Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
I really don't believe what I just saw.
I just saw a little graphic on the television screen quoting President Bush, say we can't let Iran take over the Middle East.
What the hell do we think we're doing?
We go to the UN and flit away this opportunity to defeat the Hezbollah.
For God's sakes, ladies and gentlemen.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome to Rush Limbaugh back in action, EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
Can't let Iran take over the Middle East.
Hell, we send Mike Wallace over there to humanize this little Mahmoud Ahmadinezad.
Except sounding like a Democrat, complaining about how many Americans don't have health care.
Wallace doesn't realize he's talking to an anti-Semite, a guy that hates Jews.
Wallace would be the first guy killed if this guy had a chance.
Hell, maybe the second guy that you're more useful, you idiots in the media, I suppose.
I mean, folks, let me tell you this.
It's good to be back.
It really is.
Got on the airplane, what was it?
What was the day I left?
Thursday.
Got on the airplane Thursday morning, turned on television and see about this terror effort that was thwarted over Great Britain.
And I'm saying, this is great news.
This is fabulous news.
And I'm watching the news media report this as almost as though an attack had occurred and that loss of life was profound and in the thousands.
And I'm scratching my head as I'm watching this.
Am I hearing what I'm hearing?
They're treating this as though it's an abject failure.
Here, we have a montage of some of the commentary by the drive-by media on, well, whatever day this was.
This is the Democrat response, the media response to the British successfully thwarting the terror plot to blow up 10 airplanes with explosives in midair.
Are we any safer?
Yes.
I think we are not as safe as we should be.
We have not made enough progress.
Members of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission say it's not enough.
Democrats are firing back that not enough is being done to improve security.
Do the screeners have enough training?
Is America doing enough?
For crying out loud, it was a successful operation.
Is America doing enough?
You know what, if it weren't, I wonder if the Brits used some sort of technique like our domestic surveillance programs or foreign surveillance program on terrorists to figure out what these guys were doing.
We now know, by the way, these guys are British citizens.
They are of Pakistani descent.
And it was charity money that was funding them, so-called Saudi, I don't know what Saudi charity money in this case, but charity funds ended up getting to these people, and they were tracked, and I think U.S. intelligence agencies helped.
This thing is a profound success.
It was a profound success, and it's being treated as an utter failure.
I was a friend of mine on the airplane.
I said, by the end of the day, the Democrats in a Kook fringe base are going to be saying one of two things, that this shows Bush hasn't done nearly enough because we haven't caught bin Laden, or they're going to say this whole thing never really happened.
This was just a trumped-up exercise in coordination with the Brits to make people think terrorism is still alive and dead, to distract people away from the failures of Iraq, or as sort of a pre-October surprise for the upcoming elections.
It was just stunning to me to watch this.
I watched it all the way to LA.
After LA, you lose the direct TV signal when you go 30 miles outside the continental United States.
Yeah, it's by contract.
So I was able to watch, I guess, from 7 to noon, something like that.
Stopped in Oxnard for fuel after picking up some friends in Kansas City, stopped in Oxnard.
Boy, is that a strange place.
I've never been into Oxnard before.
But we had a great guy out there who serviced us quickly, got us fueled, and got us out of there.
I was just, I cannot describe for you just how overwhelmed I was at the idea that a successful operation had been thwarted, and yet the Democrats are out there trying to paint this thing as a total failure.
Then we get to Hawaii.
We're having fun.
We're playing golf and so forth.
And on Friday, we're six hours behind out there.
And Friday come in and see that we've thrown away every opportunity for victory in the Israeli-Hezbollah war.
And I turned to my friend and said, well, the Hezbollahs have just won the thing.
And it was like a kick in the gut.
I knew something was going to happen when I left.
Always does happen when I leave.
And these two big deals occurred.
I knew there'd be plenty of time to address them when I got back.
I had plenty of email people saying, Rush, what's your take?
What do you think happened here?
Let me just, before we get into the details, let me just tell you what I think.
I think the Prime Minister of Israel is a disaster.
I think our continuing reliance on the UN is a disaster.
And I, for one, do not understand it.
And there's nobody that can make me understand it.
I don't care who wants to try.
You won't succeed.
And as a result, we are prolonging this war.
This is a ceasefire, however long it takes.
It is just going to be used for Hezbollah to ramp up and arm up.
It's another meaningless UN resolution.
And I honestly think that what's going on right now, folks, is that our leaders around the world that represent Western societies and Western cultures really don't have the will to fight this right now.
And I think they don't even have the guts to admit what this is.
This is a religious war.
It is viewed in too many circles as just episodic events.
An episode of terrorism here, an episode of terrorism over there, an episode there, but not really related.
We'll just keep dealing with these episodes.
But it's more than just an episodic series of events here.
And I am stunned.
I was stunned all weekend that we have reversed course and now pushed for this lame ceasefire BS.
How many ceasefires have we had?
I could have too many to count.
And they all end up being the same thing.
You can look at all the celebrations.
This guy in Iran today is cheering.
Basher Assad's out there saying the U.S. vision of the Middle East is nothing more than an illusion.
Hezbollah's out there pounding their chest saying they won, which they would do anyway, regardless.
But when I say it's a religious war, religious wars are numerous.
You can look at them up historically.
And one of the things about religious wars, and one of the reasons why so few people really want to categorize this as a religious war, is because there is no room for compromise in a religious war.
Fervently devout religious believers don't compromise.
That's the whole point.
As an example, you don't go to the Pope and say, hey, Pope, In order for us to have a little peace, will you please accept that Muhammad did fly to the heavens and so forth on a horse and that and that maybe Muhammad is actually Jesus just for peace?
The Pope's not going to do that.
Whatever religion you go to, you could go to the Jewish people.
Would you please accept that somebody's been a Messiah here so we can have some peace?
Nope.
Not going to do it.
Would you go to the Christians?
Would you say, come on, you know damn well it's impossible somebody could be born from a virgin mother.
You got to give that one up.
Nope, ain't going to happen.
And so there's no room for compromise.
That's why there's no room for the UN.
There's no room for a settlement negotiated when you're talking about religious wars.
And we are in the midst of a religious war.
And the aggressors in this case are militant Islamists, finally so proclaimed by the president.
And of course, there's outrage that he would dare refer to these people as Islamic fascists, which he did.
But, you know, it's amazing we continue to react as though we'll be hurt and stung by words, that the words we hear will offend us, the words we speak will offend someone else.
It's just, it's a setback.
I told you, can't say I'm actually surprised.
This is going to come to a head at some point.
And I told you last week, may not be in our lifetimes.
We may go through all these suffering ceasefires to end the suffering and so forth.
But here's the truth.
Let me just lay the truth out for you.
We'll get into some detail in a minute.
The enemy has not suffered a loss yet.
They've just taken Somalia.
They're slaughtering people in Iraq.
And they're on the rise in Afghanistan.
I'm not saying that we haven't made any progress.
But we're not taking the war to this enemy.
We're just not doing it.
This move with Israel will prolong the war when we could have used it, and it could have been used to make great advances.
And then, again, when I hear the president say we can't let Iran take over the Middle East.
Would somebody tell me what we're doing to stop that?
Right, right, I know.
Yeah, ha, ha, ha.
This time the UN, they really mean it.
Oh, yeah.
And this time, the Lebanese army, well, they really do going to work the job this.
They're really going to, they're going to, they really do.
Lebanese army really gonna make it happen this time.
I said they're not that, well, they're not supposed to disarm Hezbollah.
That's not, that's not what.
Yeah, well, they say that I'm, I'm facetious, snardly.
Of course, this is a joke.
So this time the UN really means it?
Yeah, right.
This time the Lebanese army really will do its job.
This time the international community really will come to Israel's side when the terrorists attack them?
Yeah, we got faith.
This time, everybody's going to do the right thing.
We just helped negotiate a resolution that enhances the Hezbo's standing from a terrorist group to some kind of legitimate entity.
What do you mean we get peace?
We don't have peace, and you know damn well we don't have peace.
Peace follows victory.
We've got another ceasefire.
Here are the elements, as I understand them.
Here are the elements of this negotiated settlement over which they probably had hot dogs and beer this weekend at the State Department, United Nations.
This resolution, what is this one now?
1701?
What number does it?
Okay, well, 1559 is still out there.
It didn't do diddly squat, so I guess we're just going to forget it.
Now we've got resolution 1701.
And that's supposed to help the democratically elected Lebanese government emerge from this conflict stronger and better able to extend its sovereignty over all of its territory as called for in Resolution 1559.
This will mean more security and a better chance for peace for the people of both Israel and Lebanon.
Well, fine, but it's still a new resolution.
And let me just.
Let me just.
Instead of going through the details first, let me go to the conclusion of the details here and just get to the nut of it.
The nut of it is this.
Now comes the hard part.
Implementing the resolution and making good on the world's commitment to save Lebanon and the people in Lebanon and Israel who didn't want this war and who do not want another.
The president called on the international community to turn its words into action.
That's precisely what the United States intends to do.
But the key word here, now comes the hard part, implementing the resolution.
Seems to be always the stumbling block.
It just seems to me, folks, that it would have been better if the Hezbollah had been crippled and unable to continue to fight and maybe even reconstitute themselves rather than go through this ruse.
But here's what the resolution 1701 does: it makes clear who is responsible for the war, and the blame is pinned squarely on the Hezbollahs, their July 12th attack.
It calls for the unconditional release of the Israeli prisoners abducted by the Hezbollah, although I don't think it does.
There's a disagreement of opinion on that.
Amir Tahari, who writes about this in the New York Post today, says it does not, the latest UN resolution really is designed to fudge the real issues.
It does not provide for an immediate release of the Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah.
So that remains up in the air.
What else is it?
What else it call for?
An immediate cessation of hostilities.
That means that Hezbollah stops attacking Israel and Israel suspends its offensive operations.
Israel, however, does not withdraw until the arrival of a robust international force and the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces.
The Hezbos cannot be allowed to return to their old positions from which they harassed northern Israel.
Now, diplomats say that France is likely to lead this force.
Now, you just have to excuse me for, I don't even, I, okay, so that would be deuce de blaze, right?
That would be Philippe French foreign miniature is right.
Faux pas there, but I'll stick by it.
The French foreign miniature Felipe Deuce de Blaise was due in Beirut tomorrow to discuss the conditions for the deployment of the international force, the reopening of Lebanon's ports and airport, and humanitarian aid.
Lebanon's defense minister said the Lebanese army would send 15,000 troops to the north of the Latani River around the end of the week, ready to enter the southern border areas.
However, he said, and this is the Lebanese defense minister, he said the army is not going to the south to strip Hezbollah of weapons and do the work Israel did not.
All right, so the well, I guess maybe, you know, this Deuce de Blaise guy called the Iranians a stabilizing force.
Send them in there.
May as well send the Iranians in with the French to monitor all this for all its worth and all the good that it will do.
The resolution also calls for a robust international force to deploy throughout the South, authorized to assist the Lebanese army to enforce an arms embargo to prevent the resupply of Hezbollah.
Hezbollah is not being disarmed.
That's not in the resolution.
And Lebanese say we're not going to do it.
Hey, that's what the Israelis were supposed to do.
We're not going to help the Israelis do their work.
But this resolution, we're just not going to allow them to be re-armed.
Enhances the existing UNIFIL.
Though the enhanced force still carries the UNIFIL name, this is the robust international force going in there, folks, to make this really work.
It's not the same force.
This force has a broader mandate, unlike the current bunch.
The authority to take the initiative because the resolution authorizes it to take all necessary action to fulfill its mission.
It also will have the capabilities to take the initiative.
The enhanced force will be much larger than the existing one.
We set a target of 15,000 soldiers, sevenfold increase.
This robust and enhanced force will deploy with another 15,000 Lebanese troops.
I'm just here to tell you that the 15,000 of the international troops from France or wherever else and the 15,000 troops from Lebanon are not at any moment in time going to consider the Hezbollahs to be the enemy nor the problem.
Now, this, just this morning from the Jerusalem newswire, anticipating Hezbollah's failure to comply with the UN-brokered ceasefire, the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan sent a letter to Jerusalem over the weekend insisting that Israel not respond militarily to any violation of Security Council Resolution 1701.
That's according to the Jerusalem Post.
The Secretary General said that Israel should not only respond in immediate self-defense, should only respond in immediate self-defense, not by relaunching a wider military offensive against the terror group.
In effect, Kofi Annan saying that Israel should totally ignore Hezbo efforts to re-establish itself in southern Lebanon, even though they're supposed to get out of there under terms of 1559.
The Israelis are supposed to ignore Syrian efforts to resupply the group and should only respond in a very pinpoint manner to any further firing of missiles at northern Israel.
Both the Lebanese military and French forces, expected to bolster peacekeepers already on the ground, have said they will not confront Hezbollah with force if the terror group fails to go along with the ceasefire terms.
The Israeli government sources said Annan's letter was unacceptable and that a firm response was being drafted.
So there you have it.
Pretty much sums it up in a nutshell.
Ceasefire leads to more war.
Ceasefires lead to increased wars, increased intensity.
Ceasefires lead to more death.
Back right after this.
Stay with us.
Yeah, we're trying to here, folks.
Trying to make the complex understandable.
Rushland America's real anchor man executing assigned host duties flawlessly on the excellence in broadcasting that work.
Something else about this resolution is it totally totally ignores the previous one.
Resolution 1559 just totally ignores it.
It's like it's not even there.
That was passed two years ago.
And it called for the disarmament of the Hezbo's as a step toward giving the legitimate Lebanese government a monopoly of armed forces in the country.
Everybody says that the purpose of this new resolution is to establish a firm and functioning government in Lebanon that the Lebanese totally control.
Well, that's what 1559 was.
And it's just been pft, you know, thrown away in the wind.
This new resolution 1701 just says nothing about it whatsoever.
Caroline Glick, a columnist for the Jerusalem Post, says the big winners here are Kofi Annan, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran.
Kofi Annan, a major beneficiary of the resolution, because it named him the arbiter of compliance with the ceasefire.
And that's why he fired off that letter to the Israelis that I just shared with you.
Moreover, by retaining the peacekeepers, the United Nations peacekeepers, and widening their mandate, it rendered Annan Generalissimo, Kofi Annan, of Lebanon.
Israel can expect daily condemnations from the UN Secretariat's office for any act it takes to defend itself against Hezbollah strikes.
The Hezbollahs are the big winner of the resolution because it adopts almost every Hezbo demand.
Hezbollah will not be disarmed.
An arms embargo will not be instituted against it.
Its unsupportable claim to Lebanese sovereignty over the Sheba farms in the Golan Heights has received international recognition.
It's not going to be forced to release the Israeli soldiers.
It holds its hostages.
As Hassan Nasrallah put it, yippie, we won, but we still have more demands, so you better watch out in Haifa.
They are being emboldened.
And of course, Syria is a winner because the resolution made no mention of the fact that Syria is the Hezbollah logistical base.
By ignoring Syria's central role in the war, the resolution effectively gave its blessing to continued Syrian aggression against Israel and U.S. forces in Iraq through terrorist proxy armies.
Big winner of all is Iran.
Iran, which was the architect of the entire war, did not even receive a mention in this resolution.
It's already using his victory, this victory, to force the Arab world to accept its leadership.
The Iranian foreign minister's visit Sunday with Hosni Mubarak in Egypt was a clear sign that its stock is sky high.
Iran has not had full diplomatic relations with Egypt since 1979.
So they are feeling their oats out there.
And then that little basher Assad up in Syria said that America's plan for a new Middle East has collapsed, that it is an illusion.
This is after the Hezbollah's successes in fighting against Israel.
The Middle East, the Americans aspire to, has become an illusion.
Assad was speaking to a journalists' association in Damascus, said the region had changed because of the achievements of the resistance.
In this case, the resistance actually was the Israelis, but the resistance is being called the Hezbollah group.
The Hezbollah was minding their own business, just doing their social programs, building highways and bridges and roads and hospitals and all these other good works of health care for the masses.
And all of a sudden, here come the Israeli tanks over the border.
And the great resistance of the Hezbollah mounted this attack, this defensive maneuver, and saved the day and showed the rest of the world that the mighty Israel is now impotent.
And so is its ally, the United States.
Let's start on the phones.
People want to weigh in.
Tim in Detroit, you're first on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Hello, sir.
Honor to speak with you.
Yes.
My opinion is I think Israel has no choice but to sit for a minute and wait for Hezbollah to break the ceasefire, and then they really don't have any choice but to then move forward.
I think they got caught by surprise with the arms that Hezbollah got from Iran and Syria, and they're just kind of regrouping and waiting to move forward.
Well, you think they're going to do that under this current leadership?
I think the general pressure on Olmert.
I think they got caught by surprise with the resistance, but they have no choice.
If they wait for Hezbollah to rearm with weapons that can go farther into Israel, how long are they going to wait?
Israel hasn't waited before.
I mean, they've moved when they thought they really needed to, and I think it's getting to that point.
Yeah, exactly.
My memory is on this.
The Israelis don't violate these ceasefires.
So you're saying they're going to have to wait for the Hezbollahs to violate ceasefire.
I don't think they'll do it.
I think they're emboldened.
I think they'll end up violating the ceasefire in a relatively short time.
And in the meantime, Israel can regroup and be ready.
Actually, they already have, but nobody's talking about it.
They've already launched some Katusha rockets.
They didn't make it to Israel, so nobody sees fire still holds.
The missiles didn't make it to Israel.
Ceasefire still holds.
Right.
But they've already.
I mean, Israeli Defense Army shot five Hezbollah fighters in two incidents today, but there's a ceasefire.
I think they're just biding their time.
I think they have no choice.
I don't think they can go much longer.
But I do have one side comment.
If I could bring that up.
Side comment, rear comment, front comment, they all work.
For the people in Rio Linda, I don't know.
Maybe your statisticians can bring something up just to put things in perspective there.
But has anyone put lately the population of Israel compared to the Arab states and even the square miles of Israel compared to the Arab states in the Middle East?
Just to give people in Rio Linda a picture of basically like Rhode Island against the United States kind of thing.
I am stunned you asked this question because it was I, El Rushbo, your host, who did just that two weeks ago.
I did it in a number of different ways.
Let's try it.
Let's try it again.
Imagine New Jersey.
Israel's smaller than New Jersey.
But imagine New Jersey is Israel and everything around it is its enemies who want to wipe it out.
There are, depending on how you count the populations, how far out you go with Arab countries, the population of Israel is about 6 million or 5 million Jewish people there versus 500 million Arabs.
And of course, those 5 million Jews are on land that they don't deserve.
It's not theirs.
It's the Arabs and so forth.
You've got 500 million Arabs surrounding 5 million Jews, and who is it that's putting bombs on each other and sending their kids out to blow each other up?
It's not the Israelis.
It's the Arabs.
Israel is smaller than Massachusetts.
It's smaller than Rhode Island, smaller than New Hampshire.
It's a tiny, tiny, it's nine miles wide at its narrowest.
It's a nine-mile-wide country.
Boca Raton, this is Maria.
You're next on the EIB network high.
Hi, Rush.
Great to have you back.
Thank you.
I have a question.
Since now that I feel the same as you did, we've kind of given up all hope to win this war with Israel and Hezbollah since we've turned it over to the absolute warflist UN.
When and if the Muslim world finally solidifies, because we are not really doing what I feel we should be doing strong enough, and all of a sudden Iran gets powerful enough and takes over Iraq and possibly Afghanistan again.
And these Muslim nations totally solidify in that area.
And then we've got endless terrorist cells in almost all the allied countries that we work with and deal with.
And all of a sudden, Ahmadijad says, okay, it's time to go.
Let's go.
And all these cells take off.
And they are now blasting off in every country, Australia, England, Spain, Italy.
Where are we going to be?
Who's going to be our ally?
All of those nations are going to be really busy trying to take care of themselves.
I don't see who's going to be helping anybody.
I just don't.
I wonder what you think about that.
All right.
Here's how I want to react to that.
I want to go back to my comment earlier about this being a religious war.
I know most people don't want to deal with that.
And they don't want to deal with it because they don't want to deal with the scenario that you just painted.
Most people, I will guarantee you, Maria, listening to the program today, having heard your scenario, are going, come on, that'll never happen.
It isn't possible.
Come on, let's get real.
Rush, why are you letting these wackos on the radio?
That's never, ever going to happen.
It is the objective of Iran, so far as it goes, in the Middle East.
This stuff is all being driven by fervent religious beliefs.
Some might consider them perverted and foolish, but nevertheless, that's what's, I think, on the agenda.
Nobody seems to want to deal with that aspect of it.
As I say, they want to deal with things in an episodic fashion as though these just another skirmish in Israel.
Come on, Rush.
Why do you care about it so much?
We have more to talk about.
Let's talk about the elections.
Let's talk about the Democrats.
But this little episode, these things going on my whole life, Russia, just individual little episodes.
And people don't want to conjure up the possibility of the scenario or one like the scenario that you shared with us.
It's a call to arms, in effect.
I mean, you've got to let something like that happen.
You can't allow yourself to sit around while events spiral out of control so that one day you're asking, well, gee, who are our friends?
And there aren't any left.
So that's my reaction to it.
I don't know what it's going to take for people to wake up and realize the genuine scope of the threat and what this little war between the Hezbollahs and the Israelis actually represented in terms of the proxies involved.
But it won't be long before we'll find out.
I have no prediction on how.
I know this.
I can hasten it by taking another vacation.
Back after this, stay with us.
Well, one thing this has done is just that it's it has provided some humor.
If you go to certain quarters, the Democrats now see security as a key issue for the fall.
They're going to take all this, especially the London terrorist event that was thwarted, and they're going to run around and say, see, Bush can't be trusted.
Bush just can't be trusted.
They've been outmaneuvered in the politics of national security the last two elections.
So the Democrats say they're determined not to cede the issue this year, working to cast Bush as having diminished the nation's security and safety.
And that's what this montage was all about.
I'm sorry, I don't have the date that this happened, but it has to be shortly sometime on Thursday or Friday when the announcement was made.
In fact, Grab Cut One against Ed again, Ed, and let's listen to this because this is the, you know, there's coordination, the drive-by media, and the Democrats.
Flying out to Hawaii on Thursday with my buddies, I was saying, while we're sitting here watching this, and we kept watching television until we lost the signal, we kept watching for some Democrat to go on television to do analysis in the midst of the breaking news, developing news, with all the stand-ups going on at Heathrow Airport.
And when we flew out of range of the satellite signal, there hadn't been any Democrat analysts show up.
We knew, therefore, that they were still somewhere plotting their talking points.
And this, again, is probably the fruits of their labors.
Are we any safer?
I think we are not as safe as we should be.
We are not doing enough.
We have not made enough progress.
Members of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission say it's not enough.
Democrats are firing back that not enough is being done to improve security.
Do the screeners have enough training?
Is America doing enough?
Okay, so apparently Democrats have said, we're not doing enough.
Bush isn't doing enough to protect us.
Now, I know you look at this, this doesn't make any sense.
Well, welcome to the Democratic Party.
We just thwarted a huge terrorist event.
We are safer.
There hasn't been an attack in this country since 9-11.
Are we safe, safe, safe, safe?
No.
But are we less safe?
If the Democrats had gotten what they want, listen to Harry Reid.
Grab cut two, December 16th of last year.
Listen to Dingy Harry here.
Think of what happened 20 minutes ago in the United States Senate.
We killed the Patriot Act.
We killed the Patriot.
The Patriot Act is one of the tools that we use to find out when these numb skulls, these knucklehead terrorists, are going to try to hit us.
It's the Democrats that want to make a crime out of the NSA foreign surveillance program, which I will guarantee you we used along with MI5 in tracking down these knuckleheads in London.
So the Democrats have not a leg to stand on.
They can't say this is what we've done to promote security.
They have tried to pretend there's no need for any of this, that it's just domestic spying.
Bush wants to find out what you're renting at the porno video store or whatever it is they're worried about.
And yet now they turn around and they say security is their key issue for the fall.
And they've got a website.
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has got a video on the website.
It shows footage of Osama bin Laden, refers to an increase in terror attacks, highlights illegal immigration, and points out the nuclear aspirations of Iran and North Korea.
It says, feels safer.
Feel safer.
Vote for change.
As though all these threats out there are Bush's fault.
If Bush hadn't been president, the North Koreans wouldn't be rattling their sabers.
The Chinese wouldn't be doing anything.
Iranians wouldn't be going for nukes.
It's all Bush's fault.
This is their tactic.
I mean, it's laughable.
If it weren't so serious, it would be funny.
Eric and Kerry, North Carolina.
Hello, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Got about a minute here.
Hey, Rod, longtime listener.
Thank you.
Alternate theory to provide on the ceasefire agreement.
Yes.
That ultimately it's a setup.
The headballs are just flea on the dog's hindquarters.
Like you know, the big game here is going after Syria and Iran and achieving regime change in both of those areas.
So for the first time, and the Bush administration has achieved a lot of firsts in the Middle East, for the first time in history, we're going to use the ceasefire to our advantage by getting a coalition of fighters, that would be Israel, Britain, and America, as well as support in the international community via the Security Council, so that when Syria and Iran and Hezbollah violate the terms of the ceasefire,
we have international law and some consensus to have the cover to go ahead and achieve our ultimate goal.
All right.
Okay.
I've got to run out because of time here.
Number one, we didn't need this to be able to do that.
That was already underway.
So we didn't need this to do that.
If you read this resolution, the resolution basically says none of what you said can happen without international condemnation, which will scare the hell out of us.
Nobody wants international condemnation.
No way.
Hi, I got to take a quick time out here.
An interesting theory on why the U.S. actually did go for the ceasefire is that they were embarrassed at the incompetence of Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister.