

who's is margaritaville? Oh

2:43

Jimmy Buffett Jimmy Buffett, you know,

2:45

I was just chilling with Jimmy

2:47

on the way up here You

2:49

know just relax and try not

2:51

to kick out my windshield and

2:53

strangle drivers and cars and I

2:55

Tell you the biggest problem were

2:58

motorcycles They you know, you're in you're

3:00

in tight traffic as it is. I mean,

3:02

it's just packed but it's moving And

3:04

these motorcycles are coming

3:07

through and they're, you know, millimeter distance

3:09

away and they're zipping through at high speed

3:11

and they're just jolting you the whole

3:13

time. You know, the

3:16

last thing I need when I'm trying

3:18

to get home on time to make the

3:21

show on time is to have a

3:23

motorcycle run into my car. And yet I

3:25

would say easily a dozen times,

3:27

I thought for sure a motorcycle was

3:29

going to hit me the way that as close as

3:31

they came to, to my car.

3:33

So, you know, Anyways, I'm

3:35

good. I'm okay. All

3:38

right. Was it a

3:40

fruitful trip? I think you had

3:42

some meetings in New York. Yeah, we're

3:44

I mean, I

3:49

don't know if we mentioned it to

3:51

the before on here, but we're coming

3:53

up on the 40th anniversary

3:55

of what was known as

3:57

the Starbridge conversations between Russians

3:59

and Americans that

4:02

began in 1985 with

4:04

Vladimir Posner and

4:07

Phil Donahue. They did

4:09

the first one

4:11

and there's an attempt

4:14

to revive that

4:16

for June 18th and

4:18

I've been asked

4:20

to help come up

4:23

with a solution

4:25

to the problems and

4:27

so doing some

4:30

meetings, a

4:32

lot of back and

4:34

forth and such,

4:36

but it's pretty exciting.

4:39

I hope it goes through. We

4:42

were going to do something like this

4:44

last year. If you

4:46

remember, we're taking nasty inspector on the

4:48

road to Russia, and each of the

4:50

cities we were going to, we were

4:52

going to fall in on A

4:57

studio where we were going to

4:59

broadcast and have live audiences and

5:01

have this interaction and and stuff

5:03

in the US government Pulled my

5:05

passport and shut that down I

5:08

Don't know what the US government

5:10

will do to try and stop

5:12

this iteration of it, but hopefully

5:14

they'll let it go through It

5:16

should be exciting. You know if

5:18

we can't different US government now,

5:21

right? Look what's going on where's

5:32

my passport hey where's his

5:34

passport yeah where's steve where's my

5:36

passport where my documents where's

5:38

my computer um no it's the

5:40

same government because they haven't

5:42

done anything um you know sorry

5:44

i um my world sort

5:47

of revolves around well i'm not

5:49

saying let him off the

5:51

hook scott but Doing or

5:53

failing to take action on that is

5:55

not quite the same thing as proactively

5:57

trying to stop Oh, it's the exact

5:59

same thing. Oh, yeah, cuz you don't

6:01

have the password. That's true. That's true

6:03

Yeah, for my perspective, it's the exact

6:05

same plus I want to remind Everybody

6:08

that the president on day one signed

6:10

two executive orders. It said that they

6:12

weren't going to politicize free speech And

6:14

that they were gonna undo everything Pam

6:16

Bondi put out a pair of memorandum

6:18

saying we're gonna take action They haven't

6:20

done shit All right,

6:22

so from my perspective, the Trump

6:24

administration. I'm in that

6:26

F. And until they do something,

6:29

I'm tired of hearing their talk about, we're

6:31

doing this, screw that. Take

6:33

care of Americans first. All

6:35

right? And it's, you know, this isn't like a

6:37

minor case. I was the

6:39

motherfucker they went after. All

6:42

right? The motherfucker they went after. No

6:44

one else, me.

6:47

So this is like a minor little

6:49

thing that went away. They were coming

6:51

after me to shut this shit down

6:54

to stop this from happening. All

6:56

right, now we've survived. But

6:59

no, I'm not going to let the

7:01

Trump administration out the hook at all.

7:04

You're right, especially since I was

7:06

thinking that they're not proactively

7:08

trying to stop you, but they

7:10

don't have to because you're

7:13

right. All

7:15

right. So anyway, I apologize for my language.

7:18

I want to send a shout out

7:20

to Alina and Ziad El Khoury.

7:22

They're our Lebanese friends. They've

7:24

reached out and said hello, and

7:26

they're doing well in Beirut. Peace

7:29

is breaking out all over, hopefully.

7:32

So remember the last time we talked to

7:34

them, Beirut was being bombed. So

7:37

hello, guys. I'm doing well. And they

7:39

sent me a cap with my name on

7:41

it. That's right. They sent you a

7:43

Lebanese cap. you've gone

7:45

with the us tour of duty

7:47

look but well i but i wanted

7:49

to apologize to elena and zia

7:51

for my bad language i yeah and

7:53

also why you should apologize to

7:55

larry c johnson because why the shirt

7:57

yeah you're hurting his brand are

7:59

you basically saying that larry does it

8:01

better than me okay i don't

8:03

know i'm saying that when there's no

8:05

cussing when that shirt is is

8:07

on the camera it's a no strict

8:09

no cussing policy all right let's

8:11

talk about what's going on in ridder

8:13

world There is the

8:15

weekly telegram show called

8:17

Russia House with Scott Ritter.

8:19

And this week's episode,

8:21

let me guess, it's called

8:24

The War Room. And

8:26

you're interviewing Apti Alaudinov. How'd

8:28

I do? Alaudinov. Yes.

8:32

We've done, in the

8:34

Russia House, it's a

8:36

telegram channel. We've

8:38

broken down

8:40

the different forums.

8:43

into four categories, the Russian

8:45

conversation, the war room, culture

8:47

wars, and there's a fourth

8:50

one there. I can't remember right

8:52

now. But this is definitely

8:54

the war room. Apte

8:56

Adonov is

8:58

a Chechen leader,

9:02

a man that some people say could

9:04

be in line to be the next

9:06

president or head of the Chechen Republic. He

9:10

is... I

9:12

think he actually got promoted. He might

9:14

be a lieutenant general now in the Russian

9:16

military. He commands

9:19

the Akhmat Special Forces, and

9:21

he is one

9:24

of the brains

9:26

behind Operation Botolk,

9:28

which is Operation

9:30

Flow, this legendary,

9:32

you know, incursion

9:34

16 kilometers deep

9:36

into Ukrainian lines through

9:38

a gas pipeline. that

9:41

broke the back of the Ukrainian

9:44

defenses, collapsed them, saved thousands of

9:46

lives, including civilians because

9:48

the Ukrainians were dug into

9:50

a series of settlements where

9:52

they were fully populated by

9:54

Russians. And, you know, the

9:56

Russians didn't want to go in and

9:58

do house to house fighting because, you

10:00

know, that be bad news for the

10:03

Russians. So by carrying out this operation

10:05

was extremely risky. They

10:07

broke the back of the Ukrainian

10:09

defenses. The Ukrainians were compelled

10:11

to withdraw and they've been effectively

10:13

evicted from Kursk. I think

10:15

there's, you know, the Russians are

10:17

saying, you know, 99 % of

10:19

Kursk has been reacted. There's

10:21

a couple of forest belts and

10:23

maybe a single village left

10:25

where the Ukrainians are dug in.

10:28

But the greatest Mario operation did,

10:30

tell you what, but it

10:32

was a great interview. I've

10:35

had the honor of meeting

10:37

Opti several times before this,

10:39

and we communicate. Hey,

10:42

FBI, but you guys knew that.

10:45

But yeah, there's nothing sensitive.

10:47

It's just basically exchanging well

10:49

wishes and then a request

10:52

to do this interview. And

10:54

he was gracious. We

10:56

talked about CURSE. We talked

10:58

about the campaign, and then

11:01

we got into the details

11:03

of the of the operation

11:05

itself from one of the

11:07

men who was the mastermind

11:09

and definitely the leader of

11:11

this. But it's a great

11:14

interview. It can only

11:16

be found on the Russia House with

11:18

Scott Ritter, telegram channel. Go to

11:20

ScottRitter .com, navigate in, you'll

11:22

find it, subscribe, and you'll get

11:24

to see the interview and its totality. All

11:26

right another exciting not exactly

11:29

an interview more of a debate

11:31

with Alan Dershowitz That you

11:33

record I guess about a week

11:35

ago And I think it

11:37

was released in the past couple

11:40

of days and you have

11:42

written an article about it That

11:44

is not yet published, but

11:46

we will publish it over the

11:48

weekend and it is called

11:50

dialogue and there we see a

11:53

picture of Scott Ritter and

11:55

I'm looking for Alan Dershowitz and

11:57

I'm not Oh, Ryan, look

11:59

at that. Not bad. Well,

12:02

we may have to replace the

12:04

photograph of me with me and Alan.

12:07

You know,

12:10

it's interesting. I

12:13

knew that when

12:15

I got, when

12:17

Mario Nefal's people

12:19

from 69 Minutes,

12:22

their new ex

12:24

um, production reached out and said,

12:26

Hey, we, we want you

12:28

to do this interview with, well,

12:31

they didn't say who they

12:33

said, we want you to interview,

12:35

uh, doing this debate, um,

12:37

Israel, Palestine. I said, sure,

12:39

I'll do that. And, um,

12:43

they, they said, okay, we're going to tape them.

12:45

I keep writing back saying, who, who am I

12:47

debating? Who am I debating? Who am I debating?

12:49

If I had the last minute to go, Alan

12:51

Dershowitz. I'm like, oh, yeah, Alan

12:54

Dershowitz, Harvard professor, big

12:58

pro -Israeli guy. I was taking on

13:00

the Palestinian side. So I started

13:02

doing the research into this due diligence.

13:04

I went back and looked at

13:06

interviews that he had done, debates he

13:08

had done, the position he took, and

13:11

then how people were debunking

13:13

him or attacking him or

13:15

replying to his points. And

13:17

I had to make a

13:19

decision to I

13:22

had to make a decision. Do

13:24

I want to

13:27

win over the

13:29

crowd? You

13:31

know, like a gladiator

13:33

in the Coliseum. I

13:35

go in there swinging. I could

13:37

arm myself with the crowd

13:39

pleasing, you know, rebuttals and shout

13:42

over Alan and call him

13:44

a liar and a genocidal maniac

13:46

and this, that and the

13:48

other thing. And

13:50

who knows, maybe I'll get

13:52

some more ex followers and maybe,

13:54

you know, maybe people will

13:56

follow me on Telegram and wow,

13:58

that'd be cool. But then

14:00

I was looking at the headlines

14:03

and Palestinians are still dying. And

14:06

all these people that are trying

14:08

to score points against Alan Dershowitz, they

14:11

haven't stopped the killing at all. In fact,

14:13

in many ways you'd say they made it worse.

14:16

And if I'm going

14:19

to call out

14:21

the death of

14:23

Hinderajab and tens of

14:25

thousands of other

14:27

children and innocent civilians

14:29

and say that

14:31

they matter, their lives

14:33

matter. Aren't

14:36

I a hypocrite if I

14:38

simply engage in conduct that

14:40

doesn't end the killing and

14:42

just furthers it? Is

14:44

it my job really to help

14:46

create a path towards conflict

14:48

resolution. And

14:51

I thought that maybe the

14:53

best thing to do would

14:55

be to engage in a

14:57

dialogue with Alan Dershowitz, not

14:59

a gotcha debate. It

15:02

would not be pleasing to some

15:04

people because they want to shout him

15:06

down. And when he says things,

15:08

they want to spend the whole time

15:10

debunking what he says, as

15:13

opposed to I answered the question that

15:15

was given to me. and then Alan

15:17

answered the question it was given to

15:19

him. And next thing

15:21

you know, we had

15:23

a very respectful dialogue,

15:26

a conversation. We didn't agree. Anybody who watches

15:28

it, well, you know, you're not gonna

15:30

say, oh, you know, Alan

15:32

caved in or Scott caved in.

15:34

No, we disagreed, but we

15:37

were respectful and we did find

15:39

points of commonality, you know,

15:41

where we both agree that the

15:43

killing needs to end. And

15:46

the most amazing thing happened at the end

15:48

of the interview. You see,

15:50

I could have gone for the cheap

15:52

score, pleased the digital mob, you

15:54

know, and say Alan Dershowitz sucks. And then

15:56

we, the show ends and Alan walks home saying,

15:59

Skyrim is a son of a bitch. And

16:01

I come home and go, yeah, I kicked his

16:03

ass. The crowd should be pleased with me. But

16:06

instead, Alan said,

16:08

this was the

16:10

most constructive. conversation

16:13

he's had on this issue

16:15

since October 7th. He wanted to

16:17

continue it, and therein lies

16:19

the key, ladies and gentlemen. If

16:21

we're going to find

16:24

a path off of

16:26

this incessant killing, this

16:29

off ramp has to

16:31

be built upon a conversation,

16:34

a dialogue between the opposing

16:36

sides to find commonality of purpose

16:38

that doesn't happen in a

16:40

vacuum. And I'm

16:42

not saying that Alan and I are

16:44

going to be the ones that

16:46

do this, but if we can continue

16:49

this dialogue, we set a precedent

16:51

for the kind of dialogue that has

16:53

to take place. So I'm very

16:55

proud of this, of this debate. It

16:57

pisses the hell out of so

16:59

many people. It's not even funny. I

17:01

mean, the comments. on

17:03

X and on telegram and you know

17:05

I'm apparently you know the the

17:07

worst human being ever because you know

17:10

I did not debunk Alan immediately

17:12

and shout him down and all that

17:14

kind of stuff but all I

17:16

would say to the people that um

17:18

that wanted that is what have

17:20

you done to save Palestinian lives that's

17:22

my challenge to anybody you know

17:25

first of all you weren't invited to

17:27

the debate let's keep that in

17:29

mind if you guys were so god

17:31

-awful good If you were the voice

17:33

of Palestine, why weren't you invited? And

17:37

if you had been invited

17:39

What would you have accomplished

17:41

simply a repeat of past

17:43

performances because that's that's all

17:45

that would be is Continue

17:48

to you know Recycle old

17:50

performances that have accomplished nothing

17:52

continued to divide Palestine and

17:54

Israel and end up with

17:56

dead Palestinians and dead Israelis

17:58

and nothing uh nothing

18:01

happening um so anybody who's critical of

18:03

this i i respectfully say go

18:05

to hell um respectfully say go to

18:07

hell i think that may be

18:09

the first time that phrase has been

18:11

used well i'll use it again

18:13

respectfully go to hell um what are

18:15

you doing to save palestinian lives

18:17

for all the people out there that

18:19

want to spit on ellen dirschwitz

18:21

and curse ellen dirschwitz what are you

18:23

doing to save palestinian lives not

18:25

a damn thing For all you demonstrators

18:27

out there right now, how many

18:29

Palestinian lives have you saved? Not a

18:31

single one. I'm

18:33

basically calling you out

18:36

and saying that what you've

18:38

been doing may have

18:40

had a purpose. May have

18:42

had a purpose for

18:44

the first 15 months when

18:46

we were engaged in

18:48

an existential struggle. I

18:53

was with you. I was on

18:55

the side of Palestine, on the

18:57

side of Hamas. I was hoping

18:59

for a Hamas victory over Israel.

19:01

I believe that Israel, as it's

19:03

currently manifested, has lost legitimacy. I

19:06

think Netanyahu is a genocidal maniac.

19:10

But then the conflict ended. We

19:12

had a ceasefire. Why?

19:15

Because nobody was winning. I

19:17

mean, Hamas achieved important victories, but

19:19

they didn't win. They

19:23

they survived and by surviving they

19:25

win a political victory, but the

19:27

for the people of Palestine Nothing

19:30

they're dying and then the conflict

19:32

starts up again And now there's

19:34

all you all you pro -Palestinian

19:36

people are doing is repeating the

19:38

same tactics You know what the

19:40

definition of insanity is? Doing

19:42

the same thing over and over again

19:44

expecting a different result That was

19:46

a rhetorical question. I thought that was

19:48

a rhetorical question. I thought you

19:50

were asking me it for Looking for

19:52

well, you probably knew the answer

19:54

to that too. They say Einstein came

19:56

up with it. I don't know

19:58

but it's common that the you know,

20:00

and so basically The entire pro -palestinian

20:02

crowd that continues to use the

20:04

same tactics you're insane And i'm calling

20:06

you out because you're not doing

20:09

a damn thing to save palestinian lives

20:11

Every day is really bombs drop.

20:13

What are you doing to stop the

20:15

israeli bombs? We're demonstrating you really

20:17

think you're gonna get the trump administration

20:19

to change The most pro

20:21

-Zionist administration in the history of

20:23

the United States. You really think

20:25

holding hands and singing kumbaya in

20:27

Columbia is going to change anything?

20:30

It's not going to change a

20:32

damn thing. If you care about

20:34

Palestinian lives, you have to find

20:36

a dialogue. You have to open

20:38

a dialogue with the Israelis and

20:41

find common purpose. If you think

20:43

that if you believe in a

20:45

Palestinian state, right now there's no

20:47

Palestinian state emerging from this disaster. If

20:50

you want a Palestinian state,

20:52

you're going to have to reach

20:55

a compromise with Israel. And

20:57

that only can happen through

20:59

dialogue. So I'd like to

21:01

think that Alan and I

21:03

conspired, whether, I could

21:06

tell you it wasn't our original intent, because

21:08

I didn't talk to him. He didn't even

21:10

know who he was debating until literally the

21:12

moment of the debate. They went, Scott Ritter,

21:14

and you can see him go, he thought

21:16

that I was just going to be the

21:19

world's worst human being to him.

21:21

But no, I respected him. First of

21:23

all, he's a Harvard professor

21:25

and I don't know what anybody thinks about

21:27

Harvard and I guess it's over. He's

21:30

a constitutional law

21:33

expert, widely recognized.

21:36

He's intelligent. You

21:39

can disagree with his politics,

21:41

but he has a keen

21:43

intellect and it's been tested.

21:46

Quartz and you wouldn't like I don't

21:48

mean this in a disparaging way But

21:50

you know when you look at him

21:52

he kind of looks his age But

21:54

if you just heard him talk like

21:56

if he was on the radio or

21:58

something I don't think the average person

22:01

would guess I don't think he must

22:03

be in his mid 80s now. He

22:05

doesn't Yeah, that's the other thing that

22:07

very sharp. Yeah, the other thing that

22:09

pissed me off to be honest Was

22:11

the ageism and go if you're gonna

22:13

go after Alan go after his ideas Go

22:16

after his words, but when you

22:18

start calm an old man, his brains

22:20

muddled and all that stuff. First

22:22

of all, it's not true. It's the

22:25

opposite. He deserves credit. His

22:27

brain is 85. There

22:29

you go. Um, to say

22:31

that his brains fried. My

22:33

brain's more fried than his. I'll tell you

22:35

that. I mean, uh, you know, lately I've

22:37

been having little, you know, blips where you're

22:40

going. What was I talking about? He's sharp

22:42

as attack. Uh, I don't agree with him,

22:44

but you know, Here's the thing, and if

22:46

Alan and I could sit down over a

22:48

beer, I don't know if he drinks beer. I

22:51

used to. I'm just kidding. But

22:53

the thing is, I'd

22:56

like to ask him, because

23:00

he's a human being just like anybody else, how

23:03

much of his position

23:05

is the product of

23:07

constantly being attacked? Meaning

23:09

that, you know, we speak of Newton's

23:11

third law, you know, for every action

23:13

there's an equal and opposite reaction. I

23:16

believe that applies to geopolitics and

23:18

to every aspect of human existence. And,

23:22

you know, if

23:24

we were treating Alan

23:27

with respect and

23:29

having a respectful dialogue,

23:32

because what I saw was a man

23:34

who tempered his response, a man

23:36

who was Who who said, you know,

23:38

I I don't want people I

23:40

want to to stay so I want

23:42

this So now we're starting to

23:44

get common purpose if we can both

23:46

get agreement then you can start

23:48

to work and and come up with

23:50

something but what is the What's

23:52

the human reaction when you're attacked all

23:54

the time? I could tell you

23:56

what happens when I'm attacked all the time. I

23:58

become a son of a bitch And

24:01

I want to strike back. It's

24:03

only human nature. I want to

24:05

attack back. And so my focus

24:07

is no longer about reaching common

24:09

ground. My focus is how to

24:11

defeat you, to go to war

24:13

against you, to overcome your arguments.

24:17

And I imagine, even though

24:19

he's a school -trained lawyer and

24:21

has done very well in

24:23

courtrooms, supposed to be not

24:25

falling to legal traps and

24:27

all that stuff, Israel

24:30

is an emotional subject

24:32

and I have to

24:34

believe that if you're

24:36

consistently attacked over and over

24:39

again, your position hardens

24:41

and it becomes more

24:43

of a reactive posture

24:45

as opposed to a

24:47

contemplative posture. I'm

24:49

not saying I can't speak

24:52

for Alan and I don't want

24:54

to, but I would like

24:56

to believe that if we could

24:58

remove the interaction

25:00

from the boxing, the

25:02

verbal boxing ring

25:04

to, you know, a

25:07

park bench so that, you

25:09

know, a different mental approach

25:11

to the conversation. I'd

25:14

like to believe that his position

25:16

could be tempered. And I'd like

25:18

to say that if you could

25:21

find people from the pro -Palestinian

25:23

side who would stop trying to

25:25

win debates and score points and,

25:27

you know, and instead looked on

25:29

coming up with solutions, viable solutions,

25:31

realistic solutions that their position could

25:34

be tempered as well. I

25:36

don't know. Anyways, that's the purpose of the art. Well, maybe

25:38

you'll have that chance. He lives in New York, I think,

25:40

right? Do you know where he lives? I

25:42

don't know. Yeah, I

25:45

don't know where he lives. I thought

25:47

he might live in Boston, but I don't

25:49

know. Well, he's not involved in Harvard

25:51

anymore. I think he lives in New York.

25:54

All right, anyway, let's get to the questions

25:56

from our beloved audience. These are questions

25:58

that have been sent in advance. And then

26:00

towards the end of the show, Ryan

26:02

Milton will join us with some live chat

26:05

questions that come in while we're talking. And

26:16

the first question is from John C.

26:18

in Arkansas. Russia has

26:21

historical ties to Odessa, which

26:23

appears to be absent from

26:25

future peace negotiations. Is

26:27

it realistic to expect

26:29

Russia to accept its current

26:31

regained territory, meaning the

26:33

four oblasts, along with Crimea,

26:35

without the inclusion of

26:37

Odessa? Putin appears to be

26:39

pragmatic in this regard. Peskov,

26:46

the spokesperson of

26:48

the Kremlin, has

26:51

come straight out and

26:53

said if Ukraine withdraws

26:55

its forces from the

26:57

four territories that constitute

26:59

Novoi -Rosia, Kerson, Zaparizia, Donetsk,

27:01

and Lugansk, the war ends at

27:03

that point. No,

27:06

it doesn't mention there. No, Karkov mentioned

27:08

there. No, Sumi. No, Nipet -Petrovsk.

27:10

No, Mikhailov. None

27:13

of those. War ends

27:15

right then. So I don't think,

27:17

I mean, I know, you

27:19

know, everybody wants Odessa to

27:21

be part. The

27:25

amount of military

27:27

force that would have

27:29

to be mobilized

27:32

and committed to taking

27:34

Odessa would just

27:36

be stupid. Russia

27:39

has legitimate purpose for the

27:41

fight that it's in right now.

27:44

And if you can

27:46

achieve demilitarization, denazification, Ukraine

27:50

and NATO, which

27:52

were the objectives, there's

27:54

no reason to go on to

27:56

Odessa. So I don't think Odessa

27:58

is in the mix at all.

28:02

And Wittkopf is meeting, met with

28:05

Putin. He showed the clip.

28:07

just the other day. There's

28:09

a tightening. It's interesting because

28:11

Peskov's statement made it sound as

28:13

if Russia's insisting on getting

28:15

all the land back. But

28:17

the Americans appear to be

28:19

saying that Putin might be

28:21

willing to have the war

28:24

end based upon where the

28:26

troops are now and then

28:28

maybe do some exchange. For

28:30

instance, Russia holds a lot

28:32

of Cartcliffe

28:34

and they have some territories in

28:36

Sumi And that they would

28:38

exchange that you know, for instance

28:40

to get all of Donetsk

28:42

returned or something. I don't know

28:44

but there the suggestion is

28:47

that there's some wiggle room I

28:49

I suggested that before and

28:51

you know, the the pro -russian

28:53

crowd came at me and no,

28:55

no, you can't it will

28:57

never happen and I'm like, okay,

28:59

so I'm gonna buy into

29:01

the you know, constitutional

29:04

Russia as the requirement.

29:07

But

29:09

logically

29:12

speaking, yes,

29:14

Russia had referendum

29:17

and Russia declared independence.

29:20

But from the Ukrainian

29:22

perspective, this

29:25

this land was

29:27

Ukraine. And yes, Russia has

29:29

conquered some and incorporated that. But Why

29:33

should Ukraine give up

29:35

land that it occupies, that

29:38

it considers part of its territory?

29:40

So there may be some compromise

29:42

there. I don't know. I

29:45

know I've just pissed off the entire

29:47

pro -Russia crowd. There will never be compromise.

29:50

Your name isn't Vladimir Putin, all

29:52

right? So if you're saying there will never

29:54

be compromise, it's like the Iranians. The Iranians will

29:56

never negotiate. Yes, they

29:58

will. And

30:00

Russia may... Even

30:04

though Russia is winning this war,

30:06

it's a costly war. And

30:10

if Russia can get

30:12

its strategic objectives, who

30:16

knows what compromises they may make? I'm

30:18

just saying it's not as black and

30:20

white as everybody thinks it is, that

30:22

there's a... But I will commit to

30:24

this. Odessa's off the market. Russia's

30:26

not going in to take Odessa. That

30:28

just isn't going to happen. I

30:30

heard, what's his name, Mark

30:32

Ruta, the

30:35

European, is

30:37

that his name, Mark? Ruta, Ruta, NATO

30:39

Secretary General. Yeah, I heard

30:41

him today on the radio saying that Russia's

30:43

not really winning the war and the

30:45

proof of it is they just, you know,

30:47

attacked some civilians. That's not a show

30:49

of strength. If they were really winning, they

30:51

wouldn't have done that. What's wrong with

30:53

that guy? Everything

30:56

I mean But this is the

30:58

standard NATO Ukrainian thing, you know

31:00

the vast majority of civilian attacks

31:02

that are attributed to Russia are

31:04

basically Ukrainian air defense missiles that

31:06

end up hitting Ukrainian buildings though

31:08

the Russian systems. I'm not saying

31:10

that Russia is perfect You know

31:13

and mistakes could be made, but

31:15

I don't that I don't believe

31:17

the Russians deliberately target civilians. I

31:19

just don't believe that at all

31:21

and I

31:23

believe that the Russians have solid

31:25

intelligence behind their targeting. And

31:29

unfortunately, in

31:32

war, there's

31:34

collateral damage and

31:36

civilians die. And

31:39

so if you're going

31:41

to take out a gathering

31:43

of senior Ukrainian officials

31:45

where they invited family members,

31:49

family members die. But,

31:52

you know, the Ukrainians only report

31:54

on the dead lives and children.

31:56

They don't report on that 80

31:58

senior Ukrainian officials that they got

32:00

smoke. Next question

32:02

is from Miss Silo in

32:04

southeast Wyoming. Would you

32:06

care to comment on the detonation of the

32:09

hydrogen bomb by the Chinese? It

32:11

claims to generate plenty of heat

32:13

while not having the blast effects

32:15

of a nuclear bomb nor the

32:17

toxic radiation. Yeah,

32:20

it when you say hydrogen

32:22

bomb basically it's it's using hydrogen

32:24

as a fuel to replicate

32:27

You know the heat of the

32:29

Sun In a in a

32:31

fusion weapon You know they use

32:33

the hydrogen bomb you'll you'll

32:35

initiate with a fission weapon and

32:37

then it will turn into

32:40

a fusion Reaction and it's hiding

32:42

but it's a it's a

32:44

blast significant blast effect and the

32:46

heat a lot of radiation What

32:50

the Chinese have

32:52

done is create

32:54

a chemical mechanism

32:56

to consume hydrogen

32:58

and get the

33:00

heat. It's a

33:02

slower burn. Let

33:04

me give a news flash to everybody. This

33:07

ain't new. The

33:09

fact that the Chinese have

33:11

sought to weaponize it to the

33:13

extent that they have is

33:15

an advancement. We know how

33:17

to do this. So do

33:19

the Russians. And I

33:21

think the Iranians know how to do

33:24

this. It's not new. It's

33:29

there. What

33:32

is the purpose of a weapon of

33:34

this? I mean, is it

33:36

supposed to be a

33:38

fire bomb that consumes a

33:40

city and a ball

33:42

of fire? That's a terrorist

33:44

weapon because it's a

33:46

slow. you know slow burning

33:48

thing instead of the you

33:51

know boom with the pressure wave

33:53

you know two seconds slow

33:55

it burns things but nothing gets

33:57

flat nothing gets knocked down

33:59

the purpose of a is to

34:01

flatten and destroy things through

34:04

kinetic energy if this if this

34:06

was such the weapon I

34:08

mean we use thermal barracks to

34:10

generate heat and things and

34:12

we get a significant blast out

34:15

of that I

34:17

don't know what the military

34:19

application of this weapon

34:21

is, except maybe to burn

34:23

people. It's

34:25

impressive that they did it,

34:27

but this isn't a game changer.

34:30

It doesn't give them the equivalent of

34:32

a nuclear weapon or anything of

34:34

that nature. It

34:37

looks impressive, but again,

34:39

I'm just wondering

34:41

if I have a

34:44

hardened position You're

34:47

not flattening it when you

34:50

drop this weapon on it. That's

34:54

it. I'm

34:56

not too impressed because

34:58

I know that I can

35:01

say this. I know

35:03

that we know how to

35:05

do this. We've just opted

35:07

not to do it. That's

35:16

the English pronunciation. I'm not going

35:18

to try the German pronunciation Last

35:20

week I read that the Saudi

35:22

Defense Minister was in Tehran. Do

35:24

you know the details of the

35:26

talks? He was

35:28

in Tehran. I don't know

35:30

the details of the talks but

35:33

I think it's it's important

35:35

that in the context of the

35:37

United States You know flexing

35:39

its muscles and threatening Iran with

35:41

military action over its

35:43

nuclear program. And the Saudis saying

35:45

that if Iran develops a

35:48

nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia would say,

35:50

well, we need to develop

35:52

immediately our own nuclear deterrence. Even

35:56

in the context of the

35:58

defense minister, what the Saudi

36:00

Arabia met with Iran, met

36:03

with senior Iranians, having that

36:05

dialogue, open lines

36:07

of communication, making sure

36:09

there's no miscalculations

36:13

or mistakes made, this is

36:15

what's supposed to happen. But

36:18

I don't know if either

36:20

side has released a press

36:22

report that lays it out.

36:24

Maybe they have. I haven't

36:26

seen it if they have.

36:28

Maybe some of the people

36:30

that are in the chat who

36:32

follow these things they might

36:34

know and interject. All

36:37

right, John in South Carolina.

36:40

John and I had our first

36:42

lover's spat last night on the

36:44

winers, Scott. Do you know what

36:46

the topic, can you guess what the topic would

36:48

have been? What might we have disagreed about? Trump.

36:53

Nope. 9 -11.

36:56

Good evening, Jeff. You

36:58

know, because the Tucker Carlson interviewed

37:00

the congressman and that's... Hang on

37:02

a second there. You know Tucker

37:05

Carlson interviewed what's the congressman's name?

37:08

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I

37:10

know that yeah Kurt Weldon

37:12

Ron Johnson now Weldon

37:14

Weldon Kurt Weldon Kurt Weldon.

37:16

Yeah So anyway that

37:18

that topic came up last

37:20

night and John's given

37:22

me all the cliches everything

37:24

except watch loose change

37:26

John, but we still love

37:28

each other, right? Yes,

37:33

we do. And we forgot to

37:35

mention that there was thermite found in

37:37

the debris. Nanothermite.

37:40

Good evening to

37:42

your international audience, Jeff

37:44

and Scott. Scott,

37:46

my question to you

37:49

is, how do you

37:51

believe Russia will respond to

37:53

the assassination of the Russian

37:55

General Larslav Moslovish today in

37:57

the town of Balashankia? east

38:00

of Moscow just ahead of

38:02

the Wittkopf meeting. The

38:06

Russians have to do an

38:08

investigation. That investigation is

38:10

still ongoing. They

38:13

need to ascertain who

38:15

is responsible for this.

38:18

All that stuff and then

38:20

once they get the facts

38:22

put out then Russia will

38:24

take you know Actions appropriate

38:26

if Ukraine was involved in

38:28

this and every indication shows

38:31

that they were They made

38:33

a horrible mistake because they

38:35

took out a very senior

38:37

member of the Russian military

38:39

a person that's involved in

38:41

you know strategic decision -making and

38:43

The Russians can't allow this

38:45

to go unanswered. So I

38:47

believe that the Russian response

38:49

will be horrible and significant

38:51

and I believe that Ukraine

38:54

will rue the day they

38:56

ever thought that this was a

38:58

good idea. But before Russia

39:00

takes that action, they need to

39:02

complete their investigation. And before

39:04

the show came on, what I

39:06

was reading is that that

39:08

investigation is still underway. All

39:11

right, John, thanks for the call. Have a good one. All

39:15

right, we have another phone call

39:17

here now. This is like a first

39:19

time caller, and I don't recognize

39:22

this name. Are you indeed a first

39:24

-time caller? I

39:26

am not, but I've only

39:28

called once or twice before using

39:30

a different phone. This is

39:32

a new phone number, perhaps, why

39:34

you don't recognize it. That's

39:37

exactly why. Anyway, what's on your

39:39

mind tonight? Do you want to say your name

39:41

or anything like that? Your height, your weight,

39:43

anything? I will

39:45

give my name. It is

39:47

Eric. The height

39:49

and weight are extraneous, but a

39:51

healthy height and the healthy weight. Now,

39:55

if I may

39:57

move towards the question.

39:59

Yes, please. So

40:02

one of the critical

40:04

facets that I maintain

40:06

makes it difficult to

40:08

glean a practicable and

40:11

pragmatic solution to the

40:13

Palestine question with those

40:15

who espouse the pro -Israel

40:17

positions such as Alan

40:20

Dershowitz. is insofar

40:22

as the question of

40:24

Hamas and the dearth of

40:26

knowledge concerning Hamas that

40:28

this kind of ignorance undergirds

40:30

those who proffer the

40:33

position that Hamas simply cannot

40:35

play any role in

40:37

God's future and it stops

40:39

the conversation from proceeding.

40:41

In fact, I would make

40:43

the argument that Hamas

40:46

has interwoven into the plexus

40:48

of Gaza's municipality, educational,

40:50

and civil services, and anybody

40:52

who reads the Exxampt

40:54

scholarship, of which there is

40:57

an excellent amount of

40:59

by historians and political scientists,

41:01

like Khaled Hrub, Asim

41:03

Tamimi, Paola Karidi,

41:05

Yoran Gunning, all of

41:08

them through their historical

41:10

research. demonstrate that

41:12

with the creation of the

41:14

Islamic Society and Islamic

41:16

Center in 1967 and 1976,

41:19

the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood

41:21

gained a venerable

41:23

reputation for servicing the

41:26

charities, education, women's

41:28

centers, schools, and Gaza's

41:30

first university, the Islamic

41:32

University, which they built,

41:34

support from the lower

41:37

Middle class and lower

41:39

classes of Gaza and

41:41

in turn it garnered

41:43

a working class support

41:46

base by the time

41:48

then in 1987 with

41:50

the first intifada the

41:52

Muslim Brotherhood of Palestine

41:55

turned towards resistance activities

41:57

under Shaykh Yasin and

41:59

the seven founding figures

42:02

of Hamas they had

42:04

this civic Is

42:06

there a question? This is not

42:08

lecture the inspector, this is ask

42:10

the inspector. Yes, I'm turning to

42:12

the question. Don't turn, just ask

42:14

it. The

42:16

question is whether before

42:18

engaging in dialogue with

42:21

figures who espouse the

42:23

pro -Israel position, there has

42:25

to be some kind

42:27

of erudition undertaken. to

42:30

understand this kind of

42:32

municipal activity that Hamas

42:34

has undergone for many

42:36

years, for many decades,

42:39

such that they can

42:41

be accounted for as

42:43

part of the solution

42:45

rather than sidelined. Thank

42:49

you for that. I

42:51

mean, I hope you're

42:53

not suggesting that I haven't

42:55

undertaken that erudition. I

42:58

am intimately familiar with everything

43:00

you just said. I

43:03

would also remind you

43:05

that the Israelis, I

43:07

have worked with the

43:09

Israeli intelligence intimately. They

43:12

know everything you've said and more. They

43:14

know everything there is about Hamas. the

43:17

the resumes of everybody. They've been following them

43:19

since the time they were born. They've

43:22

tracked every shekel and every dollar, every

43:24

euro that's been spent, how it's been spent,

43:26

who it's been spent on. So

43:29

the notion that the Israelis

43:31

are somehow ignorant of Hamas and

43:33

must, you know, get some

43:35

erudition before they can engage is

43:37

ludicrous. There might

43:39

be people amongst the

43:42

masses that need to

43:44

better inform themselves. But

43:46

the Israelis know damn well what's

43:48

going on. And I would say

43:50

that somebody like Alan Dershowitz, if

43:53

you took the time to engage

43:55

with him on this topic, is

43:57

probably well versed in the reality

43:59

of Hamas. But

44:01

a response might be, and

44:04

I'm not saying that I support this, I'm

44:06

just throwing it out there, Gosh,

44:08

you could make the same argument about the

44:10

Nazi party in Germany, couldn't you? I

44:12

mean, they were out there feeding

44:15

people, housing people, making trains run on

44:17

time. They were sort

44:19

of the heart of German society

44:21

before they decided to invade

44:23

the world and kill the Jews.

44:27

And so the simple fact that

44:30

because Nazi Germany made Germany,

44:32

or the Nazis made Germany efficient,

44:34

doesn't give them legitimacy. That

44:37

would be the Israeli counter I think

44:39

and I think Alan Dershowitz actually suggested

44:41

that because at one point in time

44:44

he spoke about the need for elections

44:46

in Gaza and I said you're not

44:48

gonna like the result and he said

44:50

well, yes, but you know, we we

44:52

can't allow the you know the the

44:54

Nazis to You know in the post

44:56

-war the Nazis to you know to

44:58

elect people Yeah, but we had to

45:01

defeat Nazi Germany before we could dictate

45:03

that outcome Israel hasn't defeated Hamas Hamas

45:05

is there so you know,

45:07

it is an issue, but I respect

45:09

where you're coming from on that,

45:11

but I find a little insulting that

45:13

you had to go through that

45:15

big lead -up as if I didn't

45:17

know any of this, that I'm not

45:19

familiar with any of these writings

45:21

that I haven't researched that, but even

45:24

more so that the Israelis, I'm

45:26

just telling you right now, the Israelis

45:28

know every freaking thing there is

45:30

to know about Hamas. except exactly where

45:32

their tunnels are. That seems to

45:34

be problematic. But they know all the

45:36

players. What do

45:38

you think? How do you

45:40

think they get their AI

45:42

going? What powers? Something

45:46

like Lavender, which

45:49

is an AI program used for targeting

45:51

or the gospel. What powers that? When

45:53

we say artificial intelligence and the fact

45:55

that Israel has undertaken

45:57

an unprecedented integration

46:00

of artificial intelligence into

46:02

its military targeting. What

46:04

is artificial intelligence? Well,

46:07

it's basically a computing

46:09

system that's fed data and

46:11

then makes analysis based

46:13

upon the data that's put

46:15

in. Who put that data

46:18

in there? Did Hamas come

46:20

in and say, excuse me, Isra, I'm going to help you

46:22

out here. We're going to educate you on who we are

46:24

because you guys are ignorant. There,

46:26

now bomb us. No, Israel put

46:28

in that data. Israel

46:30

knows everything about Hamas,

46:33

everything. They know

46:35

all the players, they know their

46:38

family members, they can draw

46:40

it out. I've seen, I was

46:42

in Israel in the 1990s

46:44

when literally every time I went

46:46

there, Hamas blew something up. Okay.

46:51

They blew up the restaurant that I ate

46:53

in. They blew up a discotheque under

46:56

the hotel that I was in. They blew

46:58

up buses. They blew up shopping centers. And

47:01

I was working with Israeli

47:03

intelligence. And Hamas

47:05

wasn't my belly wick, but many of

47:07

the people that I was working with,

47:09

they wear several hats. And they

47:11

were working the Hamas problem, which was

47:13

an active problem. I was in Israel when

47:15

they killed the engineer, who was the

47:17

bomb maker. And I got to

47:19

talk to some of the people that

47:21

were involved in the targeting of him

47:23

and how they got into that, the

47:25

intimacy of knowledge on how to procurement,

47:27

how to get phones into there to

47:29

make sure that he got a phone

47:31

that had what needed. I

47:35

just think it's insulting. to think that

47:37

the Israelis don't know this. They know

47:39

everything. So it's not a lack of

47:41

erudition on the part of the Israelis.

47:45

It's the fact that

47:47

the Israelis and

47:49

Hamas are on polar

47:51

opposites in terms

47:53

of goals and objectives.

47:56

The Israelis aren't ignorant about Hamas. The

47:59

Israelis know everything there is to know about Hamas.

48:01

That's one of the reasons. Are you

48:03

trying to tell me? that if we

48:05

knew about Hamas, we knew all the little

48:07

warm and fuzzy shit about Hamas, that

48:09

they're actually closer to the Israeli position, that

48:11

there could be some commonality of purpose,

48:13

that they could actually hold hands and sing

48:15

kumbaya on feet. It's just the ignorance

48:17

on the part of the Israelis that make

48:19

it impossible for this to move forward.

48:22

No. The

48:24

Israelis know everything there is to

48:26

know about Hamas. They

48:28

helped create it. you know, get

48:30

involved in politics, it was their money

48:32

coming, they've been shaping it. They've

48:34

made mistakes. Of course they've

48:36

made mistakes. The whole October 7th

48:38

thing was a misunderstanding of Hamas'

48:40

strategic objectives. But

48:43

that doesn't mean that they didn't, they don't

48:45

know who Sinwar was, they don't know who

48:47

the players are, they don't know about the

48:49

Muslim Brotherhood, they don't know about the charities,

48:51

they don't know about, they know everything. And

48:53

they've been playing that. The Israelis use that.

48:55

I know this firsthand. They

48:57

have such great intimacy there that

48:59

the Israelis were able to infiltrate.

49:01

One of the things that Hamas

49:03

did early on in October 7th,

49:06

a lot of people didn't pick

49:08

up on this, they

49:10

took over the Human

49:12

Intelligence Command Center of the

49:15

Gaza Division. That's

49:17

where all of the records

49:19

are kept of all the

49:21

Palestinian informants, all the Palestinians

49:23

inside Gaza who are reporting

49:25

back to Israel. And

49:28

what happened to them? Hamas

49:30

got us to thank you very much and went out and

49:32

killed them all. But

49:34

how'd they get in there? How

49:37

did Israel penetrate by being in

49:39

shit about what Hamas is? Have

49:41

you ever put a human source

49:43

into? You'll try to

49:45

recruit a human source inside an

49:47

insular entity like Hamas, like Hezbollah.

49:49

Israel was very successful in penetrating

49:51

Hezbollah. You

49:53

don't. get inside something like that

49:56

unless you know everything. You

49:58

know all the personalities. You

50:00

know their weaknesses, their flaws. You

50:02

know what can be exploited. You know

50:04

how things operate so that you can get

50:06

them in there and they can maintain

50:09

their cover while reporting back to you. But

50:11

in order to do that, you have

50:13

to know everything. Your case officer has to

50:15

be familiar with every little aspect of

50:17

it. So the idea

50:19

that Israel doesn't know anything about Hamas is

50:21

one of the dumbest things I've ever

50:23

heard. i don't mean to be insulting eric

50:25

but come on man you you i

50:27

don't know did you write this down because

50:30

you were reading this pretty damn good

50:32

i mean uh did you you know it's

50:34

i knew he was going to be

50:36

pretentious by the way he responded when i

50:38

asked for his height and weight i

50:40

won the bet i made with myself well

50:42

i don't i don't mind pretentious but

50:44

i'm just saying that that you you clearly

50:47

took a lot of time and effort

50:49

to prepare the setup for this question but

50:51

did you take the time and effort

50:53

to actually understand

50:56

that you're just insulting yourself. You

50:59

didn't insult me. Maybe

51:01

that was your purpose to somehow let

51:03

the audience know that Scott Ritter's dumber

51:05

than dirt that he doesn't know all

51:07

the shit that you're just spewing out

51:09

there in perfect English and all the

51:11

different relationships and all this stuff and

51:14

you name the sources, the academics that

51:16

are putting forward this stuff. I mean,

51:18

goddamn, Eric, that was really impressive. But

51:20

the way you did that, like,

51:24

Scott doesn't know it. Scott doesn't understand. Neither

51:26

do the Israelis. Scott

51:28

knows it. And the people

51:30

who know it better than Scott are the

51:32

Israelis. I'm just telling you, man,

51:34

these guys are sharp. I

51:36

don't support them. I'm

51:39

opposed to them. But

51:41

if you knew anything about how

51:43

the intelligence business works, how

51:45

to penetrate organizations, and what's

51:47

necessary to do that, imagine

51:49

yourself trying to penetrate the

51:51

mafia. here in the United

51:53

States. Do you think

51:55

the FBI just goes and goes, why don't you

51:57

go in and see how close you can

51:59

get to, you know, Don Corleone? Well,

52:02

it doesn't work that way. You

52:04

actually have to learn everything there is to

52:06

know about it, how they meet, who they operate,

52:08

how they speak, what they're, everything, because

52:10

the person that has to be in there

52:12

has to be part of the system, comfortable with

52:14

the system, flawlessly engaged with

52:16

the system. And the case, the

52:18

case agent managing it has to know

52:20

all this so that they can

52:22

do, if you ask them to do

52:24

something, you have to know what

52:26

the residual impact of that is. Try

52:29

running human agents and then you'll understand

52:32

what I'm talking about. But

52:34

thank you for your question. I apologize

52:36

for, but come on man,

52:38

that was an insulting question. You know it was. You

52:41

know the way you wrote it.

52:43

Because I'm sure you were reading

52:45

from something because unless your memory

52:47

is that good then God bless

52:49

you. You're great, but you you

52:51

were You prepared this quite guess

52:53

guess who is calling back now

52:55

Eric. Yeah, do we want to

52:57

give him another shot? No,

52:59

I mean we could but then what we

53:02

turn this into the Eric show No, I'm not

53:04

trying to talk you into it. I just

53:06

wanted to give you let you know, okay He

53:08

can he can write write a comment and

53:10

then Ryan will look at it and And

53:12

we can, we can put it

53:14

in, but I think from now on,

53:16

I'll just say, because some people

53:18

say, well, why not? Because he

53:21

had one shot, Eric. One

53:23

shot. You called. That

53:25

was your shot. All

53:27

right. You fumbled. So what? You want

53:29

to come now and get a second shot? We

53:31

already put too much time on it. All

53:33

right. But this would be a lesson to everybody

53:35

else who calls in. I don't mind

53:37

fair questions, but don't try to lecture me.

53:40

OK. It isn't going to work. Okay.

53:42

And another lesson is the

53:45

next time I ask for

53:47

your height and weight, don't

53:49

be stingy with that information.

53:52

Don't ask their height and weight Jeff, that's not

53:54

fair. No, it's not. All right. I

53:57

think somebody else is

53:59

calling now, but I thought

54:01

I saw somebody calling. Yeah,

54:03

here it is. It takes a minute

54:06

to show up. Hey

54:08

there, please lower your computer. And

54:10

you're on with our favorite weapons

54:12

inspector, not mandatory, but if you want

54:14

to reveal your height and weight,

54:16

that would be fine. Hello.

54:22

Good evening. I'll

54:24

reveal my name. My name tonight is Don

54:26

Quixote. And I'll

54:28

get to this question

54:30

for Scott Ritter. I

54:32

was talking to a

54:34

friend who is very

54:37

enthusiastically pro -Trump. of

54:40

Trump, she voted for him. And

54:43

I played an excerpt from

54:45

Scott Ritter's Ask the Inspector

54:47

two weeks ago, where he's

54:49

talking about the threat of

54:52

nuclear war. And he mentions

54:54

that the New START treaty

54:56

will expire next year in

54:58

February. And after that, there

55:00

could be a nuclear escalation

55:03

and even nuclear war. And

55:05

my donkey hody idea that

55:07

I talked to my Trump friend

55:10

is to get as many

55:12

people as possible to call

55:14

the White House and leave comments

55:16

so my question to Mr.

55:18

Scott Ritter is if you want

55:20

people to I mean if

55:23

people call the White House and

55:25

leave a message for Donald

55:27

Trump Well, what should we

55:29

say? We don't want nuclear war.

55:31

We encourage you to do

55:33

what? develop a

55:37

treaty with Russia, a nuclear

55:39

non -proliferation treaty? Yeah, that's

55:41

the question. When we

55:43

send in the comment, ask Donald Trump

55:45

to do what? All right, you can

55:47

listen to made sense. No, that made

55:49

sense. And you can listen to Scott's

55:52

answer on your computer. Thanks for calling. Look,

55:58

the most immediate thing, right now

56:00

we have a new START treaty

56:02

that's not being implemented. Both sides

56:04

admit that it's, I mean, There's

56:07

no engagement on it. And that's thanks to

56:09

Joe Biden. But

56:13

both sides are respecting

56:15

the CAPs, 1 ,550 deployed

56:17

nuclear warheads. Understanding that

56:19

we have thousands of nuclear warheads on each

56:21

side that are in reserve. And

56:23

if we eliminate the CAP

56:25

of 1 ,550, almost immediately,

56:28

you're going to see the

56:30

numbers go to 3 ,000, 4

56:32

,000, 6 ,000. We're just going

56:34

to shoot up. Because

56:37

that's what militaries

56:40

do when there's

56:42

no restrictions. And

56:45

you already hear the talk in

56:47

the Trump administration about the need

56:49

to strengthen our nuclear forces, et

56:52

cetera. And

56:54

the Russians will do the same thing. So

56:56

what we need to do is keep that

56:58

cap in place. That's the first

57:00

thing. And you do that by extending the New

57:02

START treaty. There's an

57:04

ability right now for the United

57:06

States and Russia simply just to

57:08

say, we're extending the New START

57:11

Treaty. And then

57:13

that buys you time to begin

57:15

negotiations to come up with

57:17

a better treaty vehicle that keeps

57:19

these caps or starts reducing

57:21

these caps, starts to incorporate new

57:23

weapon systems. The Russians have

57:25

developed several strategic systems that aren't

57:27

that. don't fall under a

57:30

new start in the United States

57:32

would like them to fall

57:34

under. The Russians understand

57:36

that, but there has to be

57:38

a treaty vehicle for this.

57:40

The Russians, they can't use new

57:42

start. So there has to

57:44

be new negotiations and Biden wasn't

57:46

willing to do that. So

57:48

we need Trump to basically engage

57:51

with the Russians on this

57:53

issue. So, you know, that's the

57:55

simple take is extend the

57:57

treaty and then work on making

58:00

a follow on treaty that

58:02

does what everybody needs it to

58:04

do, keep the caps and

58:06

bring in these new weapons systems

58:08

that currently fall outside of

58:10

it. I would also

58:12

encourage Donald Trump to revisit

58:15

the INF Treaty, and

58:17

at least from the perspective

58:19

of Russia and the United States,

58:22

even if you can't get the

58:24

treaty itself up and running,

58:26

that might be too hard to

58:28

do. Through executive order,

58:30

you can prevent the

58:32

deployment of INF systems into

58:34

Europe, and you can

58:36

get the Russians to make

58:38

certain commitments about keeping

58:40

their systems out. Although the

58:42

cat's out the bag there, the

58:45

Russianic missile is an INF

58:48

system that's already been used in

58:50

combat. And the Russian said,

58:52

thank you, Donald Trump, because of

58:54

you, we now have this

58:56

weapon system. you

58:59

know so but but something needs

59:01

to happen with the with the INF

59:03

treaty um because that is an

59:05

inherently destabilizing force and then we have

59:07

to have a broader discussion with

59:09

the Chinese but the Chinese have said

59:11

that they're not even interested in

59:13

um engaging on arms control until Russia

59:15

and the United States sort out

59:17

their issues they're not going to get

59:19

in the mix of that so

59:21

Russia United States have to come up

59:23

with a framework and then bring

59:25

the Chinese into get all

59:28

three involved, and this is all

59:30

doable. But the very first thing

59:32

is stop the arms race, and

59:34

you stop the arms race by

59:36

extending the New START Treaty. All

59:39

right, I have a different answer. I think

59:41

you should leave a message as follows for

59:43

the president. Make sure Scott

59:45

Rader gets his passport back,

59:48

tell him America's sweetheart wants that.

59:50

Let's take another phone call now.

59:52

Good evening, Iran, with our favorite

59:55

weapons inspector. What's your name and

59:57

what's your social security number? I

1:00:00

won't give away the

1:00:02

social. Name is Kamal. I'm

1:00:04

on your channel as

1:00:06

a nexus gamer. I

1:00:08

was curious. There's been talk

1:00:10

with with some other channels

1:00:12

that I follow like Justin

1:00:14

Apolitano about their potential for

1:00:16

being a civil war in

1:00:18

Israel or some type of

1:00:20

conflict, internal conflict. Since Israel

1:00:22

is not a signatory member

1:00:24

of of nuclear regulation or

1:00:26

nuclear weapon regulation How if

1:00:28

this should happen and Israel

1:00:30

should be stabilized? How

1:00:33

will we be able

1:00:35

to account for their

1:00:37

inventory their nuclear weapons

1:00:39

inventory? Thank you Scott, and I

1:00:41

bought your book by the way Scott.

1:00:43

Thank you, sir a highway to hell. Thank

1:00:45

you Thank you There

1:00:49

is a precedent, South

1:00:52

Africa, not a signatory

1:00:54

of the NPT. They had a

1:00:56

covert nuclear weapons program, actually

1:00:59

produced seven or

1:01:01

eight bombs. And

1:01:05

when the apartheid regime

1:01:07

recognized that it was

1:01:10

going to be... eliminated

1:01:12

and replaced with a Black majority

1:01:14

government, they said that we're not

1:01:16

going to allow nuclear weapons to

1:01:19

be in the hands of a

1:01:21

Black majority government. So they opened

1:01:23

up their program to the International

1:01:25

Atomic Energy Agency, who came in

1:01:27

and supervised the dismantling of their

1:01:29

program. I

1:01:31

would imagine that that's what

1:01:33

would happen if there was internal

1:01:35

conflict in Israel if they

1:01:37

if it got to the point

1:01:39

where Israel was because you

1:01:41

know even Alan Dershowitz talked about

1:01:43

this you know there's not

1:01:46

going to be a Palestinians because

1:01:48

we're never going to give

1:01:50

our nuclear bombs a person I

1:01:52

agree what Israel would do

1:01:54

in a situation like that is

1:01:56

that is Turn their program

1:01:58

over to the IAEA and have

1:02:00

it dismantled and have all

1:02:02

of their nuclear weapons Disposed of

1:02:04

counted for And

1:02:06

ultimately that's what I believe is

1:02:08

going to happen. I hope there

1:02:10

isn't a civil war in Israel

1:02:12

because again, that leads to death

1:02:14

and destruction and instability and there's

1:02:16

no guarantee with the nuclear armed

1:02:18

nation what happens in the chaos

1:02:20

of, you know, in terms of

1:02:22

accountability of nuclear weapons. But

1:02:26

I do believe that ultimately

1:02:28

Israel will have to give

1:02:30

up its nuclear weapons capability

1:02:32

and it will be done

1:02:34

by Israel. joining

1:02:38

the NPT and submitting

1:02:40

its nuclear program to

1:02:42

the full investigatory capabilities

1:02:45

of the IEA, just

1:02:47

like South Africa did,

1:02:49

and then the weapons

1:02:51

would be, you

1:02:53

know, there'd be an accounting form and

1:02:55

then they would be destroyed, dismantled, and

1:02:58

the IEA will do a... of

1:03:00

the program, get a full understanding of

1:03:02

the program to make sure that

1:03:05

they've accounted for everything that there's not

1:03:07

any covert missiles or covert warheads

1:03:09

lying around. But ultimately, I believe that

1:03:11

that's the direction that this is

1:03:13

going to be going. Next

1:03:15

question is from Kamalito in

1:03:17

Saudi Arabia. Kamal

1:03:20

leaves a lot up to you. This is

1:03:22

like poetry. You can interpret it as

1:03:24

you wish. Is

1:03:26

America's fate

1:03:28

sealed? Any way out?

1:03:31

How? It's

1:03:33

like a haiku almost. Is

1:03:36

America's fate

1:03:39

sealed? These

1:03:41

are the set up

1:03:43

questions because everybody tends to

1:03:45

listen to me and

1:03:47

I'm very critical of the

1:03:49

United States government and

1:03:51

its policies. And

1:03:53

I've also recognized that American

1:03:55

hegemony is not good

1:04:00

for America or for the

1:04:02

world and that, you know, we're

1:04:04

moving from American singularity to

1:04:06

a global multipolarity that means that

1:04:08

the American role will be

1:04:10

diminished. And they,

1:04:12

and so they say, ah, Scott Ritter

1:04:14

is about the end of empire, you know,

1:04:16

bring down the American empire and all

1:04:19

this kind of stuff and, you know, anti

1:04:21

America. Guys,

1:04:24

I'm pro America. i'm

1:04:27

100 pro america for all the people

1:04:29

that say scott ridder is an american

1:04:31

and you think that's an insult fuck

1:04:33

you you know it's the greatest compliment

1:04:35

you can give me i am an

1:04:37

american i love my country i'm proud

1:04:39

of my country we've made a lot

1:04:41

of mistakes but we are capable of

1:04:43

doing good things we have more potential

1:04:45

to do good than any other nation

1:04:47

out there uh we just haven't lived

1:04:49

up to that potential which is why

1:04:51

i'm very critical um but you know

1:04:54

what was the first part is america

1:04:56

what um Can America be saved? Is

1:04:59

our fate sealed? Our

1:05:04

fate is to continue to be a

1:05:06

world leader, whether you like it or not.

1:05:08

I'm sorry, America is still one of

1:05:10

the greatest powers out there. We

1:05:12

compete everywhere. I'd like us to compete

1:05:14

better, and I'd like us to compete in

1:05:17

ways that were demilitarized. I'm not a

1:05:19

big fan of leading with the military. But

1:05:22

for those who say the, I mean, again,

1:05:24

I love it. Ah, Trump

1:05:26

and his tariffs, you know, it

1:05:28

proves America sucks. What it

1:05:30

proved is America has more fucking

1:05:32

impact on the global economy

1:05:34

than people possibly know. The whole

1:05:36

world responded. Why? Because we

1:05:38

interact everywhere. You know,

1:05:40

yes, the Chinese are big. Yes, the Chinese do

1:05:43

things. Yes, so do we. And

1:05:45

the idea that we don't resonate, that

1:05:47

we don't have an impact is our fate

1:05:49

sealed. Yeah, we are fated to

1:05:51

be one of the most powerful nations

1:05:53

in the world. one of the most influential

1:05:55

nations of the world. There's no

1:05:57

way out of it. You're

1:06:00

not going to beat us. We're

1:06:02

not going to fail. I

1:06:04

mean, we will have to make adjustments. But

1:06:07

the idea that America is going to collapse and

1:06:09

go away, are

1:06:12

you high? That will never

1:06:14

happen. What we

1:06:16

will do is make adjustments. I'd like

1:06:18

to hope that we can make

1:06:20

adjustments that Allow us

1:06:22

to interface with the world in

1:06:24

a more productive manner I'm

1:06:26

not betting on that but we

1:06:29

will make the adjustments necessary

1:06:31

so that our power Is consolidated

1:06:33

and can be applied where

1:06:35

it needs to be applied But

1:06:37

the idea that America is

1:06:40

going away our fate is sealed

1:06:42

and all that guys. We're

1:06:44

the most powerful nation in the

1:06:46

world today There's no one

1:06:48

I mean China very impressive economically

1:06:52

impressive Russia impressive militarily but

1:06:54

the total package there's no

1:06:56

nation that brings the total

1:06:58

package of the United States

1:07:00

for better for worse I'm

1:07:02

not saying this is a

1:07:05

good thing but the idea

1:07:07

that we're somehow collapsing and

1:07:09

going away and disappearing no

1:07:11

we we we're adjusting We

1:07:13

have a president right now

1:07:15

who's making major adjustments and

1:07:17

it's uncomfortable adjustments, but um,

1:07:19

you know Is America's fate

1:07:21

sealed? Yeah Whether you want

1:07:23

it or not and I

1:07:25

know there's people out there

1:07:28

rooting against us. We're here

1:07:30

to stay guys we're not

1:07:32

going away and You know

1:07:34

you're gonna have to learn

1:07:36

to live with that And

1:07:39

I just lost a million flowers

1:07:41

a million flowers now Scott renters an

1:07:43

American imperialist pig who support I'm

1:07:45

just being real guys. I

1:07:47

mean, I could I could try it.

1:07:49

I could Danny forgive me because I

1:07:51

like Danny high farm I could Danny

1:07:53

high farm this America's an imperial power

1:07:55

that's uh, you know destined to collapse

1:07:57

and fall down and other But we're

1:07:59

not I mean we might be an

1:08:01

imperial power, but we're not destined to

1:08:04

collapse America's not going to collapse So

1:08:09

I don't know why people think

1:08:11

that. I mean, for

1:08:13

all the people that think America

1:08:15

sucks, get out of your house

1:08:17

and drive around and look at

1:08:19

this great country and look what

1:08:21

we accomplish on a daily basis.

1:08:23

Can we do better? We have

1:08:25

to do better. We

1:08:28

have to. But the

1:08:30

idea that this thing

1:08:32

that we have. China's

1:08:35

jealous of what we

1:08:37

have China has some nice

1:08:40

stuff But the total

1:08:42

Chinese package doesn't come close

1:08:44

to the total American

1:08:46

package That's just the truth

1:08:49

They've done some great

1:08:51

infrastructure. I mean Chinese airports

1:08:53

amazing Chinese rail stations

1:08:55

amazing fast trains. I'm jealous

1:08:57

but They're standard of

1:09:00

living for the average Chinese

1:09:02

person doesn't We

1:09:07

do okay in America and we could

1:09:09

we need to do better, but we do

1:09:11

okay. We need to be

1:09:13

healthier. We're too fat You know, I

1:09:15

mean, you know, there's a lot

1:09:17

of problems. They're sexy and slender Scott

1:09:19

Just well, you're you're the exception

1:09:21

to the rule. All right, so I

1:09:23

just lost all our followers. They've

1:09:25

all quit so We might as well

1:09:27

shut up for Americans No, but

1:09:29

even the Americans are like fuck you.

1:09:31

Well, the Americans fat. We're better

1:09:34

than every bit. We're fat, so Nobody

1:09:36

likes us. All right, let's do

1:09:38

one more question and then bring in

1:09:40

Ryan Milton with some live chat

1:09:42

questions Rob Dylan from Florida. Didn't we

1:09:44

get him last week? Hmm

1:09:47

Dylan man. Are

1:09:49

you into Dylan? Ukraine

1:09:52

keeps committing terrorist attacks

1:09:54

killing retired generals and

1:09:56

pro -russian activists in

1:09:59

Moscow. What is that

1:10:01

telling us? That

1:10:05

Ukraine is a terrorist

1:10:07

state That You know

1:10:09

what they can't accomplish

1:10:12

on the battlefield they're

1:10:14

trying to accomplish through

1:10:16

acts of terror And

1:10:18

they will be held

1:10:20

accountable That's what happens

1:10:23

to terrorist states Russia's

1:10:25

long memory and Long

1:10:27

reach And they will

1:10:29

find out who's responsible

1:10:31

and they will hold

1:10:34

them to account. That's

1:10:37

what it tells us. Ukraine's a terrorist state. Why

1:10:40

are we surprised by any of this? Is

1:10:46

that a pause or is that the end of your

1:10:48

answer? That is it.

1:10:51

Alright then let's bring in Ryan Milton for

1:10:53

some live chat and I'll see you nice people

1:10:55

in a few minutes. Brian,

1:11:08

are you adding things there?

1:11:10

No, I have not done anything.

1:11:12

Not done anything. What the hell? First

1:11:14

of all, get rid of the speedo. I

1:11:16

don't want to see your ass in my face.

1:11:19

When you do the dips with that, with

1:11:21

the 45 pound weight between the legs. yeah, yeah,

1:11:23

yeah. That's very suggestive, okay? It's,

1:11:25

well, it's, it's heavy. It's

1:11:27

a heavy weight. Anyway,

1:11:29

I have added to my

1:11:31

squat and my bench press

1:11:34

though, so. You want an

1:11:36

erudite question? How about this

1:11:38

one from Rumble, JPG,

1:11:40

VMM. When is Scott

1:11:42

going to realize that governments

1:11:44

and constitutions suck? When

1:11:52

are you going to offer

1:11:54

something in the alternative? What's

1:11:57

your alternative to government? I

1:12:00

mean, we can all agree that

1:12:02

government's inefficient. The government could

1:12:04

be better. but what's your alternative

1:12:06

to government? Because

1:12:09

none of this shit works without government. And

1:12:12

when you say government sucks, it's

1:12:15

sort of insulting to the people that

1:12:17

get up every morning and make all

1:12:19

this shit happen. The

1:12:21

people in the government

1:12:23

that are pushing the

1:12:25

papers and staffing the

1:12:27

problems and just getting

1:12:29

out there, the highway

1:12:32

department, that's government. I'll

1:12:35

tell you what, next time you're on the

1:12:37

highway, stop by and you're suck. You

1:12:39

know, they'll kick your ass. When

1:12:42

you have a sewage problem, that's

1:12:44

government. They come

1:12:46

out and they fix it. When

1:12:48

your house is on fire, that's government.

1:12:51

They come out and put the fire out. Somebody

1:12:53

breaks in your house. That's government.

1:12:55

That's the cops. Can

1:12:57

government be better? Absolutely. But

1:13:01

when are you going to realize the

1:13:03

government doesn't suck? The hypocrisy of your question

1:13:06

is unbelievable. The

1:13:08

arrogance that some of your

1:13:10

life would not happen if

1:13:12

it weren't for government. You

1:13:14

want to try and unplug from government, do

1:13:16

it? No. Government

1:13:19

controls everything. Can it be better? Do

1:13:21

we need to deregulate? There's always improvements

1:13:23

we can make. But

1:13:26

the idea that, you know, when am

1:13:28

I going to realize that governments suck? I'm

1:13:31

trying to be nice. My

1:13:33

wife is like. you can't say

1:13:35

but come on man kind

1:13:37

of quick in constitution are you

1:13:39

saying that we live in

1:13:41

a society without rules that's called

1:13:44

anarchy now you're probably gonna

1:13:46

say well i'm an anarchist and

1:13:48

i'm gonna say you suck

1:13:50

there's a reason why you know

1:13:52

anarchists never win because it's

1:13:54

chaos and anarchy and government efficiency,

1:13:56

combined with people united by

1:13:58

the rule of law set forth

1:14:00

in the Constitution, will always

1:14:02

kick your ass. Will always

1:14:04

kick your ass. 100 % of

1:14:06

the time, kick your ass. Constitutions

1:14:09

are great, especially

1:14:11

constitutions that can be amended and

1:14:13

improved over time, like ours. So

1:14:15

I'll fall back and I'll say, when

1:14:18

you're gonna realize that

1:14:20

government is necessary, mandatorily

1:14:22

so, And the constitutions are the best

1:14:25

thing that ever happened to the United

1:14:27

States of America. It's the American Constitution

1:14:29

that separates us from the rest of

1:14:31

the world. We need to do a

1:14:33

better job, both in terms of government

1:14:35

and the Constitution, but I

1:14:37

will never say they suck. I'll say

1:14:39

they absolutely are a requirement for

1:14:41

civilized society. Excellent. Dennis

1:14:43

Kucinich was on the winers last night

1:14:45

and he was talking about good

1:14:47

government. It was excellent.

1:14:49

So all right, from Twitch,

1:14:52

Sandy Dog on a dog

1:14:54

go Russia and USA partners

1:14:56

on the ISS. Why not

1:14:58

here? I agree.

1:15:00

Why not here? What

1:15:02

do you think Steve Wittkopf's trying to do? I'd

1:15:06

say that 70

1:15:08

% of his dialogue has

1:15:10

nothing to do with Ukraine

1:15:12

and everything to do with

1:15:14

improving US -Russian relations and creating

1:15:16

cooperation. The

1:15:19

thing that's going

1:15:22

to keep America and

1:15:24

Russia from falling

1:15:26

back into bad habits

1:15:28

is... Turning a

1:15:30

new page and setting off

1:15:32

and working in cooperative fashion

1:15:34

on as many projects as

1:15:36

possible that creates commonality of

1:15:38

interest commonality of purpose So

1:15:40

I think that's sort of

1:15:42

the approach I don't know

1:15:44

if they actually called the

1:15:46

ISS approach but ISS is

1:15:48

International Space Station, but I

1:15:50

think that's the heart of

1:15:52

what Trump's trying to do

1:15:54

is create a system of

1:15:56

cooperation that That

1:15:58

makes us partners and puts

1:16:00

us on the same team

1:16:02

with you know common objectives

1:16:04

So I think that's the

1:16:07

direction we're trying to head

1:16:09

All right from rumble J420

1:16:11

K with the increased tension

1:16:13

in the world should or

1:16:15

would the US or Russia

1:16:17

restart underground nuclear testing by

1:16:19

the way the China Chinese

1:16:22

publication SCMP said that last

1:16:24

week, the Chinese supposedly tested a

1:16:26

non -nuclear hydrogen bomb. I don't

1:16:28

know if that's true or

1:16:31

not, but... That's what we talked

1:16:33

about. It's a hydrogen weapon. To

1:16:36

use the term hydrogen bomb

1:16:38

implies that it replicates a fusion

1:16:40

weapon. It doesn't. So,

1:16:45

no, I mean... United States

1:16:47

and Russia know no nuclear

1:16:49

power. We have a treaty

1:16:52

that bans Underground nuclear testing

1:16:54

and above ground nuclear testing

1:16:56

and there shouldn't be any

1:16:58

nuclear testing. That's a key

1:17:00

element of trying to bring

1:17:03

an end to You know

1:17:05

the proliferation of nuclear weapons

1:17:07

So Should they know they

1:17:09

should not that there will

1:17:11

be destabilizing not Stabilizing could

1:17:14

they yeah, of course both

1:17:16

both the United States and

1:17:18

Russia are Have made preparations

1:17:20

so that in short order

1:17:22

they can immediately start testing

1:17:25

And and from the perspective

1:17:27

of people who promote you

1:17:29

know nuclear deterrence and everything

1:17:31

you know We have new

1:17:33

weapons designs that haven't been

1:17:35

Actually tested they've been tested

1:17:38

on computers and other simulations

1:17:40

But they haven't been physically

1:17:42

tested because of the prohibition

1:17:44

against testing and there's a

1:17:46

lot of people are saying

1:17:49

For you know to guarantee

1:17:51

the the assurity of our

1:17:53

weapons That we need to

1:17:55

test and So we have

1:17:57

to be very careful when

1:18:00

we talk about increasing tensions

1:18:02

and stuff that you know

1:18:04

one of the Consequences

1:18:08

could be a resumption of nuclear testing.

1:18:10

And again, that's just like allowing the

1:18:12

last arms control tree to go away.

1:18:15

Once it happens, it's just going to

1:18:17

be a cascading effect. And once we

1:18:19

start testing, they start testing and we

1:18:21

don't want that. So no, no more

1:18:23

testing. Testing should never happen again. Okay.

1:18:26

Uh, so C Rogan 52

1:18:29

with oil prices falling, why

1:18:31

did OPEC increase production output

1:18:33

by an additional 41? 411

1:18:36

,000 barrels per day as

1:18:38

of May 1st. Is this

1:18:40

to impact US production margins? Well,

1:18:46

I think

1:18:49

OPEC Plus as

1:18:51

strategic, they're

1:18:53

shaping the

1:18:56

strategic framework

1:18:58

of energy

1:19:01

security. And

1:19:04

so decisions have to

1:19:06

be made that aren't

1:19:08

linked to the immediate

1:19:10

pressures of global events.

1:19:13

So a lot of the oil

1:19:15

prices that you have right now

1:19:17

are based upon speculation, spot

1:19:20

market, et cetera. But

1:19:23

you can't do

1:19:25

strategic thinking linked to

1:19:27

the fluctuation of

1:19:29

short -term analysis. And

1:19:31

so the decision to increase production

1:19:33

is a decision that they made

1:19:35

to achieve certain objectives, one of

1:19:38

which might be what you talked

1:19:40

about. I'll

1:19:44

put it up again right there. Yeah,

1:19:47

US production margins. That might

1:19:49

be one of the strategic

1:19:51

things, but the strategic thinking

1:19:53

behind the additional 411 ,000

1:19:56

barrels per day is independent

1:19:58

of your

1:20:00

current oil prices, it's longer

1:20:02

term thinking. Okay,

1:20:04

Vedran Sladoj says, what

1:20:06

if all treaties around

1:20:09

WMS expire and no

1:20:11

new agreement is found?

1:20:13

Another race to even

1:20:15

higher yield weapons systems?

1:20:17

What about biological weapons,

1:20:19

mRNA types? What about

1:20:21

AI? Well,

1:20:27

that's the danger of... allowing treaties

1:20:29

to expire or treaties to fall

1:20:31

out of use to get people

1:20:33

to withdraw from treaties because then

1:20:35

there are no constraints. I

1:20:39

would say that if we lose the

1:20:41

treaties, because of the

1:20:43

paranoia that says, well, there's

1:20:45

nothing controlling them, we have

1:20:48

no way of confirming to

1:20:50

verify that they're not

1:20:52

doing something, therefore we must

1:20:54

do something just in case

1:20:56

kind of mentality goes in.

1:20:58

This is why I'm a

1:21:00

huge fan of disarmament, arms

1:21:03

control treaties and will

1:21:05

continue to advocate for them

1:21:07

to prevent this kind of

1:21:09

chaos from breaking out. So

1:21:12

a question from somebody you've never

1:21:14

heard of, never asked a question, Somerville

1:21:16

John. Can you comment

1:21:18

on Secretary Sergei Shoigu's comment that

1:21:20

Russia reserves the right to

1:21:22

use nuclear weapons if under direct

1:21:24

aggression from Western nations, which

1:21:26

includes close ally Belarus? There's

1:21:29

nothing new in this. This

1:21:31

is a statement made by the

1:21:33

Russians. It repeats the nuclear

1:21:35

doctrine that Russia promulgated, I think,

1:21:37

in November of last year.

1:21:39

Um, the Russians have made, you

1:21:41

know, policy statements, declaratory policy

1:21:43

statements in this regard. There's nothing

1:21:46

new here in Shoigu's statement.

1:21:48

It's just the latest iteration of,

1:21:50

uh, a restatement of what

1:21:52

Russia's policies are. Okay. And

1:21:54

mutant McGee on X says,

1:21:56

how would they denazify Ukraine

1:21:58

without crossing further beyond the

1:22:00

lines? They won't be that

1:22:02

foolish to believe Western lies

1:22:04

again. This will just

1:22:06

flare up again within a decade. What

1:22:13

I can say is

1:22:15

this that the Russians have

1:22:17

a Ukrainian government in

1:22:19

exile already that the Russians

1:22:21

are preparing for Shaping

1:22:23

the the politics of Ukraine

1:22:25

You know in a

1:22:27

post -conflict reality and I

1:22:29

just don't see Russia leaving

1:22:31

anything to chance so

1:22:33

I would say that the

1:22:35

Russians are aware of

1:22:37

everything you said and I

1:22:42

think they have a

1:22:44

solution that they plan

1:22:46

on implementing. All

1:22:48

right. Now, I'm going to

1:22:50

read you part of

1:22:52

a question from ex -Sentimentary

1:22:54

privately regarding Iran and US

1:22:56

negotiations. What did you

1:22:59

think the odds are that

1:23:01

a key strategy for

1:23:03

Iran includes the Minsk approach

1:23:05

to buy time during

1:23:07

negotiations and after to bolster

1:23:09

itself conventionally For example,

1:23:11

importation of more Russian and

1:23:13

Chinese air defenses. I

1:23:19

don't think Iran has

1:23:21

that much time. I

1:23:24

don't think the United States

1:23:26

is going to allow this thing

1:23:29

to drag out, which is

1:23:31

one of the reasons why they

1:23:33

are negotiating, because the United

1:23:35

States did put time constraints on

1:23:37

Iranian non -compliance with American

1:23:40

demands, so I don't

1:23:42

I don't see the

1:23:44

Iranians using this to

1:23:46

buy time I don't

1:23:49

think there's any parallel

1:23:51

between this negotiation and

1:23:53

Minsk There's going to

1:23:56

have to be some

1:23:58

movement toward a new

1:24:00

agreement very soon or

1:24:02

the United States will

1:24:05

Use other means to

1:24:07

eliminate Iran's nuclear weapons.

1:24:10

Okay, so let's

1:24:13

see here.

1:24:15

Last question from

1:24:17

Rumble. Will

1:24:19

Trump walk on

1:24:21

Ukraine? Will

1:24:23

Trump strike Iran?

1:24:25

DW 400 asks that

1:24:27

question. If

1:24:37

Ukraine continues to

1:24:39

be stupid, then

1:24:42

Trump's not going to

1:24:44

continue to engage. But

1:24:46

Trump's been sending some

1:24:48

contradictory signals. He

1:24:50

first started off by parroting

1:24:52

Marco Rubio's, we're out of

1:24:54

here kind of thing. But

1:24:57

when I heard that, I

1:24:59

said, don't listen to Rubio.

1:25:03

Steve Whitcoff's the guy you gotta listen to.

1:25:05

And Whitcoff just met and talked with

1:25:07

Putin and they're, you know, everybody's saying there's

1:25:09

things. So I think Trump came out

1:25:11

with some statements today that indicated that there

1:25:13

is no timeline, no time

1:25:16

that, you know, they're gonna work on this. And

1:25:19

I think we're starting to see

1:25:21

Europe, you know,

1:25:23

make, understand

1:25:25

that there's going to have

1:25:27

to be for the

1:25:29

first time now, and we

1:25:31

even have Klitschko, the

1:25:34

mayor of Kiev, saying that

1:25:36

Ukraine may have to

1:25:38

agree to Russian control of

1:25:40

territories because they're not

1:25:42

getting them back, but he

1:25:44

said it will be

1:25:46

temporary control, but the fact

1:25:48

that they're acknowledging they're

1:25:50

not getting the territories back

1:25:52

is a big step. And

1:25:55

the other thing is The

1:25:58

consequences of America unplugging

1:26:00

from Ukraine will be

1:26:02

catastrophic for Ukraine. And

1:26:05

I think that that point's

1:26:07

resonating not only inside Ukraine, but

1:26:09

also inside Europe and NATO. So

1:26:13

I see Trump continuing

1:26:15

to push for bringing it

1:26:17

into this conflict. I

1:26:19

don't see him walking away

1:26:21

anytime soon. Whether he

1:26:23

can succeed on this is

1:26:25

another question. Uh, will

1:26:27

he bomb Iran? He doesn't want

1:26:29

to bomb Iran. He would prefer

1:26:31

to have a, um, a negotiated

1:26:33

conclusion. And again, uh, the man

1:26:35

behind that is Steve Whitcoff, who's

1:26:38

out there looking for realistic solutions.

1:26:40

So, um, the

1:26:42

potential for Trump to walk away from

1:26:44

Ukraine is real than the potential for

1:26:46

him to attack Iran is real, but

1:26:48

I don't think Trump wants to do

1:26:51

either. And I think currently the mechanisms

1:26:53

are in place to prevent bombing Iran

1:26:55

and to keep. the negotiation process open

1:26:57

to bring it into the conflict in

1:26:59

Ukraine. Thank you very

1:27:01

much, and there you have it. Yeah,

1:27:04

baby, a very tight

1:27:06

15 minutes of the lightning

1:27:08

round with Ryan Milton. I

1:27:11

would like to remind folks

1:27:13

that we are developing a documentary

1:27:15

project about the dangers of

1:27:17

nuclear war called 38 Minutes, and

1:27:20

it focuses on

1:27:22

Hawaii. and the false alarm

1:27:24

that they endured a few years

1:27:26

ago. And you can donate at

1:27:28

scottridder .com. There's a big fat juicy

1:27:30

donate button at the top of

1:27:32

the website. So don't be shy about

1:27:34

helping us out there. And

1:27:36

Scott has a new article

1:27:39

coming out this weekend about

1:27:41

Alan Dershowitz or specifically his

1:27:43

debate with Alan Dershowitz. There

1:27:45

they are, the two supermodels

1:27:48

side by side. There's

1:27:50

only one America sweetheart. All

1:27:53

right, thanks a lot, Scott. You

1:27:56

did well. You deserve to call it

1:27:58

a night now. Just driving back

1:28:00

from New York to Del Mar.

1:28:02

I'd say you're entitled to take

1:28:04

the whole weekend off now. No,

1:28:07

there's plans for me. There

1:28:09

are plans. all right. There are

1:28:11

plans. Well, Well we

1:28:13

appreciate it. Thank you, Ryan. Good

1:28:15

job. and thanks to our beloved

1:28:17

audience. Join us on Tuesday at

1:28:19

three p .m. eastern time for

1:28:21

the lightning round of ask the

1:28:23

inspector That's when Scott will answer

1:28:25

every question in three minutes or

1:28:27

less. Take care, everybody.