The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Israel Is Winning A Two-Front War But What Happens Now?

Episode Date: October 1, 2024

A series of remarkable events has changed the face of the Middle East War. Israel is fighting and winning in two fronts but what happens now?

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You're just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. It's Tuesday, and on this Tuesday, our focus is on this. Israel is winning its two-front war. But what happens next? Janice Stein, coming right up. And hello there, welcome to Tuesday, I'm Peter Mansbridge. Hope you are enjoying the week so far. It is, for us at SiriusXM, a shortened week in the sense that yesterday was the statutory holiday and as a result it was an encore edition of The Bridge.

So today we're doing what we usually do on Mondays, which is a discussion with Janice Stein from the University of Toronto, the Munk School. We're going to have that today on this Tuesday. And there's lots to talk about. As you well know, Janice has, for the last, well, more than a year, has been guiding us through two major international stories, one in the Middle East and the other between Russia and Ukraine. And we're going to deal with both those issues again today. It has been a remarkable last couple of weeks on the Middle East story. And we'll get to that in a minute,

because as you've probably already heard today, the Israelis have moved into southern Lebanon at the moment with not a full-scale ground invasion, but they are on the ground in southern Lebanon with commando units backed up by some small tank units. However, that story is changing literally by the hour. We had a discussion a few hours ago with Janice, which is what will be airing today, and you'll

be, I think, really interested to hear the points that she makes on this the week before the first anniversary of the October 7th attacks. Okay, before we get to Janice, a couple of housekeeping notes. Because it's been a shortened week, I think for your turn on Thursday, I've got a lot of end bits that I want to catch up on that I've been saving up for weeks now and haven't been able to use. So I will use some of those. But if you have kind of a last minute, what's on your mind thought, please share it with me. The address is themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. themansbridgepodcast at gmail.com. Include your name, the location you're writing from.

Keep it short, please. No more than a paragraph, you know, a medium-length paragraph. And have it in by 6 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday. Wednesday, of course, is an encore day for the bridge, so we'll have one of our best shows from the last four years on tomorrow, and look forward to that. Thursday, your turn, the Random Renter. We'll be back as well.

And Friday, of course, is Good Talk with Chantel and Bruce. So there you go. There's kind of a snapshot for the week ahead. Let's get started with this week's conversation with Janice Stein, the director of the Munk School at the University of Toronto. Janice, well regarded literally around the world for her expertise on foreign affairs, and especially on the Middle East. She's known for her work on that. She's got a big article coming out next week.

Can't tell you anything about it now, but we will focus next Monday's program on the article that Janice has written. And I think you'll find it fascinating. I know I certainly did on reading one of the early drafts. in Israel's favor. But it's been a dramatic change. So I want to try and figure out where we are now as a result of these changes. And most of them involve the death of high-ranking Iranian-backed people, whether it's Hezbollah or elsewhere.

So where are we at this point? Huge operational successes within a very short period of time, Peter, by the Israeli army that no one anticipated. For the first, you know, for me, the big takeaway is all of the bean counters who sit in every ministry of defense in the world and count missile launchers and ammunition and shells always miss the capability of a breakout surprise like this. And everybody missed this this time. How did they get, and I say operational success, but it doesn't change the bigger picture. So the operational success were those pagers and walkie-talkies.

And I remember our conversation last week, and I said, you only do this if you're going to follow it up with something else. It makes no sense to create this kind of huge communication failure inside an organization and not exploit it. So I don't think there's an army in the world that would not have exploited it, and that's functionally what we've seen. Does this change the big picture? There still needs to be an agreement negotiated between both Hamas and Israel and Hezbollah and Israel. The goal here is to return those 100,000 people who've been displaced for a year. That's an enormous political problem for any government, frankly.

Despite all these successes, they're not in a position to do that until there is a ceasefire and Hezbollah forces, now confused, now unable to communicate, now demoralized, pull back away from the border. But, you know, it's almost more than that for Hezbollah because they've been decapitated. I mean, it's not just Hassan Nasrallah, the leader. It's like the next couple of levels down of leadership on like every front. I mean, there were a lot of people taken out in that bombing. So they were demoralized for sure, disorganized as well. And, you know, like how do you, you know, you can replace one person overnight,

but when you're replacing a whole tier of leadership, that's another thing. For sure. And it's a huge organizational challenge because you have to find the people, one layer down, two layers down, and move them into command position. Everybody has to understand their in-command position and who their superior is. And just imagine trying to do that of having no secure electronic communications network to use. How many pieces of paper can you send with couriers?

And that's exactly the problem that they've got right now. But this is both a huge advantage and a big risk, Peter, because there's an open window right now. And we can see that there's an open window for the Israeli army by the small number of missiles, relatively speaking, that Hezbollah is able to fire back at Israel. It's 10, it's 15 a day. It's not the 500 that people predict would overwhelm Israel's air defenses. And they have 150,000 of them buried in an underground tunnel system that is more extensive than Hamas's. It's dug into rock and some of the intelligence reports go that they go the equivalent of 40 or more stories

down. Those assets are all still there but they're not usable because their command structure and their communication structure has been disrupted. So what do you do? First of all, what do you do with the Israeli army? You know this is not forever. You know this is, relatively speaking, short-term, huge incentives to take advantage of this Jewish organization

and go further. On the Hezbollah side, how do you get the ceasefire that you desperately need right now without appearing to be desperate? And that's the larger problem for Iran, too, in this situation. You've got the Israelis at the border, some special forces teams going inside Lebanon, doing the things they do. At the border, some special forces teams going inside Lebanon, doing the things they do. You've got tanks amassed at the border with this threat of a ground invasion.

And we know, we talked about it last week, they don't have a great record, Israel, on going into southern Lebanon. In fact, it's a disastrous record on a number of times. So what do they do there? Is the massing of tanks in a signal that they are going to go in or the threat that they're going to go in? I would tell you there is tremendous pressure now on you need to go in and, you know, these expressions that you hear among military people, finish the job. What does that mean, finish the job? So let's talk first about what the military targets could be, because that would be the only reason really to go in. There are dug in and placed missile launchers, which is really what the

problem is. They would want to take out those. There are military bases and command structures still in place there because you can't get at those from the air ever. You have to take them out from the ground, those are still there. And in the way that the generals are thinking about this right now, if there's a ceasefire, even for a week to give time to the diplomats to get organized, that might be just enough time for Hezbollah to stand up yet again at Communications Network, which is really the biggest challenge they face. And that's why Netanyahu did that flip-flop last week. He agreed to a ceasefire before he got the intelligence on Israel. He got it when he was in New York, and he pivoted on a dime. On the political side, what's really interesting is this is not

only these extreme right-wing nationalists in his coalition that are supporting us. Yair Lapid leads this centrist party, fully centrist party, the second largest party, the Netanyahu's party, absolutely rejected a three-week ceasefire, said that would waste all the opportunity that was created, and said he might agree to a ceasefire for a few days, but no more. So in that political context, when there's almost wall-to-wall support for some kind of incursion into Lebanon, and the generals are arguing strongly for it,

it's going to be very, very hard to stop. Now, what's coming out of the White House? Leaks. And you have to ask how strategic these leaks are. On Monday, the leaks out of the White House were, we forestalled a large-scale ground operation. They're not going to do that. We're going to get commando raids. Go over the border. Come back. Go over the border.

Come back. And President Biden said, I want a ceasefire now. So you see the big gap between Israel on the one hand and the United States on the other. You know, you talk about the support, the widening of support for Netanyahu in the Knesset as a result of the events in the last couple of weeks. You can also kind of feel it on the street, the Israeli street, when you watch some of the stories coming out of Israel. I mean, they can't believe what's happened and how this story has turned in the last few weeks. Oh, yeah. I mean, if you think about it from the point of view just of the Israeli public, they were told, you know, 100,000 missiles, they will definitely break through the air defense.

You will have to go into shelters. This war could be the hardest war that Israel has ever fought with anybody. Those were the general public expectations, along with the fear, by the way, which would replicate to some degree what Hamas was able to do almost a year ago on October the 7th. And it's not rational, Peter, but it's very widespread, the fear. I hear stories all the time of that kind. And then, first of all, their intelligence service, which had been frankly crucified for how it missed. And this was no small miss. This was a huge failure.

The biggest failure, I think, in the history of Israel. What are they seeing now? Again, at the tactical level, you know, CIA folks are saying this is statecraft at the highest level. No other intelligence organization could pull this off and do what they've done. So a return of pride and confidence in their intelligence services and also in their military, which was devastated, frankly, for a year. Are these the same people who were in the key positions a year ago? Yes, with a couple of exceptions. The head of military intelligence resigned. You know, it's interesting who resigned, Peter.

The people who most keenly felt a moral responsibility for the failure, they've resigned as military people who say, we failed, we have to resign as soon as possible. The chief of staff has not yet resigned. I think that's in part because they're very reluctant. He's very reluctant to change in the middle of a war. So in some sense, these are the people with the strongest sense of responsibility for what they did. So one of the big questions is how can this same intelligence agency that messed up to the degree that it messed up on October 7, 2023, of this kind of performance.

One of the reasons is that that failure in Lebanon that you talked about sunk in in a very big way. And intelligence assets from the time, from 2006 on, and it was, you know, frankly, Israel lost that war on the ground. It lost the war on the ground, which is something I think everybody needs to remember here. Overwhelming intelligence concentration on Hezbollah, not on Hamas, which they did not think was a serious fighting force. So everything went into detail, detail. The most granular kind of intelligence they would track, they are tracking brigade-level commanders when they move. This is not the first time that they had the chance to target Nusrella.

They turned down several opportunities. So they have a level, that organization is now completely penetrated. There's no question about it. As by the way, are the Revolutionary Guards in Iran for very, very similar reasons. Those were the top two security threats that the Army and the intelligence services have focused on over the last decade and a half, frankly. How worried is the Iranian leadership that they're next? They have to be worried. They have to be worried. And why do they have to be worried, Peter? And look, we don't have great information about, you know, Iranian decision-making doesn't leak in the same way as American decision-making does or Israeli decision-making.

You get quite good reports and reporters have sources much, much harder in Iran. Of course, they're worried, and they have every reason to be worried, because Bibi Netanyahu focused on the big strategic threat that Iran poses to Israel for 10 years or more. The United States, under Obama, intervened twice, once in 2010 and once really actively in 2012 to stop an attack on Iranian nuclear installations. The United States had much more leverage in that with Israel than it does now. So you have to be worried about that if you're in Tehran and your biggest asset, billions of dollars of Iranian investment in Hezbollah is temporarily disabled. And again, let's focus on this. It's not permanent. This problem has not gone away. It's temporarily disabled. They're worried about this open window too, and what Israel might do in the open window. And I guess that's why Iran is not

doing anything itself to support Hezbollah in some public fashion. What they're doing behind the scenes, who knows? But that would be why they're not doing anything, retaliating in any fashion, because they know they're going to get it back. Right. So, again, I mean, what they did in April, they're not doing now, right? In April, when they launched some 300 missiles against Israel and the U.S. and other Arab allies intervened to help defend against it,

but then told the Israelis, we will not help you if you launch an all-out strike. And it was a struggle inside. Again, we will not come to your assistance if you do this. You're on your own. That's what Biden said to them over and over. So we got a demonstration effect retaliation where it showed how easily Israel could penetrate their air defenses. That has extremely good intelligence about where their nuclear installations are. But it was one contained incident and it stopped. This time the United States has told Iran,

it has sent messages through third parties, we are unable to restrain Israel. And if you engage in any kind of retaliation, Israel will come back with full force. We tend to talk, well, more than tend to, we have talked often about Israel versus Hezbollah as if there's no government in Lebanon. Well, at times in the last few years, there hasn't been a government in Lebanon. But there is now, and they popped their head up in the last 24 hours.

What does that tell us? So there is a Lebanese prime minister, right, Peter? And you're absolutely right. Hezbollah was such a powerful force inside Lebanon. And it's a powerful force from two perspectives. One, the Lebanese army doesn't stand a chance if it takes on Hezbollah. There's no comparison here. And so won't do it, won't challenge Hezbollah on the ground in any way.

But politically, Hezbollah is a powerful force. It's the leading representatives for the Shia population in Iran, which is now the largest single group. But there are two other groups inside Lebanon that we don't talk about probably often enough. One are Maronite Christians, who historically were part of the ruling elite, and the second, of course, are Sunni Muslims. And if you watched any television feeds from Lebanon over these last four or five days, they're really striking because you had celebrations inside Lebanon at Nasrallah's death, which is not only in the Christian communities,

you had them in the Sunni communities as well. And you had them in the north of Syria, because of course, Hezbollah is the organization that saved Assad. So the remnants of the Muslim opposition to Syria, firecrackers were going off and candies were being given out. Because the Prime Minister of Lebanon knows how devastating a war would be, he spoke up yesterday and he said, very late on Monday,

and said, cease fire and we will move right up to the border where there's a Lebanese army, which they have historically been completely unwilling to do. What he's really saying is, we will take on Hezbollah at this point if necessary in order to avoid an all-out war. Maybe he thinks that Hezbollah is so weakened by what's happened

that he can do that and not have to fight for it. That's right. That's right. Right now, as I keep saying, there's this window. How long is that window open for you, you might say, right? A week, two weeks, three weeks, who knows? But I think it's really important to see this as one of these shape-shifting moments that happen, but they're not forever. And ultimately, you need agreements,

whether you get them through coercion or you get them through diplomacy, you need agreements on the grounds. Is this a major blow to Hezbollah? For sure. For sure. It will take a year or two to recover. Is this absolutely, you know, a body blow to Iran, which invested in this forward strategy, said to everybody else, you go fight for Palestine, not me, you go, and we'll provide the funding and the equipment. Of course it is. Before we leave the Middle East, whatever happened to Hamas in Gaza?

It's like disappeared. Well, you know, it's so interesting. Of course it hasn't. It's that the. Well, you know, it's so interesting. Of course it hasn't. It's that the news reporting has shifted. You know this better than anyone. That's where the team is right now for all the networks and for all the newspapers. Interestingly enough, there were rumors for the last three weeks that nobody had been able to communicate with Yaya Sinoir. He cut off all communication, all kinds of speculation.

After Nasrallah was assassinated, out comes a story about Sinoir that he has now shifted locations and cut off communications with everybody but one or two people because he's so alarmed at how badly penetrated hezbollah was so he's still there he's still underground there are still hostages there but that's not what the media are covering right now. That's true. That is the way it works. It is the way it works. And by the way, what are you hearing from Palestinians in Gaza? We're forgotten. The world is forgotten about us.

You know, we were getting, everybody was concerned about our plight. Nobody is knocking on our door now. Nobody's paying attention. And the other outraged group are the families of the hostages. Sure. Right? The story, as you would say, has moved on. Did anything happen in terms of that southern buffer zone

on the border between Gaza and the Egyptian border? It's there, but nobody is using any diplomatic capital right now to challenge that because the United States, France, Britain, scrambling to prevent a larger war, you know, to try to pull this back so they're commando raids rather than a permanent, because that's, of course, the other option, right? You create, as Israel did, a buffer zone in the north, too. So those missile launchers go farther back. But frankly, Peter, what does that do? Then you're there stuck forever. There's casualties, and you're fighting the people who are just that much further back from the buffer zone. What you are doing is protecting your civilian population.

Okay. Break time. And we've got to touch base on Ukraine, Russia, and we'll do that right after this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, the Tuesday episode this week. First new episode of the week. Janice Stein is with us. We've just dealt with the Middle East. Now we're going to touch base on Russia and Ukraine.

So last week, we talked about Zelensky going to the U.S., to both New York and Washington, I guess. And he did that. And it was, you know, his last visit a month or so ago had been pretty quiet. He didn't have the hoopla surrounding him that he used to get. This one even quieter and a really awkward session with Donald Trump. Has the bloom totally gone off the Zelensky rose or what? It certainly was quieter and very little uptake by senators um and congress people

now you could argue congress not in session everybody's in deep deep election mode in the united states um but he really was not able to push this agenda forward in any way. How much we attribute this to, you know, we are in the final weeks in the run-up to a U.S. election. How many weeks are we now? Five weeks, something like that left. And then we have a transition. So nothing much is going to happen. I think it's absolutely fair to say that in both these conflicts, everybody is waiting for the results of that election in the United States. That's where the strategy is, as opposed to the tactics. More concerning for him is the grinding inching forward by Russia all across that 100-mile front in the Donbass. Peter, how about to describe this to our listeners?

This is hilly territory. It's not right to call it mountains. It's hilly. But it's the high ground, right? And when you cross over those hills, and you do that by controlling the high ground, the towns, it's plains. It's flat land. So if Ukraine loses control of this line, it just becomes immeasurably easier for Russia to move forward, frankly. And it's at risk. It's at risk because, you know, the Russians are losing,

and we talked about this last week, they're losing, from my perspective, an astronomical number of men to take a kilometer of territory, but they are throwing people at it, and they're throwing people at it all across the front, and the Ukrainians are even thinner on the ground. Look, Zelensky's hoping to change the balance on the battlefield by hitting supply depots and the energy grid and oil behind the lines. This is moving because Russia is willing to throw an unlimited number of men that it brings in from the periphery at this fight. It's worse than World War I, really, what we're seeing.

Here's my, you know, I was following a debate, I guess it was yesterday morning. You may have seen it yourself. Two people who, two journalists who I have a lot of respect for, David Ignatius from the Washington Post. Yeah. And Applebaum from the Atlantic Monthly. And the debate basically between the two of them was this. Putin keeps threatening to use nuclear weapons

if the Ukrainians go too far with their missiles and drone attacks, especially missiles supplied by the Americans or any NATO country, I guess. Yeah. One side of the debate is he's not bluffing. This is the real deal and you better be careful. The other side of the debate is he's bluffing. That's all he does is bluff. And that's all he's done for the last year is bluff.

The last couple of years is bluff on the nuclear issue. That, in fact, he's not getting anywhere. He's losing this war. And we don't need to take these threats seriously anymore. That's Anne. That's Anne. Yeah. don't need to take these threats seriously anymore that's ann that's ann now um i know that you have often said a threat's a threat you gotta you gotta deal with it as a threat but these are these two people know their stuff too, right? Both of them do. But they don't agree.

They don't agree, exactly. I found it fascinating to listen to it too, because there's truth in what both they're saying. Yes, there is. And that's what makes it so hard, Peter, to make the call. And there's evidence that both of these people are bringing to the table, right? So let me just do a little bit of a sideways here and tell you how really tough it is to make this call.

We talked earlier about the catastrophic surprise that Israel experienced on October 7th, almost a year ago. How did that happen? Well, you know why? Because the most telling piece of evidence that the intelligence services brought to the table, well, the last time we fought with Hamas, it was in 2021. Then there were two instances where there were brief skirmishes with Islamic Jihad in Gaza, Palestine, Islamic Jihad. And you know what? Hamas stood on the sidelines.

Now, that's happened twice. So these guys have changed their mind. They're not going to risk everything, and they're not going to mount a large scale attack. Somebody said that four days before October 7th last year. It's a bluff,

been a bluff, been a bluff until it's not. And you don't know. You don't know. You don't know. And every single time you're gambling, every single time you're rolling the dice on these things. We just did it. Iran hasn't done anything since April. You know, Hania was assassinated in Tehran.

Three or four or five senior Republican guards, commanders have been assassinated. So it's not only Hezbollah people, it's the Iranians too. And now Nasrallah, who was probably closest to Khomeini of everybody, of all the axis of resistance people, is assassinated, and, well, they haven't done anything. So what does that mean? Well, they won't do anything. But the question is for how long? For how long, right? So really, and I just really recreate it for you, what decision makers would hear on the inside here.

Yeah, it's, you know, this. You know, both of David and with Ann, and I know both of them, when people say this to me, when Ann says, there's no chance. All he is is a bluffer. He won't do it. And I say, how do you know for sure? Because, look, we need a very, very high level of confidence in that argument because we're talking about if we get it wrong, Putin uses some sort of tactical nuclear weapon. That's the stakes.

So I said, how do you know this for sure? Nobody can answer that question. These two stories, I mean, you know, I've learned so much by talking to you for these last, you know, a couple of years. But it is amazing how this both these stories are continuing on with no immediate end in sight although I suppose in some ways

these things could end as fast as they started you know if suddenly some kind of secret negotiations going on in the background somewhere but it certainly doesn't look like that's the case in either one of these. You know, that's a really interesting question. You know, 10 years ago, the United States could stop these.

Could, first of all, stop Israel from starting. And when they started, could stop these. Can't now. So what does this tell us about the larger world, frankly? About how much less global influence the United States has on the ground in 2024 than it had in 2014, frankly. And that's the bigger movie that we're seeing here. Okay. Well, we're seeing here. Okay.

Well, we're going to pause the movie for another week. Who knows where we'll be at this time next week? There's been so much dramatic change in the last few weeks. Who knows where we'll be next week? Janice, thanks so much for this. You take care. Pleasure. And see you next week, Peter.

You will. Well, there we go. Dr. Janice Stein, another discussion that I, you know, and I know it's not just me because I see the numbers, the ratings for our discussions with Janice, and they are up there, way up there. They're up there with good talk, those kind of numbers. So I know you appreciate listening to Janice.

Not everyone agrees with Janice. She's the first one to admit that, but that's fine. This is her life. She spends her time working on these stories. And she's kind enough to share her thoughts with us, you know, to further expand our own minds and our own discussions that go on with friends and relatives about this story, about these

two stories. Okay, Janice will be back next week. And as I said, next week, when Janice is on the program, we're going to discuss an article that she's written that comes out next Monday on the first anniversary of the attacks, excuse me, the October 7th attacks in Israel. So that's next Monday on the bridge. You know, I was mentioning earlier in bits and how I want to catch up on some of the ones I'm doing.

I'll give you a tease here. I'll give you one because this is a good one. This is a good one to test your minds. What do you think the world's best connected airport is right now? Now, when we say best connected airport, that's the number of flights it has going to other locations in the world. So, you know, for what the last, well, ever since flight became such a dominant factor in our lives, you know, it's been around for, what, 110 years or so,

but it's really been kind of the last 50 or 60 where it's been this dominant factor about connecting the world. And I think, you know, most of us asked that question 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago. We'd say, oh, it's, you know, it's New York. It's Kennedy Airport or it's one of the New York airports. Or it's London. It's Heathrow.

Maybe Paris. It's none of those now. You got a guess write your guess down right now world's best connected airport don't look it up don't google it where do you think it is well here's your answer

it's Istanbul. Istanbul. It only opened six years ago, 2018, the new Istanbul airport. It's been revealed as the world's best connected airport, according to new data from the aviation analytics firm, Sirium. Now, why is it? Why is it at Istanbul? Well, you know, it's the prime sort of east meets west location.

It operates 309 nonstop flights to destinations around the world. Most of those are with Turkish Airlines, which serves more countries than any other airline. Around 90 million passengers a year pass through this global hub, making it the seventh busiest airport in the world, and it has an annual capacity of 200 million. I'm reading this information from CNN's kind of travel unit. That's pretty amazing.

But when you look at a map, a world map, and you see where Turkey's situated, it really is kind of where east meets west. So I guess we shouldn't be surprised. So you're saying to yourself, yeah, okay, Peter, what about all the other airports in the world? Where's Canada ranked? Where's Pearson? Where's Vancouver? They're not on the top 20. I'm not sure where they are because they only list the top 20.

So I bet when you were writing your answers down, some of you were thinking, okay, well, it's not New York and it's not London. So Frankfurt. Frankfurt's number two. And Frankfurt is definitely a hub. You know, I've been through Frankfurt Airport so many times that I bypass it now. If I'm heading overseas and I need that kind of hub in Europe, I usually go through Munich, much quieter airport, beautiful airport

and connects to a lot of places. Anyway, here are a few of the top 20. You ready? So, Frankfurt's number two. Charles de Gaulle in Paris is number three. Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam, number four. Chicago's O'Hare International is actually tied with Amsterdam for number four. So there's your top five.

So where are those ones that always used to have it? Well, Heathrow's number 12. Gatwick, London's, you know, kind of supplementary airport, one of theirs. There's all kinds of airports in and around London. Gatwick is number 14. Don't see any Canadian airport here at all. But the headline is Istanbul. 309 unique non-stop

destinations. That doesn't necessarily mean daily. It just means the number of non-stop destinations they have at their airport. That you can get a flight from here to there at least at some point. So Istanbul, Turkey, the most connected airport in the world.

That's going to do it for today. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening. Remember, tomorrow, Wednesday, it's our Encore edition. Thursday, we're back with your turn and the Random Ranter Friday is good talk with Bruce and Chantel take care have a great day

talk to you again in 24 hours