YouTube Video (Extended Lead in)
Tim’s Comments:
This Mario Nawfal podcast with Brandon J. Weicher references Scott Horton describing how the Bush administration let Osama bin laden escape from Tora Bora into Pakistan so that they could pivot to war with Iraq:
by December of 2001 at Tora after Tora Bora or at Tora Bora um there was clearly an informal decision made to let Bin Laden out of the trap to let him slink away into neighboring Pakistan so that Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith and Don Rumsfeld all the neocons Don Rumsfeld wasn’t actually a neocon though but he was aligned but But definitely Wolfie and uh fight and all those guys to let them pivot and yeah and let them pivot and focus on getting the American people to believe and conflate Saddam Hussein with Bin Laden.
I don’t think the average American knows this occurred, but would perceive this to be “On Brand” for the administration. Many people are disillusioned, but some still believe that the George W. Bush administration innocently fell victim to the “honest mistake” of believing Iraq really had “weapons of mass destruction.” This account suggests that there was, rather, a Machiavellian or doctrinaire pursuit of war against Iraq that Brandon J. Weichert sees parallels today in Iran.
Transcript:
Uh, well, I don't know. I'm excited and I'm like, "All right, Glenn, I'm honored to be confused by with him. He's one of the best." Oh, I just uh I realized one thing last night. I was going through the comments as I go to bed. I was read the comments and lot Why would you do that before you go to bed? You want You want to be depressed and angry, you read the comments before you go to bed? on this on the studio on the YouTube studio there's a feature that makes you only see the positive comments so it's only in the CDA I didn't know that if you go yeah if you go through YouTube normally you'll get all the criticism ones or the highest engaged ones a lot of criticism the YouTube studio gives you the the compliments that's nice and in the it is and in the YouTube studio it's uh they still refer a lot of them refer to you as warrior like obviously people caught on [snorts] to it from when you said it and then when I heard it I'm like h like I was like I'm thinking of like how to prank you with it. I told Ruby to get us Mario and Wario. I Yeah, I sent her the address to send it to. Oh, so she did do it. I love my team. I don't know if she's done it yet, but she asked. I love my team. I just tell them one thing, they get it done. Um, so you got to get a warrior hat. But no, I just realized it suits you because it suits you because it's you're always talking war is inevitable. War is inevitable. It's got to be war. It's got to be war. And Wario, I don't know if that's what you meant by saying is that why you call yourself warrior? Yeah, cuz he's the he's he's the villain. He's the foil for Mario. You know, we could have a little fun with it. And we'd have to find Waluigi. Wario is an actual character. Yeah, the yellow hat. Oh my. I had no idea, dude. You know why? It's cuz you don't have kids. That's why. Cuz my kids love Mario Kart World and all that. So, I know all and plus I grew up, you know, I grew up also with all that. But um yeah, that's how I that's why it's all fresh on the mind because my my my kids love Mario and Luigi and Wario and so that's so funny. You've gone this long without getting you've gone this long without getting the joke all this time. That's why I keep saying no. That's why I keep saying you can't change it to Warioall when I host because then it would be copyright infringement. [laughter] There we go. There he is. my guy. [laughter] Damn, I had no idea all this time like an idiot. Um, and uh, yeah, I I um [laughter] I thought you just I thought you're just bad with jokes. I'm like, "Okay, silly joke." Mario, I'm great with jokes. Okay. I I'm always smiling. Even when I don't feel well, I'm always smiling. And it's like such a catchy one. It's just caught on. You said it like once, I never mentioned it again. People just caught on to viral. Maybe you are good at jokers. Let me tell you something. I'm plugged in. Okay, I I'm plugged in, right? There's one thing I know. There's one thing I am is I am very cool and plugged in. So, [laughter] Warrior is not cool. Let's just be clear. Um I think he's cool. By the way, a piece of news just came out as we're speaking and that's why you saw me kind of stare down for a bit. We just came out now from Where's it gone? Let me see what the sources. You didn't want to look at me in the eyes. No, no, it's Oh, there it is. According to uh um it's pretty significant. Tashnim, Iranian news, Iranian news outlet, an informed source told Tashnim that Iran and Oman reached a final agreement in early September. So now, yeah, on a new shipping on new shipping routes through the straight of Homo, but stressed that the deal is in no way means to reopening the straight. Oh, that's one from earlier today. The inbound route would take would would run entirely through the Iranian territorial waters with part of the outbound route also in Iranian waters and traffic operation under Iranian arrangements. The USbacked southern route would be closed. Oh, great. Gulf states in Iraq. Gulf states in Iraq will be briefed on the Iran Oman agreement but will not participate in technical decisions. Iran has separately presented seven conditions to Washington for reopening the straight of Homo. Until they are fulfilled, the straight will remain closed. any further reopening would operate under the new Iran Oman framework. So it just came out by the way this is different to the report earlier today. So they just came out. I'm seeing it now the timing of it. Yeah. In the last 20 30 minutes and uh in terms of the last statement there'd be conditions given to the US about opening this shoo. It's in line with what the head of the Iran parliament's national security commission Ibrahim Aizia said. He tweeted the following. No negotiations until Iran's terms are met. talks are futile. Um yeah. Yeah. Yeah. This is looking um bad for peace, great for Iran, but bad for peace because it's got to be very difficult for for Trump. Trump's not going to go they're not going to they're not going to agree to this. There's there's no there's no universe in which Trump is going to say, "Yeah, okay. I can take this." So we we are going to go back to hostilities. It's it's going to get serious again probably the day after the midterms are decided one way or the other. And let me tell you something. If Trump lose if the Republicans lose the midterms, Trump has no no reason to not burn the whole house down. I mean, that's he did say something similar. He did say he did put a statement today. It's on my agenda for today as well. So, just for the audience, I need to start every one of our shows. So, we'll do the daily news recap. me and Brandon as always. We'll give you everything you need to know about today's news and back and forth with our useless, unimportant, uninformed opinions on everything as well. Um, so Trump did say, "Speak for yourself. I [laughter] speak for myself." Trump did say, so today in in the interview with Foxes Ingram, he says, "By the way, the Iran war will end after the midterms." He said this a lot. Again, very odd thing. I asked Professor and I'll tell you, he says more in this one. This is a new one. But I've asked Morandi, I was just speaking to him before this and I asked him, I said, "What do you think Trump means by this?" Because there's two ways of interpreting it. One is what he keeps saying the war will end after the midterms. Is he saying that he he's not going to end it after the midterms? He just wants people to think because otherwise he'll just end it now before the midterms so he can get the political points. So is he essentially saying that look, it's not going to end. So just forget about it, think it's going to end and I'll sort it out after the midterms. In other words, I'll start it and then end it and be ending another war. Or another way of interpreting it, and that's one of my guests mentioned it. Very interesting point. Um, what they said is what the what Trump could mean here is he he's not going to be he understands reality. Iran is not going to let him end it before the midterms. He can't get a deal before the midterms. He can't walk away before the midterms because Iran want to strike him just before the midterms. We've spoken about this preemptively whether because they expect war or even if they don't expect war just to hurt him politically to make sure that he loses the house and the senate and then it puts him in a much stronger position after the midterms to get a good deal with um uh with Trump what do you call a president that loses the house and the senate a uh incumbent the term no that's another term a anyway president lame duck president makes him [snorts] a lame duck president so anyway so that's on that statement but let me read Fox's engage She says Fox what she said if Republicans win if Republic So that's if Republicans win. What if Republicans lose? Why would the war in Iran end if Republicans lose? Very stupid question. But Trump, what he says is a lot of people think if we lose, I'll just be more angry and I'll just take care of business. You know, you know, it's another way of doing it. Either way, they lose. So, in other words, you know, there's a few weeks between him losing the midterms and the the new more than a few weeks. It's basically almost two months. Yeah. He's got to be Yeah. Yeah. before the elected officials take office. And um in that period of time, he could just go haywire and do everything. That's what he's going to do. If he That's what he's going to do cuz he's, you know, he he he doesn't like to lose and he throws temper tantrums and he's going to want to burn the whole thing down uh before the Democrats can stop him. And by the way, you know, the Democrats, it's not like as soon as they get in, they're going to be able to stop him from doing more. There's going to be a process. There's going to be a debate within the Democratic party. You know, how far do they want to go? Um, what are they going to focus on in terms of organizing investigations and whatnot? Uh, you know, there's it's it's not like, okay, January 20th, 2027, okay, the Democrats are in, everything stops. It's not how it's going to work. Uh, and if they don't have the Senate, it's definitely not going to work like that. It'll slow Trump down from really going crazy long term. But I suspect if he loses even the House, Trump's going to then be like, "Screw it. For two months, I'm going to do whatever the hell I want to Iran and uh, you know, come January 20th, just try to stop me, Democrats." I think that's where where we're headed. It's really a bleak scenario. By the way, even if the Republicans do manage to somehow maintain majorities, which I don't think they might in the Senate, I don't think they will, but they might. I don't think they will in the House just because of how everything's structured right now. Um, but even if they did, there's no indication that Trump will deescalate because he has majorities right now and he's still kind of doing what he wants. So either way, the president is going to get what he wants, which is a war. he wants to be a wartime president. This was something I spoke to Robert, no Scott Horton or Robert Barnes, I can't remember now because I talked to them back to back uh last night, but there was a similar theme there, which is that American presidents in the modern era love being wartime presidents because it gives them more power and more prestige. So, um tell me more about the discussion with Scott Horton yesterday before we continue with the news. Anything else interesting? Anything new that you learned? So, I he's full of information. Oh, he was great. It was like I I kind of just teed him up with one question and for an hour an hour and 12 minutes, he just kind of he gave a a a college lecture on it was like a like sitting in class listening to the the the the grandmaster, you know, share the knowledge. And we talked so we talked about 9/11 um and sort of the the origins of that and and and it was just it was it was blowback of epic proportions from decades of bad US foreign policy in the Middle East. And then we talked that's right and then we talked about how basically from there we just doubled down on the failure. Uh and then the last 30 minutes 45 minutes it was an hour and nine or an hour and 12 minute discussion. Um, the last 30 to 45 minutes was probably the best discussion on Yemen that I I have heard on the internet. And I say I've heard because again, I kind of just sat and let him talk. And he cuz I told him, I said, "Look, when I had Matthew Hoe on, we kind of spent two minutes trying to remember why are we at war with with Houthies again? What's the problem?" So I brought that up and he goes, "Okay, I'm going to get to that." And he spent 45 minutes with maps. We brought up maps. Can you try to give me a TLDDR? Yeah. Uh, basically, um, what began in the George W. Bush administration as an attempt to prop up the President Salah, I think, of, and forgive me, I'm not a Yemen expert. That's okay. Uh, but I think it was President Salah who had been in office for a long time, began as an effort to prop him up by the Obama administration. It had devolved into this multi-sided fight between the Houthis leading one side Zedi Shiites um alliance between you know all of them are Zedi Shiites versus sort of Muslim Brotherhood Saudibacked al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula types. Uh, and basically the Obama administration especially got in on the wrong side. And and then he talked about how Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, President I think I think it was President Salah, the the old long-term president, he got sick, had to go to Saudi Arabia for heart issues. When he comes back to Yeaman months later, Hillary Clinton orchestrated his removal. He came back, didn't have an office. his vice president uh Hadti uh took over and Salah was like screw this screw the Americans he took twothirds of the army and he went and joined the Houthies and that's why the Houthies became such a significant fighting force and basically the whole talk with Scott was explaining how in our obsession to stick it to Iran over the last 25 years not just in Yemen we have not only empowered the people, the real people who attacked us on 9/11, this this the Muslim Brotherhood al-Qaeda types, but we've also empowered the Iranian side against us because of course this all strengthens the axis of resistance. So the bottom line is we should be non-interventionist which is what I've been telling you because whenever we intervene we make it worse for everybody including ourselves. Yeah. Um I think so essentially what I was saying Mirandi as well I had but I had the same I always have the same debate with Mirandi um we agree on 90% or 80% and then the part is like he talks about how Iran a lot of what it's doing is comes from ideology in in supporting the Palestinian cause as an example I I I refuse to believe that for any country I think each country to different extents it's all about great power politics each country advances its own interests that's all it thinks about thinks about itself and what could it do you know It supports the people where there's a benefit to it in supporting those people. It's very rare that the country does some something altruistically. That's just not how especially when Hamas in particular is not they're not a fellow Shiite Islamic group. They're Sunni and they're Arab. Uh so I'm sure there's some shared connection between the two of them as resistance. But I agree with you. I don't think there's a spiritual bond maybe between Hezbollah and Iran, but not Hamas and Iran. No. Well, there is both both could be true. There could be a spiritual bond and that spiritual bond could be leverage for gain because that spiritual bond is a what I'm saying is it's subordinate to the national interest is what I'm getting at. Yeah. Agree. Agree. So, the reason I mentioned this is I think the same thing applies with Yemen and and I'll kind of pivot now to the latest updates in Yemen and the Houthis. That's it is a hell of a bad day for the Saudis in the last 48 hours. It continues to be really bad. But um so essentially the the Yemen and why the US is involved is all about the strategic value of Yemen with the Beel Mendip straight another important energy choke point and Iran wants influence over that for obvious reasons. It gives them leverage over another chalk point of the region. Mediterranean Babel Mendde Hormuz. The Israelis yesterday said to channel N12, they said the Babel Mendibra, the Houthis controlling the Babel Mendib strait is a bigger problem for us because they have their port on the Red Sea. They have, you know, the Israelis had one port in the Red Sea shut down now because of or something like that. Yeah, something like that. Yeah. So the be menip straight being controlled by the Houthis is worse for the Israelis than what the Iran is controlling the straight of which is why they want Somali land. There we go. Exactly. So on the and the reason I said it's been a horrible day for the Saudis is the following. Let me show you the satellite image to show you the damage that the um the Houthis have inflicted on Saudi. Number one, the Saudis have bombed, according to the Houthis, they said Saudi Air Force bombed 129 strikes 100 129 times over 48 hours. These strikes were conducted with F-15s and Typhoon aircraft that took off from Saudi military bases. It gives all the details. 129 strikes. Well, the Houthi struck back. These are satellite images of the of Aramco and Abba, the Abba bul plant after the attack. At least six oil storage tanks were d completely destroyed and eight others sustained lighter damage. Uh the facilities most likely out of operation. Then you have so um another report here is the according to ABC Saudi signaled in recent days that it is prepared to launch a major military operation against the Houthis even without US participation. As we know yesterday NBS asked Trump for help. said no twice on Thursday, two days ago. Twice in one day. Um, and obviously we know the Mecca defense agreement hasn't been activated despite rumors that it will be activated. It gives you and I told you I said that this is their chance to show that if the agreement means anything and obviously based on the Pakistanis are standing behind the Saudis all the way behind. They're way so are the Turks. So are the Turks and the Saudis and this this is most embarrassing for the Saudis. It's the Pakistanis. The Pakistanis are not only part of the Mecca defense agreement. They have a bilateral agreement with Saudi. Yeah. And they need Saudi money. Saudis are the ones that bailed out the Pakistanis that filled the void when the the Emiratis asked for their money back in that loan. The Saudis came in and gave that money to the Pakistanis. Pakistanis are economically Yeah. in big trouble. And they need the Saudis. And despite that, they still decided not to opt in. Now, I don't know what conversations are being had with the Iranians. I'm sure the Iranians play a role in why the Chinese are getting involved and the Chinese. Yes. Yeah. Uh yes, I I think so. Yeah. Because Chinese are usually not interventionist, but yeah. No, no, but the Chinese have a very close relationship with Pakistan. Yeah. No, I just don't know why they leverage it for the Houthis. Well, I don't think it's about the Houthis per se. I think it's about the strategic effect that it's having. Right. The strategic effect is the Americans are [laughter] not in a good spot the longer that this goes on. Oh, you mean the Chinese would want the Houthies to have the winds in Yemen because it puts the US and remember the Chinese have already made their deals with the Houthies. This is this was reported about eight months ago that the Chinese already have separate deals to allow for their ships to go through unmolested uh through the straight of Babel Mandeb. Uh, so that's really no loss to them unless we're going to go try to stop. I'm just not that confident the Chinese would play a role in this one. I think it's more the Iranians. I could be Yeah, I could be wrong. I think I think indirectly is what I'm saying through Pak, you know, not not that they're going to directly, but that hey Pakistan you you you're in bed with us. We don't want you to to to help the Saudis. Just sit this one out. That it's stuff like that. That's what I think they're probably doing. strictly the Chinese are also trying to improve their relations with the Saudi. They're trying to they've been trouble getting away from the US for years. Yeah. But that's more of a long-term project right now. The the short-term goal is push the Americans out of the Middle East that it's a clear playing field. Then you can cut your deals with the locals and the locals are going to be more amendable to you. That's the logic I think. So then there's a there's a story on channel 12. uh the Israeli official told that the Houthi control that's what I was telling you the Houthi control of the Babel Mendde Strait presents a more significant threat than the current situation in the straight of Hum distinction attributed to geometric factors the eastern shipping channel beyond the Perum Island is approxim approximately 3 km wide necessitating that vessels pass within a visual range of Houthy position positions so this is so I think okay so where they're coming from is that Houthy control of the B mend Straight is stronger than the Iranian control of the straight home. The straight home is much wider than the Babel Mendip strait. With the Babel Mandep straight and we talked about that video, the Houthies could see with the naked eye of the ship. So they could literally get some artillery or that sniper rifle, the sniper rifle with the artillery shells. That one we saw the video. Crazy crazy gun. It just takes one guy with a drone or a gun like this to shoot at those ships. So the Israelis are saying that makes the control the Houthi control of the B mend much harder to break. The straight home and the Iran people are debating do the Americans are they able to sneak out ships? How difficult is it for the Iranians to spot them without the radars? That doesn't apply for the beel men. Then they say this this capability contrasts with the straight of hummus where Iran relies on radar surveillance systems and anti-ship missiles to threaten maritime traffic. In the beel mandib, the official noted that a fighter equipped with a basic anti-tank guided missile on Peram Island could strike a tanker with a line of sight without requiring sophisticated targeting systems. The official characterized this advantage is granting the Houthis enormous power. And that's absolutely right. Absolutely right. Yeah. And real quick, there is some question. And I talked to Mark Montgomery about this and I think you should bring this up with you should bring this up with Larry or with Malcolm as well because they would probably I might have you talk to Larry today cuz it's been a while you guys haven't chatted. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, so something that I'm I I'm I'm curious about is that Montgomery indicated that the Houthis lack the sort of precision guided targeting that the Iranians have. that a lot of it is line of sight and that the even the missiles they use they're powerful but they're sort of they're lack the kind of surveillance uh that Iran enjoys and of course Iran has that because of China so it might also be they have to do line of sight because that's all they've got the Houthies but the geography is more amendable to that sort of attack any way you look at it so yeah I um bring that up with Larry he debated me yesterday. I [snorts] was trying to trigger him. He was too calm. But he was saying that the Houthis are the Pakistanis won't strike the Houthis because the Houthis could cause a lot of damage to the Pakistanis. I pushed back. I'm like, not really. The Houthis can't do much to Pakistan. They can barely do anything to Israel. They fire a missile here and there. The Israel intercepts most of them. They can't do much. The Houthis don't have those capabilities. They have them when it comes to Saudi because Saudi is so vast and so close, but they really don't have long range capabilities as Mark just told you. And then he They do. That's the thing though. They do have That's what I That's why I wanted to ask because that we've seen demonstrations where the Houthies do fire long range weapons into Israel. Now that you're right, the Israelis shoot them down. But this is why I very limited. You don't see a barrage of No. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. No, I agree. But but it's just it's it's interesting because Montgomery was pretty convinced like what Montgomery was saying was look eventually the US Air Force. And he was very clear it can't be the Navy. It's got to be the air force. Eventually, the US Air Force is going to have to take over the the war against the Houthis and they're going to have to use shorter range munitions uh that we have plenty of and they're going to have to drop them in large numbers uh on the Houthis who we can easily identify where their positions are. And um and his point was that they don't have the precision guidance. The the Houthies Houthies militarily they're very weak and that well I again though I would be careful. Okay. Cuz because they are kicking ass right now. So yeah they're kicking but that's they they're effective domestically. They're not effective against Saudi against Pakistani longange against sorry Pakistan Israel. I just ask rock. The last successful missile landing in Israel by the Houthies was 4th of May 2025. A ballistic missile evaded interception hit grounds in Benguran airport and later August 25 missile broke up fragmented hit backward. So there's one uh the last time um yeah there's only one missile in this war that one in 2025 a missile impacted and once in 2024 impacted. So it's a very limited capabilities. The Iranis have so many targets they were able to hit. The Houthis the country is very poor. the country don't have access to the vast resources of the Iranians. So, but they don't need to for what they're doing. I mean, exactly. They don't need to for controlling the Babel Mendes. For the Be Menddees straight and considering how ideologically they're much more they're much stronger than the PL whatever the PLC I think PLC. Yeah. The PLC. Um the ideologies, you know, the PLC's are purely a proxy of Saudi. They don't have any ideological basis for what they do. They're like, okay, we do what the Saudi tell us. And and so a lot of people don't have that same loyalty to the PLC as they do with the Houthies. Like Scott Horton talked about the guy that the group that was a proxy of the US ended up defecting to the Houthies. But yeah, so that really let me ask you because Scott brought this up and it was an interesting thought experiment. Um usually we call the group that controls the capital of a country the government. Well, the the the Houthis control SA and for some reason nobody in the United States or elsewhere will refer to them as the government of Yemen. I did you listen to my conversation with Morandi? No, I I wasn't. We had somebody was I'm not offended. No, it's funny that that because I do actually though listen to you when when you guys do that. That's adorable. Thank you. Cuz I like Well, but I like I learn a lot from Mirand too. So Oh, great. Thank you. Great compliment to me. cuz you let him talk. [laughter] You're a good ho. That's a compliment. That's a compliment. You're a good host. You're [snorts] a good host. So what I said to him today, I said to him, it's really annoying how in in Syria, you had a an extremist guy who a terrorist who killed American soldiers, who committed atrocities, then led a militia and militarily captured Syria, and now it's being called the government being legitimized, shaking hands with Trump, visiting the White House just because he's um on the side of the West. He's advancing American and Western interest, American interests. And then you have the same story, a similar story where a military group in Yemen, the same thing, get a lot of popular support, eventually advance to the capital, capture the country, and yet they called terrorist organizations and decides. No, because they're Shiites. Because if they as Shiites, if they go there and start doing a deal with the US, Trump, they're great people, shakes their hand. The Houthi government, they're a great government. The people love them. It's literally all about advancing American interest. who thinks more with the Iranian course. No, of course. But yeah, you should watch you should watch my thing with with with Scott because we get into that too. There is a there is a Shiite thing going on here and it's not intentional either. It's it's not I mean Scott explained what he meant when he said the US has a problem with the Shiites and he gets into why. It's completely nonsensical. But I don't know but the but the the Americans loved the Shiites before the 1979 revolution, right? And and that's the reason we don't anymore is because of the revolution. Yeah. Exactly. Rather than I say yes. Yes. I say we I mean the government because I really don't have a problem with with Shiites. So [laughter] I don't know any Shiites. So So um so [laughter] All right. So then another piece of news, Saudis foreign affairs claims that the attack on their facilities came from east the on the east west pipeline came from Iraq. I [snorts] heard that this morning. Yeah. Material damage. So the Iraqi government ordered an investigation and kicked out the leader of one of the the the the regions the governance where the attack originated from. Allegedly, the Iraqi militia has denied responsibility, but of course they would. I tend to believe it. The Saudis, I don't think they they haven't their hands full with the Houthis. Why would they want to drag in the Iraqis? I But then again, the Iraqi prime minister might have fired that person that commands that govern it just a symbolic gesture to Saudi even if they're not behind it. I don't know. It's impossible to know. I just wouldn't be surprised if that's the case. There's an axis of resistance that works together. That's exactly right. That's what I was going to say. Yeah. There is some news also we don't have to talk about here, but I do want to put a pin on it. Uh coming out of Libya with Ukraine. So when we get to the end, when we have if we have time, I'd like to talk about that. Mixing Libya and Ukraine together. Is that the Ukrainians training militias that are against the Russians in Africa? Uh not against the Well, yeah, we'll talk about it more. I don't want to divert. I just before I forget, I don't want to forget. Oh, there it is. Port of a That's the portrais have in the Red Sea. Yeah. Um so someone summarized the um someone summarized what the Saudis have been through this year. [snorts] Iran took control of the straight of hummus. Aramco facilities were struck by Iran. Aramco facilities were struck by the Houthis. Houthis control the Baband strait. Houthis imposed an embargo against Saudi. Crude oil output in Saudi falls to the lowest level in 40 years since 1990. in 356 years. East West pipeline shuts down because of the drone attack by Iraqi militias. The Mecca Mecca defense agreement and the bilateral agreement with Pakistan ends up being ineffective just futile only needs condemnations. Not a good year to be NBS whatsoever from that grand dream and the plan the 20-y year plan whatever that big wall etc now is survival [snorts] and that's Saudi that's doing better than all other countries in the region because of the east west pip. I was going to say they're doing better because now that's but but this was always always the plan by the Iran team which is if it really gets nasty, if the Saudis really step out, we're going to then we're going to let them become dependent on the east west and if they really go too far with us then we're going to cut them off. And that's what's happening and you're seeing this and I do believe this was a strategy and this is Iran is playing a much longer I mean you want talk about 5D chess it isn't team America that's playing it unfortunately it's the Iranians this is all graduated responses this is calibrated this is still we're still on that Persian escalation ladder that's very judicious and um this is part of that so if I were Saudi if I were if I again if I were MBS Yes, I or if I were talking to him, I would say you can still pivot. You can still pivot and try to resuscitate vision 2030, but that requires you now to start cutting deals and to go on your own, you know. I don't know. I think I don't think he can. But yeah. No, I I think I don't think the world understands the shitty position, the scary position the golf is in. Yeah, just remember what same thing I told Mirandi and what Robert P told me, Professor P told me a few day a week ago. He's like, Mario, what stops the Iranians doing to the Gulf? What the Gulf did to Iran? Iran's coming [snorts] out of this war. They're not scared of the US. The Gulf supported the US in a regime change operation in Iran more than one occasion. Why wouldn't the Iranians do the same thing to the Gulf now? And that's a conversation being had in Iran and whether it's true or not, we don't know. And I asked Miranda, you worried this could happen. He's like, Mario, I can't even guess what's going to happen tomorrow, let alone 5 years from now because I asked him, could it happen 5 to 10 years from now? But these are conversations that Gulf countries have to really plan for, prepare for just in case while improving relations. You know, the Emiratis met with the Saudi with the Iranians today at the brick summit. Um, so and there's others that matter as well. But so these conversations like they are trying to improve relations diplomatically, but at the same time when the US is out, who's going to look out for these small countries that cannot defend themselves? And for some reason, they're not able to come together. That's just a bizarre thing for me. These countries need to come together. I agree. Trump's I agree. Trump spoke. Are you ready for President Trump, your president, President of the United States of America? Houthis called us and they don't want to fight with us. I'm not making this up. Houthis called us and they don't want to fight with us. They let us know they don't want us to go in after them. They would much prefer not having us involved. They are letting most ships through. Which is true by the way. There is one country Saudi. They're not happy with and we'll get that straightened out. And then he says, "Is Iran responsible for the attack on the pipeline, the East West pipeline in Saudi?" He says, "I think they are. probably they are. I'm sure they they played a role in some way. But um in other words, Trump is not willing to go into war with the Houthies. No, he's Yeah. Well, no. And um this was actually a point of frustration with the admiral yesterday. He was very frustr What he said was right now Trump is right to not intervene because we got our hands full. But his point was there needs to be a plan in the near future. He wants the air force to go in and start taking out Houthies. And I think I would not be surprised if they do with the Saudis. I wouldn't be surprised, but it's a really boneheaded move. It is a really stupid move. The the Air Force is is already under I mean just the same problems we talk about with the Navy with the ship readiness and whatnot. The same problems are afflicting the Air Force. It's the smallest fleet the Air Force has of war plananes in decades. Uh the airplane the airframes we're using are getting older and we're having to make them last longer. It is it is a disaster for the Air Force right now. I've sat in on meetings with Air Force leaders over the years where they have been talking about, you know, we're going to have to pull more planes out of the boneyard, which is where they keep all the old sort of discarded planes. We're going to because we're going to have to backfill. Uh they're really worried about the F-35 readiness rate, which is at like below 40% right now. Um, this is the Air Force is also struggling. It's not just the Navy. And by the way, if we don't have air bases nearby, that means we're going to have to rely on bigger bombers flying longer distance. God help us if we lose a B-52 or if we lose even a B2. If we lose, which they could be taken down by a lucky shot. I'm not saying that's likely, but you know, lucky shot happens in war. Uh, or the B1 Lancer. I mean, these are older planes. They're bigger planes. there are heavy birds, you know, they they also can be shot down. And so there's this sort of I don't know in DC like this blasé nature of like, well, we'll eventually be able to take them on militarily. I wouldn't volunteer for that mission if I were the president. Um, just came in now. You can put the image I sent you, Lisa. Meanwhile, so I told you that the the Iranian president met with the UAE crown prince Muhammad bin Zed. Um, and there's an image I'll show now. It's kind of a picture is worth a thousand words. Just those two leaders meeting with the bricks in the background. And also the news came out from Al Monitor. Iran and the UAE back joint bricks statement urging restraint in the war. Iran and the UAE signed up to a joint statement from the bricks group of nations that called for restraint in the Middle East war on Saturday in what was seen as a sign of diplomatic progress between the countries divided by the war. The two leaders discussed regional and international issues, deescalation, stability, and efforts to advance regional peace and development. The Abu Dhabi media office said on X, without referring to any resolution or discussion, summit organizers and diplomats have been focused on bridging the Iran UAE divide even as the US and Iran resume tit fortat strikes in the six-month war. So um as expected the uh the Amiratis will improve relations with Iran but it doesn't solve for preparing for in case Iran becomes more you know wanting to expand their influence further which we don't know if will happen or not also UA doesn't the don't the Amiradis have some people on the ground in Yemen as well or or they you know I mean how how is this proxy fight with the um the Houthies that which is a proxy of or their alliance with Iran how is that going to impact act any rehabilitation of relations with Tan. The the Amiradis are staying out of the current war in Yemen. I thought they just got a group of of their vehicles captured. Were those all Saudi vehicles then? Sa so from what I know Saudi there was a clash between the Saudi group and the Amirati group. So the Saudi group was going into a city controlled by the Amirati group. [laughter] The Amiratis told them so the Yemeni groups supported by the Emirates said we don't want you in unless you disarm. Small clashes happened allegedly, reportedly. And then what happened is while you should have seen this, while they were outside the city, the the Houthi started bombing the Saudi groups [laughter] while they're outside the city, controlled by the UAE group. How crazy is that? You know, you could see the UAE switch sides. They might just become partners with the Iranians themselves. No, I'm just joking. I'm just joking. Yeah, I know. I know. But it is a very valid point. The reason it won't happen is because the Amiratis are [snorts] the most susceptible along with Baharin, Kuwait, etc., but the most susceptible for an Iran that comes out of this war, you know, wounded and looking for blood or looking to expand its influence. So, the Amiratis are in a probably the trickiest position along with Bahrain and Kuwait, those smaller countries. Qatar's a bit further away. Saudi big enough to be Qatar has been hit bad economically though. They had a massive decline in their GDP this year. Uh, this has not been good for Qatar. [snorts] I guess Louis was happy. So if you play this one I've just sent you Lisa and I send you another one here. Uh and then this is another one here. This is a gathering of Saudi backed forces in Yemen. That's two days ago. Prevented by pro Amirati factions from entering Aden where targeted with ballistic missiles by Ansarah by uh the Houthis. So this is an Amiradi. This is a guy supported by the Amiradis. You can can you do it faster, Lisa? like a 2x or 3x uh if you can. Yeah, the fastest. There you go. He's driving through. He's looking at all the cars and stuff on the sides. And then you can see some of them are burning there cuz while they were waiting outside the city trying to go in with their weapons, the Houthi started firing ballistic missiles on them. Play the first video I sent you. Look at this. The first video as well, Lisa, wild images of what's happening in Yemen. But most of the world doesn't care about Yemen. So this one doesn't get many headlines, these stories. But it is crazy. It is extremely important strategically for Saudi and for for this is this is the new center of gravity which is what I told you before. This is going to become the next major front. This is all part of the same war. So play 3X. There you go. You see on the sides here these are the So again this is an Amirati Yemeni faction supported by the Emirates and these are the Saudis on the sides being bombed. They didn't fight together. There was some shooting I think but that's it. The Houthies ended up bombing them with ballistic missiles while they were stuck outside the city. Crazy crazy stuff. I mean, Mario, th this is so just embarrassing. I I really think we just everybody needs to just sit at a big beautiful table and cut a deal. I mean, this is like the gang that can't shoot straight. I mean, for God's sakes, at this point, we're doing more damage than we are to ourselves than the Iranians are to us. It's just And it's time to end it, you know. So let me let me go through some other news just so we catch up the audience on everything. Bahrain said it will not participate in the proposal by Oman in the meeting with Iran and Gulf states in the straight of Hummus until diplomatic stines with Iran are restored. Bahrain is asking for an end to attacks, compensation from Iran for damages, respect for sovereignty and the settlement of disputes through legal channels. So Bahrain is pretty pissed off at the current situation and being bombed so much. Obviously Iran Bahrain Bahrain is also Iran is pissed off Bahrain played such a big role in this war allowing their bases and airspace to be used. You've got the Iranian foreign minister. So this is on the straight of Homo. The Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson said um the meeting on Monday. So that was before the announcement that they have an agreement. He said the meeting on Monday in Oman will discuss on outlining the MOU between Iran and Oman to determine temporary and safe maritime routes. However, reaching this regional understanding will not necessarily mean establishing complete and lasting security in the strategic waterway. A lasting return of security is only possible through an end to US destabilizing actions, the lifting of the US blockade, and the health of military interventions. And there's been a report as well, the Iranians sent a proposal to the Americans, a seven-point proposal the Americans have to abide by before the Iranians lift their blockade of the straight home. Um, so that's one piece of news. So this is pretty much a deal between the Iranians and the Omanis that does not involve the Americans which aligns with what we heard two weeks ago where the Omanis allegedly told State Department officials to stay out of negotiations. Uh remember we talked about that and we weren't sure if that was a real report. I think it was. I think the Omanis said, "Hey, we're we're going to take the point on this. This is our backyard." So, of course, how you know how they can even think that's going to be followed through, I mean, the Americans are not going to respect that deal. We're we're not. It's not happen. The And the Omanis, I don't think the Ammanis would dare do a deal without American backing. At least not on the It looks like they're angling for it. It looks like they're angling to cut a deal and maybe they think that Yeah, I don't know. I don't want to speculate but because there is a chance that behind the scenes Trump might be encouraging them to do this and then bitching about it. They could be. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. Very that is a possibility. Another So another report here from the Financial Times. The US has instructed tankers using the straight home to travel only during designated time windows to receive military protection following an increase in Iranian attacks on ships. Washington has provided air defense since May for vessels using the route along Oman's southern coast. But the protection window was reduced in early September to two daily time slots. That's so crazy. Um meanwhile Trump said on the shredders today in one of the I put it as like right after to mention it. We very powerfully control the straight of trade. Nobody saw that happening. We are taking out on average 25 boats a day. So that's the Trump on the straight of [laughter] um so that's on on the 140 were going 140 ships were going out of the straight per day um uh before the war. So but it depends on which one. So a lot of yeah yeah tankers yeah come on you know what I mean. No I'm saying it's better I'm saying it's better tank it's better indicator is the million barrels per day rather than how many ships because a lot of ships might not be oil tankers. So, so [laughter] yeah. Yeah. Look at you. You Yeah. Look at you. You Trump. Yeah. Look at you. You Trump supporter. I'll get you a MAGA hat. No, I'm just telling you the metric you're using is wrong. Cuz by the metric I'm advocating for. I know. Trump is saying 14 million. I think it's like four to five. So, just to be clear. Yeah. It's Yes. I have a I have I have a knack. I have a knack and my girlfriend hates it. I have a knack for always like wanting to be, you know, just want to be objectively accurate. It's like, look, I don't give a about the objective point. The point I'm making is like, yeah, but you said this. It's actually that Mario, shut the hell up. So, it's a bad habit I have. It's like I still believe I agree with your point, but like let's measure with [laughter] millions of barrels, not number of ships. Shut up. We agree. This is This is why you're a math guy and I'm a liberal arts major. So, uh [laughter] All right. So, we did talk about the deal that just came in as we were live, a deal between Iran and Oman. Um, we talked about the likelihood of war and the statement by Iran, no negotiations until our demands are met. The amount of damage the Saudis have suffered so far, the what's going on in the Houthis, the amount of strikes by the Saudis against the Houthis, the concerns of the Israelis, um, and Saudis signaling, according to CNN, there ABC they're signaling that they're going to go into Yemen. And I wouldn't be surprised if they do. Then you have on the straight of Hammuz, the Iranian foreign minister spokesperson said there's a deal happening with the Omanis. The US has two slots per day for ships to go through. On the Gulf side, the Amiradis got closer to Iran. We're seeing a lot of indications in that front and Bahrain is pretty pissed off at everything on the and I know we talk about the Libya side. I want to show you another image. If you can show this image, please, Lisa. This is another one of pictures worth a thousand words. And this is the U foreign minister with Wangi, foreign minister Arai with foreign minister Yi from China. The two foreign ministers talking privately the brick summit. And the picture speaks for itself. On the military front, US officials say Iran obtained highresolution satellite imagery of Jordan's Mufawak Salti air base from Chinese entities before a July 17 attack that killed three American troops. So the report here essentially implies that China played a role in the three American troops dying. something that I think Trump will downplay for obvious reasons and I won't go too deep into this because we know the Iranians have been using satellite images from China and their by do by do system I think it's called yeah no it is likely but I just also want to say it's actually possible that Trump's people are playing that up to try to get some kind of leverage publicly as we approach the Xi Trump summit he's been downplaying he's been downplaying even another comment he said China spy on us. We spy on them, too. No, he might be downplaying it, but it might be one of those things where he downplays it, but his team is out there trumping it up. I don't know. It It is It is very likely that that is a true story, but there is also a chance that this is being blown out of proportion. Um, I'm not saying it's it didn't happen. I just it we have to be aware we're going into a pretty big Xioo uh Xi Trump uh summit. So there's going to be a lot of things going on in the media to try to jockey the two sides uh into positions you different positions here. So I I I think that's probably an accurate report but just be aware that we have to contextualize with this upcoming summit. [snorts] Um and this one is really interesting post by the foreign minister Isma Bak probably one of my favorite posts coming out of the Iranians. That's not true. It's such an important thing that I wish more Americans know about and something I'm sure Scott Horton told you about yesterday. I'll read the whole post. The narrative. So, as you know, on the anniversary of 911, Trump used that as an opportunity to talk about how Iran is a threat. They could conduct another 9/11. They're a terrorist organization. In a way, blaming them for 911. Even though they were mourning 911, they were supporting the the Americans, condemning the attack, etc. Putting that aside, 911 was conducted by group supported by the Saudis or factions within Saudi from Saudi. Another disc. Are you the person? No, that's that's another guest. Um, all right. So, I'll read out the post by the Iranian foreign ministry. The narrative advanced by the US Secretary of War on the anniversary of 911 911 is riddled with fundamental contradictions. You cannot wage aggression, carry out cowardly assassinations, and inflict civilian casualties while simultaneously claiming exclusive authority to define terrorism and define whose violence determine whose violence is legitimate. The perpetrators of 9/11 were not Iranians. They were the very same people who the US itself had armed, organized, or otherwise cultivated in the preceding decades. Yet the so-called war on terror that followed brought Afghanistan and Iraq years of war, occupations, civilian deaths, and devastation on a massive scale. Against this backdrop, invoking the anniversary of 9/11 to justify a reckless and unlawful war against Iran is utterly absurd. A criminal war that has involved the assassination of officials of a sovereign state and the targeting of civilians, including women and children, cannot be made morally coherent simply by wrapping it in the language of counterterrorism. One of my favorite posts coming out of the Iranians. Well, it's um it has the benefit of being really accurate um and being a very fair assessment. Uh we saw and I did talk to Scott about this. So we saw by December of 2001 at Tora after Tora Bora or at Tora Bora um there was clearly an informal decision made to let Bin Laden out of the trap to let him slink away into neighboring Pakistan so that Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith and Don Rumsfeld all the neocons Don Rumsfeld wasn't actually a neocon though but he was aligned but But definitely Wolfie and uh fight and all those guys to let them pivot and yeah and let them pivot and focus on getting the American people to believe and conflate Saddam Hussein with Bin Laden. And I think the same sort of propaganda narrative rejiggering is going on with Iran today. So they let Osama sorry just to understand they let Osama bin Laden escape from where to where? They they did not. Yeah. At Tora Bora, it's the mountain. Yeah. The mountain that sub um separates the border with Pakistan. Basically, you there's a guy named Gary Bernson uh who was the CIA battlefield commander for the American side. He was on the ground in Tora Bora. Him and um I'm forgetting the guy's real name, but it was a Delta Force guy that went by the name of Dalton Fury for many years. He's dead now. But the two of them came out after Tora Bora. And we're basically saying, "Look, we had Bin Laden cornered. We needed a hundred Rangers to seal up the Pakistani side of the mountain chain." And when we called Sentcom, General Tommy Franks said, "No effing way. You're not getting those that aid." Uh, and because they didn't get 100 or so Rangers, they were not able to seal the trap. And it was it has since come out that it was Rumsfeld at the Pentagon who was saying no to the requests for those additional Ranger elements at Tora Bora. And there was no real logical reason for saying no other than if you look at what was being discussed internally which has since come out at the same time as Tora Bora in the run-up to Tora Bora uh the Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and those guys were really pushing hard to hit Saddam Hussein and to associate his regime in Iraq with Bin Ladin. What year was that? That was 2001. So they essentially wanted they thought oh wow they had 20 in 2001 what month approximately this so to bora was December this was after 911 so there's a series of meetings and so one of the famous quotes on 911 you can find this in Rumsfeld snowflakes right he released all of his memos in 2011 in the run-up to his book coming out known unknown uh you can go online and find it he has it on his website of course he's dead now but they still maintain the website one of his snowflakes which are all the memos He would write daily. It was like a flurry of snowflakes. He wrote um drain the swamp, sweep everything up, things related and not. He was referring to not just Afghanistan. In fact, one of the meetings he had with Coen Pal, one of their famous sparring matches verbally. Uh he looked at Colon in one of these these meetings with the president. He said, "For God's sakes, Coen, there are no real targets to bomb in Afghanistan. It's just an exercise." and he was arguing that we need to hit Iraq because there's targets to bomb and we can actually get the videos like we did in Desert Storm of us hitting the Iraqis and it would look like a victory. The American people don't understand Afghanistan because it's so far away and it's so agriculture and it's mountainous and we don't have a big force there. And he was making the case we need to get big army involved instead of special forces and CIA paramilitaries. And so all of that congealed on December of 01. There was no impetus by the Pentagon to close the trap at Tora Bora and catch or kill Bin Laden. Even though he was literally within our crosshairs, the neocons so that we could then make the case, the neocons did, that hey, there's this link between Saddam and between Bin Laden. And I think Mario, the same kind of thing is underway. And again, I'm not saying the Islamic Republic of Iran is friends of the United States. I'm not saying that we don't have bad blood. We do. But what I'm saying is it to me seems a lot like back then where now suddenly everybody's trying to conflate in DC 911 with Iran. Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. That was some of our friends on the other side of the the Sunni Shiite split. And uh you know they it's the same thing going on because ultimately the war party is bipartisan. It is multi-deade long and they want what they want and what they really want is regime change in Iran. And I will tell you Admiral Mark Montgomery uh he was very open that that want he wants that to be the objective. He wants us to embrace regime change because we have no other choice at this point is what he was saying. But he was saying that that's what he wants. And I think he speaks for a lot of people in DC. Yeah. There was a difference between wanting something and actively pursuing something. I know probably won both. I think I think there's an element at the I think it's I don't know if it's everybody, but I do think there's an element in DC that is actively pursuing that agenda and they're trying to get the president. And that's another reason I think the president is being insulated. This is Joe Kent's whole thing. The president is being put in an information bubble and he's not allowed to hear any news or information that runs counter to this neoonservative narrative. Yeah. I spoke to the other author of uh Oh, yeah. How did that go? Swan. Yeah. Jonathan Swan. Yeah. Confirms what we know already. He uh and one of the points is that he does have a very small circle of people. He does not believe Trump because obviously he still covers the White House. still has access to a lot of people there. He he saw no indication that Trump is considering a nuke. So that was a positive point. He does not think Trump has lost his mind. He's like Mario, if you look at Trump now, he's obviously a less filters, but he said Mario, he was saying similar things before. He was talking about a big red button against North Korea. He was threatening and that was under his first term. He was threatening to bomb a lot of the uh heritage sites in Iran if Iran does XY Z. So this is the same Trump difference. Yeah, but there's a there's a difference though because the first term I now know this to be the fact. The first term you had guys like James Mattis, Rex Tillerson, and John telling him no. Yeah. Exactly. So, the concern is not Trump being different or having gone insane. The concern is that number one, Trump has been traumatized by he went through by by what he went through the uh the fact that he was almost he was almost jailed, etc., and he's being pursued by the Democrats. So that's one thing that really changed the way he looks at his at at himself. The assassination attempts, the the mention of the Iranians wanting trying to kill him. That was mentioned to him before he became president. Again, that was a planned by the Iranians to kill him. All these things really played a role in his psyche. And the second one is in this first term, he was surrounded by people that saw Trump as a threat to the US and to the world. And they felt like their job is to contain that threat till the presidency ends. Now, as you just said, he's surrounded by yesmen, by people that are believe he's doing the right thing and share his his strategy, etc. They're not standing in his way because he has a lot more influence. He's no longer that pariah president that somehow became president. He's someone that has massive. He's also a lame duck now. I mean, he doesn't have to run again. So, that gives him a lot of freedom in some ways to do whatever the hell he wants. And that's kind of scary. So, that was the take there. There's alert alert in Kami, Mushet, and Abba in Saudi. Saudi being bombed now as we speak. Um, surprise surprise. And there's this was such a stupid thing they did to open up on the an hour ago the Iranian RGC launched anti-ship cruise missiles from Syri towards the straight home which is a daily occurrence. Now the Iranians firing. Do we know what they were? Are they targeting civilians or are they targeting US Navy? Uh, it just came out now. We don't know. The same thing happened yesterday. And I think if they struck I think if they struck the US Navy I think the US would not really would try to hide it brush it under the Yeah. the rug and then I'm not saying they struck it but I'm saying I'm I'm wondering if they fire because Yeah. Yeah. That's interesting. I think it's more likely the tankers try to avoid the blockade. Sure. I think that's Yeah, probably. And Israel is bombing Lebanon. So that is the just to kind of maybe good place to wrap it up. This is a region for you every Can I Can I mention Libya real quick? Yeah, of course. Let's wrap it up with that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead. Take it. Yeah. Yeah. So, uh, cuz I just talked to Jamer Jameson Fire. He's got a great name. Jameson Firestone, I think is his name. It's a phenomenal name. Um, and you know, he's very pro- Ukraine. Um, and we were talking about what's going on with Ukraine, but while we were talking, as we were wrapping up, I got an alert. I wasn't able to ask him, but I'll let the audience know. Um, Ukraine is really leveraging their drone capability and they're selling it to the world basically. in the form of military assistance. But here's where blowback happens, right? So, according to a report, there are 14 Ukrainian military advisers inside of Libya helping the Torags uh get their drone operations going. Well, the interesting thing is the Torres were the group that the US and the French after Gaddafi fell, that was the group we ended up going to war with because they became inshed by al-Qaeda and the Islamists. So, we now have an example potentially of Ukraine, this kind of capability we've helped them develop and that they've really run with. They're now not just aiding potential allies of the United States. They're now actually going in and helping Islamist groups. I have a feeling you're going to see this thing, Mario, where these Ukrainians are doing to the highest bidder. They don't even care about why. They just need the money. And we see in Syria they and there's some problems with Israel where Israel is saying we don't want them there. But we see possibilities of Ukrainian military advisers helping Galani build up his drone forces. Now you see this possibly with the to eggs. So we have here another Scott Horton, you know, blowback or not consequence. We have helped to build up Ukraine's military capacity. They've run with it to their credit. They have a very impressive drone capability and now they're selling it to the highest bidder possibly. Yeah. [snorts] On the on the Yemen on the um Libyan front, I also report the Americans are trying to bring all the factions together. Rubio personally went there and he's Oh, I didn't know that. Wow. Yeah. So, there is efforts to kind of unite Ukraine, sorry, Libya together again. And I wouldn't be surprised. I have not much knowledge on Libya, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Torags are being dealt with similar to the al-Shara where possibly possibly yeah alliance has shifted the past the Russians under the bridge water under the bridge [laughter] you killed a lot of blood a lot of blood in that water but yeah the blood the blood doesn't wash out so easy but that's okay we look the other way the money papers it over but uh I one other thing is the the the Russians have a vested interest in Libya with Haftar are the uh the warlord there that was a former Gaddafi general. Um so this is one of the issues and the Turks have a big role there like they do in Syria. It's a it's a it's a proxy melting point. Libya is barely a nation anywhere. It's the Baskin 31 flavors of of uh of sectarian conflict. So great chat as always. Appreciate I'll be let about Larry Johnson. I'm very confident of that. Yeah. All right. Um, but I'll I will confirm 100% in the next half an hour to an hour. Cool. All right. All right. All right, guys. I'll see you live. See you soon, guys. I'll see you live in about five, six minutes with Len Diesson. Bye-bye.
Q: Who did Paul Wolfowitz and Doug Feith work for in the Bush Presidency?
A: In the George W. Bush administration, Paul Wolfowitz served as Deputy Secretary of Defense and Douglas Feith served as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. Both reported directly to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, working within the Department of Defense hierarchy under President Bush.
ELSEWHERE:
Rumsfeld let Bin Laden escape in 2001, says Senate report
Inquiry says US failure to attack al-Qaida’s leader at Tora Bora had far-reaching consequences, The Guardian. Sunday November 29 2009.
Senate Report Explores 2001 Escape by bin Laden From Afghan Mountains
New York Times. November 28, 2009
Like several previous accounts, the committee’s report blames Gen. Tommy R. Franks, then the top American commander, and Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, for not putting a large number of American troops there lest they fuel resentment among Afghans.
TORA BORA REVISITED: HOW WE FAILED TO GET BIN LADEN AND WHY IT MATTERS TODAY A Report To Members OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE John F. Kerry, Chairman ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS, NOVEMBER 30, 2009
About the time Fury was desperately concocting scenarios for going after bin Laden and getting rejections from up the chain of command, Franks was well into planning for the next war—the invasion of Iraq. A Shift in Attention and Resources On November 21, 2001, President Bush put his arm on Defense Secretary Rumsfeld as they were leaving a National Security Council meeting at the White House. ‘‘I need to see you,’’ the president said. It was 72 days after the 9/11 attacks and just a week after the fall of Kabul. But Bush already had new plans. According to Bob Woodward’s book, Plan of Attack, the president said to Rumsfeld: ‘‘What kind of a war plan do you have for Iraq? How do you feel about the war plan for Iraq?’’ Then the president told Woodward he recalled saying: ‘‘Let’s get started on this. And get Tommy Franks looking at what it would take to protect America by removing Saddam Hussein if we have to.’’ Back at the Pentagon, Rumsfeld convened a meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to draft a message for Franks asking for a new assessment of a war with Iraq. The existing operations plan had been created in 1998 and it hinged on assembling the kind of massive international coalition used in Desert Storm in 1991.