Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes monologue skewered Hollywood elites—from Leonardo DiCaprio’s private jets to Robert De Niro’s "Fuck Trump" rants—exposing perceived hypocrisy in climate activism, political grandstanding, and industry scandals like Epstein. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s 2020 Soleimani strike (a precise 48-hour operation) sparked asymmetric threats from Iran but no direct retaliation, raising questions about its long-term impact. Despite media frenzy over WWIII risks, the move underscores Trump’s erratic foreign policy: bold actions without a clear doctrine, leaving global tensions unresolved yet unignited. [Automatically generated summary]
You've probably heard about Ricky Gervais' great Golden Globes monologue mocking Hollywood.
Well I'll take you through some of the highlights of that right away.
Before I do let me invite you to become a Rebel Premium subscriber.
It's eight bucks a month.
You get access to the video version of this podcast plus a couple other shows.
Just go to premium.rebelnews.com.
Okay, here's the podcast.
Tonight, the funniest Hollywood awards show in memory because a British comedian absolutely savaged the celebrity elite.
You'll like this one.
It's January 6th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I'm publishing it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
So many Hollywood award shows and the ratings keep falling pretty much every year.
Why?
We're still celebrity obsessed as a culture.
You could say that the United States has a reality TV show president, but I think the award shows are the worst because instead of celebrating what people like about celebrities, their art, their style, maybe even just their prettiness and handsomeness, or you know, their movies, their music, well, celebrities make the mistake of thinking that it's about their political wisdom that we're all just dying to hear about.
I mean, actors read lines written for them.
They're directed.
Most musicians sing songs written for them by others.
I think they forget themselves and think it's them, them, that we want.
I mean, all day long they're flattered by yes men and yes women.
So they think the rest of us are just dying to hear their latest takes on politics or anything else.
I showed you Rose McGowan's tweet the other day about Iran, where she called America a terrorist country, said she supported Iran, stood with the killed terrorist over there.
And I'm pretty sure that's not the real Iranian flag there.
Yeah, no, I don't think they have that like beanie baby little smiley son and baby lion cub.
I think that's a kids version or some weird thing.
That's not Iran's flag.
But like I say, she didn't have a script writer helping her out.
She was using her own brain.
As I said the other day, I have pity for Rose McGowan.
She was a rape victim of Harvey Weinstein, though it seems like she accepted that rape as the entry fee to be a Hollywood starlet.
I'm on her side in that whole thing, of course.
But I note that plenty, maybe hundreds of Hollywood starlets were only too happy to make that same deal to get ahead of every other would-be starlet in a starlet full city.
And surely plenty of men made similar bargains too.
And surely everyone in the industry knew about that common practice.
So my point is, they all gather together to celebrate themselves.
Okay, fair enough.
But then to lecture us, the likes of Woody Allen, who married his own adopted stepdaughter.
He's going to lecture us maybe.
Roman Polanski, convicted of raping a drugged teenager who fled the jurisdiction, but is still a star producer.
Louis, getting applause from his peers.
He couldn't appear in person because he's wanted for rape in America, so they're cheering him.
He was on a big screen there.
These are the people who are going to lecture us.
Leonardo DiCaprio, never seen far from a private jet or a mega yacht, telling us about global warming and how we have to live smaller.
I think that's one reason why audiences are tuning out of these awards nights.
It's not just that we disagree with them.
It's that we can never look our celebrity heroes, never look at them the same way again.
Look at what this actor, remember this one, I've showed you this before.
He's whipping up the crowd in Hollywood, saying that it's time to punch people in the face that he disagrees with, disagrees with politically.
We will hunt monsters!
And when we are lost amidst the hypocrisy and the casual violence of certain individuals and institutions, we will, as per Chief Jim Hopper, punch some people in the face when they seek to destroy the Disney franchise and the marginalized.
Yeah, no, no, I don't think so.
I used to love Robert De Niro when all I knew about him was his acting, reading lines and being directed.
But then I had to hear crap like this every week.
I'm going to say one thing.
Fuck Trump.
Yeah, you need a writer, buddy, that's not particularly clever or memorable other than it's shocking to know who you really are.
That makes me dislike him no matter what.
What an idiot.
And of course, if he thinks that way about Trump, which half of America voted for and many of the world's non-American moviegoers like, well, maybe he thinks that way about me too.
Why would you antagonize 50% of your audience if you're in the retail business?
More money than brains, I guess.
No self-discipline, no self-reflection.
Yeah, I'm not interested in lectures from a guy who, according to reports, was grilled for nine hours by French police about his connections to a teenage prostitution ring.
I won't take lectures from Robert De Niro.
So yeah, actors and singers should be seen and not heard, as the saying goes, but they can't help themselves.
But something funny happened last night at the Golden Globe Awards.
Now, no one cares about the Golden Globe Awards.
No one knows what they are.
That's the Hollywood Foreign Press Association.
So it's movie reviewers and celebrity watchers from other countries who come to LA to write about Hollywood for their home countries.
I mean, who cares about them, right?
Well, more and more movies actually make their money in foreign countries.
It's why celebrities love to take a knee and protest against the United States in America, but you've never seen a pro-athlete challenge, say, China's dictatorship, have you?
So it's not just Hollywood, it's sports too.
That's why the NBA effectively bans its members from criticizing China or supporting Hong Kong democracy protests.
The NBA and those celebrities love that dictatorship money, and they know that unlike American money, it gets taken away if they criticize those regimes.
So last night, for some reason, the Golden Globes hired someone actually funny as an MC.
That's very dangerous.
They hired this guy, Ricky Gervais.
He's funny.
He's very British, but he's getting better known in America.
I think he's pretty funny.
He's political in his own way.
He's very atheist.
That's one of his big things.
He's a bit braver at taking on Christianity than Islam, of course.
I mean, he likes to live.
But still, he takes on sacred cows that most others in entertainment won't.
He loves to mock Jonathan Yaneve, the BC transgender activist who demanded that immigrant women wax his male parts, claiming he was a girl.
So Ricky Gervais does more than most to challenge political correctness.
I think the Golden Globes must have known what they were getting.
And so now you know what happened.
Oil meets water or water meets fire or whatever, something like that.
Ricky Gervais was let loose on the most smug, condescending, pretentious, hypocritical group in the world.
And it was amazing.
I haven't seen the ratings yet, but I bet they were good for a change.
Let me show you why in a few clips.
Take a look.
You'll be pleased to know this is the last time I'm hosting these awards, so I don't care anymore.
I'm joking.
I never did.
NBC clearly don't care either.
Fifth time.
So, I mean, Kevin Hart was fired from the Oscars because of some offensive tweets.
Hello?
That's true.
Kevin Hart, he's a black comedian, very, very funny, I think, but each to his own.
But literally a decade ago, or even longer ago in some cases, he made some tweets that were politically incorrect.
Like one tweet that said, yo, if my son comes home and tries to play with my daughter's dollhouse, I'm going to break it over his head and say in my voice, stop, that's gay.
Okay, well, that sort of would be gay.
But Kevin Hart wasn't accepting enough 10 years ago, I guess.
So he was fired from being the Oscar's host last year.
Because that's just not tolerant enough.
Marrying your stepdaughter is cool and haughty.
Hollywood, ask Woody Allen.
Raping a girl and fleeing the jurisdiction is cool, ask Roman Polanski.
Being so deep in a child prostitution ring that you're grilled by French police for nine hours, that's cool, but don't say that boys playing with a dollhouse is gay.
Don't even say it as a joke, not even 10 years ago, okay?
I mean, just don't make jokes.
But that's Ricky Gervais signaling what he was about to do, as in break every rule.
Lucky for me, the Hollywood Foreign Press can barely speak English, and they've no idea what Twitter is.
So I got offered this gig by facts.
So let's go out with a bang.
Let's have a laugh at your expense, shall we?
Remember, they're just jokes.
We're all going to die soon, and there's no sequel.
So, yeah, remember that.
But you all look lovely, all doled up.
You came here in your limos.
I came here in a limo tonight, and the license plate was made by Felicity Huffman.
So, no.
Shush.
It's her daughter I feel sorry for, okay?
That must be the most embarrassing thing that's ever happened to her.
And her dad was in wild hogs.
So.
Now, that's a pretty gentle joke that's making fun of someone who bribed their kids' way into a good school.
Pretty easygoing so far, although you saw Tim Hanks was shocked by that.
Here, watch another clip.
In this room are some of the most important TV and film executives in the world.
People from every background, but they all have one thing in common.
They're all terrified of Ronan Farrow.
He's coming for you.
He's coming for you.
Look, talking of all you perverts, it was a big year.
It was a big year for paedophile movies.
Surviving R. Kelly, leaving Neverland, two popes.
Shut up.
Shut up.
I don't care.
I don't care.
There was that anti-Christian vibe.
They wouldn't care about being anti-Christian in Hollywood, but that mention of Ronan Farrow and pedophiles, well, that certainly is hitting close to home, isn't it?
Ronan Farrow was the journalist who finally broke the Weinstein story that everybody knew about, but no one would publish.
I guess the fact that Pharaoh himself is a celebrity and he came from that dysfunctional Woody Allen family himself meant that he had a bit of immunity to the kinds of threats of blacklisting and blackballing that everyone else buckled under in Hollywood.
Lots of angry faces from the crowd of Hollywood types.
Some were smiling along.
Some weren't.
I think that was my favorite part, showing the reaction of all those rich, powerful immune people being called out on their own turf.
I think that was funnier than the actual jokes.
All right, it geared down a little bit.
Take a look at this.
Many talented people of colour were snubbed in major categories.
Unfortunately, there's nothing we can do about that.
The Hollywood foreign press are all very, very racist.
So fifth time.
So we were going to do an in-memorium this year, but when I saw the list of people that had died, it wasn't diverse enough.
It just, no.
It was mostly white people.
And I thought, nah, not on my watch.
Maybe next year.
Let's see what happens.
That's sort of funny.
But look, they don't care about that stuff.
The Hollywood elite is pretty comfortable with who they are.
But this next part was just great.
One more dig about rape and child rape, which seems to be rampant in Hollywood.
Take a look.
You could binge watch the entire first season of Afterlife instead of watching this show.
That's a show about a man who wants to kill himself because his wife dies of cancer.
And it's still more fun than this.
Okay?
Spoiler alert, season two is on the way.
So in the end, he obviously didn't kill himself.
Just like Jeffrey Epstein.
Shut up.
I know he's your friend, but I don't care.
You'd think they'd be laughing or booing Epstein a little more than their first reaction there.
But they weren't.
They were just like they weren't really booing Weinstein because they knew about it.
Of course they knew about it.
And they were fine enough with it.
Here's some light humor as it went.
The Irishman was amazing.
It was amazing.
Look, it was.
My fact, it was great.
Long, but amazing.
It wasn't the only epic movie.
Once upon a time in Hollywood nearly three hours long Leonardo DiCaprio attended the premiere and by the end his date was too old for him Even Prince Andrews like come on Leo mate, you know, you're nearly 50 son That's sort of funny.
But Leonardo DiCaprio doesn't hide the fact that he dates 20-something models.
That doesn't shame him.
Superb Drama About Dignity00:07:27
He wants you to know it.
And the yachts and the private jets.
But they all think they're good people.
Better than you even.
That's why this next part was my absolute favorite of the night.
With the preening CEO of Apple Computers right there.
Why was he there?
Well, take a look.
Apple roared into the TV game with a morning show.
A superb drama, yeah.
A superb drama about the importance of dignity and doing the right thing.
Made by a company that runs sweatshops in China.
So, well, you say you're woke, but the companies you work for, I mean, unbelievable.
Apple, Amazon, Disney.
If ISIS started a streaming service, you'd call your agent, wouldn't you?
Just perfect and absolutely true.
Apple broke labor laws in China.
It's widely reported.
You don't say the only surprising thing there is that China had any labor laws to break.
That's a shocking part of the story to me.
But seriously, when was the last time anyone took on Hollywood, plus China, plus the big tech companies like Apple all in one sentence?
Well, Ricky Gervais just did.
That was perfect.
And he wrapped up his opening monologue thusly.
So if you do win an award tonight, don't use it as a platform to make a political speech, right?
You're in no position to lecture the public about anything.
You know nothing about the real world.
Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg.
So if you win, right, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your God.
So it's already three hours long.
Right, let's do the first award.
The first award.
There was some silence there when he was swearing, which added to the fun.
I like it.
I like this zinger about Saint Greta.
How dare you?
Who's got the courage to take her on in Hollywood?
I love it.
And I think he took a lot of the air out of the balloon.
I think there were a lot of stars who were planning to rant about Donald Trump or whatever.
And after that lecture from Ricky Gervais, I think some of them decided to dial it back a bit.
Not everybody.
Jennifer Anniston, who's still around, I guess, she read a pre-written letter about Australia's bushfires.
As you know, 200 people have been arrested by police for arson across Australia.
Even a firefighter has been charged with arson, bizarrely.
Arson, that means people lighting fires on purpose.
But Jennifer Anniston, on behalf of an Australian actor, had to lecture the rest of the world about global warming.
Russell Crowe could not be here with us tonight because he is at home in Australia protecting his family from the devastating bushfires.
He sent along this message in case he won.
Make no mistake, the tragedy unfolding in Australia is climate change-based.
We need to act based on science, move our global workforce to renewable energy, and respect our planet for the unique and amazing place it is.
That way, we all have a future.
Thank you.
Yeah.
How many times has Russell Crowe or Jennifer Anniston taken a private jet?
How many private jets in that room alone?
Amazingly, one of the stars actually picked up where Gervais left off.
Here's Joaquin Phoenix lecturing not Americans, but the Hollywood celebrities in the room.
Listen to this.
It's great to vote, but sometimes we have to take that responsibility on ourselves and make changes and sacrifices in our own lives.
And I hope that we can do that.
We don't have to take private jets to Palm Springs for the award sometimes or back, please.
And I'll try to do better and I hope you will too.
Thank you so much for putting up with me.
I'm so grateful.
I'm so grateful for this night and all of you.
Thank you.
That's pretty amazing.
Lecturing the celebrities about jetting from LA to Palm Springs.
It was amazing.
Notice how they put the music up pretty quickly to cut him off.
Well, Ricky Gervais did his job.
And the suck-up media, the access media, the media that lives off the table scraps from the stars, they knew what they had to do.
Ricky Gervais was right.
That probably was the last gig he'll get hosting a celebrity show.
He doesn't care.
He's a comedian from the United Kingdom.
Was he care?
But the local court hears, or courtesans might be more accurate, they knew they had to defend the honor of their people, their benefactors.
Look at this.
The Golden Globe's mood was already sober thanks to an impeachment, threat of war with Iran, and Australian bushfires.
The last thing anyone needed was Ricky Gervais there telling them they sucked.
That's from a writer at the LA Times.
Yeah, come on, guys.
The millionaires in that room were all so glum because in Australia there's bushfires.
So be extra nice to these millionaires, okay?
They've had a really tough go of it, especially when you tell them how awful, when they tell you how awful you are.
Don't push back.
Here's a line from that same writer in her larger piece in the LA Times.
The last thing anyone needed was for the smirking master ceremonies to reprimand them for having hope or taunt the room for trying to use their influence to change things for the better.
Oh man, smirking, that is the worst, unless you're a smirking Hollywood actor smirking at you and me.
And I mean, guys, come on, they try to use their influence to change things for the better, like Rose McGowan and Leo DiCaprio.
He's yachting and jetting around to change the world for the better, guys.
I liked that show.
The only part I watched was Ricky Gervais.
I'll keep an eye appealed for him a bit more.
I've seen him in a few things.
I might seek him out.
I mean, he's a liberal, of course.
But like Bill Maher of HBO, he's a rare liberal.
He's an equal opportunity liberal.
He tries to be consistent, tries to jab all sides.
He's not just a partisan hack, which is why he can still be funny.
Unlike the strictly partisan hacks at Saturday Night Live or Canada's Lame 22 Minutes, Ricky Gervais is a rare comedian, one who mocks power, not one who sucks up to it.
Stay with us for more.
It says DJ Trump is the real terrorist.
What makes you say that, sir?
Can you explain why Donald Trump is the real terrorist, sir?
He kills people.
No definition for terrorism, more than this, right?
Iranians Weigh In00:15:52
Can you explain why you're here displaying a picture of the general, ma'am?
It's for him.
Was he a great man?
Yeah, very good man.
Very good man.
He's great.
He's great.
Isn't Iran the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world?
Excuse me?
Isn't Iran the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world?
Actually, I believe that the U.S. is, but hey.
Some chilling footage from our very own city of Toronto, David Menzies, out on Saturday night.
Hundreds of supporters of the deceased terrorist General Qatim Soleimani.
We saw similar vigils across Canada.
In fact, they left a little shrine to him in various cities, including outside the Alberta legislature.
What was so disappointing in the Toronto event is that police threatened to arrest our own reporter, David Menzies, for referring to Soleimani as a terrorist, saying that to do so in the presence of his supporters would be to incite some sort of breach of the peace.
It was really quite shocking.
I recommend to you the full video on YouTube, on our channel.
But what about the larger issue of the targeted attack on Soleimani?
Will it create a new war, or is it just another in the endless back and forth in a troubled region joining us now via Skype to talk about that question?
Is our friend Dr. Daniel Pipes, the president of the Middle East Forum?
Professor Pipes, great to see you again.
Thanks for being here.
Hello, Ezra.
Hello, good to see you.
What do you make of this?
I mean, critics around the world seem to suggest we're on the brink of World War III.
Is that true?
I don't think so, no.
Don't think so because while the Iranians have focused on asymmetric warfare, let us say hitting soft targets, cyber warfare, and the like, they are, I believe, very reluctant to take on the United States mono-mano in a normal old-style military war.
No, this is not World War III.
It can be all sorts of trouble.
They can attack the Israelis and Jewish interests, the Saudis and Marathis, but I don't think they're going to be attacking the United States frontally.
They can't imagine it.
They don't have the power.
You know, I think it was Senator Lindsey Graham, who's a bit of an Iran hawk, who talked about oil refineries.
Donald Trump talked about 52 targets, a symbolic number he chose because of 52 hostages back in the 70s.
If America were to attack a single oil refinery in Iran, I mean, that would cause the world price to spike a few bucks, that's for sure.
But I think it would be devastating to Iran in a way that they haven't been hurt in really 40 years.
That's my own hunch based on what little I know about oil and the oil industry and the sanctions.
I think Iran's afraid because whatever damage they can do to others, a few missiles could knock out their huge source of foreign cash.
That's my thought.
What do you think?
No, I'm in agreement.
The Iranian leadership is rational.
It's not crazy.
And I can't imagine that they would take on the U.S. forces in a direct confrontation.
They'll do other things, but it won't be World War III.
Furthermore, I don't think that this is all that significant event in terms of Iranian capabilities.
Suleimani was an operative.
He was someone who executed the ideas of others.
Khameni Yi, the Supreme Guide, is the key person in Iran.
Soleimani was his aide.
Soleimani will be replaced.
Maybe the replacement will be less competent than him.
Maybe it'll be more competent than him.
But it won't be that much of a difference.
It's not the same as assassinating a head of state, executing a head of state.
That's a different story.
That can lead to major, major shifts.
This won't.
This is rather minor.
I don't think a year from now we'll be talking much about Qasim Soleimani.
You know, I read a report in the New York Times, and it's always very dangerous to put too much stock in a New York Times process story about what was Trump thinking, because I don't think the New York Times knows, and anyone who's leaking or gossiping to the New York Times probably doesn't know.
But they seem to imply in several of their reports that the generals put, or the national security team, whoever, put to Trump the targeted killing of Soleimani as sort of a crazy outlier idea to make other proposals look more sane.
And they were shocked that Trump went for it.
I don't know, I find that story irritating.
It suggests that the security establishment is trying to game Donald Trump, but maybe.
But without going into the details of their purposes and the like, it is shocking.
Because after all, Trump had been in retreat in the Middle East.
He had welcomed the Turks to batter our Kurdish allies in Syria.
He had not responded to the Iranian attack on two Saudi oil installations.
So it looked like he was being passive.
And then this.
It goes to show that one cannot predict Donald Trump.
Now, in some ways, that's an advantage.
He's a cowboy, and you've got to be careful if you're an opponent.
But otherwise, it's a real problem because allies and even Americans don't know what our policy is.
We don't know what to expect.
So it was a surprise.
I think nobody expected this.
And anyone who now retroactively says, oh, I was expecting this all along is making it up.
None of us expected this.
It's not what American policy was.
Well, here's my theory.
And again, I certainly didn't predict it, but if I had to try and backfill a rationale, here's my sense of it.
I remember on December 31st watching the shocking images of local militias in Baghdad, Iraq, trying to smash their way into the embassy.
And the embassy sort of just looking like it was going to take it, no real muscular defense.
And I immediately thought of Benghazi because I had thought so much about that in, I guess, the seven years since that event.
And I think Trump was alive to those optics too, because he immediately tweeted, this is the anti-Benghazi.
We sent help right away.
And I think this is my own retroactive explanation.
Trump was so frustrated by how that made him look weak, like Jimmy Carter, like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, that he, because it was an attack on an embassy, which is symbolically and legally and diplomatically and sovereignty-wise, actually American turf.
Like it's almost like attacking America proper, that this was more odious to him than the Turks going into Syria or handing over an American base to the Russians.
This pricked him more because this went to his identity as a protector of America.
That embassy was his.
And that's my theory of why he hit that heavy option, because this was a whole personal attack he felt on America on his watch that, if it went wrong, would have been his Benghazi.
That's my theory.
What do you make of that?
It makes sense.
Also, the fact that an American had been murdered just some days before by Iranian-backed forces.
Also, the fact that the Iranians seemed to be up to more things, that there were plans in the works.
So, yeah, this combination makes sense.
But again, it was not at all the way, the drift of American foreign policy under Donald Trump, or indeed under anyone.
I mean, the surprising thing about U.S.-Iranian relations now, 41 years since the Islamic Republic came into existence, is that with only one or two exceptions, way back in the beginning, we have not militarily confronted them.
We have economically confronted them, but not militarily.
So this is quite a shock.
This is 40 years later.
There has not been anything in between.
You know, there's a question of allies.
And of course, Boris Johnson came under tremendous pressure to distance himself from Trump.
And Justin Trudeau, he was on vacation in Costa Rica two and a half weeks.
So his foreign minister put out a statement that was very, it was equivocating.
It was saying we urge both sides to de-escalate.
I thought that was discrediting for Canada.
But whatever the frayed alliance on the ally side, I have to note that Iran wasn't exactly brimming with its defenders either.
At least that's how it seemed to me.
The Russians put out a statement that they weren't pleased with this, but it seemed like not a lot of, there wasn't this great rising up in defense of Iran.
Am I wrong?
I think you're right.
It was an attack on Trump rather than the defense of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Now, Iran has a lot of fingers around the world, and this Qasim Soleimani, it sounds like his job was to create these surrogate forces, whether it was in Syria or Hezbollah or elsewhere around the world.
In a way, that gives Iran a method to fight back against the great Satan without using its formal military.
I think its formal military would be wiped out in hours if it had a direct confrontation.
But you have Hezbollah launch rockets at Israel.
You blow up a Jewish center like Iran did in Buenos Aires a few decades ago.
Harder to trace back, harder to hit back symmetrically.
I'm actually worried about those very projects that Qasim Soleimani was working on, the asymmetrical style of warfare.
What do you think?
Yeah, no, I'm sorry to agree with you time and again, but yes, that's what the Iranians have specialized in.
And that is generally what weaker countries do, is they focus on asymmetric warfare and not confronting one-on-one the larger power, but looking for ways to undermine it, to discourage investment there, to cause casualties, to interfere with communications and so forth.
And it works.
It is quite easy to do compared to military invasion, no question.
That's what the Iranians have done for decades, and it's likely what they'll do today.
I think that Donald Trump, I wouldn't call him an isolationist, because he's certainly pressing NATO allies to beef up their work, and he smacks back hard at anyone who seems to cross him.
But I think he's withdrawing from what he considers to be foreign adventures.
He's just walking away from Syria in many ways.
I think he's lost senior advisors over it.
I think he lost his last defense minister, defense secretary over it.
I have no doubt it was part of his disagreement with John Bolton.
I think that Donald Trump is still de-escalating and withdrawing American forces around the world.
And this was just, he just couldn't resist smacking back because it made him look like he was retreating if he would cave into that.
I think Donald Trump is still withdrawing.
You're turning it into a Trump doctrine.
I don't think there is such a thing.
I think it is an incoherent, inconsistent set of actions, which depend on his mood at any given time.
I don't think that we can turn it into a doctrine.
It is not consistent.
Anything you'll give me, I can give you something in the opposite direction.
Because even, for example, even before this, while there was the withdrawal of American troops from Syria, there was an additional, roughly the same number of troops going to Saudi Arabia.
So, where's the logic?
What's the doctrine?
I don't see it.
No, I don't see a doctrine.
I do see someone who does not have a philosophy, but he responds to brush fires as they take place and responds differently on different occasions, depending on the mood, the circumstances, what he had for breakfast, the impeachment, the campaign for re-election.
Who knows what?
Who knows what makes goes into a decision?
There's a lot of people in that neighborhood that want a confrontation with Iran.
Israel is certainly threatened by Iran's nuclear program.
Saudi Arabia, some of the other Gulf states, there's sort of an anti-Iran coalition there.
And I think some of them have been stopped.
I understand that the U.S. administration actually stopped Israel from taking out Soleimani on a previous occasion.
So there's a lot of folks who want to take on Iran.
Do you think that the balance of power in the region is changed at all, even if nothing else comes from this?
No, not at all.
As I said before, he's an operative.
He was an operative.
He's not a key figure.
A general, not a decision maker.
Maybe he was a particularly good general.
I don't know.
He was a good general.
Maybe his successor, Ismail Khan Ghani, will be as good or better.
This has happened before, that an operative is taken out and his successor is no less competent.
No, I don't see any fundamental change, and I don't see World War III, and I don't see this being remembered a year from now.
I see this as a rather minor event.
It's getting a lot of attention.
Let me ask you one last question about it.
The kind of language coming out of Tehran is bluster and vengeance and death to America.
And the language coming out of Trump's Twitter feed, which I think is the most accurate weather vein of American diplomacy, because it's by the guy who's calling the shots, is we're even now.
Don't hit us again or we'll hit you 52 fold.
So I think in Trump's mind, Iran did a couple of bad things.
America smacked back and they're even, I think.
Whereas the language out of Tehran, again, and you correct me if I'm wrong, is we will avenge this.
You've done us a great dishonor.
So it feels like, to me, if you take the Iranians at their word, they feel humiliated and slighted and there's a need for vengeance.
And I guess that's why I wonder, if nothing else happens, has Iran been taken down a peg in the world's eye and in the eye of their own people?
If the Iranians do not respond forcefully against Americans, which I don't think they will, then they will have been knocked down a peg, but they can gun back a peg quite easily.
There's a lot of things they can do, for example, against the Saudis or the Emiratis or the Israelis or others.
They don't have to do it against the Americans.
But to me, the real question is what is next in American foreign policy?
So is this a one-off or is this a change in policy towards Iran?
If it's a one-off, it's of no particular significance.
If it's a change in policy towards Iran, it's a major event.
And this is a turning point.
And maybe the U.S. policy now for the next year and perhaps longer will be that we want a change of regime.
We want to really punish the Iranians for their behavior.
Is This a Turning Point?00:02:22
That would be big news.
But so far, there's no indication of that.
And as I suggested before, there's no Trump doctrine and there's no way of predicting it.
And he does seem inclined to want not to get involved in foreign wars.
So I don't think this is a major event.
I think it's a dramatic event, in some ways a spectacular event, but it's not a very important one.
And I know I'm in a small minority in this, but there you have it.
No, you know, as the days pass, I'm coming to your way of thinking.
It's funny, I spend too much time on Twitter, and even worse, there's a new social media app that the kids like called TikTok.
I'd say the average age is maybe 20.
And the number one theme is World War III.
Are we going to be conscripted?
But I think that that's the accelerating echo chambers of people who know little but like to give hot takes.
I think that maybe the cooler heads, even in Tehran, say, okay, let's just slowly back away here before we get our refinery blown up.
And I think Donald Trump feels pretty good about a precision strike.
I mean, I have to say, to have that kind of precision strike within 48 hours of the offense, that kind of accuracy, but also restraint.
He didn't flatten a whole apartment block.
He didn't blow up hundreds of collateral damage.
I have to say that despite the New York Times mocking him, that's a hell of an operation to achieve within 48 hours of an offense.
Yeah, extraordinary intelligence and extraordinary military capabilities to be so precise so quickly.
Yeah, no question.
Very, very impressive.
Well, we'll see how things go in the weeks ahead.
Dr. Pipes, it's always great to have you on the show.
Thanks for your time today.
All right, there you have it.
You're always welcome back on the show, that's for sure.
That's Dr. Daniel Pipes.
He's the president of the Middle East Forum.
Stay with us.
more ahead on Apple.
On my monologue Friday about America taking out Iranian General Soleimani, Sandy writes, Orange Man bad.
If Trump didn't react, he's weak.
If he attacks, he's crazy.
Trump 2020.
Yeah, as our friend Daniel Pipes points out, it might not actually be that big a deal, other than everyone has their interest in making it a big deal.
American Democrats And Iran00:00:40
American Democrats and Iran itself.
I don't know.
I think it's a medium-sized deal.
I'm glad it happened.
Sean writes: terrorists are very fortunate to have allies like Democrats.
Yeah, I tell you, some of their language, some of their messaging was identical in the aftermath.
Chad writes: anybody who kills an American abroad is a target.
It should be easy to understand.
Yeah, and that's something that has not been the case for decades.
If I was an Iranian, if I was Somali, if I was al-Shabaab in East Africa, if I was North Korea, I would think twice about laying a finger on an American.