The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3592 - Trump Regime at War with Iran and Itself w/ Annelle Sheline, Seamus Malekafzali

Episode Date: March 3, 2026

It's News Day Tuesday on The Majority Report   On today's program:   CNN airs a compilation of several members of the Trump administration and GOP politicians contradicting themselves on whether or not we are at "war" with Iran.   Secretary of State Marco Rubio says that the U.S. struck Iran because they knew Israel was going to take action in Iran and that would precipitate actions against American forces in the area.   Annelle Sheline, a Middle East research fellow at the Quincy Institute, joins the program to discuss the war's foreign policy dimensions.   Seamus Malekafzali, co-host of Turbulence podcast joins the program to discuss the on-the-ground situation in Iran. For more from Seamus subscribe to his Substack.   In the Fun Half:   Speaker of the House Mike Johnson reaffirms Marco Rubio's claims that we had to strike Iran because they knew of an Israel action that would lead to an attack on American forces.   Donald Trump contradicts both Rubio and Johnson and claims that he wanted to strike first and that he "forced Israel's hand".   Bibi Netanyahu goes on Hannity and says that he did not drag Trump into this war despite what Rubio and Johnson have claimed.   The Third Way's "Winning the Middle" conference is as infuriating as it sounds.   Melania make good time party at U.N. big time!   all that and more   To connect and organize with your local ICE rapid response team visit ICERRT.com The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: COZY EARTH: Go to cozyearth.com/MAJORITYREPORT for up to 20% off. SUNSET LAKE:  Head on over to SunsetLakeCBD.com and use the code Daylight26 to save 35% on all of their CBD Sleep Products. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech On Instagram: @MrBryanVokey Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com

Bye, folks. We've got some good news and some bad news. Well, actually, we've got a ton of bad news, but we'll keep that for the show. But let's start with the tiny bit of bad news. Daylight saving time is stealing an hour of precious shut eye this coming Sunday. And it's not just that, actually. I was saying I get really annoyed because I was so excited. I got to get up early with Saul, and it's dark. And it started to get lighter. And I was said to Saul this morning, I'm like, hey, good news, daylight saving time.

And as I'm saying it, I realize, like, oh, no, it's going to get darker. But there is good news. And that is you don't have to suffer through a sleep-deprived morning. Our farmer friends at Sunset Lake Sabaday have got your back with perfectly timed sales. Prepare for the upcoming time change with Sunset Lake's highly rated sleep products. Now, 35% off when you check out with the coupon code, Daylight 26. All one word. daylight number two number six all one word daylight 26 they got products with melatonin that are great for

falling asleep and they've also got full spectrum products without the melatonin that have a seba and a microdose of taj say great for staying asleep just take a little tincture or a gummy an hour before bedtime sleep soundly and wake out with that wake up without any groginess uh i've been doing the good night oil uh for ages it really helps. Brian was actually complaining that it's too good because his back hurts because he falls asleep when he falls asleep with seven days. I don't sleep like I was shot in the back of the head in like a crazy position and I was so knocked out. I didn't move for eight hours. Really effective and frankly super important these days when there is a lot to keep you up awake at

night. Sleep better, feel better and wake up feeling refreshed unless you're like Brian, in which case your back will be contorted. Head on over to sunsetlake sabadeh.com. Use the code daylight 26. Daylight 26, no spaces to save 35% on all their sabad day sleep products. The sale ends March 9th at 1159 p.m. Eastern. See their site for additional terms and conditions. We'll put the link at the YouTube and podcast descriptions.

Now time for the show. Report with Sam Cedar. It is Tuesday, March 3rd, 2006. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five-time award-winning majority report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, USA. On the program today, Anel Shaline, research fellow at the Middle East program at Quincy Institute, Then Seamus Malika Fazli.

Fasli. Malakavzali. All right. Freelance journey. He landed it before the show. I know. I had it before the show of Turbulance Pod and publisher of his newsletter at shamis. Malaccafalai.com.

Also on the program today, war expands. U.S. shut, shuts embassies in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. meanwhile U.S. expands its bombing of Iran, as does Israel. U.S. casualties now at at least six and growing as are abandoned reasons why we launched this war. Meanwhile, Trump and Hegseth both hint at boots on the ground. Rubio claims we attacked Iran because Israel was going to. and Iran will attack now will attack

any ship in the straits of her moves Will Kane says Bill King Tim Kane in the membrane Sorry Tim Cain says War Powers vote today

in the Senate Key primaries in Texas and North Carolina today Supreme Court blocks a law prohibiting schools from outing trans students in California the DOJ backs off its assault on pro bono law firms. Judge restores lawmaker access to ICE detention facilities

in a possible prelude to killing the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court intercedes in a New York State Supreme Court congressional district redraw. Stockylacopolis. What's the name, Malacinopoulos? Malia Stocktips. Yeah. She's going to keep her district. Bernie Sanders introduces a $4.4 trillion tax on billionaires.

That's a 5% wealth tax annually. Graham Platner racks up another Senate endorsement. Sorry, Chuck Schumer. Time to drop out. Graham. All this and more on today's majority report. I'm already exhausted. War Day Tuesday.

Yes. That's what we're crossing out news day. And now it's war day. Secretary of War. Yeah. It's obviously like the hits keep coming. And Trump and Hegs have. I mean, I don't know.

Obviously, we're going to be talking to Anel and Seamus about this extensively today. And. And I do not recall any type of conflict that the U.S. has been involved in, from the Iraq War to Kuwait the invasion, the first Iraq war that took place in Kuwait, or even invading Grenada or Clinton bombing Libya or the second Libya bombing, where there was an administration that had seemingly put no effort whatsoever into coming up with a reason why they're doing this or coordinating the reason throughout the administration. it's it really is astonishing and they can't even agree as to whether we are involved in a war or not here is a

a cnn compilation of various elements that are behind this non-war war saying it's not a war even though it's also a war uh clearly a war You bomb presidential headquarters or whatever? You assassinate the leadership of and then continue to bomb. I mean, like, I'm not sure what else constitutes a war. I think we would have considered a war. If Iran killed Trump and then also killed hundreds and bombed a school. We're just being the cops, they said afterwards.

And contemplating boots on the ground, I guess, is really just more about like a, like a, field trip type of situation. Here's that compilation. And we may have casualties that often happens in war. I don't know if this is technically a war. We didn't start this war, but under President Trump, we are finishing it. This isn't a war. We haven't declared war. The Secretary of Defense, who calls himself the Secretary of War, said today this is a war. We set the terms of this war, from start to finish. Nobody should classify this as war. It is combat operations.

War is hell. And always will be. Strategic strikes are not war. They can't seem to get on the right page. And then yesterday in the morning, Marco Rubio came out with one of, I mean, this is, you know, in every conflict or every era, there are statements that are made that end up being sort of lynchpins historically.

With the Iraq war, Paul Wolfowitz testified one of the neocons. I think he was at the State Department during Bush. Maybe it was the Defense Department. I think it was Defense Department. And he said weapons of mass destruction was really the thing that we could just sort of all agree on because they all have their separate reasons for wanting to invade and occupy Iraq. I'm sure that's the case here. But I think this statement from Rubio, and we will play later in the program, Mike Johnson saying something similar.

But this is going to be the one that defines this conflict because on so many levels, it's both disingenuous. it's also absolutely insane. It's also in many ways incomprehensible. And it belies an incredible weakness. Like it really is honestly like one of those Escher paintings where you look at it. And you can't tell what you're looking at because it is so wrong in so many different ways. You have to almost like state like,

I'm going to believe it. And then... Yes. And you're not even touching on how politically insane it is, how toxic politically this statement is. The idea that Israel dragged us into this and they're admitting it. Let's play this.

The second question that been asked is, why now? Well, there's two reasons why now. The first is it was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States. The orders had been delegated down to the field commanders. It was automatic, and in fact,

it beared to be true because, in fact, within an hour of the initial attack on the leadership compound, the missile forces in the south and in the north, for that matter, had already been activated to launch. In fact, those already been pre-positioned. The third is the assessment that was made that if we stood and waited for that attack to come first before we hit them, we would suffer much higher casualties. And so the president made the very wise decision. We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces. And we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties and perhaps even higher those killed. And then we would

all be here answering questions about why we knew that indeed. So that's an admission that the Israelis dragged us into it and that they wanted to take action against Iran. And that, they needed U.S. support because the reality is, is that last summer when the Israelis bombed Iran, Israel did a good job of covering up how the Iranian response was actually significant and hit them pretty hard. So they needed U.S. support this time. And Rubio just kind of spells out the reasoning right there. Well, okay, if we take Rubio at face value, he is both arguing, A, that we had no capacity to stop what Israel is doing, even though we knew that it would seriously implicate us. Yes.

There would be a cost to pay to us, and we have no ability to stop Israel from doing that. Two, it says that... We moved all of our aircraft carriers over there for this exact purpose. Of course, I mean, of course, but wait, but we're... This is the version where we pretend he's telling the truth. he's also saying at that point that the logic is we punched this guy in the face because we knew that if someone punched him in the face, he would punch us in the face or if we punched him in the face, we punched him in the face because we knew if we punched him in the face,

he would punch us back. So we punched him in the face. Or no, our friend, we punched him in the face because our friend was about to punch him in the face, but our friend, it might actually get punched back. So we really stuck up for our friend. No, we would get punched back. That's what he said. We would get punched back. Okay. Gotcha. And we would get punched back and not know that he was going to punch us back, even though that we predicted this in the first place. They say we, but they really mean the Israelis here. Because if the, if U.S. personnel wasn't in the region and there wasn't this buildup, that is what they're most concerned about is Iranian missiles breaking through the Iron Dome. And it also hurts

Israel's projection of strength. Mir Shimer has spoken about this before. The idea that Israel, because it's such a small nation and doesn't necessarily, and it's a colonial enterprise, needs to show that they are so strong that they can

withstand all of this firepower. And Iran is the biggest threat to that. That's why Netanyahu's been trying to drag us into this for 40 years, 30 years. And he successfully lobbied this president who does not have the constitutional strength. and is arrogant and mad enough to resist the Israeli push, which is now, by the way,

bipartisan within the context of Israel. Even the Israeli liberals are endorsing the greater Israel theory. This do-he just, this do-dard thinks this is an act of strength because big bombs go boom, even though it's actually a shocking display of weakness because you're being dog-walked by Netanyahu. Now, that assumes that what Rubio was saying was true. And it may Maybe it also, but it really does stretch the imagination. But why wouldn't it be true? Because admitting that is like the most politically toxic thing that you could possibly do right now within this climate where everybody is sick of Israel and it's genocide. Everyone, the polling on the war in Iran.

To the Republicans. Well, but, but, but, but, but, but, okay, uh, maybe to some Republicans, but, you know, 70% of Republicans still support Israel. Yes, it was a 10 point job. Rubio, you know, when he's contemplating running for president, maybe in 2028, having the neocons and 70% of the Republican Party behind him, I think he's made his, I mean, there's a reason why J.D. Vance all of a sudden has disappeared. Because J.D. Vance had picked a different lane for when he's going to run for president. And that one is sort of like. But you're now admitting that it's politically toxic. Why would you have to pick a different lane? No, no, it's politically toxic depending on who you are. Yeah.

J.D. Vance had picked Elaine and that, you know, pretending like we're going to be anti-war. Marco Rubio hasn't. From Marco Rubio's perspective, he doesn't see this as politically toxic. I don't think Trump sees it as politically toxic. I think they see it as making sense. I mean, listen. They're acutely aware that right now there is a right-wing media apparatus. They've lost Matt Walsh that is saying that this is not popular. and why are they dragging us into this? And that there's a whole ecosystem of right-wing media influencers right now that say that Israel controls our foreign policy.

And he just went and said Israel controls our foreign policy. I think Donald Trump probably thinks that they're Matt Walsh aside, that he has got more of loyalty from that Republican base than Matt Walsh or Tucker Carlson or Megan Kelly for that matter. It's just the incoherence of it is also just jarring to me because Trump is just acting like a madman. The Don Roe doctrine, we were talking about this two months ago that were supposedly the overarching foreign policy objective of this administration was to retreat from the long forever wars in the Middle East. That's what they said. They were lying. And if you paid attention, you would know they were lying. But that we're going to do Western hemispheric dominance now.

That's what we're going to be obsessed with. And the only consistency is the desire for blood and lawlessness. You're just not a flexible thinker. Yeah. That's the problem. You're too stuck in your way. I'm sure. Ending the forever war that Iran's doing to us.

Right. Okay. I guess Iran is in greater Western hemisphere. Yes. You just, you just. We need to create a buffer zone for the West by bombing. You, I think in multiple dimensional chess. And you just think in checkers.

Because if you look straight through Washington, and a plane it comes out to Iran right through the planet. You're right. You're right. I mean, it's just I can't, it's like the way, you know, cats can only see a certain way. That's my femininity. Yeah. Because everything I learn about human dynamics, I experienced that air America. When you had a lunatic at the head of, of air America, people in, and actually, this happened multiple times.

there are different camps within the sort of the administration and there are right we know we have like the miller camp and the russ vote camp maybe they are together at times in jd vance and uh rubio and other and really all these people are all grifters looking and the one thing they never do when they don't fight on other people's turf and so like stephen miller may have promoted the Donne Road doctrine. And he had gotten so far. But when Rubio comes in or the neo-cons come in or Miriam Adelson comes in, Miller backs off and says like, it's a mistake, but it's not in my, it's not in my neighborhood. And I think that wasn't in the room. I was, I mean, honestly, I think that's like in, you know, apparently, I mean, I heard Trita Parsy say

this on American prestige today. Apparently, Trump is increasingly. listening to fewer and fewer people within the official administration and who he's listening to on this, these are treat his examples, are Tom Cotton, not good, who is the other person, Lindsay Graham, of course, and Laura Frickin Lumer. But that's going to be this week. Yes, exactly. When he starts going into like also Cuba now, we're going to do Cuba and then we're going to do somewhere else, it'll be somebody else.

But the problem is that this is going to take on a momentum in and of itself, and there's going to be a sunk cost fallacy that we saw in Iraq that the neocons have already got their hooks into him on this on this front like he doesn't have the consistency or the patience to see anything through but we know from the nature of regime change wars like this and actions like this that they take on a momentum of them of their own well we're going to talk to uh... now and to shamus about this it's quite i mean it it's quite possible he just says uh you know what actually i'm done with this let's everybody come back and we're going to do something different or we end up getting in a protracted another 25 year war

we'll see in a moment we'll be talking to a now she'lline a research fellow in the middle east program at the quincy institute first a word from our sponsor i can't even read this without thinking like i want to go back to bed right now to be honest with you cozy earth crafts every piece with care from soft supportive socks for your steps through the day to breathable comforters that help you rest deeply at night every detail is intentional so your everyday feels quietly elevated i have now cozy earth sheets i got a cozy earth uh comforter and it was thin it's thin it's i got like a midweight one the duvet thing or the duvet thing or the The comforter? Duvet is the cover. Oh, right. The comforter itself.

So it's not like a big fluffy comforter. It's thinner and it's really, really nice. I mean, I have Cozy Earth. Every time I wear a hoodie, it's my Cozy Earth hoodie. I got joggers that I'm getting ready to break out for spring. Cozy Earth is amazing. I mean, I don't know what to tell you. I got my girlfriend at a bunch of Cozy Earth socks.

they are soft, breathable, thoughtfully cushioned to support you from your first step to your last. These stocks come in

four styles, calf, quarter, ankle, and the no-show. I also, myself, have become like

quite a quarter a sock guy. Oh. Yep. I don't know. You know, I'm flexible. Never too late

to try new things. Yeah, exactly. The comforters. Crafted with intention to support deeper rest designed with naturally breathable temperature regulating materials. These luxuriously soft comforters help your body settle, cool, calm, and gently support it through the night. Thoughtful construction creates a cloud-like feel without the heaviness or overheating,

making it easier to unwind and feel restored. Comfort and details because you feel every day begins with how you sleep. They really do feel like they're constructed well. Cozy Earth purchases are risk-free with their 100-night sleep trial. Try them out. If you don't love them, return them hassle-free, 10-year warranty, because once you feel this level of comfort, you're going to want it to last a decade. Thanks to Cozy Earth for sponsoring this episode. Discover how care in every detail transform simple routines into moments of true comfort and ease. Head to CozyEarth.com. Use the Code Majority Report for up to 20% off.

That's Code Majority Report for up to 20% off. And if you get a post-purch survey, be sure to mention you heard about Cozy Earth right here. experience the crap behind the comfort, make every day feel intentional. Quick break. We'll put that information in the podcast and YouTube descriptions. Quick break. And then we'll be back with Annel Shalene, research fellow in the Middle East program at the Quincy Institute. We are back, Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland on the majority report.

It's a pleasure to welcome back to the program. Anel Shiline Research Fellow in the Middle East program at the Quincy Institute. Anel, thanks so much for joining us. Thank you for having me. I guess the first question, there's a lot of questions, obviously, about this that are really basic. Like, why are we doing this? Or even, why are, why is the administration saying we're doing this? Like, or like, what is the administration saying we're doing this?

Like, or like, what is their answer to this? It's hard to even answer that question because they've been all over the place. You know, coming out today that pretty shocking statement from Rubio, the idea that we knew Israel was going to attack. And so that would have meant that Iran would have retaliated and hit American. So we decided to just go ahead and attack first. You know, I saw analysis on social media that was like, you know, that's like your teenager is going to go crash the car.

And so you get drunk and crash the car instead, you know, to make sure your teenager doesn't do it. It's like just stop your teenager. You know, like we have such power over the Israeli government, as was evidenced after Israel struck Doha in September. And finally, Trump made clear to Netanyahu that he needed to at least agree to the appearance of a ceasefire. Obviously, that is not actually what happened. But it was very clear that the leverage is there. And all of this argument that Israel is going to do, you know, the U.S. can't really control. No, we provide them with billions of dollars in security assistance every year.

And if we actually put our foot down, they have to listen. Do you believe that? I mean, no, no, no, not what you just said, but do you believe Rubio? Do you think that we did that? Because, I mean, we've been building up for over a month, right? We've been getting reports for over a month that we have the largest buildup since the Iraq war, both in terms of naval and air power in the region, at least a month, maybe two months. But do you believe that that Rubio is being genuine in that explanation? I mean, my understanding is that Netanyahu has been pushing for this war.

Obviously, we saw the U.S. get involved in June, and then Netanyahu kept pushing for the U.S. to re-engage again, and he was clearly pushing on an open door. I think Trump is on a sugar high after the Venezuela operation and thought, you know, unclear why he would be under this impression that Iran would be in any way similar to Venezuela, given that there's no indication that the administration had really been in. touch with anyone inside Iran. I mean, that would have been fairly shocking, just given the dynamics there in the history of the relationship. But again, in Venezuela, they had been in touch with you know, Delci Rodriguez, also Machado. Like, there were various other people waiting in the wings willing to kind of become a U.S. proxy, and that simply did not exist in Iran. Furthermore, just the fact that you, you have that, you know, something like getting the U.S. bogged down in another war in the Middle East, you know, I mean, this is, this is precisely what he said he wasn't going to do.

And I know it's silly to hold Trump to anything he said he was going to. But I mean, how is this America first? Like, I just don't, in terms of like, in a midterm year, I, it's just, it's just. That's important, right? I mean, I think that's important to note because when we're looking, I think you're absolutely right that perhaps if the Venezuela operation didn't go the way that it did and the administration views that as a success because now they have a gun to Rodriguez's head and they're coercing her. If that had not happened, I'm not sure Netanyahu would be able to have convinced Trump this much because, you know, you know, It seems as though Netanyahu and the neocons that Trump has been surrounding himself with recently, although that's not been much of a change, sold him on the weakness of the Iranian regime in a way that does not match the reality.

Venezuela is a very different story and has a different history than Iran. Exactly, exactly. And this notion that this was just going to be some easy operation, you know, maybe he felt that the assassination of Qasem Soleimani very early in 2020, he also felt that that was successful and there wasn't major, there weren't major consequences that he really experienced as a result. But this is very different. And again, as Sam, back to your question about like, what are they saying they're trying to do? they keep shifting what they're saying. Sometimes it's regime change. Then you have Bridge Colby coming out and saying, no, it's not regime change.

And then you have them lengthening the timeline from, you know, we're just going to, you know, we'll go 48 hours and then we'll see if they want to come back to the table. And now it's like, no, it's going to be four to five weeks. And now maybe it's going to be a ground invasion. You know, Trump being very clear that he doesn't have the yips about putting troops on the ground. I mean, this is crazy. And it's a country of 90 million people. I mean, you know, Iraq is is much smaller, was much smaller in 2003.

And it's just a completely and was a complete debacle. Okay. I think it's a, I think saying that like Trump has just got rolled in some way or is, you know, some amount of crazy and stupid. What is? it's taken for granted, you know, that Netanyahu's wanted to do this for 40 years. But what does Netanyahu think was going to happen? Like, you know, like, you know, I'm not an expert on these things at all. But my understanding about the Iranian government is that there is no, we kill Khamani and the government collapses.

it's it that it is very um not necessarily decentralized but institutionalized at this point and um this is not a house of cards it's actually constructed in a way that is rather durable um what what does net njahu expect like in his fantasy we buy like does he want american troops on the ground and and is okay with a 20 year quack? Magmire for America? I mean, I don't think Netanyahu has any qualms about Americans dying in this war. I think that's been his objective from the beginning is to get the U.S. to take out Iran such that it would no longer pose any sort of threat. Again, the idea that Iran posed an actual threat to Israel, when Israel is the nuclear-armed state and Iran is not, I've been shocked by the number of people that have said, oh, is this going to go nuclear?

Like, no, they don't have nuclear weapons. Like, they, it's like, what? Israel's the nuclear armed power. But I think what Netanyahu is hoping for is regime collapse. He wants the country to fall apart. We've seen this in addition with the targeting of border areas, in particular the border with Iraq, where you have Kurdish militias. theoretically that could come in other ethnic minority groups inside Iran.

I think he's banking on the entire country simply falling apart, which would be extremely destabilizing for the whole region. In particular, you think about countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, all the America's Gulf partners on the other side of the Persian Gulf, who've been pushing for this not to happen. who've been pushing very hard for diplomacy. But I think from Netanyahu's perspective, he's not concerned by that.

The idea, you know, for us, it's so, you know, for as someone who grew up with the war on terror model and this idea that, like, you can't have these ungoverned spaces and it's better to have, you know, a strong authoritarian government in place than a vacuum. This is just, just, it's just sort of shocking to think that Trump has sort of bought into Netanyahu's thinking,

which is that total. chaos in Iran is somehow desirable. But wait, I just want to ask you one more question about that. Do the other Gulf states, do, are they, like, what is the, I mean, I understand it from, from Netanyahu's perspective, a Balkanized Iran, an Iran that is engaged in a civil war, an Iran that is a failed state. I mean, I don't know how you get there other than maybe 10 years of American, you know, boots on the ground in some type of massive war, which just seems to me to be an impossibility to sustain

in the way that Iraq was. But if that were to happen, why would that not necessarily be in the interest of, let's say, MBS in Saudi Arabia? Like, I mean, they have always been traditionally rivals. I imagine, like, you know, from their perspective, perhaps a decentralized powers in Iran might make them ascend more. Is that not the case? So I think that may have been the case a few years ago when the tension with Iran, especially between Saudi Arabia and Iran was so high. I think that was when you did tend to hear a lot more bellicosity, this sort of rhetoric coming out of Riyadh. But I think more recently, because it has become so clear to the Saudis and the Qataris, the Omanis, is that the U.S. security guarantee

alleged security is not actually there. And we're actually seeing that now, where you have the U.S. concentrating its defenses and the missile interceptors to protect Israel and not to protect these GCC countries that have given Trump personally vast amounts of money, as well as invested in the U.S. economy, enormous amounts of money. that, you know, obviously there's a lot of corruption happening there, but they would have a reasonable assumption that they sort of bought a degree of loyalty and protection as a result. And instead, what they're finding is, no, the U.S. is not going to be there to protect them. And so this isn't the first time this has happened.

You think about the Iranian attack on the Abkhake facilities in 2019, which Trump responded to, essentially saying, well, you know, they struck the Saudis. They didn't strike us. And it was after that that you then saw MBS initiating this process that resulted in normalization with Tehran in early 2023, that he decided he couldn't count on the U.S. anymore. He was just going to go ahead and cool down these tensions and just try to find a modus Vivendi with Tehran. Obviously, you had the Qataris and Omanis that have essentially been sort of interlocutors with Iran that have had a closer relationship. But just in general, a regional war as well as the possibility of just sort of smuggling or trafficking, you know, Capagon. Like when I was in Saudi Arabia in December, this is what they were articulating, was this concern that the U.S. and Israel were going to launch this extreme instability, which is completely incompatible with MBS's Vision 2030, whereby he has taped his credibility and, legitimacy on transforming the Saudi economy to be clear in an extremely authoritarian manner.

But in hopes of reducing their reliance on oil, moving towards a post-oil economy, and as well as employing women has been a significant component of that. But he needs foreign direct investment. He needs tourists. He needs it to be, he needs the region to be stable. The same way Dubai and Abu Dhabi and Ohio, these cities depend on this perception of stability, which has now been shattered. Iran probably knows that, and that's probably part of, I mean, that's, that's probably the, the weakest point in which they can, or the point where they can exercise as much influence. Yeah, the tourism piece that we saw, we were talking about this before, there were videos of tourists that were saying, how could this happen here? I mean, that, their pivot away from oil is going to be,

they want more stability in the region for that reason. There was an item in Middle East eye about how the U.S. is, quote, stonewalling request from Gulf states to replenish their interceptors. So that fits into what you're saying there. And you also see that they're warming to China. China was part of brokering some of those talks between the Iranians and the Saudis recently. And so they are keeping their options open to a degree. I want to ask you because you obviously worked in the State Department.

We've had you on the show to speak about how you resigned over the genocide in Gaza and the Biden administration not listening to pleas from you and your colleagues to change course. And so when we talk about Israel's influence over the State Department, you're somebody that has an intimate knowledge of that. I'm wondering about these Kushner and Whitkoff talks. Like on its face, Rubio as the head of the State Department should probably be a little bit concerned that we, the Trump administration and the Israelis seem to relish in the fact that American diplomacy really has no credibility anymore. Because when you have like diplomacy and talks fall apart like this, all that's left is militarism. That's music to Bibi Netanyahu's ears. That's music even maybe the Trump's ears. but like it undercuts the core function of the State Department. I mean, I don't think anyone in the Trump administration is particularly concerned about the State Department, including Marco Rubio.

I mean, you know, the fact that you have Krishna and Whitkoff not only leading these negotiations with Iran, but also Gaza, also Ukraine. I mean, right. In a in a previous administration, it would have been conducted through State Department channels, and you would have had sort of a capacity there to say nothing also with the expertise. And just, I mean, one key point there, I think that it's important to highlight is the fact that Trump could have declared victory with the deal that he got. The fact that you had the Omani foreign minister come on face the nation to say Iran has agreed to zero enrichment. This had been a red line. They didn't say zero enrichment. They said zero stockpiling, right? I mean, so that there would be enrichment, but only it seemed to me that the offer was, we continue to enrich for commercial purposes, you know, using it for nuclear power, but no stockpiling, so we can't build a nuclear weapon. Yes, I think that's right.

I think, and that was, that that would have, again, Trump could have said I got something better than what Obama got, because under the JCPOA, the, the 2015 nuclear deal, Iran was permitted to retain, I believe, 300 kilos of enriched uranium, and now it was going to be zero, as you said, that they couldn't hold on to any of it. And this, I think, goes back to what you were saying, Emma, about the fact that you had Kushner and Whitkoff looking for that, you know, specific, the zero enrichment phrase. Right. And it's like, basically, they'd agreed to that.

they'd agreed to zero stockpiling. And so there's no capacity that they simply cannot make a weapon. And that Trump could have said, I did it. I did the thing. I got the longer, stronger, better deal. You know, I got what Obama couldn't get. And he could have avoided all of this. And the fact that the Omani foreign minister,

they don't usually go on media to make this case. Because clearly, Wikoff and Kushner weren't really getting it. The fact that there was a viable deal here and that the Iranians had cross their own red line to get there. And instead, we have Trump launching these attacks anyway. And specifically, again, whether it was, and the Israelis or the Americans, but hitting a girls' school within the first, you know, out, the first day of this engagement is horrifying that, you know, we're already to this point in the conflict where, where we're, you know, there have already been 10 medical facilities struck, which are supposed to be protected. Obviously, schools are supposed to be

protected. Obviously, civilian infrastructure in general is not a legitimate military target. And yet already we're seeing the both, and again, it's hard to tell sometimes whether it's an Israeli missile or an American missile or who launched it, but targeting the civilian infrastructure in ways that are very reminiscent of Gaza. Yes. Yes. And to bolster this point, though, about Wyckoff, like, There was reporting a few months ago that Wiccoff didn't understand Putin and the Russian Ukraine land swap offer that Reuters had reported that, that it seems like, I don't know, statecraft. You're at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, but Statecraft should be a thing. Diplomacy is a thing. And just sticking your real estate buddy in and your son-in-law in to negotiate these deals means like they're, they seem to misunderstand.

understand basic tenets of what the negotiations entail. Exactly. And you think about like when under the very, you know, painstaking negotiations to get to Obama's nuclear deal, they had nuclear scientists there to sort of hash out the specifics, people whose life is dedicated to understanding these issues and could agree on the very specific terms. Whereas, yeah, here it seemed maybe like they did Control F for zero enrichment.

And since it wasn't in there, they're like, no. Yeah. Well, they also did stay at a holiday inn, express the night beat. I'm sorry. But let me ask you this, though. Is it possible that they did understand what was being offered? They had chased the car. They caught the car.

And at that point, they were like, we're not getting enough resistance from the Iranians. We've got to do this now. I think that is entirely plausible as well that you had, Trump had made the decision that he, that he wanted to move forward with this. And so negotiations really were just deploy. Emma, kind of as you were saying, that America's credibility as a negotiator has been significantly eroded not only in the eyes of Iran, but in any other country trying to negotiate with them. And as you pointed out, that is directly in the interest of Netanyahu, who doesn't want this to end in negotiations. He doesn't want an off-ramp. He wants the U.S. to continue to use up our limited interceptors.

I mean, that's also a crucial component of this is America's supply of these very expensive missile interceptors has been significantly reduced by the war in Ukraine, as well as the 12-day war last summer. And we don't have the capacity, which is why, we were saying earlier, the U.S. is focusing its attention on defending Israel and not on defending these other Gulf partners, which Emma, as you pointed out, are very, you know, they're looking for other alternatives. We saw after the strike on Doha in September, within eight days, Saudi Arabia signed the defense treaty with Pakistan, a nuclear armed state. There's been talk that they'll also sign something similar with Turkey, maybe also Egypt. And so sort of developing this alternative middle power. I mean, Turkey is a NATO member. But these countries are understandably going to be

looking elsewhere because the United States, whether it's on the security front or, you know, more broadly, just sorry, I'm a little all over the place, but just, you know, Trump's announced just now that he's going to cut off dealings with Spain because they said that they're going, like dealings, I assume like trade, you know, cut off the relationship with Spain because they're not going to allow the U.S. to launch attacks on Iran from Spanish territory. I mean, you know, it's just like the whole world is like, wow, it would maybe have been a little foolish for us who have relied on the United States behaving somewhat sanely, whether in the economic realm or the security realm, maybe it's time to restructure our global order in a way that doesn't depend on there being

somebody sane and competent in the White House. That would be the most. rational reaction to this, frankly. Anel She-Line research follow at the Middle East program at Quincy Institute. Thanks so much for your time today. Really appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks, now. All right.

We're going to take a quick break and we'll come back. Seamus Malakafzali. We'll be joining us, freelance journalist, co-host of the Turbulance Pod, publisher of his newsletter at Seamus Malakafzali.com. We'll be right back after this. We are back. Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland on the majority report. Pleasure to welcome to the program.

Seamus Malak Kethsali, freelance journalist, co-host of the Turbulance Pod and publisher of his own newsletter under his name at Substack. Seamus, welcome to the program. Happy to be on. So we were just talking to Anel She-Line from the Quincy Institute about sort of like the mystery of why America did this and what. what Netanyahu is hoping to gain out of this. Give us your perspective of sort of the regional reaction and to the extent that there is both surprise in what the U.S. has done and the surprise in which if they have any in Iran's reaction and the U.S.'s reaction and the U.S.'s inability to

protect them from Iran's reaction? In the Gulf, I have not seen very much in the way of criticizing the United States, at least for now. They are mostly concerned with shooting down Iranian drones, Iranian ballistic missiles. But this is something that the Gulf states had been warning Trump about. They had previously intervened in order to stop a potential strike back in January because of a threat of that retaliation. And apparently Trump did. And, apparently, Trump did, did not consider this to be a real possibility, nor did I think a lot of people in the administration. Right now, I think they are limiting their strong reactions to Iran solely just because right now, self-defense, as in the Patriot missiles that are shooting down these missiles and drones, they are reliant on U.S. supply. They cannot do a unilateral retaliation if they wanted to do that against Iran without significant

American support. I think they're trying to treat this as delicately as they possibly can. What I mean, what do you make of, you know, we heard the statement from Rubio and it's also Mike Johnson has said the same thing. Like, we had to strike because we knew Israel was going to strike. And we knew that if Israel struck, then Iran would strike us. And so we needed to strike them first so that as to minimize the casualties for us, if they struck, which, you know, which, okay, take that at face value. But Trump also said that he was surprised that Iran struck these various countries in the region, American bases for the most part, although it's, you know, like, I guess maybe airports,

but ones that were affiliated, you know, next to. So what ostensibly did when Rubio says they would strike us, Is he saying that they thought that Iran would send missiles to America? Like, I don't understand. How can you be both surprised and anticipate Iranian retaliation? I don't think Trump, on a personal level, understands anything that is happening or knows about what's happening or has any idea of what comes later. On the issue of, like, leadership for Iran, he seems to oscillate between hearing that there

is a temporary counsel of three people, and those are three choices. But then those choices got killed, but didn't really get killed. And now there may be moderate elements, but he doesn't know what those moderate elements are. I think he personally is just hearing things in his briefing, and he remembers bits and pieces of it, and then he just says it to the press. As for Rubio and Mike Johnson, these are people with functioning minds, and I think this is mostly deception. Dropside, I believe was reporting on this, that the date for these strikes was decided weeks in advance and that the negotiating process was intended, deliberately intended to fail. They expected this to happen. But Trump himself, I think, has been pretty much not present here.

What did the Iranians fear here more? I mean, I would imagine that because as Sam's been saying, you know, the state is so, it's more institutionalized than other countries that the United States has tried to wage offensive wars against. I mean, what, it seems like they're prepared to take a significant amount of damage more than basically capitulating. And that's been the case for decades. I don't see why this would change just because they take out Khomeini. No, there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the Islamic Republic by most Republicans, and I also think most Democrats. There is the expectation that because Ali Khomey was a supreme leader for such a long time, that all the power was vested in him, and that as soon as you took him out, then democracy would flourish. And the protesters would rush in Russia and everything would be hunky dory from there. But when Khomeini died, the Republic did not fall.

They were able to simply elect a new one. And that appears to be the case here. No, they're really hoping that a Venezuela situation could happen here in which a much less institutionalized country, to borrow the language that you're using. They see one of their top leaders, their top leader get taken out and the rest of them fall in line because they fear death. they fear being taken out of the picture one way or another. In Iran, there are multiple different institutional structures that would fight against that. And also, there is, like, there is just no chance. I hate to rely on polemicism, but there is really no chance that they are just going to give in on this

and acquiesce to American demands. that there is no way that the political system will allow for that in any strong way. It is a it is a managed democracy, but there have always been political wins inside the country pushing their heels in against American influence. For the past 20 years, anyone I've interviewed about Iran has more or less said the same thing that there are wide, deep institutions that are structural. And so if that's the case, just to get back to, and I want to come back to what you think broadly Iranian reaction will be. But if that is the case, and Rubio has a functioning brain and Lindsay Graham has a functioning

brain and Netanyahu theoretically has a functioning brain, like what do they expect to happen. Like, I guess, you know, you know, I can understand that Netanyahu has no problem with a redux of the Iraq war for America. It didn't really in any way harm Israel. If anything, it's strengthened Israel. He was happy about it. And, and I could see how he'd be like, that would be great if America was here and fighting a 10-year war in Iran. It's no skin off our back. But what does, like, Rubio or grand? expect to happen. What do they think the outcome that is going to be positive here for them to have done?

Positive, the positive reaction, the positive result they hope to see a state collapse and civil war. The idea, like Reza Patha, the son of the late Shai, is clearly trying to angle for a strong Iranian ally of the U.S. and Israel, talking about the Cyrus Accords. He was on Fox News with Bartaromo talking about there being a trillion dollar market opening for the Americans if they invest in Iran and invest in regime change. But I think Lindsey Graham was the one who said this. He doesn't care if there's another cleric or a representative democracy. He cares that Iran is no longer a threat. And that means that Iran needs to be neutralized in its entirety as a force that can project against America.

I think those were Hegsef's words. So when Steve Wickoff, who said to Sean Hannity last night, that he asked Iran to dismantle its own navy in negotiations, that is not something that I assume he expects to reconstitute under Rezaaqlevi or any pro-democracy leader, the expectation is that it no longer exists permanently so that America continues to have freedom of operation, the street of war moves in the Persian Gulf.

If Iran is constantly tied up fighting, Kurdish separatist groups or Balochi separatist groups or whichever ethnic group, then it has no opportunity to focus on projecting against the West or forming its own foreign policy objectives or projecting influence anywhere. It becomes America and Israel's ballgame entirely. And I think that's also why Netanyahu is in favor of really anything that entangles the United States in the Middle East once again is that it increases our reliance on Israeli intelligence. My camera's being a little funky. Sorry about that, folks. But it increases our reliance on Israeli intelligence. It entangles the United States even further in that relationship and makes

it so that it's less likely that the growing political wins at home are going to shift in the direction of, say, an arms embargo, which I think like we've been dancing around the timing of this. but the fact that this is happening as you have Republican members resigning from the house and as the midterms are coming up and you have even centrists like Mark Warner who are speaking about Israel's dragging us into this war like they feel that they basically have a nine month year long period to wage this war before the tide of American public opinion might impact them and they're also by the way bombing Lebanon we should say like the Israel's done everything it can to make this the region destabilized outside, but the country that they need U.S. support for

because the Iranian missiles can impact them is the U.S. I mean, they need U.S. support, I should say, if they're going to take action against Iran directly. Israel knows that it's still, I mean, Israel enjoys so much support from the United States. That's putting out lightly. It wants to be in a position in which it is not reliant on U.S. support in the future, Nanyahu had said that in 10 years it wants to be free of any sort of American military aid. But conversely, it also wants America to be, as you said, completely tied up in this, completely reliant on Israeli intelligence, Israeli leadership, aligned with Israeli objectives and Israeli strategy.

But if anyone in the government pulls back or wants to pull back, then they have no ability to control Israel. That is the ideal situation that they want to get to, Menyahu specifically. What do you make of the Oman's foreign minister saying that Iran had agreed to not stockpile enriched uranium and just, you know, having enriched uranium itself, gets diminished as you use it in a nuclear reactor for power. Iran has always wanted to control their own power because obviously you want to be able to generate your own power as a country. If you agree not to stockpile it, you can't build a nuclear weapon.

And what do you make of the timing relative to Iran having just offered that? this is according to the foreign minister from Oman? I mean, there had been that reports, as I said before, that this date was entrenched weeks ago, I guess on the eve of Pyrim, because they are using that symbology. But your intuition is correct that they wanted to head off some sort of conundrum where Iran is clearly offering things in public. But they keep having to say that Iran is, in fact, digging it. heels and not giving them anything. And they have to be stopped. This is what happened with Iraq. I mean, we had weapons inspectors on the ground. They were not finding anything. We were hearing more and

more. The weapons inspectors are going to the U.S. to the CIA. Tell us where they are because we're looking where you told us and they're not there. And that's when I think the U.S. realized like, okay, pull them out because we've got to go in now. It's just going to, we're going to lose the PR battle. in this instance, like it doesn't even seem like they were waging a PR battle. They just said, we're just going to do it. We don't need to give justification. We're just going to create these facts on the ground. You mentioned like the possibility of there being, I mean, there are many different, I guess, ethnicities, factions, you could say, in Iran.

How, if there was a, and I imagine there. are, you know, we have had, whether Israeli or U.S. or British, I mean, whomever, trying to agitate these things of funneling weapons in certain instances, funneling cash, whatever. Is there any way to see any indication of if those efforts are, like, what's happening with those efforts? Apparently, there was a story, I believe, in the New York Times that Trump, had met with Kurdish leaders in Iraq yesterday. He had talked with Masood Barzani and the name escapes me, but I believe the leader of the P.U.K.

In Iraq, there is already a Kurdish coalition that had been formed shortly before the war broke out between numerous different Iranian Kurdish factions, one of which used to be allied with Reza Pahdavi, but now has obviously gone against him in this regard. they are preparing for this. There are factions within that coalition that have openly sought out Israeli support. They are actively courting that in public, and they want that because they know it is instrumental. It is fundamental to their success, whatever that might be. Can you just shed some light a little bit on how the IRGC operates without the Supreme Leader at this

point. What is the chain of command is your understanding? And does that have an impact on, like, say, the discipline of the response? Iran has focused a lot on decentralization of its military. I think they call it the mosaic defense strategy, which allows it, like, the defense minister was killed, the commander in chief of the armed forces was killed, numerous other military officials. Trump obviously says something like 40 something, but he has not really some names in that regard. But it has allowed it that local commanders, regional commanders, still operate completely functionally because of prior instructions of what to do. And that has meant that the ladder of escalation continues to be climbed without the defense minister authorizing it, without the commander-in-chief of the

IRGC authorizing it. So that means that they are authorized, technically, to strike Oman to potentially have struck Riyadh, the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh, without the Iranian government authorizing it. And in some cases, directly saying that they did not authorize it and they would not have authorized it. That has allowed them to control the ladder of escalation better than, say, Hezbollah would have been able to, had been able to. Well, that's, I guess, Hesbola is relevant here because the Hesbola has been severely weakened by the decapitation strikes that Israel has engaged in over the past two and a half years of genocide and also, you know, bombing, illegal bombing campaigns in other countries.

But there seems to be a really concerted effort by the Israelis to conceal how much damage Iranian missiles have caused. We've also touched on this throughout our conversation, but I'm curious about your thoughts on that front and why that's the case, how that's happened, and what the capacity is for Iranian weaponry to actually inflict damage on Israel. What happened during the last war was that Iran hit numerous buildings related to the Israeli Defense Ministry and the Mossad. It achieved direct hits on these places. It was not an overwhelming show of force like Israel was able to do so, whereas America is doing so now.

But it clearly showed, one, the ability for Iran to circumvent Israeli air defenses when Israel had been claiming that 99% of drones and missiles are being intercepted at one point or another. But also that it had intelligence about where these places were, more than Israel would want to admit. I have not been, again, the military censorship regime prevents me from making any sort of assumptions about the current situation, but they are very adamant about that not happening. Again, there have already been instructions sent to the Israeli public not to film sites

where Iranian missiles are located. I believe Turkish journalists were just arrested on camera, just a few hours before this, because they have been filming. And we also remember last year when Trey Yinks, the Fox News cameraman, was trying to film the Kyria, having been attacked by Iran and the ideas immediately descended in this position. There has to be a complete shield around the aura of Israel's invincibility. And that has to be maintained because otherwise people lose faith in that. they can utilize scenes of mass devastation in places like Tel Aviv or Bechamesh when that is useful, but it cannot be constant.

It cannot be. Mearsheimer talks about this as escalation dominance and that being kind of, you know, Israel's prime, the part of their kind of psychological, the psychological element of their warfare is the trying to maintain this idea that like the Iron Dome and their missile defense and their weapon systems are so advanced and sophisticated that, uh, they, You should not strike against them. But it's important to note that that contradicts their actions and their fear of Iran. It's contradicted by their open fear of Iran's capabilities.

Yes. I mean, it's both that Israel has the ability to intercept everything, but also Iran holds not only the existential threat to Israel through its ballistic missile capabilities. And that one day, Netanyahu was on Hannity last night and said that in a couple months it would be impossible. to stop the nuclear program, even with Israeli weaponry. But also that Iran doesn't just threaten Israel, doesn't just threaten Europe, but it threatens the entire Earth. I remember the IDF had a posted a video during the last war where they had a bunch of flags wave on screen about what countries Israel could threaten. And one of them was China.

Like the whole of China is apparently a threat that is in Iran's crosshairs. It's not based in any sort of reality. You have to, you have to signal that you are both invincible but also incredibly vulnerable. And it is not, it's a very schizophrenic position. When you, when you look at, are there signs that you look for that give an indication of where this is going? In other words, if the number of interceptors is, is diminished and you start to see Iranian drones or missiles hit certain places that should not be possible based upon interceptors or if there are more U.S. ships or less U.S. ships moving in.

I mean, what would be indicators of where this is going? Because I mean, I guess like on some level, it's very difficult to predict what the U.S. is going to do because we have a mad king who, it seems to me, it's just as possible he wakes up tomorrow morning and Laura Lumer says something that annoys him and he's like, we're done. We won and we're done and, you know, we're going back or, you know, Laura Lumer sends him a muffin basket and he's like, we're boots on the ground. I'm not skittish. but what are other sort of like more tangible things that if we could predict if it wasn't a monkey playing chess, what would they be? If we remember after I think what Trump called Liberation Day with the tariffs, I mean, he was gung ho for all of this stuff.

But as soon as the market responded poorly, to say the least, then he had to pull back from that. when it's clear that he is screwing with the money, as it were, that is when I think he usually gets the picture. He starts to get calls from people he would most likely not like to get calls from. The Dow apparently plunged a thousand points today. Oil prices are sky high.

They're getting sky high. But what's interesting to me is that Trump is starting to not only dig in his heels rhetorically in that he said that after this is all over, that oil prices is going to go lower than maybe you've ever heard before. But apparently there are moves being made to force tankers transiting the street of Hormuz to get them insurance because insurers are dropping them. Yes.

I think there is an attempt here. He wants an offer, obviously. He wants to get this done in a matter of days, like was the case in Venezuela. But I think the four or five week thing is probably going to be the general timeline. when the 12-day war happened, there was a bottleneck approaching near the end of that conflict with Israel, where Israel was running out and there was going to be significant restrictions on their part. Now, America obviously has the USS Gerald Ford there to intercept things. It is apparently bringing in more interceptor batteries from the Asian feeder, which I find incredible. I don't think the bottleneck will come as quickly, but it is going to approach.

And I'm guessing that that four or five week window was what was given because of that. That that is when things are going to get nasty for the Americans. So in other words, we have interceptors that will last for four or five weeks. That is my assumption. It could come earlier if Iran continues to throw drones at the Gulf at the rate that it has. But Iran does not have, it has an immense domestic. capability, but it does not have infinite domestic capability. It will inevitably have to cut the rate at which it fires things, which will give America potentially time to move in things and

extend that timeline. But I won't say anything for certain because we are truly an uncharted territory here with the kind of assets that are being brought in. And this is where Venezuela, it's important to put it in that context when we're trying to understand Trump's motivation here, obviously is because, I mean, it seems like he was willing because he was on this high, really willing to accept these pie in the sky assumptions about how quickly he could both like topple the regime, but then maybe even do what he said with Venezuela, which is just take the oil. You know, is he diluted enough to think that he can seize the oil? and that's when he says things like oil prices are going to be going down to record, record lows, because he views this as another way for conquest, and that we're essentially just going to be taking over their reserves or their oil fields quite quickly.

He hasn't said that explicitly yet, which I am almost surprised by. He has mostly focused on eliminating missile capabilities in Navy, but I am sure that that will come into the discussion. soon, if this becomes drawn out and costly, when America needs to justify to the public that it will be getting something out of this arrangement other than simply waging a war primarily for Israeli interests. That entered the equation, Venezuela, as you said, it's going to enter the conversation with Cuba, it entered the conversation with Ukraine. It is a matter of time, I think, with him, even if he is moving towards state collapse with Iran?

I guess we'll see. I mean, it's going to be interesting to see if, you know, he's an old guy. If he passes away in the next six weeks, how many people go like, I didn't want to do this, but he insisted. Well, if he is assassinated by Iran, we can just take comfort in knowing that it's not an act of war. because just how the world did I break Seamus

I can't it's not Seamus does Seamus does want to this conversation it's a joke I know I know is anyone listening

it's a joke yes of course I mean but there you know a precedent has been set it's not an act of war it's obviously illegal but it's not an active war

and Iran should be able to bomb our facilities as well and we should not be able to punch back. So, um, precedent said. Well, they would have only done that so that to prevent us from punching back. Right. Right. After somebody else did it.

Yeah. Deniably. Yeah, exactly. Shamis, Malakavzali. Thank you so much for your time today. We will put a link to your, uh, newsletter at majority.com and our podcast and YouTube, as well as a link to a link to. the turbulence pod. I suspect you're going to have a lot to talk about over the next,

I don't know, a couple weeks or 10 years. So thanks so much for coming on. Appreciate it. Thanks, Seamus. All right, folks. We're going to take a break and head to the fun half of the program. I mean, I, who knows? I ate. Doing the dance, we're doing the dance, the car rove dance. Oh, my God.

We're all doing the car rove dance today, folks. You got to go back in the archives. Like, the neocons are, you know, they're back. They never left us, but they're back. And so we need some Bush era kind of reminiscing if we're going to be doing this. I was going to mention to him. I was going to mention to him. The idea of someone like Lindsay Graham or Rubio, for that matter, or Netanyahu, being okay with a Balkanized Iran with multiple warring factions is a mini version of what the Project for New American Century document was that was written in the wake of the first.

rock war by folks like Dick Cheney and Pearl and Wolfowitz, I think, was in writing. And Feist, was Doug Feist, I think it was his name. These names I haven't said in, you know, 15 years. And the project for New American Century was the contemplation by the neocons that America could become a hyperpower and that the rest of the world, world would be in what would happen is there would be no other superpower to contest with us we would be a hyperpower that would oversee a world with a bunch of regional conflicts and those regional conflicts would be both containable but also serve to prevent any type of coalition or build up of power that would challenge us and we would have a somewhat pox but totally Americana

in terms of over the entire globe by having that hegemony that was enhanced by low-level conflicts. And so the idea of a balkanized Iran that would be helpful to Israel just means like nobody can coalesce and deal with our power. Iran plays a pretty key part in China's Belt and Road initiative. I mean, all of the Middle East, I mean, I was also quite convinced that. much of Iraq was a was founded in a concern that Iran would, excuse me, that China would get hegemony or creep into, we would lose hegemony over the oil. And it wasn't so much that we would just get it cheaply, but rather we would control the spigot. And that's, I mean, why it's

Of course China then goes and says like, oh, we're going to do solar and our car is going to be electric. We have options. I mean, that's why it's important to mention that that report about the Gulf states getting stonewalled by the United States. If they're going to experience the blowback, but not the benefit, this is mandate from heaven for Xi Jinping. I got to say, like, being aware of American history and the way of the American colonists play different tribes against each other. and eventually came for all of them. I would just say that when Dave Rubin says you're all Muslims

and he doesn't know why Iran would attack other Muslims, like that's where, you're all on the menu, folks. So you should figure out how to get off out from under America because we're not going to treat you any better. Dorsey reminds me it was Doug Douglas Fyth, who Spain also wanted to investigate him for war crimes. Spain was quite good in the whole war crime thing.

I think they got pretty far down the road with Dick Cheney because of the way that they have their prosecutors. But he escaped by dying. That's it for us today, at least for the free show. We're going to head into the fun half, and boy, is it going to be fun. Oh, yeah. You're going to hear more from folks like Mike Johnson. Oh, yes. There's a lot of third way stuff.

Here's the other thing I wanted to mention. because I mean, we're not quite in Iraq war territory in terms of our attack on Iran. We may or may not get there. But the thing I learned from going through those four or five years, this first four or five years, well, six years, I guess, of that war, is that during that time, there, there was enough insight by people I did not like, like Rahm Emanuel, let's say, and those forces within the Democratic Party to understand that someday the Democrats would be back in power. And they prepared. And that's been going on through the Trump years, even through the Biden years.

And the difference is this time is that it's not just been happening with the third way types. It's been happening with the folks to the left of the Democratic Party who want to pull the Democratic Party left. DSA, Justice Democrats, however you want to place that ideologically. And so Bernie Sanders came out with a proposal yesterday for a wealth tax. And, you know, it occurred to me that like, If something like this had been proposed during the beginning of the Iraq war, I'd be like, there's no time to talk about this. But this is a very important time to talk about it because Donald Trump is not going to be president forever. He may not even be alive for the rest of his term.

Who knows? He's got a huge rash on his neck. And who knows what that is? It's gross. It's called the winning rash. My understanding is there are flesh-eating bacteria that exists. in the world. So it could be anything. It could just be eczema. But Bernie Sanders introducing a wealth tax. It would be 5% annually on billionaires. It would raise about $4.4 trillion. He has a list of

things on how to spend that $4.3 trillion. So it would be deficit positive. In other words, it would shrink the deficits so you could say that but you know by a billion dollars um but the point that this is going to serve as or could is very much like medicare for all did in various campaigns or in and does today like every candidate that we talked to yesterday and i would say almost like you know the the number of candidates who it's non-controversal we need medicare for all at this point is astounding relative to the way it would have been 10, 12 years ago. Yeah. And it's a litmus test and it's a shorthand.

And it's a, not necessarily a purity test, but it is a litmus test. Are you, you know, it is a shorthand, this person can be supported in many respects. And I think that the reason why Sanders is introducing this now is as a, we go forward into the midterms, and we're getting closer in many respects to things like, you know, primaries, obviously a big primary today in North Carolina from a congressional standpoint. The trillionaire tax becomes a way in which people can ask candidates and get a sense of where they're located in this battle between a money. We'll talk more about this as we talk about these third way clips. But this is a very important piece of legislation, regardless of whether you think

it can happen or not. It is a way of ideologically defining yourself as to the question of a wealth tax is definitive in the same way that a single payer health care system is. It is basically saying that, you know what, we do not want a society where people can accumulate so much. money that they function as royalty in a system where royalty actually gets to make the rules. So we'll talk more about that. But in the meantime, this show relies on its members to keep on, keeping on. And you can help this show survive and thrive by becoming a member at Join the Majority Report.com. When you do, you only get the free show free of commercials.

You also get to IMS on the fun half. We'll take phone calls today, I think, even. Whoa. Yes. Also, just coffee.coffey. It's a co-op. It's in Madison, Wisconsin. They make great coffee.

They make a majority report blend. And they'll give you 10% off if you use the coupon code. Majority, our longest sponsor on this program. Actually predates this program. And I am curious how? No. Okay. Matt, what's happening?

in the Matlek universe. Yeah, we've been doing a lot on Iran for the Sunday show. I did a solo show talking about Iran and what Charlie Kirk would have wanted, which is to celebrate last year how Lindsay Graham is definitely not going to get what he wants.

What a difference a year makes. And today, after the show, we're going to have Gene Bajelon, Rake, TMBS, original guest on talking about Iran and also someone named Anel Shiline talking about Iran as well. So a lot of Iran stuff today coming up right after the show

right after the fun half. That was a happy coincidence, by the way. But yes, oh, I have to plug if you are in L.A. in a few weeks, March 22nd, I'm going to be a Dynasty typewriter with Francesca Furentini, Van Lathen, Ida Rodriguez, great, great, great lineup.

Link down below. March 22nd. It's a matinee. It's going to be really fun. And people are going to be able to party and go to things in L.A. because it's so far from Iran that the ballistic missiles won't be able to intercontinental missiles that Iran has will not be able to get to California, right? I mean, thanks to Trump.

Are we closer on the East Coast? I don't know. To Iran? As the crow flies? Yeah, I think you go over the northern North Pole. I think we're probably closer. Probably. Okay.

So you're out there. People are going to be partying in here. Right, right. I'm hopefully escaping. It's like London and the Blitz where Iran's looking at us. Nuclear waste land. And then also, I guess, check out my episode of Doom Scroll, if you haven't already. folks see you in the fun half three months from now six months from now nine months from now

and i don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six months from now and i don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now but i think around 18 months out we're going to look back and go like wow what what is that going on it's nuts wait a second hold on for hold on for a second Welcome to the program. Hey. Fun. Matt.

Who? Fun. What is up, everyone? Fun hat. No, McKean. You did it. Fun hat. Let's go Brandon.

Let's go Brandon. Fun hat. Bradley, you want to say hello? Sorry to disappoint. Everyone, I'm just a random guy. It's all the boys today. Fundamentally false. No, I'm sorry.

Stop talking for a second. Let me finish. Where is this coming from, dude? But dude, you want to smoke his... 7.8? Yes. Yes? That hurts me.

I think it is you. Who is you? No sound. Every single freaking day. What's on your mind? We can discuss free markets and we can discuss capitalism. I'm going to guess how like. Who libertarians?

They're so stupid though. Common sense says of course. Gobbled eke. We fucking nailed him. So what's 79 plus 21? Challenge met. I'm positively clivering. I believe 96 I want to say.

857. 21. 35. 501. One half. Three-eighth. Nine eleven for instance. $3,400.

$1,900. $6.5,4, $3 trillion sold. It's a zero-sum game. Actually, you're making me think less. But let me say this. Poop. You can call satire.

Sam goes to satire. On top of it all? Yeah. My favorite part about you is just like every day all day. Yeah. Hey, buddy. We've seen you. Obviously. Yeah. Sun's out guns out.

I don't know. But you should know. People just don't like to entertain ideas anymore. I have a question. Who cares? Our chat is enabled, folks. I love it. I do love that.

Got to jump. I got to be quick. I get a jump. I'm losing it, bro. Two o'clock. We're already late, and the guy's being a dick. So scroom. Sent to a gulaw?

Outrage. Like, what is wrong with you? Love you. Bye. Love you. Bye-bye.