Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

"The situation in #Iran is extremely difficult now. It’s very different from Venezuela. The reason I mention Venezuela is because some people say Donald #Trump did something in Venezuela very quickly—he struck quickly against Venezuela’s leadership and weakened the government. But with the Iranian government, you can’t say that....

andreas_krieg's profile picture

Dr Andreas Krieg

43,923 subscribers

27,596 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

#Iran#Trump
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🚨GREATER ISRAEL PLAN: ‘Israel wants to be surrounded by failed, fragmenting, or co-opted states. Its goal in Iran is STATE COLLAPSE, NOT regime change.’ —Former Israeli Peace Negotiator Daniel Levy ‘What I’m suggesting is that the notion of a Greater Israel dominion, a project of domination in the region, is not just about territory. It’s about how far Israel can extend its hard power hegemony. And to do that, it wants to create a situation where it is surrounded by states that are either collapsed, in the process of fragmenting and dismantling, and therefore cannot prevent any challenge to that hard power Greater Israel project… Or states which find themselves easily co-opted by Israel because of vulnerabilities and dependencies that are brought into play, often actively by Israel. What Israel is trying to do is not some dream of regime change in Iran. It doesn’t really believe that. It’s going for regime and state collapse, chaos that then spills over. So that deals with Iran. Saudi Arabia being attacked in the war on Iran was by design as far as the Israelis are concerned. Because part of the goal here is to weaken the Gulf states so that they look around and they say, ‘America couldn’t deliver for us. We may not all like it, but there is a major regional power here and we are going to have to get on board with its project.’ Israel has talked openly about not only being a regional superpower, but Netanyahu has said becoming a global superpower. It’s talked about corridors for transporting Gulf oil to market that would run through to Israel’s Mediterranean ports. So it is trying to create Gulf dependencies on Israel. I’m not saying it will succeed.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇
3:45

🚨GREATER ISRAEL PLAN: ‘Israel wants to be surrounded by failed, fragmenting, or co-opted states. Its goal in Iran is STATE COLLAPSE, NOT regime change.’ —Former Israeli Peace Negotiator Daniel Levy ‘What I’m suggesting is that the notion of a Greater Israel dominion, a project of domination in the region, is not just about territory. It’s about how far Israel can extend its hard power hegemony. And to do that, it wants to create a situation where it is surrounded by states that are either collapsed, in the process of fragmenting and dismantling, and therefore cannot prevent any challenge to that hard power Greater Israel project… Or states which find themselves easily co-opted by Israel because of vulnerabilities and dependencies that are brought into play, often actively by Israel. What Israel is trying to do is not some dream of regime change in Iran. It doesn’t really believe that. It’s going for regime and state collapse, chaos that then spills over. So that deals with Iran. Saudi Arabia being attacked in the war on Iran was by design as far as the Israelis are concerned. Because part of the goal here is to weaken the Gulf states so that they look around and they say, ‘America couldn’t deliver for us. We may not all like it, but there is a major regional power here and we are going to have to get on board with its project.’ Israel has talked openly about not only being a regional superpower, but Netanyahu has said becoming a global superpower. It’s talked about corridors for transporting Gulf oil to market that would run through to Israel’s Mediterranean ports. So it is trying to create Gulf dependencies on Israel. I’m not saying it will succeed.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

Going Underground

47,005 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Chris Murphy: "One of the reasons that President Trump is refusing to negotiate is because he likes the fact the government is closed because he thinks he can exercise King-like powers. He can open up the parts of the government that he wants. He can pay the employees who are loyal to him. This is a leader who is trying to transition our government from a democracy to something much closer to a totalitarian state. This is part of what happens in totalitarian states -- the leader, the regime only, decides what things get funded and what don't often in coordination with their oligarch friends."
1:21

Chris Murphy: "One of the reasons that President Trump is refusing to negotiate is because he likes the fact the government is closed because he thinks he can exercise King-like powers. He can open up the parts of the government that he wants. He can pay the employees who are loyal to him. This is a leader who is trying to transition our government from a democracy to something much closer to a totalitarian state. This is part of what happens in totalitarian states -- the leader, the regime only, decides what things get funded and what don't often in coordination with their oligarch friends."

Aaron Rupar

897,400 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

“Iran is not going to declare an end to the war while Israel is still attacking Lebanon. It has to be part of the deal. And of course, Bibi won’t play ball because he doesn’t want the war to end. And Trump is just waking up to that fact three months into the war, and he’s not happy about it.” “A lot of what he’s saying is that Bibi should do everything that he says. And now he’s learning that that’s not the way the world works. So constantly over the past three months, Trump is confronted by reality, which totally contradicts the made up story he has about the Iran war in his head. And guess what? In the end, reality is winning out.” “And that’s why we’re in the quagmire we’re in. Because Trump won’t accept the reality. He only wants the world to bend to what’s in his head. In this case, he’s not getting what he wants, so he’s throwing a tantrum.”
0:41

“Iran is not going to declare an end to the war while Israel is still attacking Lebanon. It has to be part of the deal. And of course, Bibi won’t play ball because he doesn’t want the war to end. And Trump is just waking up to that fact three months into the war, and he’s not happy about it.” “A lot of what he’s saying is that Bibi should do everything that he says. And now he’s learning that that’s not the way the world works. So constantly over the past three months, Trump is confronted by reality, which totally contradicts the made up story he has about the Iran war in his head. And guess what? In the end, reality is winning out.” “And that’s why we’re in the quagmire we’re in. Because Trump won’t accept the reality. He only wants the world to bend to what’s in his head. In this case, he’s not getting what he wants, so he’s throwing a tantrum.”

Josh Rogin

13,279 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

MS NOW: “My question to you is, it’s one thing to say let’s abolish ICE, but then what do you replace it with?” ABDUL EL-SAYED: “Well, as you well know, ICE has nothing to do with the southern border. That’s Customs and Border Protection.” “I believe in a secure border. I also believe in immigration enforcement, but I also believe in not shooting Americans in the back of the head, in the face while you’re trying to do it.” “And maybe it’s because I’ve served in government agencies, but once a government agency like that is told that it has impunity to do the worst things and violate the highest law of the land, which is the Constitution itself, I don’t think you can reform or retrain that.” “I think we need to start from scratch.” “And ICE is not very old. It’s 15 years younger than I am… it was a bad experiment. It’s been weaponized to do the worst things.” “And I think we need to abolish it and start from scratch.”
0:56

MS NOW: “My question to you is, it’s one thing to say let’s abolish ICE, but then what do you replace it with?” ABDUL EL-SAYED: “Well, as you well know, ICE has nothing to do with the southern border. That’s Customs and Border Protection.” “I believe in a secure border. I also believe in immigration enforcement, but I also believe in not shooting Americans in the back of the head, in the face while you’re trying to do it.” “And maybe it’s because I’ve served in government agencies, but once a government agency like that is told that it has impunity to do the worst things and violate the highest law of the land, which is the Constitution itself, I don’t think you can reform or retrain that.” “I think we need to start from scratch.” “And ICE is not very old. It’s 15 years younger than I am… it was a bad experiment. It’s been weaponized to do the worst things.” “And I think we need to abolish it and start from scratch.”

Overton

205,269 просмотров • 11 дней назад

Tucker Carlson: Trump knows that the only force that can prevent the Iran deal from actually happening is not the US Congress. It's the government of Israel. They will try to torpedo the deal, as they have so many times. They'll try to blow it up. Trump knows that he has to diminish Benjamin Netanyahu—and not just Netanyahu, but the state of Israel's moral legitimacy in the United States—in order to keep going. And so, amazingly, he's done that.
0:39

Tucker Carlson: Trump knows that the only force that can prevent the Iran deal from actually happening is not the US Congress. It's the government of Israel. They will try to torpedo the deal, as they have so many times. They'll try to blow it up. Trump knows that he has to diminish Benjamin Netanyahu—and not just Netanyahu, but the state of Israel's moral legitimacy in the United States—in order to keep going. And so, amazingly, he's done that.

Clash Report

141,914 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent delivered the perfect answer when Maria Bartiromo asked whether he is confident that the Iranians will keep their promises when it comes to a deal. He ended with a warning to the regime. BESSENT: “Well, what I have confidence in is that President Trump’s going to hold them to it.” “That with the Iranians, we’ll see. Their government, as I’ve said, we didn’t have regime change, but we changed the regime.” “The first layer was decapitated, second layer decapitated. We’re on the third group so maybe they have seen what happened to the others and they see what President Trump is willing to do.” “So if President Trump agrees to this deal, I would tell the Iranian leaders right now, he will enforce it. And both military and economically.” Trump will enforce any Iran deal with full force.
0:49

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent delivered the perfect answer when Maria Bartiromo asked whether he is confident that the Iranians will keep their promises when it comes to a deal. He ended with a warning to the regime. BESSENT: “Well, what I have confidence in is that President Trump’s going to hold them to it.” “That with the Iranians, we’ll see. Their government, as I’ve said, we didn’t have regime change, but we changed the regime.” “The first layer was decapitated, second layer decapitated. We’re on the third group so maybe they have seen what happened to the others and they see what President Trump is willing to do.” “So if President Trump agrees to this deal, I would tell the Iranian leaders right now, he will enforce it. And both military and economically.” Trump will enforce any Iran deal with full force.

Overton

138,265 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Why did the Somali government send a pro-Somaliland delegation to Davos to participate in the World Economic Forum? Trump is there. A large Emirati delegation is also there. The separatist leader is there as well. So why is the Somali government being so lenient about something like this? What makes it even more absurd is that Hassan Sheikh Mahmoud is set to travel to Ethiopia to celebrate the Ethiopian Air Force. What does Somalia have to do with Ethiopian military celebrations? Is the country not going through a critical and decisive moment, with far more urgent national issues that demand attention?
6:56

Why did the Somali government send a pro-Somaliland delegation to Davos to participate in the World Economic Forum? Trump is there. A large Emirati delegation is also there. The separatist leader is there as well. So why is the Somali government being so lenient about something like this? What makes it even more absurd is that Hassan Sheikh Mahmoud is set to travel to Ethiopia to celebrate the Ethiopian Air Force. What does Somalia have to do with Ethiopian military celebrations? Is the country not going through a critical and decisive moment, with far more urgent national issues that demand attention?

Deeqa 🇸🇴

79,909 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”
2:36

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

Curtis Houck

108,556 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The Trump plan, which was presented at the White House, included two parts. What was approved today in Sharm el-Sheikh has nothing to do with the future. Regarding the future of Gaza, we are still at the initial idea, which was not translated into details on the ground — and it’s no coincidence, because the assessment, at least in Israel, is that it’s impossible to really reach agreements with Hamas on its dismantling. There has not yet been an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organization that agreed one day to simply dismantle. And so what we have here is a hostage release deal, and Israel is at a fork in the road. First, if Hamas is willing to disarm, Israel will indeed withdraw to the Gaza perimeter. If not, then not — and then IDF forces will be there, because we have no one to rely on but God and them. Now regarding the main issue. After all, Hamas ostensibly received guarantees. That’s what Hamas is saying. That’s its excuse to release the hostages. It is replacing the 48 hostages with an American-Qatar-Turkish-international guarantee that Israel will not enter. They say in Israel, “no problem, we also have guarantees. The war will end if Hamas disarms.” So we see here two American guarantees, which I, in order not to be anti-American, will not say that they are foolish. I will say that they complement each other: the war will not be renewed if Hamas disarms. And so, if you break it down even more: That war is over. It’s over. The ground entries, the raids, the exits, the Gideon’s Chariots A, B and maybe even C. What will happen next? Israel expects it to be “Lebanonization,” but in the positive sense of what happens after the ceasefire. In other words, not ground raids, but precise damage to any attempt to build up and/or harm IDF soldiers. This is the Israeli desire. We’ll see what happens on the ground.
1:34

The Trump plan, which was presented at the White House, included two parts. What was approved today in Sharm el-Sheikh has nothing to do with the future. Regarding the future of Gaza, we are still at the initial idea, which was not translated into details on the ground — and it’s no coincidence, because the assessment, at least in Israel, is that it’s impossible to really reach agreements with Hamas on its dismantling. There has not yet been an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organization that agreed one day to simply dismantle. And so what we have here is a hostage release deal, and Israel is at a fork in the road. First, if Hamas is willing to disarm, Israel will indeed withdraw to the Gaza perimeter. If not, then not — and then IDF forces will be there, because we have no one to rely on but God and them. Now regarding the main issue. After all, Hamas ostensibly received guarantees. That’s what Hamas is saying. That’s its excuse to release the hostages. It is replacing the 48 hostages with an American-Qatar-Turkish-international guarantee that Israel will not enter. They say in Israel, “no problem, we also have guarantees. The war will end if Hamas disarms.” So we see here two American guarantees, which I, in order not to be anti-American, will not say that they are foolish. I will say that they complement each other: the war will not be renewed if Hamas disarms. And so, if you break it down even more: That war is over. It’s over. The ground entries, the raids, the exits, the Gideon’s Chariots A, B and maybe even C. What will happen next? Israel expects it to be “Lebanonization,” but in the positive sense of what happens after the ceasefire. In other words, not ground raids, but precise damage to any attempt to build up and/or harm IDF soldiers. This is the Israeli desire. We’ll see what happens on the ground.

Amit Segal

23,239 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Chris Cuomo asked Bill O’Reilly what the strategy is for Iran — but he didn’t realize O’Reilly already knew what comes next. This wasn’t speculation. O’Reilly spoke directly with President Trump on Tuesday, and what he was told points to a very narrow window ahead. CUOMO: “I don’t understand what our strategy is here. I mean, it’s it’s really bad there. But it’s really bad in a lot of places.” O’REILLY: “Let me explain.” “So on Tuesday morning, I had an extensive conversation with President Trump about Iran.” “What the problem is there is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard will fight.” “Unlike Venezuela where the army wasn’t going to fight. CIA knew that, it can send American troops in and grab Maduro.” “The Revolutionary Guard will fight. All right. So now the president has to make a decision.” “He has offered a deal to the mullahs. The deal is that you abandon your new program forever and you let out all the political prisoners. Okay?” “If the mullahs do not take that deal, there’s going to be a military strike.” “I don’t know what it is. He’s not going to tell me.” “But here’s something that no one has mentioned, Cuomo, but I know it.” “The olympics start on Friday.” “That’s when the talk is supposed to be in Istanbul. It would be very difficult for anybody launch a military action during the four weeks or three and a half weeks of the olympics.” “Exceedingly difficult to do that, because the whole world’s focus…is on a sporting event in Italy.” “So you’re going to blow that out of Iran while the skiers are going the alps? It doesn’t stack.” “So there’s a little bit of window here to get a deal.”
1:41

Chris Cuomo asked Bill O’Reilly what the strategy is for Iran — but he didn’t realize O’Reilly already knew what comes next. This wasn’t speculation. O’Reilly spoke directly with President Trump on Tuesday, and what he was told points to a very narrow window ahead. CUOMO: “I don’t understand what our strategy is here. I mean, it’s it’s really bad there. But it’s really bad in a lot of places.” O’REILLY: “Let me explain.” “So on Tuesday morning, I had an extensive conversation with President Trump about Iran.” “What the problem is there is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard will fight.” “Unlike Venezuela where the army wasn’t going to fight. CIA knew that, it can send American troops in and grab Maduro.” “The Revolutionary Guard will fight. All right. So now the president has to make a decision.” “He has offered a deal to the mullahs. The deal is that you abandon your new program forever and you let out all the political prisoners. Okay?” “If the mullahs do not take that deal, there’s going to be a military strike.” “I don’t know what it is. He’s not going to tell me.” “But here’s something that no one has mentioned, Cuomo, but I know it.” “The olympics start on Friday.” “That’s when the talk is supposed to be in Istanbul. It would be very difficult for anybody launch a military action during the four weeks or three and a half weeks of the olympics.” “Exceedingly difficult to do that, because the whole world’s focus…is on a sporting event in Italy.” “So you’re going to blow that out of Iran while the skiers are going the alps? It doesn’t stack.” “So there’s a little bit of window here to get a deal.”

Overton

37,558 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”
2:11

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

Arjun Khemani

23,056 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Mamdani on Arch/Ballroom/Club Rose Garden: My message would be that this is not what government has to be. This is not the only vision for what it looks like to have politics in this country—that is so divorced from the needs and wants of everyday people. And what we are looking to show in New York City is an alternative to what has led so many to become disenchanted with the political process. We want to show that not only can government work, but it must, and that at its core, our responsibility is to working people—to ensure that we’re doing everything to make their lives easier. That has to be what drives our actions, and for too long, government has felt more like a distraction than a fulfillment of the needs of the people who’ve been left behind by the politics of today.
1:26

Mamdani on Arch/Ballroom/Club Rose Garden: My message would be that this is not what government has to be. This is not the only vision for what it looks like to have politics in this country—that is so divorced from the needs and wants of everyday people. And what we are looking to show in New York City is an alternative to what has led so many to become disenchanted with the political process. We want to show that not only can government work, but it must, and that at its core, our responsibility is to working people—to ensure that we’re doing everything to make their lives easier. That has to be what drives our actions, and for too long, government has felt more like a distraction than a fulfillment of the needs of the people who’ve been left behind by the politics of today.

Acyn

31,743 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

A very harsh threat, made by Netanyahu toward Iran. What is behind the heightened tone? It is not only harsh, it is also unusual. The event that took place in recent months was a paralyzing fear of what is called miscalculation. They will think that we will attack first, even though that was not the intention, and then they will attack, and the entire region will be dragged into another round of confrontation. In a region where there is fear of miscalculation, you are not supposed to announce this kind of thing in the Knesset. I just want to make that clear. Yesterday, Naftali Bennett promoted his press conference on the conditions of soldiers, okay? He gets six million views because the timing looks like a countdown and he is a former prime minister, so the Iranians are in hysterics that he is actually announcing that they are going to attack. That’s the atmosphere. So when Netanyahu attacks like this and makes an unprecedented threat—not only harsh but also unusual—one can’t help but think that for Netanyahu there is a message, or something more problematic than miscalculation. And he wants to warn the Iranians. Now, what’s the issue? The issue is that if the Iranians come to the conclusion that their regime is on the verge of collapse, there is one thing that might save them. And that is an attack on Israel. Because we saw during the war what is called “rally around the flag.” Even those who were in the opposition rallied around the flag when their country was attacked. It is not only the Islamic Republic that is under attack, but also the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is essentially the issue, and that is what Netanyahu, in my opinion, is trying to stop with the threat he issued after the security discussion.
1:27

A very harsh threat, made by Netanyahu toward Iran. What is behind the heightened tone? It is not only harsh, it is also unusual. The event that took place in recent months was a paralyzing fear of what is called miscalculation. They will think that we will attack first, even though that was not the intention, and then they will attack, and the entire region will be dragged into another round of confrontation. In a region where there is fear of miscalculation, you are not supposed to announce this kind of thing in the Knesset. I just want to make that clear. Yesterday, Naftali Bennett promoted his press conference on the conditions of soldiers, okay? He gets six million views because the timing looks like a countdown and he is a former prime minister, so the Iranians are in hysterics that he is actually announcing that they are going to attack. That’s the atmosphere. So when Netanyahu attacks like this and makes an unprecedented threat—not only harsh but also unusual—one can’t help but think that for Netanyahu there is a message, or something more problematic than miscalculation. And he wants to warn the Iranians. Now, what’s the issue? The issue is that if the Iranians come to the conclusion that their regime is on the verge of collapse, there is one thing that might save them. And that is an attack on Israel. Because we saw during the war what is called “rally around the flag.” Even those who were in the opposition rallied around the flag when their country was attacked. It is not only the Islamic Republic that is under attack, but also the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is essentially the issue, and that is what Netanyahu, in my opinion, is trying to stop with the threat he issued after the security discussion.

Amit Segal

41,392 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Ben Shapiro: “I think the Senate filibuster is actually quite important because if you do not have the Senate filibuster, what you end up with is a country that is already pendulumingside to side, doing so even farther with 51 votes in the Senate.” “Ramming through massive changes to the system of government itself... The argument President Trump has used is Democrats will do it anyway when they get the first opportunity. So we should go ahead and do it.” “I’m not sure that’s true... [What should happen] is a constitutional amendment to enshrine the filibuster in the Constitution.”
1:04

Ben Shapiro: “I think the Senate filibuster is actually quite important because if you do not have the Senate filibuster, what you end up with is a country that is already pendulumingside to side, doing so even farther with 51 votes in the Senate.” “Ramming through massive changes to the system of government itself... The argument President Trump has used is Democrats will do it anyway when they get the first opportunity. So we should go ahead and do it.” “I’m not sure that’s true... [What should happen] is a constitutional amendment to enshrine the filibuster in the Constitution.”

RedWave Press

553,369 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

CNN’s Abby Phillip interrupts former Iranian political prisoner Kian Tajbakhsh and immediately cuts to a commercial right after he said this: “You can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” TAJBAKHSH: “What happened with President Obama, I’ll just say this very quickly.” “And I was in the State Department in the 2000s when we implored the Bush administration not to restrict the engagement with Iran simply to the nuclear file.” “What happened with president Obama is that, for better or worse — and I’m not going to litigate that here — he decided that given the four big problems that have always been on American objectives with Iran, that is enrichment, ballistic missiles, proxies and democracy inside Iran, that he would put all the last three aside and focus only on the nuclear deal.” “Now, I’m not going to say that was good or bad. I don’t think it was a great idea, but what we have seen and this is also maybe controversial and I think a lot of my liberal friends are going to hate me for this…” “Is that unfortunately you can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” “I think that what the Trump administration is—” PHILLIP: “We…we…we do have to go to a break here.” TAJBAKHSH: “Okay.” PHILLIP: “There’s more on the other side. So hold your thought because I have some follow up questions for you about what the endgame is here and now…”
1:32

CNN’s Abby Phillip interrupts former Iranian political prisoner Kian Tajbakhsh and immediately cuts to a commercial right after he said this: “You can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” TAJBAKHSH: “What happened with President Obama, I’ll just say this very quickly.” “And I was in the State Department in the 2000s when we implored the Bush administration not to restrict the engagement with Iran simply to the nuclear file.” “What happened with president Obama is that, for better or worse — and I’m not going to litigate that here — he decided that given the four big problems that have always been on American objectives with Iran, that is enrichment, ballistic missiles, proxies and democracy inside Iran, that he would put all the last three aside and focus only on the nuclear deal.” “Now, I’m not going to say that was good or bad. I don’t think it was a great idea, but what we have seen and this is also maybe controversial and I think a lot of my liberal friends are going to hate me for this…” “Is that unfortunately you can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” “I think that what the Trump administration is—” PHILLIP: “We…we…we do have to go to a break here.” TAJBAKHSH: “Okay.” PHILLIP: “There’s more on the other side. So hold your thought because I have some follow up questions for you about what the endgame is here and now…”

Overton

651,427 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Brett Meiselas: [Donald Trump] has his propaganda that he wants to push, and the IRGC and the Iranian regime, they have things that they want to push to their people. And so you get these maximalist statements on both sides, oftentimes neither of which line up with the truth. But I do have to say, more times than not, the Iranian story has been far closer to the truth than what we're hearing with our own government here in the United States. That is something that is deeply troubling to me. That's something that takes a lot of getting used to.
1:32

Brett Meiselas: [Donald Trump] has his propaganda that he wants to push, and the IRGC and the Iranian regime, they have things that they want to push to their people. And so you get these maximalist statements on both sides, oftentimes neither of which line up with the truth. But I do have to say, more times than not, the Iranian story has been far closer to the truth than what we're hearing with our own government here in the United States. That is something that is deeply troubling to me. That's something that takes a lot of getting used to.

MeidasClips

18,473 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

.Carla Sands from the top rope on CNN NewsNight warns Iran that President Trump will bomb them back into the Stone Age. “President Trump is doing what no American president did since Jimmy Carter. He's actually taken on this murderous regime, the Mullah regime, the IRGC. These are revolutionary nuts, and they're killing their own people, and they've killed American soldiers throughout the world for decades. President Trump is the first president to say, "You know what? It may cost me politically, but I'm going to do the right thing." He's done this in Venezuela, he's working on this in Cuba, he's working around the world to make the United States, the people safer, and there are people in Iran that want to have democracy, that have a plan... So I think this is a great opportunity for the Iranian people, but President Trump is going to have to drive these very bad actors into the Stone Age to change the what’s happening now.”
1:02

.Carla Sands from the top rope on CNN NewsNight warns Iran that President Trump will bomb them back into the Stone Age. “President Trump is doing what no American president did since Jimmy Carter. He's actually taken on this murderous regime, the Mullah regime, the IRGC. These are revolutionary nuts, and they're killing their own people, and they've killed American soldiers throughout the world for decades. President Trump is the first president to say, "You know what? It may cost me politically, but I'm going to do the right thing." He's done this in Venezuela, he's working on this in Cuba, he's working around the world to make the United States, the people safer, and there are people in Iran that want to have democracy, that have a plan... So I think this is a great opportunity for the Iranian people, but President Trump is going to have to drive these very bad actors into the Stone Age to change the what’s happening now.”

Steve Guest

13,496 просмотров • 23 дней назад