My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Scott Galloway Forgiveness, Jetson One Flying Car, Maricopa Election Audit, Lewiston Shooter Rumors, Israel Hamas War, Dearborn Michigan Terrorist Concerns, ESG Funds Closing, Elon Musk, Gaza Starlink, Sponge Bomb, Naftali Bennett, Gaza Siege Plan, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
And if you'd like your experience, which will already be amazing, to go to levels that nobody could even understand, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank of Chelsea Stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like a coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine.
At the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better is called the simultaneous sip.
And it's going to happen now.
Go.
Well, would you like to hear all the stories?
Stories of the day?
That's why you come here.
For the stories.
I'm going to turn this device upside down first.
On the locals people.
If you'd like to say hi to the locals people, they're right here.
They will be on this iPad.
There we go.
Much better.
Now, First story.
I saw a speech by Vivek Ramaswamy.
He's got some things to say about Hamas.
He'd like to see the top 100 Hamas leaders heads on stakes.
As a message to the rest.
To which I say, Vivek, decaf.
Just one word, decaf.
Don't really need their heads on a stake.
Too far.
Dial it back a little bit.
Just about 10%.
Heads off of stakes, but still dead.
Still dead, yes, we can all agree on that.
Heads on stakes?
A little too far.
But I gotta say, you'll never forget it.
Talk about visual, visual persuasion.
If this were Trump, what would I say about it?
I would say you cannot get the image out of your head of heads on a stake.
And number two, the only thing you'll remember is that he was the toughest one on Hamas.
That's all you'll remember.
You won't take it too seriously.
You'll just say, whoa, that was stronger than anything anybody else said.
And it was visual.
So even though I have fun with it by saying he should switch to decaf, you're not going to forget it.
If you heard it at all, you're not going to forget it.
So that was pretty good.
Pretty good persuasion branding there.
Matthew Perry has tragically passed away, drowning in a hot tub.
He had a long history of drug and alcohol abuse.
It's hard to imagine that's not part of the story, but we don't know.
He generally was not The picture of health in his later years.
He was 54.
So that was pretty alarming.
I don't have anything to say about that except it's terrible.
There's not much to add.
Scott Galloway.
You know Scott Galloway?
So he was on Bill Maher's, and I may have mentioned this, but he said that he was part of the school board for his kid's school, I guess, and he was pushing hard for keeping kids out of school, social distancing.
And he now says he was totally wrong about that.
It was the wrong way to go.
But he asks that people maybe have some grace about it.
Because he was trying.
And everybody was trying and then some of them got it wrong.
And now he's saying, I tried.
Tried to keep everybody safe.
Got it wrong.
Now the reaction that most of the people who believe they got it right, or would have gotten it right, was screw him!
You hurt our children.
You must go to jail and pay for it forever.
I disagree with all of you.
And I will remind you that at the beginning, The very beginning of the pandemic, there was something I told you all, which I'm going to stay true to.
I said there's a big old pandemic and nobody knows what the right thing to do is.
But, unlike you and I, there are people who are going to have to make decisions without knowing what's the right decision.
When they make the wrong decision, and they will, not all of them will be right, some will guess right, some will guess wrong, we should not Hold it against them after the fact, if later we find out it was the wrong decision.
And I'm going to stick to that.
So I think everybody who says he should be punished is wrong.
You're all wrong, in one sense.
You're not wrong in terms of how it feels.
How you feel about it is simply up to you.
But in terms of a system that you want to support, you don't want to start punishing people who are Well-meaning, well-educated, well-informed, but got something wrong.
In the context of nobody knew what was right.
Now, I also said, at the very beginning of the pandemic, I said, we have basically a bunch of binary decisions.
You know, vaccination, yes or no.
Lockdown, yes or no.
So a lot of it is yes or no.
In these yes or no decisions, the thing you can guarantee is that somebody will be right.
And somebody will be wrong.
Now you can't guarantee that if there are millions of solutions, but if it's either yes or no, yes we do it, no we don't, you're going to know at some point what was right, and you'll know some of it was wrong.
So I think we should be a little bit more humble, those of us who were right.
So if you were right about anything, somebody was going to be right.
Because there were people on both sides.
And everybody was operating without complete information.
So being right is nothing to brag about, honestly.
It really isn't.
Being wrong is nothing to feel bad about.
The only thing I would have felt bad about is people who didn't try.
If you didn't try, or you didn't try to get informed, or try to make a difference, well, maybe that wasn't useful.
But if you tried, You're okay with me.
And I do understand that the outcome was horrible for children.
I get it.
But I'm not going to tear the country apart by going after people who are smart and well-meaning and tried.
That doesn't help.
Who's that help?
Who's better off for that?
So would you like that the next time?
Let me just ask this question.
Would you like the next time there's an emergency That all of the well-meaning, well-educated, you know, people who are very capable.
Scott Galloway is a very capable adult.
Right?
You want the very capable adults to sit it out next time?
Because you're all assholes?
If you're going to be an asshole to the people who tried, you're not going to get them to try again.
So what do you want?
What do you want for next time?
You want everybody to just shut the fuck up?
That's all you do?
That would be better.
So the next time there's an emergency or something, just everybody just take a pass.
Because you don't want to get in trouble.
All right, well, I'm sure glad that there are people like Scott Galloway in the world.
He got that one wrong.
He says he got it wrong.
Move on.
All right, I'll take 10 of him over anybody who is criticizing him.
I'll take 10 of him over everybody who's criticizing him.
Because the people criticizing are not systems thinkers.
You're being goal-oriented.
The goal was to get it right, right?
The goal was to get it right.
But sometimes you don't.
The system, the system is to let the smart people do as well as they can, to make their best judgment, learn what you can from it, and then maybe adjust for the next time.
But if your system is to punish people who guessed wrong, that's a terrible system.
You're just going to discourage people from trying.
So think about it in terms of a system.
Don't think of it in terms of a binary, oh, I was right, my enemies were wrong, which might be also true, that you were right and your enemies are wrong.
It doesn't help you.
How does that help you?
Not at all.
All right.
Flying cars in Italy.
There's a company that's making a product called the Jetson One.
Finally, flying cars.
Now, it doesn't fly that long.
I guess you have to charge it for hours to get 10 minutes.
But it's basically a bicycle that flies.
It's this tiny little thing.
You just sit in it.
It's got four propellers, like a drone, and it just flies.
For $100, somebody says, do you think a time will come when the rest of the world looks at Israel and thinks they're too great a liability to continue to exist?
No.
That wasn't really worth $100.
But thanks.
No, I don't think that people will give up on Israel.
All right.
As you know, there have been many claims made about the 2020 election, but nothing has been proven to my satisfaction that there was anything illegal that would have changed the result.
But there's always drama, and there's fun.
I love what's happening in Maricopa.
So there's some kind of, you know, Extra checking, I don't know if you want to call it an audit, or is it an audit?
So there were some claims that they're still looking into, and the claims are that there were 200,000 individual ballots that were printed on some kind of unauthorized paper, which some would suggest was intentional and or You know, a sign of something illegal.
I'm not making that claim.
I'm saying that is the claim being made.
But here's the fun part of that.
I may have some of the details wrong.
So give me a fact check on this.
My understanding is that those ballots still exist and they're in a room that's locked away.
And if we could get if if the people who want to check it could get access to the room literally just unlock it.
And look at it, that it would be really easy to see it's not the right paper stock that was the only paper stock allowed for the election.
And that would prove that there's some big irregularity.
Maybe then you could look into it.
Now it could be they just ran out of paper or somebody made a paper mistake.
Maybe somebody didn't have access to all the paper they needed and got a second source and they just didn't know.
Anything's possible, right?
I love the fact that just maybe there's a room with a lock on the door that unlocking the door could answer all of your questions.
Isn't that just the greatest drama?
If only they'd just unlocked that door.
What's back there?
Now, if it's like every other Kraken, it will turn out not to be what you thought it was, or hoped it was, or suspected it was.
But I love the drama of it.
That they exist, they're behind the door, and if you could get the key, in a legal sense, if you could get the key, we'll know what happened.
I doubt that we'll actually know what happened if we got the key, but it's a fun story.
Speaking of fun stories that are actually bad, my local DA, the Alameda County DA, Pamela Price, she made the mistake of parking her car in Oakland.
Do I need to finish the story?
You could complete the story without even knowing the rest of the story.
I'll just say the first part again.
I'm not even sure I'm going to tell you the rest of the story.
Because the one that's in your head is so close to the real one.
Close enough.
Yeah.
Alameda County DA, who is allegedly one of the Soros type DAs.
She had a laptop she left in her car and parked it in Oakland.
Well, you know, I'm not in the habit of giving advice about crime to local DAs, but if I had a laptop and I had a car, I would not combine the laptop and the car with Oakland.
Talk about asking for it.
But of course, she got help from the police.
Who told her healthfully she should go online and make a report.
If she didn't want to wait for an officer to arrive.
Because it might take so long for a police officer to arrive that they don't want her standing on the streets in Oakland.
Would you?
You might want to You might want to get out of there as soon as possible, because you're in Oakland.
Maybe online, talk to us online, rather than wait for a cop.
We don't know if we can get there in time to save your life.
Anyway, that's the news from walking distance from my house.
Well, it'll take a long time to walk there, but I can do it.
Somebody's spending another $100 to ask the same question again.
If you wouldn't mind, could you please explain why you don't believe the rest of the world will eventually consider Israel a liability?
Well, who's the rest of the world?
If you're talking about the Christian world, they're too linked, you know, by tradition and everything else.
So no, the Christian world isn't going to give up on Israel.
And the, let's say, secular people in Christian worlds saying, you know, China doesn't care, right?
So it's basically, you know, the pro-Palestinian types will always be against them.
The left will always be against them.
The right will probably always be for them.
But no, I don't see it giving up.
Now, if you're asking, would it be wise For the rest of the world to say you're too much trouble.
Doesn't matter.
Because it won't happen.
It doesn't matter what's wise.
It's sort of like talking about should Israel, you know, attack Gaza.
You could talk about it all day long but it doesn't matter because they're going to attack Gaza.
There's nothing you can do about it.
So there's not much to talk about.
I don't think there's any chance at all.
That Israel will be abandoned by its primary supporters.
I mean, if you're talking in 20 years to 50 years, I don't see it changing.
Anything can change in 200 years.
But no, what holds us together is psychology.
And the violence has never changed the psychology that I can remember.
You know, terrible things have been done to Israel.
Israel's been accused of doing terrible things back.
You know, who knows what to believe about anything?
But it doesn't seem to change anything.
So I don't think this will change much either.
All right.
So Germany's running out of boomers, but just in time to replace them with robots.
So I guess it's really hard to get people in Germany To do skilled work.
Not enough of them, and so robots to the rescue.
I mean, it blows my mind that we're having a skilled worker shortage in the world at exactly the same time.
Well, you must have too much money, but thank you.
Somebody's paying $100.
somebody's paying $100.
This would be $300 they paid.
But the third $100 is just a thank you.
So, thank you.
I appreciate that.
But I would encourage the rest of you.
These super prompts are not ideal for the live format because it's a little distracting.
But I appreciate it.
I always appreciate it.
But just in terms of the flow of the thing, better not to do them.
I love your money though.
Thank you.
All right.
So let's talk about that main shooter.
The guy who killed a bunch of people in Maine, but then he killed himself.
I've seen no media reports that there were two bullets in him.
That seems to be just an internet rumor thing.
So I've seen nothing that would suggest there were two bullets in him.
Right?
There's nobody actually.
Now, right, yeah, there's no credible report of that.
So forget about that.
We still don't know where his boat is.
Why don't we know where his boat is?
That was like a big part of the story.
I'd love to know if they ever found his boat.
I mean, maybe he just put it at a different dock and there's nothing to it.
But you kind of want to know that.
Also, wasn't it rumored at one point that he broke up with a girlfriend?
And we've heard nothing from any girlfriend.
So I think the girlfriend part was fake.
The two bullets part was fake.
And then we also know that the locals knew he was a shooter risk.
So the locals actually knew it, because there were enough hints and suggestions that the police actually went to his house to try to find him, and they were not successful.
So I don't know if they gave up, because they couldn't figure out where he was, so they just thought, So I don't know what happened to that.
But apparently there was somewhere in the system they knew he was a risk and they were looking for him.
So that's interesting.
So I think the odds that we'll hear much more about that situation seem low.
Yeah.
Yeah, I don't think it's likely that it was anything except exactly what it looks like.
It was probably exactly what it looks like.
Crazy guy with a gun.
Somebody suggested that if he was a crazy, paranoid guy who heard voices, that he may have chosen the bowling alley and the bar that he shot up because he imagined something happened there.
Like he imagined somebody was talking about him or something.
Could be that.
I don't know.
It still doesn't make sense why he killed himself in a dumpster by his old job.
That still doesn't quite make sense.
So, and yeah, I still have lots of questions about this, but we'll see.
Alright, here's a thought experiment that I like to put out every now and then to make everybody feel bad.
It goes like this.
Alright, imagine in a magical world, so this is not actually possible, but imagine it were.
If somebody could tell you The real story, like all the bad stuff, behind the scenes of every major entity and political party in the United States.
So you knew what really happened, like why decisions were made, and where the money came from, and who's getting paid, and who's corrupt, and all the schemes that have tried before, and all the fake news around them.
Suppose you were taught that.
And you knew all the bad history as well as what's happened recently.
You knew all the bad things about every part of our government and every politician, except there'd just be one exception.
The only thing you wouldn't know anything about, more than you already know, is about our election systems.
So you would be taught the full level of deep corruption in every one of our other systems, but you would learn nothing about our election system.
What would you assume about the election system?
Pretty good?
Looking good?
Well, that's pretty much the situation that we're in right now.
So even though we don't magically know about all of our other systems, we know enough.
We know enough to know that there are major members of Congress who are not just maybe corrupt, totally corrupt.
Just the way you thought it.
So while I don't believe that, you know, Pizzagate was necessarily real, there is some sense that there are bad people doing Epstein Island things for real.
There really is an Epstein Island.
That was a real place.
So you don't have to know every bad thing that happened with every government entity and every important person to know That anything that can be corrupted, hello?
Can you finish my sentence?
Anything that can be corrupted, it will be.
Right.
And there are still people who say, for example, We know that there was no corruption in 2020 because there were lots of challenges and none of them met the level that they would change the election.
It turns out that there were more successful challenges than you remember.
If you subtract from the challenges, Kyle Becker did a good thread on this, if you subtract the challenges that were thrown out because of standing, and you can question whether that was even appropriate, But standing means the people bringing the suit were not the ones who were specifically damaged by it, I guess.
So they didn't have the standing to take it.
Or something like that.
I mean, that's the dumb guy's impression.
But of the ones that the courts accepted and said, OK, you're the appropriate person to bring it.
We're the appropriate people to look at it.
The pro-Trump people won more than they lost.
Did you know that?
But there were smaller improprieties.
They didn't change the whole picture.
They were just real things that really happened.
Which does not, by itself, doesn't say anything about any larger attempt.
Except that there are people involved in elections who are willing to do sketchy things.
And sometimes things don't add up.
So, I think it's laughable to imagine that all of our systems in the country are broken.
We are completely aware of it, but maybe not the total depth of how broken they are.
Except for our election systems.
All good.
Election systems.
Now, which part of the, which court looked at the alleged 200,000 ballots in Maricopa?
Which one did that?
None, right?
So can you say for sure that there was no cheating when there are 200,000 ballots sitting in a room that are questioned?
I suspect, if I had to bet on it, I'd bet that whatever's behind that room doesn't change anything.
Because the smart bet is against every claim.
Which is different from saying every claim is wrong.
I'm just saying the smart bet is no, probably not a Kraken.
Probably not.
But it doesn't mean there is no Kraken.
Just means bet against it if you have to.
All right, let's talk about the Middle East a little bit.
I was thinking yesterday that the whole Middle East situation looks like a murder-suicide situation.
The only difference is we can't decide who's the murderer and who's the suicide.
You think about it?
Is Hamas a suicide situation and they're trying to murder Israelis but it's a suicide plan?
Or is the existence of Israel in the middle of all this hate?
Essentially a suicide thing and Hamas is trying to murder them at the same time.
So it just looks like, it looks like by design it couldn't possibly work.
I mean, it's like somebody created a situation that's guaranteed to be terrible forever.
And then everybody said, all right, I guess this is the best we can do.
This terrible situation that can never be better, it's a murder-suicide.
You know, slow moving.
It's like a slow motion murder-suicide.
Anyway, and I challenge people to describe any scenario in which it works out in the long run.
In other words, what's the scenario where Israel finds something like the peace that other countries enjoy, where their neighbors are not trying to kill them all the time?
What scenario would ever get you to that point?
So the trends that we see are the population is growing faster in the countries that want to destroy Israel.
Israel's, you know, geographically in the middle of them.
So you've got a growing population of haters.
Even if it's only a small population, within the larger population that wants to kill all Israelis, it's still growing.
Because the larger population is growing, so whatever percentage they are is growing as well.
The children, at least in the Palestinian areas, appear to be weaponized.
Meaning that they've been taught that it's their sacred duty to grow up and kill Jews.
Now, I don't know what percentage of them I don't know if it's 80% or 10% or 2%.
It's a little unclear if that's universal, but I guess it is.
If I had to guess, I'd guess it's closer to universal than not.
Yeah, it's probably 100%.
And how do you fix that?
If today all the adults surrendered and said, oh, Hamas didn't work, sorry, didn't mean it, we'll put down our guns, you'd have an entire generation Which is like half of the entire population, because the young people are about half of all the Palestinians, who would just replace them.
And while they were replacing them as adults, the new children would be taught to be the new replacements of those adults.
So as long as the education system is weaponizing children, there are more children every day, and then the power of weapons A weapon that one individual could use is getting stronger every day, right?
One person will be able to launch a drone that does immense damage pretty soon, if not already.
So under that scenario, what is the scenario in which everything works out in the long run?
Can you even describe a world where that happens?
I can't think of anything.
Can you?
The Rapture.
To me, it always just looks like buying time.
I mean, I think Israel is going to be there for a while.
But how in the world can it, you know, how can it survive in the long run?
Let me put it another way.
I'll borrow somebody's example.
For Israel to survive, it has to be able to successfully repel every attempt to destroy it.
Forever.
That would be what survival is.
Destroying every attempt to destroy it.
But the people doing the destroying themselves typically get destroyed.
But they only have to be right once.
So the math is really, really bad here.
Israel can destroy the enemies 99 out of 100 times.
But the enemy only has to get it right once and Israel disappears.
Now, we're not there yet.
But did you see what happened when they all just sort of ran toward Israel individually?
Got on their motorcycles and their little paraplanes or whatever they were.
And it was just a bunch of individuals who were attacking.
To me, that's always been the big risk, is the wave of individuals.
I don't think the big risk is necessarily missiles, although it is a really, really big risk.
I don't know if the biggest risk is necessarily nuclear, because it's hard to imagine that anybody who's Islamic would want to irradiate a holy zone, right?
It's a holy land for both sides, right?
So I don't really see a nuke.
It seems unlikely.
But if you just get more and more people who are on that Captagon drug, The drug where they can hand you a rifle and say, I've got an idea.
Why don't you run as fast as you can into that hail of gunfire and see how many people you can kill on the other side.
Yeah, don't worry about the harm.
Yeah, don't worry about anything.
Just run and shoot.
If you have enough of them, could they not overrun, basically, an Israeli city?
So, you know, and especially we saw that the Israeli citizens are largely unarmed.
So it would be, you know, same kind of thing but bigger.
So I don't know what stops it from happening in the future.
And I didn't see anybody who could describe a scenario where it does work.
I will say that from the missile category, you know, let's say Hezbollah's got 200,000 pretty good missiles at this point, which should be enough to take out an entire city, I would think, and then some.
But Israel's also working on that, you know, laser beam defense weapon.
And I can't imagine anything else that would work, if that works.
Because there's no way you're going to shoot a missile to block every incoming missile.
Because the bad guys will just have a bunch of fake missiles.
They will make as many fake missiles as it takes to overwhelm your missile defense.
But, if your missile defense is lasers, The lasers are just and take out the missiles as quickly as they're launched.
So then there's this fast missile launcher.
Then the bad guys adjust too.
They're like, OK, we can't get a missile through.
We'll put it on the back of a motorcycle and a bunch of us will just make a run at you.
Something like that.
Anyway, it's really difficult to imagine where it all goes, but it's I don't know.
Let me ask you this.
Is there any parallel in history where there was a little landlocked country surrounded by people with bad intentions who want to take it over, where it lasted in the long run?
So Taiwan's lasted a while, but there's no way that Taiwan will always be separate from China.
Poland?
Yeah, well, okay, landlocked is relative.
Nuclear-powered laser satellites?
Yeah.
All right, well, so apparently Kyle Bass was posting today that he talked to somebody who said the big terrorist network in the United States is In Dearborn, Michigan.
So the United States now has a bunch of Hamas and Hezbollah supporters, and quite a few of them, and they're in Dearborn, Michigan.
Now the question is, how many Islamic supporters would there need to be in America before America was guaranteed to turn Islamic?
The number is really small, it's like 10%.
I think Europe is probably over that number, right?
So Europe is above the number where they can survive, I think.
Survive as their current form.
They would become Islamic.
So I think Great Britain, France are probably lost.
lost, or if you like what it's going to turn into, you'd like it, I guess.
So to me, it looks like there's...
I don't see how that could be reversed.
Because the thing about Islam is it's hard to leave.
And many of them, well there's a portion of them that have a pretty aggressive opinion about things.
So watch out for Dearborn, Michigan.
I think maybe the next hundred years will be about trying to escape war zones.
Because they're going to be everywhere.
Well, the good news is that ESG is dying.
There were three ESG funds launched recently, while 13 closed down in the last three months.
There were 13 ESG funds that closed in the last three months.
As you know, BlackRock's Larry Fink said, quote, I'm ashamed of being part of this conversation talking about ESG.
So they were big pushers of ESG, but it became so scandalized that they didn't want to even be part of it.
Now, it's not dead, because there were three ESG funds launched, even though 13 closed.
But I think you can see the trend.
Looks like ESG doesn't have a chance.
Well, Elon Musk, of course, has been dragged into the Gaza situation.
I wondered why it took so long.
I'm just waiting.
It's like, okay, how does this...
Will the current fad of being anti-Israel I don't know that that's a FAD.
I don't think that's going to change.
I believe that the U.S.
educational system is anti-Israel.
Unless you somehow change the entire education system, what's going to happen?
So it's not a trend if it's being taught to young people.
If it's being taught to young people, then it's just education.
As bad as that is.
All right.
So Israel cut ties with Starlink.
Because Musk said that he would give Starlink access to only the authorized international bodies that were trying to help people in Gaza.
So he wasn't going to make it available to all people, and certainly not all terrorists.
But he was going to make it available to the aid people.
But Israel didn't like that because, quite reasonably, they're not sure if the aid people would be the only ones who got it.
So Israel's basically just closed down everything and make it hard in there.
There's a new technology for tunnels.
I knew there would be a new technology for tunnels.
Did I tell you that?
Does anybody remember?
Maybe I only said it on the locals only live stream.
I said that you would find out that Israel had the best tunnel It's killing technology.
And I guess they've been trading with one of these technologies called Spongebombs.
Not Spongebob.
Spongebob actually lives under the sea in a giant pineapple.
Almost useless against tunnels.
So not SpongeBob, but SpongeBomb.
So apparently it's two different chemicals.
You throw this SpongeBomb down the tunnel.
When it explodes, it expands into this big sponge thing that hardens and blocks the tunnel.
Now you say to yourself, well, why do you need that?
You could just, you know, bulldoze the tunnel or something.
Well, you would use it if you're in the tunnel trying to clear it.
So let's say you're in a tunnel and there's more than one way, and suddenly you hear the bad guys coming down one of the tunnel things, but you still have another tunnel that you could escape to.
You can block their tunnel and still do your work.
So as you hear the bad guys coming down this tunnel, you throw the bomb down, block it, and then you keep working down the rest of the tunnels.
It's pretty bad stuff.
I guess a couple of Israeli soldiers were actually blinded just doing exercise with it recently.
So it's dangerous stuff, but it's one of their options.
All right, here's the most interesting thing.
I think it was the last Prime Minister of Israel had a very long, his name is Naftali Bennett.
He printed a very long explanation of what the strategy is or should be for Israel's attack on Gaza.
Now what he's suggesting is a slow squeeze, a siege.
So instead of going in hard, he's saying squeeze it and siege it.
Siege it and squeegee it.
So I'm going to read a chat GPT-4 summarization of what the last prime minister said of Israel.
So just see if it sounds familiar.
Maybe you've heard some of this before.
But here's the idea.
So this is chat GPT did a not just a translation but also a summarization.
So these are not his exact words.
So the siege plan would be to suffocate the Hamas operatives in the tunnels.
So if they can turn off the power, the tunnels become almost impossible to stay in.
So they could have an air problem and all kinds of problems.
So if they go in hard, well, I'll just read it.
Surprise tactic.
Instead of entering deep into Gaza, the plan suggests imposing a complete siege on northern Gaza.
Forcing the boss operatives to leave their tunnels.
Right.
So the first part is you don't have to go down the tunnels.
The tunnels are already a prison.
Do you think that even one day in that tunnel is a good day?
I don't think they're having any good days down there for the rest of time.
So basically they're already captured.
Why would you lose any more soldiers to capture somebody who's already captured?
They're already in the tunnel.
They're in the worst place you could be in the world.
There's no place I would less rather be than in a tunnel in Gaza.
So you say leave them there.
They have to come out eventually or just die there, I guess.
Security strip.
Establishing a two kilometer deep permanent security strip along the border.
So they would clear that out with firepower.
And I'm not sure the exact purpose of it.
If Israel wanted to take the nuclear option, would the US be incentivized to take them out before they can do it?
Are you really asking me if the United States would nuke Israel to stop Israel from nuking somebody else?
Is that really what you're asking?
The answer would be no.
We will not nuke Israel to stop them from doing anything.
So the security strip, I don't know its purpose, but I suggested at one point that they make a security strip that would allow anybody who's a civilian who wants to get out, they'd have a chance.
So at least there'd be some place they could run to.
It's like, oh, if I can get to the security strip, maybe I can run to the other side.
I don't know if it's only for that, or if it's just for transportation, but they need that security strip.
It's probably also so that they can move their assets where they want to quickly.
Continuous firepower, so they would just keep pounding things, pounding and pounding.
And then here's the next part.
They would isolate neighborhoods without having to clear every tunnel.
So essentially, they'd find a neighborhood that's easy to conquer with relatively low losses, and they would just conquer it.
And then they would look for another low-hanging fruit, and they would conquer that.
And they would basically just shrink the battlefield.
Good idea?
Yeah.
Just do it slowly.
Slow squeeze.
And he actually uses the word squeeze, I think, in an article about it.
So a siege, squeeze, humanitarian corridors.
Oh, actually that was exactly what I was talking about.
So give them a corridor so that they can get, you know, water and food and medicine to the locals.
And then evacuate them a little at a time.
So as you're able, Just keep evacuating people.
If you don't do the big push, you also get to keep negotiating for the release of hostages.
You got that?
that.
He says, strategic patience, utilizing time as an advantage.
Who told you that time was on Israel's side?
Now, they do have the issue that they got too many mobilized soldiers that are out of the economy that They've got to get them back.
But if you don't do the hard full push, you also don't need your full military.
They just take their time.
Siege it and squeeze it.
Minimizing collateral damage.
Of course, that's going to be good for public opinion as well as everything else.
They say this would, well, The ex-Prime Minister says, surprise and deception.
So the plan is to catch Hamas off guard because they sort of expected a full-on attack.
So if you just don't give them the full-on attack, they may not be as prepared for the siege.
Pressure shift.
Transferring the pressure from Israel to Hamas changes the power dynamic.
It does, right?
If you do this slow squeeze, there's no question who's in control from that point on.
So this would force the Hamas leadership to choose between disarming or facing a historical disaster.
Basically a slow-motion death to all the Hamas fighters, or disarming and just surrendering.
I assume they'll take death, but we'll see.
And I like this part, reduced likelihood of Hezbollah getting involved.
So if Israel did, you know, a big, brutal, bloody, you know, head-on attack, That would be a trigger that would make it easy for the other Israel-hating entities to get involved.
It's like, ah, you went too far!
Too far!
But if you use the technique that I always tell you my mother taught me, that you can get used to anything, if you simply keep squeezing, and the news on a Tuesday sounds exactly like the news on Monday, it's hard for anybody to say, ah, you went too far!
Because today is just like Monday.
You blew up a few buildings.
You squeezed it a little bit more.
We don't really have a trigger to go.
It's sort of like it turned into just background noise.
So if they can do that, they can keep other people out of the fight.
Pretty good strategy.
Align the return of the Israeli hostages with the end of Hamas's power.
And the longer they hold the hostages while the siege is going on, the less power they have.
Compliance with international laws so that they can make sure that Israel is doing the thing that would look the most humane, but also might be the most effective.
So that is sort of a twofer.
You would want to be the most effective, but usually that means the most casualties.
But this is a strategy that's the most effective and the least strategies, at least the least casualties.
Now, that assumes that there's some point where the civilians can mostly be somehow released from the battle zone.
If they can never be released, it ends the same, everybody's dead.
But, you know, much better chance under international law especially to get them out this way.
So basically they want to strategically weaken and isolate Hamas, keep them alive as their symbol of hate.
I mean actually keeping Hamas alive for a little bit, that might not be bad.
You know, make sure that we don't forget them.
If Hamas got beaten in a week, a month later we wouldn't remember them.
But making us think about them from three years to five years, that's an interesting strategy.
So this plan hits the right psychology, international law, military effectiveness, gets some of their workers back to the regular day jobs, and would be, I think, completely effective.
So does that plan sound familiar?
Does that sound like any plan that you've heard from anybody before?
Doing the slow squeeze siege?
Right, Jim Davis, he talks about this all the time.
All right.
It's old news.
It's old news.
There's nothing I've ever talked about in my life where somebody didn't say two things.
One, it's impossible, it's a bad idea.
Two, it's already being done.
I always hear both of those things.
Already being done.
And it's impossible.
All right.
Gold's at 2,000.
All right.
I just saw the best military idea I've ever seen.
Require all the people in Gaza to get vaccinations.
All right.
Oh, that's just that's just messed up.
That's messed up.
All right, ladies and gentlemen.
Those are my comments for today.
Is there anything I missed?
Anybody else want to ask a question?
We talked about Starlink in Israel.
Yeah.
I mean, I'm not sure it makes that much difference whether Starlink is there.
You know, if it's only authorized for the aid people, I don't know how it could be that bad.
But anyway, Israel has to be sort of absolutist at this at the moment.
I'll give you a Maui update.
Maui update.
Now the Maui update unfortunately doesn't have any of the, you know, behind the scenes stuff.
But the locals, let me say this for Maui, the locals are begging for people to come visit Hawaii for the places that were unaffected.
Begging.
Now I don't know how hard it is to get a place, but for the parts of the island that were not affected by the fire, The restaurants are open.
The hotels are looking for business, I think.
But I'll give you one warning.
There are a lot of locals who are still put up in hotels.
So you could end up at a facility that's got a lot of locals in it, as well as guests, if that matters to you.
Might be a little different vibe to it.
Hawaii is open.
Maui is open for business.
Just not the Lahaina part.
So there's tons of parts that were not directly affected.
And let me put it this way.
The locals are mostly back to work.
The hotel service people.
But they're not getting tips.
The reason they're not getting tips is because they're handling a lot of locals, because the locals are there, but also there just aren't enough guests.
So the employees in the service industry are just getting killed because they're getting base pay.
If you know what base pay for a server or bartender is, you know how dire that is.
Yeah, base pay.
It's like below minimum.
It's way below.
It's way below minimum because they assume that there are tips.
So it's a dire situation employment-wise.
So if anybody was thinking of going, if you had any consideration of going there, you'd be doing a solid service to the people in Maui.
So I would encourage you to take a look at it.
What is the baldy take on Dean Phillips?
Well, I appreciate your description of me as the baldy take, but I do accept that.
I do accept that.
The whole Phillips thing, running for president against Joe Biden, I don't know what he expects to accomplish.
I don't see how he could ever win the nomination.
But there is definitely a need for a backup.
The odds of Biden getting the nomination and then failing physically before the election itself is really high.
Really high.
So if the Democrats don't have at least one normal person just sort of sitting there hanging out who's not Kamala Harris, they're in a lot of trouble.
Because I think their odds are not looking good right now.
So it makes perfect sense as a backup plan.
He doesn't have any chance if Biden's reasonably healthy.
What was the other question about?
Oh, Pence dropped out.
Yeah, Mike Pence.
Do you know what I thought about when I heard that Mike Pence dropped out?
I was suddenly reminded, oh yeah, Mike Pence is running for president.
I don't know who's gonna get his half of 1% support.
Who knows?
Who knows?
But that was, I think a few more will drop out pretty soon.
You know, the people who are sub 2% probably need to do something else.
Am I related to John Adams, the president?
I'm not a descendant of, but we probably meet in England.
At some point, I assume.
I assume all the Adamses are related in England, if you go back far enough, but I'm not sure.
So, let's see, Mike Pence is out.
Who's your least trusted candidate now?
How do you feel about Nikki Haley?
Does she feel like a military-industrial complex?
Joyce?
Or is she just good at what she does?
I'm not going to repeat that word you just used.
All right, rhinos.
Yeah, she, I think Nikki Haley creates a lot of, she has a Trump-like approach in the sense that people, when people are angry, they're really angry at her.
Have you noticed that?
When I look at Mike Pence, I say, well, wouldn't be my choice for president.
But I don't hate him.
You know, I don't hate him.
But I think people have these really vicious feelings about Nikki Haley for a variety of reasons, I guess.
Don't know what that's all about.
What about Robin Swamy?
Oh, and then there was a weird video Of Ron DeSantis in some campaign event.
He was walking across the stage and apparently his boots were so large that like half of the boot was bending as he walked.
So people were laughing that his boots were twice the size they needed to be.
I don't know if that was just fun.
Crispy, cream, Christy.
Let's see.
All right.
Did Dave get fired?
No, Dave is still there.
Ramakami.
I like that most of the vague attacks are fake moves.
That should tell you something about something.
Like, almost all of the vague ones are just fake news.
I don't think any of it's real, actually.
I think actually 100% of it is fake news.
But people like to fake news.
Yeah, when I see DeSantis, my first thought was the same as Pence.
I just forgot he was running.
When was the last time you saw a DeSantis, like, campaign news event?
Why is he still running?
Is he just there in case Trump goes to jail or something happens?
You see the backup plan?
Vague is big pharma.
Why would you say Vivek is big pharma?
Because he had a pharma company that he doesn't have anymore?
But do you think he's going to go be a CEO of Big Pharma?
He's not going to take a job.
How is he connected to Big Pharma?
You might wanna look into that a little bit.
What's that?
Oh, people on Twitter are claiming Netanyahu controls Hamas.
Well, that's just dumb.
I saw Ian Bremmer, who's well connected, in the sense that he understands the entire field.
And he had a quote that, I'm going to paraphrase it, but it sounded like Netanyahu had said in 2019, That the best way to thwart the Palestinians was to support Hamas.
Something like that.
It was like a cynical plan to support Hamas because it was really a plan to make the Palestinians look bad.
What's the problem with that?
Who has a problem with that?
And what would it be?
Isn't that just like the most obvious statement in the world?
So there was this one time that Netanyahu said something that was 100% obvious, and everybody thought the same thing.
And so he's a bad guy because he thought exactly what you think.
What's the argument exactly?
Is it not completely obviously true that supporting Hamas for the last several years was guaranteed, guaranteed, To make Gaza poor and terrible and not really a threat, at least in a big military sense, but in a terrorist threat, yes.
Now, I'm not even sure it was the wrong play.
Now, obviously, you could argue, well, supporting them created this October 7th thing.
But I feel like it would have happened anyway.
Was there something that Israel could have done differently?
That would have made October 7th not happen?
I don't think so.
So if Netanyahu was sort of cleverly, in a three-dimensional chess kind of way, saying the worst thing for the Palestinians, in terms of their aggression against Israel, is to support the worst leaders, because that would make them ineffective.
You know what would be the worst thing that could happen to Israel, in my opinion?
Gaza being super prosperous.
The worst thing that could happen was Gaza being prosperous, or the Palestinians in general being prosperous.
Because the more money their enemies have, the more of it is going to get funneled to the percentage of them that would want to be violent.
So unfortunately, keeping the Palestinians in a relatively Low economic situation is probably the only way that Israel can survive.
I'm not saying it's moral or good or bad.
It might be just the only thing.
And if there's only one way to survive, it's hard to criticize it.
The Gaza experiment is over.
Well, Gaza will never be an independent state again.
I feel like I feel like Gaza will just be some kind of special zone of some sort.
In the short run, it won't be part of Israel, but it will never be some self-governed Palestinian state.
I would say that the two-state solution is absurd at this point.
Would you agree?
Does anybody think a two-state solution could ever work?
How would it?
See, here's everything you need to know about a two-state solution.
You ready?
There's one variable you need to know about a two-state solution.
There are lots of variables involved.
There's only one that matters.
The Palestinians weaponized their own children.
There's nothing else to say.
Once they've weaponized their children, you can't help them, and you can't let them prosper.
Because they're weapons.
They're literally weapons.
So they might be children.
They're definitely children.
But they're also weapons.
And if you treat them like children, you die.
If you treat them like weapons, that's not good for them, but it is what it is.
So, yeah, the last thing you'd want is a big old rich country next to you that also wants to destroy you more than they want anything I'm actually wondering if Gaza will ever be repopulated.
Because here's what it looks like.
It looks like the idea is to get rid of every building, at least in the bad parts of Gaza.
Once there are no buildings there, what's anybody going to go home to?
Then you say, we're going to announce this big rebuilding program, but Israel will not fund it because, you know, we're not happy with you.
But the rest of the world can.
The rest of the world can fund it, and then Gaza will be rebuilt.
But, since Israel controls the security, and I think always will, Israel can say, you absolutely can fund and rebuild Gaza.
Here are all the obstacles which you must pass.
Number one, the ownership of the building has to be approved by us.
So we make sure it's not a Hamas supporter.
And then they can't find anybody.
They go, okay, we're still looking for somebody who Israel will say is not a Hamas supporter.
And then they can own this building and they can build back, but they can't find anybody.
So I think that Israel will use a Dilbert approach to keep Gaza undeveloped.
There will be a plan to develop them, there'll be money to develop them, but nobody will get building approval because they can't pass the test of not being terrorists.
And why would Israel allow even one building to be rebuilt in Gaza If somebody that was their enemy was going to be the real builder or the owner or even the tenant.
So I think what they'll do is keep them in permanent camps.
And I think that they'll make the expense of those camps somebody else's problem.
As in if the international community doesn't want to feed them, too bad.
Why is that our problem?
So I think Israel wants To have a permanent situation that says, that's where Hamas bought you.
You know, see these camps where you're living in misery?
That was Hamas.
Now, of course, half of the world is going to say, no, that was Israel.
But Israel's got a strong argument there that there would be no camps if there were no Hamas.
All right.
Anything else?
Israel's withdrawal in 2005 was an obvious mistake.
Why?
Why was Israel's withdrawal from Gaza a mistake?
You think this was not going to happen?
I mean, they lost, what, what's the death count?
1,500?
How many would they have lost?
I don't know.
They might have lost people a different way.
I do think that sometimes you have to make things worse before you can make them better.
If what Netanyahu was doing was allowing Hamas to show the rest of the world what Netanyahu and the leaders already knew, that it's not just a difference of opinion, that one group is just murderers.
They want to kill you all.
The only way that the world could understand what Hamas was, really understand, is to let it happen.
Now, you could say, therefore you're a terrible leader if you created a situation where you knew this would happen.
To which I say, compared to what?
Compared to what?
Should they let Hamas keep building and getting stronger until their attack would be successful?
I hate to say it, but what happened was the best case scenario.
Hold that in your head.
Try to digest that thought.
That the Hamas attack on Israel, as horrible as it was, one of the most shockingly horrible things in your entire lifetime, was the best-case scenario.
Because it was the only thing that authorized them to take care of a problem that had to be taken care of.
There was no long-term There was no way that Gaza could just build up unfriendly powers and just keep getting stronger.
That wasn't going to happen.
So when you look at that, I think the problem that we all have looking at the Middle East is that we fantasize that there is a nonviolent solution.
That's pure fantasy.
There are no nonviolent solutions.
You're choosing among horrible alternatives.
Horrible alternatives.
And if you would argue to me that even as bad as the attack was, it puts Israel in a much stronger position, because now they can finally do what they needed to do all along, but they didn't have the trigger for it.
So if you tell me that, oh, that Netanyahu, he created a situation where it would get worse, Maybe he fucking did.
And maybe he's the best leader that they've ever had.
Can't rule that out.
Now, by the way, I don't know if it was a good idea or a bad idea.
I'm just putting out the general idea that you don't know either.
You don't know.
You don't know that making it worse wasn't the best thing they could do because their other alternatives was, you know, maybe half the country disappearing or something.
Yeah.
The depth of how bad it could have been is unfathomable.
I mean, it's a full-on Holocaust.
What they had was an absurdly horrendous terrorist attack that affected the entire nation with PTSD, and might have been better than the next best scenario.
Unless you're fantasizing that everybody just decided to be nice all of a sudden.
The alternative is, Hamas would have gotten stronger before they eventually attacked again.
Might have had missiles, might have had better drones, might have had God knows what.
So, this premise agrees with some intelligence analysts I listen to.
Oh, well that's good.
Have you noticed the ability to simply beat the experts just because you watch the news a little bit?
Have you seen how many times that can be done?
How many times can the experts be beaten just by somebody who is paying attention to the news?
No expertise.
But there are some general principles that just apply to every situation.
So if you're aware of general principles about how human beings typically work, you can bring that to almost any situation.
And The one that I always bring is you forgot to look at the alternative.
How many times do I say that?
I say it over and over and over on all situations and this is another one.
So if your analysis of Netanyahu was he did a thing that intentionally created the situation where Hamas would do this horrible attack, you might be right.
You might be right.
Now argue that that wasn't the best case.
You can't.
No way to know.
But I'll tell you one thing.
If I'm in a situation where I have an unsolvable problem, what's the first thing I do?
If I have an unsolvable problem, what do I do?
Shake the box.
Shake the box as hard as you can.
You have to create a different situation.
And the different situation might be chaos.
You might need chaos To get to the better situation.
So we don't know what would have happened if Netanyahu had had a different strategy, but I'll tell you it wouldn't have been crazy if his strategy, and I don't know if it was really, it wouldn't have been crazy to invite some amount of danger to avoid some far, far bigger amount of danger.
That's all.
All right, so that's all I'm going to give you for today.
YouTube, thanks for joining.
You were very awesome today, by the way.
I do appreciate the super chat questions, and they were reasonable questions.
Normally, the super chat questions are maybe a little off topic and stuff, but those were perfect.
