All Episodes
Previous Next
July 17, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:17
July 17, 2006, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, we're going to need a gorbasm update today, Mr. Mamon.
Gorbachev was on Good Morning America today.
Yeah, we have the audio soundbites of that.
It's on there with Infobabe anchorette Diane Sawyer.
Anyway, greetings to you, thrill seekers, music lovers, conversationalists all across the fruited plane.
The award-winning Rush Limbaugh program on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
I'm America's real anchorman, a highly trained broadcast specialist, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
And I promise, and we'll get to your phone calls here in the next segment.
I know people have been on hold here since the program began.
One more story here on the upheaval in the Arab world over all that's going on in southern Lebanon with Hezbollah and Israel.
The battle between Israel and the Lebanese militia, Hezbollah, raging, key Arab governments have taken the rare step of blaming Hezbollah, underscoring in part their growing fear of influence by the group's main sponsor, Iran.
Saudi Arabia with Jordan, Egypt, and several Persian Gulf states chastised Hezbollah for unexpected, inappropriate, and irresponsible acts.
At an Emergency Arab League summit meeting in Cairo on Saturday, the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, said of Hezbollah's attacks on Israel, these acts will pull the whole region back to years ago.
We simply can't accept them.
Prince Faisal spoke at the closed-door meeting, but his words are reported to journalists by other delegates.
The meeting ended with participants asserting that the Middle East peace process had failed.
Huh, really.
And I requested help from the United Nations Security Council, which is the architect of all the failed peace processes.
It is nearly unheard of for Arab officials to chastise an Arab group engaged in conflict with Israel, especially as images of destruction by Israeli warplanes are beamed into Arab living rooms.
Normally, under such circumstances, Arabs are not blamed, and condemnations of Israel are routine, but the willingness of these governments to defy public opinion in their own countries underscores a shift that is prompted by the growing influence of Iran and Shiite Muslims in Iraq and across the region, the way some officials see it.
Israel is the devil they know, but Iran is the growing threat.
There is a screw of thought led by the Saudis that believes that Hezbollah is a source of trouble, a protégé of Iran, but also a political instrument in the hands of Iran.
This school says we should not play into the hands of Iran, which has its own agenda by sympathizing or supporting Hezbollah fighting against the Israelis.
Well, what would be, Mr. Snerdley, you tell me, what would Iran's agenda be here?
What could they possibly want that they don't have?
What is it that Iran wants?
No, no, no, that's, well, no, that's, I think they could, Mr. Snerdley said Iran wants a war.
I don't think they really do.
I think they're content to have proxies fight the war for them.
What they want is Iraq.
What they want is Syria.
What they want is Lebanon, and they want the Saudi oil fields.
That's what Iran wants to be.
I told you the other day, imagine a map of the Middle East where every country today says Iran.
and then there's Israel.
Now, if they had their brothers, there wouldn't be any Israel either.
But the reason the United Arab Emirates and the Saudis Qatar, Qatar, whatever that they're they're they're worried about this.
As I told you in the previous hour, this is you know, the Iranians are not Arabs.
They are Persians.
Well, Sturdley is asking me if I don't think that Iran really wants to draw us into a conflict with them.
In other words, you're saying you think Iran wants war with the United States.
Well, of course, if they think we're going to cut and run and that we won't do it, then they don't want a war with us.
If they actually thought that we would not cut and run, I don't think they want a war with us.
I don't think Iran wants that at all.
I think they think if they can get what they want without having a war, that that would be cool.
And that's why they're employing this strategy with trying to kick us out of Iraq and to try to make and render Israel impotent and so forth.
This leader, you know, I'm going to tell you a little story.
I'll just tell you one thing.
You know, the Friday before my infamous trip to the Dominican, I met with, as I told you, I met with President Bush in the Oval Office 20 minutes.
And I asked him about this guy.
And I, you know, I understood that I'm going to get surface-level answers here.
I can just tell you what he said.
He said, we don't know yet who this guy really is and what he's really, is he really a lunatic or not?
He's trying to make us think he's a lunatic.
All this talk about blowing Israel off the map and this, and Bush even talked about the 12th Imam.
Bush, he's all this talk about the 12th Imam.
He's out there talking about he's presiding over the end of the world as we know it today.
And we don't know if he's real or not.
We're trying to get boots on the ground and get some accurate intelligence about it.
Now, I didn't expect to be given a briefing as though I'm a member of the administration when I'm asking the questions, but I can only tell you what he said.
But it is a good question, and it is an interesting answer.
Is this guy really the lunatic that he's portraying himself to be?
After all, it probably helps this guy if everybody thinks he is a lunatic.
I don't know what he's going to do next.
If he says he's going to blow Israel off the map, he might actually do it.
He wants the Saudi oil fields, he may actually go in there and try to get them.
If he believes that he's the guy that is here on earth at this point in time to preside over the arrival of the 12th Imam and the wiping out of Western civilization and culture, which is what he's saying he is, if he really believes that, okay, you got to, well, how do we deal with lunatics?
You don't deal with them rationally.
You put them in some institution and let Nurse Ratchet have at him.
We can't do that with this guy.
The closest we have to a Nurse Ratchet's Hillary.
And I don't know that she's up for this.
And I don't know that we could get Ahmadinejad to get in a room with her.
So that option is sort of cut off from us.
But if he's smart like a fox, that's another thing.
That is why, with Israel opening up this Western front against Hezbollah and surrounding and basically cutting them off, if we did the same thing in Iran, I think you'd have a profound impact there.
You don't need to occupy the country.
It's a restive population in Iran.
It doesn't like this mullah-dominated leadership over there.
And the key is always how to spark the revolt and support them when that happens.
You've heard a lot about Newt and his proclamation that we're in World War III.
Saw him in the press yesterday with Tim Russert, and this is his comment.
This is all the context in the comments.
Iran-Syria-Hamas-Hezbollah alliance, a war in Iraq funded largely from Saudi Arabia and supplied largely from Syria and Iran.
The British Home Secretary saying that there are 20 terrorist groups with 1,200 terrorists in Britain, seven people in Miami videotaped pledging allegiance to Al-Qaeda, and 18 people in Canada being picked up with twice the explosives that were used in Oklahoma City with an explicit threat to bomb the Canadian parliament and saying they'd like to behead the Canadian Prime Minister.
In New York City, reports that in three different countries people were plotting to destroy the tunnels of New York.
We're in the early stages of what I would describe as the Third World War.
This is World War III.
I believe if you take all the countries I just listed that you've been covering, put them on a map, look at all the different connectivity, you'd have to say to yourself, this is in fact World War III.
Well, I haven't agree, but been saying this since 9-11.
I think if you want to say that whatever you want to call World War III began, it began then.
And as always, the problem is, so we're a very prosperous country, and we have a lot of affluence, and we have a lot of people with a lot of time on their hands.
We've got a lot of people living really, really good lives, and they don't want to think that they're in a war, and they don't want to get up in the morning thinking that we are in a war.
Once you admit that, then you have a commitment to dealing with it.
And then you've got the left.
It doesn't want to, you know, they're invested in our defeat in all this because they're such a bunch of skullduggins that they don't understand the threat posed to them.
You know, you can't, you have to factor them in because they're there, but you can't rely on them.
So it is a serious time, and that's the point there of Newt's context.
All right, quick timeout.
We'll come back and get to you on the phones.
By the way, folks, I misspoke.
Gorbachev was on Good Morning America last Tuesday, was not on yesterday.
We still have the sound bites.
But to the phones, we go to Bill in Columbus, Ohio.
You're up first.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
What a pleasure this is.
And thanks and Adam Dittos from the swing state of Ohio.
Thank you, sir.
I think Israel should go ahead and go directly after Iran.
They have the technology with their bunker busters, bombs.
They could take out their nuclear capacity, eliminate it.
They've got the technology.
They don't need anybody's approval.
The threat is coming directly from Iran toward Israel.
They want to eliminate them from the face of the earth.
Let them go ahead and take that initiative.
Obviously, Iran is behind everything that Hezbollah is doing.
You make that move.
That eliminates the United States having to talk to them about, you know, stop your military buildup or your nuclear buildup.
Let Israel take care of it.
They've got the technology.
Well, I addressed this in the first hour.
I don't think Israel can deal with Iran without help.
It's too far away to send ground troops in for Israel.
They haven't even sent ground troops into Lebanon yet, not permanently.
I mean, a little cross-border show of force, then I think they pulled them back.
I'm not even certain about that, but they have not committed ground troops to southern Lebanon yet.
We're all looking for that, by the way.
But they're occupied with Hezbollah right now.
They've opened up this Western front and they're surrounding Hezbollah.
But Israel, you talk about the technology to bomb the nuclear sites.
They may have it, but they don't have the technology to get back.
Their planes can get there, but they wouldn't be able to get back.
And the refueling, I'm not actually sure about why that's not a fact.
I don't know if they've got tankers or not.
They may not have tankers for mid-air refuel.
But even if they do, it would be a risky thing because That's a long geographic area to cover.
We could be helping them.
We could be doing to Iran what Israel's doing to Lebanon right now.
And it would distract them and it would show them that they're playing for keeps.
One of the things I just heard in the break was that Iran has sent some foreign minister.
Iran has a foreign minister.
That sounds too civilized for this bunch.
But okay, they've got a foreign minister.
They sent him up apparently to Damascus.
And he's there trying to broker a ceasefire and a pullback.
Now, don't be fooled by that.
When it's your turn to watch the news and you hear this, I think what that's all about is Iran trying to do two things.
Iran's trying to demonstrate that they can be good guys.
We don't want this war.
We don't want it as to, which is BS because they are funding Hamas.
Well, Hezbollah, they may, in fact, not just funding them, giving them their orders.
They want to demonstrate their power in the region.
They want to show that if there's going to be a ceasefire, they're the ones that can make it happen.
And that's supposed to get them respect, you'll see, as a power in the region.
And have they said that?
Are they thinking?
Okay, yesterday, okay, yesterday, Iran also, in the middle of all this, Iran says that our nuclear proposal to them is worth talking about.
Now, that coupled with the Iranian quote-unquote foreign minister up in Damascus, which for those of you in Rio Linda is in Syria.
For those of you in Rio Linda, that's in the Middle East.
For those of you in Rio Linda that's north of Lebanon, I realize for those of you in Rio Linda, none of this is helpful.
But I'm trying to be.
I think they're just trying to show they've got power.
I think they're trying to show they're the ones that will be able to make things happen or not happen.
And by saying that they're willing to talk to us now about nukes is an attempt to get us to shut down because that's what everybody's worried about.
Oh, they want to talk now.
Okay, Israel, you must stop.
You must cease fire.
You must pull back.
Iran is ready to talk.
I wouldn't trust these people as far as Madeline Albright could throw them.
Who's next?
Michael in Osage Beach, Missouri.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Good afternoon, Rush.
How are you today?
Good, sir.
Thank you.
Good.
I just have a couple quick points, and I had a question for you.
First point I wanted to really kind of bring up is there's, you know, at some time in America, we have to hold our leaders responsible.
Second is the war in Iraq is completely the responsibility of George W. Bush.
Third, the poor execution of the Iraq war, the inability to successfully prosecute the war makes the lone world superpower look weak.
Therefore, that kind of lack of cohesive foreign policy coupled with our strategy in Iraq kind of puts us on the outside looking in.
And I'm wondering if Iran and Syria see the instability and what we've done up until now, and they're trying to capitalize on that.
And as you can see, Israel is a shiny example of how to execute the war on terror.
So can we actually follow that?
Do we have the resolve as a nation, as a people that are obviously going to be affected by this?
Do we have the ability with the current, I mean, say what you want about Clinton and say what you want about Reagan, Carter, everybody.
We have to deal with who we have in office today.
And, you know, can we follow that example of Israel?
And can we successfully prosecute and take care of the people?
You know, it's interesting.
It's interesting.
Without responding to your assessment of the war in Iraq, because I disagree with that.
But even as you say, that's at this point really not the focus.
If you look at what happened after 9-11, just as an illustration, this is a little bit roundabout way of getting to the answer to your question, but here goes.
After 9-11, what did we do?
Essentially, what did we do?
We went to the world and asked for permission to respond.
And we asked the rest of the world to join us.
And the rest of the world, well, enough of the world on the Security Council to block it, told us to go to hell.
The Israelis didn't ask anybody.
They don't get permission from anybody.
When they're hit, they fire back.
One of their soldiers, two of their soldiers kidnapped, they fire back and they don't go and ask anybody for permission.
Why do we ask for permission?
Why do we do?
Well, it's one of the, I think, shackles, actually, of being a superpower to just run roughshod all over the world as the world would consider it to be.
They already do, even though we spent months, years at the United Nations trying to get the world to deal with Saddam Hussein, not just two years after Bush came into office, but all through the 90s after the First Gulf War.
And the UN and the world didn't do diddly squat.
Finally, we did.
But it took 9-11.
Now, without us being hit again, I don't know that we would go to Iran and do what I, here on this program, safely ensconced behind the golden EIB microphone, I admit, am advocating.
But I do know this, since you mentioned all these other presidents, since I have, if there's anybody who would do it, it is George W. Bush.
And he with the G8 was pretty bold in defending Israel when most of the rest of the world doesn't want to be on Israel's side in this or in anything else.
So, and do we have the national will?
Are we bogged down?
I think one of the problems, and you've gotten very close to it.
You put your finger on it here.
And I even mentioned this months ago.
I think the bog down in Iraq is multifaceted.
If you want to say we're bogged down, I say it only in the sense that we haven't used a tiny, but a tiny portion of the power that we can fully project.
We haven't done that.
We're fighting a minimalist war.
Why are we doing that?
Now, I've answered that in countless other programs, and I don't want to repeat myself here, but it has led to the impression in this country among the population, we are a representative republic, that we can't do this kind of stuff anymore.
And we've gotten to a point where 2,500 casualties, oh no, it's horrible.
They can't handle this.
So whether there's the national will or resolve is another thing.
But I also know that if we were going to do this, we wouldn't put it to a vote of the people.
We would put it a vote to the representatives of the people and then let elections deal with what the American people think of the action and the result.
Got to run here because of time.
Glad you called.
We'll be right back and continue.
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
El Rushbo and the excellence in broadcasting network, the all-knowing, all-caring, all-sensing, all-feeling, all-concerned, maha-rushi.
Well, from the Washington Times today, the Israeli attack in Lebanon is part of a carefully orchestrated plan, not yet half-completed, that calls for four stages of mounting intensity, culminating in the movement of ground troops into Lebanon.
This according to Israeli reports.
Military correspondents with access to senior military officials say that in the first stage, Israeli warplanes attacked missile caches throughout Lebanon, particularly those housing long-range missiles, are doing it again even as we speak.
Israeli warplanes are pounding these installations in Lebanon.
50 of these caches, some hidden underground, some in private homes, reportedly were destroyed.
Do you understand what's happening here?
These missiles are being launched from homes.
These missiles from Hezbollah are being launched from homes.
And when Israel hits back, of course, they're accused of killing civilians.
Israelis are going to do what they have to do.
I admire them in the sense they take care of business and do what they have to do, and they couldn't care less what anybody thinks of them.
And hell, that idiot, idiot, the clown that runs Hezbollah, his son strapped on bombs and killed himself in a suicide or homicide bomb attack back in 1997.
The guy the other day talked about how proud he was of his son.
Sends his son out.
These people are, you know, they're a different breed out there.
But these missiles are coming from homes in Lebanon.
And of course, these Hezbollah leaders are bunkered way, way down underground so as to be protected.
At any rate, the second stage of this four-stage plan, which began early last Friday, warplanes attacked the heart of Hezbollah's power, destroying high-rise buildings in southern Beirut that house the organization's command structure and the home of Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.
That's the clown that talked about how happy and proud he was of his son, who blew himself up in a terror attack.
Sheikh Nasrallah reportedly was trapped for a while in the militia's underground command center when the building above it collapsed.
He apparently was not injured, though.
The third and fourth stages are secret.
However, the operational plan calls for each stage to be more powerful than the previous one, said the correspondents, who appear to have received detailed briefings.
Now, if Israel's main objectives, a halt in the firing of missiles into Israel and a Lebanese government agreement to displace Hezbollah from the border area, have not been achieved by the end of this week, ground troops will cross the border, according to the sources.
And, of course, that's the key.
I mean, if Israel does that, then the world will know that they're the same old Israel.
They're going to fight this the way they've done so in the past.
Jason in Norfolk, Virginia, it's your turn, sir.
Welcome to the program.
How are you doing, Majah Rush?
I'm just fine, Jason.
Okay.
What I want to say is what we have here going on with Kofi Annan, and he's all of a sudden screaming to get an international coalition going right into Lebanon and securing the environment.
And he hasn't done that for like two decades, right?
So I really think it's conspiracy.
I really think he just wants to send the coalition in there to be shields, human shields, against Israeli attacks into Lebanon in order to prevent them from protecting their country.
I really, I'm dead serious.
I think he's if for that to work, the Israelis would have to stop firing.
Now the Israelis wouldn't stop firing in a situation like that.
Here's the story that he's talking about.
It's from the BBC.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and Prime Minister Tony Blair have called for an international force to be sent to Lebanon to stop attacks on Israel.
Tony Blair said the force could stop the bombardment coming over into Israel and therefore gives Israel a reason to stop its attacks on Hezbollah.
All right, what's the problem with this?
What in the world is this UN force going to do to stop Hezbollah from lobby missiles into Israel?
What is any UN, anything, going into Lebanon going to stop Hezbollah from doing?
What is it?
There's already a 2,000-strong UN mission has been monitoring the Lebanese-Israeli border since 1978, but it doesn't have the power to enforce the peace, and it couldn't if it did.
What do you mean, enforce the peace?
There's no such thing until somebody loses.
Enforce the peace?
What peace?
There hasn't been any peace.
You know, you've got to, we've got to define peace here.
Some of these people have the most asinine definition of peace.
To some people, peace is no missiles being fired for six months or a year.
Well, that's not peace.
That's everything but peace.
And every day you think, is this going to be the day my house gets blown up?
Is that peace?
How can you have peace when life is spent living in fear?
And that's what that whole region is like.
So they've already got 2,000 people in there.
And if 2,000 in there can't stop it, what's another force, how whatever you call them, going to be able to do?
It's unclear which countries would contribute to the force and what the force's mandate would be.
Kofi Annan called for a package of actions, not exhortations, that would require parties to release prisoners, stop both rocket attacks into Israel and retaliatory action, and pursue this idea of a stabilization force.
Now, what Jason's theory is, is that the presence of these peace-loving, flowery-carrying, sandal-wearing peace NICs will do is essentially provide a human shield and make it impossible for Israel to fire into it because it just peace people that they're trying to keep the peace and Israel's wiping them out.
But as long as this force, as they call it, has nothing to do with stopping Hezbollah, it's the same old thing.
It's no different than Kofi Annan saying, well, Israel needs to practice restraint.
Well, it's being fired on.
Israel needs to practice restraint.
So it's all balderdash, folks.
It's nothing more than a bunch of diplomatic gobbledygook.
And if anybody wants to just take a look at history 30 years ago to the present and see where any of this has ever worked, be my guest.
Point it out to me.
I would love to be wrong about this, but I know I'm not.
Here is Brian, Lexington, Virginia.
You're next, sir, on the EIB network.
Hey, Rush, great to have you back this week, and thanks for my shot at 15 Seconds of Fame.
Thank you, sir.
Your comments about Israel not being close enough to Iran to effectively take them on militarily reminded me of how brilliant President Bush's strategy in prosecuting the war on terror is.
By taking on Afghanistan and then Iraq, we have basically established bases of operation on both the west and east sides of Iran, showing that I know my geography.
Yes.
So once it becomes evident that Iran is only going to get more intertwined with this action, that gives us the moral high ground to go ahead and take the next stage in the war on terror and take them on immediately.
And we have troops surrounding them, and that could only increase if needed.
Okay, you know, I hear you, but let me give you a countervailing thought.
Yeah, we got troops on two different borders, essentially.
Well, within proximity of two borders of Iran, and has it stopped them from doing what they're doing?
Have they shown any indications they're intimidated by our presence?
They're ramping up their nukes.
They say they are.
They're funding and directing this stuff in Lebanon and Syria against Israel.
They are undermining every effort being made in Iraq.
They are probably housing and hosting renegade, on-the-run Al-Qaeda leaders who find the territory in Pakistan and Afghanistan too hot.
So just where does...
I know if we decided to make a move, what you're saying is we already got a presence there.
It wouldn't take much to stage operations because we're there.
But it hasn't stopped them.
Well, we are there.
It hasn't stopped them.
We need the opportunity to do so.
And like you said, this has been a great opportunity for the world to bring some of these terrorist groups out in the open.
Another case would be Hamas being, quote, legitimately elected in Gaza and the West Bank because that makes them the official heads of state of those two satellite territories, which just makes it easier to prosecute a war because rather than having these shadow insurgency groups, you can just take on the actual sovereign territory.
So when Iran puts themselves on the chopping block by making it undeniable that they're involved in terror and supporting it and promoting it and funding it, then we as the United States have the moral high ground to prosecute them as a legitimate target on the war on terror.
We've had that for a long time, though.
We've had that moral high ground for a long time because we've known it.
It's no mystery what Iran is.
They have been allowed to grow and expand under this current regime since 1979.
Hello, Jimmy Carter.
You know, Jimmy Carter gave us this current circumstance in Iran.
And look at the only reason I have some of you people joining us late, I said that what's going on here today, and he referred to it in a call, what's going on here is actually a gift to the world.
This represents an opportunity to finally do something about Iran before they get their nukes, because I don't know that anybody's got a plan for dealing with them after that.
I really don't.
So that's why I say this is a gift to the world, but I don't see them intimidated by our presence.
They may be.
I mean, I just don't see it.
They seem to be goading us.
And if our strategerists think that we're being goaded, they will not react to that.
Don't want to grant that kind of psychological power to an enemy.
And so they're goading us could be nothing more than their attempt to just delay.
You know, if I were these people, and I know this is going to make some of you people mad, but if I were the Iranians, and I watch U.S. media, and I can see what's being reported, and I can watch how the United States media is actively engaged in the United States defeat, I'd just wait for the 08 elections and I'd do what I could to get a Democrat elected and then march wherever I wanted, knowing full well, nobody'd ever stop me.
I have confidence in that.
Be back after this.
Hi, welcome back.
Nice to have you, folks.
As always, an Israeli airstrike in Lebanon today, fairly recently, destroyed at least one long-range Iranian missile capable of hitting Tel Aviv.
Military officials said Israeli aircraft targeted a truck carrying the weapons before they could be launched.
The officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity, the force of the blast sent at least one missile flying into the air, but it fell nearby.
So these effort here to take out these missile launchers and launching sites appears to be successful today as Israel continues to ramp up its four-part strategy.
George, in South Windsor, Connecticut, welcome, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Hey, Rush, I happen to agree with you about this gift, and I'll tell you why, because the Iranians just flinched.
And I think the Hezbollah abduction of those is really changing.
Wait, wait, hold on.
What do you mean, Iran just flinched?
Oh, maybe the nuclear plan looks a little good.
Maybe it's starting to look better.
I think they're flinching.
And because this was a test, the Hezbollah was totally set up by Iran.
It was to test the response by Israel.
Because Israel's been making a lot of concessions with the Palestinians lately, looking a lot like the Americans because of the politics that are being involved.
So they test Iran just to see what their response would be, because if they snuck their nose on the nuclear option, now they know how Israel is going to react.
Because if they'll react the way they did to just an abduction, can you imagine if Iran tried anything different?
So I think Israel passed the test wonderfully.
Now, this is an interesting point.
I must, you know, grant you that.
Very, very, very good for a caller.
Let me expand on this.
Because, you know, he's right.
You know, Israel's been giving away a lot of land.
Get rid of this.
Get out of Gaza.
Get out of there.
Get out of there.
Move over there.
Give up the settlements.
Get out of the West Bank.
Haifa.
Get out of wherever.
And Israel's been doing it.
With the presumption being that peace would follow.
And of course, it hasn't.
And so it could well be that the Iranians in Hezbollah thought, all right, these people have lost their resolve.
All right.
They don't want, they've done Oslo.
They've been trying to make peace.
And of course, these clowns don't want peace as it's being defined by the diplomats of the world.
And so they kidnap a couple of soldiers and blow up an Israeli Humvee and get the soldiers.
And Israel's response is what it's been.
And what he's saying here is that the Iranian foreign minister saying, hey, hey, hey, U.S., we'll talk to you about our nuke program now.
Is Iran flinching?
Could well be.
We don't know.
But it could well be.
There's another school of thought that says that all of this, and their foreign minister is also in Damascus saying, hey, if you want Hezbollah to stop this, we can get it done.
They're trying to assert themselves as a power in the region.
That is why.
Let's say that Georgia's theory here is right.
That is why, folks, this is a gift.
Because if he's right, and if we said, hey, Iran, we know that Hezbollah is basically you.
We know that Hezbollah is the Iranian army.
Can we just be honest about that, folks?
Let's just get it out on the table.
Hezbollah is the Hezbollah, however you want to pronounce it.
It's pronounced both ways.
I checked.
Is the Iranian army.
So if Israel has opened up this Western front against the Iranian army and we were to lob a couple missiles into Iran or shell Iran in a way, we'll find out.
I mean, I think you've got a point because it's something I also mentioned earlier, and that is weakness is what these people are going to see when we don't enforce agreements that have been made with them.
And in the case of Syria, Syria said it would get Hezbollah out of southern Lebanon, and Syria said that it would withdraw from Lebanon.
And it didn't.
And nothing was made to happen to them.
Thank you, U.S. State Department.
This is pre-Kandi.
And so if you're basher Assad, son of Hafez el-Assad, now room temperature, and people are huffing and puffing to blow your house down, and you're okay, okay, okay, don't blow my house down.
I'll do what you want, and then you don't do it, and nothing happens to you, you are going to interpret that as weakness.
Assad and maybe Iran as well.
So the Israeli response could well be something that's shown the Iranians at the time is still not quite right because the Israelis are not soft and have not softened up.
But it could be the other option as well.
It could be that they're just attempting to goad and prolong This standoff for whatever strategic reason they might have devised.
Whatever it is, how many times on this program in the last three years, four years, have we said, when are we going to go into Syria?
When are we going to root that?
Because we know that's where some of these insurgents are coming from.
Saying, when are we going to go into Iran?
We've known this all along.
At some point, this is going to have to happen if we're serious about a war on terror.
And that's why this is a golden opportunity now with what has a gift to the world, as I called it earlier, what's broken out over in Lebanon today.
Back in just a second.
Stay with us.
I have a little fantasy here, folks, of how this could possibly end up.
And it's possible.
Even though it's a fantasy, it's possible.
▲
Export Selection