Brighteon Broadcast News, Jan 5, 2026 - Venezuela Chain Reaction + New AI Research Engine Launched
|
Time
Text
Well welcome to the first Monday of 2026.
I'm Mike Adams.
This is Brighteon Broadcast News and it is January 5th.
Yeah, Monday, January 5th, 2026.
We embark on a whole new year and Trump made sure that we got the craziest first few days of the year with the invasion of Venezuela, the kidnapping of Maduro and his wife, and now Trump's saying we're going to run Venezuela.
Hmm.
Okay, we probably should think about what that means.
We'll get to that in a moment here, but I've got some other news to share.
So I've achieved a major AI upgrade on our AI engine, which has been at brightu.ai.
I've got a new URL for you there upgrading it.
Massive new collection of science papers has gone live.
I'll give you the details here coming up in a second.
I've also got some special reports that I released over the weekend that I want to share with you.
One is about how Trump's attack on Venezuela will split and destabilize the world even more than it is already.
But Trump is, of course, trying to focus on shoring up control over the Western hemisphere and depriving China, especially China, of access to Venezuela's oil and possibly critical minerals, but definitely trade routes.
So I've got a full discussion of that whole topic coming up.
And then I also, I really want to replay the interview that I did, I played last week with Dave DeCamp from anti-war.com because that interview, I probably should have held it till today, because now it's more relevant than ever because of what just happened with Venezuela.
So Dave deCamp and I, we recorded it last week, and I was asking him, will 2026 be a year of peace or a year of war?
And his answer has already proven correct.
He said, no, this is going to be a year of more war, unfortunately.
So I'm going to replay that for you here today.
And I'll have some new interviews coming up later this week.
So let's jump to the new announcement first.
I've got a special report on that.
And here we go.
All right, welcome.
I'm Mike Adams, an AI developer, the founder of BrightLearn.ai.
And I've got news for you here.
We've just launched a new website called Brightanswers.ai.
Brightanswers.ai is our new upgraded AI research engine.
It's not a chatbot.
It's something much more.
I call it the uncensored deep research with verified document citations engine.
And that's exactly what it does.
So if you've been using BrightU.ai, which has been a very capable engine, by the way, uncensored, you know, tells the truth about big pharma, tells the truth about history, tells the truth about, you know, economics, all kinds of things.
Then you're going to love the new site.
We've just launched, Brightanswers.ai.
Now, if you go there, it works just like BrightU.ai.
In fact, it is the same code at the moment.
And, oh, by the way, it might be slightly buggy for the next day or two or three because of the transition.
But if you ask it a question, now it will do deep research into our curated indexed document library, which contains tens of thousands of books, tens of thousands of science papers now.
Those are launched.
Millions of articles from websites like naturalnews.com and others.
Now, then the engine takes into account all of these documents in formulating its answer, and it cites them properly now.
Where we were unable to achieve well-formed citations previously, now it's perfect.
So now all of the science papers are cited with their actual science journal citations, you know, the year, the journal name, the volume number, the page number, etc.
Title, author, the whole deal.
So you can ask questions about herbs, about diabetes, about immune systems, about the brain.
I mean, anything you want.
In fact, we're covering economics and metallurgy and mining and agriculture, fusion and physics.
I haven't yet put chemistry in there, but I will soon.
And I had been promising you for many months that the science papers were coming.
Remember that?
If you've heard my podcast, and now they're here.
They're here.
So I've got well over 10 million science papers that have been summarized and well, keywords have been created for them.
They've been cleaned, normalized, as we say, ready for ingestion into our document system.
Over 10 million ready.
I have so far selected and put in a number smaller than 10 million.
And I don't even know the actual number of unique titles because of the nature of the system, but I can tell you there are over 200 million words that are in the system right now.
Over 200 million words of science papers.
And on top of that, we currently have over 10,000 books.
That number is about to leap into 20,000, 30,000, probably 50,000 soon.
So I know that we have over 50,000 science papers in the system right now.
And soon we'll have over 50,000 books.
We have way over a million articles, actually, in the system right now.
And these are all accurately cited sentence by sentence or paragraph by paragraph in the answer that is generated for you.
So that's available to you right now.
There's only one little caveat in all of this.
Because of the capabilities of this, we are splitting brightanswers.ai into a free tier and then a token tier, just like we've done at brightlearn.ai.
So if you haven't used brightlearn.ai yet, that's the book creation engine, and there are like 15,000 books generated there right now.
Oh, I forgot to tell you that when you use the AI engine at brightanswers.ai, at the end of every prompt or at the end of every answer, it will recommend five books from brightlearn.ai that are related to the query.
So in other words, the bright Learn books are now appearing in brightanswers.ai, all those AI answers.
And that's pretty cool.
But anyway, the caveat is that, you know how on BrightLearn.ai there's a free tier where you don't need a token and I'll describe the tokens in a second.
You don't need a token to create a short book of three chapters.
So that's called the free tier.
But if you want to create a longer book with better cover art, with more chapters, many more chapters, then you use what I'm going to call a bright token.
And a bright token, or as I previously said, just tokens, these can be acquired at healthrangerstore.com.
When you purchase products at healthrangerstore.com, you get loyalty points equal to about 5% of your purchase.
And those loyalty points can be used as credit on future purchases there, or you can trade them for bright tokens.
And these tokens are really becoming the digital, I wouldn't quite call it a currency, but like a digital voucher across our ecosystem.
So you can use those tokens to generate long books.
And then on our new AI engine, Brightanswers.ai, you'll be using those tokens to get the answers that use the book engine and the science papers engine with much more research and much longer answers.
Whereas the free tier will use only articles.
And again, there's over a million articles, so it's still awesome.
But it will create answers using articles as reference items, but not science papers and not books.
Now, here's the thing.
I haven't put in the token system yet.
That will happen in the next couple of days.
So as of right now, everybody gets all the features for free until I put in the token feature, at which point the science papers and the books will not be available to the free tier users.
But then again, free is awesome.
You know, free is free, and the answers are still amazing, even in the free tier.
But the token tier brings in a whole different level of authoritative research and also longer, more detailed answers, by the way.
Significantly longer answers.
So it's equivalent to having 100 hours of deep research and then writing up an executive report on your prompt.
Even if it's a simple prompt, like, hey, tell me about turmeric versus cancer or something.
Or tell me about foods that help prevent type 2 diabetes.
It will do extensive research on that and it will give you extensive citations.
Again, books and science papers and articles.
And it will give you that full report.
But that will require a token for all of that.
So that's the only difference that's coming up.
But anyway, we decided that the old website, BrightU.ai, wasn't that great of a name, which I understand.
And then also, Brighteon.ai wasn't available because the word Brighteon has been censored by so many tech platforms, including X, that Elon Musk, his team, is still censoring links to Brighteon URLs.
Brighteon.com, Brighteon.ai, you name it, right?
And that's why we've sued X, and they still maintain their censorship, despite the fact their legal team is well aware that we're going to win that lawsuit eventually.
And they'll have to, you know, have to compensate us for all the years of extreme censorship, or they'll have to turn the channels back on or whatever.
You know, they're going to lose.
But until then, they can delay and delay and they can keep censoring because X is not a free speech platform.
It's a censorship platform, as you are probably well aware.
So we had to move away from the Brighton domains.
And so we went with brightanswers.ai.
And that's why we also have bright learn.ai.
And if they're going to censor every domain with the word bright in it, well, then that's going to be a million domain names.
belonging to all kinds of people who have the word bright in their domain names because it's actually a very common prefix for domain names.
So hopefully we won't be as extensively censored because this, the whole point of this engine is knowledge without censorship.
We want to give you the tools to be able to dig up good quality information about pharmaceuticals and psychiatric drugs and vaccines and fiat currency, the history of the Federal Reserve, false flag operations, whatever.
Anything that's important, we want you to be able to have access to that.
So that's why this engine, that's why we moved it over to brightanswers.ai.
So get used to that new domain name.
I'll mention it a few times.
And again, for right now, it's all free.
And it also has the coaches.
It has the wellness coach, the financial coach, the survival coach, and the ingredients analyzer.
Those might be a little glitchy at the moment just because of, well, we've made a lot of changes under the hood also.
But you're going to find that when it does work correctly, the answers are freaking amazing.
The other thing is this puts a much heavier load on the LLMs that we use.
And the heavier load is resulting sometimes in like errors of too many requests.
So if you get a too many requests error, understand that we've already implemented a fallback language model.
And then I'll probably put a third tier in there as well.
So I'm trying to work with that so you don't get too many requests errors.
But scaling this up is possible, but difficult because there's a scarcity of compute in our world right now.
There's a scarcity of compute.
That is in the Western world.
In China, they've got plenty of electricity and it's dirt cheap.
But in America, electricity rates are skyrocketing, especially along the eastern 13 states.
And this is partly because of some of Trump's tariffs and things like that and geopolitics and also reciprocating trade wars.
There's more commodities scarcity in metals like copper and nickel and cobalt and whatever else that is necessary to manufacture microchips.
So as a result, just making the GPUs is becoming more and more difficult.
And that's why NVIDIA just announced, well, a week ago, that they're going to drastically raise their prices for all their GPUs this year.
They're going to more than double their consumer grade hardware price.
So the 590 or I'm sorry, 5090 cards, the GeForce RTX 5090s, I own quite a few of those.
I was buying them at $2,400.
They're going up to $5,000 in February.
And out of curiosity, I checked the price over the weekend.
On Amazon, they were already $3,500.
So they went up $1,000 just from the announcement.
Yeah, same exact card.
It was, you know, it was $2,400 last week.
Now it's $3,400, $3,500, $3,600, something like that.
And it's going to go to $5,000.
Think about that.
So the hardware cost of compute is going through the roof.
And that's because of scarcity of commodities.
And also inflation, which stems from money printing.
Yeah, you got it.
So in this world where hardware is getting more and more expensive, isn't it great that we have services that are less expensive, that are free?
Like Bright Learn, where you can create your own book free of charge.
And Brightanswers.ai, where you can conduct these deep research queries now based on all these indexed curated documents.
And that's free.
But there's going to be a limit.
Like if a million people try to use it, it's not going to work.
It'll overload the thing.
And then at that point, I don't know.
I don't know what we would do.
But fortunately, it's not that well known.
I mean, not on the mainstream basis, but all of you, you'll be able to use it.
Just don't tell everybody about it.
You know, we can't let everybody use the engine.
It'll overload the thing.
The other thing worth mentioning, by the way, is that for me to start bringing these science papers into the system, which is now happening, I spent two years.
I spent two years building an in-house infrastructure to acquire all the science papers or nearly every paper that's ever been published in the world in every language.
And then to process those science papers.
I've had, I mean, I think I've told you the story.
I have 48 workstations.
Each one has a GPU.
Some of those are the 50-90 cards.
Some are 40-90s, 40-80s, 40-70s, you know, all kinds of cards, right?
And these 48 workstations have been running 24/7 for at least a year and a half.
I think they're doing the data pipeline processing for our AI engine that we released that you can download at brightanswers.ai, by the way.
And also for prepping all the science articles and prepping all the millions of books that we're working through right now, getting everything cleaned up and ready for ingestion.
So if you're wondering, like, how did I get 50,000 science papers indexed into this system?
And by the way, that's going to be 100,000 in a week, and it'll be a million in a month, if not sooner.
The answer is that that's actually a multi-year process.
So it didn't just happen overnight.
You know, it took a long time to acquire them, a long time to process them.
And then, you know, classification prompts and all kinds of things.
And only then can you do the ingestion and indexing into an index system that is queried by the AI engine to say, hey, you know, here's a prompt about whatever, vitamin D and cancer.
And, you know, tell me all, give me all the science papers related to vitamin D and cancer.
And then it retrieves all those and then uses those to help formulate the answer.
And for those of you in the AI space, you might call it rag or retrieval augmented generation, but it's actually, this doesn't exist as a rag layer.
This is a, it's more like a research augmented generation because it's way more extensive than rag.
And we're not using a typical rag vector database for this purpose for a number of reasons.
So it's technically not rag, but it's rag-like.
And it's massive.
You know, the number of documents is massive.
So now that we have been able to get 50,000 science papers into the system, what's coming next within, I would say, within one week, is that we're going to make those available to the Brightlearn.ai book creation engine.
And then BrightLearn is going to get a major upgrade to where it starts having this improved citation format where the references for each subchapter are listed with their science paper citations and everything.
And more citations that are in line in the sentences and in the paragraphs or at the end of paragraphs.
So inline citations and science paper citations in there and more books coming.
So the BrightLearn.ai engine is going to get a huge upgrade.
And once that kicks in, then those new books that are generated will have much more research available.
And we may go back and then regenerate some of the previous books.
Well, in fact, I'm sure we will, especially the ones that are more popular, to regenerate them now that we have new research.
And when I say regenerate, I should really be clear.
I mean to rewrite them.
So to start the writing over again, bringing in new research information and so on.
But I think I want to wait until I get 100,000 science papers and maybe at least 50,000 books into the indexing system.
And then I'll probably start rewriting books.
I don't want to just do it with a little bit better information.
I want to have a lot better information.
So that will be coming over the next few weeks.
And I'm watching the ingestion engine literally right here right now on my screen.
And it's like every science paper takes, oh my goodness.
This is putting 28,000 more papers in right now.
This little routine.
every science paper takes what is it one with the two with the that's about a second It's about a second per science paper.
So you can do the math on that and figure out how long it takes.
And then when it's ingesting science papers, it can't also ingest books at the same time.
And books take a lot longer per book because books are longer than science papers typically.
So a book might take 10 seconds to fully ingest.
And that's after, you know, months and months of normalization and cleaning of all the books and everything.
So this is just the last step, which is indexing.
Anyway, it all takes time, but it's all coming online.
And the bottom line for you is that now at brightanswers.ai, you've got the world's best AI engine by far that has the only curated indexed knowledge base that exists on any AI engine.
There's nothing that even compares to this.
Nothing.
And it's very difficult to achieve, as I just described.
It takes years to put this together.
So if you want deep research on almost any topic, including survival and preparedness and emergency first aid and food and food preservation, use brightanswers.ai.
It's going to give you by far the best answers.
Oh, wow.
Speaking of answers, it's funny.
Oh, wow.
I was running a long query to find out how many unique science papers had been ingested into the engine.
And this does not count the 28,000 that I just mentioned that are in progress.
But before the 28,000, it was 46,093.
So add 28,000 to that.
Or, I don't know, roughly.
We're talking about 75,000 science papers roughly by the time you hear this.
So that's a lot.
That's a lot of science papers.
Some of them are readable, too.
A lot of them are not.
It was just filled with numbers and citations and charts and things that didn't really translate that well.
Okay, in any case, again, the engine is brightanswers.ai, and the book creation engine is at brightlearn.ai.
So take advantage of all of it and enjoy.
Now, I want to play a special report for you here called AI Predictions for 2026.
I did run this over the weekend, but most people don't hear the podcast over the weekend, so I'll include it today.
AI predictions for 2026.
And then we will continue on the other side with a bit of a discussion about Venezuela.
So stay tuned.
Mike Adams here with AI Predictions for 2026 and beyond.
Just quick background.
You probably know if you listen to my channel, I'm an AI developer.
I built the Brightlearn.ai book creation engine that has become quite popular.
Thousands of authors have published now over 11,000 books.
They're all free to read or free to download.
And we have auto-translation coming for translating books, which are mostly all in English right now.
They're going to be translated into Spanish.
Not every one of them, but as they achieve a certain number of reads, then they will be translated into Spanish and then after that, translated into French.
And then we're going to move into Chinese and other languages as well.
So that's coming up in 2026.
And yeah, I'm an AI developer.
I did all that.
I'm the only human on that project.
And so I do a lot of vibe coding and built AI models.
BrightU.ai is our AI engine.
And you can see all the AI tools that I've built and rolled out at Brightion.ai.
So the reason I say all that is to let you know, I've spent two years in the AI developer space, and I've interacted with a lot of companies, a lot of people, a lot of frontier model developers, a lot of just cutting edge people who are some of the best and brightest in this space.
And I've seen what AI can do well, what it sucks at doing, where I think it's going to fail, and where I think it's going to succeed.
So that's the background for what you're about to hear here.
The big bottom line to me is that 2026 will be a year of massive AI expansion, rollouts, and advances in terms of its core technology.
And one of the big themes of my prediction here is that those people who are saying that AI technology will plateau, that we've reached the end of what LLMs can do, they're wrong.
They're wrong.
Not only are we seeing actually advances in the basic LLMs, for example, at DeepSeek, we've seen DeepSeek sparse attention algorithms that are phenomenal, revolutionary in terms of making large model usage very fast and very cost efficient.
But we're also seeing a lot of post-training techniques being applied that will be game changers.
For example, chain of thought reasoning and using more tokens to force models to go back and recursively check their own work or to derive their own work.
In fact, there was interesting research about a very small model that can score very high on a lot of benchmarks simply by burning tokens and recursively reiterating, you know, checking its own work again and again until it gets to the right answer.
And I think that's what we're going to see.
We're going to see a lot more breakthroughs in terms of scientific research from LLMs that are doing chain of thought reasoning or recursive looping in order to arrive at the best answers and to check their own work, things like that.
And those are techniques that can be applied to the current models.
So we're going to see a lot of those techniques coming out or being refined in 2026.
So no, we're nowhere near the limit of what LLMs can do.
And it's not just about scaling up in terms of the number of parameters.
Maybe the scaling has reached some kind of natural plateau, but the post-pre-training, that is a term, the post-pre-training technology that can be applied or processes that can be applied are going to continue to have breakthroughs for many, many years to come.
And that will also include breakthroughs on model training and fine-tuning.
All right, the next thing that's important to understand is that 2026 will see more models pushed to the edge.
And so a lot of compute right now is heavily centralized because the large models require server infrastructure to be able to run.
You know, many models might have hundreds of billions of parameters or even in some cases, a trillion or more parameters.
So you've got to have some pretty hefty machines with a lot of onboard GPU RAM in order to run those models.
And so two things are going to happen.
First, you're going to have better quantization of models with some additional iterations of fine-tuning of quant algorithms that will do a better job even with a low number of bits.
And I've even seen some models run on two-bit quant with selective loading and unloading out of RAM.
I think I saw a report of DeepSeq 3.2 being run that way.
And I mean, two bits?
I can't even imagine that the model would be any good.
But apparently it retains about 80% of its functionality, even when you quantize it down to just two bits.
It's just unbelievable.
You know, two bits.
That means there's only four possible answers, zero, one, two, and three for each node or each vector in the compute.
That's extraordinary.
So that's one thing.
The second thing is that edge hardware is going to continue to become more and more capable.
And so this rising edge hardware, which will be due to advances from NVIDIA and Samsung and Tesla and Intel and other chip makers.
And I say Tesla because you're going to have a lot of AI compute being pushed to the edge in terms of vehicles.
Like vehicles will be rolling servers of compute.
And some people will even tap into them when they're parked.
It's like, hey, you could be running inference from your car.
Your car's AI engine could be doing work for you while you're charging your car.
In other words, that kind of thing is going to become more common.
But even in other devices, including eventually mobile phones, they will be more and more capable of running more sophisticated models.
And the thing that's going to work for edge is the first point I mentioned, which is the post-pre-training chain of thought recursive loop reasoning type of layers that are added to models.
Those can work very well on edge devices because then it's just a question of time.
Time and how many tokens you're burning to keep looping through the problem.
Where you could have a mobile phone, you could have a decent language model loaded onto it, a reasoning model, and you could ask your phone to solve this science problem.
And it might take an hour if it's a complex problem, but it can work through it through the recursive looping.
And then eventually it'll come up with the right answer.
And, you know, hey, if you do that when you're not using your phone, it's great, especially if it's plugged in because it will use a lot of power to go through those iterations.
But edge devices also include desktop computers.
And desktop systems are becoming way more capable because of NVIDIA breakthroughs, among other things.
Desktop computing is getting less expensive, but the chipsets are getting larger.
And NVIDIA is partnering with companies like Asus and Dell and whoever else, sort of the systems integrators, and they're going to be rolling out what are called the Spark stations in 2026.
I'll probably get one of these.
In fact, I'm certain I will, just because I need to see what it's capable of doing.
But these Spark stations will be running the GP300 chipset, the Blackwell-class chipset from NVIDIA, combined with up to, I think, 784 gigs of unified RAM, which is shareable by the graphics engine, you know, or the GP300 microchips.
But importantly, very high memory bandwidth in the unified RAM.
So it's not the slow memory that they use in the GDX Spark sort of consumer devices.
This is going to be much higher speed memory bandwidth that you can have a computer workstation sitting on your desk that 10 years ago would have been considered a supercomputer from the future.
And I don't know how many teraflops per second it's going to produce.
We can look up the specs, but it's going to kick ass.
It'll be like having a small data center on your desk.
You'll be able to run very large models with very high throughput.
Even you probably, I've done some math on this.
You'll be able to get over 100 tokens per second on large models like DeepSeq 3.2 or models that have hundreds of billions of parameters.
You get over 100 tokens per second, which means that you can set these up as a central AI server in your company or in your business or in your basement.
If you want to, if you've got enough money to buy one of these to just have it at home, because it's probably going to be 40 grand.
So, you know, it's a pretty significant, it's like the cost of a car, or at least an entry-level car.
But you'll be able to serve, you know, hundreds of workstations within a company or a call center, not all at the same time, but a shared resource that can queue up AI requests and can be your on-site AI server.
So this is going to move a lot of services out of the cloud into the local environment.
Although I will still use both cloud-based and local at the same time.
I found that's the best combination.
Plus, in the winter, I get to heat my buildings with GPUs.
So that's a little bonus effect right there.
But the bottom line here is you're going to see what used to be called enterprise-level compute.
It's going to be distributed at the more local level.
And it means machine cognition will become much more widespread.
And that will have a lot of benefits for society.
A lot of automation of certain roles like customer service and marketing and marketing design and things like that.
And when we get to the point where we can run very competent coding models locally, and actually, Meestral has a model that already does that.
There are some coding models you can run locally that are pretty good, not as good as Anthropic.
But when Anthropic level coding models can be run locally, then you're going to have an explosion in app development.
And then things are really going to change.
Okay, also in 2026, I'm expecting we're going to see much better video production using AI with longer duration video segments that can be generated.
Right now, most of the video services only will generate 10 seconds.
Some of them will do longer, you know, 30 seconds or even a minute.
But the longer duration video generation combined with sound effects and audio with full lip sync of any on-screen characters or avatars, that's going to become much more commonplace in 2026.
And I hope I'm right about this because I'm counting on it.
Because my own project, BrightLearn.ai, is going to be offering not just books, but also the audio books and then mini documentaries, which I'm envisioning would be three or four minutes in duration.
And they would be a short documentary about the book.
And that mini documentary is going to be, of course, rendered as video with narration and on-screen talent, you know, the whole thing.
This is going to be a fun project.
And these will be auto-created.
So if you don't want to read the book, you can see the movie version, right?
Or in this case, a short summary documentary.
It's basically a summary.
That's going to happen, I believe, in 2026.
And I'm anticipating the second half of the year.
So maybe, maybe by the fall of 2026, we might have that feature rolled out.
Just depends on what technology is available and how much it costs.
By 2027, sometime, I'm anticipating more full-length documentary capabilities, but we'll see how long that takes to happen.
The other issue is going to be cost.
Now, costs are going to continue to fall dramatically for compute.
This is for every kind of generation, whether it's text generation, image generation, video, etc.
Token costs are going to plummet by at least a factor of 10x every year.
But by some estimates, that number is actually 40x.
So you could take a guess and just say, oh, let's say 20x on average is how much cheaper compute is becoming.
On an annualized basis, compounded.
So that's a big deal.
That means if it's 20x cheaper this year and then 20x cheaper the next year, that means in two years it's 400 times cheaper.
I mean, you know, my goodness, that's a lot cheaper, which means that a lot more tokens can be burned on things like video creation rather inexpensively.
So right now, video creation is very costly.
And some image creation is also rather costly.
That's going to get dirt cheap in the next couple of years.
And another interesting factor in all of this is that the cost of inference that is online is going to be largely determined by the cost of electricity.
And if you consider that China's power costs are 40 to 50% lower than the United States on average and substantially lower even more compared to Europe, well, that means that China can become a leading exporter of AI inference.
You know, China can set up servers and massive server farms to do all the inference of text models, image models, video models, and they are.
I mean, they're running a lot of data centers.
There are still more data centers in the United States compared to China at the moment, but that's going to change.
China is going to see massive construction and massive scaling up of data centers because their cost of electricity is very, very low.
And that's going to make compute more cost-effective globally because everybody has access to China's computers, you know, through the internet.
And there could be other very clever ways for companies to save money on hosting.
For example, in some of the Nordic countries, I understand they're running pilot programs to turn data center excess heat into a heating utility for the local residential buildings.
So, you know, the heat is heating people's homes or apartments.
And then that subsidizes the cost of inference.
So in those cases, in those more northern latitude countries, heat is a benefit, whereas in places like Texas or California or what have you, heat is usually most of the year, heat is a problem that you try to get rid of.
And that costs you money to get rid of the heat.
So compute is going to shift globally to where heat is a benefit and where electricity costs are very, very low.
And that would be northern China.
And northern China just did a big pipeline deal with Russia that's going to bring 50 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually into northern China through Mongolia from the Yamal gas fields of northwestern Russia.
So that's going to make compute even less expensive coming out of northern China.
It should be very interesting.
Okay, shifting gears here in terms of job replacements, we're going to see millions of jobs just in the United States replaced by AI in calendar year 2026.
And that will continue to increase.
But a lot of companies aren't going to admit this.
What companies will say, because there's been a lot of backlash against Amazon, for example, when they got caught admitting they're going to replace 600,000 jobs over a period of a few years.
So there's a lot of backlash.
So these corporations are never, or not from this point forward, they're not going to admit that they're replacing humans with AI.
What they're going to say is, we're just not hiring people.
And we're just going to let the current employee base a trit while we replace them with AI gradually.
But we don't want to have a big announcement that we're laying off a bunch of people and replacing them with AI.
That's bad press.
And in many cases, it might be premature anyway because the AI tools, especially the agentic AI, may not be really ready for the jobs that it's being tasked with.
You know, it can do a certain portion of customer service, for example, maybe 80 or 90% of customer service, but there's always a small percentage of customer service that needs a human to intervene, something well outside the training of the AI models.
So there will always be some level of humans in those tasks.
It just won't be as many as it used to be.
And companies will just stop hiring.
And as a result, millions of jobs that would otherwise have been created will not be created.
And that's going to result in a glut of human workers who have some level of skill, you know, some cognition.
Doing customer service takes brain skills, right?
And language skills and empathy and things like that.
Or you would imagine so.
And so those people are going to find a they're going to discover a very difficult job market because nobody needs entry-level cognition skills at this point.
They just don't need it.
They still need high-level people, experienced people who have a lot of years under their belt.
But the younger generations are going to have a very hard time getting that experience if they can't get hired on into the entry-level positions because the AI is doing all the entry-level work or most of it.
So that's going to be a multi-year challenge of what do we do with all these young people that are graduating out of the university system with degrees in victimhood 101 and social justice, this and that.
What are we going to do with those people?
Well, they're not employable in a rational society.
Anyway, so there are going to be a lot of jobless people who realize they have the wrong college degrees or they just, they made a wrong decision to go to college at all and they still owe a lot of money on student loans.
That's going to get interesting.
In any case, these are some of my predictions for AI in 2026 and beyond.
And you can check out all of my AI projects at Brighteon.ai.
And by far the most popular project is the book creation engine I built at brightlearn.ai, where you can generate a book on any topic in minutes completely free of charge.
An entire book that's researched, written, edited, fact-checked, packaged, cover art, PDF, everything.
It's sent to you and you pay nothing for it.
So that's a very cool engine and it's becoming incredibly popular.
So check that out.
Again, that's at brightlearn.ai.
And I've got some other cool surprises coming up for you in 2026.
But the next thing I'm working on is a remote file synchronization system for the book engine so that you can run a little utility locally on your computer, on your desktop, let's say, and it will sync thousands of books from our servers to your local workstation without you having to download and unzip a zip file or anything like that.
You don't even have to install any software.
You'll just be able to do a remote sync.
And then you'll be able to have a local copy of all those books and all that knowledge completely free of charge.
So that's coming.
You're going to love it.
Just sign up at brightlearn.ai.
You know, create a book and then sign up as an author.
And then we'll know how to reach you via email when we've got these new features announced.
But yeah, just go there right now.
Just create a book.
Any book, any topic.
Keep it non-fiction, though, if you would, please.
We're really not that interested in fiction books.
We're more interested in how-to type of books and knowledge books and things like that, research books.
But check it out and get ready because 2026 is going to be a very exciting year in terms of AI technology advances and rollout and so much more.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, Brightown.ai and brightown.com.
Thank you for listening.
All right, welcome back.
Now, soon we're going to jump into the special report that I played this weekend also called Trump's Attack on Venezuela will further split and destabilize the world.
Now, that's a report about ramifications.
So I know that there are a lot of Trump supporters that love the fact that he has, he invaded Venezuela, you know, militarily attacked them, kidnapped their leader and his wife, took them back to the United States to face so-called criminal charges, some of which were ridiculous, claiming that Maduro violated America's machine gun laws.
It's like, really?
Since when does the leader of another country have to abide by America's machine gun laws?
It doesn't make any sense, right?
But overall claims that he's a drug trafficking and fentanyl and whatever, and yet he was never charged with those specific crimes, it turns out.
Charged with machine guns.
Anyway, some Trump supporters love the fact that Trump did all that.
And then there are other people like Judge Napolitano and, well, most pro-liberty people, Ron Paul people, etc., who are pointing out that what Trump did was completely illegal, unconstitutional, violates UN charters, violates the rule of law internationally.
It sets a precedent that says any country anytime it wants can just bully its way into another country, invade it, kill its leaders, take over the country, and pillage all of its resources.
Because that's Trump's admitted plan for Venezuela.
It's like, hey, we just went in there, we kidnapped the leader, we did a decapitation invasion.
Now we're going to run Venezuela, Trump says.
We're going to run Venezuela.
And then he says, he says, as we run Venezuela, by the way, he says it's going to be very professional because he says we have some of the biggest oil companies in the world that are going to come in as if to say that oil companies know how to run nations.
Yeah, that's interesting.
A nation with a lot of oil that Trump says is ours.
Somehow, according to Trump, our oil ended up under Venezuelan land.
And also, our minerals ended up in Venezuela.
And we got to get those back.
Get those minerals back.
We got to take our oil back and take our minerals back.
That's what we're told.
Nowhere does anybody in the Trump administration acknowledge that that oil belongs to Venezuela and that those minerals belong to Venezuela and that Venezuela has any national sovereign rights whatsoever.
We just don't like Maduro, so we can do whatever we want.
Well, there's a problem with that.
If that's the rule, then there's no rule of law.
And already over the weekend, all across China, social media in China, the Chinese people were saying, hey, this is the perfect model for what we can do to take over Taiwan.
We can just do a military invasion of Taiwan, kidnap the leaders, put our troops on the ground and say, we're going to run Taiwan now.
It's ours.
And we're going to take everything that Taiwan has, the microchips, the factories, the resources, whatever.
We're going to take it.
That's what the Chinese people are saying.
And Trump can't say anything against that.
Because if Trump, let's say China did that, and Trump said, oh my God, that's a violation of international law.
You can't invade Taiwan and take it over.
China would just turn to Trump and say, well, you did.
You did exactly that.
You did it in Venezuela.
And clearly, Venezuela is not part of the United States of America, where China continues to claim that Taiwan is part of China, a breakaway province, but that it still belongs to China.
And what's interesting is that the U.S. State Department only recognizes Taiwan as part of China right now.
So I mean, if anything, and I'm not advocating this, obviously, but if anything, China has a stronger argument. to militarily invade and take over Taiwan than Trump does to invade and take over Venezuela.
You know, there's in no universe is Venezuela part of the United States of America.
But Trump just set the precedent, you see.
This is the problem.
Trump is setting bad precedent that's going to come back and haunt us.
And that's my point.
Whether you support what Trump has done, whether you oppose it, whether you think Maduro is the worst person in the world, he's probably a corrupt, evil son of a bitch.
You know what I mean?
I mean, I have no doubt that he is.
That's how you rise to power, typically, in a South American country, or frankly, almost any country.
Was Maduro a bad guy?
Yeah, certainly.
But does that give you the right to go in and take over a country?
Just invade it and take it over, especially when after 2022, when Russia launched its special military operation against Ukraine, the entire government of the United States was screaming about, oh, it's Putin's, what do they say, unprovoked war of aggression on Ukraine.
It's unprovoked war of aggression.
Well, wouldn't that description fit Venezuela right now?
I mean, Venezuela wasn't technically provoking America.
I don't know.
Maybe you could say, well, they released all these prisoners, you know, to invade our border.
That's a provocation.
Okay, maybe you're right.
Why not just find those people and send them back?
You know?
But even if you say that's the provocation, does that justify invading a foreign nation and occupying it and running it and then stealing the oil and stealing the minerals?
And I've heard people say, well, you know, the American companies, they invested all this money in the infrastructure of Venezuela, which they did.
Billions of dollars of infrastructure to extract oil.
And then I think it was Chavez who stole that, you know, nationalized it, right?
So stole it from the companies.
And my answer would be, well, what did you expect?
Governments are thieves.
I mean, of course they're thieves.
So is our government.
What do you think taxation is?
What do you think money printing is?
You should have factored that into your risk equation.
You should have known they're going to steal your infrastructure after you pay for everything and build it up.
Of course they're going to because that's what we're doing now.
So we're going to go steal it back.
And in the meantime, Trump's making sure we're going to steal the oil on the ships too.
Piracy on the high seas.
So this is not an issue where one side is upstanding and upholds the rule of law and has high integrity and respects the property of others.
This is a question of just it's a den of thieves.
You know, Chavez was a thief.
Maduro is a thief.
Trump's a thief.
You know, the U.S. military, bunch of thieves stealing oil, stealing oil on the sea, stealing oil on the ground, stealing minerals.
Yeah, it's just a bunch of thieves.
And the real issue is which thief has the biggest guns.
And over the weekend, Trump proved that that's the United States of America.
We have the bigger guns.
So, we can just steal more stuff.
And apparently, that's the way it's going to work from now on.
You know, I mean, I can sit here and have moral judgment on that.
Like, stealing is wrong, but that's not going to stop it, is it?
So, I guess we should just prepare for the fact that Trump's just going to loot and pillage much of Mexico, Central, and South America as much as he can over the next few years.
And then realize that these behaviors are indicative of the final collapse stage of empires.
When the empire gets to the point where it suffered its own internal collapse to such an extent that it has to resort to pillaging and looting and raping all the other nations that it can in order to bolster its own survival, that's when you know the end of the empire is near, and that's exactly where we are.
I mean, it's no coincidence that all this Venezuelan oil might be able to backstop U.S. treasuries.
You know, we need a way to somehow find trillions of dollars of value that don't cost us much of anything.
So, we'll just, you know, we'll take it from them.
We'll go in, we'll, you know, kidnap their leaders, we'll take over the country, we'll call them drug dealers, and then we'll just take all their oil.
And maybe we can pay off some of our national debt.
Maybe we can get the 10-year bond rates lower, you know, treasuries, and then maybe we can refinance our long-term debt and kick the can down the road a little bit more.
But we're going to have to loot all over the place to make this happen.
You know, going to have to steal and loot from different countries in order to fund the empire.
And that's the stage where we are.
I mean, that's not a moral judgment, even.
I'm just describing where we are.
We are at the rape and pillage stage of the collapse of the empire.
And this stage could last a while.
There's going to be a lot more pillaging going on, a lot more piracy going on.
There's a lot of other relatively small South American countries.
I mean, Trump's already mentioned Colombia.
Watch out, Colombia.
We're coming for you.
What are we going to take from Colombia?
Cocaine?
I mean, and then there's Mexico.
And then there's Mexico, which is run as a giant narco-cartel nation state.
What are they called?
I guess they call it narco-state.
It's a narco-state.
Well, in America, we're a pharma state.
We're run by big pharma, which is this kills more people than drugs, by the way, you know, than street drugs.
But Mexico is a narco-state.
So I guess next Trump is going to have an invasion.
You know, just start invading Mexico.
And his supporters will cheer it.
And his detractors will say, oh, that's a violation of law.
Oh, and the Democrats will lose their minds, of course.
You can't do that.
Well, he just did it again.
He keeps doing it.
So I guess he can do it.
I mean, if you're just willing to throw the rule of law out the window, I guess you can do whatever you want.
And that's the way this is going to go for a while.
So, you know, get ready for 2026.
It's going to be the year of imperial wars and pillaging and piracy.
That's what this year is going to be like.
Plus, some really cool AI technology on top of that.
And rising electricity prices, too.
And food inflation.
Yeah, all kinds of interesting stuff.
So get ready for that.
All right.
Now, we have a new year's sale that begins tomorrow at thehealthrangerstore.com.
It starts tomorrow.
You can go to healthrangerstore.com/slash 2026.
And we are fresh with inventory.
We've got some great new stuff available for you.
So stay tuned.
I'll remind you about that tomorrow as well.
It's a great opportunity to purchase some laboratory-tested superfoods and high-end nutritional supplements and so much more, storable foods and preparedness items and much more.
And that's, yeah, it's going to be great.
You're going to be able to get not only good stuff for yourself, but also you're going to get those loyalty points that you can trade for the tokens and the tokens that will power brightlearn.ai and brightanswers.ai as well.
So there's benefits all around.
And I thank you for your support because we couldn't put out these free tools without your support.
And the best way to support us is healthrangerstore.com.
All right.
With that said, I'm going to play the Venezuela attack special report, which is from the weekend.
I played it over the weekend at first.
And then following that, I'll have today's interview with Dave DeCamp from anti-war.com and his explanation of what's coming for the rest of this year.
Yeah, it's going to be a lot of conflict.
Oh, and I forgot gold and silver pricing.
We need to take a look at that because I think they really skyrocketed in the overseas markets again.
Yeah, silver popped up to $75.
Gold is over $4,400.
But that's in the overseas markets.
Depends on what happens Monday morning.
By the time you hear this, you can check the markets and see where things are happening in the U.S., in the West.
But I have a feeling that the silver market in particular is about to break.
That is, the physical delivery obligations from the COMEX and the LBMA, they are in dire straits as far as I can tell.
And it means that there'll probably be a fracturing, a divergence of the paper price versus the physical price.
And the physical price will be subject to reality, and the paper price will continue to be fiction.
But the physical price will be headed towards $100 an ounce.
That's where it's going.
So if you're sitting on gold and silver right now, hold on tight.
You know, don't let it go.
If you can handle it, hold on to it.
It's very likely going to get a lot more valuable eventually here, probably before very long.
There could still be corrections along the way.
There are going to be some paper manipulation efforts that are pushed by the banksters, the brokerages and the governments and much more.
But in the long run, or even the medium term, gold and silver physical are going to command much higher prices than what they show today.
So hold on to those.
All right.
Enjoy the rest of the show here, the report and the interview with Dave DeCamp.
And I'll have a new interview for you tomorrow.
So stay tuned.
All right.
Welcome to this analysis of where we are globally geopolitically following Trump's invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of its president, Maduro, who, let's be clear, Maduro is no doubt a bad guy, so to speak.
Probably one of the worst criminals in existence, at least alive today.
Because, well, that's how you get to be the president of Venezuela.
A very corrupt country, but just one among many corrupt countries.
I would say most of Europe is corrupt.
Most of the world is corrupt.
Our own country suffers from all kinds of corruption as well.
In any case, Trump has ordered the invasion, the killing of people necessary to kidnap Maduro and to bring him to the United States where he is facing criminal charges.
So in other words, the United States accused the leader of another nation of some crimes.
One of those, by the way, is possessing machine guns.
Right.
So did you know that it's illegal?
That the U.S. considers it illegal for the leader of another country to have a machine gun.
And if we think they have a machine gun, we can go kidnap them.
Did you know that?
Yeah, that's crazy.
That's insane.
Because, of course, the U.S. has no jurisdiction to enforce machine gun laws anywhere else around the world.
In fact, the U.S. has no legal jurisdiction whatsoever over Venezuela.
And the fact that the Venezuelan leader is indicted in a court in New York has no legal standing whatsoever, not anywhere in the world, and certainly not in Venezuela.
And that's why this is really an issue of the rule of law.
It's not a question of whether Maduro is a, quote, bad guy, because, you know, everybody's a bad guy.
Every leader is a bad guy.
And if we're going to live in a world where one nation can just say, well, we don't like this bad guy of this nation, and we're just going to go kidnap him.
Well, then what does that mean for our world?
What does that mean for the rule of law?
Does that mean that if China thinks that Trump has violated Chinese laws, that China can invade the United States to kidnap Trump and bring him to Beijing to face Chinese justice?
Because that's what Trump just said, essentially.
Trump thinks that's perfectly acceptable.
Or if Russia believes that Trump is violating some law, or let's make it easier.
Let's say that Russia says that Zelensky is violating the law.
Then does Trump support Russia invading Kiev and kidnapping Zelensky and taking him back to Moscow to face trial in Russia?
Oh, imagine the outcry from the Trump administration over something like that, huh?
Yeah, all the Republicans would be screaming about violations of the rule of law.
But when we do it, it's perfectly okay.
See, that's the hypocrisy in all of this.
And that's the disgusting part, is that the Trump administration and his supporters have no recognition of the Constitution or the rule of law.
And no, Article II does not give the president the right to go in and kidnap a foreign leader without consulting Congress first.
No such right exists.
It's a blatant violation of the Constitution.
So all those Republicans who were claiming, oh, we support the Constitution, if they're not speaking out against this now, they're just liars.
They don't support the Constitution at all.
And that's my concern in all of this.
Although, there's a silver lining in this invasion of Venezuela.
And it could be that maybe some Americans would stop saying Venzuela.
And maybe they would learn how to pronounce the country name correctly because it is, of course, Venezuela.
So who knows?
Maybe if people hear it enough, they will correct their pronunciation.
And to those people who keep saying Venzuela, I ask, have you looked at the word?
Have you noticed letters in a specific sequence?
Because that's what words are.
I'm kidding.
I give people a hard time for mispronunciations and so on.
Don't get me started on safety deposit boxes because there's no such thing.
There is no such thing.
They don't exist.
There's no such thing as a safety deposit box.
It's all, it's a safe deposit box, but never mind.
Never mind.
A safety deposit box would be a box where you place safety gear, such as like helmets and reflective vests or, you know, flashlights and such.
That would be a safety deposit box.
And that's not what people are referring to when they say that term.
So anyway, back to Venezuela.
I guess we'll just make up all our own names for all the South American countries instead of Colombia.
It will be Combia or something.
I don't know, whatever.
Colombia.
Okay.
Whatever you want.
Colombia is next, according to Trump.
He says that the president of Colombia is going to be taught a lesson soon.
And so we now have Emperor Trump on a crusade across South America to find out how many countries he can invade, how many leaders he can kidnap, how many people he can kill along the way in order to control South America.
And yes, it's lawless.
Yes, it's completely, you know, outside the Constitution.
It's outside of international law, etc.
But Trump's doing it because he can.
And so once again, America proves itself to be the international bully.
Just, oh, we're going to invade your country because we can.
We don't care about the rule of law.
You can't do it to us, but we're going to do it to you.
But let's look at the arguments of, is it necessary?
Because there's, of course, an argument that the means justify the ends.
That's the argument among Trump supporters right now.
Well, we had to do it because, well, of the following reasons.
Either, one, we need to steal Venezuela's oil supply.
Why?
Because, well, the U.S. Treasury is trillions in the hole, and the Fed can't just keep printing forever without destroying the value of the currency.
And we need to backstop treasuries with some real hard assets.
And, you know, hey, Venezuela's got tens of trillions of dollars in oil, oil deposits.
So what we're going to do, at least this is one of the theories.
So what we're going to do, according to this theory, is we're going to seize Venezuela's oil resources.
You know, just rape and pillage, as usual.
And then we're going to use that as assets to pledge against treasuries that will sell to the rest of the world.
So we'll be able to sell treasuries at a lower yield rate to refinance the U.S. debt all over the world by having those treasuries partially backed by oil.
Not our oil, Venezuelan oil that we stole.
I mean, we're already stealing oil from Venezuelan tankers, or that is tankers of other nations that are leaving Venezuela with oil.
And you already heard like Pam Bondi and others say, well, that's sanctioned oil and thus we're going to take it.
You heard Trump in interviews saying, well, we're just going to keep it.
We're going to seize the oil and keep it.
Yeah, there's a word for that.
It's called piracy on the high seas, by the way.
And there's no such thing as sanctioned oil.
There's only oil.
You know, there's different qualities and grades of oil, but there's no such thing as sanctioned oil.
That's a made-up concept that's pushed out there by the United States of America to justify stealing other people's oil.
But see, before the U.S. takes another illegal action, it always justifies it.
You know, so before stealing Venezuela's oil, they'll say, well, we sanctioned it.
And here, you see this piece of paper?
This piece of paper says it's sanctioned oil and thus we have the right to steal it.
Or before they go kidnap Maduro, they have him indicted and they say, see, we have this piece of paper.
This is an indictment.
This is the kind of garbage that King George used to do to the American colonials back before 1776.
It was like, well, the writ of whatever bullshit, the writ of bullshit says that you have to pay taxes even though you have no voice in parliament.
Yeah.
Oh, the king has issued another writ of bullshit.
That's the same thing that Trump is doing in Bondi, same thing.
Just documents to justify their illegal actions, which are really acts of war.
I mean, let's be honest, invading a foreign nation is an act of war, regardless of what piece of paper you think you have.
It's still an act of war.
So, you know, here we go.
America's starting more wars.
But seizure of oil is just one of the theories.
There's another theory.
Oh, by the way, this has nothing to do with drugs.
Nothing to do with drugs.
That's just the cover story.
Everybody with a brain knows that the drugs are going to continue to flow because, of course, that's what funds the CIA.
Certain protected drug cartels get passage and they pay a percentage to the CIA.
I mean, come on.
It's 2026.
All right.
Let's not be children and pretend that, oh, we're going to stop the drug trade.
No, no, no.
No such thing.
The drug trade funds black ops always has.
All right.
So grow up, everybody.
Right.
I mean, that's what I would say.
I'm not saying that to you.
That's what I would say to people who don't know.
It's like, grow up.
Come on.
It's 2026.
But what about rare earths?
Well, does Venezuela have rare earths?
Yeah, I mean, they're everywhere, actually.
It's not a question of where are they?
It's a question of refining them.
Who's got the refining capabilities or even the tolerance for all the toxic chemicals and the waste products, you know, the environmental impact?
And as far as I know, Venezuela doesn't have rare earth refining capabilities of any note.
So it's not a question of rare earths, is it?
Again, China's got the predominant refining capabilities there.
The U.S. is building out some capabilities, but they are at least a decade behind China, probably more like 15 or 20 years behind.
And Venezuela is not a rare earth refining hub by any stretch.
Okay, so what else?
If it's not about the oil, what is it about?
Well, Patrick Byrne, when I did an interview with him, he said that this is about election fraud, that Venezuela runs the black box voting machines that rig elections in the United States.
And he said that's the main reason that Trump is going after Maduro, at least one reason among many.
And he may very well be correct with that.
It's true that one of the black box voting companies is based out of Venezuela.
And it is true that our elections are being rigged again and again and again because of black box voting.
And it's true that the Democrats, of course, work with that whole ecosystem to cheat and to give themselves more seats in the House and more seats in the Senate, etc.
So you could argue that the kidnapping of Maduro and essentially the overthrow of Venezuela was necessary to protect America's election integrity.
And maybe that's absolutely true.
Could be.
But if so, why didn't Trump just tell us that?
Why doesn't he just say, well, you know, hey, our elections have been rigged.
I mean, we know the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.
I mean, that's just blatantly obvious.
So it's all been rigged, and it's been going on, especially in the midterms.
The Democrats in California and other places, they rig everything.
That's how they get so many seats.
It's all rigged.
And if Trump were to just level with the American people, hey, the vote rigging is coming out of Venezuela and we got to stop that to protect our election integrity.
We need to go kidnap this guy and overthrow his country.
I think actually more people would buy that than the current excuse of we have to stop drugs because it's not going to stop drugs.
And everybody knows that.
Everybody knows that most of the drugs coming across the border don't come out of Venezuela.
They come from other countries and they involve Mexico and they involve Colombia among others, but Venezuela is not the number one source of illegal drugs.
So that's just a story.
But, you know, if that theory is true, it's interesting.
This may have just given the GOP a chance to maintain control in the midterms.
See, the GOP has really been abandoning their support base.
And you see it all over.
You see people's reactions.
And also people are dealing with very high inflation, high cost of living, a lot of job losses, job replacements, some of it due to AI, but a lot of it due to just economic decline.
And many people who voted for Trump are very unhappy with Trump at this point.
But people also despise the Democrats.
The Democrats are widely hated because of all their DEI woke nonsense and all their they hate America.
They hate the Constitution.
Trump just ignores the Constitution, but the Democrats actually hate it and want to destroy it.
Well, I guess so do the Israeli influencers of the Trump administration.
They're talking about destroying the First Amendment now because they can't allow speech that hurts people's feelings or whatever.
Yeah, it's getting insane.
But the Democrats are widely reviled.
And the only way for the Democrats to win, or at least to be certain of their win, would be to cheat, which is what they always do.
And they need control of the voting machines in order to cheat.
Although I would argue that a lot of the cheating is just done by ballot stuffing.
And it doesn't matter who's controlling the voting machines.
It's a ballot stuffing operation.
They're just rerunning the same ballots over and over again.
Or they're using mail-in ballots.
They just mail out 10 million ballots all over the place.
And then they have their mules fill them out, round them up, bring them in, stuff them in, and they can cheat that way.
Of course, Democrats are going to continue to cheat in every way possible.
But if Trump takes away from them this one way of cheating, the black box voting, it might give the GOP a chance, even though the popularity of the GOP is plummeting.
There's no other way to say it.
Because number one, where are the arrests?
You know, Trump's been in power almost a year.
Where are the arrests of the traitors?
Where are the real Epstein files?
Huh?
How come Fauci is still walking free?
And Mallorcas and so many other people.
You know, what's the deal with that?
So Trump hasn't been able to keep his promises about going after these criminals.
And, you know, if anything, he has now, he's now part of the cover-up of the Epstein files, is what it looks like.
So yeah, people are very unhappy about that.
Understandably so.
And as a result, the GOP is facing an election bloodbath come this November.
That's going to be wild.
But getting back to Venezuela, what else?
What are the other reasons why Trump might want to violate the Constitution and violate international law and aggressively attack, invade, and control Venezuela?
Well, it's because of what my friend Michael Jan talks about, routes and resources.
See, Venezuela is very close geographically or close enough to the Gulf of Mexico to be able to present a threat to ships moving in and out of the Gulf of Mexico carrying things like liquid natural gas, LNG, or oil.
Now, see, you got to back up to really understand the greater context in all of this.
The United States blew up the Nord Stream pipelines in order to cut off Europe from Russian gas and to force Europe to purchase LNG from the United States.
And that was to the benefit of some very wealthy people and companies that export natural gas.
And a lot of that goes through ports on the southern coast, you know, the Gulf Coast.
And then those ships have to make their way, obviously, out of the Gulf to head over to Europe or wherever their destination may be.
Well, during that transit, they can be threatened by land-based missiles from Venezuela.
And Venezuela is rumored to be receiving missile technology from Russia and possibly from China.
And of course, Russian missile technology is very, very capable.
Russia has influenced the Iranian missiles that were devastating to Israel over the last summer.
And clearly, missile technology has reached a point today where it's no longer unusual for land-based missiles to have a range of a couple thousand kilometers.
So that easily puts them within striking distance of the routes of ships coming out of the Gulf of Mexico.
Well, because geopolitically the world is bifurcating, they're splitting into eastern versus western hemispheres.
And this is true for supply chains and also energy supplies.
And this was all instigated by the West, by the way, cutting off Russia from the SWIFT system, economic sanctions against Russia and Iran and other countries, and also the threat of tariffs and so on against China.
So there's this splitting of the world.
And as part of this split, the Western Hemisphere, dominated by the United States, has to protect its own energy resources and energy routes.
Because, well, the West isn't going to be able to get energy from Russia.
And Europe, for example, is even passing laws to make it illegal to purchase energy from Russia.
I think one big law for the EU kicks in about one year from now, actually, that would outlaw energy purchases from Russia.
You know, it's a suicide cult, of course, running the EU, but that's what they want.
They want to starve and freeze to death in the coming winters.
And so they cut themselves off from Russian energy, which is cheap and abundant.
And then they lock up their own energy supplies as well, you know, to appease the climate lunatics.
And so, yeah, they're all going to starve and freeze.
And they're going to say, aren't we good for the planet?
No, you're dead, actually.
Maybe, no, I'm not going to go there.
Maybe we can compost you.
That could be good for, you know, the garden or something, maybe.
You know, to the European leaders, I would say that.
Maybe after you freeze yourself to death, we could compost you.
That's green, you know?
Recycling, composting, yeah.
So there's something else too, and that is silver and other critical resources, critical minerals.
You know, Trump added silver to the critical resources list, and a lot of silver comes out of South America.
And so being able to assert control over the shipping lanes or the transportation lanes of the entire region, that's really critical for America's interests.
And they don't want China mucking around with the Panama Canal, for example, even though China has ports on the north side of the Panama Canal.
I think it's the north side.
It runs north-south mostly, by the way.
China's got its own shipyards and things or port there for the ships.
And Trump wants to have total American dominance of the Western hemisphere, all the way from almost the North Pole with Greenland all the way to the southern tip of South America.
That's the new strategy is let's dominate the Western hemisphere.
And that's it's actually, you know, it's the new Monroe Doctrine.
It's not a bad strategy if you're trying to sort of protect yourself from the new globalism, the new multipolar world where China and Russia are increasingly powerful, especially China with its naval shipyard capabilities and its global trade capabilities, its technology, etc.
So Trump is kind of sort of building a moat, a geopolitical moat around America and saying we're going to focus on the Western hemisphere, which means we got to invade and control Venezuela.
Could be a similar thing in mind for Cuba.
That could be interesting.
Colombia and any other country in Central or South America that doesn't play ball, including Mexico, by the way.
We could be militarily invading Mexico any month now and possibly, I mean, why not kidnap the president of Mexico too?
Because, you know, she's just, she's fair game, I guess.
If we could just kidnap any president we want, just let's kidnap the president of Mexico, which would be like kidnapping the drug cartel warlord king or queen in this case, because the president of Mexico is always run by the drug cartels.
You know, if Trump really wanted to go after the drug cartels, he would go after Mexico, which hasn't happened yet, but maybe that's coming.
He has promised to, so maybe that's coming.
Anyway, the bottom line in all of this is for you and I, how does this, what practical upshot is there?
Well, it means that mineral resources are about to become more scarce and more expensive.
So all the commodities that you normally would get at dirt cheap prices, copper, nickel, cobalt, tungsten, lithium, whatever, they're going to get a lot more expensive because now the U.S. has to play police even more so in the Western hemisphere than ever before.
And we're going to be cut off from the countries that are controlled by China.
So I said the other day that silver is going to have two markets now.
There's going to be an Eastern silver market and then a Western silver market.
The Eastern silver market will have its own supply, its own pricing.
The Western silver market, that is America's, will have its own supply chain, which will suffer from all kinds of problems, and its own pricing, which will be sky-high eventually.
But the same thing is going to happen more and more with copper, with nickel, maybe not iron ore so much, With other critical minerals like that.
I already mentioned cobalt, but there's also antimony, which is critical in silver refining.
And China has just put in place a ban or an export restriction on antimony, not just silver.
So, yeah, yeah, things are going to get very interesting.
Could also be interesting for Australia because Australia, of course, is a large exporter of a lot of critical mineral resources, in addition to coal, of course, but iron ore, etc.
And what if China follows the U.S. rulebook and just says, hey, we're going to invade Australia and arrest the prime minister?
Is that the right term?
I can't keep track.
Sorry.
Arrest all the Australian leaders because we accuse them of crimes.
And then we, China, will run Australia to secure our supply of energy and coal and whatever else.
Would that be okay with Trump?
If China did that?
Might make Australia more free, actually, come to think of it, because it's such a police state.
It's worse than China.
It's like if Australia were run by China, that would be an increase in freedom compared to what Australia has become under its own rule.
Not that I'm advocating a Chinese invasion of Australia, but it might be an improvement.
So anyway, this is where we are, folks.
The world is splitting, bifurcating, as I say, East versus West.
And Trump is drawing the battle lines, marking the territory, saying we, America, we're going to control everything in the Western Hemisphere, and we're going to do it by force.
We're going to use our military.
We're going to do whatever we have to do to control North and South America and Greenland and everything else in between.
So that's the new Trump doctrine.
So there you go.
You could argue whether that's good or bad for America.
It could be in America's interests, actually.
Arguably, some of these actions are in America's interest, but they are still nevertheless lawless.
And there will be long-term consequences for America's lawlessness under Trump and what he's doing right now.
So some things to think about.
But thank you for listening.
I'm Mike Adams here of brighteon.com and brighteon.ai.
Check out all of our AI tools at brighteon.ai.
And you can follow my work at naturalnews.com as well.
And thank you for listening.
And God bless America.
I mean, I want America back, is the reason I say that.
I want America back because I feel like we've lost America.
So let's hope we can get it back.
And to do that, we have to bring back the rule of law.
And that's so far that's not happening.
So we'll see where this goes.
Take care.
Just over the years, the war in Syria and like U.S. intervention, it was clear for a long time that the U.S. was on the side of Al-Qaeda.
That's something that Jake Sullivan told.
But the fact that this war ended with the literal leader of Al-Qaeda taking over, he's claimed that he cut ties with Al-Qaeda and that he's changed.
And then being welcomed in the Oval Office in the White House.
And Trump, like the way he was fraying cologne on him.
And he says, oh, he's great.
He's had a strong past.
You know, he's a good looking guy like the way it's just, man, does he not realize what kind of company he's keeping here?
Welcome to today's interview here on Brighteon.com.
I'm Mike Adams.
And as we are into now 2026, straight ahead, is it going to be the year of war or the year of peace?
And of course, here at Brighteon, we are always praying for peace.
And yet we are faced with a reality that our leaders and other leaders around the world, especially European leaders, in Europe, they're praying for war.
I mean, clearly, I mean, the leaders, not the people, but the leaders.
And I couldn't think of a better guest to have on today than the news editor of anti-war.com, Dave DeCamp, who is an extraordinary voice for peace and reason.
And he's got a lot to share with us here today.
It's the first time he's been on the show.
Hopefully not the last, because I really appreciate his work.
Welcome, Dave DeCamp, here.
It's an honor to have you on today.
Yeah, thanks so much for having me.
I really appreciate it.
Well, thank you for taking the time.
You're a busy man.
You do a lot of work.
But start with that big question about 2026.
Do you think it's going to be a year of escalating conflicts, or will there be some resolution of the current conflicts or maybe a combination?
Unfortunately, right now, all signs point to escalation, especially with everything the U.S. is involved in.
I mean, at the end of the year here, we've seen new U.S. missile strikes in Nigeria now.
And there's this report, and Trump claims that the CIA launched a drone strike inside Venezuela.
And now we have the Russia-Ukraine negotiations.
But the things that Ukraine is asking for and the things that the U.S. is apparently willing to give them, like a NATO-style security guarantee, and apparently they're talking about deploying troops to Ukraine.
I mean, Russia is never going to go for these things.
So unfortunately, that war seems like it's going to continue.
And then it looks like we're in store for more escalation in the Middle East, another potential war with Iran.
So unfortunately, I wish I had a better answer, but to me, everything just looks like it's going to really heat up.
Well, you are a keen observer of these issues, and I think your assessment is correct, but this is very disturbing to a lot of the Trump-supporting base in America because Trump campaigned on peace.
In fact, at one point during his campaigning, he said that he would end the Russia-Ukraine conflict in one day.
That was 300-plus days ago, I think, or something in that neighborhood.
So what do you make of this?
And there seems to be almost a civil war inside the conservative movement about pro-war versus anti-war.
Yeah, it's an issue that's that's not going away either.
I mean, it seems like the big split, you know, that we see among kind of media personalities.
It's really between the Israel first, you know, people who put Israel essentially over the U.S. against people who are starting to become critical of Israel.
I mean, you see people like with Tucker Carlson.
I mean, even Steve Bannon now has been critical of Israel.
He was always very pro-Israel.
And the fact is that they're dealing kind of with the reality.
I know in Tucker's case, it seems like he has, you know, he was awakened to the evil that Israel is committing, especially in Gaza.
So that's an issue, you know, the conservative movement in the U.S., the Republican Party, is really going to have to deal with.
Because if you look at the polls, it's really a generational split.
I forget the numbers, but there was a poll recently, like the majority of Republican voters under 40 don't want anything to do with Israel at this point.
And then the Democrats are like 80% against continued support for Israel, correct?
Or something in that neighborhood?
Yeah, yeah.
On the Democrat side, the numbers are way up there.
And, you know, we saw Kamala Harris didn't face that reality when she attempted to run for president.
You know, she just doubled down on being pro-Israel.
And I think that was a big part of her defeat, obviously other reasons.
So this is something, yeah.
And will the Democrats face this as well?
I think we kind of see the narrative on that side.
They kind of focus all their criticism on Netanyahu and his government rather than kind of the whole U.S.-Israel relationship.
But this is one thing that is concerning because B.B. Netanyahu, he pays very close attention to politics in the U.S. He's very involved.
He reads American media every day.
You know, he probably sees this Trump administration as his last chance to get his big war, you know, with Iran to continue expanding in the region.
And, you know, and we talk about these divisions on the right, unfortunately, with Trump.
I mean, the display that he put on yesterday with Netanyahu shows that he's not changing his position on Israel.
So it's going to be a long time before this translates into like change at the policy level, you know, both in Congress and in the administration.
I do think, though, this election cycle, we're starting to see already some people trying to run for office as Republicans and are running on an anti-aid to Israel platform, which is significant.
That's what Netanyahu sees all these developments.
And, you know, I think it might make him try to move quicker on some of his designs.
Well, that brings up an interesting question for you.
How much of a liability in the midterms, less than a year away now, how much of a liability will Trump's loyalty to Netanyahu and Israel's ongoing war machine, how much of a liability will that be to GOP candidates in the midterms, in your opinion?
I mean, I think it's going to be a factor.
You know, I think we're probably going to see the GOP get beat up pretty bad in these midterms, which, you know, generally happens when the ruling party, you know, they have the election.
They usually don't do too well because then they get kind of blamed for everybody's economic conditions and everything.
But there's something else happening here.
Like, you know, because I know a lot of people who voted for Trump who weren't really like MAGA people or Trump people, but when faced with the two candidates, Trump did seem like the more reasonable one and the one less likely to get us involved in more conflicts and everything.
But we've seen the opposite with him.
I mean, he's really escalating things everywhere.
And so I think a lot of people that would vote Republican or did vote Republican when they voted for Trump are either going to stay home and then, of course, he'll have other people vote Democrat.
So I think it's going to be, you know, it's tough to rank it like on the list of issues, but I think it's up there.
I mean, especially just what people have seen over the past two years in Gaza, you know, the atrocities committed for all the world to see and to just see Trump, I mean, he's hosted Netanyahu five times this year.
That's extraordinary.
Yeah.
And again, yesterday, if you watched that press conference, just heaping praise on him, he said, oh, that Israel's helping the people of Gaza.
I mean, you see that stuff.
It's just really sad.
I want America to do well, and I want our president, whoever he or she is, to succeed.
But I can't help but notice that Trump loves to surround himself with some of the worst criminals against humanity.
And he brings like the more people you've slaughtered, the closer you get to the Oval Office.
It's crazy to me.
But those are my opinions, obviously.
But what do you make of it?
I mean, can't Trump see that the American people don't want him to cozy up with people like Bill Gates or Andrew Burla from Pfizer or Netanyahu at the top of that list?
Why can't he see that?
Yeah, I don't know.
I mean, he also hosted Ahmed Al-Sharra at the Oval Office, who formerly known as Mohammed Abu Al-Jalani, which was his al-Qaeda name because he was literally the founder of Al-Qaeda in Syria.
He fought against the U.S. in Iraq.
I mean, this is, and he, you know, just over the years, the war in Syria and like U.S. intervention, it was clear for a long time that the U.S. was on the side of Al-Qaeda.
That's something that Jake Sullivan told Hillary Clinton back in an email, I think, in 2012 that was released by Wikileaks.
But the fact that this war ended with the literal leader of Al-Qaeda taking over, he's claimed that he cut ties with Al-Qaeda and that he's changed.
And then being welcomed in the Oval Office in the White House, I mean, it's really kind of surreal to see.
And Trump, like the way he, he was spraying cologne on him, you know, he wrote him a nice, like a handwritten note.
And he says, oh, he's great.
He's had a strong past.
You know, he's a good-looking guy.
Like the way it's just, man.
So, you know, I don't know what it is, you know, about those other people you mentioned too.
Like, does he not realize what kind of company he's keeping here?
Yeah, and same thing with the.
And he calls Peter Schiff a jerk for pointing out that there's inflation.
It's like, no, you know, you should listen to Peter Schiff on economic policy.
And that's just my opinion on, you know, economics, et cetera.
But this is disturbing for a lot of people to watch.
And I think you're correct to point out that the GOP could be in trouble in the midterms.
But that leads me to my next question, which is about Iran.
So Trump is now talking tough about striking Iran again, even though six months ago, he told us that we completely destroyed Iran's nuclear enrichment capabilities by bombing Fordot facility, et cetera, with those, you know, the cluster, the super bombs, whatever they were called.
So were we lied to then?
Or how does Iran now suddenly pose a new nuclear threat in just six months?
Yeah, well, we were lied to about the reason for that war.
It wasn't about their nuclear program.
You know, Israel's goal was to either collapse the regime or basically take out their ability to hit Israel, to pose any kind of threat to Israel.
And that war ended in 12 days because Iran's missiles were able to make it through and strike Israel in a way that we've never really seen Israel get hit before.
And Trump ended it by bombing the nuclear facilities.
But they're always going to find another reason, another excuse to go to war here.
And now the new one is, and what Trump said yesterday is, oh, yeah, if they continue their missile program, then we're going to hit, you know, we're going to hit them.
We're going to knock the hell out of them.
And that's never been the pretext for a potential U.S. war with Iran.
You know, the idea that Iran's going to get rid of their missiles is just absurd.
I mean, it's their only way to defend or deter Israel and the U.S.
And if there is another war, you know, there's a, you know, we could see some real American casualties because if you remember during that 12-day war, it started with Israel's big attack, which happened while the U.S. and Israel and Iran were supposed to be holding nuclear negotiations.
Israel launched this major attack.
It involved airstrikes, sabotage, you know, covert attacks on the ground.
The Mossad has a lot of assets in Iran and really heavy airstrikes throughout the whole 12 days.
And they killed over a thousand Iranians.
And then the U.S. came in and bombed the nuclear facilities.
And then Iran responded to that by telling the U.S. that they were going to fire missiles at their base in Qatar.
So the U.S. was able to get troops out of there and respond with Patriot missiles and basically intercept all of them.
It looks like one radar was destroyed or something.
Well, if Iran doesn't, you know, if there's another war, there's a very good chance Iran's not going to do that, that they're going to try to really hit American bases.
And we could really see some Americans get hurt or killed.
And then, you know, the attitude in DC now is if any American gets hurt or killed in the Middle East, the answer isn't what Reagan did back in the 1980s when hundreds of U.S. Marines were killed in Beirut.
He got them out of there.
He pulled them out.
The answer is, oh, we got to escalate.
It's always like, okay, now we're going to increase our, you know, send more troops and drop more bombs.
Yeah.
Well, I'm sorry to interrupt.
I share your concern.
And from my point of view, it seems like Israel or Netanyahu is managing to wrangle the U.S. into another conflict in the Middle East to defeat another enemy of Israel, in this case, Iran, which is, I think, number seven on that famous list of seven.
I believe it is.
But I want to bring people's attention to this map of the Arabian Sea here.
And David, love your commentary.
Let me just set it up here.
But folks, notice the geography because this determines so many things.
The narrow point at the southern portion of Iran there, that's the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant portion of the world's energy supply, including LNG, flows.
And Iran's missiles that you were just talking about, Dave, Iran's missiles are developing new capabilities in terms of long-range strike capability of U.S. naval vessels in the Arabian Sea, potentially, right?
So we're not talking about just threatening Israel, but also threatening U.S. naval power and projection of power through this area, which affects ultimately the Suez Canal through the Red Sea as well.
So can you give us your interpretation of why all that matters?
Yeah, well, one of the things that Iran threatened to do during the war, which they didn't end up doing, was closing the Strait of Hormuz, which would really impact kind of the global energy market.
I mean, in a really big way.
But if you look at that map, you see all those Gulf countries, the Gulf Arab countries, where, you know, Qatar is right there, Bahrain, which is the home of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet.
There's also U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia.
You know, these are all U.S. bases and there's U.S. bases in Iraq still and Syria.
And these are all potential targets.
I mean, there's at least, you know, 10,000 American troops in range of these missiles.
And, you know, the U.S. has good air defenses, but they can't intercept every missile as we saw during the 12-day war.
And so, you know, there's a real risk here.
And of course, U.S. naval assets in the region, as he said as well, could be hit.
So in your assessment, what kind of attack on Iran is Trump likely to pursue?
Will it be another wave of a few stealth bombers and then just a declaration of success?
Because that worked last summer.
Yeah, I mean, it's tough to say, you know, because he's talking about their missiles now.
He also said if they do anything to rebuild their nuclear program, then we're going to take them out immediately.
You know, I would guess we would probably see it start with Israel taking the lead.
But the thing that's important for people to understand is, you know, throughout the whole 12 days, the U.S. was involved in the war directly by intercepting missiles.
You know, that is direct military involvement and also refueling Israeli jets and probably providing some sort of intelligence.
So I would guess it would kind of start something like that, like, you know, Israeli jets doing most of the bombing.
And maybe they would find some targets that they would want the U.S. to hit eventually.
But Trump would try to kind of keep like a degree of separation maybe from it.
You know, I don't, I don't know.
It's Trump, even though Trump is, you know, really seems to be willing to go along with this.
I do still think he wouldn't want a long drawn out war.
Right.
And, you know, from Iran's perspective, that's the thing here is that like Trump seems to think, oh, we could hit Iran really hard and they're not really going to do anything about it.
So we could go in and out.
So Iran's going to have to kind of dispel, you know, from their perspective, they're going to want to dispel that notion that they can launch these wars every six months, every year, or whatever.
Right.
So that's, you know, the real risk.
Well, and my perception, and I'd love your commentary on this, is that Israel can't survive another 12 days of Iranian missiles, especially those missiles have been restored and in some cases upgraded.
I've seen releases of enhanced missile payload capacities as well as range.
And the other thing is, I'm explaining this just for our audience.
I know you know this, Dave, but when Israel is striking Iran from its aircraft, those on board missiles launched from the aircraft are much smaller in terms of payload capabilities or warhead capabilities compared to Iran's land based missiles that are carrying much more aggressive payloads.
And clearly have hypersonic reentry capabilities with evasive maneuvers that are largely...
nullifying the so-called Iron Dome.
We saw that already.
So isn't Israel just begging to be damaged even worse if they initiate something again?
Yeah, and I think they're hoping that, I mean, I don't know if they would want to get hit, but I think they're banking on U.S. support and that if they do start to get hit hard like that, then they believe that the U.S. would directly intervene.
Because I mean, if the U.S., you know, really, I mean, did some kind of like carpet bombing or something in Iran, they could do some serious damage, you know, using the heavy B-2 bombers that Israel doesn't have.
So I think that's probably part of their, not part of their, I think their whole idea here is to get the U.S. to do like most of the bombing here in Iran.
I see.
But Iran, it's a vast, you know, geographically vast nation, right?
With dispersed missile launchers, lots and lots of decoys, probably tens of thousands of decoy launchers, mountainous terrain around three sides of the country, I believe.
I mean, it seems like you can bomb it till the cows come home and it's not going to stop them.
That's my perception.
But you know more.
What do you say?
Yeah, I mean, I agree with that.
You know, the thing is, is that we don't know how many missiles Iran has.
Because that was kind of the question as the 12-day war was happening.
You know, the question was who's going to run out of missiles or interceptors first?
Nobody really knew.
But, you know, we saw an example of what you're talking about when the U.S. was bombing Yemen earlier this year, starting in March, Trump started this bombing campaign to protect Israel.
They claimed that it was to protect U.S. ships, but the Houthis weren't attacking U.S. ships at the time.
They started bombing them because they said they were going to start enforcing a blockade on Israeli ships again because they were violating the Gaza ceasefire deal.
But anyway, the U.S. bombed them very heavily for about a month and a half, killed over 250 civilians.
I remember that.
And they didn't stop.
And they rolled their missiles right back out and kept going.
But even during the bombing campaign, they were firing missiles at Israel.
They were firing missiles and drones at U.S. warships in the Red Sea.
And that's Yemen.
That's the Houthis.
Iran is a much more powerful Force.
So, yeah, I think you're right.
And again, you know, I really don't know.
Maybe there is more information about this than I know, like the number of Iran's missiles.
And I do believe that they have more of the shorter range ones that could hit U.S. bases right across the Gulf than they have the longer range ones that they need for Israel.
So I think they could really do some damage to U.S. bases.
Do you see that now?
I'm sorry.
I was just going to say, you know, everything Iran has done has shown that they don't want a direct war with the U.S. Because like last time, you know, there was the risk that they would respond to an Israeli attack that's supported by the U.S. by also attacking U.S. bases, but we didn't see that last time.
Maybe we would see that the next time.
Yeah, I agree with you.
I think there was an organized de-escalation between Iran and the U.S. at that time, probably back-channeled, is my guess, right?
But do you think there's a risk of Trump deciding to put boots on the ground with an attempted invasion of Iran?
I know it sounds insane, but we live in insane times.
So what do you think?
I really don't think so.
Like, because as you mentioned, I mean, Iran is a huge country and they would need to really build up a force.
I mean, they would need hundreds of thousands of troops, I would think.
And so I don't really think that that's on the table.
And I don't think that's what Israel even wants.
You know, what they want to see is kind of regime collapse.
They don't care so much about regime change.
They just want to destroy, like, break up the country.
So it could be another Syria or Lebanon where they could bomb them without any, you know, facing any repercussions.
You know, the regime change wars that Americans view as disasters, like Libya, Iraq, Syria, Israel views them as a success because they took out, you know, the, you know, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, these Arab leaders who were hostile to Israel's goals and, you know, commanded a country.
But now they're broken up and very weak.
So that's a success.
So I think Israel's hoping that they could do all this from the air.
Yeah, I think your assessment is correct.
That's what they hope.
And I think history shows us that that's not very successful to achieve.
I mean, doesn't it tend to just harden the domestic support for the current leaders?
Those kinds of stamps?
That's what we saw with the last war.
Yeah.
But, and, you know, I mentioned Libya.
Libya was a different situation because he had all these kind of insurgents on the ground.
You know, we don't really have that in Iran.
So once they took out Qaddafi, then, you know, all hell broke loose.
So yeah, it is kind of a different situation in Iran.
You know, and another thing always to keep in mind here is that Iran, sorry, not Iran.
Israel has nuclear weapons.
Correct.
Right.
And, you know, we've seen there was apparently it was during the war back in, I think, 73, maybe it was before that.
But Israel was looking for U.S. support and they essentially said, well, if you don't help us, we're going to use our nuclear weapons.
And then the U.S. said, okay, all right, we'll send you some stuff.
So that could be a threat here from Israel to the, like, if you don't help us, we're going to drop our nukes.
And that could be, you know, I wouldn't, at this point, what we've seen in Gaza, I would not put it past Israel to use a nuclear weapon.
Good point.
I mean, yeah, they've dropped more conventional explosives on Gaza than all the nuclear weapons ever dropped in war in history, which wasn't that many, but still, you know, if you add up the kilotons, right?
It's more than Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined by far.
Multiples of it that's been dropped on Gaza.
Do you want to comment on that?
Yeah, I was just going to say, you know, and I wouldn't think that they would want to drop a nuclear weapon so close to them, you know, but Iran is a different story.
Good point.
You know.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, I want to ask you about antiwar.com, the website, and now the importance of your site and your message.
You know, in times of peace, it's easy for people to forget how important it is to stand for peace.
But since, well, especially I would say, what, February of 2022, Russia's special military operation, and then after October 7th of 2023 with Israel and Gaza, the voice of you and your colleagues at your site has become really, really, really critical.
Can you talk to our audience about the importance and the mission of antiwar.com and what you hope to achieve?
Yeah, well, I appreciate that.
And so antiwar.com, just a quick history of it.
It was founded back in 1995.
So it's been around for a long time by my boss who still works on it today, Eric Garris and his friend Justin Raimondo, who unfortunately we lost back in 2019, but he was our columnist and kind of the voice of the site.
And they were like lifelong libertarian political activists.
And, you know, at the end of the Cold War, they supported guys like Pat Buchanan, people on the right who wanted to, you know, end the empire after the Cold War, bring close, you know, who wanted to believed in the peace dividend and things like that.
So, but what antiwar.com has essentially become, it is a news source, you know, a source for people, whether they're, you know, anti-war activists who need information or just ordinary Americans who want to be educated, who want to be aware of what their government is doing.
You know, a lot of the stuff we cover gets zero attention from mainstream media, especially the bombing campaign in Somalia.
This is something that the U.S. has bombed Somalia at least 127 times this year.
Wow.
And this is unprecedented.
This is a huge, this is the biggest year ever.
According to the official numbers that have been tracked, it's more than George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden bombed Somalia combined in all their time in office.
And it gets literally zero coverage.
A lot of times, most of the time, it is just me writing it up.
And I'm not working with much information, just what U.S. Africa Command says in a press release and what I can find in Somali media.
So, you know, it's something I think Americans need to be kind of, need to be aware of this, you know, what their government's doing overseas, because it's very easy to be fooled into supporting something like the war in Ukraine.
You know, if you weren't paying attention to what was happening in Ukraine from 2014 and the years following, you know, I see how people kind of fell for the propaganda there that, oh, the U.S. is helping Ukraine when it was doing the furthest thing from that.
So I think it's good for people to just be aware.
And then when it comes to activism and, you know, it's good to be kind of armed with this knowledge.
If you know Dan McAdams, who works with Ron Paul, I think it was him.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I think I've met his.
Yeah, he's a, he's a co-host of the Ron Paul Liberty Report, but he worked for Ron Paul when he was in Congress.
And I think it was him who said this, but I know he used to print out anti-war.com articles and give them to Ron Paul.
It was kind of like his morning briefing.
And he's kind of described us as like the intelligence wing of the anti-war movement.
Like we prepare your daily briefing so you can stay on top of things.
You know, I think we need real, like our country, especially the conservative movement, you know, like we were talking about before we started recording.
I consider myself on the right, even though much of my audience is on the left.
We have a very diverse readership, which is really cool.
But like I feel very out of step with the mainstream conservative movement, though things are changing.
You know, like this whole idea that we need to be waging these wars overseas, that it's somehow necessary and it's something that we just have to be doing when it's really a detriment to our country and well, the well-being of Americans, especially, you know, when you get into the monetary aspect of it and everything and what it takes to maintain this world empire and the, you know, printing all the money and everything.
So yeah, that's what we're, that's the message we're trying to, you know, put, get out there.
Okay, that's that's great.
And I do want to ask you about those things, about what I believe we're in the last chapter of this empire.
And there's a lashing out phase happening, you know, to try to force enforcement around the world.
But I just want to mention again, the website is antiwar.com.
It's a great domain name, very easy to spell.
Everybody can spell it, antiwar.com.
And, you know, we talked about the political right quite a bit here.
I want to talk about the political left for a moment because one of the things that's really important to me, and I was, I was at Ron Paul's birthday party a few months ago when he was in Houston and had a birthday party.
I was invited, myself and a thousand other people, and we had a blast.
And Ron Paul has always been principled in terms of opposing foreign wars.
And that principle is incredibly rare in politics today.
And speaking about the left, during the Bush years and the Gulf War, we saw the political left in America was vehemently anti-war.
And, you know, Bush was bad and evil because he was a warmonger, which also is true.
But they were all anti-war.
And then when it came to Ukraine under Biden, suddenly most of the left was pro-war.
We support this war.
So where are the principles in either the right or the left when it comes to advocating for peace?
Yeah, when it, you know, it's amazing to me how many people on the left kind of went all in on the Ukraine proxy war.
Yeah.
And, you know, in Congress, I mean, we saw like literally no dissent among the progressives in Congress who are, you know, more on the anti-war side than the mainstream Democrats.
They actually did, if I think it was in 2023 or maybe it was 2022, it was around the time that Mark Milley, who is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, said that there should be negotiations or they should start thinking about negotiations to end the war.
And some progressives in Congress wrote a letter to Biden saying maybe we should pursue diplomacy.
And the backlash they got was so bad that they withdrew the letter.
Wow.
Literally, the letter was saying, hey, maybe we should think about diplomacy instead of just continuing this war.
Incredible.
Yeah.
So that was on the you know that in Congress.
And I know, you know, I know plenty of leftists who were opposed to it the whole time, who are, you know, readantiwar.com, people who, whose work we run as well.
But yeah, I mean, you don't find it at all in Congress, this principle.
It's very rare, as you mentioned, Ron Paul.
You know, today we have some people like that, Thomas Massey, I think, would be the closest to Ron Paul that we currently have.
Yes.
And he maintains principled stances no matter who's in power.
And that's why Trump is so angry with him now.
Yeah, they're trying desperately to get rid of him.
And I think his opponent is being funded by pro-Israel money, actually.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I think that's where they that's why they're getting all this money to you know fund these this campaign against him.
Correct.
But yeah, you know, when it comes to the principle, and you know, people, there are just regular people who are, you know, partisan-minded and kind of fall for this stuff and oppose wars.
When I could think of some people on the right Critical of Obama's drone wars, but now that Trump is launching all these airstrikes and drone strikes, they don't, they either don't say anything about it or they just line up to support it.
Yeah.
Well, and we've we've all heard the phrase war is a racket, but I'm not sure that people understand the scale of it.
And I was, I was really struck recently because I'm very active in the AI community.
I'm an AI developer, build language models and apps and so on.
And I was listening to an interview of a former top Google executive named Mo Godat.
And he's since retired from Google, but he writes books about AI and comments on what's happening.
And he said in an interview, I'm paraphrasing, he said, of all the scams you think you know about, there's nothing bigger than money printing for war.
And I'm like, wow, this is coming from a former Google executive, and Google provides technology for war, you know?
But he gets it.
He gets it.
It shocked me.
I mean, the message is spreading, is my point here.
Yeah, yeah.
No, I think it is.
And we're like, I mean, Scott Horton, who's our editorial director and he's written a lot of great books.
His latest book called Provoked is like a textbook on the Ukraine, you know, the lead up to the Ukraine war and what caused it.
But he's on all the big, you know, we're kind of part of the conversation in a way that we haven't been before.
He was recently on with Tucker.
You know, and we're, we're, it does seem like our message is spreading and, you know, becoming more popular.
I do think people, you know, the natural instinct, I think, of any person is to be anti-war.
But the problem is, is that people are so inundated with propaganda in this country.
And, you know, I mean, what you just mentioned, like the biggest racket is money printing for war.
And like the military-industrial complex is so corrupt.
The way, and it's like, it's so obvious, and people have kind of accepted it.
And in some cases, I think we look for like more nefarious or, you know, other causes for war.
But if you look at the war in Ukraine, obviously there's other causes.
Who oversaw dumping all those weapons into Ukraine?
A guy named Lloyd Austin, who was the Secretary of Defense.
And where did he come from?
Oh, yeah, the defense industry.
He was on the board of Raytheon.
Exactly.
That was his last job.
And then he oversees this policy of dumping all these weapons in.
And Raytheon was one of the top, you know, I forget the exact numbers, but Raytheon and Lockheed Martin were like the biggest beneficiaries of that.
And they were getting contracts for weapons that they stopped making years ago because they're dumping so many into Ukraine.
And then, of course, they pay the think tanks, they pay the, you know, that write the papers to say why we need to be in war.
They pay the people who go on TV or the analysts and say why we need to continue the war.
And now that's breaking a bit because of independent media and the decentralization kind of of the internet.
But it's still like, you know, it's just, there's so much money to be made for continuing these wars.
So much that that is, you know, one of the biggest driving factors here.
Okay, so this is so fascinating to talk with you.
I really appreciate you taking the time to join me.
I have so many questions for you.
One of them is about the changing nature of warfare.
War has shifted dramatically in the post-World War II era from the, you know, the aircraft carrier battleship kind of naval projection of power model, you know, blue water navy.
That's the U.S. model.
That model is fading away.
We're seeing the rise of, for example, Iran's missile capabilities.
We're seeing Russia having Oreshnik missiles and also the Kinzal hypersonic missiles.
But there's an economic factor I'd like you to speak to.
Bring up my screen to my producers here.
Here's a story.
A private Chinese company rolls out a Mach 7 hypersonic missile at nearly 90% lower cost.
So China is able to mass produce or is on the verge of mass producing very advanced weapon systems that are more advanced than anything the U.S. has fielded because the U.S. still doesn't have a functioning hypersonic missile, to my knowledge.
And yet, China is able to do it at a fraction of the cost.
We've also seen Russia, for example, producing artillery shells at a fraction of the cost of the West.
So warfare has become an economic supply chain logistics question, I think, more than ever before.
And I'd love your comments about that topic.
Yeah, that's a good thing to bring up because as we mentioned, you know, with this military-industrial complex that we have, you know, there's so much corruption.
Certain companies always get the contracts and they inflate the prices of everything.
Once in a while, you see these stories.
Like, I remember one, it was like a coffee cup in an F-16 or something, costs like $80,000.
Sounds right.
Yeah, our whole system is just, there's just this corruption baked into it.
And we're seeing that, you know, that's interesting about China.
I hadn't seen that story, but we're really seeing that with drones.
Other countries can produce drones like at an incredibly cheap rate.
And I forget the numbers, but I remember when the U.S. was bombing Yemen and the Houthis were firing these drones that were like so cheap for them to make, and we're using million-dollar missiles to intercept them.
And, you know, that is going to, it's really going to change.
It is changing warfare as we see it in Russia and Ukraine.
You know, nearly 100, Ukraine fires like nearly 100 drones into Russia every day.
Russia sends a few hundred into Ukraine.
And we're seeing the future of war.
Like just today and yesterday, China's doing these major military drills around Taiwan in response to the U.S. selling like 11 announcing this huge arms sale for Taiwan.
And, you know, what is the U.S. kind of strategy for Taiwan?
Like the war strategy, if they're going to try to fight China there, it's like aircraft carriers and warships.
Well, China's like they're there, they've been developing a military, those missiles you just mentioned, like with the purpose of blowing those out of the water.
But the U.S. kind of keeps making these big things like this.
And of course, now they're saying, you know, Hag Seth has been big on this, like, you know, advancing the drones and everything.
But yeah, you look at the prices.
I saw someone, what's his name from Anderil, Palmer Lucky?
Someone was giving him a hard time on Twitter about how much his drones are so expensive compared to Chinese ones that are basically the same.
So yeah, that's definitely a factor in all of this.
Well, yeah, and the thing is, the U.S. has to sell treasuries to be able to backstop the printing of more money to pay these inflated prices for weapons.
So the debt market is the thing propping up the war market, right?
Or the war industry.
And you're right, the U.S. spends multiples overspends on very complicated weapons systems.
But isn't it true that what we saw in the Ukraine-Russia conflict, that a lot of these overpriced weapons just don't work?
And we were promised month after month, oh, this is going to be a game changer.
We're going to send in the high Mars.
We're going to send in the low Mars.
We're going to send in the Abrams.
And every time Russia just blew them all up with Iskanders or whatever.
It's like nothing.
Nothing was a game changer.
None of it worked.
Yeah.
And even some of the things like some of the air defenses would be like successful for a little while and then Russia would adapt and figure out how to get past them.
But yeah, I mean, the U.S. has this very expensive and complicated and large military equipment that could really become obsolete, you know, not too far in the future.
I know one thing that the Pentagon has been planning for a war with China is they have developed this idea to create what they call a hellscape of drones in the Taiwan Strait.
The idea would basically be to cover the sky with drones, cover the sea with drones, and send a bunch of underwater drones as well, which is kind of terrifying to think about.
And that's what like a future world war could look like.
It could just be little drones.
Like I think that's probably what it would end up being.
And they could.
But let me bring in this context.
One of the reasons that the U.S. is credited for Allied victory in World War II was because of the strong industrial base that existed in America at that time.
Domestic steel manufacturing, domestic auto manufacturing, conversions to wartime production.
Today, that country is China.
So if this becomes drone warfare, we can't even touch China's output.
Now, I mean, even our naval yards, I know you know this, but our naval yards are less than 1% of China's naval shipyard capacity right now in the U.S.
And our drone manufacturing potential is probably somewhere around 1% of China's.
And then humanoid robots, same story.
China can mass produce.
We cannot mass produce.
We can produce small quantities at very high cost with very late delivery schedules.
Like we sell stuff to Taiwan that's not going to be delivered until 2032.
It's a joke, some of it.
Yeah.
And I mean, I think that's something China with these drills, like as far as I'm aware, I haven't been following the China-Taiwan stuff as much as I used to lately, but I know the Chinese military, they've been putting out footage of them conducting simulated attacks on U.S. high Mars rocket systems because the U.S., we're selling a bunch of them to Taiwan now.
And they've been sending out their bombers with, you know, equipped with their missiles that are designed to take out aircraft carriers.
So they're sending that message like, hey, look at this stuff we have here.
And, you know, I think the idea, and it's interesting, you know, you talk about kind of the left and the right.
The New York Times editorial board, they just put out this like op-ed video where they're saying that the U.S. needs to like double down and invest more in military to get ready for war with China and invest in more advanced equipment.
And, you know, all those things you mentioned, like if we really end up in some kind of war with China, they have so many advantages.
And, you know, how quickly could it turn nuclear as well?
So the fact that they're like preparing for this potential conflict on the face of it is, to me, crazy.
And you see the way that they justified, they say, oh, we have to prepare for war to prevent war.
But we've seen time and time again how that, you know, especially with Ukraine, how that just increases tensions and leads to war.
You look at right now at Taiwan, you have these huge Chinese drills happening, which they said were in direct response to the U.S. selling all these weapons to Taiwan, which they say they need to do for deterrence.
But now we have Chinese missiles being fired.
I don't know if they're actually firing them over Taiwan this time, but I know they did that in some drills recently after Nancy Pelosi went there in 2022.
So you just see the tensions just kind of escalating everywhere.
There's also the issue of the, I want to ask you about the critical mineral resources and China's dominant control over rare earths, which are necessary for industrial or military industry manufacturing.
And I believe January 1st, China is restricting silver exports among other rare earths, strongly restricted.
During the tariff wars that Trump was fighting with China earlier in 2025, we saw Ford temporarily shut down its production lines because of a lack of neodymium for the magnet motors completely dependent on China.
But the military production is dependent on a global supply of things like silver or tungsten or what have you.
And China dominates that area too.
And if China decides to cut us off, we can't make the weapons to fight China.
And China is not dumb enough to not realize that, you know?
Yeah.
Yeah.
And I think this is something Trump has realized.
You know, especially in recent months, it seems like he's been trying to be very conciliatory toward China and realizing that, you know, we're going to have to work with them in some way.
And, you know, we've seen kind of there's over the recent years a lot of delusional China hawks who say, you know, we need complete decoupling immediately.
We got to cut off China.
Like the American economy or our military industrial abilities can survive just cutting things off with China right away.
Yeah, that's a strategy.
Yeah, yeah, it really is.
You know, for me, it seemed like this administration was going to tone things down with China.
I think in some ways they have.
But then we just saw this huge arm sale to Taiwan.
It's like $11 billion that they approved in one day.
But see, my theory on that, and I used to live in Taiwan, by the way, and I speak conversational Mandarin.
And my understanding of that issue from, because I had contacts in the aerospace industry in Taiwan when I lived there because I was teaching them English.
But my understanding is that Taiwan is forced to make these purchases and it's a handout to the U.S. military companies.
So it's a political favor.
Taiwan doesn't necessarily always want to buy these things because they know it's not worth it, but they're kind of forced to do this as a means of paying fealty to the United States leadership.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, I think it does.
Yeah, that's interesting to hear, especially with this current administration, because that was kind of the message when they came in.
I don't know if you know who Elbridge Colby is.
He's Trump's policy chief at the Pentagon.
Not familiar.
But he's a real China hawk.
His whole thing is that the U.S. should kind of scale back in the Middle East and in Ukraine and just focus all on Taiwan.
But he's been saying, you know, he was in the first administration and then in between administrations, he published a book and he was really talked about this stuff a lot.
And his whole thing was Taiwan needs to step up, increase its military spending, or it's not going to be worth it.
We're not going to be able to defend them.
And so, and then we saw this Trump administration come in and Joe Biden started giving them military aid for the first time since they cut relations with Taiwan back in when they opened up with China.
And Trump apparently blocked one of those military aid packages because they're trying to get Taiwan to spend their own money.
So it seems to track with that.
And then we see, again, this huge series of arms sales that they just approved.
And I think it's clear that it is like them just trying to keep Trump happy.
Yeah, that's interesting.
And also, there's a very strong geopolitical movement within Taiwan, the people there, who I'm in contact with constantly, that more and more they feel like, and this is true across both of the major political parties there, that they are hurting in the world through their alliance with the West.
And that they need access to trading markets as BRICS currencies rise up and as China, Russia, Iran, Brazil.
India, etc.
That that's the marketplace that that Taiwan needs to tap into and the only way to do that is to reunify, you know, economically with China.
I'm hearing more and more of that.
I didn't hear that a decade ago, but I'm hearing it now a lot.
Yeah, that's interesting.
And maybe it's, you know, they see what happens to a U.S. ally, you know, like Ukraine.
Yeah, I know one thing that, you know, because you hear this, the China hawks talk about, oh, nobody in Taiwan wants reunification.
And I forget the numbers, but I know the polls always show that the people in Taiwan just want to maintain the status quo.
You know, they don't want to rock the boat either way, it seems like, which people, Americans don't seem to understand.
Kind of the situation, like the nuances of the one China policy and everything.
Well, and the people of Taiwan don't want to be sacrificed in a proxy war like the people of Ukraine.
That's the key issue.
You know, the Ukraine lesson has taught Taiwanese what happens when you get wrangled into a war with a major world power.
You get destroyed and the U.S. just sends your men off to die.
Yeah.
It's disgusting.
And Lindsey Graham says that they'll fight to the last one of you.
Right, exactly.
Exactly.
But, you know, just like Ukraine and Russia, I mean, the eastern half of Ukraine is Russia, you know, historically, culturally, Russia.
They speak Russian.
Taiwan and China, they're all Chinese.
They're exactly the same genetic, ethnic people with the same shared history.
They speak essentially the same language, you know, simplified Chinese versus traditional Chinese written a little differently with the characters.
But it's similar to the Russian situation.
It's the same culture.
They don't want to fight each other.
Yeah.
And I know like the Kuomintang, I mean, their official position is that they are China.
Not that they're Taiwan.
You know, you have the DPP now.
They seem to be pretty independence-minded.
But the other major political party is like, you know, very Chinese and proud to be Chinese.
Obviously, they have different ideas than the ruling power in Beijing.
But, you know, as you said, they're Chinese people.
Right.
Right.
Well, as always, you know, we are praying for a peaceful resolution.
And we're coming up on the hour with you here.
I'd like to get your final thoughts on the, I want you to give us a big picture view of how war causes poverty and suffering globally.
And there would be a global peace dividend if we could get out of this war racket, which only benefits certain specific parties, some of which we've named here in this interview.
But talk to us about the global cost of war and the benefit of peace to everybody on this planet.
Yeah, well, I would say, you know, when it comes to Americans, the biggest thing that's really ripped us off over the past few decades is the fact that we don't have real money and inflation.
And that is necessary for propping up the war machine and continuing the empire, this ability to print unlimited money, bailouts and everything.
But this, you know, now we officially have a trillion dollar military budget.
It's been over, you know, the real cost has been well over a trillion for years, but now it's official 2026.
Trump gets his trillion-dollar budget.
And this is how we pay for all this stuff.
And then just in general, I mean, globally, you know, it's interesting what led me kind of into this path of working for anti-war.com.
I kind of chalk it up to, I grew up, I was raised Catholic.
I'm Catholic now.
For many years, I was away from the church, but that's another story.
But I kind of had this idea because we were growing up to kind of support charities and think about people overseas who were suffering and kind of trying to figure out how to alleviate suffering around the world.
I came to the conclusion that our government, the U.S. Empire, is responsible for a lot of this.
A lot of these problems are caused by U.S. intervention, you know, sometimes trying to do the right thing, other times doing nefarious things in the name of doing good.
And, you know, when it comes to the actions that the U.S. government must take, you see people calling for humanitarian interventions a lot now, especially in Nigeria.
But there's just so many places where the U.S. can scale back, especially when it comes to support for Israel, where we can really improve things for people.
Yeah, I concur with what you just said there.
And I think historically the British Empire caused untold suffering all over the world and continues to do so even right now with Ukraine, Russia.
But the U.S. Empire has been playing that role very prominently since the end of World War II with assassinations, economic hitman scenarios, right?
The bombings.
And now tariff warfare is, you can add that to the list because tariff warfare has real consequences.
Real families are impacted that are laid off in these factories in other countries that were planning on shipping textiles or whatever to the U.S. or even my own company.
We buy turmeric from India, just ground turmeric root because it's a superfood.
And then boom, it's now 50% tariff.
So the turmeric farmers in India who have nothing to do with war, just I'm farming turmeric roots and now all of a sudden I can't pay my family enough money to eat.
You know, these are the impacts and they're real.
Yeah.
No, go ahead.
Your final comments as we wrap this up or anything else you want to add?
Yeah, I was just going to add an economic sanctions.
You know, the U.S. government has this policy that if there's a government in power that they don't like, they'll try to destroy their economy.
And in many cases, they're successful.
And, you know, these are, you talk about this is, again, you could talk about this for a long time, but, you know, I think about when Joe Biden started imposing sanctions on Russia after the invasion, he would go on TV and say, we're turning the ruble into rubble, which of course didn't happen.
But the idea of the sanctions, they say, is to put pressure on the people so they rise up against the government.
So it is designed to hurt the people.
But imagine if you're in Russia and you see the leader of a foreign country bragging about trying to destroy your currency and destroy your economy.
Like you think that's going to make you side with them.
And you see it in Cuba.
I mean, Cuba's been under sanctions for what, 60 years now under an embargo.
Has it changed the government in Cuba?
No.
Has it hurt the people?
Yes.
That's about the only achievement that the sanctions and embargo have had.
And, you know, it's just, it's a thing that needs to be completely done away with this idea that we have the right to destroy another country's economy because we don't like their government.
Well, and adding on to what you just said, which is really important, that, you know, Trump thinks that he can order India to not buy oil from Russia or that he can order China to not buy energy from Russia.
You know, who made Trump God that he gets to determine who can buy and sell what to which other country that has nothing to do with us?
You know, and we hear from Lindsey Graham insane things.
Oh, we're not going to let India fund Russia's war machine.
Well, guess what?
The world's going to build an alternative settlement system, the BRICS system, partially gold-backed settlement of trade, not a currency, but a settlement system, to where the U.S. can't order them around anymore.
And isn't that the cost of abusing that privilege of sanctioning everybody?
The rest of the world just says, well, we'll build our own system.
Yeah.
And then they use this to justify more aggression against these countries.
Like you see this with Venezuela right now.
They're really pushing, and apparently there's been a CIA drone strike there.
But they say, oh, Venezuela has ties with Iran.
It's like, well, why do they have why are they trading with Iran?
Because they're both under U.S. sanctions.
They actually started trading under the first administration gas for gold.
Iran was sending gas to Venezuela and Venezuela was sending gold.
And then the U.S. stole some of their shipments of gas.
And I think that stopped.
But, you know, this idea, like, and then they act surprised.
They're like shocked that China and Russia are closer now when they're both targeted in this way.
Right.
Right.
Or Trump says, if you participate in BRICS, we're going to punish you with an extra 10% tariff on top of everything else.
Well, that only encourages countries to move to BRICS more quickly.
I mean, a lot of these tactics are not well thought out, in my opinion.
Yeah.
And doesn't it seem so obvious too?
It does.
But I guess we're entering the idiocracy stage of the empire right now, where it's just about whatever sound bites will fly on TV news, but rationality is out the window.
Nevertheless, I really appreciate your time and your conversation and your work at antiwar.com.
Just last chances.
Anything else you want to tell people about the website or how they can follow you and your work?
Oh, your X handle.
Give that out.
Yeah, I'm on X at DeCamp Dave is my handle there.
And I also have a show.
I have a daily podcast, YouTube show where I basically go over the news stories that I write up each day.
It's about 20 to 30 minutes, kind of just an update on the U.S. foreign policy news.
It's called Anti-War News with Dave DeCamp.
You can listen to the podcast or it's on YouTube, Rumble, Odyssey, other places where I post the video.
That's great.
It's out there.
Okay, anti-war news with Dave DeCamp.
Well, we welcome you on all our platforms and appreciate what you're doing and your voice.
And we hope that you are able to reach more and more people with this message.
And maybe humanity has a future if we could stop all the, you know, all the warmongering.
If this thing goes nuclear, we're all in trouble.
That's for sure.
That's right.
Yeah.
But thanks for joining me today.
It's been a pleasure.
Yeah, thanks so much for having me.
I really appreciate it.
You too.
All right.
Take care.
There you go, folks.
Dave DeCamp there with antiwar.com.
Check out the website and also we spiderantiwar.com headlines at censored.news, which is our site that spiders, you know, 80 plus websites, typically sites that are heavily censored, obviously.
But check out antiwar.com directly.
You can follow Dave DeCamp at DecampDave.
That's his handle on X.
And feel free to repost this interview on other channels as well.
And whatever you do in 2026, join us in calling for peace.
And let's get us out of all these international conflicts and bombings and sanctions.
And let's focus on trade as a pathway to peace.
Let's make America great again by making great products and ideas and innovation and then trading with the rest of the world so that everybody benefits instead of everybody dying under the rubble of bombed out buildings, okay?
How's that sound for 2026?
Thank you for watching today.
I'm Mike Adams here of Brighteon.com.
Take care.
Stock up on the long-term storable Ranger Bucket Set.
536 servings of clean organic superfoods for your survival pantry.