June 16, 2026 • 16 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
At six if anybody carc de talk station. It's Tuesday,
and it's always made a better Tuesday because we get
to talk to Breitbart get the inside scoop, and I
always start by recommending Breitbart dot com, b R E
I T B A RT dot com where you're gonna
read what Francis Martel, who is the international editor, Welcome
back to the Morning show. Francis. It's always a pleasure
(00:23):
having you on the show.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Thanks so much for having me on.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
You know, Francis, maybe you have the inside scoop because
I'm looking high and low in every news site and
organization I can find. Apparently Trump already signed off on
this agreement with the Iranians, and the Iranians either scheduled
to or already have agreed that they're going to sign it,
perhaps on Friday. Uh do you have any idea what
it says, Francis, because the text of the agreement is
suspiciously absent from media reporting, and I really like to
(00:49):
know if we're gonna sign something, what's in it? You know,
A mean why that hasn't been released?
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Uh? Yeah, because they're gonna have a big signing ceremony
on Friday, and so what the White House is that
they're going to release the full text a little bit
after that. I think it's really just to have everyone's
attention on Friday and to up the drama, and it
also kind of allows for some leeway if anything goes
wrong between here and Friday. But yes, it's impressive that
(01:15):
actually that the text hasn't leaked on either side, right
the same Iranian state media but also the White House,
we haven't really seen. We've seen, you know, guesses, but
not really anything concrete where someone has looked to the text.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
Well, and that's funny because that maybe the only point
of absolute agreement in the United States and the Iranian
officials have right now is to not release the text. Wow. Well,
you know what, when you're trying to negotiate with somebody,
always spring from a point of agreement. So at least
we've got that going for us. But the devil seems
to be massively in the details. As it's been widely reported,
the Straight of Horror moves will be open, and I
(01:50):
guess that involves the Iranians promising to not bomb things
going through the Strait of Horror moves, the removal of
the minds et cetera, but also US opening up their ports.
So if we go there, then everything else needs to
be negotiated over what has been described as a sixty
day period, which be nuclear weapons, the missile program, and
the whole idea of will the Iranians be charged? It's
(02:13):
not tolls anymore, Francis, it's fees. So there's a huge
difference enter the Ministry of Truth in George orwell so,
I mean, I guess I'm just struggling to see. This
sounds like an extension of the cease fire that we
apparently have been in with the Iranians for months, although
we do still blow each other up from time to time,
(02:33):
ignoring that, But is there really much more than that
other than getting the straight open to provide some economic
relief to the United States and the price of gas
and the rest of the world and everything else we need.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
That is the biggest part by far, and the thing
that actually gives me a little hope that this deal
won't be immediately broken is exactly how narrow it is.
The objective of the deal is essentially to remove all
third parties from being involved in this, right with countries
like China, like South Korea, like India that have been
(03:03):
really hurt economically tremendously by the Straight of Horn Moods situation.
So the goal of step one seems to be stop
hurting or involving countries that really have nothing to do
with this, particularly in East Asia, and then we go
from there, and that's what the sixty day period is about, right,
(03:24):
And so I do think that we can at least
hold to that, if only because China has really been
the most economically besides Iran hurt by the Straight of
Hornmoo situation. They're Iran's top oil clients. They purchase a
lot of natural gas and other fossil fuels from the
Gulf States. So China has really been behind the scenes
(03:46):
pressuring Iran and not so behind the scenes. You know.
Chi Jinping's personally made a call for the Straight of
Horn Moods to open in a phone call with the
Crown Princess Audi Arabia, Mohammad Vinzalman, which is the most
you know, the most insulting way that you can sort
of tell Iran to do something is to use Saudi
Arabia as the mediator. So China has been vocally calling
(04:08):
for this to stop, and Iran really can't afford to
lose the alliance with China because that's the only country
that both is big enough to buy enough of their
oil and also cares does not care about US sanctions
because you know, Russia doesn't care about US sanctions either.
Russia has its own oil. They're not going to buy
(04:28):
Iranian oil. So I think that's really the leverage here
that's going to make it at least make this step
work and take us to a step two where global
commerce is ineffected gas prices go down.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Well, this sounds to me. I guess I have to
think about it. China and India have very substantial, substantial militaries.
They have a lot of military hardware, bombs and airplanes,
et cetera. If they really wanted the straight up horror
moves open and they wanted a future without having to
pay the Iranians a toll for every time a boat
goes through, you think they might to step up and
maybe render a little assistance and just wipe the regime
(05:03):
out in order to open it up and not have
to worry about the straight being closed someday in the future.
Because the Iranians know full well since they've got drones
and these little speedboats. They've been able to fend off
America's biggest military of the United States and prevent them
from opening up the Straight because we don't want to
lose all of our you know, aircraft carriers and alike.
And I get that. So they have a lever over
our heads that they never had before the epic Fury
(05:25):
thing even started. What's your take on that sort of analysis, Francis.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
Well, you know, India and China are both allied with
around through the Bricks platform, which is basically an anti
American coalition of Roque states. You know, Russia's in there,
but you've also got actors like Brazil that are kind
of you know, neutral to anti American, and Bricks has
essentially been completely devastated by this war because the UAE
(05:52):
is also in bricks. So this war was the first
time that you had two bricks countries actively bombing each other,
which completely undermines the point of bricks, which is that
we're all going to unite to destroy the United States
and you know, and American hegemony and all of that.
So if things are already bad enough for Bricks, if
China and India started using their militaries actively against Iranian interests.
(06:15):
I think that would that would end bricks completely, and
so nobody wants to do that because ultimately the long
term point of bricks is to have a global currency
and to undermine the United States, and those goals are
bigger than what's happening now. The other issue with those
two countries is they have very large militaries, but they're
very large infantries. The Indian Navy and the Chinese Navy
(06:39):
are well behind the American Navy. You know, China's trying
to build its second aircraft carrier and they're you know,
it's taking them forever and there's all these hurdles to it,
and even their their infantry, to be honest, you know,
it's the biggest one in the world, but they just
constantly have problems with poorly trained and not physically soldiers
(07:01):
and they're trying to you know, they put all this
work into their education system to try to get their
men to be more fit so that they can fight
in the military. So they are, you know, two of
the most formidable militaries in the world by far, but
they are also like significantly behind a military like ours
(07:22):
or honestly, even like Ukraine's at this point, which has
so much real world.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
Experience, wonderful response. You know, I've got to contemplate so
much more than just exist on its face. I just
keep thinking, Look, Iran's a thorn on everybody's side, obviously
causing problems for China in India. But China and India
like Iran being a thorn in our side, So they're
willing to deal with the harm caused by the regime
that they're friends with, even though it seems to me
they might have leverage over that regime to just stop
(07:47):
it and and and reopen the supplies that are not
going through anyhow, Are we getting anything out of this ultimately,
Francis Martel from Breitbart because it I know a lot
of people are comparing this to like, Okay, this is
just another Barack Obama type agreement, because fundamentally, for the
last since nineteen seventy nine, we can't trust the Iranians.
I mean, they have a religious perception that we are
(08:08):
in fact a satan, We are the great evil. They
hate us and want to eradicate us. Is there any
reason to believe that Iranians are going to honor anything
that they agreed to in this down the road, or
are we just setting ourselves up for a repeat of
this at some future point.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Well, I think they have a lot more to lose
than we do. I think the thing that makes this
deal work and what distinguishes President Trump from President Obama,
is that Trump took out, you know, dozens of Iranian officials,
including the Supreme Leader. It just obliterated the top leadership
of the IRGC and of the Iranian government in general,
(08:48):
and at any given moment, you could just do that again.
And he's really gone out of his way to kind
of establish his authority as a president who is willing
to make the hard decision and just straight up kill people,
and has done that with Iran with more than any
other country, starting with Costem Soleimani during his first term
in twenty twenty. Kasem Soleimani was arguably the world's most
(09:11):
dangerous terrorist, was the head of Iran's international terror operation,
and one air strike just took him out. And with that,
you know, the IRGC COUDS force has never really recovered.
It's become largely irrelevant to Iran's military because the mastermind
was taken out. So I think the Iranians know in
the back of their minds, as much as they want
(09:33):
to push, and they have this ultimate goal to destroy Israel,
to destroy the United States. It's a long term goal
and they can't achieve that goal if Trump keeps killing
off their best minds. So that's what they have to lose.
It's not so much that this deal is going to
give us anything except for obviously better gas prices, and
(09:54):
you know, we're not at war, which is nice, But
it's that Iran has too much to lose to say
no to this deal.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
And see, that's the kind of leverage we have over
the Iranians right now. Sadly, though, the political the politics
seep into this. This seems to be so much about
the November election an Americans' willingness to vote for something
that wouldn't necessarily be in their best interests i e.
Democrats and all that would go along with that, merely
because the price of gasoline's gone up seventy five cents.
So you know, if we could hold out, if we
(10:22):
could suck it up and ignore the pain that we're
feeling at the pump and the other inflationary realities that
go along with it, we could keep the Iranian ports
closed and basically continues starving them to death. And if
that had to go on over time, I think ultimately
would win that battle of attrition.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
I agree with that the worst case scenario for us
is that a lot of Americans would suffer economically and
we would have we would get a fully democratic government.
But there is no there's no worst case scenario where
the constitution just ends, you know, the current American regime
is just completely destroyed and we just have a new constitution.
(10:59):
Whereas for a RU the worst case scenario is that, right,
is that the current the status quo, the constitution, and
all of the structures of the raigning government collapse entirely.
And so again, they have so much more to lose
than we do. That said, the big fear is here
that Iran is not Venezuela, where you have a group.
(11:20):
There's there's one Delsy Rodriguez in there that you can
grab and make interim president and start rebuilding around her.
Everyone in the leadership in Iran is a radical extremist,
and there's no viable opposition to replace, right, There's no
you know, there there's names that are thrown out there,
but it's people in exile, it's you know, figureheads that
(11:44):
look good on cable news but don't have real world
governing experience. And so the power vacuum situation is very real,
and that I think that's what's tying the White House's hands. Well,
we can't just go in there and take everybody out,
although we took out a lot of people, because you
don't want another you don't want a country with ninety
million people and a bunch of enriched uranium to just
(12:04):
have no leadership become paranalists. And that's something that we
have to take into consideration when we look at the
deal and we're like, well, why don't we just take
them all out? Well, you know, we can't just leave
a hole where the Iranian regime used to be. And
that also answers your question of you know, why doesn't
China or India just you know, go along with taking
(12:24):
out the people that are there. It's because we don't
know what comes next, right, I mean, they're in the
same boat that we are in that perspective.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
Well, and do you think hindsight's twenty twenty, But do
you think we underestimated the value of the religious fundamentalism.
I mean if there will. I mean I suggest to people,
if someone asks you to renounce your faith in Jesus
Christ or something, I think you'd be pretty reluctant to
do it, especially if you think the foe that that
is being that is asking you to renounce your faith
(12:52):
is like Satan for example. I mean, they're not willing
to bend. They're willing to deal with tremendous pain, economic pain,
real pain, loss of infrastructure, whatever, because they have a
profound belief in the religion. It just doesn't seem to
me that they took that into consideration. Again, if you
try to liken it to a situation of Venezuela, you
knock off the leader there. It's not a religious it's
(13:13):
not a theocracy. It's just a guy leading the country
who's not there anymore. It's a totally different landscape with
the Iranians.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
Isn't it. I think that's part of it. But I
think the part that is bigger even than that, is
personal salvation. Right. You know what happens to these officials
when the regime collapses. If you look at the Iranian people,
the Iranian people hate their government, They absolutely hate it,
and they hated it, you know, six months ago before
(13:41):
the government killed thirty to forty five thousand of them
because they dare to have peaceful protests. So there's no
stepping down, there's no my little exit where you just
go to a nice jail like you hang out with
pig It. You're like, they're going to get the Kadafi
ending and I think that's really terrible flying to them.
And obviously the religious aspect goes into that, where if
(14:04):
you have a disgraceful death, then you know, you don't
get to Jannah, right, you don't get to the Islamic
version of heaven. You don't get the glory that comes
with jihad if you're just you know, killed by a mob,
especially if there's God forbid women in the mob, you know,
then that plays into the survival instincts too. They aren't
(14:25):
afraid to die, but they are afraid to die dishonorably.
And we've seen that with many jihadists, from Isis to
Hamas to Hasballah. I mean, I love the stories of
you know, the Isis terrorists who ran away from the
all female Kurdish army because because if they got killed
by a woman, they couldn't go to heaven, so that
is definitely part of, you know, part of the situation
(14:47):
there and what pushes their survival.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
In religion and the goofy rules that go along with
Francis Martel Brydburn, International Editor, Real quick here before we
part company, I have to ask you what of the
Iranian people? Does this not leave them basically where they
were if we understand the basic parameters of what might
happen down the road with this agreement because regime is
not changing, So is this a letdown for them?
Speaker 2 (15:10):
Well, you know, I don't know what else they would want,
right The alternative to this would be a full American
occupation Marshall Plan Japan style, and I don't think that
was ever happening. We're leaving them with no Ali Kamani.
We're leaving them with the elimination of dozens of their oppressors.
There's a new and greener class of oppressors that are there.
(15:33):
So if they want to try overthrowing these guys, I
think it would be easier than the last group that
we took out. So it's not nothing, But I'm sure
there are Iranians who are disappointed, who are hoping that
it would just be the end. But you know, it's
a massive country and that regime has been there for
fifty years, and we don't have We have neither the
(15:54):
capability nor the right to just decide to eliminate that regime.
That has to come from Iranian people. They have to
find a leader, they have to organize around someone who
can run a government properly, and we can't do that
for them, and we can't in a ground war.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
Seems to be insurmountable challenge because look what happened in
Afghanistan after decades. The Russians tried it. We tried it,
and not as many people, in as much real estate,
and still didn't seem to accomplish much over time. Francis
Martel leave me with that final thought as we part company.
Thank you so much for your time, and I'll recommend
my listeners re
At six if anybody carc de talk station. It's Tuesday,
and it's always made a better Tuesday because we get
to talk to Breitbart get the inside scoop, and I
always start by recommending Breitbart dot com, b R E
I T B A RT dot com where you're gonna
read what Francis Martel, who is the international editor, Welcome
back to the Morning show. Francis. It's always a pleasure
(00:23):
having you on the show.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Thanks so much for having me on.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
You know, Francis, maybe you have the inside scoop because
I'm looking high and low in every news site and
organization I can find. Apparently Trump already signed off on
this agreement with the Iranians, and the Iranians either scheduled
to or already have agreed that they're going to sign it,
perhaps on Friday. Uh do you have any idea what
it says, Francis, because the text of the agreement is
suspiciously absent from media reporting, and I really like to
(00:49):
know if we're gonna sign something, what's in it? You know,
A mean why that hasn't been released?
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Uh? Yeah, because they're gonna have a big signing ceremony
on Friday, and so what the White House is that
they're going to release the full text a little bit
after that. I think it's really just to have everyone's
attention on Friday and to up the drama, and it
also kind of allows for some leeway if anything goes
wrong between here and Friday. But yes, it's impressive that
(01:15):
actually that the text hasn't leaked on either side, right
the same Iranian state media but also the White House,
we haven't really seen. We've seen, you know, guesses, but
not really anything concrete where someone has looked to the text.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
Well, and that's funny because that maybe the only point
of absolute agreement in the United States and the Iranian
officials have right now is to not release the text. Wow. Well,
you know what, when you're trying to negotiate with somebody,
always spring from a point of agreement. So at least
we've got that going for us. But the devil seems
to be massively in the details. As it's been widely reported,
the Straight of Horror moves will be open, and I
(01:50):
guess that involves the Iranians promising to not bomb things
going through the Strait of Horror moves, the removal of
the minds et cetera, but also US opening up their ports.
So if we go there, then everything else needs to
be negotiated over what has been described as a sixty
day period, which be nuclear weapons, the missile program, and
the whole idea of will the Iranians be charged? It's
(02:13):
not tolls anymore, Francis, it's fees. So there's a huge
difference enter the Ministry of Truth in George orwell so,
I mean, I guess I'm just struggling to see. This
sounds like an extension of the cease fire that we
apparently have been in with the Iranians for months, although
we do still blow each other up from time to time,
(02:33):
ignoring that, But is there really much more than that
other than getting the straight open to provide some economic
relief to the United States and the price of gas
and the rest of the world and everything else we need.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
That is the biggest part by far, and the thing
that actually gives me a little hope that this deal
won't be immediately broken is exactly how narrow it is.
The objective of the deal is essentially to remove all
third parties from being involved in this, right with countries
like China, like South Korea, like India that have been
(03:03):
really hurt economically tremendously by the Straight of Horn Moods situation.
So the goal of step one seems to be stop
hurting or involving countries that really have nothing to do
with this, particularly in East Asia, and then we go
from there, and that's what the sixty day period is about, right,
(03:24):
And so I do think that we can at least
hold to that, if only because China has really been
the most economically besides Iran hurt by the Straight of
Hornmoo situation. They're Iran's top oil clients. They purchase a
lot of natural gas and other fossil fuels from the
Gulf States. So China has really been behind the scenes
(03:46):
pressuring Iran and not so behind the scenes. You know.
Chi Jinping's personally made a call for the Straight of
Horn Moods to open in a phone call with the
Crown Princess Audi Arabia, Mohammad Vinzalman, which is the most
you know, the most insulting way that you can sort
of tell Iran to do something is to use Saudi
Arabia as the mediator. So China has been vocally calling
(04:08):
for this to stop, and Iran really can't afford to
lose the alliance with China because that's the only country
that both is big enough to buy enough of their
oil and also cares does not care about US sanctions
because you know, Russia doesn't care about US sanctions either.
Russia has its own oil. They're not going to buy
(04:28):
Iranian oil. So I think that's really the leverage here
that's going to make it at least make this step
work and take us to a step two where global
commerce is ineffected gas prices go down.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Well, this sounds to me. I guess I have to
think about it. China and India have very substantial, substantial militaries.
They have a lot of military hardware, bombs and airplanes,
et cetera. If they really wanted the straight up horror
moves open and they wanted a future without having to
pay the Iranians a toll for every time a boat
goes through, you think they might to step up and
maybe render a little assistance and just wipe the regime
(05:03):
out in order to open it up and not have
to worry about the straight being closed someday in the future.
Because the Iranians know full well since they've got drones
and these little speedboats. They've been able to fend off
America's biggest military of the United States and prevent them
from opening up the Straight because we don't want to
lose all of our you know, aircraft carriers and alike.
And I get that. So they have a lever over
our heads that they never had before the epic Fury
(05:25):
thing even started. What's your take on that sort of analysis, Francis.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
Well, you know, India and China are both allied with
around through the Bricks platform, which is basically an anti
American coalition of Roque states. You know, Russia's in there,
but you've also got actors like Brazil that are kind
of you know, neutral to anti American, and Bricks has
essentially been completely devastated by this war because the UAE
(05:52):
is also in bricks. So this war was the first
time that you had two bricks countries actively bombing each other,
which completely undermines the point of bricks, which is that
we're all going to unite to destroy the United States
and you know, and American hegemony and all of that.
So if things are already bad enough for Bricks, if
China and India started using their militaries actively against Iranian interests.
(06:15):
I think that would that would end bricks completely, and
so nobody wants to do that because ultimately the long
term point of bricks is to have a global currency
and to undermine the United States, and those goals are
bigger than what's happening now. The other issue with those
two countries is they have very large militaries, but they're
very large infantries. The Indian Navy and the Chinese Navy
(06:39):
are well behind the American Navy. You know, China's trying
to build its second aircraft carrier and they're you know,
it's taking them forever and there's all these hurdles to it,
and even their their infantry, to be honest, you know,
it's the biggest one in the world, but they just
constantly have problems with poorly trained and not physically soldiers
(07:01):
and they're trying to you know, they put all this
work into their education system to try to get their
men to be more fit so that they can fight
in the military. So they are, you know, two of
the most formidable militaries in the world by far, but
they are also like significantly behind a military like ours
(07:22):
or honestly, even like Ukraine's at this point, which has
so much real world.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
Experience, wonderful response. You know, I've got to contemplate so
much more than just exist on its face. I just
keep thinking, Look, Iran's a thorn on everybody's side, obviously
causing problems for China in India. But China and India
like Iran being a thorn in our side, So they're
willing to deal with the harm caused by the regime
that they're friends with, even though it seems to me
they might have leverage over that regime to just stop
(07:47):
it and and and reopen the supplies that are not
going through anyhow, Are we getting anything out of this ultimately,
Francis Martel from Breitbart because it I know a lot
of people are comparing this to like, Okay, this is
just another Barack Obama type agreement, because fundamentally, for the
last since nineteen seventy nine, we can't trust the Iranians.
I mean, they have a religious perception that we are
(08:08):
in fact a satan, We are the great evil. They
hate us and want to eradicate us. Is there any
reason to believe that Iranians are going to honor anything
that they agreed to in this down the road, or
are we just setting ourselves up for a repeat of
this at some future point.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Well, I think they have a lot more to lose
than we do. I think the thing that makes this
deal work and what distinguishes President Trump from President Obama,
is that Trump took out, you know, dozens of Iranian officials,
including the Supreme Leader. It just obliterated the top leadership
of the IRGC and of the Iranian government in general,
(08:48):
and at any given moment, you could just do that again.
And he's really gone out of his way to kind
of establish his authority as a president who is willing
to make the hard decision and just straight up kill people,
and has done that with Iran with more than any
other country, starting with Costem Soleimani during his first term
in twenty twenty. Kasem Soleimani was arguably the world's most
(09:11):
dangerous terrorist, was the head of Iran's international terror operation,
and one air strike just took him out. And with that,
you know, the IRGC COUDS force has never really recovered.
It's become largely irrelevant to Iran's military because the mastermind
was taken out. So I think the Iranians know in
the back of their minds, as much as they want
(09:33):
to push, and they have this ultimate goal to destroy Israel,
to destroy the United States. It's a long term goal
and they can't achieve that goal if Trump keeps killing
off their best minds. So that's what they have to lose.
It's not so much that this deal is going to
give us anything except for obviously better gas prices, and
(09:54):
you know, we're not at war, which is nice, But
it's that Iran has too much to lose to say
no to this deal.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
And see, that's the kind of leverage we have over
the Iranians right now. Sadly, though, the political the politics
seep into this. This seems to be so much about
the November election an Americans' willingness to vote for something
that wouldn't necessarily be in their best interests i e.
Democrats and all that would go along with that, merely
because the price of gasoline's gone up seventy five cents.
So you know, if we could hold out, if we
(10:22):
could suck it up and ignore the pain that we're
feeling at the pump and the other inflationary realities that
go along with it, we could keep the Iranian ports
closed and basically continues starving them to death. And if
that had to go on over time, I think ultimately
would win that battle of attrition.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
I agree with that the worst case scenario for us
is that a lot of Americans would suffer economically and
we would have we would get a fully democratic government.
But there is no there's no worst case scenario where
the constitution just ends, you know, the current American regime
is just completely destroyed and we just have a new constitution.
(10:59):
Whereas for a RU the worst case scenario is that, right,
is that the current the status quo, the constitution, and
all of the structures of the raigning government collapse entirely.
And so again, they have so much more to lose
than we do. That said, the big fear is here
that Iran is not Venezuela, where you have a group.
(11:20):
There's there's one Delsy Rodriguez in there that you can
grab and make interim president and start rebuilding around her.
Everyone in the leadership in Iran is a radical extremist,
and there's no viable opposition to replace, right, There's no
you know, there there's names that are thrown out there,
but it's people in exile, it's you know, figureheads that
(11:44):
look good on cable news but don't have real world
governing experience. And so the power vacuum situation is very real,
and that I think that's what's tying the White House's hands. Well,
we can't just go in there and take everybody out,
although we took out a lot of people, because you
don't want another you don't want a country with ninety
million people and a bunch of enriched uranium to just
(12:04):
have no leadership become paranalists. And that's something that we
have to take into consideration when we look at the
deal and we're like, well, why don't we just take
them all out? Well, you know, we can't just leave
a hole where the Iranian regime used to be. And
that also answers your question of you know, why doesn't
China or India just you know, go along with taking
(12:24):
out the people that are there. It's because we don't
know what comes next, right, I mean, they're in the
same boat that we are in that perspective.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
Well, and do you think hindsight's twenty twenty, But do
you think we underestimated the value of the religious fundamentalism.
I mean if there will. I mean I suggest to people,
if someone asks you to renounce your faith in Jesus
Christ or something, I think you'd be pretty reluctant to
do it, especially if you think the foe that that
is being that is asking you to renounce your faith
(12:52):
is like Satan for example. I mean, they're not willing
to bend. They're willing to deal with tremendous pain, economic pain,
real pain, loss of infrastructure, whatever, because they have a
profound belief in the religion. It just doesn't seem to
me that they took that into consideration. Again, if you
try to liken it to a situation of Venezuela, you
knock off the leader there. It's not a religious it's
(13:13):
not a theocracy. It's just a guy leading the country
who's not there anymore. It's a totally different landscape with
the Iranians.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
Isn't it. I think that's part of it. But I
think the part that is bigger even than that, is
personal salvation. Right. You know what happens to these officials
when the regime collapses. If you look at the Iranian people,
the Iranian people hate their government, They absolutely hate it,
and they hated it, you know, six months ago before
(13:41):
the government killed thirty to forty five thousand of them
because they dare to have peaceful protests. So there's no
stepping down, there's no my little exit where you just
go to a nice jail like you hang out with
pig It. You're like, they're going to get the Kadafi
ending and I think that's really terrible flying to them.
And obviously the religious aspect goes into that, where if
(14:04):
you have a disgraceful death, then you know, you don't
get to Jannah, right, you don't get to the Islamic
version of heaven. You don't get the glory that comes
with jihad if you're just you know, killed by a mob,
especially if there's God forbid women in the mob, you know,
then that plays into the survival instincts too. They aren't
(14:25):
afraid to die, but they are afraid to die dishonorably.
And we've seen that with many jihadists, from Isis to
Hamas to Hasballah. I mean, I love the stories of
you know, the Isis terrorists who ran away from the
all female Kurdish army because because if they got killed
by a woman, they couldn't go to heaven, so that
is definitely part of, you know, part of the situation
(14:47):
there and what pushes their survival.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
In religion and the goofy rules that go along with
Francis Martel Brydburn, International Editor, Real quick here before we
part company, I have to ask you what of the
Iranian people? Does this not leave them basically where they
were if we understand the basic parameters of what might
happen down the road with this agreement because regime is
not changing, So is this a letdown for them?
Speaker 2 (15:10):
Well, you know, I don't know what else they would want,
right The alternative to this would be a full American
occupation Marshall Plan Japan style, and I don't think that
was ever happening. We're leaving them with no Ali Kamani.
We're leaving them with the elimination of dozens of their oppressors.
There's a new and greener class of oppressors that are there.
(15:33):
So if they want to try overthrowing these guys, I
think it would be easier than the last group that
we took out. So it's not nothing, But I'm sure
there are Iranians who are disappointed, who are hoping that
it would just be the end. But you know, it's
a massive country and that regime has been there for
fifty years, and we don't have We have neither the
(15:54):
capability nor the right to just decide to eliminate that regime.
That has to come from Iranian people. They have to
find a leader, they have to organize around someone who
can run a government properly, and we can't do that
for them, and we can't in a ground war.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
Seems to be insurmountable challenge because look what happened in
Afghanistan after decades. The Russians tried it. We tried it,
and not as many people, in as much real estate,
and still didn't seem to accomplish much over time. Francis
Martel leave me with that final thought as we part company.
Thank you so much for your time, and I'll recommend
my listeners re
Brian Thomas News
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.