Israel/US-Iran Military Conflict Explained! Geopolitical Trends

All right, hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you, and I have missed you guys all. So it's been a long 3 weeks, but, but anyway, very, very excited to be here. First of all, let me say hi quickly to our wonderful community. Leanne, good to see you. Willie Holman, as always. Timeline Dankle from New York City. Phil from Ottawa. Karakulak, good to see you as always. Um, got an interesting topic, guys. Uh, there is a lot to cover into all this, and I have, uh, decided to do this in more than one part. So most likely you might see two more parts to this particular topic. Of course, the US-Israel-Iran military conflict. Why is this? Why I decide to do it this way? Is because there is so much information and I don't want to overwhelm you. Because when you talk about, for example, strategic things, I don't want to talk about the military dimension. I don't want to talk about the Arab world. I don't want to talk, you know, I want each one to be separate. This is why I don't want to cram everything. So today I am not going to be talking about what the Irans have launched and what the Israelis have launched. I'm going to be talking about a much bigger strategic aspect of this. Then I will do geography and history, because you have to understand the history of Iran to understand what lies ahead for this country. So, and the, uh, then probably part 2 either tomorrow or Monday. There are some, uh, information that I am in a process of confirming. Uh, for example, they're saying that China has sent some weapons to Iran. That's, that's a lie. That is a lie. You guys, be careful as to what you are listening to on YouTube. So just pay attention to that. All right, first of all, uh, I want to let you know, uh, I will be, uh, appearing on Dr. Wilmer Leon, uh, right after I finish this one here. So I'm going to send you the link. Should you guys be interested in checking this out. It's going to be at about 3:00 PM Eastern Standard Time. This is what I'm going to be, uh, doing that one. So, uh, then we'll just go from there. So, so now regarding this topic, and, and of course, as I said, I was aware of it. I couldn't do anything from overseas because the setup was not right for me to do, and I am not about to just get into something because I want to be first to do it. I don't do that. I don't do that. I'd rather provide you substantive information, so content that will benefit you in understanding the bigger picture. So I decided to wait till I came back here. So, so the question we're gonna— there are some key questions we ought to ask, so, and I'm gonna share them with you on the screen here, then we'll tackle, uh, uh, uh, individually to a degree. But, uh, for example, uh, will Iran prevail in all this? Let me just say it from the get-go. Here is the way I see it, that if the US gets involved, okay, if the US gets involved, this could be the nail on the coffin for the US and Israel for that matter. Because now you're going to be seeing what Iran has been doing, which by the way, which has been attacking and launching into inside Israel, which by the way, the media is controlling that narrative. And I'm going to share some clips with you that I was, uh, made aware of from Tel Aviv. So, and I have some people that I know in— live in Tel Aviv. So, second question: will US involvement in the war, uh, alter the region forever? Yeah, when we're talking about Iraq War, I did mention back then that with the invasion of Iraq is going to change certain dynamics of geopolitical landscape. Now with Iran is a different ball game altogether. And the third question: is China-Russia-Iran alliance a tactical partnership or just a convenience sort of to undermine the US or distract the US from focusing on other areas like Central Asia or the Caucasus or the Pacific? Those are legitimate questions we ought to ask as we move forward into this. So now when you look at this unprecedented escalation between now Israel and Iran, and it's going up, the escalation is moving up with Iran launching over almost 400, according to some record that I read in a foreign language, not here in the US. US, they are filtering the information, Western media. That is the same concept in Israel. They put in a lid on a media not to release videos and so forth. So Iran launched about 400 missiles, as a matter of fact, and, and, and, uh, few hundreds of drones at Israel in response to the latter's airstrike, uh, which, by the way, it killed about 240 people in Iran, including women and children. So once again, I am not going to be talking about this at this point here. So suffice it to say Suffice it to say that despite the reputation of the so-called Iron Dome, which is the Israel's air defense system, sort of a number of Iranian missiles have successfully penetrated these defenses. I am even this morning had to check on one particular aspect, and I am waiting for a confirmation whether hypersonic was used or not. And, and which called the Fatah, or Fatah, Fatah-1. That's, that's Iran, which worked on it in 2022 and deployed it in 2023, enter into a service. So, so let me, uh, share a clip with you because I want you to see with your own eyes here, guys. Then, then we'll just go from there, and I'm not gonna— I might do a translation for you. We'll see because there are so many to cover here. So let me share the screen and we'll go. All right, here it is. Take a listen, please. Basically saying pictures from Tel Aviv which clearly show and demonstrate the consequences of the destruction. Let's take a listen. All right, I'm going to stop right there. What it says right there in Arabic: basically a block inside Israel uh, uh, sort of it's been destroyed after being, uh, targeted or hit, uh, with either— with the missile from Iran. That is what it says right there. So I think I have another one here. This has to do with the, uh, the targeting of a hospital. Now here is the question that I pose for you: was the targeting of the hospital by Iran, meaning Iran launched a missile into a hospital. Was that a mistake or was the target intended to be something else? I couldn't confirm either or because it strikes me, uh, weird that Iran will target a hospital. That just defies logic in my judgment. I could be wrong, but I'll let you be the judge of that. Take a listen here. Now we are looking at the picture inside Soroka Hospital, and this is according to the Israeli media. The media saying that the— this, this building, which is the hospital, the reason it was targeted, because that's the hospital where the, uh, the, uh, injured soldiers, the Israeli soldiers in, uh, in, uh, in Gaza. That's where they are usually brought in. Okay, I'm gonna— once again, I just wanted to, uh, share this with you to highlight that there are targeted locations inside Israel. It's just the media is sort of, sort of putting a blackout on it. So that's just the way Uh, I— the way I found it here. So I have another, uh, one more clip on this aspect here, then we'll move on into geography and history. Let me share a clip with you here, and this I got it on my account on X. So take a listen here, guys. Okay, now, and once again, this— I want just to make a point for you that the Israel— the Tel Aviv, which is the heart of Israel, has been targeted by Iranian missiles. So now becomes the question of— and as you know, guys, I have written a book about Iran, uh, a few years ago, and interesting enough that I mentioned certain aspects as to what's taking place right now, and I am going to be sharing some excerpts with you to make my point. One thing that strikes me right now, and I will address this separately in another video, it's just I wanted to mention this to you as to whether the alliance, like I asked the question, between Iran, China, and, and, uh, and Russia. So because when you think about it, it is considered, in my opinion, given the current conditions, as the most significant geopolitical phenomena taking place today. That, that now it will even be— can you just imagine? And here is a question for you, because we have to think like we always do in our community. We think outside the box. In addition to these three countries, Russia, China, and Iran, would you consider, or can you think of the possibility of North Korea joining this alliance? So another question for you, and please just answer in the chat box, yes or no. In your opinion, will North Korea join this alliance?

Yes or no?

So, and I'm going to see some of your answers there because, uh, uh, Karakolak is saying yes. Irene, you say yes. Taiwan Steel, you say yes. Uh, Avengers, you say yes. Uh, Napster, you say not yet. Okay, that, that's fair answer because what if North Korea is Assessing and evaluating. Suffice it to say, Phil, you say no. Okay, that's possibility also. Uh, suffice— Paul Green, you say yes. Suffice it to say that the possibility is there, and this is why we have to think outside the box. And as I said earlier, I will do a separate, uh, uh, because this one deserve a conversation by itself, whether we are looking at a tactical alliance here or not. Because if it is, that will be a game changer. You know, Israel will be done. The US sort of dominance in the Middle East will be over, and the pathetic Arab leaders will be shifting to the East. That's the way I see it, because you're looking at the, the promotions of this multipolar system in all dimensions— economically, politically, and militarily. So, and that is the, that is my point on this. And like I said earlier, to answer that question, it's because it's make more sense for both Russia and, uh, China and even North Korea if it gets involved, that you distract the United States in some other parts of the world. See, this way they stay away from the Pacific and from the Caucasus or Central Asia. There is so, so here is what I disclosed in my book regarding this aspect. Uh, while this development shaped the security architecture of the Middle East, Iran and Russia continue their partnership in the hope of developing military cooperation. Tense US-Russia relations over the latter's annexation of Crimea paved the way for Iran and Russia to move rapidly into a more inclusive partnership. This stems from the following: A, Iran will likely to possess advanced missile systems beside the domestically produced ones to project strength in case Israel decides to attack its nuclear facilities. And B, Russia will prove to the West that it still could tilt the political balance by by challenging the geopolitical equation in the Middle East. This is what I wrote back in '18, 2018, and here we are, because that's exactly what Iran is doing. So, so let me do brief geography here, a little bit of history, and I'll go into, uh, one, one particular analysis that I want to share with you. So, uh, let me get to the picture for you to see the country of Iran. I know it's written in Arabic. You have on the right here Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Armenia. So those are just the map that I wanted to share with you. So once again, as I said, you know, when I wrote my book about Iran, I had to address the geography of it, rather. So So Iran, officially known as the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is located between the southwestern part of Asia and the Middle East or West Asia. To the north, Iran borders the Caspian Sea and Turkmenistan. To its northwest, it borders Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Armenia. On the west, it borders Iraq. And on its long southern border, Iran meets the Strait of Hormuz, which in turn meets the Gulf of Oman. On the east, Iran borders Afghanistan, and to the southeast, Pakistan. This geography makes Iran a strategic location that bridges different cultures. Allowing it to play a vital role economically, politically, religiously, and culturally, which is true. Especially now, you have to pay attention to the Strait of Hormuz. You look at the Persian Gulf and you look at the Strait of Hormuz, and this is one possibility that Iran, should the United States gets involved, they might shut it down. I am aware Even during my time in Washington, I was and I am still aware of what the ordinance that Iran has placed under those waters just for this case, in case. So now there is another aspect that you need to understand when it comes down to the history of Iran. It's very, very complicated. Like I mentioned, I remember not mentioned, but rather wrote in my book, in my Iran book, that I wrote back then that it will be a daunting, really a daunting task to cover the history of Iran, a 5,000-year history of the Persian Empire. So, and for me to do it in few pages, that just defies logic. So, because it won't be right if I don't spend about 30 pages to address them, then that's not right for the reader. But anyway, suffice it to say, I had to explain at least and put in perspective and also, uh, some sort of illuminate the crucial elements that have shaped modern-day Iran. So why? Because of the given events of many millennia ago, and I am going to be providing some to put it in perspective for you. It will not, as I said, do you justice if I focus sort of this conversation on only one specific period or another. So, because it was an extraordinary empire to those who know a little bit about history. So, that said, the need to emphasize, and here is the thing, the early historical events of the Persian Empire— remember, I didn't say of Iran, I say the Persian Empire. So could not be greater. And the reason being because such a sort of understanding will help us and show that the events that took place of the Persian Empire that have shaped, influenced, and of course elucidated the political, social, and cultural plateau of Iran on which So many agendas are competing right now. This is why it's very, very, very important to understand. So what I'm going to do, I'm going to provide you a link for a history, uh, that you guys can read up on it later on. Because as I said, it will be a, a daunting task to cover everything about the history of Iran. But I will mention few things here. Uh, suffice it to say, uh, I read an article which I posted for you guys There was an article written by Shiva Balagi, very interesting one, I read it, which is a brief history of Iran in the 20th century. So suffice it to say, from the outset of the 20th century, Iran was embroiled in a bifurcated struggle because on one hand you had Iranians struggle to maintain their national independence. The— why am I saying all this to you guys? To make a point that when Mr. Trump said, 'We demand absolute surrender,' I say, 'What are you, delusional? How stupid a statement like that.' And that tells me personally Mr. Trump has no clue about the history of the Persian Empire. There is no way the Iranians will surrender. Mark my word on this, and time will prove, will prove me right. So, and this is one part of why this history sort of this national independence, because it, it was in the face of the colonial pressures. And that's why Iran's geopolitical importance made it a central focus of the colonial, uh, uh, uh, powers. As you know, it was named the Great Game. And who were the two main players? Does anybody know? By the way, if you happen to know a little bit about this era, who were the two main great powers at that time? They were vying for influence in Iran. Can you please type it in the chat box? And once again, just to share knowledge here, Let me see, it takes a delay here for it to show. Two main powers, and you will understand why. Omayyads, yes, but you went too far out. Oh, oh, Sam, Sam, where is Sam Karina? Uh, right there. Sam, you got it, you got it. It was the Soviet Union and Britain. This is what's surprising to many. Because here is what happened in August 1907. So this is when the two powers at that time decided to carve up Iran into spheres of influence. The way they did it is that the agreement sealed for the Soviet Union at that time, or, or Russian Empire, whatever you want to call it, the supremacy in the north, because you remember access to the waters. And for Britain, it was the supremacy in the south, south of Iran. And that is where that struggle even was taking place within Iran's border, especially between 1905 and 1911. So, and of course, it was one particular event when the price of sugar finally sparked the first public protest of that revolution. So, and it's a long, long history. And again, I am just providing a brief stuff here. I'm gonna move quickly to the rise of the Bahá'í dynasty. So how this came about, you're all familiar with this Shah Rida Bahá'í. So World War I found Iran in difficult straits at that time. Why is this? It's because one, its economy was shattered. You know. And second, the country in itself, meaning Iran, that is, uh, suffered from some sort of, uh, what do we call it, it was like a vacuum, power vacuum. And once again, why is this important? This is one of the key words I need you to understand as to why Israel is attacking Iran. It is not about nuclear weapons. Yes, it's part of it, it's It's not about that. It's ensuring there is a power vacuum in the Middle East so Israel will maintain the dominance. So is the US, or so does the US, that is. And this is why in 1921— I'm going to take you back to that— Reza Khan led a group of soldiers into Tehran, and he demanded that the cabinet be dissolved. And this is where Qajar Shah— I have a picture of him here. I had to dig into the archives to get you guys this picture right there. This is Ahmad Shah Qajar, and look at who is on his right side. That's British. So what happened at that time? Uh, Qajar Shah appoints his commander of the military Using the army as his primary instrument, Reza Khan sought to restore a sense of national unity within Iran's border. So, and that's why in 1923, uh, 1923, that's when Qajar Shah named Reza Khan as a prime minister. So that's why. Fast forward, I'm going to take you to 1941. What, what happened in 1941, guys? Does anybody type in chat box what happened in 1941? Major event, of course. Let me see. Uh, Alistair Loken, you might want to change that to two. Good, good try, good try, Alistair Loken, you got it. World War 2, okay, 1941. Why, why is this important? It's because the Persian Gulf and Iran at the time, vast oil reserves. Why it became very crucial to the success of Britain? How do you think? I mean, think about it, guys, with Japan, for example. Why did Japan lost? Japan lost because it did not have access to energy. This is why it was important at that time in 1941. So, so Iran declared itself neutral at that time, but Reza Shah, who has established strong cultural and technological ties with Germany at that time, was perceived as problematic by the Allies. You see what I'm getting at here, right? So with Iran under visual occupation, under virtual occupation by Allied Forces, he was forced to abdicate his throne because he was a monarchy. And who took over? It was none other than his youngest son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was only 21 years old, and he was crowned as the new king. And Reza Shah would die in exile. That's the father, died in exile in 1944. Now you all know what happened with the reign of Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, which by the way, just to let you know, his son Reza Pahlavi, his son lives in San Diego, California. The US government, including the agency, the three-letter agency We're thinking in terms of how we could put him back in power. This is why it's important to understand the opposition to the current regime in Iran is very strong, especially with the group called Mujahideen-e-Khalafeh, is known as MEK. I had a chance to meet one of its members coincidentally in France when I was there last week. I was floored. So, but we talked. He was very decent man, kind, uh, you know, and I'm not to judge him, but it was very interesting because I told him, this is the first time for me to meet a member of the, uh, MAK. So, so that's why it's important to understand. Now, with the Shah, uh, by the time he became the Shah, the, the, the leader of it, Allied Forces occupied much of Iran at that time. And of course, at the end of World War II, Russia continued to occupy regions of northern Iran because that was the deal. So the young Shah, Ahmad Reza, the young Shah visited the United States, and that's when he meets with US official while addressing the United Nations. And under pressure, the USSR withdrew from Iranian territory. So this is where— and all this was tied to the oil, of course, as you know, because of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. And in 1951, the Shah appointed Mossadegh, Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh, as Prime Minister. Mossadegh followed through with his plan. And what was his plan? Does anybody know from history what was one of the key policy Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh embarked on for the sake of his country? And we didn't like it. Does anybody? Okay, it has to do with, uh, oh, oh, Amanda, you got it! Amanda, you got it! Nationalizing Amanda, you got it. Nationalizing of the oil, which means oil will become now an Iranian source. So, so Mossadegh followed through to nationalize the oil, the oil industry, and the National Iranian Oil Company was formed. And for many Iranians, Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh became a national leader. Because he didn't cave in to the Western, uh, powers like the pathetic Arab leaders in— you know, look at them: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Tunisia to a degree, uh, even Morocco to a degree. So this is why it's important to understand. And of course, you all know what happened in 1952, because 1952, what happened? Mossadegh was named the Time magazine Man of the Year. And what happened right after that, 1953? What happened? Does anybody know? 1953, right, one year after he was nominated as Man of the Year. Uh, not the coup— the coup to a degree, but the revolution in 1979, that's later. 1953, we took him out. The US and England decided to take him out. So it was both the three-letter agency and the MI6. So, and that's— by taking him out, he became a symbol of yet another moment in history in Iran. And that is the reason why I'm sharing all this with you guys, is to understand how the Iranian, uh, uh, uh, citizens, uh, based on what Donald Trump said, that he wants absolute surrender. It's just pathetic. It's just pathetic. So they're not going to understand the history of Iran. So now, one thing that I need you to understand when we think about Iran The word in itself, and I argued this, uh, in, in my, uh, in my Iran book. So for those who have purchased a copy, uh, you can, uh, or you can go to— let me see if I can get you the links. If you are interested in learning more about the world, maybe I do. Yeah, right there. It's right here, but I need to copy it. Hold on a second, I'm gonna put it for you guys. So I'm gonna put it in the chat box for those who wants to purchase a copy of the book. But anyway, uh, what I disclosed in, in that one, uh, at that time is that, uh, for Iran, the idea of, uh, the word in itself, Iran, where did it came from? It derives from the word Aryan, A-R-Y-A-N, because here's the thing: the Iranian-speaking population gradually moved into the region of none other than Zagros Mountains. I have a picture for you here to see. I know I didn't get into my analysis yet, but again, history is important, guys, you know. That's the Zagros Mountains, very, very important. So the largest group there was the Midas and the Persians. So Midas were some ethnic group there and the Persians. So, so, and the ability of Iran's residents of this era to use— they were able to use iron tools and irrigation system enabled them to use the land and farm more effectively. Now here is one key historical fact. I'm gonna ask you in the form of question: who was the founder of the Persian Empire? For those who have read history— and again, this is just to share knowledge, no more, no less— does anybody know who was the founder of the the Persian Empire? It was a major figurehead, Prince of Persia. No, uh, oh, oh, oh, Sam! Oh my goodness, you got it, you got it, Sam! It was Cyrus the Great. I'm sorry, not this one, right there. Matt Becky, good to see you, and you're right, Matt. It was Fernando, you got it, it was Cyrus the Great. Uh, let me move this. Here we go. It was Cyrus the Great that founded the Persian Empire. So Cyrus first conquered the Median Empire back in 550 BC and then went on to conquer the Lydian and the Babylonian. So, and that's what, of course, under the rule of the, of its, uh, sort of later kings The empire will grow and govern vast territories including Mesopotamia, which includes modern-day Iran, Syria, and Kuwait, in addition to Egypt, Israel, and Turkey. So, and its border eventually will stretch over 3,000 miles from east to west, making it the largest empire on earth at that time. So this is what I need you guys to just understand, all this here, because it's very, very, very important. Liking this video so far? Don't just be a watcher, go ahead and hit the like, share, and subscribe button. And don't forget to tap the bell so you will not miss any of my videos or live streams. This way you will be supporting the channel that stands for the truth and objective reporting. The choice is yours. Thanks for your support. And indeed, thank you for all your support, guys. All right, let's get into our analysis. I had a chance to read, uh, uh, uh, the book, uh, by, uh, his name is Vali Nasr. He is an Iranian-American academic and political scientist, you know, and his specialty, academia— I'm very familiar with him familiar with his work. I even quote him in my book. His specialty is Middle Eastern studies and the history of Islam, of Islam. So he's a professor of international affairs and Middle Eastern studies at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. So I agree with some aspects of his take, I disagree with some, And that's usually how it works in the world of academia. You don't have to agree 100%, you don't have to disagree 100%, as long as the arguments makes more sense. So now here is what I need you to understand now about this conflict, and I'm gonna get into it based also on what, uh, Dr. Nasser wrote. And, and I, I agree on some aspects of it. So beside the nuclear aspects, there is a much bigger problem. And that bigger problem is for both United States and Israel. And here is the thing, what you need to understand about Iran's history, and again, as I disclose this in my book, the leadership in Iran tends to talk in symbols, in like, in riddles, if I may use the term. I'm going to share with you a quote by Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader. And, and if I read it to you, uh, in a Western world, it doesn't make sense to us, but it carries a lot of meaning into it. Here is what he wrote, and I quote: Iran is close to achieving its strategic goals. It has climbed the slopes and is close to reaching the top of the mountain. It must continue to climb with determination and not grow weary of the journey. The closer it gets to the top of the mountain, the more America will try to block its path. End of quote. So, and this is why it's important to understand why Iran, the way Iran, its political structure, its political identity, so, and of course its history, its memories, its sort of even, uh, I use the term excessive apprehension of its neighbors. This is why the neighbors have never get along with Iran, because it was always that element of fear and suspicion. So, but also you have to understand Iran's deep pride in its history. So, and all this came to shape where Iran is today. So And yet when you think about this metaphor that Ali Khamenei used, it's because it's exactly what is happening now. Iran's insistence on climbing the mountaintop and America's insistence on blocking Iran's path to the summit, that's exactly what is going on right now. The nuclear stuff is just part of it. We don't want to see a strong country in the Middle East or West Asia beside Israel. Israel's strength is not in its own. Israel's strength is because of the United States. So this is what's important to understand. And this is why when you think about the whole region, you look at right now, Iran's being attacked, right? Tell me if it was any Arab country who condemned this. Besides, this morning I just saw Qatar said something, but it was vague. It's because most of the Arab countries have submitted to the will of the United States and Israel in the region, except Iran and Yemen, especially with the Houthis. So, and this is where you think about the number of— if you think about the Arab countries and even some, uh, uh, uh, uh, scientists in the West, so, who have made it clear that Iran is on the threshold of a nuclear power. And it's only, as the author mentioned, Dr. Nasrallah, and I quote, separated only by a political decision and the final technical steps, end of quote. You know, and it becomes to me clear, if Iran had the bomb we won't be seeing this today. You know, it's common sense. Once again, I give the example of, uh, what is the other country? It's of, uh, Pakistan or even North Korea. Think about it. Did we ever threaten North Korea? Now we can't because we know what they're going to do and we know what they have. They're not going to mess around. And that's what I'm saying. Hypothetically, if Iran would have had, the bomb, we won't be having this conversation. But at the same time, Israel's concern is that if Iran developed this, that means Israel will have to disclose its acquisition or, or, or the presence of a nuclear weapon. As you know, Iran is going with the OPEC policy, not, not confirming or denying. So, and this is where this so-called the approach to the threshold of a nuclear is, uh, uh, seems to some the reason, uh, for the current Israeli-American and Iran conflict. I don't believe it is 100%. It is part. What I believe in is that what Israel and the United States want to do is to prevent Iran from reaching the summit that, uh, uh, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was talking about. That's exactly— think about it. Khamenei's statements about the American obstacle to Iran's rise. Because remember, since the revolution of 1979, we imposed sanctions and Iran's still standing. We didn't like that because we have submitted all other countries— Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Yemen, uh, not Yemen, United Arab Emirates, uh, and others in the region, even Iraq right now. We still influencing that government. They don't have the gut to really, really kick them out like what Niger did in Africa by asking Americans to pack and leave. Because the idea of this new war that the US might embark on— as a matter of fact, Donald Trump is now hesitating. He said he will make a decision in two weeks, and I will be addressing this in a separate because it pertains to the tactical aspects. I don't want to overlap, uh, too much information here. So this is where the difference is. The idea that he was thinking about dropping the bomb this weekend— no, because it's not going to work. And that is why you have to think in terms of this war is as part of the longstanding partnership or strategy that exists between the United States and Israel. So why? To prevent any Muslim country, particularly in that part of the world, from possessing qualitative power, or even, as the author puts it, and I couldn't agree more, building, and I quote, strategic immunity. Iran seems to have that now. It's showing what it can do. As a matter of fact, I feel confident saying that if the US gets involved, it could be the last nail on the coffin for the United States, and in return for Israel as well. That is part of where this is about. So even the Iranian president Masoud Barzishkian. He said this one, and I quote, Israel seek to strike Muslims one by one, end of quote. You know, I see the logic into that, except that we saw what the Houthis have done to the Israelis. Do you hear anything about now Israel attacking Houthis? No, you don't, because Houthis took stand. But the pathetic other Arab leaders like the Gulf monarch, whatever, all of them, they don't care, you know. And if they call themselves Muslims, why aren't they standing up in support of Iran? Because that's their religious duty. They're just using religion as justification. So, so you need to understand, and this is the whole reason why I'm doing this, you need to understand what this conflict means on the bigger picture. The bigger picture is that the US and Israel strategy. So that targets all those countries in that region. There might be someone other countries elsewhere, but for now suffice it to focus on West Asia. Why? Because that's where Israel is. And the reason they target all those countries, because Israel needs to maintain its influence. And that is why they adopting one by one, one country by one. Marginalization and fragmentation, which what the Dr. Nasser used. And I couldn't agree more because I see it, I saw it, I witnessed it. I was in Iraq, I saw what happened to the government. I was aware of Libya even during the negotiations of dismantling its nuclear and biological program. Uh, a colleague of mine was involved in those talks. You know, we kind of saw how it happened. Because when you marginalize, you know, those countries one by one, what you doing basically is an extension of colonialism. And that is the legacy that America has inherited from the Brits. And now in turn, the Israelis wanted to inherit that from the Americans. See how it goes in cycles. So when you prevent other countries in the region— we're talking now about Middle East— when you prevent other countries from, uh, sort of, uh, uh, being, uh, strategically independent. We did it to Iraq, we did it to Libya, we did it to Egypt, we did it to Syria recently because we don't want them to be independent, to make, uh— but we couldn't do it to Iran. That is where the difference is. That's what I need you guys to know. And the way we do this also— by how do you do this? If you want to create chaos, you infiltrate the government, the structure of the ruling structure, that is. So, and this is exactly what we tried in Hong Kong, remember, demonstrations. This is what we are currently doing in Taiwan. This is what we're doing in Philippines. South Korea and Japan, we doing it in, in a different manner. Australia in a different way. So, but for Syria and Iraq, it was clear. In Libya, it was clear, you know.

The whole—

the, the US neutralized Gaddafi after it reached an agreement for him to dismantle the biological and nuclear program. So, so, and that in itself leaves the orbit of the American-Israeli influence in any direction it turns. All the other Arab countries in the region will have to bow. That's why I always use the term pathetic. Those Arab leaders are pathetic. So because this way, this kind of influence, this kind of control, this kind of dominance by the American-Israeli strategy, devoid and prevent sort of those countries from having self-determination, free will, if I may use the term. And that's when you realize they are exposed. They can't make independent decisions. They have to be approved. It's like when we sell weapons, we only sell weapons to certain countries if they fight each other, but not to fight Israel. And by the way, we have the encryption key. We can shut it down if we want to. And that is why if you want to mess around with a country's internal equation, just have, uh, ensure that they are subservient, uh, leaders like what we're seeing right now in, in the Arab world. And I'll give you the quick example of currently Egypt. You know, when you think about when Egypt refused to allow Palestinians And now you have the Israelis leaving, leaving Tel Aviv because you saw what happened in Tel Aviv. This is picture from Tel Aviv. Here is the, the Israeli defense systems that couldn't handle what Iranians were sending. And you have now people fleeing, the Israelis that is fleeing. So where do they want to go? They want to go to the, uh, uh, uh Shamshir in Egypt, and Egypt most likely will let them. And I did a survey and 82% of you guys said no, Egypt should not allow it. And yet they didn't allow Palestinians in. But my point in this, that this is when you see that servitude, it's almost slavery of sort, you know. That's how powerful, that's how influential the, uh, the American-Israeli strategy when it comes to the Arab leaders. So, and that's why you'll be left with no dignity whatsoever, except that US and Israel couldn't do it with Iran. Even the sense of religion becomes questionable. So, and this is what I need you to understand, because with this fragmentation of power, so now the state whatever that might be— Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, you name it— in this case, they will be removed from that strategic, uh, decisions because it doesn't matter now who governs. Look at the example of Syria. Look at the example of Libya. Look at the example of Iraq. This is what I need you to understand about the current conflict. Between Iran and US-Israel is because we couldn't have the loyalty of the Iranian government. That is the thing. You don't see the same in Syria. Look what we did in Syria. And that is my point, because, uh, when you start to think about those countries, it is exactly what, uh, what's his name, General Wesley Clark. And I'm gonna share a clip with you guys here. Bear with me here. All right, I remember did that before, but it doesn't matter. Take a listen here.

Right after 9/11, about 10 days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me and he said, sir, you gotta come in, you gotta come in and talk to me a second. I said, well, you're too busy. He said, no, no, he says, we've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq. This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, we're going to war with Iraq? Why? He said, I don't know. He said, I guess they don't know what else to do. So I said, well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda? He said, no, no. He says, there's nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq. He said, I guess it's like we don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can take down governments. And he said, I guess if The only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail. So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, are we still going to war with Iraq? And he said, oh, it's worse than that. He said— he reached over on his desk, he picked up a piece of paper. He said, I just— he said, I just got this down from upstairs, meaning the Secretary of Defense's office, today. And he said, this is a memo that describes how we're going to take out 7 countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran. I said, is it classified? He said, yes, sir. I said, I said, well, don't show it to me.

That was interesting, Wesley Clark. So, but anyway, that's, that, that makes a point, at least for you guys to understand why the conflict is taking a different dimension. And this one, by the way, didn't start on June 12th when Israel attacked. That starts way back with Hamas in October 7th. And it start gradually moving because we started to see the resistance and the losing of the American influence in the region. And this is why when you think about this method of how you You, you disintegrate a system. It's always perfect, always perfect in circumstances where there is a revolution. Think about what took place in Syria. In Syria, we will arm the rebels, but if we see them winning, we will stop. So because that's what you do, you enter into the, uh, system through the cracks and fissures that results from this conflict. And this way you have boot-wearing parties killing each other, destroying each other completely. For one reason also, to prevent them from the ability to decide on the battle, on the outcome. Once again, we couldn't do this with the— with, with the— with Iran. And that is where that difference is. So when you consider, for example, what the US now and Israel, especially the US, what the US is about to do, it makes you just wonder. It makes you just wonder. And I don't know how— and I'm going to do a video for you guys soon about this, this particular aspect of the US involvement. So, so now when you think about the Iranians and the Arabs, A lot of people do not know, especially in the West, Iranians are not Arabs. They always confuse the two. Iranians are Persians, you know, Persians and Arabs. So Iranians and Arabs. So, and to some degree, some inside Iran, not all, and those inside Iran will be the one that are willing to cooperate with the West. They don't realize that how much the United States and Israel, some sort of wanted to subjugate them, and he already succeeded in doing that, to the point of controlling the destiny of those people, meaning the Arab people. Yeah, Israel tried this with the Houthis, but they couldn't. Saudis tried to fight the Yemenis, but they couldn't defeat them. Even some other Muslim countries came to the support of Saudi Arabia against the, against the Houthis. What a hypocrisy, you know, a Muslim brother fighting another Muslim brother, and yet they call Islam. Well, if you call Muslim Brotherhood in support, whatever, why aren't you supporting Iran right now? It's a Muslim country. So, and this is again where you see that, that, that, uh, uh, the, uh, distinction between what the Arabs saying versus what they doing. Uh, there is an American, uh, Jewish writer, uh, his name is Edward, Edward Luttwak, you know, and I read some of his, uh, articles. You know, he's a, an American Jewish thinker, you know, very, very well informed, and he's the one who formulated this, the method of destruction under the name of— it's almost like a theory, a war theory— give a war a chance. Theory, because there is another— in political science you learn there are some other theories, like for example just war theory. And he argued, because it was his, his famous theory, he argued this in a, in a 1999 article in the New York Times. So I'm gonna, I'm gonna share the link with you guys because I'm not gonna go through it, uh, I'm gonna put it for you in the chat, and you can read it later on if you want to learn about it more. So, but anyway, uh, in '99, which he called for non-intervention to end the wars in this region, meaning in the Middle East or West Asia, rather letting them run their bloody course than imposing American solutions, which means Israeli solutions. That's his argument. He's right, because you're going to impose that on the warring parties. It's the same tactic we tried regarding the Iraq-Iran, uh, Iraq-Iran War, you know, because the assumption was Iraq is going to defeat Iran. Iraq couldn't do it. We were providing weapons to both. And that's why in 2014 Edward called for applying his theory to the war in Syria. That's what he did. So, and he wrote, and I quote, at this stage of the conflict, prolonged attrition is the only course that doesn't harm American interest, end of quote. He concluded with this advice for the American decision makers when he said to them, and I quote, "Arm the rebels whenever Mr. Assad's forces appear to be on the rise and stop supporting them whenever they appear to be winning," end of quote. This is why I said for Giuliani, it just, it will be like we will decide. It's not him that decides, despite what you hear. And when you go back to the— because the painful Syrian ordeal would have not been prolonged that long if it weren't for the US strategy, giving a war chance, that is. And this was the case also, as I mentioned, in the case of the Iran-Iraq War. So here is what, what, what I need you guys to understand. Nearly 45 years ago Okay, which was back in during October 1980. Ronald Reagan, and I have a picture here, Ronald Reagan at that time presidential candidate met with his friend Henry Kissinger at that time. Why? To consult on a foreign policy should he win the presidency, meaning Reagan. He wanted to know. So one of Reagan's burning questions at that time was one particular question: What should the American strategy towards the Iran-Iraq War be? And you know how Hillary Clinton replied, which by the way, she replied coldly when she said, and I quote, "It is in the American interest to see the Iraq-Iran War continue, so make sure The fighting continues, end of quote, meaning the fight between the two countries. And so it was a devastating war, as you all know, to those who were familiar with what took place back then, and the price of which the region, the region is still paying for today. So, and Reagan, after him Carter, adhered to this infernal advice. The American government provides both. That's what they did. Iraq and Iran provide them with the means to continue fighting each other, preventing each other from resolving the war and escaping the bloody conflict that was devastating their people. This is the big picture. Here is what I wrote, uh, in, in, uh, one of my previous books, uh, when I did the— if I recall, this one here, I think that's where— The Ambiguous Foreign Policy of the United States in the Middle East. So, uh, I intend to discuss two issues in this brief account of Reagan presidency as it relates to Iran. One the role of his administration played during the Iran-Iraq War, and two, Reagan's decision to sell weapons to Iran in return for funneling money to Nicaragua. Regarding the Iran-Iraq War, Reagan's administration sought to assist Iraq in the hope that it will defeat Iran. However, when it became apparent that Iraq will be unable to defeat the US sworn enemy Iran, the Reagan administration worked behind the scenes to end the conflict since dragging it out would undermine US interest in the region. However, it will do the reader injustice if I were to omit key information that led to the Iran-Contra affair. The essence of this information convinced the Reagan administration to sell weapons to Iran through Israel in return for the release of the US hostages in Lebanon held by Hezbollah, a proxy of Iran. This is what I need you guys to understand, the big picture. And I don't think so, a lot of, lot of— I saw some videos, just skimmed over, everybody focusing on missiles here, missile there, and all that. But there is a much, much bigger, much bigger, much bigger picture into all this. So now, even during this war, it was a lieutenant general by the name Nizar Khazaraji. He's an Iraqi, and I have a picture. I was familiar with his case. Uh, let me get picture if I get it. No, I didn't get his picture. Anyway, this guy who is, by the way, he vanished in Denmark because he fled to Denmark but vanished, and vanished prior to the Reich War. Yeah, I don't have picture. I thought I did save it, but I didn't. In any event, So anyway, so he vanished in Denmark. So, but anyway, what he said during the arm— he noted that the abyss into the which Iraq and Iran has fallen in service to Israel. That's what he said. So, because he described it as follows, and I quote, a dark tunnel that was prepared for Iraq to slip into and become embroiled in a long war of attrition that would push towards two goals. One, neutralizing Iraq's superior capabilities as a decisive factor in the confrontation with Israel's enemy on the one hand, and then leaving the war to take its heavy toll on the two warring countries whose containment and exhaustion was also a goal that served the interest of that aggressive entity, end of quote. So, and once again, I need you guys to understand the big picture. This is why it's to understand the nature of the current war, this Iran-Israel, and soon to be the United States if Donald Trump— because, you know, uh, I won't say he's one of the worst presidents, most American presidents are worse anyway. But that's gonna— it's going to be his legacy. Even now, MAGA, they are fighting each other. And if I am to say he wants to go to war, how about sending his son to the war? Yeah, he turned 18, so he's eligible for— to wear the uniform and fight. Why don't you— why doesn't he send his son to the war? So instead of sending just other American soldiers, so And this is what I need you to understand about the nature of this current war. So, because we need to place it within the broader context, the strategic one, you know, this is what's important, especially when it comes down to the region and especially when it comes down to what took place, uh, with the, with the, with Gaza, uh, uh, because to put it in the overall strategic environment. So And like I said earlier, the United States has inherited the British military colonialism in the region, and that's where transforming it into a political and strategic colonialism that would benefit for the long term, meaning benefit the US. And now we see in the same scenario, except on a different end, is that Israel now aspires to inherit American political colonialism. So because as America begins to relieve itself of regional burden because of its decline, despite what you hear, is the American decline that is now exposed, is the end of the American hegemony, is coming to an end. So Israel wants to take on, uh, the, the challenge for that, but Israel is gonna pay a heavy price. So is the American, once we start having body bags coming into the US if we send troops to Iran. So, and I am convinced, guys, again, it's my own, uh, decision. If I am wrong, then I am wrong, but I am convinced that if the US enters, this will be the final nail on the coffin for the United States. So, because you, you have to some sort of think in terms of, uh, of the idea of the US leaving the region, you know, and withdrawing from this because they wanted to focus on a much larger picture. Yes, they're saying about China. That is what the argument in Washington. We have to focus on the bigger problem, which is China. Well, we couldn't even defeat the Houthis. What makes us think we're gonna defeat the Chinese? And this is why I need you guys to understand. This is why you're gonna start hearing some misinformation regarding the Chinese are sending weapons to Iran, and because they wanted to withdraw China into the conflict. So be aware of that, be careful with that. So, so once again, here is what I wrote in my Iran book, and I'm going to share one excerpt here, and I'm going to end this conversation here because I have to go prepare for my next interview with, uh, Dr. Wilmer Leon. So it is what I wrote: No country in the Middle East is more concerned about Iran's nuclear program than Israel. The Jewish states see Iran's nuclear program as an existential threat, and understandably so. However, statements by Israeli leaders regarding military options are not helping the cause. I believe Iran fully understands that Israel or US military bases in the Middle East are a red line. I am certain the mullahs in Tehran will think twice about embarking on such suicidal mission. However, perception seems to hold sway over public opinion. In other words, some Israeli politicians have exaggerated the threat to the point that some within the Israeli cabinet privately and publicly have rejected the danger of Iran's program. Yet calls by Israeli hawks for military strike on Iran's nuclear facility prior to the agreement were counterproductive. But Israel does not possess the capabilities of the British or American Empire, and this is not the era in which those two powers dominated. That was my arguments. Back then, and I still stand by this also. Now, regarding the Arab countries, quickly here, Arab pathetic leaders or whatever, these Arab countries granted Israel some sort of a free game. That's, that's how Arab leaders operate. They care less for their people till you see some changes. We saw one in, in, in Egypt But look what they did to Mohamed Morsi. You saw one, what took place in some other countries. You saw what the outcome was. So it's because, uh, uh, the, the idea that the war on Iran, this is what about the strategic vacuum that Israel wants to ensure that the people in the region will accept the state of chronic weakness and inactivity. That is the whole reason to it. So it's very, very important to understand this one here. And, and, uh, and I'm gonna end this with a quote from, uh, it was a— if I recall his name, uh, Ibn al-Khawakiyyi. I don't know if you would know, uh, al-Khawakiyyi was some sort of, uh, a philosopher back in the day. So he was a Syrian author and a liberal thinker, and he was also Pan-Arab solidarity supporter. He was one of the most prominent intellectuals of his time. So, and all he said was very, very simple. Because here is the thing, you think about big fish. If Iran loses this and shattered in the face of the current tragedies, the entire region will experience a bleak era of, as the author Dr. Nasser put it, unlucky slavery. So because this is why When you think about the outcome of the Arabs, Arab leaders, they're not going to be able to do anything whatsoever because they can't. They are so weak. So, and that's gonna— we will be now just as the white man once said, makes the best use of judgment. So, and this is exactly where things are going to be, and we shall see how this will evolve as the United States prepare to get involved, if they do. We shall see. So anyway, guys, I hope you find this very informative. I know it was a little bit longer, and that's why I said there is a lot to cover on this. I'm going to be thinking about doing the, uh, part 2 where I will tackle the tactical side of all this And, and we'll just go from there. So in any way, I hope you guys, uh, join me later on at 3 o'clock Eastern Standard Time for my conversation with Dr. Wilmer Leon. And, uh, and I'll be talking to you about my upcoming trip to Asia. I know because it's coming soon, but I don't know if I'm gonna make it or not. That depends again where we are as far as funding for that. That's remained to be seen. We'll talk about this later on. So Anyway, hope you guys enjoyed this, and I look forward to seeing you next time. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, guys, bye-bye.