YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → WW3 DEBATE: “We’re On the Brink of Global Collapse”

WW3 DEBATE: “We’re On the Brink of Global Collapse” — Transcript

by Chris Williamson · 31,704 words · 4,685 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00Hello friends. I'm bringing a brand new
0:02live show across the UK and Ireland this
0:04October. It's stories, psychology,
0:06audience Q&As's, and whatever happens
0:08when thousands of overthinkers
0:09voluntarily leave the house and end up
0:10in the same room together. I'd love to
0:12see you there. The last tour completely
0:13sold out, so make sure that you snag
0:16tickets now using the link in the
0:17description or heading to Chris
0:19Williamson. Dublin's already sold out.
0:21Loads of venues are limited. Tickets are
0:23very limited, so get yours now. Chris
0:25Williamson.
0:27There's a lot to pay attention to right
0:28now given how many global conflicts are
0:31happening, shifting political powers,
0:33populist uprisings. What do you think is
0:36the biggest threat to global peace at
0:38the moment?
0:39>> The biggest threat to global peace we're
0:41about to see in our midterm elections.
0:43It's the internal divisions in the
0:44United States. Uh those internal
0:47divisions have been building for the
0:48last 5 years. They've been normalizing
0:51political violence in the United States.
0:53uh they've led to the rise of leaders in
0:55the United States that find the use of
0:57political violence increasingly normal.
1:00That's how we got to the Iran war. And
1:02so that um uh a lot of the specifics
1:06that we see Chris around the world uh I
1:09think it's very important to understand
1:11um that there is a hub uh the United
1:14States is the most important the most
1:16powerful country on the planet and what
1:18happens internally in the United States
1:21can have ripple effects around the world
1:24and so I think it's really important to
1:27not just talk about all the other issues
1:29but to see the United States is at the
1:32center of many maybe not all but many of
1:35those issues and what's happening
1:37internally in the United States. This is
1:40increasingly becoming a house divided.
1:43>> What do you think?
1:44>> I think the United States right now is
1:45the greatest threat to global peace
1:48because for the past 30 years Pax
1:50Americana has been dominant and now with
1:53the rise of other powers, United States
1:55refuses to seed its global hijgemony and
1:58this is why we're seeing conflicts all
1:59around the world specifically in the
2:00Middle East.
2:03I don't see a global conflict coming.
2:05Many regional conflicts are coming
2:07because the global system is
2:09restructuring itself. There is not
2:12really a global system at this point as
2:14there was during the European imperial
2:17age or during the period of uh after
2:21world war ii called. So rather than
2:25looking at a confrontation like nuclear
2:29war between the United States and
2:31Russia, we're looking at various smaller
2:34elements. Sometimes the United States
2:36gets involved.
2:38But as to the international conflict,
2:41I lived through the 1970s. It was
2:43intense in the United States, but it was
2:45intense over a very small war. M
2:47>> so the idea that there's a global system
2:49at this point it's emerging
2:52but because it's not emerged yet many of
2:55the wars are going to be regional
2:56>> right so you still see is it right in
2:58thinking that Ukraine Iran whatever
3:01happens Taiwan China that these things
3:04are separate conflicts rather than part
3:06of a single global conflict
3:08>> well I think that we may the three of us
3:11disagree about whether or not there will
3:13be a world war II a true unified global
3:16able war. I just want to point out that
3:20right now we're experiencing multiple
3:22regional conflicts. They are linked in
3:25some ways, but together they are
3:27wrecking the global economy.
3:30>> They're having a major effect on the
3:33global economy of what's happening in
3:36Russia, what the Russia Ukraine war,
3:38what's happening in in the Iran uh
3:41conflict. And if we had a conflict with
3:44Taiwan and China on top of that, even if
3:48those remain three separate arenas,
3:51Chris, uh we might be heading to
3:53something far worse than a 1930s
3:55depression. So for the world, so this
3:58would have blowback effects on Africa
4:00even though they wouldn't even be
4:02involved. So we can usefully talk about
4:05whether we should expect a true World
4:08War III uh scenario, but we are already
4:12seeing global consequences
4:15um in ways we haven't seen since World
4:18War II. We did not see these global
4:20consequences in the Vietnam War, for
4:23example. Uh we did not see these global
4:25consequences with the two what we called
4:27forever wars, Iraq and Afghanistan.
4:30We're seeing them now. And that even if
4:33it doesn't become army on army, Chinese
4:37army on American, that kind of force on
4:39force, this is already
4:42amazingly consequential for our lives.
4:46>> I think what's really important to
4:47appreciate is that yes, these conflicts
4:50are regional, but there's a power
4:52orchestrating these conflicts, and that
4:53is United States. So um it is United
4:56States that unilaterally without any
4:58reason decided to attack Iran which
5:01started the war in the Middle East which
5:03is right now threatening to destroy the
5:05global economy. The war in Ukraine can
5:07also be be blamed on United States
5:09because um um at the onset of the war in
5:132020 uh 2022 uh Putin and Nanski would
5:17have come to an agreement but Boris
5:19Johnson flew into Kiev and convinced
5:22Zanski to fight this war. right now in
5:26um in Southeast Asia, the United States
5:28is withdrawing, but we're seeing Japan
5:31being remilitarized and we can imagine
5:33that Japan is being supported by the
5:34United States. In fact, if you look at
5:36the National Defense Strategy, which was
5:38published by the Pentagon uh earlier
5:40this year, it calls for United States
5:43withdrawing from the global stage and
5:45creating balance of power in in each
5:47different region, Europe, um the Middle
5:50East and uh uh Southeast Asia. So you
5:53can make the argument that the United
5:55States is intent on maintaining its
5:57global hegemony, but it recognizes that
5:59it doesn't have the military power, the
6:01political will to control the entire
6:04world as it did in Americana. So it is
6:06um basically offloading its
6:08responsibilities to its regional allies,
6:10NATO in Europe, uh Israel and the GCC in
6:13the Middle East, and Japan in uh
6:15Southeast Asia.
6:16>> See, I agree with about 70% of what he's
6:19saying. I I believe Well, I think you're
6:22really on it. And um I think that the
6:25parts I really agree with are that
6:28American decisions have been at the
6:31taproot of both of these wars, the war
6:35with Russia and Ukraine and uh the Iran
6:38war that we're experiencing right now.
6:41where I may disagree is I think that
6:44they're very much um a function of uh
6:48decisions and decision makers that have
6:51been evolving given our internal
6:54divisions in our country. I think that
6:56we shouldn't look at this as simply a
6:59product of a global cycle of empires. I
7:02think we need to see that for the last
7:0410 years, we have seen in 10 years, not
7:07just two years, an [clears throat]
7:09incredible rise of political violence in
7:12the United States that is being driven,
7:14Chris, by major social changes inside of
7:18the United States, the shift from uh a
7:21white majority democracy to a white
7:23minority democracy for the first time in
7:26our 250 year history, the shift of uh
7:30massive wealth to the top 1% over the
7:33last several decades. These are having
7:36amazing consequences inside of our uh
7:40government. It's producing a set of
7:42priorities and leaders which are very
7:45different. So we are now seeing leaders
7:48that find political violence normal and
7:52what this is what you see with uh
7:55President Trump both in his first term
7:57and now increasingly in his second term
7:59and also some by uh Democratic leaders.
8:03You're also seeing because of these
8:06internal problems Chris I think uh not
8:10sufficient attention to the consequences
8:13of these global decisions. So I don't
8:16believe that we have uh s over the last
8:1910 years devoted the amount of attention
8:23to the consequences of uh issues with
8:28Russia and Ukraine, issues with Iran. Uh
8:31I think that and I think that because
8:33I've advised every White House from 2001
8:35to 2024. I know something about this
8:38degree uh of of attention and I am um uh
8:43overall uh observing not no attention. I
8:47think that's not quite right. And and I
8:49don't mean that they're they're they're
8:50truly uh trivial, but nonetheless,
8:53um the uh the idea that we would uh
8:58continue to support NATO expansion and
9:01and uh um make Ukraine a much much
9:06stronger country even after Putin uh
9:09takes Crimea in 2014 without serious
9:12attention to the consequences. I think
9:15this is this is there there's just not
9:17there's there's too much we need to see
9:20as we're becoming internally absorbed
9:23we're having we have less cognitive
9:25space for the thing that I often do
9:29strategy in the rest of the world and
9:31that lack of cognitive space has not
9:35just been a function of one president I
9:37think it's been a function of multiple
9:39presidents and I think that's really
9:41what maybe it's not a disagreement it's
9:43what I would maybe an extension or I
9:45would add to what you're saying.
9:47>> I guess people keep debating whether
9:49America is losing its grip as a world
9:50superpower. 20 years from now, do you
9:54think America is relatively stronger or
9:56weaker than it is now?
9:56>> I would say it's not losing it, it's
9:59wanting to lose it. The past 80 years
10:02was not been a happy time for the United
10:03States. For the United States, the
10:06fundamental principle is command of the
10:08sea from a long time. Keeping them away
10:11from the Atlantic ports was essential in
10:14this. This draw drew us into creating
10:18NATO, creating a economic system based
10:23on Breton and all these other things
10:25that put tremendous pressure on the
10:27American economy. Even recently we had
10:29to bail out the Japanese in a way. So
10:33what I see the United States is doing
10:35okay and these things are not gracefully
10:37done ever is pulling back from its
10:41vulnerability to the world not engaging
10:43it. Now the world is not
10:47seeing it that way because
10:50various things happened. Okay one the
10:52cold war ended in Ukraine. The Russian
10:55army could not take Ukraine after five
10:59years. This is not a military threat. So
11:03no, the cold war is obsolete and the
11:05idea that so the American re desire and
11:10is to dis and was predictable was to
11:13disengage to the extent possible. But
11:16what the Americans are doing is not
11:19increasing their power around the world.
11:21It's trying to remove its vulnerability
11:23from the world and the world feels
11:25betrayed. So the United [clears throat]
11:27States is no longer
11:29>> doing it. It no longer wants the role it
11:32had for the past 80 years.
11:34>> But if we look out 20 years, Chris, and
11:37you ask the question, well, right now
11:39we're 26% of the world's GDP. China's
11:4217% of the world's GDP. So we still are
11:45number one, at least in terms of the
11:47numbers. And uh but if we look out 20
11:49years, China has a tremendous advantage
11:52going forward. But it's not just the
11:53slope of the curve. Um, a big thing is
11:57happening, Chris, and it's been
11:58happening for the last 20 years, which
12:00is we are losing the next industrial
12:03advance, the next economic revolution,
12:07and we're losing it to China. And we're
12:09not even noticing it very much, Chris.
12:12So, in June of 2025, while we were
12:16bombing Foraux, I spent two weeks in
12:18China touring China's advanced
12:20industries. Uh, this was in uh Beijing.
12:23Um, and this was in Wuhan. This was in
12:26Hang Cho, this was in Senchen. Most
12:29people go to China. First of all, they
12:31stopped going after CO and most people
12:33who went tend to go to Beijing and
12:34Shanghai. I want to see the actual
12:36advanced industries on the shop floor.
12:39>> For from my point of view, China is a
12:41terrifically difficult position
12:43economically.
12:44>> Well, let's let me just explain. You can
12:46challenge it, George, but let me explain
12:47what I mean. what I saw on that two-week
12:50trip. I thought I was going to go and
12:52look at sort of Alibaba, see how they
12:54were a little bit ahead of different. I
12:56came away with a completely different
12:58impression. It was the most important
13:00trip. I've been I was in China in 1979,
13:02so I had some experience here. What I
13:05saw was not just uplifting of individual
13:08companies, Chris, uplifting whole
13:11cities. Wuhan, whole cities. So, not
13:15just the advanced sector, the health
13:17care sector, the construction sector.
13:20Uh, when you look at what's happening in
13:23the cities, we're we're we're getting
13:2510% of the idea of what's happening
13:28inside of China in the New York Times
13:31and in the media. Uh, February, I want
13:34to organize a trip to go back to China.
13:36Chris, if you want to come, I think
13:38you'd find this really interesting
13:40because it's what's So, I was born in
13:42Erie, Pennsylvania. I went to the
13:44University of Pittsburgh in the rust
13:46belt. That's if you go from Chicago to
13:49say Pittsburgh that's about and down to
13:51St. Louis that's about 50 million people
13:53give or take. Well, that's about the
13:55half moon crescent from Wuhan to
13:59Senchan. not identical but pretty close
14:01as as because as you know that area it's
14:04a huge country but that crescent we're
14:06talking about what China has done and
14:08literally in about uh 10 or 12 years it
14:11has some roots in the '90s is they have
14:14uplifted those in that entire 50 million
14:18people Chris they integrate why are they
14:22ahead they're not just building
14:24companies their universities are tightly
14:27producing the BAS the MAS, the PhDs. Why
14:31can't we produce more Patriot missiles
14:34right now? Why can't we just have an
14:35operation warp speed? We don't have the
14:39workers to do that because we're not
14:42integrating the advanced workforce with
14:45the advanced with also advanced health
14:47care and by the way advanced driver's
14:49license. China's cities is not China.
14:55The rural areas of China are profoundly
14:57important.
14:59It is the second largest economy in the
15:01world. In terms of per capita income,
15:03it's 71st.
15:05The fundamental problem that China has
15:07is it cannot consume the products it
15:11produces.
15:12Right now, Xi just a few weeks ago
15:15announced a plan to make more demands
15:18possible in the rural regions which are
15:21very different from the coastal regions.
15:23And so when we look at China, we look at
15:27a country that has an economy too much,
15:29too large for it to consume. It is
15:32dependent on exports with the United
15:34States being the largest importer of
15:36Chinese goods.
15:37>> Mhm.
15:38>> So when you take a look at China and you
15:40take a look at how the the summits are
15:44evolving and what's happening there, we
15:47see a very I see a very different China
15:49from you. I see the cities in marvelous
15:52shape. the the coastal areas and South
15:54China, but that's not the majority of
15:57China. The Chinese still have the rural
16:00area where Mao Tong went to raise the a
16:04rebel army on a long march and bought it
16:08back and that's what it did. Now when
16:11you look at it from a point of view on a
16:14global basis, it is the second largest
16:16economy. When you look at it in its
16:18ability to sustain itself, it heavily
16:21depends on exports and what are the
16:23things that
16:24>> it can't consume what it produces.
16:25>> It can't it can't possibly. It has
16:27tremendous capabilities but it's per
16:30capita income is very low. So you you
16:34see a situation emerging
16:37as emerged several times before
16:40particularly with the United States.
16:41United States was a China
16:43>> Mhm.
16:43>> of the 19th century. That is to say,
16:47first the civil war took place after
16:50that an industrial rising that heavily
16:53dependent on exports to Europe. So when
16:56you take a look at
16:59the relationship between the economic
17:02issues and the political issues and so
17:03on and so forth, the nature of the
17:05United States
17:08is to simultaneously have deep divisions
17:12and be able somehow to manage it. Okay.
17:15So when I look at these events and I
17:17lived through the 70s
17:20this this loathing of various patches if
17:25you were not anti-war and went in
17:27university you did not come out of that
17:29university frequently so I'm not so
17:32impressed by the tensions within the
17:34United States
17:35>> I don't know of the period where they
17:37weren't there we survived the civil war
17:40which was really a a big discussion okay
17:43so I see United States as constantly
17:46dynamically evolving through tension.
17:49>> So if I was to categorize at least what
17:51I'm hearing so far uh from your side,
17:54China very impressive, not just the
17:56upward trend but the the integration
17:58this almost uh like systemic blending of
18:02education in with industry etc etc
18:05>> beyond what we're doing.
18:06>> Yes. And internal strife inside of
18:09America that's worrying. This could
18:10cause fracture and fisher from your
18:12side. China. Well, it's got some
18:15problems. Look at the rural area of
18:17this. Yes, you've got uh great
18:19development inside of the cities, but
18:21those are pockets that are relatively
18:23localized. That makes it less. Also,
18:25you've got this high export dependency
18:28because you can't consume what it is
18:29that you produce. And America's been
18:31through before. It can probably put
18:33up with it.
18:33>> First of all, China is vulnerable
18:36because it depends on these exports.
18:38assume that the other economies
18:41falter
18:42>> where they can't buy it or there's a
18:44political shift, the Chinese get into
18:48trouble because they must have access to
18:50the global market the same way the
18:52United States had to in the early part
18:54of this century.
18:55>> Yeah.
18:55>> So when we look at all these things okay
18:58we say okay China has evolved
19:00dramatically. It has not solved this fun
19:04fundamental problem which historically
19:06was there. the difference between the
19:08coastal regions of South China and the
19:11interior. This is what led to the
19:14revolution on the Mahatung
19:16>> and he didn't solve that problem.
19:19>> Jang, give me your perspective. We've
19:20seen two two relatively diametrically
19:22opposed insights [clears throat] here.
19:23Give me yours.
19:24>> Yeah. So, I am completely surprised by
19:27this, but unfortunately, and my wife's
19:29going to get very angry at me for this,
19:30but I'm going to have a great George on
19:32on this issue. Um, so let me explain my
19:35reasoning. So George mentions the
19:37vulnerability of American empire and
19:39that's the US dollar as a global reserve
19:40currency. The American people do not
19:43want this system because essentially the
19:45world can become a parasite on America.
19:48Right? So if America has a global
19:50reserve currency then um then uh
19:53America's capital markets are completely
19:55free and open and liberal. You cannot
19:57control capital flows and this caused
19:59tremendous problems. for example, wealth
20:01inequality and financial
20:02financialization, the hauling out
20:03American and the American manufacturing
20:05sector. Okay, that's one issue. Another
20:07issue is America needs to guarantee
20:11global peace and security. So that's why
20:13its army is spread throughout the world.
20:15Um that's why it's um Pentagon budget is
20:18a trillion dollars a year. So the United
20:21States assumes a lot of cost. And who
20:23benefits from this arrangement? Well,
20:25two forces. Wall Street, right? Because
20:27of the financialization.
20:29uh but also the Chinese Communist Party
20:31because as George points out, China is
20:34an export dependent economy. In fact,
20:37you can make the argument that what
20:38China is doing is free riding on
20:41American system, right? Because because
20:44when Chinese ships export their goods to
20:47Europe, to the Middle East, to the
20:49United States, it's it's being protected
20:50by the US Navy. Not this Chinese Navy,
20:53the US Navy. China China doesn't even
20:55have a blue water navy. It's the
20:57Americans that protect the seas. And
20:59when Chinese do exchanges, when they
21:02trade, it's through the US dollar. So,
21:05um, the China is completely dependent on
21:07Pax Americana. And so, the idea that as
21:10Pax America is falling, China will rise
21:13makes no sense. Um, and I mean, the
21:17reality is, as George points out, China
21:19lacks domestic consumption power. Its
21:22people do not spend any money because
21:23its people do not have any money. All
21:26the rich people are going where to
21:28United States. That's problem number
21:29one. There's a huge problem that we
21:31haven't discussed which is the
21:32demographic issue where China is aging
21:34rapidly because of the one child policy.
21:36China has no workforce. That's why China
21:39is spending everything on robotics and
21:41on semiconductors and on AI because
21:44China doesn't have the productive force
21:46it needs to carry it through the past 20
21:49through the next 20 40 years because of
21:51the aging crisis. So China's in a world
21:53of trouble. But where I disagree with
21:55>> is a bigger world of trouble than
21:56America.
21:57>> Oh yeah, absolutely. Because regardless
21:59of how you feel about the United States
22:01right now, the United States is a
22:02self-sufficient,
22:04resourcerich
22:06economy with a very vibrant, energetic,
22:09young population. China has the opposite
22:11problem, which is that it is extremely
22:13extremely exportorientated. Um, it's a
22:16very poor country, very limited
22:17resources. It's very dependent on global
22:20supply chains. And what's breaking down
22:21right now are global supply chains. Tell
22:23me if this sounds familiar. You train
22:26regularly. You eat reasonably well. You
22:28feel fine, but you're just kind of going
22:29off vibes. Most people have absolutely
22:32no idea what's going on inside their
22:34body. And that is why I partnered with
22:36Function. Function gives you access to
22:37more than 160 advanced lab tests
22:40spanning hormones, heart health, kidney
22:41function, and even detects early signals
22:44linked to more than 50 types of cancer.
22:46To put that in perspective, your typical
22:47annual physical might test 20 markers.
22:50Function runs over 160. It's huge. Best
22:52of all, you test twice a year and
22:54everything lives inside of a simple
22:55dashboard. So, you track trends over
22:57time, make sure you're moving in the
22:58right direction. And this level of
22:59testing would usually cost thousands.
23:01But with function, it is $365 per year.
23:04Just $1 a day to actually know what's
23:06happening inside of your body. And right
23:07now, you can get $25 off, bring it down
23:09to $340 bucks. Get the exact same blood
23:12panels that I use and save $25 by going
23:14to the link in the description below or
23:16heading to
23:16functionhealth.com/modernwisdom.
23:19That's functionhealth.combottomwisdom.
23:22>> So let me just respond in this way. I
23:26had exactly their image 10 years ago.
23:30Exactly their image. So I first went to
23:32China in 1979. Then I didn't go back
23:34until 2012. 10 trips from 2012 to 2015.
23:38Then I went back in 2025.
23:41In two even as late as 2015, I had
23:44exactly their image. Here's what
23:47happened in this trip and this is what
23:50really are the core things that I'm
23:52seeing. Um, number one, the Alibaba,
23:57BYD, Xiaomé, I didn't just go and look
24:00at the shop floors. I met with their
24:03executives. They showed me their growth
24:05plans. Um, it's not just that they have
24:08been spurting up since CO. So all this
24:11building massively development since
24:13since co it's that since 2017
24:16essentially the Trump tariffs that were
24:17first put on China in 2017 by President
24:20Trump there's been a dramatic uh
24:23emphasis to disengage the uh development
24:28of the next generation of industries
24:31from chi from America. So you can't buy
24:35the cutting edge BYD vehicles here in
24:37the United States. uh you can't buy the
24:39next level Teslas of Xiaomé here in the
24:42United States and they're not trying to
24:44sell them here. Also, the whole issue
24:46with Walmart and um so forth, that's the
24:49last generation of what's occurring.
24:51They showed me their growth models. They
24:54are still export oriented, but they're
24:56not export oriented to Europe and
24:58they're not export oriented to the
24:59United States, although they take a
25:00little crumbs on the on the edges. It is
25:03built around Asia. They showed me the
25:06growth model. they're really counting on
25:09are in Asia. Now, true in the short term
25:11here there's some problems with the Iran
25:14war and of course Asia. So, we talked
25:16about that with the actual top VPs, the
25:19exact the top executives, and they
25:21explained to me that the bottom line is
25:25the more the United States gets sucked
25:27into a quagmire with Iran, yes, they
25:30will run into some short-term problems,
25:33but just like CO, when they came out of
25:36those problems of the supply chain
25:37problem in CO, they jettisoned ahead.
25:40They thought they were likely going to
25:42get ahead. And if you look at the
25:44numbers of what the BYYD production has
25:46been this year in 2026,
25:49uh what the numbers of Xiaomé has been,
25:51uh the numbers at least we can see, uh
25:53they're not as good as they were hoping,
25:56but they're about at the same level as
25:57the last year. So, China's not
25:59collapsing.
25:59>> Chinese growth rate is down to a little
26:01over 4%. It was previously 5% and it was
26:06a 15% growth rate.
26:07>> And I'm saying this is the wrong
26:09measure. This would be like measuring
26:11America's growth rate without noticing
26:13electrification in the 1880s, which
26:16starts in this really small way. America
26:18has been great because since 1880,
26:23we have led every technological
26:26revolution since 1880. The AI revolution
26:30that we're right going through right
26:31now, we hope we're going to come out
26:34ahead. The stock market's certainly
26:36betting on that. I'm telling you what I
26:38saw in China. It's not just about Deep
26:40Seek and Alibaba. They're building the
26:43core infrastructure to be able to beat
26:47us.
26:48>> If I may, let me ask you this question.
26:50Um, so right now, Japan is remorizing
26:54rapidly. Yes.
26:55>> And it's building an alliance with
26:56India, the Philippines, and Australia,
26:58the Quad, right? It seems to me in the
27:01long term the intention is to embargo
27:03China to cut off supply chains
27:05>> with with India coming into it,
27:07Indonesia coming into it and so on and
27:09so forth. So from Japan all the way to
27:12India there is at sea a blockade.
27:15>> That's right. So what is China's
27:16response to to this possible embargo?
27:19>> So as I look out here um first of all if
27:23you're quite right that there's a
27:25military possible consequence here. Um,
27:28I think President Xi's question to Trump
27:30was exactly the right question, which
27:32was, um, are you, President Trump, going
27:35to fight here if there's a conflict
27:37between China and Taiwan? And President
27:40Trump said he wouldn't answer that
27:41question because if you uh yes you have
27:44the quad moving forward but if you take
27:47out the United States from that equation
27:50as I think we are heading in that
27:52direction then this is just a very
27:55different competition between um uh the
27:58Quad and China. They might fight. They
28:01might decide to fight just the Quad in
28:03China. But uh and both will go down
28:06some, but this is not a sure winner for
28:09the Quad over China. So I think this
28:11would be a very different and notice
28:14this is not China provoking the war.
28:16That's right. This is this is outsiders
28:19attacking China. And what is what did
28:20Mao what what happened with Mao? This
28:23was a a gigantic revolution inside of
28:26China to foreign conquest. So this is
28:28not talking about unifying China.
28:30>> If I could, the Taiwan situation has
28:33profoundly changed inside of Taiwan.
28:37The population is divided almost down
28:40the middle with the KMT, thewaming,
28:43which is in favor of reuniting with
28:48China in some sort of way. That's about
28:51half the population. The other half the
28:53population is very much opposed to it.
28:57From the Chinese point of view,
28:59Taiwan was a very great danger because
29:02between Japan and the Philippines,
29:04Taiwan was a blocking force.
29:06>> The force island chain.
29:07>> H the force island chain.
29:08>> Yeah.
29:08>> Yeah.
29:09>> That's the first island chain that they
29:12want Taiwan opened. Okay.
29:15United States does not have a
29:16fundamental interest on Taiwan. So the
29:20idea is we see that Xi is coming to the
29:24United States and he has said this week
29:28we're going to reach many great
29:30agreements in the United States. One of
29:32the forecast I had was that this year
29:34China and the United States would come
29:35to a fundamental understanding with each
29:37other. Why? China must have that
29:39understanding. The United States is not
29:42a trivial partner. Okay? It is the
29:44number one trading partner and it is the
29:47only military threat to China.
29:49Therefore, accommodation is rational for
29:52China and these talks have been taking
29:54place. So, what I'm seeing in China is a
29:59tremendous amount of instability in the
30:00political system. The economic system is
30:03moving ahead properly.
30:06But China has a fundamental problem
30:09because as I said it must have a decent
30:12relation with the United States and the
30:14United States has said to it we cannot
30:16be dependent on China for its imports
30:19if it is also possible to go to war with
30:21us. That happened during the Arab oil
30:23embargo. We were dependent on the Arabs.
30:26The Israelis went to war and they cut it
30:28embargo. It was a disaster in 1970s.
30:31So if we are too dependent on a country
30:34with whom we have hostile relations,
30:36that's unsustainable.
30:38>> Are you suggesting that the US and China
30:39are going to become friends soon?
30:41>> We're not going to be have friends.
30:42They're not going to be lovers. They
30:43simply need each other.
30:45>> And here I agree. So my whole point was
30:47not that we must then have conflict with
30:49China. In fact, when I was in China, I
30:51was giving talks uh arguing that given
30:54everything I just said, I think that
30:56China can rise peacefully with the
30:59United States. That's my big position
31:01and it's because when I look out at the
31:04growth of power, what is power today?
31:08Power is modernization, technological
31:11development. We see that right now with
31:14uh the drone with what we're
31:15experiencing with Iran. We're not losing
31:17to Iran because of Iran's 4% of it's
31:21because of we're behind in understanding
31:23the second precision revolution. What's
31:27happening, Chris, is others are
31:29evolving. We're used to thinking we, the
31:32United States, are on the cutting edge
31:34of everything. And what we're learning
31:37is we're not on the cutting edge of
31:39everything. Now, that doesn't mean we
31:40have to go to war against China. I was
31:42also impressed. President Xi basically
31:44asked Trump about the Thusidities trap.
31:47Are you are we going to go to war? So, I
31:50believe these are the right questions. I
31:52don't think we're heading to a war with
31:54China if we're smart because what we
31:56need to do is develop our industrial
31:59base. We need to develop and modernize
32:02internally. This is a choice. Back to
32:04your question, will we be replaced as
32:07the world's number one in 20 years? This
32:10is a choice. If we keep fighting these
32:12horrible quagmires, if we stop, if we
32:15don't develop internally here, if we
32:18don't catch up to China, the answer is
32:21yes. Given where we're at at the moment,
32:23looking at your respective crystal
32:25balls, which country do you think is the
32:28most powerful in the world in 20 years
32:29time?
32:30>> The United States is the only global
32:32power. China is a regional power. You
32:34cannot push force into the Atlantic and
32:37so on. We can. So, we're reaching a
32:39world that's very different.
32:41>> That doesn't mean that the United States
32:43is in decline. Okay? Certainly, I agree
32:46with you on many of these things, but I
32:48don't think it's fundamental to the
32:50position of the United States. It is the
32:52United States occupied a position in the
32:55world which caused it a great deal in
32:58many different dimensions
33:00and that backing off from that reduces
33:03tensions within the United States and so
33:05on.
33:05>> It's I was thinking that there would be
33:06some sort of seesaw probably between
33:08China and the US, but maybe there was
33:10another player that I I hadn't thought
33:12about. Uh it sounds like both are in
33:15some form of mild decline.
33:17>> They're in flux. So my position is it's
33:21up to our leaders who's going to be
33:23number one in 2020. There's three
33:26dimensions of global power. I would look
33:28at dimension number one is uh the
33:31country's GDP is a fraction of world
33:34product. Right now we're 26% China's 17.
33:38But if you look forward here, this could
33:40easily flip-flop in 20 years. Uh the
33:43second is allies. How many friends do
33:46you have in the world? Well, look at
33:48what's happened with the tariffs. Look
33:49at what's happening with uh Canada right
33:51now today. What is happening is in the
33:54middle of this gigantic war that we're
33:57having with with with uh Iran, we are
33:59deciding to alienate uh friends. Well,
34:02who's likely to pick up those friends?
34:04It's going to be China. And then issue
34:06uh number three is our technological
34:09base, our growth. If the world economy
34:12goes over a cliff with our $40 trillion
34:15in debt, I think the idea that we're
34:17going to invest our way out of this in
34:18the AI I'm just look, maybe that will
34:21all work out, Chris. Okay. And we're
34:23going to be fine with 40.
34:25>> I'm laughing my way through the
34:26apocalypse. I don't know about you.
34:27>> Well, I'm just trying to explain these
34:28are the problems I'm worried about. So,
34:31I want
34:31>> Just one second. Let's hear Let's hear
34:32from Professor Jen. So um I think that
34:36these past 30 40 40 years of pax
34:38americana have been unique in human
34:40history. Never before had we we had a
34:43power that could span the entire globe
34:45that had a for the first time we had a
34:47global reserve currency. Um never before
34:50um had one nation been able to dictate
34:53the global economy. So I think Pax
34:55American has been unique in human
34:56history and I think we're reverting back
34:58to the mean which is more regional
35:00dominance. M um so the way that I
35:03examine how nation states um thrive or
35:07die is using three basic criteria which
35:10is going to be very different from
35:11yours. But first I look at energy
35:13basically how hardworking are the
35:15people. Second thing is openness which
35:18is how open are people to change? How
35:22how are they how much are they willing
35:23to absorb new ideas? The third is
35:25cohesion which is how much do they value
35:28their own neighbor. use if you if you
35:30actually use these three metrics okay
35:32energy uh openness and cohesion you find
35:36that in each region one nation will
35:38dominate above all else so in East Asia
35:41it will not be China that dominates it
35:42will be Japan that dominates it will be
35:45in uh in Europe it will either be
35:47Germany or Poland one of the two um
35:50Germany is more powerful but Poland is
35:52more cohesive and and you can tell me
35:54next week what what what you find
35:56>> it's more dynamic by far
35:57>> absolutely absolutely and it's more in
35:59danger it seems and that's
36:01>> more energetic
36:02>> energy.
36:03>> That's right. And then in in North
36:05America it's it's the United States by
36:06far. United States is so dominant that
36:08it United States could like keep on
36:10electing Donald Trump in the next
36:11>> could face plant its way through the
36:13next few decades and still
36:14>> unfortunately unfortunately that is the
36:15case United States and then in the
36:17Middle East I believe it is Israel that
36:19is most dominant.
36:20>> In other news, have you ever noticed how
36:22some websites make it ridiculously easy
36:24to buy while some feel infinitely
36:26harder? Back in my day, I had to walk 10
36:28miles to the local store.
36:30>> Aren't you younger than me?
36:31>> Yeah, but my dad got a DUI.
36:34>> Anyway, the reality is most businesses
36:37just get the website wrong. And if your
36:39setup is messy, you lose a ton of sales,
36:42which is why I'm such a massive fan of
36:44Shopify. They power 10% of all
36:46e-commerce in the United States,
36:48including brands like Gym Shark, Skiims,
36:50Aloe, and Mutonic. Because when it comes
36:53to converting browsers into buyers, they
36:55are best-in-class. Their checkout's 36%
36:57better on average compared to other
36:59platforms. And with Shopay, you can
37:00boost conversions by 50%. So upgrade
37:03your business and get the exact same
37:05checkout that we use at Newtonic with
37:06Shopify. You can sign up for a free
37:08trial period by going to the link in the
37:10description below or heading to
37:11shopify.com/modernwisdom.
37:14That's shopify.com/modernwisdom.
37:17>> Interesting on uh the US's ability to
37:20put its both of its feet in its mouth
37:21and continue to be a preeminent power.
37:24Does that help to smooth over some
37:28cracks and inefficiencies and
37:29instabilities inside of America? The
37:32momentum, just the sheer size of it
37:34means that there can be uh issues
37:36burbling below the surface that don't
37:38get seen for a little while and then
37:39eventually the sort of lid gets brought
37:41up. Obviously, you're talking about
37:42civil unrest. I don't know how likely
37:44you think civil unrest, proper civil
37:46unrest is going to be due to this. So,
37:48um, uh, I have coming out, Chris, a book
37:51called Our Own Worst Enemies: America in
37:53the Age of Violent Populism. Uh, it's
37:56pre-order now on Amazon. It'll be
37:58available in just a couple weeks to be
38:00in your mailbox. Um, and I've spent 5
38:02years studying this problem because my
38:05work on political violence, what I do,
38:08Chris, is I look at where is the biggest
38:10threat to America, the biggest threat.
38:13So, it changes from time to time. And
38:16what I started to see after the George
38:18Floyd protests, which were uh mostly
38:21peaceful, but what does mostly peaceful
38:22mean with the George Floyd protests?
38:24When 28 million are protesting and 7%
38:27are riots and political violence, that's
38:30millions of people who are unrest. Um,
38:32and then also in January 6, this is the
38:35first time in our history that we've had
38:37a violent mob supported by the president
38:40of the United States to try to uh stop
38:43the constitutional process of changing
38:46presidential power in the United States.
38:48Then we've had the rise of uh political
38:50assassinations and assassination
38:52attempts. Uh, I could go on and on. This
38:55is, I would say, um, akin to the 1960s.
38:58I agree. We've had some periods of
39:00violent populism before. or the book
39:02covers that. But what's different is
39:04it's on both the right and the left. The
39:06number one fact today is tens of
39:09millions of Americans on each side, I
39:12don't mean total, each side of the
39:14political spectrum support political
39:16violence for the goals that they also
39:19support. That's why you're getting uh
39:21support for very aggressive ICE tactics
39:24that against democratic protesters even
39:27after ICE kills those democratic
39:29>> argue that this is not the first time it
39:31happened. We had a civil war and that
39:33civil war we ripped ourselves apart and
39:36then came together again. There's a
39:38strangeness in the United States. Most
39:41countries that have that kind of civil
39:42war could not accommodate itself again.
39:46We are historically when we take a look
39:48at these various periods in history at
39:51each other's throats. It is one of the
39:53dimensions of the United States which is
39:55based on the fact that there were an
39:58invented country. Invented not only in
40:00the sense that the constitution was
40:02invented but that the population was
40:05invented. There was no other nations
40:08have histories of culture and so on. We
40:11constantly came together. So one of the
40:14things that the United States is very
40:15good at from the founding
40:19is being deeply divided because as John
40:21Adams said onethird of the people were
40:24for the revolution one third of people
40:26were against the revolution onethird of
40:28people didn't care
40:30>> that was his his reading. So I see the
40:33divisions in a very different way than
40:35you do. Well, I don't think it's good
40:37enough to say that we survived the Civil
40:39War because 600,000 people died in the
40:42Civil War. So, let's just be clear. We
40:44are 40 trillion in debt. The idea that
40:47sure, we'll just have a civil war and no
40:49problem. We'll get out of this just
40:51fine. This is the showing how he we've
40:54got to go to the civil war standard to
40:56to say we can survive a civil war. No,
40:59we will not be able to be anything like
41:01we won't even be a regional power.
41:03>> I disagree profoundly.
41:05There's a cultural nature. China has a
41:08culture. It has a history. It has an
41:10evolution. Britain has a history and so
41:12on. Okay.
41:13>> Thank you.
41:14>> When you take a look at or you used to
41:17shut up, dude. [laughter] All right.
41:19Shut up. Okay.
41:20>> When you take a look at American
41:22history, you measure yourself and your
41:25state of your company against something.
41:28Otherwise, you're constantly in a
41:30feeling of this has never been so
41:33terrible. So you have to have a sense of
41:35proportion on what goes on. So when we
41:38look at the the division in the United
41:42States between World War II between the
41:44isolationists
41:46and the interventionists, we have
41:48constantly approached the world deeply
41:51divided. Okay, I saw that mentioned the
41:54civil war because that was the most
41:56extreme example.
41:58But even the world the revolution was
42:01not a joint universal uprising. It was
42:06deeply divided and my wife's family had
42:09to move to Canada because after they won
42:12>> that's a high price to pay.
42:14>> Well, they were the point I'm making
42:16here is that
42:17>> put me in the wall.
42:18>> One of the things about the Americans is
42:21we're constantly having the feeling
42:23we're going to hell. We have the ability
42:25to overestimate tremendously our
42:28weaknesses and underestimate the
42:31tremendous strengths. This is where I
42:33have to respect you. I disagree with
42:35you. I look at the past as a measure of
42:40the culture and its flexibility and
42:43viability even under pressure.
42:45>> Do you think America is a country
42:47permanently in strife internally or is
42:49there something unique about the modern
42:52>> Well, let me let me also be clear. My
42:53book is explaining we're not heading to
42:55civil war. We are heading to violent
42:59populism and we're in the middle of
43:00violent populism.
43:01>> Can you explain what the difference is,
43:03please?
43:03>> Yes. Civil war is where you have armies
43:06going toe-to-toe. Truly, we're this is
43:08um battle after battle. So, we start to
43:10see the movies on civil war. These are,
43:13I think, the uh extreme uh scenarios.
43:17And we can talk about extreme scenarios.
43:19I hope we would never get there. I don't
43:21find them acceptable, but I don't think
43:22that's really what our future is. Um, I
43:26think our future is more we're more in
43:28danger of becoming turkey, for example,
43:31where because we have normalized
43:33political violence, it starts to become
43:36normal for the president to absorb more
43:39and more powers under the presidency.
43:43Uh, and then also to sort of hide
43:45things. So, this isn't just happening
43:47with President Trump. during um
43:49President Biden's presidency uh we had
43:51open borders essentially we had 10
43:53million plus come into the country and
43:56yet this was all the image was oh no
43:58there's nothing happening at the border
44:00it's literally not happening uh and that
44:03was um uh by a democratic president so
44:06what I'm trying to point out Chris is
44:08that we're in a world where because
44:11political violence is becoming normal
44:13and and George is finding it well sure
44:15it's just okay it's just another day in
44:17America this is what I'm t this is what
44:19the book's about. It's about how
44:22political violence has become normal for
44:24tens of millions of Americans for the
44:26first time since the 1960s and this has
44:29consequences because it's on both the
44:32right and the left and we're coming to
44:34an election and this midterms we already
44:37have um and I was just on many podcasts
44:40we have people who are who are terrified
44:43that President Trump is going to seize
44:45ballot boxes. Now, why would they be
44:47terrified of that? Because President
44:49Trump said he was going to do that in
44:51February. [laughter]
44:52And so, so this isn't just coming out of
44:54nowhere. And and my and when I'm on
44:56those podcasts, I'm trying to say, "Yes,
44:58that may happen, but we will hold
45:00ourselves together, and here's how we're
45:02going to do it." So, I'm not trying to
45:04tell you we're heading to civil war.
45:07>> I'm also not trying to tell you civil
45:08war would just be fine. What I am trying
45:11to tell you is uh the way you're going
45:13to see um uh powers absorbed by the
45:17federal government uh things like use of
45:19martial law and so forth is because
45:22political violence has become normalized
45:25>> the normalization which is the
45:26difference on your what's your
45:28perspective on internal strife in
45:29America
45:30>> right so I think like the best
45:31historical analogy for the United States
45:33right now is the Roman Empire and the
45:36critical turning point uh for the Roman
45:38Empire is uh maybe 150 B.CE and this is
45:43the third Punic War. This is before the
45:45third Punic War starts between Carthage
45:47and Rome. At this point, Carthage is
45:49basically um destroyed and it's just an
45:53e economic center. It's no longer a
45:54military power. And there's a huge
45:55debate in the Roman Senate about what to
45:57do with Carthage. Uh Kato the Elder
46:00demanded the destruction of Carthage u
46:03because Carthage would always be a
46:04threat to Rome otherwise. Everyone else
46:07was like, "No guys, we cannot destroy
46:09Carthage because if we destroy Carthage,
46:12what will happen is we will have no
46:13external enemy and we will start to tear
46:16ourselves apart." Kale the Elder won and
46:18they destroy Carthage in the third punic
46:20war and then right what happens
46:21afterwards complete civil strife. And
46:23after the civil war starts, right, with
46:25um starting with um um um um it starts
46:31about 100 B.CE E um some something
46:34called the social war but it never
46:35really stops it. So social war then
46:38leads to the rise of uh Julius Caesar
46:41which leads to the rise of August
46:43Augustus Caesar which then leads to all
46:45sorts of wars. So that's a problem with
46:48United States. The United States is
46:49probably the most violent country on
46:51this planet like by far. There more
46:53there are more guns per capita. There
46:54are more guns than people and like
46:57America's the only nation to play
46:58football. Am I am I correct to say um
47:00only Americans play football? Yeah.
47:02>> Um so American Americans have this
47:04tremendous energy.
47:06>> Hang on. Hang on. You're going to have
47:07to draw the parallel between there's
47:09lots of guns in America and America is
47:10the only country to play football. I
47:12feel like I missed something there.
47:13>> Right. What what I'm saying is that
47:16America is a society that uh prides
47:19itself on the first amendment and the
47:21second amendment. It's a society that is
47:24um by the standards of every other
47:26society it's pretty aggressive and
47:28>> right the physical contact violence like
47:31doing like listening to Metallica and
47:33flying F-14s and
47:35>> So so with this energy you can you can
47:37either you know um direct it outwards to
47:40to you know conquering the world or if
47:42you don't direct it outwards and there's
47:44a fear that it becomes um directed
47:47inwards which could lead to civil war.
47:49It could be violent populism. It could
47:50be a fall uh civil war. It could also be
47:53an emergency very much like the movie
47:56one battle after another. But I I do
47:58think that right now at this point uh
48:00domestic violence is almost unavoidable.
48:03>> Why really why
48:06>> um if you I mean like you can you can
48:09agree or disagree but I think there are
48:10certain trends that that are in place
48:13that make in internal u violence um
48:16unavoidable. So the first is just the
48:19wealth inequality, the financialization
48:21of society.
48:22>> This is what I was talking about.
48:23>> That's one trend. But another major
48:25trend um is um the gerontocracy, the
48:31baby boomers. So what's happened is that
48:34um baby baby boomers I I apologize to to
48:38both of you, but the baby boomers have
48:39monopolized political power, economic
48:42wealth, and social status. And if you're
48:44a young person, you have absolutely no
48:47opportunity. Um, you know, so um, James
48:50B. Calhoun in 1960s, he ran a very
48:52successful experiment called the rat
48:54utopia experiment. He basically put rats
48:57in a paradise where there would be no um
49:00um, predators free food every day. And
49:04all that happened was the rats just
49:05turned against each other and killed
49:07each other. And the reason why is young
49:09men, especially young men, they strive
49:10for social status. If you don't give
49:12them social status, if they're not able
49:15to climb the social hierarchy and find
49:18recognition and status, they turn
49:20violent and and and this is just human
49:22nature. So, we tried to get at this. So,
49:24this this book uh that I'm coming out
49:27with, it's not um it's a product of this
49:30five years of research that we've been
49:32doing at the Chicago project on security
49:34and threats at the University of
49:35Chicago. Uh 20 national surveys. This is
49:39where all that millions of dollars. So,
49:40and why we did all that was to try to
49:43answer some of the why questions. So, we
49:46asked questions such as how worried are
49:48you you won't be as prosperous as your
49:51parents? That kind of gets at the wealth
49:53inequality and the social mobility.
49:55Well, we didn't just find out the
49:57general answer to that. We wanted to
49:59know did that make you more likely to
50:01support violence, political violence.
50:04And it turns out the more you think you
50:06won't be as prosperous as your parents,
50:09the more you support political violence
50:11on the right and on the left. It's a
50:14wedge. It drives both sides up. We also
50:18asked, remember I mentioned the second
50:19social change? We're transitioning from
50:21a white majority democracy to a white
50:24minority democracy. Well, other
50:26countries in the world, this has played
50:27a huge role in political violence.
50:29That's why Lebanon, for instance, has
50:30had so much political violence over the
50:33years, over the decades. Well, this is
50:35not unique to America, but it's
50:36happening for us now, Chris, for the
50:39first time. And so, we ask the question,
50:41if you are you uh happy with the
50:43transition to a white minority
50:45democracy, or are you unhappy and want
50:48to reverse it? And what do we find? If
50:51you want to reverse it, you are far more
50:53likely to support political violence on
50:55right-wing issues. If you want to keep
50:58it going, you're more likely to report
51:00political violence on left-wing issues.
51:03These are not happening in isolation.
51:06They're not just swirling around. And
51:08gee, it's kind of random why we're
51:10having a this rise of violent populism
51:13now. There are actual reasons and they
51:16overlap with some of what John's talking
51:18about, but we're able to get to the data
51:20to see, well, let's do some tests here
51:22and see, can we really see it in the
51:25data? And the answer is yes. And this is
51:28why um so I it's it's been very
51:31worrisome Chris for some time. So a year
51:34ago I published a big oped June 2025 in
51:37the New York Times. I was explaining
51:39this data in this oped and I was warning
51:41we're on the brink of major political
51:43violence and what happens? The Charlie
51:46Kirk assassination happens. What
51:48happens? We get the rise of Operation
51:51Midway Blitz and then Metro Blitz. And
51:53that wasn't the first time. So a year
51:56before that, this data was showing a
51:58rise of anger to the point of violence
52:01against President Trump. This was in
52:04June 2024. So I brought it to our
52:07National Sheriff's Association. So I'm
52:09connected with these. So remember
52:10advised White Houses, etc. And I warned
52:14them that there's a non-trivial
52:16possibility that we're going to see a
52:19assassination attempt against President
52:21Trump.
52:21>> When did you say this? This was the last
52:23week of June 2024.
52:26>> Now, they listened. I'm just gonna say,
52:28Chris, they listened and guess what
52:30happened on July 13th at And then what
52:35happened in my phone is it blew up
52:38because suddenly people were
52:41>> Let's get that data. [laughter]
52:42I thought it literally blew up. But
52:44>> well, no, no, lit. What I'm trying to
52:45say is Chris, this is so just as my 20
52:49years of modeling of the Iran war has
52:52led to some predictions about what might
52:54come in advance. We haven't but uh
52:56that's of course been well known in this
52:58at this point. This is not the first
52:59time my work has been studying um
53:03political violence, not just in the
53:05rearview mirror, but with an eye toward
53:07giving real decision makers, whether
53:10it's chief of staff of the Air Force,
53:12West Wing of the White House, uh FBI,
53:15um for uh I call it strategic
53:18intelligence. It's not tactical
53:20intelligence. It's where things are
53:22heading to see where probabilities of
53:26events in the future are shifting.
53:28That's my work.
53:29>> I don't I don't disagree with you. We
53:31are in a violent time. I simply put that
53:34in context of American history and
53:36American culture. So if we're doing
53:41something that we've never done before
53:44and never done before and recovered from
53:46and so on is very different from this is
53:48unprecedented.
53:50So when I look at culture, I take a look
53:54at the culture itself and its history
53:58and ask the question, is there a
54:00precedent for this? Okay, have we is
54:02this something we've never seen? If
54:04that's true, then there's a radical
54:07shift possible. If this is a cycle, a
54:10process of a cycle that periodically
54:13happens and comes and goes and is
54:15handled in the past, there's a high
54:17probability of a counteraction. of it
54:20subsiding.
54:22So this is why I go back to things that
54:24don't seem very relevant because they
54:27went away. But if you'd lived through
54:30the 1930s with the isolationists deeply
54:35in some ways anti-semitic and everything
54:37else and the tensions that were there,
54:39well, I've seen that. So when I talk
54:42about the civil war, it's just to say
54:44this was the most extreme event of this
54:46sort and we survived. So I ask question
54:50not only is a crisis coming which I
54:52completely agree with you on but is it
54:54in the nature of the culture of the
54:56United States to withstand those crises.
54:59Yeah, I suppose. Okay, so your your
55:01point is this might not be terminal.
55:02This might not be existential to the
55:04United States. Exactly. I mean, does
55:06[snorts] anybody think even if there was
55:07a civil war, there would be some people
55:09left and then you've got a country
55:11afterward like from the ashes something
55:13can come back.
55:14>> What came out of that of civil war was
55:18the most dynamic
55:20development economically
55:23perhaps in history. Oh, this is like an
55:24accelerationist argument. We could
55:26>> No, there it has nothing to do with the
55:27causality or this is necessary.
55:30>> I'm simply saying to you
55:32>> that if you get a fever that you've
55:35never had before, well, that's really
55:38significant.
55:39>> If on the other hand, you had another
55:41cold, you don't take it that seriously.
55:44I'm trying to put this in the context of
55:46the American nature. So, I'm arguing
55:49there's a culture, there's a nature,
55:51there's a history. I I just want to make
55:53two quick
55:53>> and one thing though one and one thing
55:55is up. Every time we saw it, we were
55:59finished. During the 70s, the idea the
56:02the the killings, this kidnappings, and
56:05everything that were going on,
56:07>> well, they went away. So, I'm saying
56:09there's a cyclical process. A quick
56:11aside, you've probably heard me talk
56:12about Element before, and that's because
56:14I've started every single morning the
56:15same way for the last 5 years now, which
56:17is a cold glass of water with Element in
56:19it. Element is an electrolyte drink
56:20mixed with everything that you need and
56:22nothing that you don't. It's a
56:23sciencebacked electrolyte ratio of
56:25sodium, potassium, and magnesium. No
56:27sugar, no coloring, no artificial
56:28ingredients. It reduces muscle cramps
56:30and fatigue, supports brain function,
56:32and helps to regulate your appetite
56:34throughout the day. I genuinely notice
56:36the difference when I take it versus
56:37when I don't, which is why I don't shut
56:39up about it and also why it's used by
56:41everyone from Dr. Andrew Humeman to
56:43Olympic athletes and FBI sniper teams.
56:46The the good sniper teams, not the bad
56:47ones. Also, they have a no questions
56:49asked refund policy. So, if you don't
56:51like it for any reason, they'll just
56:52give you your money back. Plus, they
56:54offer free shipping in the US. Right
56:55now, you can get a free sample pack of
56:57Element's most popular flavors with your
56:58first purchase by going to the link in
57:00the description below, heading to
57:02drinklnt.com/modernwisdom.
57:04That's drinklnt.com/modernism.
57:10>> So, I would just say two quick points.
57:12Number one is I want it on the record. I
57:14am not pro- civil war. [laughter]
57:16>> Number two, just I just want to be
57:18clear. Just want to make sure I'm on the
57:20record. Number two, no, hold it. Number
57:22two, more more more seriously. So, the
57:24point of the research of the book isn't
57:26just to give histories of the 60s. It's
57:28why did the violence in the 60s end. It
57:31ends for real reasons. It's not just we
57:33burn ourselves out. There were two
57:35drivers to the 1960s political violence.
57:38They're driven on social change. drain
57:40number one was we had a massive shift in
57:44migration of blacks to the the north and
57:46the Midwest that would that were not
57:49getting political representation that
57:51was underneath the black riots Malcolm X
57:54the ballot or the bullet in the by the
57:56mid1 1970s you start to have the black
57:59caucus you actually get some black now
58:01it's not as good as it should be I'm not
58:02trying to say it's perfect but this is
58:04one of the big reasons why that violence
58:06comes down there's a second driver of
58:09violence in in the 1960s. It's the
58:11Vietnam War. The anti-war movement
58:13conscription. What ends? It's not just
58:15the Vietnam War ends, Chris.
58:17Conscription ended. We end in 1973.
58:22Conscription. So, I never had to be
58:25conscripted. Okay.
58:26>> Something structural has changed
58:28>> and that took the steam out of the
58:30anti-war movement. As soon as the that
58:33that's what ended the weatherman, the
58:34weather underground, that's what ended
58:37those uh that that violent protest here,
58:41both of those issues end. So my point is
58:44we can actually look today at the social
58:46causes and I can tell you we're likely
58:49to have this violent populism for
58:51another 10 years. It's not just
58:53>> you think that there's another decade of
58:55this.
58:55>> Yes. Because of the social changes. We
58:57can talk about those shifts. ask you the
59:00question, how does it end this time?
59:02>> This is up to us. And that's my point.
59:04My point is that this is not all in
59:07historical inevitability and we
59:09shouldn't just throw the dice to the
59:11wind. We should understand what's
59:13happening to us so that we can make more
59:16intelligent decisions going forward.
59:19It's not just a prediction of doom and
59:21gloom. It's things are going in a bad
59:24direction. Let's take that seriously and
59:26then let's do something to offset it.
59:28That's been my world world with mostly
59:31uh foreign policy elites for the last 30
59:33years. I'm now trying to do that with
59:35the public.
59:36>> Do you reckon there's going to be
59:37internal strife for the next 10 years?
59:40>> Right. So um back to the young man
59:42problem. So right now there's a very
59:44popular phrase called hypergami. Uh I'm
59:47not sure if if you know the what hyperam
59:49means. You know what it means.
59:51>> Why are [laughter] you looking at me as
59:52hypergamy? He's saying that's because
59:54I'm a high value male.
59:55>> That's right. That's right. Yes. Yeah.
59:57So, so the problem is that the majority
1:00:00of ma young men are not able to find a
1:00:03suitable mate. Uh because one way to
1:00:07reduce um men young men's like violent
1:00:10tendencies is to get married, have
1:00:12children and then become productive
1:00:13members of society. But if like you know
1:00:15the majority of young men cannot get
1:00:18married, then what's the solution? Well,
1:00:20you send them off to war, right? So, um,
1:00:24there are two possibilities ahead for
1:00:27the United States. Um, how do you deal
1:00:29with these millions of young men who
1:00:31cannot get laid basically? Well, you
1:00:33send them off some off to war to die.
1:00:35But if you did that, if you had
1:00:36conscription, it's possible they they
1:00:38would just rather fight you. Okay? So,
1:00:40another solution is to colonize
1:00:44uh, North and South America to turn the
1:00:47entire Western Hemisphere into a US
1:00:49colony. And they're doing that already
1:00:51with Venezuela. They'll probably do that
1:00:52with Canada. They're talking about
1:00:54Greenland. Uh
1:00:55>> do you think that realistically America
1:00:58would try and colonize Canada,
1:01:00Greenland, and Venezuela? Not just, oh,
1:01:03we're going to take a couple of leaders
1:01:04here and have soft power. They would
1:01:07actually try to do
1:01:08>> Yes, I do. Because there's no one to
1:01:09stop the United States from doing this.
1:01:11Why Why wouldn't the United States just
1:01:13take Alberta? What's stopping United
1:01:14States from just taking Alberta? And And
1:01:17>> is that not like
1:01:18>> Canada has what army again?
1:01:20>> Yeah. Yeah. The reason he's saying
1:01:22Alberta is that's where the oil is. So
1:01:24one of the things so this is this is
1:01:26something I was so with my classes at
1:01:29the University of Chicago. So not for
1:01:31the reason of the exact dynamic I won't
1:01:33quite go that far but [snorts] what I um
1:01:36so having studied violent populism um I
1:01:40um watched over 200 of President Trump's
1:01:43speeches as he was running for
1:01:44president. 200 all the way through. I
1:01:47went to four of his rallies, which
1:01:48didn't mean you just go to his rallies
1:01:50and listen to a Trump rally. That means
1:01:52you get there at 8 a.m. You're already
1:01:54three hours late because you can't and
1:01:57you can still barely see the stage, by
1:01:59the way, and you have to wait 10 hours
1:02:01and you can't move. If you move, you
1:02:03lose your place in line and you're all
1:02:05the way at the back. So that's why those
1:02:07hundreds of people are dropping over
1:02:09there. So what do you do? I surveyed
1:02:11them. I talked to them. I actually
1:02:13literally that's what it surveys. And so
1:02:15I learned a lot about what was
1:02:18underneath uh the support for Trump. I
1:02:20also went to Harris rallies and um it
1:02:23was easier to get there. You get a 330,
1:02:25you still get a seat. So it was a little
1:02:27different there. So but nonetheless um
1:02:29uh nonetheless what he is describing uh
1:02:32here you could see a lot of uh in some
1:02:35of what President Trump was saying, he
1:02:37was planting some seeds.
1:02:39>> But come on, bombastic this guy
1:02:42gregarious talkie. Like, isn't this a
1:02:44cool talk? Realistically, he's going to
1:02:46go to China.
1:02:47>> Hold it. Hold it. That was all fine,
1:02:48Chris. Until after the election. It
1:02:51wasn't just uh talkie-talkie. It got
1:02:53seriously serious. [laughter] Okay. So,
1:02:56so I'm not telling you I'm not telling
1:02:58you I immediately jumped to the
1:03:00conclusion, oh, that would be a 99%
1:03:03likelihood of happening. I work in
1:03:05percentages.
1:03:06>> Okay. What do you think is the
1:03:07percentage likelihood that Greenland or
1:03:09Canada or Venezuela are uh brought into
1:03:14the American uh uh remitt?
1:03:16>> I I think it turns hugely on um what
1:03:20happens with this election in 2028. So
1:03:24if we are internally divided, as I think
1:03:27there's likely to be, I think this
1:03:29external expansion is likely to go down.
1:03:32However, if it turns out that this is
1:03:34not just we're not internally divided,
1:03:36but we see the MAGO red wave get
1:03:39stronger and stronger and stronger,
1:03:41there's a very good chance that what um
1:03:43Jang is talking about will come to be.
1:03:45Uh because these are this is what I mean
1:03:48by it's up to us, Chris. This is wild. I
1:03:51did not think that I was going to find
1:03:52out that we were maybe going to invade
1:03:54Canada and Greenland and Venezuela.
1:03:56>> Why not?
1:03:57>> I just it seems so int. so absurd and
1:04:01and and and this would be it would be
1:04:04invasion.
1:04:05>> I'd agree with you.
1:04:06>> Well, I'm not I'm not again the
1:04:08probabilities here. So, let's be clear.
1:04:10I'm not saying this is 70% likely. So, I
1:04:13deal in the world of probabilities. But
1:04:15if we're talking about where there is a
1:04:17world where this is even a 20%
1:04:19probability, this changes everything.
1:04:21The idea then if it's even 20% likely
1:04:24and notice what's happening with Carney,
1:04:26notice what's happening with the
1:04:27leaders. I don't think Carney believes
1:04:30it's 80% likely, but if you watch his
1:04:32speech, listen to his speech in Munich
1:04:34this year, he certainly thinks this is
1:04:37there's something on the horizon. And
1:04:39President Trump has been talking
1:04:40directly to him about moving the border
1:04:43with Canada and the treaty and
1:04:46abandoning the 1908 treaty with Canada.
1:04:49This has been a direct conversation with
1:04:51the prime ministers of Canada in the
1:04:54last year and a half. This is I don't
1:04:56say it means it's it's a certainty,
1:04:58Chris, that's going too far. But to
1:05:01ignore that this is then translating
1:05:04into taking uh Venezuela's oil uh
1:05:08serious uh war planning now for uh
1:05:11Greenland. The war planning doesn't
1:05:13equal conquest, Chris, but I think we're
1:05:15making a mistake to just simply dismiss
1:05:17it as, oh, this is just talk on the
1:05:19side.
1:05:20>> I I I wasn't dismissing it. I didn't
1:05:21even know that it was an option on the
1:05:22table. What do you think is more likely?
1:05:24China into Taiwan or the US into one of
1:05:28Canada, Greenland, Venezuela?
1:05:30>> Oh, I vote for the the latter with the
1:05:32US. So, I think that
1:05:34>> no way. All of this talk, all of this
1:05:37talk that people the processors, the
1:05:39microch all of the the China into
1:05:41Taiwan. And
1:05:42>> so, I've been arguing for decad
1:05:43>> more likely that we're going to go into
1:05:45Canada, Venezuela, or
1:05:46>> if China plays its cards right, Taiwan
1:05:48is going to fall right into China's lap.
1:05:51I've been so President Chen brought me
1:05:53to Taiwan in January 2003. I was one of
1:05:56five air power experts. This was the
1:05:58president of Taiwan, okay, for a two-day
1:06:01conference with the president of Taiwan.
1:06:02He wanted the answer to the question,
1:06:04this is January 2003. What should Taiwan
1:06:08do if China preemptively attacks Taiwan
1:06:12while the United States is preemptively
1:06:14attacking Iraq? So remember, we had this
1:06:16thing called the Iraq War. Well, for
1:06:18Taiwan that was a very scary situation.
1:06:22So for 2 days I was with the president
1:06:25and also with the top of the air force
1:06:28and we were discussing the no kidding
1:06:30discussions here and also got windows
1:06:33into their national security and I got
1:06:35the polls that is the internal polls
1:06:37which there was nothing classified
1:06:39inside no NDAs. So, I'm not revealing
1:06:41anything that I'm not supposed to be,
1:06:43but I'm telling you that one of the
1:06:45absolute issues here with Taiwan is
1:06:48there's a large part of the population
1:06:50that sees growth over there
1:06:53>> and they're happy to get some growth
1:06:54called Taipei 101. So, there's a whole
1:06:57lot underneath this. Chris doesn't mean
1:06:59Taiwan is certain to um uh you know sort
1:07:03of go in China's way. But what I've been
1:07:06arguing for some time is that if China
1:07:08just continues to grow, then what's
1:07:11going to happen is uh it will eventually
1:07:14dwarf Taiwan even more than it does
1:07:17today and a lot of folks in Taiwan are
1:07:20going to want to make money in China.
1:07:22>> And you already talked about that. What
1:07:24I want to do is not deny any of these
1:07:26things. put in perspective. Take a look
1:07:29at a community like the United States
1:07:31which is a community common value so on
1:07:33and so forth. Has there ever been deep
1:07:35divisions?
1:07:37How did we handle them? So when we take
1:07:40a look as for example immigration right
1:07:42from the beginning of the founding there
1:07:44was a dread of migrants.
1:07:48The Scottish Irish that came here were
1:07:52marginalized profoundly and so on so
1:07:54forth. Okay. Along with these evolutions
1:07:58of uh immigration and so on so forth
1:08:01which we were built on we needed. Okay.
1:08:04There's also tension within though
1:08:06between those who wanted it and didn't
1:08:08want it. The businessmen wanted cheap
1:08:10labor. The others didn't want it. The
1:08:14workers didn't want it. Okay.
1:08:17So we have to enter these from my point
1:08:20of view and I agree with you absolutely
1:08:22on what's coming.
1:08:25I simply have a different sense of
1:08:26proportionality that it's not as
1:08:29profoundly serious as we who have never
1:08:32experienced it before would want to make
1:08:33it be. There is precedent for it.
1:08:36There's a manner in which the Americans
1:08:38have historically gone through this. My
1:08:41pointing to the Civil War was soon to
1:08:42point the most extreme situation that
1:08:45even that we recovered from.
1:08:46>> When was the last time that you saw
1:08:48something you would say was
1:08:48unprecedented?
1:08:50>> Internally in America I see a long line
1:08:54of continuum
1:08:56including the tensions and everything
1:08:58else.
1:08:58>> But eventually you break you're using so
1:09:02much artistic license to say well you
1:09:04know this thing has been it's analogous
1:09:05to something that's occurred before. Is
1:09:07there a time like I'm trying to work out
1:09:09when that's not that cycle hasn't
1:09:11>> Well, my point my point is before I say
1:09:14this is catastrophic, unprecedented and
1:09:17so on, I have to look back. Most stable
1:09:22countries go through vast cycles,
1:09:25periods of economic, social unrest. So
1:09:30it's not a smooth flying anywhere, not
1:09:33even isolate. Do do you think it's
1:09:35perfectly normal for a United States
1:09:37president to invade a country with no
1:09:39reason with no strategy, with no plan at
1:09:43all to win the war?
1:09:45>> I will say, let me see in three months
1:09:48what happens. First of all, there was a
1:09:52reason.
1:09:53>> What was the reason?
1:09:55Basically, he keeps going after nuclear
1:09:59material. Why? because I was on staff at
1:10:03times after 9/11
1:10:06doing scenarios. What is the worst case
1:10:08scenario? And it was a nuclear a country
1:10:12like Iran getting nuclear weapons,
1:10:14putting them on board a French ship and
1:10:17sailing New York Harbor.
1:10:19At this point, we've had very few
1:10:21casualties on the American side. And two
1:10:26days ago, a a commander of the RGC, a
1:10:30very senior commander, stood up and
1:10:32said, "We've got to stop this war. The
1:10:34people are not are suffering and
1:10:36everything else." All I am saying about
1:10:38this war is when you're in the middle of
1:10:40it, it's extraordinary. On the other
1:10:43hand, we see one, it's been a very short
1:10:46one. There's been on the American side
1:10:48very small losses
1:10:51on the you're seeing evolutions in Iran
1:10:57with very different outcomes. So I
1:11:00simply say okay step back from this
1:11:03extraordinary event and ask the
1:11:06questions and then ask is it really
1:11:08extraordinary? So if the reason was a
1:11:11nuclear weapon, why assassinate it? Why
1:11:14assassinate on the first day the alatola
1:11:16who who had fatwa against nuclear
1:11:20weapons? Because he wouldn't this
1:11:22president wouldn't listen to
1:11:24intelligence.
1:11:26>> The head of counterterrorism resigned
1:11:28saying that
1:11:31he will not allow me into his office.
1:11:34He's listening to the Israelis.
1:11:36And presidents make massive mistakes. He
1:11:39confused the people there as a
1:11:42government of Iran. He confused
1:11:45[clears throat] them, killed them.
1:11:47That's not the government of Iran. It's
1:11:48the IRGC.
1:11:50>> On the other hand, no, it's very
1:11:52important to say this wars lasted a few
1:11:53months.
1:11:54>> Okay.
1:11:56We are far from understanding how it
1:11:58will end, but that it will end certain
1:12:02and so on. So when I take a look at
1:12:05this, yeah, he did a very stupid thing.
1:12:08He profoundly, he's not the first
1:12:11president to do some very stupid things.
1:12:13The only thing I'm saying is that we
1:12:17tend to overreact to things when we
1:12:20don't put them in context.
1:12:22>> How big how big of a deal is the Iran
1:12:24>> Well, oh, it's a it's it is the biggest
1:12:26deal since going up against Germany in
1:12:28World War II. So Iran is the most
1:12:30difficult challenge we've had since
1:12:32Germany and World War II. So let me give
1:12:35a different window into this. So I've
1:12:36been modeling the bombing of Iran for 20
1:12:38years. And in the modeling of the
1:12:42bombing of Iran, I started do this in
1:12:442005. And here's where I partly agree
1:12:46with George. Um I do this in 2005
1:12:49because once it is known that Iran is
1:12:52enriching uranium, that's when the
1:12:54military planning of going against Iran
1:12:57really jacks up. And I know cuz I was
1:12:59teaching for the Air Force in the '9s. I
1:13:01had a lot of experience. So from 79 to
1:13:04about 2002, we have political tensions.
1:13:07Yes, we occasionally do a war game. But
1:13:09after 2002 and 3, things get much more
1:13:12serious. I start to model the bombing of
1:13:14Iran in 2005. And I did it every year
1:13:17for 20 years. I did this in my classes
1:13:19at the University of Chicago. And what
1:13:22I'm do, I lay out the target set. I lay
1:13:25out what uh there's all changes of
1:13:26course the target set changes for comes
1:13:28on we get um uh the MOABs of so we get
1:13:32we get the different technology changes
1:13:34and so forth but the big thing that uh
1:13:37the modeling always showed is that uh
1:13:41once we meaning America bombed the Ford
1:13:45facility which only we could do because
1:13:48the Israelis didn't have the large
1:13:50precision ordinance to be able to do it
1:13:53once we did that we would be 90% likely
1:13:58to destroy the centuge industrial uh the
1:14:01the enrichment capability of the uh
1:14:04facility of Ford but we would have
1:14:07virtually no knowledge of whether we
1:14:09destroyed the 60% enriched uranium the
1:14:12actual fizzle material and
1:14:14[clears throat] that's critical Chris
1:14:16because building a bomb is a piece of
1:14:18cake once you have the enriched material
1:14:22most people don't know that I also teach
1:14:24my students how to build a bomb. So, so
1:14:26I take them through this soup to nuts so
1:14:28they really understand it's the fizzle
1:14:30material and then the modeling and this
1:14:32is what I told my class and I have the
1:14:34slides and so and so forth and I put
1:14:36them on my Substack and I said then what
1:14:38would happen is if we bomb for then a
1:14:42year or two later we would do regime
1:14:44change bombing not just come back and
1:14:46bomb in general we would literally do
1:14:49regime change bombing. And why would you
1:14:51do regime change bombing? Back to your
1:14:53question kind of link and connect all
1:14:55the dots. It's because you would become
1:14:58once you bomb for you couldn't track for
1:15:02with high confidence the dispersal of
1:15:04that fizzle material. And we know we
1:15:07have civilian satellites um showing that
1:15:10a couple days before we bomb Fordo
1:15:12stuff's coming out of we have civilian
1:15:15satellite showing that Estafon another
1:15:17site in February of this year a month
1:15:20before we do the bombing. Uh Iran is
1:15:22digging stuff out. We think that maybe
1:15:24they moved the stuff from Ford to
1:15:26Estafon and now they're digging it out.
1:15:28So this issue of a nuclear weapon I
1:15:32think is really quite serious. Uh now
1:15:34Israel I think is playing a role but I
1:15:37in my I think it's secondary because
1:15:39they have been arguing to do this for
1:15:42every year for 20 years. What make the
1:15:44difference here I believe was the
1:15:46concern that we couldn't track the
1:15:49fizzle material and that's still going
1:15:52on to this day. That's why we're worried
1:15:55about pickaxe mountain very spec. So
1:15:58what all that means Chris is we're in an
1:16:02escalation trap. The trap didn't just
1:16:04start with killing the leader on
1:16:06February 28. It starts with the bombing
1:16:09of Foraux. And that's the stages I
1:16:12published literally several days before
1:16:14we uh killed the leader. I escalation
1:16:17trap. I laid out the stages of what
1:16:19would come would kill the leader.
1:16:20>> Is it following your predictive game
1:16:22plan thus far?
1:16:23>> Yes. And that's what's so scary about
1:16:25this. It's and what I'm really concerned
1:16:27about is we are coming now to a a
1:16:30serious stage of the escalation trap
1:16:33that's going to start next week and the
1:16:36following week. So I've been laying out
1:16:38on my Substack the escalation trap the
1:16:41nightmare scenario for how this is going
1:16:44to escalate to get worse. And that
1:16:47nightmare scenario which I started
1:16:49laying out in July was the rise of gas
1:16:52prices in the United States. Well, I
1:16:54don't know if you've been tracking
1:16:55[laughter] it, but in Chicago, they're
1:16:57going up. And what that is doing and and
1:17:00what this is doing is it creates the
1:17:02opportunity for Iran to really uh close
1:17:06and try to shut down Hormuz. Why? So
1:17:09that they can try to damage Trump
1:17:12politically in the midterms to
1:17:14irrevocably destroy his presidency. And
1:17:18why is And what did I say that was going
1:17:20to do? that was going to energize the
1:17:22Trump administration to start fighting
1:17:25back. And what is to what are we going
1:17:27to see literally tomorrow with Scott
1:17:29Bessett is D-Day. Okay. Now, it's an
1:17:32economic D-Day, but that economic D-Day
1:17:35is the Iran's already talking about
1:17:38further escalation here. If Iran
1:17:40escalates, are we really just going to
1:17:42sit back and say, "Oh, sure. We're going
1:17:44to No, there's a real danger. We're in
1:17:47the spiral phase of the escalation trap.
1:17:50As those gas prices went up, this
1:17:53created a window of maximum leverage for
1:17:56Iran. They're using that maximum
1:17:58leverage to wreck Trump's presidency in
1:18:02the for the midterms. And I think that
1:18:04what President Trump is doing is trying
1:18:06to figure a way to it's not just how to
1:18:09deal with Iran now. It's what does he do
1:18:12to show he is going to do something as
1:18:15Iran is really doing great damage to our
1:18:18economy and his presidency. We're we're
1:18:20seeing the collapse of the global
1:18:22economy because for the past 30 40 years
1:18:25there's a very simple deal that govern
1:18:27the world which is that the United
1:18:29States would provide production to the
1:18:31GCC and to Japan and in return Japan and
1:18:35the GCC would buy US treasuries and that
1:18:38was a deal that made the American
1:18:40economy so vibrant. The GCC now is being
1:18:42destroyed by this war. And because Japan
1:18:45gets most of its oil from the GCC, the
1:18:48Japanese yen is weakening, which means
1:18:51that these two regions of the world that
1:18:54provided most of world's liquidity,
1:18:55especially United States, they can no
1:18:57longer do so. So what Scott Besson is
1:19:00worried about is um um the GCC and Japan
1:19:05can't buy US treasuries. And so, right,
1:19:07and so what that means is United States
1:19:09cannot refinance its $4,200 debt. This
1:19:13is this is the apocalypse. This is a
1:19:15catastrophe. This is not just a short
1:19:17war. We should also take a look at the
1:19:19other side. What Iran is experiencing,
1:19:22what is happening in Iran. This is not
1:19:24simply the United States.
1:19:26There's a significant split happening in
1:19:29Iran. A speech the other day made by a
1:19:33major leader said, "Look, our people are
1:19:35starving. We cannot continue this war.
1:19:38Okay, the artesh is there which is the
1:19:41secular army. So in other words, look at
1:19:44this war not just from our side and the
1:19:46consequences to us. See the pain pain on
1:19:48the other side. Okay. So we assume that
1:19:52the RGC is super powerful, can continue
1:19:54to do anything it wants, has no
1:19:57resistance. We forget that there was
1:20:00about 20,000 people killed in an
1:20:02uprising before the war. Okay, that
1:20:06division is not gone.
1:20:08>> Iran has been under sections for the
1:20:09past 50 years. It's a poor place. People
1:20:12are used to being poor. Are Americans
1:20:14going to put up with $10 $10 gallon gas
1:20:16prices?
1:20:17>> If you're going to spend an hour in the
1:20:18gym, you might as well look hot and feel
1:20:20comfortable while you're doing it. And
1:20:21honestly, who wants to be in the
1:20:23background of a Tik Tocker's highlight
1:20:24reel dressed like a chump? Gym Shark
1:20:26makes some of the best men's and women's
1:20:28training gear on the planet. And
1:20:29something that I realized a few years
1:20:31ago is that when you actually like what
1:20:33you're wearing in the gym, you show up
1:20:34differently, you train harder, you stay
1:20:36longer, and get way more high fives. The
1:20:38hybrid shorts are my go-to. They are the
1:20:41perfect length, super lightweight, easy
1:20:43to wash and dry, and they're sleeveless
1:20:45t-shirts, what I've trained in every day
1:20:46for basically the last decade. They're
1:20:48the ideal fit. They're breathable. They
1:20:49hold their shape perfectly. No more
1:20:51looking like Adam Sandlers, your
1:20:53stylist. Basically, everything they make
1:20:55is unbelievably well-designed. You
1:20:57already know about them. They're high
1:20:58quality. You get 30 days of free returns
1:21:00globally with global shipping and a 10%
1:21:03discount sitewide. So get that 10%
1:21:05discount by going to the link in the
1:21:06description below or heading to
1:21:08jim.sh/modernwisdom
1:21:10and using the code modernwisdom10 at
1:21:12checkout. That's jim.sh/modernwisdom
1:21:14and modernwisdom10 at checkout.
1:21:17>> So for 30 years I've been studying air
1:21:20power, economic sanctions, blockades. Um
1:21:25I've focused on American political
1:21:26violence. So again, it's the
1:21:27intersection of these military uh action
1:21:30and politics. Uh one thing that's very
1:21:34important to know in advance of what
1:21:36Scott Besson is about to tell us is
1:21:38since World War I, not going back before
1:21:41World War I, since World War I, even
1:21:45heavy economic pressure alone, I mean
1:21:48alone without other military force has
1:21:51never won a major war.
1:21:53>> Never won a major war.
1:21:57All I want, and this is going, there's
1:21:58going to be a big Substack tomorrow as I
1:22:00put this out. All I want is I want the
1:22:03reporters at that news conference to ask
1:22:06a very simple question. So, the British
1:22:09blockade on Germany in World War I did
1:22:12not defeat Germany, even though it
1:22:13killed over 700,000
1:22:16ger uh German civilians, and we still
1:22:18had to have ground power to end that
1:22:20conflict. So the economic sanctions on
1:22:24Japan before World War I and then during
1:22:26World War II and then during World War
1:22:28II itself did not stop us from bombing
1:22:31uh its cities using the atomic bomb and
1:22:34then also Russian entry into the war
1:22:36with ground forces. That's how we
1:22:38defeated uh Japan. Uh if we look at Iraq
1:22:41from 1990 to 2003 um it was our American
1:22:45military that kicked Sodom out of
1:22:47Kuwait. And once Saddam was out of
1:22:49Kuwait from 91 to 2003, we had fif we
1:22:52had sanctions that crushed the Iraqi
1:22:55economy by 50% each year for all those
1:22:59years. And what did we have to do?
1:23:01150,000. You see, you get my point.
1:23:03>> Every time you speak, I feel like I'm
1:23:05treading on eggshell. I'm like, I don't
1:23:06want to know what comes next. Well,
1:23:08don't want to know.
1:23:09>> Now you feel Now you see what it was
1:23:10like when I taught for the Air Force
1:23:11because
1:23:12awful.
1:23:13>> That's [laughter] how they describe it.
1:23:15The prison of pain. He gets you in the
1:23:17data so you can't get out.
1:23:18>> We see Iran as a completely united
1:23:21country.
1:23:22No factions and so on and so forth.
1:23:25Okay, that's obviously an illusion
1:23:27because there are always factions and so
1:23:29on so forth. So I'm not saying that it's
1:23:32economic force,
1:23:34but there were great divisions that we
1:23:36saw before. Those divisions
1:23:39are still there in some ways. So the
1:23:42question is not just the economic
1:23:44consequences
1:23:45but also the fact that it's very rare to
1:23:48have a country that is totally united in
1:23:51this way and this is not the country
1:23:53it's like
1:23:54>> so George the external force is bringing
1:23:56those divisions closer together. They're
1:23:59not breaking them apart.
1:24:00>> I profoundly disagree. They can
1:24:03sometimes push them together. Sometimes
1:24:05I say is we did in the Vietnam War. I've
1:24:08seen the
1:24:08>> All I say is what's the case since World
1:24:10War I? All I need is one case.
1:24:13>> One case.
1:24:13>> One case where our external pressure,
1:24:16our economic pressure where we've had
1:24:19and again I just gave you uh four. We
1:24:21have another five.
1:24:22>> I just particularly said and I'm meaning
1:24:24economic pressure. I'm talking about the
1:24:27inherent differences within this vast
1:24:31country.
1:24:32>> Why does that matter? It matters because
1:24:34when the attacks start to happen and the
1:24:37pain starts to rise, they become more
1:24:41powerful in the sense that others look
1:24:43at them and say, "You were right. This
1:24:45was not the government we should have."
1:24:47>> So, but did they not already try and
1:24:49uprise before and that didn't work?
1:24:52>> Of course. No, they killed them all.
1:24:54Now, under these circumstances,
1:24:55>> is that going to stop?
1:24:57>> Well, this is the fundamental question.
1:25:00Okay.
1:25:01>> And all we need is a case, George. Just
1:25:02give us even a case of bombing. So let's
1:25:05widen it beyond military pressure. Where
1:25:07is the case that without ground forces
1:25:11bombing alone correct the government?
1:25:14>> And the answer is that the question in
1:25:17my mind is not bombing. Okay. It is the
1:25:21disunityity of the country itself which
1:25:23we saw the weeks before the war began.
1:25:25Is your suggestion that if Iran had
1:25:28sufficient disunityity inside that the
1:25:32government would choose to give up
1:25:34because it's got so much pressure
1:25:36happening internally.
1:25:37>> What I'm saying is the government itself
1:25:39the statement that was made and was
1:25:42transmitted all over the world by this
1:25:44leader of the IRGC a former head of the
1:25:46IRGC that we must not continue this. So
1:25:50I'm saying that the the as in Vietnam
1:25:54[clears throat] the government was US
1:25:56government was complet frequently
1:25:57divided on what should be done.
1:25:59>> I at least from what I know tiny amount
1:26:02I know about Iran. I don't get the sense
1:26:04that the government is going to be too
1:26:06concerned about the quality of life of
1:26:07its citizens to give over to what
1:26:10Trump's pressures are going to be. Am I
1:26:11right or wrong?
1:26:12>> All I have is one speech from the former
1:26:14president that was published. He is
1:26:17still alive apparently. So when you take
1:26:19a look at a country, take a look at the
1:26:22fragments within our own country and
1:26:24don't assume that this country is
1:26:26totally united or simply afraid of the
1:26:30regime. The regime itself
1:26:34is divided. We've seen it. Unless this
1:26:37speech that I saw and everything
1:26:40translated
1:26:42was made up by something,
1:26:44this represented a significant thing.
1:26:48Now the Pakistani
1:26:50uh head of the military is coming to
1:26:53talk to the Iranians. He's may already
1:26:55be there. Okay. There's been talk this
1:26:58morning about Iran being allowed to
1:27:01become part of the
1:27:03the entity that was created. In other
1:27:06words, wars don't end because the
1:27:08bombings. I totally agree with you. They
1:27:11grin through political processes
1:27:14sometimes within countries. You don't
1:27:15totally defeat them,
1:27:18but it we have to be a aware that these
1:27:22are human beings. They're not all
1:27:25fanatics to do die.
1:27:26>> Well, I think there's a difference
1:27:27between do we see all of the citizens of
1:27:31Iran as supporting a regime that we are
1:27:36concerned about that might be part of
1:27:38global terrorism or something like that.
1:27:39I don't think anybody's making that
1:27:40claim. I think the concern is no matter
1:27:44what's going on internally, whether it's
1:27:46divided or cohesive, whether they're in
1:27:49support or against, like the the war is
1:27:52going on from the people at the top of
1:27:54Iran and the people at the top of
1:27:55America, regardless of what the people
1:27:56below that,
1:27:57>> but somebody who is at top of Iran, this
1:28:00man
1:28:01>> made this speech,
1:28:02>> but he's no longer in power, right?
1:28:04>> No, he's not in power.
1:28:05>> He's not in power, but he has tremendous
1:28:07influence. H that's what that's look
1:28:11here's the since World War I starts with
1:28:14Julio Duh Haye he wrote a book command
1:28:16in the air mostly has to do with air
1:28:18power there's been a hope with either
1:28:20economic blockades or air power that air
1:28:23power or blockades without a ground
1:28:25force could incite a popular revolt to
1:28:28topple the government so that we
1:28:30>> we don't want to do it you do it for us
1:28:32>> exactly and this has been a hope and it
1:28:34hasn't happened
1:28:35>> no one I have not talked about toppling
1:28:38and the government. I am saying that the
1:28:40government itself is split in various
1:28:43ways. The RGC is not totally unified
1:28:47as we go into wars. We are not totally
1:28:51unified and sometimes disunification.
1:28:54You have to take a look at the
1:28:55internals. So, so one factor that we
1:28:56need to look at is
1:28:58>> that right now the Iranians have chosen
1:29:00to adopt something called the Mosak
1:29:02defense,
1:29:03>> which is a decentralized
1:29:05command and control um military warfare,
1:29:08which means that it's entirely possible
1:29:12no one is in charge of Iran right now.
1:29:15So, it doesn't really matter what the
1:29:17people want. Doesn't really matter what
1:29:19the leadership wants because you have 31
1:29:22commanders spread out all over the
1:29:24country and as long as one of them wants
1:29:25to keep on fighting the shooters will
1:29:27remain closed and this war will
1:29:29continue. That's a problem.
1:29:31>> Sounds like decentralization but it
1:29:33might just be leadless in that way.
1:29:36>> It's they run the government through
1:29:38consensus. We saw this with the Taliban
1:29:41and Afghanistan as well. So it's there's
1:29:43different models for how you govern.
1:29:46Some are very rigid top down. Gaddafi
1:29:49ran his government very rigid top down.
1:29:51That's absolutely the case. Uh others
1:29:54are more very very decentralized,
1:29:56fragmented almost. I don't think that's
1:29:58where Iran is. Iran is in this middle of
1:30:01consensus. And it's hard to see because
1:30:04this is where the supreme leader when he
1:30:06made a statement remember theou the
1:30:09supreme leader made a statement saying
1:30:10that he personally didn't agree with
1:30:13theou but he was going to give it a
1:30:15chance and support those who did which
1:30:17meant there was a division just as
1:30:19George is saying and that side of
1:30:21getting a negotiated outcome won in on
1:30:25June 17th that has now been replaced I
1:30:28believe by the other side the supreme
1:30:31leader side the and that's what you see
1:30:33with the replacement of the whole
1:30:35command structure of the IRGC in the
1:30:37last several weeks. It's all in one
1:30:40direction.
1:30:40>> The MOU was a major turning point
1:30:42because before the MOU I think George is
1:30:44right there were these factions. I
1:30:46agree.
1:30:46>> And um theou was a compromise and um
1:30:51what the Americans have shown is for the
1:30:54reason they will not abide by the terms
1:30:57of theou and so the Iranians
1:31:00like at some point said screw this we
1:31:03are not going to negotiate. We are not
1:31:05going to compromise. We're going to
1:31:06fight this to the end. So now the
1:31:07hoofies have been brought into the war
1:31:09and this war is just expanding very
1:31:11rapidly.
1:31:12>> What do you think is the likely outcome
1:31:13of the Iran war? It doesn't end it.
1:31:16What's going to happen is eventually the
1:31:18Ukraine war in the Iran war will emerge
1:31:20already. We're seeing that uh after
1:31:22Zalinski uh bombed an Iranian cargo ship
1:31:25in the Caspian Sea and Iran and Zansko
1:31:28was very proud of this like you you see
1:31:30um I can do this for for the Americans.
1:31:33So um it is very likely that all the
1:31:35world powers are brought are brought in.
1:31:37China is brought into the war. Russia is
1:31:39brought into the war. Uh,
1:31:41>> this sounds a lot like the World War II
1:31:42that we said wasn't going to happen at
1:31:44the top of this episode,
1:31:45>> except it's a world. So,
1:31:47>> I mean, it's a Did I say that?
1:31:49>> No, no, he No, he No, he actually thinks
1:31:51World War II is is kind of coming
1:31:53quickly. Here's where my Here's where I
1:31:55would uh So, I see the trends that Jang
1:31:58is saying. I don't want to disagree with
1:31:59the trends. I think January of this year
1:32:03is going to be a focal point moment.
1:32:05>> January of next year.
1:32:06>> Of next year. I mean January 2027 will
1:32:08be a focal point moment where all the
1:32:11actors the United States, China, Iran
1:32:15have a chance to reset. Now where they
1:32:18go here's what I but why January keep go
1:32:22back to what I just said which is Iran
1:32:24has a strategy for the US midterms. It
1:32:27sees the oil inventories running down.
1:32:29It sees its period of maximum pressure.
1:32:32The opportunity here is uh to destroy
1:32:36Trump's presidency politically, not to
1:32:40knock him out of office, but so that he
1:32:42is the lamest of lame ducks. Well, will
1:32:45that happen or not? We'll know a quite a
1:32:48bit in the first week in January. Now,
1:32:50we won't necessarily know 100%, but
1:32:53we'll know a lot of information. And I
1:32:56believe what's going to happen is once
1:32:58we get to the first week in January,
1:33:01everybody will be recalibrating
1:33:04for a post Trump world now or a future
1:33:08Trump world.
1:33:09>> Yeah. How do you feel about this?
1:33:10>> Well, look, the problem is we're trying
1:33:12to see this from an economical lens. And
1:33:15the reason why the MOU fell apart is
1:33:17Israel refused to abide by the terms.
1:33:20One of the major terms of theou signed
1:33:22between the United States and and Iran
1:33:24is that all terms all peace terms that
1:33:27apply to Iran would also apply to Iran's
1:33:30allies, especially Hezbollah in Lebanon.
1:33:33And that required Israel to withdraw its
1:33:36forces from southern Lebanon. Israel
1:33:38refused to do so and Israel has only
1:33:41accelerated its attacks on Hezbollah. So
1:33:45we think that it's entirely between um
1:33:48United States and Iran but Israel has a
1:33:53lot of options and right now for the
1:33:56reason we can discuss this Israel is
1:33:58choosing to um escalate the war and we
1:34:02and also the Hoofies have been brought
1:34:04in and the thing about the Hoofies is
1:34:05that they are religious fanatics. They
1:34:08are they are they are very poor people.
1:34:09They live in mountains and they're not
1:34:11afraid to die. And right now they're
1:34:14fighting this war against Saudi Arabia.
1:34:16So Saudi Arabia Aramco facilities are
1:34:18being hit. The um the other strait uh in
1:34:21the Middle East, the the Bab El Mandad
1:34:24Strait has been closed by by the
1:34:25Houthis. So we're seeing this war
1:34:28escalate. And again, we're trying to see
1:34:30this from economic lens. But if you look
1:34:32at what the Houthies are Houthies are
1:34:33doing, if you look at the what the IRGC
1:34:35and the Israelis are doing, I would say
1:34:37this is almost like a religious war.
1:34:38It's a crusade. It's an escological war.
1:34:41But there's an other dimension. We have
1:34:43to see
1:34:43>> the alliance
1:34:46between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and
1:34:50Pakistan.
1:34:51Now, if you take a look at the map or
1:34:53all around them, these countries, Saudi
1:34:55Arabia has no use for Iran.
1:34:59The the Turks are seeking to evolve
1:35:03themselves into a major point, scaring
1:35:06the Israelis to death.
1:35:08And Pakistan itself is evolving
1:35:12dramatically in this war at a very
1:35:14sophisticated state. So when you take a
1:35:16look at the situation of Iran, let's not
1:35:18just talk about the bombing and
1:35:19everything, but the geopolitical
1:35:21development. Now today there was a
1:35:23story, I don't know if it's true or not,
1:35:26that Iran is going to be asked to join
1:35:28this coalition. In other words, submit.
1:35:31Whether they do it or not, whether this
1:35:32is an actual offer or anything, I have
1:35:35no idea. But it was there. But this
1:35:37created a new structure in the Middle
1:35:40East, this alliance, a very different
1:35:43one with a very powerful country. Israel
1:35:46is terrified of
1:35:50Turkey because they know they do
1:35:52>> it just bombed [laughter]
1:35:55just
1:35:55>> Turkish officials in in Syria
1:35:57>> by my Yes. And that was part of it
1:36:00because this is a country they cannot
1:36:02defeat. They've only fought countries
1:36:05along their borders and they were able
1:36:08for since the founding of Israel to hold
1:36:11those borders.
1:36:14The Turkish army is three times as large
1:36:18as the Israeli army.
1:36:21And while I don't believe that the Turks
1:36:23really have any desire to fight them,
1:36:26these Israeli,
1:36:29shall we say, society is built around,
1:36:33a commitment to the belief that they're
1:36:35going to try to destroy us.
1:36:38There is a built-in paranoia. So when
1:36:42this ends, you know, this problem ends
1:36:45[snorts] a little bit, they bomb
1:36:49uh Syria. They then tell the American
1:36:52ambassador they didn't bomb Syria. Then
1:36:56they say Turkey is our greatest fear
1:36:59built into Israel
1:37:03by n by history is a paranoia. Who is my
1:37:07greatest enemy? I have one. Now they're
1:37:10facing for the first time an enemy that
1:37:13they cannot because of both geography
1:37:15and military capability
1:37:18defeat. All right. Now
1:37:22when Lun was asked what to do after the
1:37:24battle of Bulge, he said make peace, you
1:37:26fools.
1:37:28And this is the situation that Israel is
1:37:30in. It's an internal crisis. It has
1:37:33reached a point where its military
1:37:35capability is not enough.
1:37:37So the reason I think the midterms are a
1:37:40decisive threshold, not just a minor
1:37:44threshold, is it will determine whether
1:37:47the Democrats control Congress.
1:37:50>> If the Democrats control Congress, which
1:37:52is still an if, but we'll know in
1:37:54January. There is going to be two things
1:37:56that are going to happen, and we see
1:37:59this in the Democratic policies already.
1:38:02Number one is there'll be tremendous
1:38:04pressure to literally end the Iran war.
1:38:07So we saw this in 1974 by Congress.
1:38:10Congress has not played much of a role
1:38:11in foreign policy. The last time it got
1:38:13involved was 74 with Vietnam to truly
1:38:16constrain the executive. There'll be a
1:38:18battle about this of course, but number
1:38:21one is the Democrats wanting to shut
1:38:23down this and that would stop it from
1:38:25becoming a forever war. Which one more
1:38:27one more point and then I'll let you.
1:38:28The second point is they're going to
1:38:30want to constrain Israel. There's a huge
1:38:33push in the Democratic party to shut
1:38:36down all of the look at all the
1:38:38Democrats that are um uh that were
1:38:41pro-Israel that are losing [laughter]
1:38:44and they're losing because there's a
1:38:46huge movement inside of the Democratic
1:38:48party uh to zero out the budgets to
1:38:52Israel. And that means that come
1:38:55January, Israel is going to have to
1:38:58calibrate uh Iran, others are going to
1:39:00calibrate based on the results of
1:39:03whether the Democrats control Congress.
1:39:06Now, we don't know whether the Democrats
1:39:07will control Congress. But what I'm
1:39:09saying is it's too soon to truly project
1:39:12out beyond January because come January,
1:39:15we'll know. Are we in a forever war? And
1:39:18by the way, if the Democrats, even
1:39:19though they control Congress, support
1:39:21the war. Oh yeah, we're in a forever
1:39:24war.
1:39:25>> So which major Democratic leader has
1:39:28come out against the Warren? And which
1:39:30leader has said we must end this war
1:39:32right now? Which which leader?
1:39:34>> Oh jeez. Almost all of them. I mean just
1:39:36watch CNN. They come on all the time. So
1:39:38what they if you if you listen to the
1:39:42Democrat No. Well, if you listen to the
1:39:43Democratic leaders, this has just been a
1:39:46mantra to end the Vietnam War. I'm
1:39:48sorry, to end the Iran war. And the uh
1:39:52real question is going to be Jiang
1:39:55whether or not once they control will it
1:39:57take responsibility for that? Because
1:40:00right now it's easy to run against the
1:40:04uh Iran war because gas prices going up
1:40:07uh you know bad mistakes by the admin
1:40:09the Trump administration which they hate
1:40:11they hate anyway. where it will become
1:40:13difficult will be once the Democrats uh
1:40:16assume power because if it turns out
1:40:20that the Democrats stop the war and Iran
1:40:23gets a nuclear weapon, think about that
1:40:25for the Democratic party. That could
1:40:27bring the Republicans right back in in
1:40:292028. So, I think these are the real
1:40:32issues and that's why it's about not
1:40:34just what you claim you're going to do,
1:40:36but what you do when you're in power.
1:40:38So, so I I must have missed the news,
1:40:40but can you name me one major Democratic
1:40:42leader whether it's just
1:40:43>> Jeff is was just on CNN, I think it was
1:40:463 days ago, arguing that the war should
1:40:48end now. Um, I just listened to the
1:40:50woman who just ran um the progressive
1:40:53who just won uh the Senate for the
1:40:55Senate seat in the primary here on Ford.
1:40:57I was just on a um a podcast with her on
1:41:00the Joy Reed show just two days ago uh
1:41:03talking about this issue and she was
1:41:05hugely uh uh against the uh against the
1:41:08war and and thought it was a total
1:41:10mistake and it should end. So I mean
1:41:12those are at least two people right
1:41:14there. So, so did Heckham Jeffree say
1:41:16that if the de Democrats were to win the
1:41:19House in November, they would
1:41:21immediately try to restrict Trump's war
1:41:24powers and try
1:41:25>> I haven't said anybody has gone that
1:41:27far. That's the next step. That's the
1:41:30real issue here. And that's what I'm
1:41:32saying is you won't be able to know
1:41:34whether they'll do it until they're in
1:41:36power, Jiang. And if they're in power
1:41:39and they support the war for fear that
1:41:42they will lose their political viability
1:41:44as Hillary Clinton was worried about
1:41:46with the Iraq war, then this will that's
1:41:48how you got a forever war. You get both
1:41:50parties in favor of the war because
1:41:52neither one will stop it. Now you have a
1:41:55forever war. But in this particular
1:41:57case, both the Republicans
1:42:00opposed the war because that's one of
1:42:02the bases on which he won the election
1:42:05was not to get into these forever wars.
1:42:08The Democrats also are doing it. When
1:42:10you take a look at the poll numbers on
1:42:12this war, they're enormously unpopular.
1:42:16Congress tends to do what's popular and
1:42:19ending [snorts] the war is popular not
1:42:21only in the Democrats, but with the
1:42:23Republicans. This is the fundamental
1:42:25difference that I've never seen, which
1:42:27is that his own party feels betrayed.
1:42:30So, I think there's one of the things I
1:42:33think the Iranians are saying, let's
1:42:36wait. Let's wait to see if they come
1:42:39apart. In the same way I'm talking about
1:42:41Iran having internal problems, we have
1:42:43enormous internal problems. I'm seeing
1:42:46the Iranians trying to put this off as
1:42:49long as possible and then try to make a
1:42:51deal at in September and or October
1:42:56before the election. So fascinating that
1:42:59uh Trump's
1:43:03positioning and his desire to be seen as
1:43:06a a competent president and obviously
1:43:08the last couple of years of his legacy.
1:43:10uh that is being used as a geopolitical
1:43:13tool. That's almost a weapon that other
1:43:16people can insert themselves into
1:43:17because they know that this is going to
1:43:19be it's a a point of weakness or it's a
1:43:22point of leverage that can be used to
1:43:24play with the incentives that the US has
1:43:28got. Do they want to push further? Do
1:43:30they want to pull back? This is
1:43:31something I've seen in again advised
1:43:34four white houses 2001 to 24 Democrat,
1:43:37two to two uh Republican. Legacy matters
1:43:42to let's call it the White House if not
1:43:44the president. I also think the
1:43:46president, but let's just make it that
1:43:48legacy is beyond just getting the next
1:43:51win. Legacy is what you're remembered
1:43:54for. And I think this is what is
1:43:57important that we miss when we talk
1:43:59about presidents in the United States.
1:44:01We think, well, you can't run for
1:44:03reelection again. Therefore, you don't
1:44:05care anymore about anything. Uh, no. I
1:44:09think what they what I see is even in
1:44:12their first term, they're thinking about
1:44:14their legacy going forward. And that
1:44:17legacy, there have only been 47
1:44:20presidents in our history. This there's
1:44:22not that many presidents. a big sample
1:44:25size.
1:44:25>> So I really Well, it's not that. It's
1:44:27that it's that they know they're one of
1:44:2847 for or 48. It's the other way around,
1:44:32Chris. It's because it's a tiny club.
1:44:34Their legacy is going to be with them
1:44:36after they're dead for a 100red years
1:44:39plus.
1:44:40>> But if he's so worried about his legacy,
1:44:42why did he attack Iran in the first
1:44:44place?
1:44:44>> I think again back to the modeling. Um,
1:44:47I'm just going to keep going back to the
1:44:49modeling because I I made a prediction
1:44:51to my classes for 20 years in a row that
1:44:55once we bomb for
1:44:58>> we would panic about Iran getting a
1:45:00nuclear weapon in a way we couldn't see
1:45:03and we would get intel whether it's
1:45:05Israel or somebody else that was showing
1:45:08us they were getting intelligence and we
1:45:10would try to resolve it through regime
1:45:12change not because regime change was
1:45:15magically thought to be a better
1:45:16strategy, but it was really the only way
1:45:20you could come up with even a a half
1:45:22plausible idea.
1:45:23>> Was your question about why to do the
1:45:24bombing in the first place?
1:45:26>> So, so, so I want to
1:45:27>> take a step back from
1:45:28>> Yeah. Yeah. I I I want to present
1:45:29another theory. Okay. Besides your
1:45:31modeling,
1:45:31>> please.
1:45:32>> So, 1996 U is a clean break memo. Yes.
1:45:36Right. And you you probably know people
1:45:37who wrote that, right? Richard Wolf
1:45:41>> Paul Wolf was from my department. Jen,
1:45:43>> okay.
1:45:43>> 71 PhD University of Chicago. So I know
1:45:45these people pretty well. So so just for
1:45:48for some context for the idiot in the
1:45:49room. Thank you.
1:45:50>> Yeah. The clean memo was uh a proposal
1:45:53to Benjamin Nanyahu and the argument is
1:45:56that that Israel um under Nanyahu should
1:45:59withdraw from the peace law from the
1:46:01sorry from the Oslo peace accords
1:46:04because um in order to assure peace in
1:46:07the Middle East, Israel had to be
1:46:10strong. It it had to conduct regime
1:46:12change in Iraq and Syria. Also, um
1:46:16Israel needed to be self-sufficient
1:46:18economically and militarily. It need to
1:46:20basically stop being dependent on the
1:46:22United States. You know, if you want to
1:46:23resolve the Palestinian issue that you
1:46:25beat the crap out of them rather than
1:46:27try to compromise, give them land that
1:46:29would just make them more greedy.
1:46:30Instead, you um you uh establish
1:46:34peaceful strength though that those are
1:46:35the exact terms, peaceful strength.
1:46:37Okay, so that's the 1996 clean brick
1:46:40memo. Why that's important is if you
1:46:42look at the clean brick memo and you
1:46:43look at today, they basically
1:46:44implemented every single point of the
1:46:47clean brick memo, right? Every single
1:46:49point. That's number one. Number two is
1:46:50what's interesting is the people who
1:46:52responsible for the clean brick memo
1:46:55pearl um Douglas 5 went on to work in
1:46:59the Bush administration and they were
1:47:00along with Paul Wolfitz your friend the
1:47:02architects my friend. Okay, sorry no
1:47:04that's going too far but there's three
1:47:06of [laughter] them. Okay, the three of
1:47:07them in the Pentagon were the architects
1:47:09of the Iraq war,
1:47:12right? And then uh after 911, Wesley
1:47:15Clark appears on stage with Amy Goodman.
1:47:18And uh Amy Goodman Amy Goodman is like,
1:47:21"What's the plan?" And Wesley Clark is
1:47:23like, "We're going to go after seven
1:47:24nations in 5 years." And these seven
1:47:26nations include Iraq,
1:47:29uh Syria, Libya, Lebanon, uh Sudan,
1:47:34Somalia, and there's one more, Iran. So,
1:47:37if I'm just looking at it from like a
1:47:39like top down um bird's eye view, I
1:47:43would say that this was was always a
1:47:46plan uh ever since 1996 the clean memo
1:47:49to attack Iran eventually because
1:47:51they've been saying this for the past uh
1:47:5530 years. And so,
1:47:58isn't that a good reason to attack Iran?
1:48:01So, is that always the plan? So let me
1:48:02first of all number one I I agree with
1:48:04your characterization of the cream boy
1:48:06cream break plan. Number two I agree it
1:48:08was a plan. Um what I see from 2005 on
1:48:14um and I uh was working with the Bush
1:48:17administration about how to essentially
1:48:19calm down the Iraq war. So I had many
1:48:21many interactions here with the Bush
1:48:23administration because um I was warning
1:48:25before we did Iraq that we would touch
1:48:27off the largest suicide terrorist
1:48:29campaign of modern times. Uh, we did
1:48:31invade Iraq. We did touch off the
1:48:33largest suicide terrorist campaign of
1:48:34modern times. And who started my center
1:48:36at the University of Chicago? The
1:48:38Chicago project used to be on suicide
1:48:41terrorism. It was actually the Bush
1:48:44administration. Think about that for a
1:48:46moment because suddenly somebody made a
1:48:48unique prediction. Not other terrorism
1:48:51expert was predicting that. And I gave
1:48:53it directly to Paul Wolawitz here. He
1:48:56was did Iraq anyway. It touched it off
1:48:58anyway. And so now suddenly I'm engaging
1:49:02with uh with them. Um we never put an
1:49:05army in a certain African country. Think
1:49:07Somalia. That was a possibility. That
1:49:09did not happen. Certain things that did
1:49:11not happen also are important to know.
1:49:14So one of the things that happened
1:49:16during this period after the um uh this
1:49:19Iraq war became a disaster is all that
1:49:23influenced by Wolfwitz left uh F left um
1:49:27Pearl left and it's because it became
1:49:30widely understood what the real dangers
1:49:34were of going into Iran much I mean Iraq
1:49:37was already a problem but Iran is a much
1:49:39bigger I said the biggest challenge
1:49:41since Germany in World World War II.
1:49:45>> This was widely understood at the time
1:49:47and it's widely understood by uh the
1:49:50military. It's widely understood in both
1:49:52white uh Democrat and Republican White
1:49:55houses. This is not a unique situation
1:49:58here. Um I think you really run into um
1:50:02an issue with why did President Trump
1:50:05bomb for? So I've talked to the people
1:50:07from the administration who have left in
1:50:09detail about this in uh in May. I think
1:50:13you have to understand one thing which
1:50:17is although um President Trump decided
1:50:19to reject Netanyahu in his first
1:50:21administration, President Trump has
1:50:23become his own national security
1:50:26adviser, his own secretary of defense,
1:50:28his own secretary of state. If you look
1:50:31at all the decisions that are happening,
1:50:34everybody else is essentially executing
1:50:37his policies and occasionally he'll get
1:50:39mad at them and blame them for
1:50:41something, but he's not really following
1:50:45closely the advice of any of those
1:50:47people around him. I think what's
1:50:50happening is that um our pres our system
1:50:55gives the president inordinate
1:50:58discretion when it comes to the use of
1:51:01force.
1:51:01>> You're saying that this was a personal
1:51:03bias and a whim.
1:51:04>> I think it was um yes, largely so. But I
1:51:07would say it's because I would say that
1:51:09what you're seeing here is that the
1:51:12style of president what what it doesn't
1:51:16matter if if he fires Pete Hath next
1:51:18week or he fires Scott Besset next week.
1:51:21Do we really think the style of the
1:51:23president is going to change? I think
1:51:25that we need to understand that we in
1:51:28our system of government we have uh
1:51:31given inordinate power to the president.
1:51:33I'm not calling for a change of the
1:51:35constitution, but I am saying that that
1:51:37means if the president wakes up one day
1:51:40and wants to press the button
1:51:42>> and by the way, Abra there's famous
1:51:43Abraham Lincoln famous story in uh Doris
1:51:46Kern Goodwin's of team of rivals where
1:51:48Abraham Lincoln goes around the table
1:51:50asks the entire cabinet and and they all
1:51:52say no no no no and they come to the and
1:51:55Clinton and and Lincoln says I and
1:51:58gentlemen the eyes have it. [laughter]
1:52:00This is what happened. What does Trump
1:52:02have against Iran?
1:52:04He can't even find Iran on a map.
1:52:07>> I mean, he can't. Well, look, I have
1:52:10>> I guarantee you he cannot do it. Well,
1:52:11look, I think we've pushed We I I like
1:52:14to talk to people directly. I've never
1:52:17in this case,
1:52:19um, everybody I've talked to who's been
1:52:22around this, who've actually briefed the
1:52:24president on this, they only go so far
1:52:27in willing to say why he did certain
1:52:29things. And I'm saying it's because of
1:52:31the way he has chosen to make his
1:52:35decisions. There's not the process we're
1:52:37used to seeing here. So what that would
1:52:39mean is, and I've never talked to
1:52:40President Trump, is unless I could
1:52:43actually talk to Trump, I won't go
1:52:44further than I've currently said,
1:52:46because I do think that this is though
1:52:48how we got here. And once he did for I
1:52:52don't know that at all he understood the
1:52:54consequences but I think then he was
1:52:56sunk Jang because once he did that and
1:52:59he sees the satellite imagery I'm seeing
1:53:02in the civilian world and there's
1:53:03probably more he he knows if they
1:53:06develop if they test nukes on his watch
1:53:08man he's sunk for all of history. What's
1:53:10your psychoanalysis of?
1:53:12>> So, so, so let's just look at his
1:53:14pattern behavior in his both his first
1:53:16term and second term, right? First term
1:53:18he comes in office, he he he cancels the
1:53:21JCPA POA, which is the Iran nuclear deal
1:53:24under Obama, right? He's like, we're not
1:53:25doing this anymore, guys. That's number
1:53:27one. Then he recognizes, sorry. Then
1:53:31what he does is he um transfers the
1:53:34American embassy from tele Tel Aviv to
1:53:37Jerusalem which is one of the most
1:53:38provocative acts an American president
1:53:40has ever done in the Middle East. You
1:53:41don't you don't do that. Okay, that's
1:53:43number two. Number three is he
1:53:45recognizes Israel's control of the
1:53:46Golden Heights. Then the the most
1:53:49dramatic thing he does is in January
1:53:512020, he orders the assassination of
1:53:54General Kasam Salmani who was Iran's de
1:53:57facto ambassador in the Middle East. So
1:54:00for this seemed a logical extension of
1:54:03his actions. He is the most pro-Israel
1:54:06president the United States has ever
1:54:07had. Right? It seems like if you just
1:54:10look at the clean brick memo of 1996 and
1:54:13you look at what what Trump is doing in
1:54:16um in the Middle East, it seems like he
1:54:18is trying to create the Greater Israel
1:54:19Project.
1:54:21Sorry, do you know what the Greater is
1:54:22Project is? Um right. So the greater
1:54:25Israel project is um the idea that um
1:54:30Israel should occupy all biblical lands
1:54:33or the lands that Yahweh God promised to
1:54:36Abraham. And these lands um extend from
1:54:40Egypt from sorry extend from the Nile in
1:54:42Egypt all the way to Euphrates in Iraq.
1:54:45So if you look at the entire map of what
1:54:48the United States has been doing for the
1:54:50past 20 years, attacking Iraq, Libya,
1:54:52Syria, um and now this war which
1:54:56promised to engulf um Saudi Arabia,
1:54:59Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, it seems like
1:55:04this is all to achieve the Greater
1:55:06Israel project.
1:55:07>> I I believe
1:55:08>> but if he was only interested in Israel,
1:55:11why Venezuela? Why Greenland? Why
1:55:14Canada? What I
1:55:16>> have something to do on the weekend.
1:55:17>> Well, what I'm just what I'm pointing
1:55:18out what I'm pointing so I agree with
1:55:20you that's the second most important
1:55:22reason Israel. I'm not saying it doesn't
1:55:24matter at all. I think that what we need
1:55:26to see is um that first of all,
1:55:28President Trump is really um enthralled
1:55:32with the use of violence. Enthralled
1:55:34with the use of violence. He's part and
1:55:36parcel of violent populism. He's both a
1:55:38cause and a symptom of it at the same
1:55:40time. And it's not just term he did not
1:55:43start a war.
1:55:44>> Well,
1:55:44>> he kept his promise. I will not start
1:55:47and violent and after January 6,
1:55:50>> I think uh the process leading up to
1:55:52January 6. And then in chapter five of
1:55:54the book, I track I traced this out that
1:55:57in aftermath of January 6, this has
1:56:00radicalized MAGA. MAGA is not the same
1:56:03uh sort of group political international
1:56:06policy, not just internal.
1:56:08>> Yes. But once you have norm once
1:56:09political violence is normal for you at
1:56:12home, it's a lot easier to use.
1:56:14>> He was in office from way before.
1:56:16>> Well, what I'm trying to tell you is
1:56:17that it it there's a there's a
1:56:19trajectory that's emerging. It's not
1:56:21that he comes in planning on, you know,
1:56:242017 to do January 6th. There's a a
1:56:26trajectory that emerges and I think that
1:56:29we we need to see that yes, Israel is
1:56:32playing a role, but there's a lot more
1:56:34that he is doing. So you think the
1:56:36number one reason is this escalating
1:56:39acceptance
1:56:39>> normalization of political violence? It
1:56:41is the thing that is underneath.
1:56:43>> But there's something else to look at. I
1:56:45think there is also in Trump
1:56:49a fear of 9/11 and there's in ways it
1:56:54should be. Okay. So when you take a look
1:56:56at Iran and their relationship with al
1:57:00Qaeda ruined but still there
1:57:04something comes to mind at times which
1:57:06is what would happen if instead of 9/11
1:57:09happening with aircraft a ship sailed in
1:57:12with a nuclear weapon to New York Harbor
1:57:15and detonated.
1:57:17So given the ideology of Iran, given the
1:57:20fact that they have nuclear materials
1:57:23and so and the presence of al-Qaeda, we
1:57:26can say we can say all the various
1:57:28things we say about Trump in various
1:57:30ways and I agree with much of them.
1:57:32There's also a rational fear that can
1:57:35involve this is why his fundamental
1:57:38demand has been the nuclear weapons. Now
1:57:42he attacked them first. He claimed it
1:57:45succeeded. it failed. Okay. And we
1:57:48really don't know, I think, for sure
1:57:50where the nuclear capabilities are. We
1:57:54don't know how to destroy them. And
1:57:55we're looking at that.
1:57:57But I think that underneath it, if you
1:58:00take a look at the question of what
1:58:01happens if there's a nuclear weapon,
1:58:04especially the secret one developed in
1:58:06Iran,
1:58:08given the ideology, what might happen?
1:58:12And I think in many ways when you look
1:58:15at
1:58:17you know how we will be viewed in
1:58:19history
1:58:21from from that if that were allowed to
1:58:23happen under his watch would be also
1:58:25driving him.
1:58:26>> Do you think the JCPOA was working?
1:58:31It didn't fail. What it was working is
1:58:34another matter. The the fundamental
1:58:36thing was to denuclearize
1:58:39these areas. So if Trump is most
1:58:42concerned about Iran develop a nuclear
1:58:44weapon, why did he withdraw from the
1:58:46JCPOA?
1:58:48>> Because I he wanted more control. I
1:58:51think I have no idea what his went
1:58:53through his mind. He wanted to have a
1:58:54direct American control on that. He
1:58:57thought that would be more effective.
1:58:59When you take a look at his practices,
1:59:01okay, he clearly doesn't go through
1:59:04reliance systems. It doesn't want to
1:59:05have dependence on others. He wants that
1:59:08power in his own hand. He can't have it.
1:59:11He does it as well. I don't I can't
1:59:14psychoanalyze him. But what I see
1:59:16happening is that
1:59:19and this is something I wrote on Bogler.
1:59:22The fundamental fear was the nuclear
1:59:249/11 and he keeps coming back to that.
1:59:27So if he was if he if he were afraid of
1:59:29a nuclear weapon, he should have avoided
1:59:31avoided three things. Okay? One is
1:59:33withdrawal from the JCPOA. Second is do
1:59:35not assassinate the other Kaii because
1:59:38he want he didn't he refused to ever use
1:59:41nuclear weapon and number three is do
1:59:43not attack Iran and Trump did all three
1:59:46things yes but that doesn't mean that
1:59:48the operational action didn't have a
1:59:51certain end in mind so in other words it
1:59:55was rational to be concerned about it he
1:59:58proceeded irrationally in action
2:00:01>> yes and I think the choice set is
2:00:03interesting here So, I agree, by the
2:00:06way, with with George that there's a a
2:00:09rational fear of a nuclear weapon with
2:00:11Iran. There is an an element of a
2:00:13rational fear of that. I think we could
2:00:15learn to live with it, by the way. So I
2:00:17don't think it means that once you're
2:00:19concerned about an Iranian nuclear
2:00:21weapon, the solution is the force
2:00:23direction. But I would but but but yeah,
2:00:26I thought you might. But let me say that
2:00:28what we saw with the JCPOA was not just
2:00:31that Trump ripped up the JCPOA, but he
2:00:34replaced it with a maximum pressure
2:00:36campaign. So what President Trump has
2:00:38done very often in his career and this
2:00:41is what I would say is and this is
2:00:42before January 6 but he has uh there's a
2:00:45trajectory here which is he is more and
2:00:47more comfortable with force domestically
2:00:51and internationally as he becomes as he
2:00:54goes through his presidencies his two
2:00:56presidencies and I that's what I mean by
2:00:58the normalization of it. becomes more
2:01:01normal. You you you um uh because he
2:01:04didn't just rip it up the JCOPA. He
2:01:06thought a pressure campaign would be
2:01:09better. And I think that he uh learned
2:01:12from that failure because it didn't stop
2:01:14Iran, that he should have more pressure.
2:01:17A lot of others of us would say you
2:01:19should learn from that by seeing that
2:01:21the pressure campaign is making things
2:01:23worse. And I think that this is what
2:01:26we're what we're seeing with our
2:01:27president. He finds a lot of comfort in
2:01:31the use of political violence.
2:01:32>> He also doesn't really understand
2:01:36power. He overestimates what he has.
2:01:39>> He went into that war expecting it to be
2:01:42readily done.
2:01:43>> He did not understand the mosaic system.
2:01:46He did not care about responses. So, one
2:01:50of the problems have I don't necessarily
2:01:52disagree with pressure as a measure. He
2:01:56doesn't understand how to apply the
2:01:59pressure, nor does he have a clear
2:02:02understanding of just how much power he
2:02:05has.
2:02:05>> My question is, if this is just complete
2:02:07chaos, if this is just one guy behaving
2:02:09irrationally, why all events helping to
2:02:13create the Greater Israel Project?
2:02:15That's that's my question. Well, and my
2:02:17challenge to you is that explain the
2:02:19Western Hemisphere because if you really
2:02:21want to build the greater Israel project
2:02:24and you look out here over time, what
2:02:28you would like is you'd like President
2:02:29Trump um completely focused on the
2:02:32Middle East and yet President Trump
2:02:33starts out with his tariffs again very
2:02:36which not quite violent but again very
2:02:38aggressive uh against our own allies. Uh
2:02:40then he moves to actual military ideas
2:02:44with Greenland and and our allies
2:02:46Canada. And so what he's doing, Jiang,
2:02:48is it's not that I just again I want to
2:02:51be very clear. I think that Israel is
2:02:52the second most important driver here.
2:02:55This is this is where I I I just um I
2:02:59think also with the 2003 Iraq war, um
2:03:01some of the people I most respect in the
2:03:03world believe the number one reason we
2:03:05did the Iraq war in 2003 was Israel. I
2:03:09think it's uh what happened after 911. I
2:03:13think 911 created an enormous fear of
2:03:15Muslims in the United States including
2:03:18with the people at the very top. It
2:03:20wasn't only Israel,
2:03:21>> right? So one thing uh that people don't
2:03:24appreciate appreciate about the great
2:03:26project is the major impediment to that
2:03:29thing is actually the US military
2:03:31because the US military provides balance
2:03:33of power in the Middle East. the US
2:03:35military provides uh protection to the
2:03:38GCC. So if Israel were to become the
2:03:41dominant nation, it would need a way to
2:03:44remove the United States from the
2:03:45equation, right? And this Iran war is
2:03:48it's it it is a solution to this problem
2:03:51because if the if the Americans send in
2:03:52ground troops, which is part of the
2:03:54escalation trap.
2:03:55>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
2:03:56>> Then there's then the United States
2:03:58would probably lose this war and the
2:04:00United States would be forced to
2:04:01withdraw back into the Western
2:04:03Hemisphere.
2:04:03>> Hang on. Are you saying that Israel
2:04:05managed to convince Trump to go into
2:04:07Iran to do the bomb, which then gets
2:04:10into the escalation trap, which means
2:04:11that you need to put boots on the
2:04:13ground, which means that America
2:04:14ultimately loses, which means that
2:04:16America then has to withdraw to make
2:04:18room for Israel.
2:04:19>> I do not know if this was intentional. I
2:04:21don't [laughter] know if this was
2:04:22planned, but it's turning out this way.
2:04:25But one of
2:04:27the problem, if you're right, then and I
2:04:28I did a piece on my professor paper
2:04:31stack on this. What will happen if
2:04:33America truly truly withdraws is a much
2:04:38smaller Israel.
2:04:39>> I think it becomes a nuclear sparta. It
2:04:41doesn't quite get wiped off the map, but
2:04:43a much smaller Israel is.
2:04:45>> Yeah, Israel is much weaker.
2:04:46>> What if Israel took over SNCOM?
2:04:50>> What if all of America's military
2:04:52apparatus, okay, the planes, the troops,
2:04:55all then uh became under the control of
2:04:59Israel, which is happening right now,
2:05:01right? because you have de
2:05:02debacification right now in the Middle
2:05:05East which means that all these um
2:05:07planes all all this weaponry is now
2:05:09forced to go to Israel because it's the
2:05:11only safe space
2:05:13>> under that hypothetical I agree with you
2:05:15but what you see with let's take the
2:05:17Democratic party and about a third of
2:05:19the Republican party is they're not
2:05:22having that so what you see is as that
2:05:25exactly your scenario by the way is one
2:05:27of the big reasons why there's been so
2:05:30much anger against Israel. So there's
2:05:32two actors or two two actors that are
2:05:35getting blame for this war in Iran which
2:05:38is wrecking the world's economy. It's
2:05:40number one, President Trump and number
2:05:42two, it's Israel. And both of those are
2:05:44in deep trouble as we go forward and
2:05:47that Israel is in trouble with the
2:05:49American public. Israel is losing the
2:05:52American public.
2:05:53>> Israel is losing profoundly
2:05:57because [clears throat] Israel has
2:05:59always faced enemies that it could
2:06:00defeat. With this alliance that occurred
2:06:03with Turkey evolving, Israel is much too
2:06:06weak to do this. Therefore, Israel has
2:06:08to change its fundamental strategy,
2:06:11which to face the fact that it's a small
2:06:14country
2:06:16in an area that doesn't welcome it. make
2:06:19peace, try to find ways to enter it. So
2:06:23when Israel takes a look at this
2:06:24alliance that was formed, there are two
2:06:27ways to look at it. One, it might
2:06:30restrain non-state actors. Other it is a
2:06:33massive alliance that threatens Israel.
2:06:36So at this point, Israel is making very
2:06:38strange sounds like, you know, we're
2:06:41going to do something about Turkey. They
2:06:43can't do it. Remember this is a
2:06:45situation in which Israel has not found
2:06:47itself in where it does not have the
2:06:50military power to deal with a threat. So
2:06:55you look at this from two sides. One,
2:06:57yes, I think the Israelis manipulated
2:07:00Trump's thinking. That's was very clear.
2:07:04At the same time, Netanyahu has made
2:07:06massive dis mistakes in overestimating
2:07:10his influence and his power. Do you
2:07:12think Congress will pass the NDAA which
2:07:15will allow Israel to access data and
2:07:18intelligence from the US military?
2:07:19>> Not if the Democrats take I can't
2:07:21imagine that happening. Not if the
2:07:22Democrats and I don't even think if the
2:07:24Democrats don't cuz I think that this is
2:07:27you and and you've been part of the
2:07:29reason it's uh your your attention
2:07:31bringing this attention on social media
2:07:33I think it's been very important Jang
2:07:35because um I think that the more
2:07:37sunlight that falls on that the much
2:07:40less likely this is to happen. Israel's
2:07:43grand strategic problem from the
2:07:46beginning and to this day is it is 7
2:07:49million Jews surrounded by
2:07:52>> 9 million I think.
2:07:53>> Well 9 million 7 million total Jews.
2:07:55Yeah. Sorry. You got 2 million who
2:07:57don't.
2:07:57>> That's right. 7 million. That is 71
2:08:00miles wide widest point.
2:08:02>> Yeah. 7 million Jews surrounded by 3 to
2:08:06400 million Muslims depending on how far
2:08:10you you want to count with Pakistan. So
2:08:13that ratio the only way you can have
2:08:17Israel the greater project is with
2:08:19American power. So with if you have
2:08:22American power withdraw completely from
2:08:25the Middle East with the way Iran wants
2:08:27it to be and and that may end up being
2:08:29the outcome, uh then Israel is in deep
2:08:32trouble. If they can't stop Iran now and
2:08:35those missiles coming into Iran now with
2:08:37America's presence still there, what's
2:08:39going to happen a year or two from now
2:08:41when there's no military from America
2:08:44there? Israel, those 7 million are going
2:08:47to be on their own up against those
2:08:50three to 400 million. I don't think this
2:08:52means Israel, by the way, gets wiped off
2:08:54the face of the map, but I do think it
2:08:57becomes a at least a se it'll be a
2:09:00second tier power at best.
2:09:03>> Israel was successful in wars. It gave
2:09:06an illusion of power. What is evolving
2:09:10now geopolitically in the Middle East is
2:09:13terrifying to the Israelis,
2:09:16particularly with the rise of Turkey. At
2:09:17the same time, the United States now
2:09:19wants to withdraw from these various
2:09:21conflicts and even wants to reduce our
2:09:24the its
2:09:26reliability on Israel as well. And
2:09:29there's movements in the United States
2:09:30and the public and also in strategists
2:09:32and stuff. The fundamental crisis in
2:09:36Israel is one that the Americans can't
2:09:38solve because the American public is not
2:09:41going to go that deeply into it. But
2:09:44there is the possibility of
2:09:45accommodation by Israel. Now Netanyahu
2:09:48does not believe in accommodation and
2:09:50believes he must use force in all cases.
2:09:55He can't. Now he's had a peace treaty
2:09:58with Isra with Egypt for many years and
2:10:00it's held. the theory that Antonio has
2:10:04that no agreement with the Arabs will
2:10:06ever be honored in this particular case.
2:10:10Um, he's wrong because the Egyptians
2:10:12did. Certainly Saudi Arabia has nothing
2:10:15hostile to Israel. They've been quietly
2:10:18working with them on intelligence
2:10:19matters and a range of things. Okay.
2:10:21Pakistan has no fundamental interest in
2:10:24Israel.
2:10:26And Turkey really has many bigger fish
2:10:29to fry as it evolves than Israel.
2:10:34At the same time, Israel does not know
2:10:36how not to call attention on itself. It
2:10:39somehow always gets into it because its
2:10:42grand strategy has been since its
2:10:44founding always attack, be stronger than
2:10:47the other guy, but they've reached a
2:10:49point where they're not and they won't
2:10:51be. So the question is how does Israel
2:10:54evolve in this situation along with how
2:10:57does the American relationship with
2:10:58Israel evolve? Very deep questions for
2:11:01these areas. But I think you're
2:11:03absolutely right that Israel is at the
2:11:05heart of this as a problem. But at this
2:11:08point it's profoundly weakening hour by
2:11:11hour almost.
2:11:13>> Why is it that Israel's got so much
2:11:15influence over the US?
2:11:16>> Oh money. It's it's money. It's Apac.
2:11:18This is in the Israel lobby. John
2:11:20Mirshimer and Steve Walt's book, they
2:11:22lay it out. Um, and it's fun
2:11:24fundamentally, it's a very simple story,
2:11:27which is that although anybody can give
2:11:29money to elections, it's a it's a free
2:11:32and open process. It just turns out if
2:11:35you look at all the data, uh, that Jews
2:11:38as a group give more money than any
2:11:41other group per capita and as a group
2:11:43overall, about a third of all money in
2:11:45elections is coming from Jewish.
2:11:48>> Very different reason. During cold war,
2:11:52the Soviets had relations with Syria,
2:11:56had relations with Egypt and so on. The
2:12:00cold war was fought there as well. When
2:12:03the Arabs attacked Israel in 1973,
2:12:08okay, it was with Soviet weapons, Soviet
2:12:10training, many cases Soviet tactics
2:12:14imposed.
2:12:16Israel at that point was one of the few
2:12:20countries that was pro-American and it
2:12:22had a strategic point that it could
2:12:24undermine Egypt. It could undermine
2:12:26these things. So remember, ever since
2:12:28the Suez crisis,
2:12:31the Soviets had gotten involved in it.
2:12:33The Cold War is over now. These are not
2:12:35relevant to this thing. But it's not
2:12:38simply money or something that was there
2:12:41too. But that when the cold war you take
2:12:44a look at the situation that the
2:12:46Russians had and the amount of influence
2:12:49they had even in Lebanon and so on and
2:12:50so forth destabilizing it was deeply
2:12:53involved in the region and the United
2:12:56States didn't have very firm lies. It
2:12:58had Iran as an ally had Israel as an
2:13:01ally and they were players. So there
2:13:04were so that that situation is obsolete.
2:13:08the Soviets are no longer there and so
2:13:10let's get rid of it. So to answer your
2:13:12question, why is so much power? There's
2:13:15an alliance between Zionist capital um
2:13:19um basically APAC as well as um
2:13:22Christian evangelicals which is about a
2:13:25quarter of the population. Among these
2:13:27Christian evangelicals
2:13:29um maybe a minority are Christian
2:13:32Zionists uh which and they believe that
2:13:36um Israel is God's plan to save the
2:13:39world. So Israel has has to be has to be
2:13:42protected on all costs. Okay. So you
2:13:44have this massive alliance between um
2:13:47Zionist capital and then you have these
2:13:49fanatical Christian evangelicals.
2:13:52Um so one of the most powerful um
2:13:55organizations in United States is
2:13:56something called Christian Christian
2:13:58United for Israel run by someone named
2:14:00John and about 7 million members
2:14:02and all they care about is Israel. So if
2:14:04you're a congressman, you say anything
2:14:05bad about issue, you have like millions
2:14:07of people literally calling you up every
2:14:09single day bitching at you. Like
2:14:11literally, um these are the people who
2:14:14are funding uh the West Bank settlement
2:14:16settlers and they are the main cause of
2:14:18friction between uh the Israelis and the
2:14:22Arabs. Um because these West Bank
2:14:25settlers are just complete nutso.
2:14:28They're they're they're they're crazy.
2:14:30Um so um you say that okay in November
2:14:35the issue lobby will be taught a lesson
2:14:37but if you got like this alliance in
2:14:39place right between Zionist capital and
2:14:42we're we're talking like a lot of money
2:14:43right they put in like $30 million to
2:14:45defeat Thomas Mass in Kentucky they put
2:14:47in $70 million to defeat um Abdul Aliad
2:14:51in in Michigan that's a lot of money for
2:14:53a primary right they have almost have
2:14:54access to unlimited capital you have
2:14:56someone like um Laren David Ellison who
2:14:59who's able to buy CBS news and install
2:15:01Barry Weiss. So this alliance is almost
2:15:05unprecedented in American politics. So I
2:15:08don't see how just discuss with Israel
2:15:12can um um negate the power of of the
2:15:18issue. Well, you're seeing that um
2:15:20Jewish uh representatives running for
2:15:23Congress are losing left and also that
2:15:26so it's not just whether they are Jews
2:15:28running for the American Congress,
2:15:31whether they are the Christian Zionists
2:15:32running for the Congress and u one of
2:15:35the big things that's um underneath that
2:15:38is that there is a large movement um
2:15:41among the right. So most of the the
2:15:43evangelicals are on the right. They're
2:15:45they're not on the left. They're not
2:15:46Democrats. they're they're
2:15:48conservatives. Uh many of the folks
2:15:51supporting say Tucker Carlson, uh Joe
2:15:54Kent has run for office several times.
2:15:56Um they are uh folks that are extremely
2:16:00unhappy with the role of Israel in
2:16:03driving the foreign wars as they see it.
2:16:05Uh I see it as a secondary factor. They
2:16:07agree with Eu Jang that it's a number
2:16:09one factor. And what they're doing is
2:16:11they're voting the bums out. They're
2:16:13literally voting the bums out and
2:16:15replacing them with new people who they
2:16:18think um are going to zero out the money
2:16:21for Israel. And I think they're going to
2:16:22hold those people to account. They want
2:16:24that Israel's money to be zeroed out
2:16:26>> and that is not
2:16:28realizing that the primary use of Israel
2:16:32is obsolete.
2:16:35Syria does not have Russian bases,
2:16:37Soviet bases. Egypt is not a Soviet
2:16:40power
2:16:42potentially blocking the Suez Canal and
2:16:44so on so forth. So Israel was once a
2:16:48vital asset for the United States under
2:16:50the circumstances.
2:16:51>> Surely as long as Israel has money, it's
2:16:53a vital asset for the United States.
2:16:54>> No, the answer is a lot of countries
2:16:57have far more money than Israel.
2:16:58>> Can they put it into American politics
2:17:00as easily as Israel can
2:17:02>> if that was the only thing that was
2:17:04doing it? the that would be true. On the
2:17:08other hand, if you go back to the Cold
2:17:10War and how desperate it was,
2:17:14the relationship between the US and
2:17:15Israel doesn't isn't based on money and
2:17:18nobody owns it because the Soviets are
2:17:21so powerful there.
2:17:22>> The the reason this is happening now,
2:17:25this anger against Israel is not just
2:17:27it's another forever war. It's because
2:17:30this is the war that's hurting the
2:17:33American pocketbook in a serious way. If
2:17:37you go back since 1991,
2:17:40uh, and you can even go back further,
2:17:41but if if listeners will just go back to
2:17:431991 and call up on Google and say, give
2:17:46me a chart of annual GDP growth or
2:17:49decline in the United States since 1991
2:17:52to today. They're going to see some
2:17:54great patterns. They're going to see
2:17:56number one GDP growth goes down during
2:17:59the 19 2007 say housing crisis co but it
2:18:03does not go down during the uh Gulf War
2:18:05in ' 91. It does not go down in Kosovo.
2:18:08It does not go down in 2003 when we
2:18:10invade Iraq. It does not go down during
2:18:12the forever wars in Iraq and
2:18:14Afghanistan. This war is different. And
2:18:17the reason it's different is not just
2:18:19it's another war in a long period of
2:18:22time. It's different because this is the
2:18:25war that Americans are feeling it in
2:18:27their pocketbook for real. So, so if if
2:18:31it is the case that the American public
2:18:32is turning against Israel, I certainly
2:18:34hope so. How did Thomas Massie, who was
2:18:38one of the um most ardent anti-Israel
2:18:41voices in
2:18:42>> Trump went after him in a big way. You
2:18:44got the So, Trump targeted Massie with
2:18:47in he targeted Marjorie Taylor Green. He
2:18:50targeted Massie. And when you're
2:18:52targeted by Trump, and we know this most
2:18:54from Marjgery Taylor Green, this means
2:18:57assassination attempts against you and
2:18:59your kids and your families. So this
2:19:01isn't just a small uh this isn't just a
2:19:04political targeting we're talking about.
2:19:06>> So So let's summarize what you're
2:19:09saying. Number one is you believe money
2:19:11has a significant impact on American
2:19:13politics.
2:19:14>> Oh yeah.
2:19:14>> And Zionists have a lot of money to
2:19:17spend. Okay, that's number one. Number
2:19:19two is Trump is very powerful within the
2:19:23um Republican party. So if he if he
2:19:25targets you, whether you be Thomas
2:19:26Massie or uh MTG, um you will you will
2:19:31you will lose,
2:19:32>> right? But I think Trump's influence is
2:19:34waning. I think it's it's up for grabs
2:19:36between now and January. That's what I'm
2:19:38saying. And it's what's driving the
2:19:39escalation trap. His desire to hold on
2:19:41to power is what's really driving the
2:19:43escalation trap between now and January.
2:19:46and and I am willing to I definitely
2:19:48agree it's an uphill battle because of
2:19:50all the money and all the uh sort of uh
2:19:52you know institutionalization as you are
2:19:54explaining it that's all true however
2:19:57that can crumble within a period of just
2:20:00a couple of years I don't think this
2:20:02idea that that it will take five or 10
2:20:05years in fact by 2028 I'm expecting
2:20:09there will be a candidate for the
2:20:11Democratic presidency of the United
2:20:13States that will be avowedly anti
2:20:16Zionist, not just kind of on the edges.
2:20:19And I think this is just
2:20:20>> that's what they'll almost run on.
2:20:21>> I think at least one person because yes,
2:20:23almost run on because somebody's going
2:20:26to be blamed for all the wreckage of
2:20:30this Iran war. And who are you going to
2:20:33blame?
2:20:34>> Why wouldn't you just blame Trump?
2:20:35>> Because uh Trump will already be toast
2:20:38by that point. You're going to This
2:20:39isn't This wreckage is going to go on
2:20:42for a while. You need you need an active
2:20:44candidate that
2:20:45>> I'm just saying we don't we're not going
2:20:47to be done blaming people because you
2:20:49know Iran
2:20:50>> this Iran war is one of the biggest
2:20:52messes in modern history.
2:20:54>> It's the biggest mess.
2:20:55>> It's the biggest mess since we have had
2:20:57in our country since since really all
2:21:01the go back to all the way World War I.
2:21:03There's no bigger
2:21:04>> biggest mess in 100 years.
2:21:05>> Yes. Be not because of the casualty. So
2:21:08we we're used to
2:21:09>> basically been at least on
2:21:10>> it's the economic consequences that are
2:21:13so big and as you're hearing and I agree
2:21:16with his economic analysis here he's
2:21:18talking about massive economic economy.
2:21:22>> Oh my gosh it's massive and I I I hope
2:21:25he's wrong. I mean this is where I'm
2:21:26predicting the es you're predicting the
2:21:28other and [laughter] I I think we each
2:21:30hope the other is not quite right but I
2:21:32am really concerned with his analysis
2:21:35because I can't chip away. I brought
2:21:37Jeff Curry on uh my Substack to do
2:21:40these, you know, sort of like what you
2:21:41do here uh here because I think he's
2:21:43just an amazing economist and so forth.
2:21:46He's right there. I mean, so he's right
2:21:48here.
2:21:49>> Can you give me Can you I'd like to say
2:21:51Okay, I agree.
2:21:54This will be the biggest crisis if it
2:21:57doesn't end. If it ends, it'll become
2:22:00like those other wars that we've had in
2:22:03past and it goes on. The fundamental
2:22:05question is
2:22:07how does it end? How could it end? And
2:22:10so on so forth.
2:22:13We don't understand I don't understand
2:22:15fully the nature of political systems in
2:22:18Russia or in Iran and how they continue
2:22:22the wars. So before we're ready to say
2:22:25this is the biggest disaster, I would
2:22:27say yes, if it continues, it will
2:22:30certainly be that. So far, it has not
2:22:33created the kind of crisis in the United
2:22:35States, for example, that Vietnam did by
2:22:38far. So, it's a question of how does
2:22:41this end? And it's really,
2:22:43>> how long would it have to go on for? If
2:22:45it goes on for another year, would you
2:22:46say it's the biggest crisis?
2:22:47>> I have no way to see it because I don't
2:22:50know the consequences, nor do I know how
2:22:52to forly fought or what will happen in
2:22:55the Straits of Hormuz and so on. So if
2:22:56they were in the straits of Hermuz and
2:22:58so on, if they were secured and the war
2:23:01went on, it might have one path. There's
2:23:04another path.
2:23:04>> But Trump, don't you see, George, that
2:23:06Trump's effort to end the war quickly
2:23:09with a victory for Trump is what is
2:23:12likely to create the pirick victory
2:23:14that's going to go on and on.
2:23:16>> The answer is I probably agree with you,
2:23:19but I'm not certain because I'm not
2:23:22certain about how Iran is evolving.
2:23:26So I agree with you certainly that if
2:23:29this war continues the consequences will
2:23:32be massive. I also agree with you that
2:23:35Trump will have a great deal of
2:23:36difficulty ending it on his own terms.
2:23:40But there's a variable there that we
2:23:42have to take seriously the internal
2:23:44capability.
2:23:45>> We do have to put some probabilities
2:23:47between now and November which is what
2:23:5075 days. I think between now and
2:23:52November to expect Iran to implode,
2:23:55which is possible. I wouldn't I would
2:23:57say possible, but I wouldn't even give
2:24:00it a 10% chance between now and
2:24:02November.
2:24:03>> I think they're using the election to
2:24:05try to force Trump into a position that
2:24:07he has to end it even by making massive
2:24:10concessions.
2:24:11>> We agree there. We agree. The question,
2:24:13>> what's the likelihood of Trump
2:24:14voluntarily ending it? Well, I think
2:24:16this without more for right
2:24:19>> 0%. Yeah. I think that what you're
2:24:22seeing is the opposite. He he is more
2:24:24likely to use force or and it's starting
2:24:27with economic force to get a symbolic
2:24:30victory and I don't think Iran is going
2:24:33to play their part. Iran is just not
2:24:35willing to give him the victory that he
2:24:37can. Yeah, they're giving him the
2:24:38middle. In the same way that we say
2:24:41Trump doesn't have the power to do these
2:24:43things, we have to take a look at power
2:24:45of Iran as well. So, one of the things
2:24:48that Trump wants is to end the war and
2:24:51not be a crippled president above all
2:24:54else.
2:24:55>> Y
2:24:57the Iranians seem to be operating trying
2:25:00to push it out. Now, come October, he
2:25:04can't the president cannot make a deal.
2:25:07that they're trying to force him into a
2:25:10position negotiation and they're
2:25:11succeeding because he understands he's
2:25:14going to lose power if he continues
2:25:16this. So now we ask the question
2:25:18psychologically that I can't answer.
2:25:20Does Trump care more about remaining
2:25:23powerful as president or more about
2:25:26beating the Iranians because he started
2:25:28the war and he wanted to be successful?
2:25:30I have no idea which way it goes. But
2:25:32the Iranians, I think, are sophisticated
2:25:35and are using it
2:25:37and using the election as a bargaining
2:25:40chip. If Trump wants to win this war and
2:25:44bring world peace and prosperity, he he
2:25:47needs to do two things. Okay? If he does
2:25:49these two things, I guarantee you this
2:25:50war will this war will end. United
2:25:52States will come up on top. And these
2:25:54two things are one, give $2 trillion to
2:25:57Iran.
2:25:58>> $2 trillion in Iran. two trillion
2:26:01dollars to Iran. The United States is
2:26:03$40 trillion in debt. Give two $2
2:26:05trillion to Iran. Not a big deal. The
2:26:07second thing is
2:26:08>> control Israel, embargo Israel, saying
2:26:11like if you misbehave, we will cut off
2:26:13arms to you guys and we'll no longer
2:26:16support you. Right? So, withdraw from
2:26:18Lebanon, stop these seven wars you're
2:26:21fighting right now. Um, come to peace
2:26:24with the Palestinians. So if he does
2:26:26these these these two things he he will
2:26:27be remembered as the greatest president
2:26:29in US history%
2:26:32no first [laughter]
2:26:34of all I I think so so I think that the
2:26:38problem with the plan first of all I I
2:26:41think that um containing Israel is
2:26:44becoming uh more and more part of
2:26:46President Trump's repertoire. He's not
2:26:48doing as much as I think he should be
2:26:49but it's become the bigger part is your
2:26:51first point. The key problem President
2:26:54Trump faces is he's trying to end this
2:26:58conflict between now and the midterms or
2:27:01now and say January, but really now in
2:27:03the midterms. And if he were to give $2
2:27:06trillion, what would happen is Iran
2:27:09would say, "Sure, we also want you to
2:27:11pull all your forces out." Fine. Trump
2:27:14pulls all the forces out and No, hold
2:27:16it. Hold it. And $2 trillion. And what
2:27:19then is Iran going to do? It's going to
2:27:22likely topple the governments in the
2:27:24Gulf States. It's not going to sit back
2:27:28and say, "Oh, sure."
2:27:29>> Because they've got free reign, because
2:27:30there's no over.
2:27:31>> Because there's a power vacuum. What has
2:27:33created what's been created now, and
2:27:36this would make it even worse, is a
2:27:38power vacuum where it used to be America
2:27:40preeminent, Israel on the rise, Iran
2:27:43declining. Well, now the power vacuum is
2:27:45because this is changing. And what's
2:27:47going to fill that power vacuum is
2:27:50critical for the future. Iran, if under
2:27:53your plan, they will fill the vacuum uh
2:27:56for Iran. And this will wreck Trump
2:27:59future. This is they it's not just Trump
2:28:01won't viscerally do it. This is just
2:28:04going to wreck Trump's future.
2:28:06>> I did not say give Iran two $2 trillion
2:28:09of gold. I said give them $2 trillion$2
2:28:11trillion US. Which means that
2:28:14>> it's going to be worthless anyway. Yeah,
2:28:16that's the point. If you want the $2
2:28:17trillion deal, you want to give them a
2:28:19sucker. If you want the $2 trillion,
2:28:21okay, you need to participate in the
2:28:24global economy, you need to make sure
2:28:25the Middle East is able to send oil to
2:28:28East Asia.
2:28:29>> Well, this is a version of JD Vance's
2:28:32idea of pay for performance. And as I
2:28:34argued before when theou was coming up,
2:28:36I Vance's whole approach to this as a
2:28:39business deal, I think, was completely
2:28:40misguided. What Iran is doing is not a
2:28:43business deal. pay for performance like
2:28:44a like playing a football player. What
2:28:46what they want is power. Power is what's
2:28:50at issue. So that's why I'm describing
2:28:51as there's a power vacuum. Who's going
2:28:53to fill the vacuum? It's not about the
2:28:56money per se. It's about power because
2:28:59in international politics, that's what
2:29:02determines outcomes. 20 years ago, um
2:29:05there was a philosophy in Washington
2:29:07called neoliberalism. I'm not I'm not
2:29:09sure if it's still around, but the idea
2:29:10was fading fast. Well, the idea was that
2:29:12trade would promote peace, right? So, if
2:29:14you wanted peace in the Middle East, you
2:29:16just trade it with Iran. Iran has a lot
2:29:18of oil. You let them sell the oil and
2:29:20and then you have peace.
2:29:22>> Yeah.
2:29:23>> Is anything wrong with that idea?
2:29:25>> There's nothing inherently wrong with it
2:29:27as long as you had a big protector like
2:29:30uh the United States that could enforce
2:29:32the stability on which that deal rested.
2:29:35That and this is your point about how
2:29:37globalization is coming unglued. So, uh
2:29:40I agree. I wrote a piece in foreign
2:29:41affairs laying out that what's happening
2:29:44uh with the Iran war is America as
2:29:47protector of the global rules of power
2:29:51meaning stability for commerce is simply
2:29:54coming unglued. So it's not just here in
2:29:57the Middle East it's going to be around
2:29:59the world. And what uh in ' 91 when
2:30:02America won this stunning victory in the
2:30:04Middle East, it wasn't just confidence
2:30:06that America could police the sea lanes
2:30:09in the Middle East, there was confidence
2:30:11America could police the sea lanes
2:30:13globally. That's why trade went from 38%
2:30:16of world product to 62% of world
2:30:19product. Think about that. Because it
2:30:21became cheaper to trade. You didn't have
2:30:23to worry about instability as much. Now
2:30:26instability is back. What does that
2:30:30mean? Trade is more expensive, more
2:30:32risky insurance rates. And what does
2:30:34that mean? Anything that becomes more
2:30:36expensive, you get less of it.
2:30:38>> Do you think Trump's really serious
2:30:39about pulling out of NATO?
2:30:41>> Oh, I don't think it even I I think
2:30:43NATO's already dead in terms of the key
2:30:46element of NATO.
2:30:47>> But is it not symbolic to do that?
2:30:49>> It's not about that. NATO at its core is
2:30:52not just a political alliance. What's in
2:30:55article 5 is that once article 5 is
2:30:58declared a US general there's no other
2:31:01decision it's a US general sacure who
2:31:05commands all the NATO troops not just US
2:31:08troops all the NATO troops the British
2:31:11troops the German troops France not in
2:31:14NATO for this reason and that is what
2:31:17NATO is NATO is a unified it's it's a
2:31:20warfighting unified alliance where you
2:31:23decide in advance. The Americans call
2:31:26the shots for everybody.
2:31:29>> Who's going to be in Europe is going to
2:31:30after what they've been through? Who's
2:31:33going to let America run British tropes?
2:31:36>> But you also remember that the Americans
2:31:38don't want to be exposed there. Always
2:31:40in when you're looking at Trump, okay?
2:31:44And he was serious about these forever
2:31:46wars. That he clumsily, stupidly got
2:31:49involved in one is true. But he hid out
2:31:53of a fundamental principle of the United
2:31:55States. We did not want to be involved
2:31:58in these wars, these endless wars that
2:32:00we lost. It never helped.
2:32:02>> There's actually a much simpler reason.
2:32:03Trump really hates the Europeans. He
2:32:06hates the Europeans much more than he
2:32:07hates the Iranians. [laughter] He blames
2:32:09I'm serious. He blames the Europeans for
2:32:11his 2020 20 election loss. He thinks
2:32:13that Obama conspired the Europeans to
2:32:16defeat him. That's that's why he went
2:32:17out of NATO.
2:32:18>> I I' I'd be doing a patriotic disservice
2:32:21if I didn't bring it up. Is the UK ever
2:32:23seriously going to be considered in
2:32:24discussions of world powers moving
2:32:26forward again?
2:32:27>> Well, if you So, I look at percentages
2:32:30of a country's world product compared to
2:32:32world product. If you look at the UK in
2:32:341990, that was around 6 to 6 12% of
2:32:38world GDP. What is it today? Just under
2:32:414%. So what's happened since 1990? So
2:32:45again, I track power with some key
2:32:47metrics that we can observe. And in
2:32:501990, America was 26% of world's GDP.
2:32:53China was 2%. Wow.
2:32:56>> Uh and the Europeans varied from about 5
2:32:59to 7%, Germany the highest. You look
2:33:02today and America's flat at 26. China's
2:33:06up from 2 to 17. And what's happened to
2:33:08all those Europeans? They're down by a
2:33:11third or more. Who's the sucker here? So
2:33:15people say we've been uncle. This is my
2:33:17one of my complaints against uh this
2:33:19argument that America's uncle sucker.
2:33:22No, we played the Europeans here, not
2:33:24the other way around. and Japan. So,
2:33:27this is why I don't worry about Japan
2:33:29was um over 10% of world's GDP at that
2:33:34point. Where are they today? 4%.
2:33:374%. So, if you just This is all World
2:33:39Bank numbers. People listening can go
2:33:41and Google it. You will see that we have
2:33:45been enormously
2:33:47privileged by this period called the
2:33:50cold war which this war is ending at the
2:33:54expense of other countries.
2:33:55>> One of the things you should point out
2:33:57however is Japan responded by massively
2:34:01increasing its military power. So it did
2:34:04not simply look at us at the United
2:34:06States and say where are you going? It
2:34:09took action. And China now worries great
2:34:12deal about Japan. The Europeans thought
2:34:16it was an immoral act improper to want
2:34:20to pull back and depend on them.
2:34:23The American point of view was the EU is
2:34:27larger than China economically. There is
2:34:29no possible reason why we should be the
2:34:33primary defender of Europe. That was a
2:34:35fundamental reason for many years. But
2:34:38why now? So I don't think this should be
2:34:40put into a Trump load. I think with or
2:34:43without Trump, this questioning of
2:34:47whether or not we should remain exposed
2:34:51in NATO and what NATO should evolve into
2:34:54would have been put on the table by any
2:34:57president at this point. The China
2:35:00example is very much what Europe should
2:35:03have done. We pulled back from that. The
2:35:06Japanese
2:35:08created a much is creating a much
2:35:12greater force along with the Australians
2:35:14and along with the Vietnamese who are
2:35:16now involved in that too. So many things
2:35:18are happening. So I think there are
2:35:21limits to what we can blame Trump for.
2:35:23>> We mentioned this earlier on.
2:35:24>> Well, I wasn't really blaming Trump just
2:35:26to be clear. I was just showing the hole
2:35:28in the argument.
2:35:29>> I understand that. I'm simply saying
2:35:31that there's a very reasonable
2:35:34redefinition of Europe after Ukraine
2:35:39defeated essentially Russia.
2:35:41>> We uh we mentioned this earlier on
2:35:43changing demographics specifically in
2:35:44China. But this is happening globally.
2:35:46Looks like global population is going to
2:35:48peak 2100 something like that. Maybe
2:35:50>> a weight decline is happening not just
2:35:52in the United States but in Europe as
2:35:54well.
2:35:55the bottom of
2:35:56>> 10 billion maybe and then it's going to
2:36:00do this unless there's some intervention
2:36:01that we can't yet foresee. When it comes
2:36:04to you guys planning out how you think
2:36:06about the future geopolitically,
2:36:09>> how much of a uh curveball is the
2:36:13potential changing demographics?
2:36:15Obviously, we've got AI and robotics and
2:36:17automation coming in at the same time,
2:36:19but what it seems like China is doing is
2:36:21basically trying to speedrun using
2:36:24humans to build robots so that the
2:36:26robots can replace the humans once the
2:36:27humans have off. How do you think
2:36:30about global population decline playing
2:36:32into your models moving forward?
2:36:34>> So, this war in the Middle East, um,
2:36:36people don't really appreciate the, u
2:36:39geopolitical consequences. So right now
2:36:42we're about 8 billion people but if you
2:36:44talk to economists they'll tell you that
2:36:46the earth by itself can only support
2:36:48about two billion people. The way we get
2:36:50around this is with fertilizer right so
2:36:53Middle East is important not just
2:36:54because it provides cheap energy but it
2:36:56also provides a lot of fertilizer um to
2:36:58the world. I can't remember the exact
2:37:00number maybe a quarter to a third of the
2:37:02world's fertilizer. So if a quarter to a
2:37:04third of the world's fertilizer goes
2:37:06offline for a year, then you're going to
2:37:09have millions of people starve to death.
2:37:12Um so there's no way we will reach 9
2:37:14billion people. Uh you will see massive
2:37:17starvation throughout Africa at some
2:37:19point.
2:37:19>> You think this is going to happen? You
2:37:20don't think?
2:37:21>> Oh, I I think it's baked in already. So
2:37:23I I agree maybe for a slightly different
2:37:26um angle on this, which is so I think
2:37:29about power, balance of power. You're
2:37:31hearing me come everything from a
2:37:33balance of power perspective. That's why
2:37:35I sometimes agree disagree with the
2:37:37other. But from the balance of power,
2:37:39what's happening? America was preeminent
2:37:41from 1991
2:37:43until this war. America's being knocked
2:37:46back because for the first time since '
2:37:4891, a state beat America. Just think
2:37:53about that. And everybody's learning
2:37:55that lesson that America can be beaten.
2:37:58Well, that means America's global
2:38:01influence that we call it the world
2:38:02empire. You can call it American
2:38:04hegemony. This is now fading fast.
2:38:08What's going to replace it? We could say
2:38:10it's multipolarity. I think it's going
2:38:12to be more fragmented than that. I think
2:38:14you're going to see I you might even
2:38:16call it a emerging anarchy that's going
2:38:19to occur. And under those conditions
2:38:21here, this is because the states that
2:38:25used to be under uh America's
2:38:27protection, they're not under America's
2:38:29protection before. You're talking we're
2:38:30talking about Japan building force. And
2:38:32notice we're not saying Japan getting
2:38:34America to come and help it. We're
2:38:36talking about Japan on its own. Many
2:38:38states around the around the world are
2:38:41thinking this way. That's what I mean by
2:38:43an emerging anarchy. It's not really
2:38:45quite a multi-olar world. It's more
2:38:47fragmented than that. who would be the
2:38:49polls or who would be
2:38:50>> it'll be it'll be a center US and China
2:38:53have aligning interests fundamentally
2:38:57and we are seeing that diplomatic
2:38:59process playing out I think it will
2:39:02succeed with an understanding okay but
2:39:05at the same time China is not the Soviet
2:39:08Union it doesn't occupy countries it
2:39:11uses economic influence in those
2:39:13countries investment and so on and so
2:39:15forth so it's a very different country
2:39:17not too different from the United States
2:39:19in the way it operates as well. Although
2:39:22the op United actually operates with
2:39:25more military power. Okay.
2:39:27>> But but in this emerging anarchy you
2:39:29will see greater uh incentives for
2:39:32nuclear proliferation for example with
2:39:35greater incentive and you already saw
2:39:36that with Saudi Iran, Saudi Arabia uh
2:39:39you will see this um uh these incentives
2:39:42start to spread as a result of this war.
2:39:44What will also happen as a result of the
2:39:47incentives for proliferation is concerns
2:39:50about preventive wars, preemptive wars
2:39:53to stop that. So we've worried about for
2:39:57some time Poland might start to think
2:39:59about going nuclear. People are already
2:40:02noticing Putin has been focusing on
2:40:05Poland. Why would Putin focus on Poland
2:40:09next week to meet the president?
2:40:10>> There you go.
2:40:11>> Ask him if he's got any nukes. The the
2:40:14answer is Poland is the eastern front of
2:40:17Europe.
2:40:19It cannot trust the western front
2:40:21because it's the alliance of the
2:40:22willing. Okay. And with that statement
2:40:26that shows it Poland is evolving
2:40:29dramatically and it has the capability
2:40:31and is discussing becoming a nuclear
2:40:33power.
2:40:34>> There you go. So the question of because
2:40:37when I talk to them I constantly hear
2:40:39back you know
2:40:42we're not counting on the United States.
2:40:44We have 10,000 troops there but we're
2:40:46not counting on the United States. So
2:40:48it's evolving dramatically and it's
2:40:51going to be looking at that. So I agree
2:40:52with you that the need to have nuclear
2:40:55weapons okay or the supposed need for to
2:40:58have nuclear weapons will create it. But
2:41:01at the same time, I see the economic
2:41:04alliance between the United States and
2:41:07China, and I think that's going to
2:41:09happen is going to create a strange pole
2:41:14between the two because they have very
2:41:16similar interests.
2:41:17>> I don't disagree with you. I don't
2:41:19disagree with Jiang. What I'm saying is
2:41:21we're moving to a more warprone
2:41:24world.
2:41:25>> Yep.
2:41:26>> Well, the world is fairly full of war
2:41:28for a while. it. But this is about to
2:41:30get much worse.
2:41:31>> What are the places that you're keeping
2:41:32an eye on with regards [clears throat]
2:41:34to conflicts that aren't just going to
2:41:36expand from existing ones now?
2:41:38>> North Korea. North Korea is the big one.
2:41:42>> If I'm North Korea and I'm, you know,
2:41:44I'm poor, but I've got nuclear weapons
2:41:47and Japan, China, South Korea are all
2:41:50distracted, why don't I just extort
2:41:52everyone, right? Why not just like, you
2:41:55know, hold a gun to everyone's head and
2:41:56like just say, "Pay up or I'll just blow
2:41:58you all up. China itself has tensions
2:42:00with North Korea.
2:42:01>> That's right.
2:42:02>> Okay.
2:42:02>> Why is it why is it the case that this
2:42:04uh whatever you want to call it global
2:42:06quasi anarchist world why why is that
2:42:11happening?
2:42:11>> Because we have lived under a certain
2:42:15amount of stability from 1991
2:42:18when the cold war ended the Soviet you
2:42:20that cold war conflict receded. It was
2:42:24immediately followed by the first Gulf
2:42:26War, which showed America could easily
2:42:29beat Iraq, which was a power trying to
2:42:32control the world's economy.
2:42:34>> People know that daddy can't look after
2:42:36everybody.
2:42:36>> Daddy can't take care of you anymore.
2:42:38Daddy's either too old baby boomer. So
2:42:40maybe, you know, the big too old,
2:42:42daddy's too old anymore, and she doesn't
2:42:45have all his marbles.
2:42:46>> And I'll also assert the other thing,
2:42:48the United States doesn't want that
2:42:49role. So it's not only they can't do it,
2:42:53it doesn't want to do it.
2:42:54>> So it's it's strange to think that you
2:42:56can have a a globe with a bunch of
2:42:59different nation states, individual
2:43:01countries who are competing with each
2:43:03other and sometimes in tension with each
2:43:04other, but you still kind of need
2:43:06somebody in charge.
2:43:07>> Yeah.
2:43:07>> And now there's nobody in charge.
2:43:09>> So you know what? If you go back to
2:43:112000, uh the world was perfect, but then
2:43:15[laughter] I'm serious. The world was
2:43:16perfect in 2000. perfect
2:43:19decided to go invade Iraq,
2:43:22>> Libya, Syria and create all this chaos
2:43:26in the Middle East. Um and um then it
2:43:30start to sanction Russia. NATO start to
2:43:32expand westwards and uh then you have
2:43:35this conflict in uh Ukraine between
2:43:38Russia. So um I mean I think it's
2:43:42hubris. Uh so it's not just the United
2:43:45States becoming exhausted and doesn't
2:43:46want its power. I think it's also
2:43:48hubris.
2:43:48>> So this makes the uh Iran war even more
2:43:52stupid. It it sort of uh expedited
2:43:56something that was already kind of
2:43:58modeled wars and conflict for years.
2:44:00This was the one I modeled for 20 years,
2:44:03year after year in and out. And it was
2:44:06because this was the next German. This
2:44:08was the biggest problem if we took it on
2:44:12that we would find for United States
2:44:13since Germany in [laughter] world that's
2:44:16what I'm asking we're we're trying to
2:44:19we're trying to tell you the reasons but
2:44:22we will be debating this Chris for
2:44:24decades
2:44:25>> if it's I will agree with you that if it
2:44:28extends it will become that it has not
2:44:31extended let's not overestimate it
2:44:34>> okay but I I understand on that but if
2:44:36you say this is a insane move which if
2:44:41you give it enough time and it's not
2:44:42that much time presumably 18 months or
2:44:44two and a half years or something like
2:44:46it's a really big [laughter] deal like
2:44:47if you you
2:44:49>> we don't need to worry about it. It
2:44:50wasn't that big of an error if we don't
2:44:53reach the end of the gang plank. It's
2:44:54like no no like you're already on the
2:44:56plank. You're walking. There's water
2:44:57either side of you if [laughter] you
2:44:58just about manage to turn around at the
2:45:00end and then reverse your direction. And
2:45:02the difference between life and death is
2:45:04how far you go down the plank. Oh, I
2:45:06agree. So, that is I disagree, but it
2:45:08just I'm less com confident about the
2:45:12decision.
2:45:12>> You get a little wind that pushes you
2:45:14off the
2:45:14>> Yeah. Um but it it really is like Oh,
2:45:18this was the worst thing you could do.
2:45:20>> This was absolutely Yes. And I think
2:45:22this was where um the real issue with
2:45:25President Trump walling himself off from
2:45:29anything like strong advisor. So if you
2:45:33just look at the advisers around Trump,
2:45:35I'm sorry. This is just an extremely
2:45:38weak group of advisers. It's not
2:45:40>> and Natalie Harp as well. I
2:45:41>> will also say I don't want to get into
2:45:44the some of that.
2:45:44>> Vietnam was far worse than this war.
2:45:47From the American point of view only a
2:45:49global point of view, it was not that
2:45:50terrible.
2:45:51>> Exactly.
2:45:51>> But for the Americans, this was the
2:45:54moment.
2:45:55>> That's why after Vietnam, we could just
2:45:56shift over to deal with Europe, try to
2:45:59defend the so Europe from the Soviet
2:46:01Union. this war. We're not shifting,
2:46:03>> dude. If this if this turns out if if uh
2:46:05history looks back and does its analysis
2:46:08and finds out that one guy one morning
2:46:10just decided to press the button.
2:46:12>> Yes.
2:46:13>> Like that. Oh, what what was the
2:46:14motivation? Was it some deeply sought
2:46:16after analystfueled thing? It's like no,
2:46:19some guy just woke up and decided to
2:46:21press a button. You will think how was
2:46:23it that we allowed power to be
2:46:25centralized so much behind one
2:46:28famous commercial by Hillary Clinton in
2:46:322016 which is the red phone is ringing.
2:46:35It's 3:00 a.m. and that means that was
2:46:37the phone to the nuclear weapons. Who do
2:46:40you want to answer that phone? This is
2:46:42the way we've built our constitution.
2:46:44Chris one person makes that decision. I
2:46:47would argue that
2:46:50don't overestimate,
2:46:52okay? If you extrapolate all the way
2:46:54forward, okay, but see the forces that
2:46:58are making Iran itself consider what to
2:47:02do and so on. So yes, if this war
2:47:05continued, it would have massive
2:47:07effects. It has already had significant
2:47:10effects. On the other hand, do not
2:47:13assume that we understand
2:47:16at this point just how far Iran can go
2:47:19as well. Yes, one man started this war.
2:47:22Okay, he's failed to win it, but do not
2:47:26assume that this war cannot end except
2:47:30go on forever.
2:47:31>> I I very much hope that it does.
2:47:33>> Well, when I say January, we'll know the
2:47:35answer to that.
2:47:36>> Is January kind of a point of no return
2:47:38for It's a point. It's a It's a It's an
2:47:40inflection point because in January,
2:47:43either President Trump will have the uh
2:47:46wherewithal to be able to continue the
2:47:48war or he won't. And that's because of
2:47:52the Democrats in Congress. So, the
2:47:54Democrats will either win Congress or
2:47:56not. And if they win Congress, they'll
2:47:58either act to shut down the war or not.
2:48:00We will know this in January. the damage
2:48:03has already been done to like a lot of
2:48:06the facilities the energy facilities of
2:48:08of the have been shut down. It's going
2:48:09to take them 6 months. Let's assume the
2:48:11war ends today or tomorrow 6 months to
2:48:14restart all these facilities.
2:48:16>> Yes. Well, then 6 months it'll get
2:48:17better then. So, we're talking about a
2:48:20fundamental shift in the nature of life
2:48:23on Earth
2:48:25which could happen but not in this
2:48:28shorter run.
2:48:29>> Well, well, wait a minute. But his I
2:48:31don't think the two of you are as far
2:48:32apart because remember you're speaking
2:48:34in very very broad strokes. What he is
2:48:37saying is that even by January, my my
2:48:40threshold, um he's very concerned about
2:48:43the debt crisis. He's very concerned
2:48:45about the world. He's worried about the
2:48:47world economy. So, and your point is
2:48:50even if we have a a world recession or
2:48:52depression, we'll recover. You two are
2:48:55not as far apart as you might think. Uh
2:48:57but the point is I think that we are at
2:49:00a book end with this war. The one thing
2:49:02that won't come back is confidence in
2:49:06America as the protector of that global
2:49:09system. that's not coming back for
2:49:11decades
2:49:12>> to end it is this is exactly
2:49:15what we in Texas want
2:49:18because [laughter] we have because we
2:49:21served during the cold war to fold the
2:49:24gap uh and there's really a desire in
2:49:29the United States in the public not to
2:49:32have this role okay among those of us
2:49:36working this we this is a natural thing
2:49:38they should we should have this role
2:49:40But when I talk to my neighbors,
2:49:43the idea that we are responsible for the
2:49:46world and one of the reasons there's
2:49:48hostility from the Texas Republicans
2:49:51with toward Trump very much so is that
2:49:55he did what he promised he wouldn't do.
2:49:58Get us involved again.
2:49:59>> Yes. And I'm not arguing for taking care
2:50:02of the world to take care of the world.
2:50:04I'm saying that America's primacy is not
2:50:07coming back. Is there a and again I will
2:50:10say
2:50:12>> that means for America well the economy
2:50:15losing the if if we are if this is right
2:50:19then the future of social security is is
2:50:22not long for this world um and that's a
2:50:25tremendous problem I have a 97year-old
2:50:28um uh mother-in-law and I am seeing
2:50:30already that we are horrendous in this
2:50:33country at I've been um at taking care
2:50:35of people in their 90s and we're going
2:50:37to have more people living in their 90s.
2:50:40What if social security goes away as a
2:50:42result of this war?
2:50:45>> I don't know how the connection can be
2:50:46made that would h be possible.
2:50:49>> Well, this is his more his area than
2:50:51mine.
2:50:51>> Well, I would argue that the American
2:50:55production and trade and everything else
2:50:56is critical to the world.
2:50:59>> It's the debt, it's these financial
2:51:01underpinnings that are being stressed.
2:51:04>> They're crucial. When you look at world
2:51:06trade and you look at who consumes it
2:51:08and who can't consume it, the United
2:51:10States still has a role. Okay.
2:51:13Artificial intelligence now accounts for
2:51:1650% of GDP growth in United States. 50%
2:51:19of GDP growth or these AI data centers.
2:51:22Guess who's financing these data
2:51:24centers? The GCC.
2:51:26>> So imagine a scenario where this work
2:51:29continues. The GCC is no longer able to
2:51:32provide any financing. the bubble, the
2:51:34AI bubble burst. You have like millions
2:51:37of unemployed Americans.
2:51:40>> I mean, the consequences will will be
2:51:42very dire.
2:51:46There's different models that may play
2:51:48out. That may be one of them, but I see
2:51:51it happening somewhat differently,
2:51:54which is that the United States
2:51:57dominating the Western Hemisphere,
2:52:00not having the price to pay
2:52:03in in terms of defense and everything
2:52:05else may well get by. So, the issue here
2:52:09is not that the world isn't changing. I
2:52:11think we all agree that a radical new
2:52:14system is emerging. Okay? We may not
2:52:17agree on what it would look like, but
2:52:19it's certainly going to be different.
2:52:21At the same time, I don't view this
2:52:24evolution as catastrophic from the
2:52:26American point of view or from the
2:52:28global point of view.
2:52:29>> Is there a a conflict or a war or a area
2:52:33of focus that everyone's preparing for
2:52:36right now that probably won't happen? Is
2:52:38there something that a lot of attention
2:52:40is being paid to a type of
2:52:42>> nuclear war? nuclear war nuclear war
2:52:44will not happen.
2:52:47>> Why?
2:52:48>> Because um there's no incentive for
2:52:51these nations to blow themselves up.
2:52:54>> Mad.
2:52:54>> It's Yeah. It's it's madness, right?
2:52:56>> Mutual assured destruction.
2:52:58>> Yeah. Yeah.
2:52:59>> Which is why we haven't had any such
2:53:00wars,
2:53:01>> right? So I I don't see any scenario
2:53:02where nuclear weapons are used even
2:53:04tactically.
2:53:05>> [snorts]
2:53:06>> Um, I think that before the war started
2:53:09on February 28th, I put the odds of a
2:53:12nuclear weapon being used by the United
2:53:14States in this conflict, cuz I modeled
2:53:16for 20 years as under 5%. By Israel at
2:53:21about 15%. So just to tell you where
2:53:23this has been, I've now essentially been
2:53:26doubling those over time because um the
2:53:30nature of um the players. So the
2:53:33modeling is agnostic to the decision
2:53:36makers right over time because you have
2:53:37different presidents come in.
2:53:39>> But what we've already seen is that uh
2:53:42President Trump um is already
2:53:45inordinately looking into nuclear
2:53:47weapons. uh a dolphin which is a nuc
2:53:49which is a nuclear uh arms carrying
2:53:52submarine by Israel. Israel moved it
2:53:54into the Red Sea within firing range of
2:53:56Tehran. Now these are not by themselves
2:53:59just these are these are just movements.
2:54:02So I understand that but nonetheless um
2:54:05these are encouraging Iran to move
2:54:09forward to do nuclear tests.
2:54:11>> So as you look at uh I'm not saying so
2:54:15as you just look at strategic
2:54:16interaction. And so that's what a model
2:54:18is. It's not just one player. It's
2:54:20strategic interaction. Uh the reason
2:54:22I've upped my percentages is because
2:54:25I've seen actions by Israel and the
2:54:27United States that I believe are
2:54:30increasing Iran's incentives to do
2:54:33nuclear tests and that once Iran would
2:54:37actually literally prepare to do nuclear
2:54:40tests, if we see those coming, that is
2:54:43another interaction. So that's my
2:54:45dynamic that I'm concerned about, but
2:54:48it's not at the level of 50 70%.
2:54:50>> Right now, Iran cannot develop a nuclear
2:54:52weapon because of a fatwa in place. So
2:54:54for the fatwa to be rescended, the
2:54:56supreme leader would need to organize a
2:54:58council and they would need to
2:55:00>> there's no chance that they could
2:55:01subvert the religious doctrine.
2:55:03>> It's a theocracy. It's it's like saying
2:55:05like, you know, let's ignore the first
2:55:06amendment of the constitution.
2:55:07>> Yeah. But that could be arranged pretty
2:55:09quickly.
2:55:10>> Well, um
2:55:11>> and they're about to withdraw from the
2:55:12NPT possibly. So they're already talking
2:55:15about what? So these are these under the
2:55:17hood.
2:55:18>> They need to revoke that fatwa. Okay.
2:55:21According to their system,
2:55:22>> so Iran would only develop a nuclear
2:55:25weapon if Israel or United States were
2:55:27to attack first, right? But if you're
2:55:29Iran, oh sorry, if you're Israel, United
2:55:31States, you use a tactical nuclear
2:55:32weapon say maybe on Pickax Mountain,
2:55:34right? What
2:55:35>> building the deliverable nuclear weapon
2:55:38is much more complex
2:55:41than testing one. You have to have all
2:55:44sorts of elements to come together. It
2:55:47would take time.
2:55:48>> That's true for hydrogen generation 2
2:55:51weapons but not atomic weapons. Fat Man
2:55:53and Little Boy. So Fat Man and Little
2:55:56Boy are undergraduate. Well well no
2:55:59fatman and little boy are delivered on
2:56:01uh was delivered on aircraft. This was
2:56:03not a put into a the second generation
2:56:06was miniaturaturized to put into the
2:56:07missile. But once we look
2:56:09>> I I simply am saying that developing a
2:56:12nuclear weapon and testing it and making
2:56:15sure it works takes a long bit of time.
2:56:18>> Well, if North Korea the 212th poorest
2:56:20country on the planet can do 60, pretty
2:56:23sure this country can conquer this
2:56:26problem
2:56:26>> over a period of time. Yes.
2:56:28>> Well, just pointing out it's it's you're
2:56:30you're raising it to the bar. It must be
2:56:32miniaturaturized and look like our if
2:56:34once we go back to World War II level
2:56:36nuclear weapons which you just have to
2:56:39keep keep in mind um killed well over
2:56:41100,000 people in those two explosions.
2:56:44North Korea plenty of problems
2:56:46>> nuclear program in North Korea lasted
2:56:48many years.
2:56:49>> Well, that's because they went too
2:56:50miniaturized. I'm just pointing out that
2:56:52Iran may go much more quickly.
2:56:55>> One thing I want to do is
2:56:57>> I see the risk of nuclear war even with
2:57:00Iraq down the road with plenty of time
2:57:03to do it. Just we're talking about
2:57:05things you're wean test two nuclear
2:57:08devices. I I think that the odds that we
2:57:11are going to look at those two nuclear
2:57:13tests, let's say it's an October
2:57:14surprise.
2:57:15>> I totally
2:57:16>> if they test two nuclear weapons in
2:57:17October, are you telling me George?
2:57:19We're going to look at those two nuclear
2:57:21tests and say, "Don't worry, folks. It's
2:57:23going to be years before they could hit
2:57:25[clears throat] nucle two nuclear
2:57:27weapons in Octo."
2:57:29>> You're absolutely right.
2:57:32>> I am saying, however, knowing something
2:57:34about developing nuclear weapons,
2:57:37that first test will probably fail and
2:57:39so on so forth. There is time is all I'm
2:57:41saying. Okay? Nothing more than that.
2:57:45>> What should people be paying the most
2:57:47attention to? let's say the next two
2:57:50years, something like that. People that
2:57:52are listening, what are the uh warning
2:57:55signs, nuclear tests coming out of Iran,
2:57:57one of those uh what are the little
2:58:00hurdles in terms of timing? You
2:58:02mentioned November, you also mentioned
2:58:03January.
2:58:04>> What are the bad signs or some of the
2:58:06good signs?
2:58:06>> Just what should people be paying
2:58:08attention to if this is the sort of uh
2:58:10change which occurs? What would be the
2:58:12big inflection points that you guys are
2:58:14paying attention to over the next two
2:58:15years? Number one inflection point I'm
2:58:17tracking and again building on what I
2:58:19just told you about January is whether
2:58:22we will see the Democrats win one or
2:58:25both houses of Congress and seated
2:58:27peacefully seated peacefully. So we need
2:58:31to understand that um what we saw uh in
2:58:35November 2020 was an election did not go
2:58:38President Trump's way. Now we have not
2:58:41seen President Trump as president have
2:58:43that happen again. he is about to be
2:58:45president and we're going to see in
2:58:47November 2026 will an election not go
2:58:51President Trump's way and if it doesn't
2:58:53go President Trump's way is he going to
2:58:57do anything to disturb the process of it
2:59:00going and that will go on for months
2:59:02because the election is November 3rd
2:59:04seating the Congress is January 3rd if
2:59:07that's what I'm really focused on
2:59:08because if that goes south all of these
2:59:11issues are going to get much much much
2:59:12worse
2:59:13>> I I see the positive one evolving is a
2:59:16US China economic onant and reducing
2:59:21tensions within that if those two
2:59:24countries get together the global system
2:59:27changes possibly with proper presidents
2:59:31stabilizes in a different form so I'm
2:59:34looking at that as the most critical
2:59:36thing coming
2:59:38>> my question is will the United States
2:59:40target critical civil infrastructure in
2:59:43Iran next one or two months if Iran
2:59:46start sorry United States starts
2:59:47targeting power plants or the desalation
2:59:50plants on mass this war is now out of
2:59:53control we are now beyond the escalation
2:59:55trap um it's it's complete madness
2:59:58>> even if it's done remotely it doesn't
2:59:59need to be boots on the ground it
3:00:00doesn't need to be nukes
3:00:02>> if the United States targets Iranian
3:00:04power plants Iran will target
3:00:07>> in any way
3:00:08>> in any way Iran will target all of the
3:00:10Middle East energy infrastructure the
3:00:12pipelines the energy fields and it's
3:00:14easy to do with drones.
3:00:16>> I I agree with this. I just put the
3:00:18internal problem a little bit higher,
3:00:20but I agree with his assessment that and
3:00:22this is part of my nightmare.
3:00:24>> It's not like these two things are
3:00:25existing separately.
3:00:26>> They actually go that's what I'm trying
3:00:28to say. These things actually go
3:00:29together. And then I gave this
3:00:31presentation to my Substack about the
3:00:33four steps that would be the nightmare
3:00:35scenario just in the Iran war. And this
3:00:38is uh this is the critical step because
3:00:42once you hit and I uh when I taught for
3:00:44the US Air Force in the 1990s targeting
3:00:47electric power plants was one of the
3:00:49critical things we studied for months
3:00:51and months. We fortunately did it in the
3:00:53unclassified world so that I was a I'm
3:00:55able to talk about this. We brought in
3:00:57people that ran the power plants, the
3:00:59engineers that built them. So I I have a
3:01:01fair idea of the different places you
3:01:03would target the plants, what the
3:01:05consequences are and there's a great
3:01:08paper that if people are listening by
3:01:10Thomas Griffith called targeting
3:01:13electric power. He was a military
3:01:15officer when he wrote this paper. It is
3:01:18the best paper on the consequences of
3:01:20targeting military power. Uh, and on my
3:01:23Substack, I wrote a lengthy piece what
3:01:26targeting Thrron would really mean for
3:01:30the people of Tehran when you take out
3:01:32the electric power in Tehran for a
3:01:35month. And I walk through it. Uh, but
3:01:38not good. I imagine starvation.
3:01:40>> Oh my god. you you would you it's oh
3:01:42yeah it's much because all of the uh so
3:01:45much of the food 25% of the food in
3:01:48Thran is under refrigeration and that
3:01:52includes all the supermarkets all
3:01:54there's so much that is and then you
3:01:57really start to run out of the ability
3:01:59to pump water. So things like water
3:02:02pumping stations in the Middle East
3:02:04where you depend on water. So there's
3:02:06there's so much of detail underneath
3:02:09this summary of uh um droughts,
3:02:12starvation, u mass evacuations of the
3:02:15city, but where did these 10 million
3:02:17people go? It's not like they just run
3:02:20to some other place and turn on the
3:02:22faucet. So this is the the targeting of
3:02:24electric power is much worse than most
3:02:28people. Oh my gosh. It's actually worse
3:02:30than the nuclear option to do. That
3:02:32would be worse than using a tactical
3:02:34nuke on pickaxe
3:02:35>> in terms of destruction quality of life
3:02:37change
3:02:38>> in terms of the escalation of death. Oh,
3:02:41the escalation ladder civilian.
3:02:43>> No way. So if you hit you're saying if
3:02:45you hit power plants with any kind of
3:02:47missile that's more
3:02:50>> well well just to beious super clear
3:02:52there's two aim points on the electric
3:02:55power and and this is a target set that
3:02:58we've uh the American air force has had
3:03:00many
3:03:00>> designed it yeah [laughter]
3:03:02>> so
3:03:03well in order to understand why not to
3:03:06do it to be and by the way from the
3:03:08moment of Tom Griffith's paper and we
3:03:10did this in the mid '9s until right Now
3:03:13we've not targeted electric power. So
3:03:16that paper for 20 years has been the
3:03:19paper to of the warning to all the
3:03:22generals and sencom this is what it
3:03:24means to target electric power
3:03:26>> and it shows and so what you are um uh
3:03:30what you are seeing in in the plant
3:03:32itself. So, if we could imagine, I don't
3:03:34see a good thing to use as a plant, but
3:03:36you can hit the um the cables that
3:03:39connect the plant to the grid, the
3:03:41electric power grid. That's like blowing
3:03:44a fuse in your home. That knocks it out
3:03:46for like Yeah, about a week. Okay. Maybe
3:03:48two at most, but maybe really about four
3:03:50or five days. But if you hit the holes,
3:03:53the actual generating holes, those are
3:03:56each specialmade. They're gigantic.
3:03:59They're much bigger than this whole
3:04:00building. and it takes 6 months to even
3:04:04design them and produce them, much less
3:04:06bring them back in. So once you go after
3:04:09the hulls, so when President Trump his
3:04:11his rhetoric here is worrisome because
3:04:15he's talking about when he's talking
3:04:17about uh these massive consequences.
3:04:21This would be fit. This would fit with
3:04:23the description of going after the
3:04:24holes. And you're not bringing this back
3:04:26with the Red Cross and you're not going
3:04:29to come in and you're not going to
3:04:30support this with a giant berlin airlift
3:04:33of massive water to all these people.
3:04:37This is this is going to this would be
3:04:39much more horrendous. Um and if you take
3:04:41out Thrron, that's 10 million people. It
3:04:45wouldn't be long before you took out
3:04:47another like 10 different nodes and the
3:04:50entire 70% of the population would be
3:04:53without electric power. It's a it's a
3:04:55much bigger problem than people realize.
3:04:59>> That is scary. That is terrifying.
3:05:01Gentlemen, I appreciate you all. This is
3:05:04I I don't know whether I'm reassured,
3:05:05but I'm definitely more educated. Uh
3:05:07which is nice. Where should people go to
3:05:09check out everything that you've got
3:05:10going on?
3:05:10>> Uh I'm on YouTube and Substack
3:05:12Predictive History.
3:05:13>> Oh, yeah. Uh I'm on Substack here,
3:05:15Escaluation Trap, Professor Pap. And
3:05:17starting tomorrow, a brand new YouTube
3:05:19channel that's coming tomorrow
3:05:21afternoon, uh Pape on the Politics of
3:05:24Force. So stay tuned.
3:05:26>> And a new book.
3:05:27>> And and a new book coming, Our Worst
3:05:29Enemies, America in the Age of Violent
3:05:32Populism. And my nightmare scenario was
3:05:35always that we'd have an election as
3:05:38this contentious with an international
3:05:41crisis. And they're both happening.
3:05:43>> Heck yeah.
3:05:44>> And uh for me, geopolitical futures.com
3:05:48is what you can visit. And I'm of the
3:05:50opinion humanity will survive again
3:05:54as extremely improbable as it may seem.
3:05:57>> Beautiful gentlemen. I appreciate you
3:05:59all. Thank you very much.
3:06:00>> Thank you.
3:06:00>> Goodbye my beauties.
3:06:01>> That was great. Thanks so much,
3:06:02>> George. George, thank you very much.
3:06:04That was awesome. That was awesome.
3:06:06Enjoyed that.
3:06:07>> Thanks, Chris.
3:06:09>> Congratulations. You made it to the end
3:06:11of a podcast episode without dying. Now,
3:06:14here's another one.
3:06:16Go on, watch it.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of WW3 DEBATE: “We’re On the Brink of Global Collapse” by Chris Williamson, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 31,704 words across 4,685 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.