Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 5/23/24: Hamas Gains Thousands Of Recruits, ICC Arrest Warrants Debate, Pentagon Admits Gaza Pier Failure

Episode Date: May 23, 2024

Krystal and Saagar discuss insane Hamas IDF combat footage, Hamas gains thousands of recruits, debate on ICC arrest warrants for Israel, Pentagon admits Gaza pier failure.   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.com/   Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator,

and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, voiceover is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process.

Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to voiceover on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your not the father week on the OK Storytime podcast,

so we'll find out soon. This author writes, my father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us. He's trying to give it to his irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up, they could lose their family and millions of dollars? Yep. Find out how it ends by listening to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here, and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that. Let's get to the show. So we are getting new indications that, as many have said before, Israel appears to have destroyed everything in Gaza except for Hamas. Let's go ahead and put this up on the screen. We're getting lots of new Red Triangle videos from Hamas on a near daily basis.

You can see here, infamously, this is their targeting, showing they're still able to operate in various parts of the Gaza Strip, including we know that there have been IDF casualties, and we'll get to that in a moment, in the northern Gaza Strip where they had already gone in and completely annihilated, supposedly declared mission accomplished. And so, surprise, surprise, Hamas is filling that vacuum. And also, surprise, surprise, when you murder and slaughter a bunch of civilians, kids, women, destroy homes, hospitals, schools, etc., guess what? The ideology that fuels Hamas, you are doing nothing but pour gasoline on that ideology. So let's put this up on the screen. This is incredible. From Politico, Biden admin openly hammering Israel's military strategy in Gaza. They got a bunch of quotes both on and off the record from Pentagon leaders who are saying there is no total victory against Hamas. That's quote unquote unlikely. You have another individual who says not only do you have to actually go in and

clear out whatever adversary you're up against, you have to go in, hold the territory, then you got to stabilize it. If that doesn't happen, it allows your adversary then to repopulate in areas if you're not there. So that does make it more challenging for them as far as being able to meet their objective, being able to militarily destroy and defeat Hamas. Those comments followed others by Tony Blinken, who last week predicted the eventual withdrawal of Israeli forces could leave a vacuum that's likely to be filled by chaos, by anarchy, and ultimately by Hamas again. This is like preschool level. It was so easy to see this and was foreseen and predicted even by people like us who are not military experts. Jocko was talking about this like three days into the

Israeli offensive that they were making. If they actually wanted to target Hamas, this was the exact wrong way to go about it. Of course, that was never the actual goal. That was the goal sold to the Israeli public and the U.S. public and the world. Never the actual goal. The actual goal has always been complete and utter annihilation. Some other incredible quotes from this article, though. let's go ahead and put this up on the screen. They say, although Hamas communications and military abilities have been degraded, only 30 to 35 percent of its fighters, those who were part of Hamas before October 7th, have been killed. And about 65 percent of their tunnels are still intact, according to U.S. intelligence. Let's put the next piece up on the screen.

Biden officials have also become increasingly concerned that Hamas has been able to recruit during wartime thousands over the last several months. That has allowed the group to withstand months of Israeli offensives, according to a person familiar with U.S. intelligence. So honestly, Sagar, when you look at these numbers that they've only, and this is according to U.S. intelligence, killed 30% of Hamas fighters, that Hamas has been able to recruit thousands more fighters during this time, which again, it was obvious that the Israeli offensive year was only going to make people more likely to take up the Hamas ideology of armed resistance and also join, actively join Hamas. When you put those two numbers together, it's reasonable to ask whether they have degraded Hamas's numbers at all. Yeah. And what's especially frustrating is that all of this was obvious to anybody. And I think, you know, look, I'm not going to toot my own horn,

but it's like basically Abai came up with Iraq and Afghanistan covering the Pentagon. And so all of the people who came up and really took over the Pentagon during the counterinsurgency movement knew this from the very beginning. That's part of the reason Jocko was able to identify that. I will point here to General Joseph Votel, who was a great general. He was the head of the U.S. Central Command during the fight against ISIS, covered him extensively at the time, had special operations access. And here's what he says, quote, Everybody gets the fact that you have to destroy Hamas, but then what? What's the plan to take care of the 2.5 million Palestinians?

What is the plan to deal with the remainder of Hamas fighters? It seems incomplete. I don't think they have communicated or have thought through that as well as they would have hoped that they would have. Now, you're couching that in very friendly language, but this is obvious and has been. And I will point, again, to the quotes from General Petraeus, from all of his staff that was involved in Iraq.

They are repeating the exact same mistakes that the United States did in its war in Iraq. And again, let's not forget, it took some two years for the full-blown insurgency to happen. Even three years, some might argue, for the actual civil war to heat up to the point where most people in America would pay attention. We are watching this and that's why those videos matter so much because what do you see? Guerrilla warfare, freedom of movement, using the ability to move in and out of the rubble, disguise yourself amongst a civilian population and hit the occupying force wherever it is, even if they have superior military technology. And as

long as you have the civilian population on your side, or at the very least, you're able to recruit a ton of people from there, you are going to win just because you can outlast the other ones. They cannot, by definition, kill all of you. It's just not possible. And, you know, I would point again to in here is that the very top of our military command is now outwardly saying this, including our new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The reason why is we are the ones who are paying these bills now. This is what we're going to talk about with Ken. You know, our pier has been a disaster.

We've spent half a billion dollars on it. We've barely gotten any aid. The plan from the Israelis, from the Saudis, and all of that is to ensnare the United States, send calm in all of the soldiers and command officials who came up in Iraq to try and repeat that experiment in Gaza this time around and basically get bought off by the Israelis. So we have to resist this at every turn possible. And you can read this very clearly. These are sober-minded individuals who have extensive experience fighting these exact type of militants. And they're looking at this and they're seeing a full-blown nightmare.

Yeah. They could see it clearly. It's not like it went all that well when we tried to do it either. But it worked for a bit. Yeah. But, I mean, listen, if you actually are going to—if you are actually serious about destroying, quote unquote, Hamas. Even if you do kill 30, 50, 60% of their fighters, if you're fueling the ideology, then you are going to see them bounce back tenfold. And so what would really actually degrade Hamas? It's not a hard question to answer

because we've seen over time when Hamas has been more or less popular. Hamas is at its most popular at times, frankly, like this, when peace seems impossible, especially through nonviolence and diplomatic negotiations, when there's absolute fury at your treatment at the hands of the Israelis. Those are the factors that fuel and bolster Hamas. Nothing has been a greater gift to Hamas, which I think it's true, doesn't really care about civilian life and is perfectly willing to sacrifice Palestinians in the service of their cause. Nothing has bolstered them more than this response. What has diminished Hamas popularity is when there is an actual possibility and real prospect of peace. So if you were serious

about undermining Hamas and destroying the legitimacy of their ideology and ability to recruit, you would go in the polar opposite direction of what Israel has done. And this will be relevant in the next topic we discuss as well, which is recognition of Palestinian statehood. And there's all this conversation, oh, this is a gift to Hamas, a gift to terrorists, et cetera. Quite the opposite. Actual negotiations towards peace, nothing would undercut the Hamas ideology more than a real prospect of peace and something approaching a just resolution. To the point earlier about how we know it's not just, you know, their Hamas propaganda videos, but they are inflicting casualties and exacting real cost

on the occupation forces. Let's put this up on the screen. You had three IDF soldiers who were killed in northern Gaza fighting, northern Gaza. Those soldiers, they were killed in a variety of ways. There was one who was killed as a result of an explosive device that went off inside a building. A reservist and a combat officer were also seriously wounded in that other incident. The other two were killed by sniper fire and another soldier from that same division was also seriously wounded. So this is in northern Gaza. You have at the same time this now massive action in Rafah, which, you know, anyone looking at this would definitely classify it as major, even though the Biden administration doesn't. You've had almost a million Palestinians once

again forcibly displaced from Rafah with nowhere safe to go. You have aid effectively completely cut off. We'll talk to Ken a little bit more about that. Absolutely dire situation, civilians still being killed. And, you know, to the point of, oh, well, why isn't there a plan for a day after? And why have they never, you know, laid out what their plan is for the day after? Well, there are certainly people who are in the fold who are cabinet ministers who have said very plainly what their plan is. One of them being Ben-Gavir, who is one of the most psycho members of the Israeli Bibi Netanyahu's cabinet. Let's put this up on the screen. I'll read you what he said recently, indicating that he wants to occupy all of Gaza with Jewish

settlement. He says, but that's not enough. One more step, which is the most important step, immigration. Yes, I'm not saying all of them, by the way. And then he says, explain to me. So go back to the settlements we occupied during the war. But not only that, you have a lot more to occupy. If there's an emigration of hundreds of thousands who will leave, you will enter with more and more people. And the questioner says, you will be the first to live there? And he says, I will be very happy to live there. Yes, why not? So not only do you have, we're going to resettle the entire Gaza Strip.

We're going to ethnically cleanse it of Palestinians. I personally am interested in living there. This is the goal of, you know, powerful elements within the Israeli government. This is what they have always wanted. This is what they've said very clearly. For some reason, U.S. politicians pretend they don't hear this, pretend they don't know that this is a very clear goal of a very important part of the Bibi Netanyahu coalition. And I think that Mearsheimer is right, that the original goal of Bibi himself was this ethnic cleansing, which hasn't really succeeded, and so then shifted to just all-out annihilation. And, you know, writing is on the wall as far as that's all concerned.

This is why I also think a government change in Israel would be profound, is even getting people outside of that, like outside of the government, and even forcing diplomatically their hand to try and form some sort of post-war strategy is definitely still better of an alternative than the current situation. Because Bibi himself refuses to rule. For example, in a CNN interview, he rules out, he says, there will be no Israeli settlement in Gaza. But then you have members of his own cabinet, which are out there saying it, on top of many of the previous things that he has said. I'm not saying Benny Gantz is an angel or any of these other things. But if you want to look at how to actually move forward, I think it's pretty clear that the current situation is unsustainable, both militarily, strategically, and domestically for the current situation.

Which will not, doesn't necessarily mean that they will change anything. They will probably still continue. When you say it's not sustainable, what do you mean by that? Oh, sustainable as in, so you can't continue a puff. So basically, they don't have the military capacity to pull off a complete annihilation. It's literally impossible. They could try, but given international pressure and all that, not going to happen. Same time in terms of strategically, you see the ICC charges, international isolation, growing challenges even here at home. Even Nancy

Pelosi says, hey, Bibi, don't come and speak to Congress right now. So you have a big problem in terms of your biggest ally. And then domestically, you have got a basic problem with your domestic coalition. You've got the hostage issue, which continues to blare in your face, and huge protests that are there at home with a viable opposition leader who is sitting there getting more popular by the day. So on all three fronts, you have a serious issue. That doesn't mean it won't sustain for a long period, but I still think it's a big problem. I hope you're right. I'm just not sure because we also have an election coming up, and Donald Trump administration isn't even going to do the performative hand-wringing that the Biden administration occasionally does.

They're not going to have those, quote-unquote, tough conversations. They're going to give them everything they want, when they want it, and go above and beyond because that's the position that the whole Republican Party has staked out, Trump included, that Biden hasn't been supportive enough of Israel. So can they sustain it through the election? I mean, any of the previous, like, you know, when we had that minute of them saying,

oh, we paused a ship and it was this big deal. That's all gone now. You know, a million Palestinians have been displaced from Rafah. This supposed red line has been, you know, more than crossed. And now all you see is just back to the bear hug. So I don't see any sign that the Biden administration is planning to change their policy orientation towards Bibi and his government. I don't see that they're willing to do anything other than, you know, these tough conversations

behind the scenes, really, to try to effectuate an outcome, which we know isn't going to do anything. So, you know, can they wait it out until the Trump administration comes in? Do they really, over the long term, the fact that they're a pariah nation, yeah, I think that bites and that's going to be a problem for them. But in terms of sustaining, you know, this horrible status quo where people are just dying and dying and dying and nothing seems to really change, I don't know. I'm afraid they can't sustain that. The only thing that I have going for it is that Trump hates Bibi because he congratulated Joe Biden on the election. So it could be his own pettiness gets in the way. Remember,

he's attacked him in every interview that he's been given on the State of Israel. I can't see him going against Israel. I mean, think of how many of his major donors are extremely pro-Israel. Think of where the Republican Party establishment is. Think of the comments that he's made about, you know, he's very clearly in the camp now. Biden hasn't done enough for Israel. So I just, I can't see that. So, you know, in terms of the Israeli political pressure, again, it's not like the Israeli public opposes the war. The rub is feeling accurately like Bibi doesn't actually care about the hostages. He doesn't. You know, obviously they could have had a hostage deal that could have been secured. So perhaps that pressure ultimately amounts to something. But I don't know.

He's a very wily operator. He's, you know, held on to power this long and he's certainly improved his prospects of being able to hang onto power a lot longer. And then the other question is, like, would Benny Gantz or whoever really be any that much different? Yoav Galant, who's, you know, also facing arrest warrants from the Hague, and is the one who announced the siege, and we're going to treat him like human animals because that's what they are. He's also considered a quote-unquote moderate, so it's also an open question if he did get a governmental change how much it would really amount to. True.

I don't know. I don't know. Like I said, I hope you're right. I just, I'm not sure. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution.

But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia

that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal.

It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience

to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to Boy Sober on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves. This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who didn't make it. I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself. And I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes on the new season of

Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first Black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor, going above and beyond the call of duty. You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, let's move on to another significant development here. You have three more countries, Israel, sorry, Ireland, Spain, and Norway, which have now recognized the state of Palestine.

They're joining some, it's now some 80% of the world, actually, that does recognize the state of Palestine. Of course, our nation here, of course not, and Canada and some other of our closest followers also do not recognize the state of Palestine. They held a joint press conference to announce this shift in their diplomatic posture. Here's a little bit of the Irish prime minister and what he had to say. Last month, I stood on these same steps with Prime Minister Sánchez of Spain. And we said that the point of recognizing the state of Palestine was coming closer. That point has now arrived. Today, Ireland, Norway and Spain are announcing that we recognise the state of Palestine.

Each of us will now undertake whatever national steps are necessary to give effect to that decision. In the lead up to today's announcement, I've spoken with a number of other leaders and counterparts, and I'm confident that further countries will join us in taking this important step in the coming weeks. You have a whole Israeli freakout over this action, which is primarily symbolic, but again contributes to that Israel becoming a pariah nation, Palestine becoming more recognized, more accepted, etc. You also have more European countries who are saying, hey, listen, we may have some quibbles with what the International Criminal Court at The Hague is doing, but bottom line, we support it. So if Bibi comes here and there's an arrest warrant, we're going to arrest

him. Let's put this next one up on the screen. France and Germany were the latest European nations to show support for the ICC after their prosecutor applied for those arrest warrants in a statement Monday. France's foreign minister said that the decision over whether to issue arrest warrants rested with the ICC's judges. Quote, France supports the International Criminal Court, its independence, the fight against impunity in all situations. Germany, which has been, they describe, a staunch ally of Israel, certainly the case, described the court as a fundamental achievement of the international community. They did express reservations that decision to apply for arrest warrants against both Israeli and Hamas leaders, give this a false impression of equivalence. Nevertheless, Berlin reaffirmed its support for

the ICC, quote, Germany respects its independence and its procedures like those of all other international courts. Sagar, I'm curious for your reaction to the significance of so many European countries saying, like, listen, if there are arrest warrants, we are going to do our duty. That's going to be the most important one. We will see in terms of the Irish, what is it, Ireland, Norway, and Spain. Yeah. It's a little bit, you know, I mean, these are not top tier great powers. On the continent, you would want France, Germany, or any of the other big economies

that actually have a decent amount of pull. That hasn't happened yet. I will say that the French foreign ministry decision is the most important one, and the German one as well, because they specifically say this, quote, France supports the International Criminal Court, its independence, and the fight against impunity in all situations. Basically saying there is no Israel carve-out.

Germany, though, which has all those crazy laws on books, says that the court is a fundamental achievement of the international community. And specifically, though, it does say that there has been given a false impression of equivalence, but still affirms its support for ICC. So I think what they are staking out is an eventuality position, but some of the things that you and I have talked about here before is there's still some procedural hurdles there for Israel, for Hamas, and there's still a lot of ways in which they can find their way out of it. And if I had to guess, that's what they're trying to stake out. In terms of the decision, like if it eventually does come to it, but they're going to be working behind the scenes, especially with the Germans,

with some of the language that was there. There's going to be a real full court press. It was already happening on the ICC. I mean, in the announcement, the ICC prosecutor really chastised those, I've seen very much directed at the American politicians who were trying to bully and threaten them and suggest not only would they, you know, sanction the ICC, which by the Biden administration is now signaled they're open to as well, Mr. International Law, when it came to Russia, suddenly very different tone when it comes to Israel out and out suggesting sanctioning the International Criminal Court, that as well. But the Republican letter suggested they would also sanction like their family members and that there would be a, it was like mafia language, there'd be a price to pay, etc., etc. So he was chastising them for saying that. He also indicated, I know you and Ryan covered this,

that some politician, possibly Lindsey Graham, because we know he had spoken to him recently, said this is just for, you know, Africans. Thugs. Yeah, Thugs and Africans and Russians. This has, not these, you know, our allies. How dare you, thugs and Africans and Russians. This has, not these, you know, our allies. How dare you suggest that? But I think he's, I actually think that's honest and true, which is correct. I mean, I agree. Yeah, but what it has been and what it should be are two different things, Sagar. There is no such thing. This is, this kind of, I've been wanting to talk about this. If we go back to Nuremberg, Nuremberg happened because we conquered the Nazis and basically put them on trial in collaboration with the Allied powers.

Same with the Japanese. I mean, it's not—the idea behind it and the enforcement was that we had them under full-blown military occupation. Without that, it doesn't exist. I mean, it's true. The ICC, the United Nations, is a tool of the great power nations. That's why the UN Security Council exists. That's also why China and Russia has not signed on to the ICC or has not supported a lot of this stuff with Israel

is because Russia- Well, China does support this, actually, with regard to Israel. Right, but they've supported on Israel. But, oh, we want to talk about Xinjiang? No way. That's never going to happen. And the Russians,

they got all these breakaway provinces, right, in Ukraine. They're like, I'm not going to do that. So, again, it's like, it's all fake, at least in my opinion. But, again, there's a difference between what it is. You are not wrong in any way about what it is and what it should be and the way our politicians talk about it, right? Because they certainly don't openly talk about it as this selective tool of great power politics. And not just with regard to the ICC, which obviously, you know, we're worried that those rules might apply to us, which is why we're not a party to it.

Get to Lindsey Graham in a moment and some comments that he made about that, which was amusing. But, you know, the grand idealistic notion that has been sold is that we have these lines in the sand that, you know, we said we're going to try to protect civilians. We're going to try to protect hospitals. We're going to try to avoid allowing a genocide to unfold before our eyes. We're going to have these certain rules and standards and norms, and we're going to have these international bodies to enforce them when the local governments fail. Now, has that actually been what's happened? Of course not. Of course it's been selective. Of course they've been hypocritical. But that's why, you know, previously we were talking about whether this legitimizes or delegitimizes the ICC. And I think it's a very fraught moment because in a sense, the fact that the rules could apply to Bibi Netanyahu, that he could face arrest if he goes to Paris again. That's profoundly legitimizing.

That brings the court closer to its stated principles and what it is supposed to be. Not what it's been, but what it's supposed to be. On the other hand, there is a real risk that, you know, they try, that they do issue the arrest warrants, and then it doesn't change behavior, and it doesn't matter. And then everyone can sort of thumb their nose at it. So it's a moment of great peril. But if they didn't issue the arrest warrants, then they're automatically delegitimized, given the extent

and the clear nature of the atrocities here. I don't disagree. And I think really, this again is a very big difference in worldview. I am happy that this is happening. I want people to understand that the quote-unquote rules-based international order is not real. You're happy that what's happening? That the destruction of the idea that it's just for Africans and Russians is true. It's like the global international system is a tool of the American empire. We should all just be honest about what we are doing here. I prefer that. We need bilateral relations, which are not in the fakery of, oh, well, we have human rights and that's all really important, except whenever it's a barbarian Saudis and then we need their oil or it's like anything. Let's just be real about what we're all doing here. Let's have an actual conversation. having an acknowledgement of the reality of the world. I would prefer a world in which we actually did have norms and standards that were enforced consistently or as best as, you know, as

consistently as human beings can be expected to, where civilians are protected, where genocide isn't just allowed to unfold and we all just go, well, they're a big power and they got a lot of guns, so what are you going to do? I guess the Palestinians just to have to like, you know, watch their kids get slaughtered. I would prefer to live in a world where they actually lived up to the norms. Now, I think one step towards building that world is exposing the previous hypocrisies, understanding what the actual reality is now, and trying to make it so that you do have consistent application of the principles, which is, again, why I think it's really important that this has been applied to Israel, because it starts to build a more consistent

regime where even U.S. allies can suffer some consequence when they're blatant war criminals as Bibi Netanyahu is. Maybe. I guess I just, for me, it's about limiting principle. Like, for example, and this is going to sound real harsh, so clip it if you want to, but if Russia was committing a straight-up genocide, what would we do about it? You know, like, should we militarily invade a nuclear-armed power if they were committing a genocide? I would say no. I don't think it's worth it. Even though I think it's horrible, sure, I think we should, you know, bring to bear whatever we can, but there are limiting principles of action, you know, in the global system. And that's what I mean about being honest here. Yeah, it's a nice world, you know, to be able to think

that some global body can impose rules, but that's just not true. Like, all of it comes back to the force of power. And we are an empire. I think we should be honest. I don't even think it's necessarily a bad thing. You know, it works to our advantage. Now, it definitely works to the disadvantage of some, but the hypocrisy is what drives a lot of other people crazy. So, us, like, kind of revealing, yeah, it's like this international body has no enforcement except against, you know, anti-Western leaders. I'm like, yeah, that's a good thing. We should, we should, people should, people should see that it's actually happening. But, you know, we're at an interesting moment,

though, because the unipolar world of, you know, American superpower, sole superpower status, it's done. It's over. It's gone. You know, maybe we're hanging on to the last vestiges of it. So now there's a real question about what is the world that, you know, was built after that? What does that look like? And you see some inklings here of, you know, South Africa and Ireland and some of the smaller countries around the world trying to actually pick up, you know, the mantle of the idealistic notion of what the U.S. had laid out before and are trying to create more legitimacy in this system than has previously existed. You know, the odds are stacked against it working. You know, the odds are very much in favor of, okay, well, in the new order, you'll just have this push and pull between, you know, the odds are stacked against it working. You know, the odds are very much in favor of, okay, well, in the new order, you'll just have this push and pull between, you know,

who takes control of these institutions and how do they use it to their advantage, etc., etc. But that's not inevitable. So, in any case, that's why I think this is incredibly important and why I think it matters that you have France and Germany saying, no, we actually are, even though this is uncomfortable for us and we don't really like that you're charging Bibi and you're charging Hamas too. You know, we think that's a false equivalent. That's totally complete bullshit. But anyway, put that aside. That they're still saying, no, we support it.

And if they come here, we will arrest them. So that's not, there's no enforcement mechanism. I mean, that's real, right? Bibi likes to travel internationally. Yeah, sure. Israel prides itself on being this, you know, global high-tech country, very dependent on foreign direct investment. Their economy is already taking a huge hit and their stance in the world, you know, they're starting to realize like, oh, even though we don't see it this way, people around the world

see us as equivalent to Hamas. Those things do actually matter in the long term and can constrain behavior because it really does limit you as a country if you're, you know, this pariah nation separated and cut off from everybody else. To be clear, I do agree with you. And that's why I think for Israel, they should be carrying themselves different because they're not a global nuclear-armed superpower and the chief empire in the world. So they have to be considered of whatever. But let's be real. We can do whatever we want, basically. I mean, we invaded a country, Iraq, destroyed it, spent $7 trillion, and we survived. That's honestly nuts, especially when you consider Afghanistan. That's part of the thing that was in the Lindsey Graham thing. But the example, I guess, I'm just trying to get to is we are, and I agree that the unipolar moment is over.

I think that will actually make the world safer and it will make us safer as well because we have had tremendous hubris like the ability to invade Iraq and Afghanistan and suffer no consequence. I think that the rise of actual balance brings us to a place where we have to mutually respect both the great power nations of Russia, of India, of China, of the global, and especially growing GDP in Asia. All of that will make us safer because we have to recognize our own limitations. And the problem with the quote-unquote rules-based international order, which is basically a template for American dominance of the world, is that we talk out of one side of our mouth, and then we do something that is actually to our benefit. I would rather us just deal honestly with

the world, which in a multipolar system, you do have to start operating more like that and not be blatantly hypocritical as we have done throughout the 80s, the 90s, and the mid-2000s. I think we're returning to a more balanced system. I think the Israelis in the long term will suffer dramatically, specifically because they no longer have the unipolar umbrella that protected them in the Yom Kippur moment and others. They assume they only need the United States. And in the short term, that may be true.

Yeah, it is true. Over the, you know, medium to long term, if there are any Palestinians who survive this moment, then, you know, I think they'll face, it will be a much different political diplomatic landscape. So in terms of the Israeli reaction and whether they think that these actions matter, you know, we've already brought you Bibi's response to the potential ICC arrest. He called them, what, one of the greatest anti-Semites of all time or something. I mean, just completely unhinged insanity. Let's put this up on the screen.

So Israel is saying they are now not going to transfer much-needed funds to the Palestinian authority as punishment for three European countries recognizing a Palestinian state. So the fact that you had Ireland, Spain, and Norway say we're going to recognize a Palestinian state. So the fact that you had Ireland, Spain, and Norway say, we're going to recognize a Palestinian state. The Israelis are then punishing the Palestinian people for this stance of the European countries, which obviously makes no sense and is wrong and immoral, illegal, et cetera. Decision came from the psycho finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, far right leader, opposes Palestinian sovereignty, threatened to push the Palestinian government, they say, into a deeper fiscal crisis. He said in a statement he'd informed Netanyahu he would no longer send those tax revenues to the authority which administers part of the West Bank in close cooperation with Israel. So the Palestinian Authority already in really dire financial straits. There have been these ongoing negotiations.

Basically, Israel collects tax revenue on their behalf. PA is effectively collaborators with the Israeli government. Some of that tax revenue goes to Gaza. And so there's been this ongoing dispute about whether the tax revenue is still going to come to the PA. They seem to work on a deal where a third party was going to hold on

to the portion that's supposed to go to Gaza and the rest of it was going to go to the West Bank. You also have real economic problems because a lot of the Palestinians who previously had work permits and were working in Israel, those, you know, it's become much more difficult and much more limited, the number of Palestinians being allowed in. So huge economic crisis there. And this will obviously, it could actually cause the PA to completely collapse because they're in these sort of dire financial straits. The U.S. reacted to this negatively, but it's not like they're threatening to actually do anything. Jake Sullivan, we can put this up on the screen, said, quote, I think it's wrong on a strategic basis because withholding funds destabilizes the West Bank.

It undermines the search for security and prosperity for the Palestinian people, which is in Israel's interest. And I think it's wrong to withhold funds that provide basic goods and services to innocent people. But again, you know, empty words, no indication that there will be any action. So basically meaningless on that front. And to the point of Sagranai's previous conversation about whether or not the Hague should apply those rules of international law should also apply to our war criminals, which I very much think that they do. Lindsey Graham had an interesting moment where he came out and said, if they can't come for Israel, they could come for us next. Didn't get exactly the response that he was expecting because there were a bunch of anti-war activists in the room who would be happy to see our own war criminals locked up as well.

Let's take a listen to how that went down. So we, hopefully, together, will find a way to rest our displeasure with the ICC because if they'll do this to Israel, we're next. This group tried to come after our soldiers. Yeah, you can clap all you want to. They tried to come after our soldiers in Afghanistan, but reason prevailed. So at the end of the day here, what I hope to happen is that we level sanctions against the ICC for this outrage to not only help our friends in Israel, but protect ourselves over time. Mr. Secretary, your statement yesterday was excellent. The President's statement was excellent. Senator Schumer's statement on the floor was excellent about the outrage here.

They have destroyed the notion of complementarity. They have misled people in the United States about their intention, and they shall and will pay a price. Ms. Secretary, I appreciate what you've said. It is now time for us to act. So real bipartisan moment there, shouting out all the Democratic leaders who he agrees with when it comes to the ICC. But it reminds me, Sagar, of Bibi and his response.

He was like, this would be like locking up Bush for 9-11. And a lot of people were like, hmm, I'll take that deal. I hate to say it. I do agree with Lindsay. I mean, only in the fact of in terms of that's why I don't support multilateral organizations like this having jurisdiction over us. What annoys me always, and this is, I think, the difference, is I hate the conflation of Israel, a basically client state of the United States with a tiny population, a tiny GDP, number 50 on our trading list, being equated to a great superpower. I think they should be understood of the vassal state that they are. It drives me crazy that they assume some great power status when they get away with the things that great powers are supposed to get away with,

even though they have nothing to their name except being underwritten entirely by the U.S. security umbrella. But again, this is just some—I don't believe in multilateralism really, period. So there should be no consequence for being a war criminal. The consequence is that we lost prestige. Unless you're an African or a Russian, in the words of Lindsey Graham. I would say, do I think that Bush should be in jail for 9-11 and for the response? Yeah.

Do I think that we should let the Hager, anything like that, do that? No. I think that the democratic check of our own country is the one that should take care of it. And the reason why is because— And how did that work out? It didn't work out. Right, exactly. I mean, that's the idea of complementarity.

But then we are supposed to give the power to the Hague to lock up our president? It's ludicrous. It's never going to happen. I think there should be accountability for the criminals. No great respecting nation should ever hand over its sovereignty to a multilateral organization. I would be fine with George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Hillary Clinton. You can throw Barack you know, Barack Obama for the drone program. Totally fine with the Hague having actual enforcement mechanisms. And,

you know, clearly, I think there are a lot of people who agree with the sense that things like genocide should be off the table, that there should be some sort of body and accountability that doesn't just rely on if your justice system is, you know, basically beholden to the political class and not going to have any sort of consequences for domestic war criminals. Yeah, I think there should be. It would be nice to live in that world, but it's not a realistic possibility. But it's not going to happen. So we might as well just leave it off the table. It's like, okay, well, are the Russians going to voluntarily hand over Vladimir Putin? No. But Sager, I would not have ever thought that it was a possibility in my lifetime

that an Israeli prime minister would be facing arrest at the Hague. Like, it's almost as preposterous to me. But he's not actually facing arrest. He is. France and Germany are saying they'll arrest him. He'll still continue to live in Israel. He's a Pittsburgh native. Yeah, but you can't say like it doesn't matter at all. I mean, again, you would have said a year ago, there's no way the ICC would ever issue arrest warrants against an Israeli prime minister. It's a world that's not going to happen. So why even pretend? Let's just acknowledge this is all fake. Well, guess what? That world does exist now. That world does exist where there's an arrest warrant that's going to be issued for Bibi Netanyahu and Yoav

Golan and continuing investigations, and they might be found guilty of a genocide. So, you know, just because things seem unlikely, which I would have said the same thing, very unlikely, likely impossible, doesn't mean that it is completely off the table. I think we should still advocate for the world that we would ideally want to live in. And that world for me is one in which the language about human rights, protecting civilians, is not meaningless bullshit, that it actually matters, that it's applied consistently across the board, whether you're from a quote-unquote great power or not. Well, I think that the way to achieve that world is not through multilateralism, fakery, and rhetoric. It's through basically achieving a balance where it's in everybody's interest and to pursue exactly that. So that's why I talk in the language of interest. I don't think it's in Israel's interest to to pursue exactly that. So that's why I talk in the

language of interest. I don't think it's in Israel's interest to be prosecuting the war itself. Right. Talking in the language of morality, A, convinces nobody, and B, you know, basically, okay, is there a rest for it? Let me just, on that point about Israel's interest, part of why it's not in quote-unquote Israel's interest is because of these multilateral institutions. That's not true. It's true. You can't say that's not part of why this is a problem for them. Because the reason they're becoming more and more of a pariah state is because of the plausible genocide,

is because of UN finding reasonable grounds that there's genocide, is because of the arrest warrants, because France and Germany are saying we'll arrest Bibi if he comes on our soil. Because you have more countries that are saying like, screw you, this is outrageous. We're going to recognize a Palestinian state. There was no multilateralism in the 1900s when the Ottomans slaughtered a million Armenians. But in the world where people can have photographs and real life accounts of what's happening, they became a pariah state and they eventually crumbled because of that.

That's my point, is that slaughtering people, it's not multilateralism which stops it. It's the inherent morality of mankind who looks at that and be like, oh, this is horrible. Same with the aversion to the Japanese Empire and its slaughter of Chinese and Korean civilians in World War II. It wasn't the League of Nations or the UN. It was good-meaning people who were like, this is horrible, we're going to do something about it. Same with the Germans and the Nazis. And part of what they did was set up multilateral institutions to try to protect against it happening again.

But was enforced through full-blown military occupation. So absent that and literal subjugation of the entire people and the nation in some sort of rule where, you know, we have arrest warrants where somebody can't travel to Paris. It's like, okay, well, you know, we have arrest warrants where somebody can't travel to Paris. It's like, okay, well, you know, there's not a lot that's going to be happening here. I'm not diminishing all of the importance of it. I do think it's going to have an effect. Yeah. That's all I'm trying to get you to acknowledge is that it's not nothing. But my point is that you didn't need multilateralism in the 1900s for the British

population to be outraged about what was happening with the Ottomans, right? You just needed people to be like, this is horrible. We're going to do something about it. Or I'm trying to think. There's a lot of examples. Basically, since the invention of modern media and photography being able to go wide, all mass civilian slaughter has always been met with basically a horrified population in the rest of the world and eventual some sort of military action. You didn't necessarily need multilateralism to do anything about it. Now, they thought that it would be a fix for it, but obviously I think that was incorrect.

And we've seen that we saw it all fall apart during the Cold War whenever it became in the interest to ignore certain things. Which goes back to power itself is the only fix for it. Even as broken as these, even as, you know, hypocritical and broken as these multilateral institutions certainly are, I would really submit that, you know, the fact that we actually have a report that the ICJ may issue an actual ceasefire injunction that's from that Israel Hayom that's been credible in the past. I'm not that familiar with the outlet, but it's an Israeli news outlet. And apparently ICJ, South Africa had come back to them and said, listen, look what's happening, Ravi. You really need to issue an injunction.

That, it looks like, may happen on Friday. We'll be watching for it, et cetera. But even the fact that there was this determination that a genocide was potentially, that it was plausible, that the Palestinians' rights were being violated and a genocide was occurring. Even that has had an impact just in terms of, think about American political conversation. You know, to your point about the population's revulsion mattering. You now have a plurality of Americans who say this is a genocide. You now have a clear majority of Biden voters, Democrats, who say this is a genocide. I don't think that happens if you don't have this sort of international legitimacy of putting that on the table. That really furthered that conversation. Now with the ICC arrest warrants,

right? Bibi's not excited about the fact that he can't travel internationally anymore, that his life is personally, you know, curtailed, what that means for him and his family and his son and the way he's viewed. Israel as a nation is not excited about the fact that they feel they're, you know, correctly being seen as like on a level with Hamas around the world. They're not happy about that. I'm not saying it's an end-all be-all at this point, but even now, even in the state of hypocrisy and brokenness of these institutions, they still are having some impact. And so I just don't think you can deny that or deny the possibility that they could be improved, that this could be actually a step of creating more legitimacy where they actually matter more, constrain behavior more, and have more violence.

I hear what you're saying. I'm not saying it had zero impact. I just point to this. What's going to be more impactful? The United States, the great power of the world pulling weapons from Israel, or the ICJ? Of course. That's it. We're power lines. I don't see those things as disconnected because with Biden, it has certainly created, that's part of why you got this like little temporary pause. That's part of why they look increasingly ridiculous trying to defend, you know, even complying with our own laws, like the Leahy Act, part of what has put them in a difficult position and has perhaps made it unsustainable, to use your word from earlier, is that you have these, you know, now you're shipping

bombs to a war criminal. Now you're shipping bombs to a country that's possibly doing a genocide. It's creating more political pressure on you. I would posit it as much more just the straight up images coming out of Gaza and probably domestic political pressure more than ICC, ICG. But I'm not saying that stuff doesn't matter. I'm saying they build on each other. Sure.

And that it's not like it's a nothing. Exactly. That's it. I think you're confusing me saying it doesn't matter at all. What I'm saying is that the primacy of power and military force will always preempt multilateralism, which is why I think multilateralism is stupid and mostly doesn't work.

And especially people who put way too much faith in institutions like the ICJ or the ICC or the United Nations or whatever, NATO or any of these other things. These are just constructs. They're parts of power. Like who else are we supposed to put faith in? It's clearly not the U.S. government. Well, then we should try to change the U.S. government because they're the only force that can really do what we and maybe four or five other nations in the world are the only ones with the capacity to change anything. So I care a lot about our government, but I wouldn't put any stock in the U.N. or any of these other places because in the long run, our action is always going to have more importance. You keep shifting them.

You're like, I'm not saying they don't matter. And then you're like, they don't matter. They don't matter. You said, I don't put any stock in the UN. That would indicate like it's completely meaningless. It doesn't matter. It doesn't help to constrain or drive any sort of behavior at all. And I just don't think that's an accurate picture of the world. You can say absolutely, of course it would be more impactful if Joe Biden, if we pulled our support, it'd be over. There's no doubt about it. Part of what is building the pressure that could result in some sort of a shift and has already resulted.

I mean, again, Pelosi signing onto a letter saying we maybe should condition aid to Israel. Chuck Schumer calling for BB to be pushed out. These are things that were not even on the table before that even in our own cramped, bought and paid for politics are now on the table. Part of it is, it's not the whole, but part of it is the judgment of those multilateral institutions. So you can't say that you should put no stock in them and it's meaningless and it doesn't matter at all. You can say you don't think it should matter and they should just go away and we should just focus on great power politics. But I just don't think it's an accurate picture of the world to say these things haven't mattered at all. I'll revise and say it is marginal at best, in my opinion,

especially with respect to the U.S. All U.S. actions thus far, I don't think have been dictated largely by these multilateral revulsion or anything. It's been domestic politics and it's been the actual state of play inside of Israel and or U.S. interests in the actual region, like, I don't know, maybe spending a billion dollars in a single day to protect a bunch of people who struck an Iranian embassy and then suddenly, you know, have to claim the right of self-defense. That's always, again, I think that's where it really does come from. Now, maybe, you know, Biden and all of them have been moved by this, but considering that they immediately come out and blast the organization and don't take it seriously, I don't see a lot of evidence for it.

Clearly, the Israelis feel that these things are impactful. And they should because they're not a great power. They're not a superpower. Right. But again, if you're saying it doesn't matter at all, there's two players who have the most impact here, the U.S. and Israel. Now, I do think that these decisions have really shaped the conversation. You can now say the word genocide was used on MSNBC. Again, a majority of Biden voters see it as a genocide. These things were not, were fringed. You could barely say, you couldn't say it, right?

Very recently. I think that has helped to mainstream. I'm pretty sure 40% of some people say genocide way before ICC. You don't need the ICC to say it. Even if you dismiss, oh, this has no impact on U.S. public opinion, that has no impact on the Biden administration, etc. Even if you acknowledge it has impact on Israel, which I think is very clear, then it still has impact. Okay, so the reason I say—the reason the difference is that, again, small nations who don't have the capacity to actually have freedom of action, yeah, they should care. Any small nation should care. But a great power like the U.S. and who I care about and who I'm thinking of in terms of our action, no, it doesn't matter for us really at all. Now, again, who matters more for Israeli action? Is the United States, the U.N., or even the European Union? It's going to be the U.S. So the actual impact of U.S. policy is the basic sole determining factor of the state of play inside of Israel for their geopolitics,

for their actions, for the vast majority of the things that they do in the world, for their number one trading partner, for their security, for their weapons. I mean, in a sense, yes. But we also see that the Israelis have completely, I mean, at this point, we seem like we're the client state. Like, they do whatever the hell they want, regardless of the Biden administration's, like, concerns, et cetera, et cetera. So having an impact on them, like, that's, they're the actual center of gravity with this since Biden has decided he's just going to let, do the bear hug and let them do whatever they want. That is true. And that is because we have a foolish president who has subjugated our, not just president, our political system has subjugated

our interests to a country of 11 million people, our number 50 trading partner and all of that. So I would not disagree on that front at all. But that is just because we refuse to embrace our empire status. And if we did that, we would be better off. Okay. We had a great guest, Annie Pye. To talk about one of our ineffectual efforts here with regard to Gaza, more patheticness from Joe Biden, the whole peer situation. Let's get to it. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution.

But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long.

You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships.

It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience

to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves. This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who didn't make it. I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself, and I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes on the new season of Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly,

one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor, going above and beyond the call of duty. You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us

about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Joining us now to break down the whole peer situation is the newly independent Ken Klippenstein, fantastic journalist covering national security in particular. Great to see you, Ken. Good to see you, man. Hey, guys. Good to be with you.

Before our first question, where can people follow you? How can they support you? Always do fantastic work. Continue to get bombshell scoops that the mainstream media can't get their hands on, even in newly independent status. So where can people follow you and support? Check me out on Substack. That's kenklippenstein.substack.com.

All right. So, Ken, let's put this latest report up on the screen. Apparently, as of this writing, none of the food aid that moved through the Gaza Pier has actually made it to Palestinians. So, tell us what this whole pier situation was all about and what is going wrong thus far? Yeah, so the Biden administration refuses to work with UNRWA, the UN agency that provides aid to the Palestinian territories, Gaza in particular. And because of that, you know, that institution is one of the only ones that has the breadth of skill, the resources, the experience, and the relationships on the ground in Gaza to be able to scale that aid. So what ends up happening is the administration finds itself in a very awkward position

where it wants this, frankly, PR stunt of being able to say, hey, look at all this great stuff we're doing, even though we're not, you know, seriously suspending support to the Israeli military. And so they're stuck with things like humanitarian aid drops from airplanes that don't reach very many people. And then trying to create this aid peer, which without the help of an institution like UNRWA, they're stuck relying on individual NGOs. And if you look at the public messaging that the press secretary and deputy press secretary of the Pentagon have been putting out over the last several weeks running up to this, they couldn't answer who they're going to actually use to distribute the aid. And they were asked this repeatedly every time they had to punt the question because

they don't have an answer to it because there is no NGO-level institution that is going to be able to distribute this at scale. Right. And Ken, what do we know right now about the risk to U.S. forces that are involved about what has happened and the cost now that has come at the result of this boondoggle? Yeah, that's one of the most interesting and undercover parts of the story. I think it's pretty well appreciated the problems with being able to distribute at scale. But as soon as this thing was announced, I started hearing very early on

from service members that this is a risky proposition for the Biden administration. Now, the administration has hewed to messaging that there are going to be no boots on the ground. That's a little misleading because they're going to use a lot of military contractors, and they already have. In addition to that, troops are moving some of these resources and having set up the pier initially, but the idea is they're not actually going to be operating on the ground. So who they need to operate instead, in large part, has been reliance on the IDF to be able to set things up. The IDF has been inconsistent in saying that they would support it, saying that they're not going to support it. But in any case, there's an IDF logistics facility right next to the APIR, which is a legitimate military target under the rules of war,

and indeed has been a target of fighters as recently as the last several weeks. So there are legitimate military targets right next to this pier, not just Hamas, but other militant groups able to operate in the area. And so the concerns raised to me privately by service members, and now to some extent publicly by think tanks and such, seems like a really legitimate thing to be worried about. Is the U.S. getting a bigger footprint in this and putting those contractors at risk? Yes, I can. I won't be the first to point out the total insanity of this whole boondoggle because

you've got miles and miles, thousands of aid trucks lined up at the border into the Gaza Strip that just aren't being allowed in. So this pier is not a solution to the aid problem, but pressuring the Israelis to actually allow that aid to enter the Gaza Strip is a solution. So what can you tell us about the overall aid situation, the level of humanitarian crisis. And also, I sort of go back and forth. Is this whole peer situation some expensive, dangerous, stupid virtue signal, basically, to try to persuade disaffected Biden voters that, no, we really do care about Palestinian life?

Or is there a more nefarious goal here? Because we've also seen Bibi talking about, hey, maybe we can use this pier for our ethnic cleansing project. We've also seen reporting that apparently the pier was Bibi's idea. So is it just the expensive, stupid boondoggle? Or do you see any indications that there's some other intended purpose for this thing? Well, I think that there are second order consequences of this facility that might not be intentional on the part of the administration, but which nonetheless can happen, which is to say another, you know, spoke in the hub, as it were, that the IDF is going to be interacting with. And, you know, I mentioned that logistics facility, they are building up,

you know, the war is not like in the movies. It is a logistical undertaking. And so you have to build things up and create infrastructure to be able to sustain that. And this might provide one more, you know, spoke in that hub for the Israelis to be able to conduct these things. And so I think that's a legitimate concern, even if it's not the intent of the administration to do, which I personally, from talking to people at State, get the impression that they just really need some kind of a win short of actually cutting off

significant forms of military aid to the Israelis. Now, there's been a lot of, there's been much ado about the president's threat to suspend certain forms of aid. I did a story on that on my sub stack as well, showing that much of that aid is not gonna be, much of those military weapon systems that he's starting to come off, cut off, would not be felt for weeks or months and aren't even relevant to this stage of the conflict,

which is at a very late stage. The kind of war fighting that they're going to conduct in Rafah is going to look very different than the air power heavy campaign at the beginning of the conflict. So it's really disingenuous for the administration to say, oh, look, we're considering cutting off things in a way that would change their conduct in Rafah. So all of that to say they're in a position where they really need a win to be able to bring to, frankly, the entire Democratic base and say, hey, look, we're doing something to help. And unfortunately, this is what they've settled on. So tell us a little bit more about where this thing goes from here. We've had zero

aid. We've had what is about half a billion or so that has been invested. The Pentagon itself on the record says that nothing is being delivered to Palestinians. Is there are they going to ramp up this, you know, operation to try and get more aid in there? Or is this just the best that we can expect? The most absurd part of this is that if you watch the press briefings, which I paid close attention to, I don't think they know what the next step is because they're frequently being asked these same questions and they go, we'll have an answer for you shortly. And we're currently, we're in negotiations with the Israelis and contractors are trying to figure out. So I don't have an answer to that because they don't have an answer for that. And that should tell you how seriously they're taking this entire thing.

Wow. Absolutely insane. Ken, thank you so much. Congratulations on the shift to congratulations on your newly won independence. I know you'll be successful there. And thank you, of course, for breaking down your reporting this morning. Good to see you, man. Thanks, guys.

My pleasure, guys. Congratulations. Thank you guys so much for watching. We really appreciate you. Now, don't forget, you got to sign up for your Locals account. Just transfer over there because Supercast is ending. Support at Locals.com. Otherwise, we will see you all on Tuesday because of Memorial Day.

That's right. So we'll see you in a few days. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight-loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me,

voiceover is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to voiceover on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your Not the Father Week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This author writes, my father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us.

He's trying to give it to his irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. This is an iHeart Podcast.