The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart - At War in the Middle East, Again with Christiane Amanpour and Amb. Wendy Sherman

Episode Date: March 4, 2026

As American strikes intensify and Iran retaliates across the region, Jon is joined by Ambassador Wendy Sherman, who negotiated the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement that Trump later withdrew from, and CNN's Chief International Anchor Christiane Amanpour. Together, they analyze Trump's decision to choose war over diplomacy, assess what the administration is trying to accomplish through military force, and examine the possibilities ahead for the Iranian people and the region. Plus, Jon talks about the merger aftermath and his Last Meal order! This episode is brought to you by: GROUND NEWS - Go to https://groundnews.com/stewart to see how any news story is being framed by news outlets around the world and across the political spectrum. Use this link to get 40% off unlimited access with the Vantage Subscription. FACTOR - Eat smart at https://FactorMeals.com/TWS50OFF and use code TWS50OFF to get 50% off your first box, plus Free Breakfast for 1 Year. QUINCE - Go to https://Quince.com/TWS for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. FAST GROWING TREES - Go to https://fastgrowingtrees.com/tws and use code TWS to get 20% off your first purchase. Follow The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart on social media for more:  > YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@weeklyshowpodcast > Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/weeklyshowpodcast > TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@weeklyshowpodcast  > X: https://x.com/weeklyshowpod   > BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/theweeklyshowpodcast.com Host/Executive Producer – Jon Stewart Executive Producer – James Dixon Executive Producer – Chris McShane Executive Producer – Caity Gray Lead Producer – Lauren Walker Producer – Brittany Mehmedovic  Producer – Gillian Spear Video Editor & Engineer – Rob Vitolo Audio Editor & Engineer – Nicole Boyce Music by Hansdle Hsu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You know what's interesting about the avocado? And I've never really thought about this. When you cut it open, you get that perfect little scoop with the little indentation. Have you ever thought to yourself, I bet that's comfortable to sleep in? Almost looks like a body shape where you can just lie there. And that's the genius of our sponsors. Avocado green mattress. They've taken the beauty of the restful beauty of the inside of an avocado and turned it

into a mattress. It's not made of avocados. Obviously, that thing would spoil. God, 30 seconds. But it's called avocado green mattress. They sell mattresses, pillows, solid wood furniture. What more do you need? And no pits. It's all made for materials designed to support healthier living and more restorative sleep. Made without the harmful chemicals. Can actual avocados say that? Probably not. They only use certified organic non-tacted materials. They even have sleep trials. You know, up to a year to make sure you get the best mattress for you. Avocado Green Mattress, it is, it's brilliant. Avocado, dream of better.

Go to Avocado Green Mattress.com slash TWS, avocadogreenmatress.com slash TWS. Avocado Green Mattress. com slash TWS. You might be tempted to let Taco Bell's new Lux Value menu go to your head. Because 10 indulgences for $5 or less makes you, You feel fancy. Like you might think you need cloth napkins.

Well, you don't. Just use the ones that come in the bag. Don't let the luxe go to your head. Hello, everybody. Welcome to the weekly show podcast. My name is John Stewart, and I will be your host and pilot for this evening's flight. It is Tuesday.

It is March 3rd, and we had a banger. A banger. Plan for you. We had election experts. We had experts in dark money. We had experts in social media. the point of the conversation was going to be that, you know, there's all this focus on undocumented people that are completely throwing our elections and all that. And yet everybody ignores the

billionaires who are putting $350 million and changing algorithms to reflect their own political ideologies. And what's really out of those two things, the one that is more damaging to a free and fair election and our democracy? And it would have been decisive. It would have been informative, decisive, entertaining. I think it would have been exactly what you are all looking for. And then this motherfucker bombed another country. And so we once again, the best laid plans of mice and men. Man plans and Trump laughs.

Or I don't know if he can laugh. All he can really do is look at the drapes. So we are going to talk about Iran. and everything that is going on there. And with two people that I think have both wonderful areas of expertise about Iran, and I think can help us get through a little bit of some of the confusion and lack of justifications and all those different things that are flying around in the moment right now. So let's get right to them.

We've got Christian Amunpore and Ambassador Wendy Sherman. So as we try and navigate through these somewhat chaotic times and these somewhat malleable justifications for a war that we have just launched, or maybe not a war, perhaps. It is not a war, in fact. It is just merely a long-distance explosion. Hello. We are joined by Christian Ammapur, CNN chief international anchor and Ambassador Wendy Sherman, former deputy secretary of state and lead negotiator of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. Thank you both for being here. I can imagine that you guys are burning. up the wires with people talking to all.

Christian, can you give us just very briefly any kind of sort of real-time update about where this all stands right now as we're entering days four and five? What are you hearing? Well, for me, the most important signifier of where we are right now is the order given by the United States for all Americans to leave the Middle East, but do it on your own dime, do it on commercial. We can't get you out. For me, that speaks volumes.

It means it speaks to me to a lack of planning, to a lack of having talked about this war in any public forum. Certainly they didn't go to Congress, but there was no speech to the American people. There was no advice to Americans, civilians, businessmen, and women, tourists and all the people who live out in the Middle East and in all those areas that are vulnerable, which host US bases, to leave. And now they're panicking. So I don't know what that, I can't say that they're panicking inside the White House or the Pentagon, but that was a panic message to me. And the whole thing is very different than people expected. There are civilians dead in many places, not to mention in Iran more than 500. Plus, you know, some of those were children, about 160 according to the Iranians at a school. There are allies targeted. You know, there's shifting reasons for this about, you know,

Why they're doing it? Not only that. What they want to achieve in one 24-hour period, maybe even less, 12 hours, Hegsseth, Trump, Vance, Rubio, all gave different and I don't know what kind of justifications. And Rubio ended last night by saying, you know, actually, I mean, he didn't say it like this, but he implied that, you know, Trump was essentially rumbled by Netanyahu into this. he was bullied but the thing that strikes me about it and wendy maybe you can speak to this is in the chaos of all that in the idea that maybe we didn't understand the justifications also buried in the briefings is this has been planned four months they and the Israelis have planned the attack meticulously and so they may not have been prepared in any way for the aftermath or the collateral effects of all this. But they've clearly put more effort into this than they did to any kind of negotiation for a nuclear deal. Is that fair or unfair? I think that's absolutely fair, John. I think that, you know, our military is extraordinary.

And they plan for plans, for plans. There is nothing they do not plan for and do it meticulously. And that's what we're seeing, a meticulous military plan. But the objective, as Christian pointed out, keeps changing on a minute-by-minute basis. And as a result, there was no real political strategy, there was no overall strategy, there certainly was no regard for people, whether those were our diplomats who now have to leave embassies or American citizens who are told, as Christian pointed out, leave, but we're not going to help you. The State Department has just now. Is that unusual? Oh, extremely unusual. If you recall John, the first day of the Afghanistan withdrawal was tough, and it was brutal.

And it was not done well. Right. And we got excoriated for it. No question. We then got our act together, and that was very sudden and very unexpected. But we got our act together and we got out 125,000 people. What this administration has done is called a neo, which means everybody has to get out, but they did no planning, no preparation. They have axed the State Department budget. In those 14 countries where Americans are to leave, eight do not have confirmed U.S. ambassadors. And that matters because it makes it harder to talk to governments. Who do you go to? Exactly. This is truly outrageous. The first responsibility of the Department of State is to protect American citizens.

I have friends that haven't been in Dubai who fled on foot, who literally had, oh, who walked because the bombs started dropping. Where are they walking to? Because there's all the airspace is being closed around the Gulf. Yeah, they had to get, I guess, to the border. and get out of there on land routes and that kind of thing. I mean, that's how chaotic it's gotten. Well, there you go. I mean, usually we would see, you know, military planes deployed or the government renting big, you know, transport carriers or big airlines.

And this is all for employees. This is all for American personnel, not necessarily just American corporate. No, it's for everybody. It's for everybody. Oh, everybody. The Europeans have chartered airplanes. to take their people out. Oh, man.

The United States has not chartered airplanes. And we have done this in every other circumstance. We pay to get airplanes, two difficult places, to help get people out. Not just our diplomatic personnel, but Americans. And right now the American government has basically given the order, get out of there, and Godspeed, good luck. Yeah. Pretty much. And airports are all closed, as you just mentioned.

That's incredible. Now, Christian, is that an indication, though, that the United States believes that the escalation is this will, this is going to spread to a variety of, like that it's not just going to be the Iranians targeting American base in these areas, that this actually may spread? Well, look, I think it is an indication because of what happened in the first, you know, first 24, 48 hours. There was response immediately. And then there was more response after they had buried Chamini or the remains of Chameh and done some kind of, you know, official prayer ceremony because like Jewish people, Muslims get buried immediately. So that's basically what happened. And some of my contacts said that wait for a even bigger response once they've got that out of the way. But the thing is, again, to Wendy's point, when you plan for war, you plan for the day after and you have an exit strategy as well. Of course, reality hits against reality and things change. But you're meant to have a plan going in. And the problem exemplified by, A, the surprise and shock that Iran has retaliated, number one, I'm sorry, they said they were going to do exactly this.

Oh, that can't be a surprise, Ken? I mean, I... Well, it is, obviously. They are, they are saying, how could this be? These are, you know, countries that, you know, didn't want this war to happen. Iran could have, you know, maybe had them on side. But they're not just targeting the Iranians now with their missiles and drones, the American bases. They're also targeting some of the economic hubs.

And at one point, very sadly, a civilian hotel in Dubai. Now, some of these hotels are housing military and other personnel. So I don't know what Iran's justification is, but it's not allowed to hit civilians. So there's that. Forget about justification, just strategy-wise. if this is a, you know, you're already being, you know, overwhelmed by a two-on-one fight. You've got the United States and Israel who both have vaunted militaries seemingly who got married and blended into each other and now they all fight together.

Why in God's name would they then provoke the Saudis and any other country that has our military equipment to get into this? Wouldn't they want to limit the participation? or is the idea that if they cause economic damage in these other countries, that that will put pressure on the United States to back off? So it has put pressure on the United States. The stock market is way down today. Energy prices are way up.

This is only going to get worse, LNG as well. That market is off because it comes out of Qatar. And so I think the idea is to sow chaos to so economic damage. We know Donald Trump. We know the president of the United States. United States now. And we know that if he sees the stock market go way down, if energy prices go up. After all, he has bombed, I think now, Christian, I know better than seven or eight countries. Yeah. And. Well, but he's stopped eight wars. So right now he's, he's even. He's even. Right now we're

even Stephen. Stop, stopped eight, started eight. We seem to be even. Yes. But in that bombing of all of these countries, what he's always focused on is how the stock market's been doing. And it helps him to avoid dealing with the real affordability issues in the United States to deal with the Epstein issues. Well, we saw the same thing with the tariffs. As soon as he levied the tariffs when he saw that the bond market was about to crash, he suddenly backed off of that. Does that give him a justification? You know, because they're being so all over the place for what the aims of the war are, Does that then make it easier for him to declare, oh my God, we won, we did everything we intended to do. Now I can leave. Is that where he's going with this, Christian?

To add to Wendy's analysis of why all these, you know, flashing outs by Iran, many Iranian experts have said that, you know, when Trump killed Rasem Soleimani, the head of the Rhodes Force, back in 2020, Iran practically telegraphed a very limited response. Right. They gave us a heads up beforehand. Yes. And then in the so-called 12-day war and even before that, you know, the actual encounters with Israel, you know, Iran really didn't land a punch. Israel was doing really, you know, well and its allies were doing well, helping it with a defensive shield and all the rest of it.

So this much vaunted sort of Iran will wipe us off the face of the earth didn't even come close to happening. And Iran was, in my opinion, revealed as either not having the wherewith the war, or the ability or the desire to go further. So then that became an issue within the Iranian regime. We were limited and restrained, they say, last times. Now, if we're attacked like this, are weakened, we're weakened because of all the Israeli-U.S. strikes in this past year. We're weakened because of the, you know, I mean, I'm saying legitimate uprisings of people in Iran. They weakened from the outside.

They weakened from the inside. A war now was going to be existential for them. And I think they decided no more proportional. Now we have to give it all that we've got because it didn't work the last time. And now they're after us. And they know that because both Netanyahu and Trump and everybody else was saying this is about regime change.

You remember, we can quote left and right Trump and Netanyahu. They even were saying it in the opening hours of the war. Oh, Netanyahu very explicitly said in an address, I've been working on this for 40 years. 40 years. Think about it. As long as my people were in the desert, I've been working on changing the regime. I mean, this is the greatest moment for his political career. It's the only way he, I think, probably had a prayer of staying in power in the first place. Look, the algorithm is killing us.

The algorithm, the way that it incentivizes, the hostility and weaponizes, ideology and all the, it just, it's, it's not right. But the antidote, the antidote is information. And that's where ground news comes in. Ground news, it's this website nap. It's designed to give readers a better way, an easier way to navigate the news. It pulls together every article about the same news story from all outlets all over the world and puts them in one place and not, not incentivized for like the worst, most hostile, most partisan take. It tells you where it's coming from. You can see starkly in black and white

how these different organizations and algorithms are manipulating the information that we get. They show you how reliable the source is and who's funding it. Who's funding it? Follow the money. Know who's behind the headline. Oh, who is this Rupert Murdoch fella?

He seems delightful. Hmm, he seems to have a somewhat pointed view of the world. I'm telling you, man. The Nobel Peace Center has even mentioned that Ground News is an excellent way to stay informed. Noble Peace Center. That's, I think, the one that Trump started. I think it's the 3D prints Nobel Peace Prize is just hands them out. The platform is independently operated, supported by its subscribers.

So they stay independent and they stay mission driven. They don't get sucked into this slop. If you want to see the full picture, go to Ground News. They can help you through the noise and get to the heart of the news. Go to groundnews.com slash Stewart. Subscribe for 40% off, the unlimited access, Vantage subscription, discount available only for a limited time. And this brings the price down to like $5 a month.

That's groundnews.com slash steward or scan the QR code on the screen. What I'm curious about, and Wendy, maybe you can speak to this. I feel like the hubris and arrogance of the Trump administration is reflected in the idea that they think they cracked the code on regime changes. You know, we all remember, what was it, four weeks, five weeks, they went into Venezuela. They took Maduro. And what they did is they just basically decapitated the leadership and rather than trying to foment a Democratic. democratic revolution or bring more liberty to the people who've been suffering. They just cut a deal with the next in command, basically by saying, you see what happened to that guy?

If you don't want to get two to the back of the head, you'll cooperate with us. Is that the strategy now that they think they can deploy on any other nation? Like now with Iran, hey, we took al-Hamaneh, the next guy up, you'll just make a deal with us. we're not necessarily going to free the people. We're just going to get a slightly less reactionary dictator to work in American interests. Right. One of the things of the many objectives laid out that worried me the most was Trump saying that Venezuela was a template.

And if Venezuela is a template, then he somehow believes, of the various scenarios the CIA offered, he's choosing the one that somehow he can find a pragmatic person in Iran, who will cut a deal with him, maybe give him access to Iranian oil or economic possibilities, and all of their enrichment and their missiles and somehow control the economy of Iran, but help out Donald Trump. This is so naive. Christian has looked at Iran and been in Iran for many, many years, and she knows as well as I do. There are many layers of Iranian leadership, many plans for succession. It is a culture of resistance. Ostensibly this morning, there was a hit and comb

against the council that was meeting to elect the next Supreme Leader, another effort to decapitate the leadership of Iran. That will not stop Iran. That will just double down to try to keep going. And maybe this time they won't have a public meeting. They'll do it in a bunker somewhere to make sure that they get a Supreme Leader if, in fact, everyone was killed in this attack. I don't know yet. But the bottom line here is a total misunderstanding of what Iran is, who Iran is. And if a deal is made, that freedom for the Iranian people is not going to happen. And remember, that's how this all started. President Trump said to the protesters who were being killed, we have. your back. Sure. Rise up. We're not going to give you weapons, but we have your back.

Christian, can you explain a little bit about, so what is the power structure? And when we talk about the Iranian power structure, this is obviously post-1979 revolution. It was very different when the Shah was there still autocratic, but not dogmatic in the theocracy sense. What is the power structure there beyond sort of the supreme leader? Then there's a council. right, of mullahs. Can you walk us through that a little bit? I can walk you through it, but it's really complex. So I'm going to give you a general picture. It's based on what's called the Velaida Fari. Essentially, the supreme leader so-called is the representative of God on earth. That's what it's like a pope, right, in the Catholic faith.

And therefore what he says, because it's always a he, it's a mullah, is, is their state policy, both religious and military and economic and foreign and domestic and everything. Under that, there are various councils. There's the Council of Experts. There's the Assembly councils. There's a Guardian Council. There's a number of different councils, which are so medieval to try to pick through. But they have a certain internal logic and a bureaucracy and an administration that works to put the next leaders or to map out the policy or to do all the things.

And I know Wendy's familiar with this because she would have had to go through all their. machinations when they did the JCPOA, the Iran nuclear deal. But suffice to say, immediately Khamini was killed, the state television and Ali Lari Jani, who I know very well. He is currently the national security honcho. He comes from a very hardline family of Lari Jani's, and he used to be Speaker of the Parliament. He can be described as pragmatic, but nonetheless, he's a true believer. And he's in charge. That's all I'm telling you. That's what I've been told. He's in charge, along with the current Speaker of the Parliament, who is named Barre Ralebaugh. But Laurie Johnny, he's not eligible to be the Supreme Leader, then.

No, no, no, no. But right now he's running the country because of what has happened. The leadership has been decapitated. They're trying to get, you know, a new Supreme Leader. And so all of this stuff is going on and it's very, you know, unique to that place. But the real issue for me, no matter how much we talk about whether America was. was, you know, will succeed, whether Israel was, you know, pulled America into it, what the retaliation is. The real issue for me, as an Iranian and as a journalist, is the promises made to the Iranian people. And as Wendy says, I have covered this place for nigh on 35 years, ever since the First Gulf War, obviously I grew up there, but then fled with the revolution, et cetera,

but went back and continued to cover it. These are the most extraordinary people I've ever met in my life. And you just had a conversation with the Iranian director, Jafar Panahi, who showed you how extraordinary Iranian people are. And all they want is freedom, democracy, a standard of living that they can actually afford to live and survive and have three meals a day, pay their rent and send their kids to school, not to mention, try to travel and be normal human beings. That's what they want. And in every opportunity they've had, whether it's these so-called elections, they've always, in the 30-odd years chosen the lesser of the two evils, the more pragmatic, the more reform, except for Ahmadinejad and Reisi. But that's where they are. But even then, they chose really

Mossavi and not Ahmadinejad. That's exactly right. It just wasn't allowed. You're right, because you know it, the 2009. And I got, that's the last time I got banned from there for explaining and showing with CNN's new technology how all the people were in the streets saying, this time we're going to rise up, Madam, we're going to take our country back and they were crushed. So the people, John, have risen over and over again. And they've been crushed by their heavily armed IRGC Republican Guard, Revolutionary Guard, the foot soldiers, the Bassege. They have the guns.

Then Trump said, help is on the way. And Reza-Palavi said, help is on the way. And then they got crushed again when help didn't come. So now... They were massacred. I mean, they're saying now 30,000, 40,000 people. Now, there are a faction of people there who are desperate and hoping that this will liberate them, but there's another faction which are also on the streets that are pro-regime.

Now, it's smaller, but it's very, very, very fervent, and it's backed by the thugs with the weapons. So this, to me, is what we're going to wait and see. Who is going to win the battle of the streets if there's a military resolution to all of this? Wendy, when you were, so you've dealt with them in a slightly different capacity when you're negotiating with these. When Christian is talking about the power structure and, you know, there's the mullahs and it's dogmatic and it's theocratic. Are you, who are you, what layers are you having to walk through to get agreements that are, that can hold? Are you walking with the pragmatists first to create these frameworks, and then they are sort of pushed up the ladder to the mullahs to make sure

that they abide by, you know, a different standard. Exactly. The current foreign minister, Abbas Arachi, was my counterpart during the Iran negotiations, and his deputy, Majid Takravanchi, also was my counterpart. And they particularly, Arachi, speaks perfect English, writes perfect English, most of these folks spent time in the United States. Barn minister Zareef at the time, who built a relationship with Secretary John Kerry, had lived in the United States for 30 years. He understood us very, very well.

But even though these folks understood us very well, Arachi and I both became grandparents and we shared photos of our grandchildren. At the end of the day, they answered to the Supreme Leader and to this layered bureaucratic, and theocracy that Christiane laid out. And so for months, we could not put anything on paper because if we put it on paper, they had to send it up the chain and they would be told no.

So we had to do everything in all kinds of machinations way to get to a deal. And when we finally thought we had parameters that we'd all agreed to and we really thought we were on the glide path to a deal, the Supreme Leader gave a speech. and changed every threshold, every single one. So the red lines in a deal for the bureaucratic state are different than the ones for the theocratic leaders? Without a doubt, without a doubt. And so then we had to twist ourselves into pretzels to figure out how to meet the

Supreme Leader's parameters while staying true to what had been agreed in this multi-party negotiation. What are the types of parameters that came from on high that complicated? In other words, what would we have to do to satisfy their vision? So their vision was much stricter. A lot of it was on technicalities in the deal. And one of the things I think people need to understand is Whitkoff and Kushner did a drive-by negotiation. Well, they're also real estate guys. I mean, they're viewing this is. They're viewing this as. a development scheme. Exactly. Like that's, it's just a different animal.

Right. And if you can't build one building, you just go on to the next building. This is national security. This is the geopolitics of the world. And so their drive by, they said, well, Iran wouldn't agree to anything. They didn't understand Iran's need to hold on to its dignity, though we all find that sort of strange. They didn't understand Iran's need to have a deterrence, you know, what sovereign country doesn't want a deterrence, even if we hate and find an anathema what this country does.

And so they wanted a quick fix because Trump always wants a quick fix. They couldn't get a quick fix. Negotiations are tough work, really hard work. But worse, I'm really interested to ask, Wendy, because you mentioned the last drive-by negotiations in your words. I was stunned, and I'm sure you were, John and Wendy, I'm sure you were. Last week, just before the war started, Whitkoff said to Fox, you know, the president, and we, we're quote, I don't want to use the word frustrated, but we're frustrated. I don't want to use the word capitulate, but because they haven't capitulated, which in one word to me said, they just don't get it.

Wendy, you never got a capitulation. And it seems that for Trump and the Trumpies, negotiation means zero-sum game. I win, you lose. And that's not what this lot in Iran are all about. But again, I also want to ask Wendy and John to respond to something that I can't answer to. But Vance and Trump and all the others have been now they're basically saying that this negotiation process was rubbish. For the longest time, you all talk, talk, talk, talk, Iran was never going to do X, Y, or Z.

We had to get to this point today. That's their latest justification. And maybe they really believe it that, you know, 2015 JCPOA wasn't good enough. Well, they didn't believe it was good enough, Christian. They were critics at the time. And what we said to them is, we have a choice. We can stop their program.

We can verify it and monitoring it to the nth degree. or we face the prospect of an Arab-Persian war, which is what we're getting. Oh, wow. Well, that's the question, Wendy. So when you talk about, you know, in that nuclear deal, the big trigger was that international inspectors were going to be going. This is the JCPO. Yeah, JCPOA.

That international inspectors would go in there and that they would be able to monitor the Iranian nuclear program. And Iran was saying, for our national sovereignty, we have to be able to enrich uranium. not for weapons, but for energy and other types of things that seem to be very crucial to them. Now we've expanded the aperture to the development of missiles. I don't know if that was in the JCPOA. I don't, and also their support for proxies and other things within the region. I don't know if that was also.

So they've included, it's a much broader negotiation, it seems. And get rid of their Navy. So it's a long list of things that we're doing now. So it's basically, though, in some respects, a castration. Absolutely, without a doubt. But here's the thing, and this again, I don't understand, okay, because it's different words being said in public. So after the 12-day war,

Israel and the United States brought all the intelligence images and all the pictures and said, we have obliterated their nuclear program. And by and large, I think most people agreed that they'd at least put it out of commission, that they have not been able to enrich since the 12-day war, and a lot of the main production centers and enrichment centers have been obliterated, or at least extremely badly, put out of action.

And we also read in the lead up to this war that these aerial satellite photos and things had shown that the Iranians were not, in fact, going to enrich and doing that. They weren't doing that. They were plugging some of the holes. But what they were doing was trying to rebuild their missiles and all the rest of which, as Wendy said, is their sort of defense thing and deterrent. But even now, Raphael Rossi, who's the head of the IAEA, the UN agency to monitor the nuclear issues, said that in this round of bombings, the nuclear staff has not been touched. So it's just really confusing. Well, it appears, Christian, that they may have gone after Natanz today.

Okay. So, you know, but the tell is exactly what you said. President Trump said that we obliterated all of their facilities. Clearly, we said it way back, but we did not obliterate it. And did I think that Iran would try to start enriching again? Yeah, probably they would. But as you pointed out, the real way to ensure that you know what's going on is to have the inspectors inside. And we, we have. had the most unbelievable monitoring and verification mechanisms that didn't exist anywhere else in the world that Iran agreed to. We had eyes on everything. We had for 25 years what's called uranium accountancy. Whatever you take out of the ground, you follow it through the process, and you know that what comes out the other end is exactly what you put in. It hasn't been taken off to some covert supply chain to create a nuclear weapon. So, There was just tremendous work because we had an amazing cadre of experts. And obviously, as you know, Secretary of Energy, Ernie Moniz, who was just completely brilliant.

None of that existed in these negotiations. None of that hard work existed. So we're in a really tough place. Folks, I don't know if you know what it's like to work in the podcast minds like we do. The hunger you work up after a long day. in toiling in the depths of sitting in your own house talking for like an hour. But so you go out, you know, you've worked up a hunger. You've earned that meal and you buy all these ingredients in the supermarket and then you get

home and you're like, nah, I'm tired. So you order a little takeout, whatever. But you know what? There's better options out there. Like our friends of factor meals. Factor meals. What do you want to make it yourself? You get a meal made by a chef.

designed by a dietitian. Are you a dietitian? I'm not. And you know what they do? They deliver it to your door or window. I don't know where you live. You eat the meal for like two minutes. Eat it.

They've got lean proteins, colorful vegetables, whole food ingredients, healthy fats, no prep, no cleanup. I'm telling you, man. It's kind of awesome.

Head to factormeels.com slash TWS 50 off. And use code TWS 50 off to get 50% off and free breakfast for a year. Eat like a pro this month with factor. New subscribers only varies by plan. One free breakfast item per box for one year while subscription is active. Are we searching for answers that maybe aren't even there, that this is a much simpler,

they've sort of decided, and this happens sometimes. They did it with Saddam Hussein. They are bad actors. Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Hamene, and the Americans decide, in a somewhat cavalier manner, in my opinion, these are bad actors, and we're going to take them out. And whatever comes next will probably be better than these bad actors. Somehow we didn't do it to Assad, but we're going to do it now in Iran, and we set terms that we know a country cannot meet.

similarly to what Netanyahu is doing with Hamas, basically saying, I'll just bomb you till you disarm, knowing that, well, and now they won't, so it just turns into this weird siege. But is it simpler, you know, are we looking for justifications and strategies that don't actually exist? Go ahead, Christian.

Yeah, well, I just, look, you have a, you know, the broader, more governmental, I have the more, you know, on the ground reportorial view. of this. So look, a number of things have struck me in the aftermath of the launch of this war. The United States says, the U.S. officials say, there is no international law. There is only American law, and we do whatever we want for our own national interests. And that's what they're going by right now. In Britain and in most of the other part of the world, parts of the democratic world, there is international law. So why did Britain decide not to go with Trump in the initial

opening salvos? Because there was no legal justification for it. There was no imminent threat. They call it, you know, the US and Israel preventative, preemptive and all the rest of it. But that implies a imminent threat of which there was none, despite the false claims of many of the Trump administration and their foot soldiers. So Britain then, now it's expanded. There are reasons and Britain is now letting the US use some of its bases. So that's one thing. The other thing is that what's really, I think you're right, the president has decided that might makes right. And this is what has been playing out since last January. Since his inauguration, I was at the Munich Security Conference when, you know, of last year when J.D. Vance read the riot act to his allies, not his

adversaries, his allies, and basically said, you know, we're going to do what we want. You're a bunch of pussies, you don't even enable your, you know, your far right and all the rest of it. I mean, it was mad. And then sort of cozied up a little bit, as you saw, play out in the White House to Putin and diss Zelensky and all the rest of it. So yes, I think they think that they can decapitate whoever. But here's where it's a problem in Iran. There is no known, modern or ancient example of regime change from the air. Okay? Doesn't happen. Maybe this is an exception, but right now it hasn't happened yet and it hasn't happened before. It takes an invasion.

Wouldn't Libya, would Libya be that? No, it wasn't regime change. No, no, no. They just, I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, they bombed, you know, Benghazi, but Gaddafi stayed until his own people massacred him, basically. You know what I mean? And it's a total chaos. And you don't want that kind of regime change because to this day, Libya is chaotic. And my fear about Iran is that already, even before the war, experts in Washington, people like Karim Sajapur, I said to Karim, what are they saying to you in the State Department, the Iran experts? First, he said to me, there aren't any. I haven't found any. Right, there aren't any. And second, he said to me that they seem to be talking about doing a deal with a pragmatic Revolutionary Guard or somebody. Whoa, that's not what the opposition wants. The U.S.-based opposition of Reza-Palabi,

has basically said anybody who does anything with anybody in the current power structure is appeasing or collaborating and we won't have it. So there's no clarity on the day after, who, what, where, when. And in the middle of this, there is no clarity for the Iranian people. And I'm very fearful because it's already being said by the Trumpies. We're just providing the environment for you, Iranian people, to go seize the moment. Yeah, I think there's, John, I think you're totally on to something here. that this is just about Mike makes right. We're tired of this. We're just going to use our military.

The president, you know, when we heard Texas the other day do his very macho announcement of why we were doing this, he said, we're not going to have any stupid rules of engagement. It was a very telling statement about how to go about these things. We will do what we want to do when we want to do it because we're the United States of America. And we know. that that arrogance has gotten us into big trouble in the past. We all loved the shock in all the first few days of the Iraq War. The fact that we were going to help Vietnam, the South Vietnamese, create a democracy. And then it turns into a quagmire. So whether this is a forever war or not, I don't know. But it's certainly a war of choice and a war of chaos and a war of

confusion. There's no doubt about it. And it has second and third and fourth term effects with our allies in Europe, in terms of Ukraine. The president's going to China at the end of March. I think he wants this to be over before he goes to China unless he's succeeding and then scares the devil out of Xi Jinping, which I don't think is going to happen. I think what it says to Xi Jinping is he can take Taiwan because might makes right. And the U.S. will let him do what he wants to do because the president wants to be his partner, not his competitor. We are in a really different world. And what about Zelensky, Wendy? Absolutely. Certainly Putin has said, I mean, he has, Putin has said explicitly, gloves are off now. Now we get to do whatever we want. There is no

moral order. But Wendy, I want to ask you, because I think you're more, you know, familiar in these negotiations. I'm struck by the Trump team's air of grievance and victimization. The United States created this rules-based order. It was our design after World War II. We're the ones that rebuilt Japan and Germany and the rules that they were going to be militarily neutered. And we created the trade rules. And we created this world order. And now we're saying everybody is taking advantage of us in this world order that we created in the United States and have been benefited from more than any other country. We have had the most successful 80-year run of a country, you know, in the modern times. But we've been getting ripped off. And so we're going to

burn the whole thing down and go with the old world more sort of monarchical colonialist version of, I need something, I'm going to go take it. Is that the frustration you're seeing from negotiators, that treaties are for losers? Is that where we're at? Well, you know, Donald Trump famously said that John McCain, a patriot and a war hero, was a loser because he had been captured. So a lot of this is out of Donald Trump's mentality. He has always been a of McKinley, the president who believed in spheres of influence, who believed in tariffs, who got us into a lot of trouble. Yes, may have acquired a couple of territories, but we're shouldn't be a colonial power. We should not be an oppressor ourselves. This is like nuts. And I think we're

beginning to see politically in the U.S., MAGA beginning to have some concerns about all of this because it was supposed to be America first and no wars abroad. And the president instead is projecting power. But do they really believe that the world order has existed, the democratic world order, I'm talking about Europe, the Canada, that they've existed to exploit the United States and that we have been victimized by the world we designed? I think the president has always worked on the concept of grievance. And globalization, which was part of that world order after World War II, helped people get better food, better pharmaceuticals, have possibilities.

But it also meant that some people no longer had their manufacturing jobs in the United States. It's collateral damage. Collateral damage. And we never had an employment assistance program worth anything. And so those folks feel like they were left out and left behind, that that world order didn't help them. They saw huge cultural change in this country where gay people could be married. Women would go to work. A woman might even become president of the United States. Their wife had to go to work, even though that wasn't their deal. People moving into their

community spoke a different language or went to the mosque, not to their church. And people felt untethered and filled with grievance. And Trump has worked really hard to milk that grievance and say, Everybody's against us. Yes, we are the most powerful. We're going to show it with use of our military. I'm going to get you what you deserve through tariffs. Instead, what he's gotten is a tax hike for every single American and a war that may not have an end anytime soon. Christian, I'm struck by what Wendy is saying in that the seeds of that grievance can be found in the seeds of the religious movements in the Middle East. Yeah. The sort of a response to modernity. You know, if you were to look at the University of Cairo graduating class in 1966, you'd probably see women in mini skirts and you'd see a whole thing.

You know, back when there was sort of Nazarism and we were going to have reproachment with the West and everything got liberalized. And Beirut was the Paris of the Middle East. And the seeds that Wendy is talking about, it feels like those were the sort of cataclysms that occurred in the Middle East, that turned it into this much more conservative area. Do you see the echoes of that, Christian? Yeah, I do.

And I actually think it's really interesting that you bring it up. Of course, those kind of grievance-based politics are very dominant in Europe, but also, as you say, in the Islamic world, particularly since the Islamic Revolution of Iran. Some of it is based on, you know, the grievance of the Iranians

when the Americans and the Brits had that coup, as you know, in 1953, brought the Shah back, when their Democratic Prime Minister had been kicked out in a coup, etc., etc. But if you read the history of Shiism, the Shiites, of which Iran is the most powerful country and the most populous Shiite nation, it's 99% Shiite. And the history of Shiism is the same kind of grievance, victimhood, and martyrdom that you're seeing in a much more different religious way,

that you're seeing now, you know, all these centuries later, by post-industrial Western nations who have used, you know, all their politics and fear of the other to gin this stuff up. But that's why both these countries are talking past each other. There's actually no understanding. And if you go back and read a little bit of the, which I'd be doing in this last week, to refresh my memory, I mean, I was in Iran during the revolution, but to refresh my memory of everything, you know, the Americans are still haunted by the hostage crisis. you know, 1979. The Iranians are still haunted by the coup of 1953, and and, and it goes on and on and on. And so there's a wall of mistrust. But Christian, I want to ask you, in 1979, though, it seems like that revolution against the Shah wasn't necessarily a religious one. I don't think Khomeini?

Yes, it was. But no, but I'm saying, don't you think Khomeini appeared to be a more moderate figure before he got there? You don't think that when he was living in exile? No, I don't think he was more moderate. He was a true believer. But what he did do, because you did get quite a lot of the, I don't even know what to call them, the upper middle class deciding to go into the streets against the Shah and vote for him.

He managed to lie and dissemble. But he managed to tell everybody that he was going to bring democracy, he was going to bring this, he was going to bring that. And, oh no, a mullah will never be in charge. So all of this stuff, you know, was a lie. And actually, very gullible Western politicians believed him. At the time, the British government, maybe some in the US government thought, wow, we're going to get democracy in Iran.

Let's throw the shah over our, you know, decades-long ally, who, yes, was authoritarian. But I think the difference there was that in 1979, after a full year of revolution, and let just have to tell you, in New Year's 77 going into 78, Carter and Roslyn came to Tehran and they had a state visit, which culminated in a state dinner. And President Carter told the Shah that you are our greatest friend and an island of stability in the Middle East. Okay? That meant they knew nothing about the rumblings. Their ambassador there knew nothing about eight days later the revolution started. It took a year and one year later, Khomeini came back. Eight days after Carter's famous, you are my best friend and you are, you know, the stability of the Middle East,

which means that nobody knew anything. Or if they did, the message wasn't going up the chain. I mean, that's a simplistic version, but that's basically what has been happening. To this day, to this day, I'm going to just say, I think 47 years of Western policy to Iran has been rubbish, literally rubbish, literally rubbish. In the sense of the sanctions and the way that they've isolated them? You know why? You know why? Because they focused only on the hard power. Nukes, missiles, foreign mercaries, never on the rights of the Iranian people. And the Iranian people are some of the most sophisticated people in that whole region, the best educated, the most female empowerment, the most technologically savvy, the best scientists, doctors, artists, for thousands of years, right?

and we just lump them all as quasi-terrorists, all the people of Iran, never, never put their human rights or their democratic rights, not just at the top of an agenda, but anywhere on the agenda. That's what I meant, Christian, even with Khomeini, it felt like a bait and switch, not to the world, but to the Iranian people. Yeah, and to the world. He said, we're going to give you democracy and to the world. And to the world, who backed him.

And then he gets there and they start massacring everybody. and imposing these religious customs. Yeah. Because I agree. And Wendy, maybe your experience there as well. If there is a country over there that seems most inclined to be kind of brethren with the United States, it's Iran. Their culture, their people, their seem much more aligned with Western sensibilities, no? Well, without a doubt, as Christian pointed out, highly literate country.

Very sophisticated people, technologically, culturally, intellectually. Just look at Christia. So I think that... That's right. I think there's no doubt that there could have been another story written here. But I think that the searing of the hostage crisis in 1979 lives with us forever. and certainly for my generation, it lives forever in the same way that Vietnam lives with me forever. Madeline Albright, with whom I worked both at the State Department and in business, really was a daughter of Munich, not of Vietnam, and had a very different view of the world and the United States because of that experience. And we all are a creature of our history. And this generation, as we're seeing, where Israel is concerned,

I know my own daughter, young people around the world, yes, they think Israel has right to exist and therefore the Israeli people, but they do not consider themselves Zionists in the same way that my generation perhaps did. And we see a huge split in any of the polls. And we see a huge split in any of the that is done for the first time the American public has greater support for the Palestinians than for Israel. And that's really astonishing, and it has to do with our own experience and Bibi Netanyahu's decades now of deciding how the world would go. I'm very, very much certainly feel horrified by what happened to Israel on October 7th. No doubt about it.

But I'm also horrified about everything that is happening now and the rights of the Iranian people, not the mullahs, but the people. Yeah, I'm always talking about the people. I mean the people, not the structure. The people are going to get left behind, I'm afraid, in all of this sound and fury. You know, I was going through my fashion magazines that I subscribe to. And I was looking through them. Is that even a thing? Can you? I don't actually even know if that's a thing anymore.

There used to be like a Sears catalog, but I don't know. I don't even know if they do that. But the truth is I don't know any of that stuff. For me, latest fashion trends, that's just, that's Quince. That's Quince. There are guys. Quince has it all. Everyday essentials that you can wear, I don't know, if it's fall, winter, I can't tell.

It's been gray out now for what it feels like a year and a half. They work with top factories. They cut out the middlemen. You're not paying for brand markups. You're not paying for the fancy retail store with the chandelier. What do you need a shit? You're a clothing store. What am I supposed to admire the chandeliers?

How's that helping me button my pants? Right now, go to quince. dot com slash TWS for free shipping and 365 day returns. That's a full year to build your wardrobe and love it, and you will. Now available in Canada, too. Don't keep settling for clothes that don't last. Go to QINCE.com slash TWS for free shipping and 365 days returns. Quince.com slash TWS.

Okay, one question. Yeah, please, Christian. Could it be a Berlin Wall thing? because I'm very nervous. We've explained all the possible downsides and the possible cynical deals that might be made around the back of the Iranian people to end this.

But could it be, Wendy, John, I didn't cover the fall of the Berlin Wall, I wasn't a foreign correspondent yet, but it was like, no, no, no, no, no, until one day it happened. Now, it did have Gorbachev sign off and the soldiers didn't shoot, and that was crucial,

which will be crucial in Iran. But I wonder if you think, there might be the space Wendy created by this war to allow that there. Christian, you should be a journalist because let me tell you something. That is an incisive question and one that we had not considered previously. You know what? Send me your resume. Can I work for your show? Oh, please. Absolutely. Anytime. I hope you like basic cable money because that's where it's going.

Wendy, what about that question? I mean, I think there's always that possibility. Anybody who lived through the Berlin wall falling in the fall, the USSR, and all those things, what is your feeling on that? These guys could collapse and there could be a sort of different renaissance. Look, I think we would all find that a wonderful outcome. I think that we don't have an organized opposition in Iran. There were organized groups in Europe and ready to take the seeds of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and we had West Germany, of course, who could help usher in that change.

Perhaps that can happen here. We didn't have a Shia-Sunni split in the same way that we do here. Nonetheless, that was a hard integration between East and West Germany. We'll see how that plays out in Merz's visit with the president today, the Chancellor of Germany. But look, nothing would make me happier, not in terms of our politics in the United States, because I am not a fan of President Trump's. But for the Iranian people, I'd be delighted if there were such a situation. Christian, you covered Arab Spring, and it does bring up, I remember being in Egypt right before. It wasn't before Mubarak fell, but before Morsi fell.

And the Arab Spring had that feeling of young people and a democratic movement. But what we saw was exactly what Wendy is saying, without having the infrastructure or organization, the only groups, because civil society has not been fostered necessarily in those countries in the same way, the only groups organized enough were either the ultra-religious groups like Muslim Brotherhood. or the military. Yeah. And so what you don't get, and maybe this is, you know, the legacy of Arab Spring, you don't get that fostering of that democratic society that, you know, is, you know, from bottom up, you get top down autocracy either through religious actors or military actors. Is that the problem with the general structure there?

Yeah, I think it was absolutely the problem. problem there. And what happened is that because the Muslim Brotherhood had civil society in its pocket, having been the, you know, the sort of humanitarian lifeline for so many Egyptians through the mosques and through their foundations and this, that, they were the only the only clear, organized group first. And when there were elections, they won. And then the military said, no, no, no, no, no. And they had the weapons. So what, you know, it's the weapons versus, you know, and nobody was. And nobody wanted to see what they thought may be radical Islamic groups taking over any of these countries. It was different than Iran in that there was no outside intervention. Here you've got

Israel and the United States bombing. And I fear very much for the backlash in generations to come because I think it's very controversial to be liberated in a Muslim country by Israel in the United States. But I know a lot of people are saying whoever it takes, whatever it takes. But I worry about that for the future. Christiana, are there tent posts within Iranian society that would make them better ground

for that type of democratic infrastructure to rise up? I think that you have a very young population. It's very, very young across the board, but most especially it's essentially called like a Gen Z uprising right now.

These are people who are incredibly plugged in. But I worry a little bit that they're also incredibly plugged into TikTok, you know, so there's potentially a little bit of an unrealistic notion of how you have to do the grassroots and the groundwork and most particularly unifying, you know, what you don't want is to have an opposition wherever it comes from who's going to just replace one, you know, one hegemony with another for want of a better word, you know, one sort of superiority to another. So I think just like in Syria where the new president Al-Sherah, who's been in now just over a year,

his biggest challenge, and he's known that it's his biggest challenge, but he must get over it, is to unify a very fragmented country. So that any leader has to do that. And do not forget that there is a genuine 10, 15% fundamentalist population in Iran who are very religious, who could be brought along in a new Iran, but they're not nothing, you know, they're not nobody. And they need to be brought in and unified. I think Israel has to decide what it's going to do. I mean, there's another whole front open now, again, in Beirut.

There may be a land invasion of Lebanon, again, by the Israelis. But they are undercover of our inattention regularly bombing a new free Syria, who the U.S. happens to be friends with. And I fear... That's a later Trump likes. I mean, that almost seems like his model, which is, I like a strong man, but I want a strong man that seems... Seems reasonable to me and is my friend, because he has no compunction with strong men throughout

he loves Putin, he loves MBS. But my fear, Wendy, and you can take this away, obviously, because you know much more than me on the Diplu, but that Israel does not want a strong Iran, no matter who, under who. I think that they want to fragment it and have a chaotic Iran, and that would be a disaster, in my humble opinion. I certainly don't think that Bibi Netanyahu wants Iran that has any strength. whatsoever. Really? Even so even if they're not a theocracy, he would object to a powerful Iran. If they are still financing proxies in the region, if they still have missiles that can reach

Israel, if they still have an enrichment program, none of that is anything that Bibi Netanyahu wants. And let me just say on this political point, it's really important. I actually, with Anne Patterson, who was then the ambassador in Egypt, went to meet with Al-Sisi. He was not the president of Egypt yet. We also met with all the different political factions and political groups. They were just beginning. They were babes in the organizational development of what you need. Is this in between Mubarak and Morsi in that space a year, I guess?

Right, right, okay. And we met with all these political groups. groups, and they were terrific and wonderful, but like, had so far to go to have the power and the capability to rule a country like Egypt. And we met with Assisi, and Anne and I came out of that meeting, turned to each other and said, he's going to take over. Yeah. He's going to throw Morsi in jail, and he's going to take over. And was very popular when he did it. And was very popular when he did it. I mean, that year of chaos had created such, as Christian said, I think the people just wanted to feel safe. Yes. And as though they were in, Wendy, when they talk about, you know, Trump says now I bombed, but you know, hey, look, I'll negotiate. What does that even look like? And who would he even talk to at this point? And what could they seed other than just utter supplication? which, as Christian said earlier, no country will allow itself to be in that position.

So if I were Iran, and in June I was negotiating and three days into that negotiation got bombed, and then I was negotiating again in February and got bombed, as we've seen, seen in these last few days, the chances I would sit down and negotiate with the United States, boy, I'd have to know a lot was going to be on the table that I would get as a result of doing that. And I don't think from Iranian culture and a culture of resistance, again, Christian knows better than I do, I would give in and say, well, if you'll just stop bombing me, I'll give you everything you want. That's not going to happen. And I don't know, Wendy, whether you know any more from talking to maybe, you know,

insiders and particularly close to the administration, but I was told that Trump is trying to negotiate and like with Iran's new leaders, God only knows who those are. But we've heard that Laurie Johnny has said there will be no negotiations under bombs. But I do find it interesting, the couple of polls that I read, right as the war started, a poll was taken, that basically had 41% of Americans four and 41 against, right? So that's pretty equal. The latest one from yesterday, from Washington Post, found 52 against and 39 in favor. And you've seen all the officials, the major cabinet officials, including the president of the United States,

sort of struggling with their messaging. And MAGA very upset and, you know, certainly the, can you imagine? Can you imagine it's Tucker Carlson, who's the only one who's actually tried to tell Trump the negative fallout of a possible war with Iran? The rest of them just off they went into it. It's what's launched him into frontrunner status for 2028. Yeah, but I wonder what's going to play out internally in the politics of the U.S. I don't know. And also in the context of Americans, look, we love us a good new war. And a lot of times, if you remember, you know, H.W. Bush, when he started bombing the Middle East, his stuff would go up to 90%.

Like generally, Americans rally around the president and the flag during these signs. So to start out with even 50-50 about going into a place like that is shocking for these types of operations. But as we wrap up, and I'm cognizant that you guys have a lot to do, the one area we haven't really discussed is the other Gulf states. What kind of a game is Saudi Arabia playing here? because let's be honest that, you know, the Sunni Shia rift in that part of the world and that power structure is real. And as Iran had tried to create that sort of corridor through Lebanon and Syria to extend their power, the Saudis were very concerned about, and that's why Iraq was so important to them. What are they doing with regards to Palestine and with regards to Iran?

Because they talk a game of resistance, but it seems like behind the scenes, they facilitate and agree with a lot of these actions. So what is your feeling about their role in all this? I think Saudi Arabia, more than anything, wants stability and wants to have the economic future that Mohammed bin Salman, really, the person who's running Saudi Arabia, hopes out of his 2030 plan for the economic future Saudi Arabia, which also has a very young population and an understanding that oil will not exist forever and that, in fact, the royal family will be at risk if they cannot create a future for the

young people in that country. He has tried to create a relationship with Iran, even starting diplomatic relations. That was really to protect his back. But now Saudi Arabia has been attacked, And of course, Saudi Arabia didn't want to be attacked by Iran again after they went after the Saudi Aramco plant some time ago. So this was sort of like his, I'm going to make sure that I've got a back channel and a way to make sure we don't get targeted again so that I hold on to the future I want for Saudi Arabia. How does his public relationship with the United States and Netanyahu differ from what you believe is. going on because that portrays him in a much more conciliatory role with Iran than I would have imagined. I don't think he's conciliatory. I think he's trying to have it always all of the time and stay in control. And as we've seen, he's a very controlling person. We all know about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, which many of us will never, ever be able to forget it was so horrifying.

and so outrageous. So I think a lot of these countries are very pragmatic, very transactional, and Saudi Arabia has bought enormous number of weapons from the United States, truly important to us as part of our economy. They don't know how to use these weapons sometimes very well. We saw that in Yemen, which hasn't gone very well for Saudi Arabia. And now that, Saudi Arabia has been attacked, but some of those targets have been U.S. targets, not just Saudi targets. So we will see where Saudi Arabia goes and whether they will now be all in. One other point I'd make about all these Gulf states and reports this morning, which is they all have munitions often bought from us, and they are running out of those munitions.

And one of the big debates to come in the United States now is whether we're going to spend more money to help all of these Gulf countries increase their munitions as well as get more for ourselves. And our military industrial complex is very slow going. Getting those munitions in storage and in stock is not something that happens in five days. And we don't have the manufacturing base for it anymore. Exactly. We do not have the manufacturing base for it. And you can't start up those manufacturing on a dime. So we are about to see how this is all going to play out. UAE, ostensibly United Arab Emirates only has maybe a week at most left of its munitions. To keep those missiles from, they're talking about all those shields that they've created.

Christian, what's your thought on where the Gulf states? playing this, and Saudis in particular. Well, I would just add that I think it'll potentially cause Saudi Arabia and UAE and Qatar and their people to potentially maybe question the wisdom of having American bases on their source, particularly when they're not being defended by the United States, their allies. And I don't even know, I don't even know whether they were alerted that this was happening on Saturday morning. I don't know.

But I also think that for the UAE and Qatar especially, and now Saudi more and more, They have branded themselves as this place that is modern, that is stable, that is a financial hub, a business hub, a negotiating peace hub, you know, World Cup here, this and that there. They have completely branded themselves on being a safe bolthole for very rich people and those who want to, you know, have some tourism and sports and all the rest of it. Whoa, now they are in the line of fire. So they're going to have to make some decisions and it's going to be very weird and interesting to see how this all plays out for everybody. It really is so huge the ramifications of what's just happened. And I will go back to the whole business of Israel because I was pretty shocked two days, two weeks before October 7th to learn that the then National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan had said publicly, you know, things in the Middle East are quieter. and more organized and I'm paraphrasing than in a long, long time.

So all I'm saying is there still seems to be a knowledge gap. There just seems to be a gap between what's going on and what is actually happening and what your best friends think halfway around the world. And that affects everything. Even Netanyahu has been written recently that he asked the Qataris to increase the funding for Hamas practically on the eve of October 7th.

So, guys, something's got to change. This same policy that's been, you know, sort of had for the last half a century is not producing the optimum results. Well, certainly not a learning curve. I mean, I would say, you know, you would talk earlier about, you know, the lessons of Vietnam and the lessons of Iraq,

but it doesn't seem that we've tried every version of this game, whether it's bombing for a, a little bit, whether it's bombing and then invading and then occupying and holding it until, and we've seen in Afghanistan and we've seen in Iraq and we've seen in Vietnam and we've seen it that the collateral damage and the downstream effects that we just don't know are going to be, but the one thing we never seem to stop doing

is meddling and trying to control the hubris of a nation, as even as strong as we are, thinking that it's not just about influence, It's about control. And when you put it into control, you know, our Constitution very clearly states people want to breathe free. They want self-determination. And when we have policies that use these other countries as puppets, how can that not be disastrous? I still think the Americans have one big superpower and they have to use it, either this president or the next one, to force peace and a just solution to the Israeli-Palest.

I genuinely believe that that is the source. It is huge this. Everything else is a tentacle that hangs off that. Everything else I believe is a tentacle. I'm convinced that a proper lasting peace will do so much to quieten most of the tension in that region. I really do. And I think focusing on the human rights and democratic rights of a people like in Iran is very important to, along with the way.

along with the national security. Not just the transactions. Yeah, along with that, you have to have something for the people. Yes, I agree with you, Christian. I think that's absolutely critical. I don't think it's about building a resort on the beautiful waterfront of Gaza. But I do think that giving people the dignity they deserve to live a decent life. Right.

And the dignity of their own identity. And maybe understanding it's not ours to give. Yeah. That you can't, it's that we cannot be patronizing when it comes to the dignity of other people. It's their unalienable rights. We don't grant them the ability to get those. But I really appreciate the conversation and the insights here today. I think you've both got bright futures.

I just hope the people of Iran have bright futures and the people of Israel and the people of Palestine and the people in the world because they are treated as, you know, unfortunately, second fiddle to everything, or fourth or fifth fiddle. And, you know, when you talk about it, it just, it all seems so much simpler than what it is, which is like, to people live in dignity. We should go and do it. Right, exactly. Christian Amaport, CNN, chief international anchor, Ambassador Wendy Sherman,

former deputy secretary of state and lead negotiator of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran both of you. Thank you so much for your insights. Thank you, John. Which Trump pulled out of, don't forget. Yes, because it was a disaster of Barack Hussein Obama's doing. And he's the only one who prevented nuclear war. Right, a man of great dignity. Always. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank you. Hey, folks. I don't know if you know this about me, but I lived in what they call a concrete jungle. I lived in New York City for many, many, many years. And in New York, is a kind of place where like you literally will walk by a weed coming out through the asphalt and the sidewalk and think to yourself oh i didn't know they put a park here that's how

desperate you are for the greenery for a little bit of of shade a little bit of leaf a little bit of surround yourself with some photosynthesis fast growing trees that's the name of the company That's not just a description of something in your backyard. That's the name of a company. They're America's largest and most trusted online nursery. Thousands of trees and plants. Two million happy customers. That's not easy to do.

People are grumpy. Get that many happy customers? You're delivering some nice trees. Flowers, shrubs, fruit trees. Wouldn't you like to have a fruit tree? A little lemon. little lime, maybe a fig. Is a fig of fruit?

I don't even know. Yeah, it is. Yeah, what am I talking about? Of course. And every plant's backed by their alive and thrive guarantee. It promises you that the plants arrive happy and healthy and ready to thrive. Although I don't know that you would be able to tell the difference, quite frankly. Maybe you're an arborist.

But they know what they're doing, man. Right now they got great deals on planting essentials. Up to half off select plants. And listeners to our show get 20. percent off their first purchase when using the code TWS at checkout. It's an additional 20% off better plants and better growing at fastgrowingtrees.com using the code TWS at checkout. Fastgrowingtrees.com code TWS.

Now's the perfect time to plant. Let's grow together. Use TWS to save today. Offer is valid for a limited time terms and conditions may apply. I'm always somewhat taken abat when two experts, one in the field of diplomacy, one in the field of journalism, both come to the same conclusion that this will not end well. I mean, it really can't. There's no goals, like real concrete goals, no strategy. I mean, how can it end well? Yeah, it's just shocking in that, you know, they're describing sort of the dynamics of it. And then they're saying, now, There is a way for this to go right, but it's not going to.

Not going to happen. No. Even when they say, like, could this be a Berlin Wall moment? Then they took a moment to think like, yeah, no, probably not. It's also crazy. There's a Board of Peace in the region. I wonder what their take. Has anybody thought about calling them?

Yeah. So the problem is they're still in the hiring phase. They're still taking resumes. So they're not fully. Now, you can call there and there's a, obviously, you can still get through. Of course. No, there's still not a lot of follow-through. Right.

They're fully funded, though, just ramping up the hiring. Well, because it costs a billion. What is it? Was it a billion dollar? He runs everything like a fucking country club. Like, it's a board of peace. You pay a billion dollars. And there's a dining budget that you have to fulfill.

But the food is not that good. There's a three-year waiting period. Yeah. How quickly after the war started did the Board of Peace puns? The Board of Peace is board of peace. Like, the Internet is unlawful. Like, the internet is undefeated. Well, I think when he fell asleep at the meeting,

Board of Peace just became very easy to make jokes on. That did become the meme. But don't you think, like, his ADD, I really do wonder, like, he just doesn't have the long, he likes demo day. He's a big demo day guy, but he doesn't like to be in there the day where they're like, yeah, we're just framing out the siding. We're, you know, we're painting the trim. Like, he's, that's not the.

shit that interests him. I mean, he's falling asleep in meetings. And I imagine that once these, you know, big, beautiful attacks or whatever aren't as big, he's probably going to move on. Yeah. I saw this great thing that was like, Trump is not a day two president. He's just day one. And anything that happens day two is like, I have no time for that. No, he moves on. The thing he's most interested in. But the ballroom does continue to captivate him. That, that I was just, Jillian, that's so, I was exact. I was go. But the one thing that he brings up in any situation is the ballroom. He loves gold.

I think it's because it's right outside the window. Like, it's like you can't forget about it when it's right outside your window. We need to start putting some wildlife right outside. Right. Have him divert to zebras. Yeah. Right. That'd be so great if they did it like one of those Disney hotels where you say and the giraffes just walk up to the window.

Yeah. That's what he could open up on. We got to get those like four. fly by planes, like the Jersey Shore. Yes. Yeah. You could really. With lawyers that you can call to sue people.

No, I like what's going on here. Distract him with benign things that can't get the world in trouble, just like baubles and trinkets and such. But somebody said me the day, which I hadn't even really considered. And they go, and by the way, like, I'm not like a construction guy, but how can a ballroom cost $400 million? And I was just like, that's great. Like, I don't know what.

kind of sound system you're putting in there. But $400 million does seem like a lot for a one story. Yeah. Especially DC real estate. This is in New York City we're talking about. $400 million. I can't wait to go to my first party there. Yeah. Maybe the speakers are like, I don't know, camouflage does other things. Like you can't see the sound. It's all built into the curtains. I don't know. I'm trying to imagine. I don't think he's getting his money back is what I'm saying. I think even when he sells this, he's going to take a hit. No right off the depreciation. Because by the way, he's never moving out of there.

He's living there. Brittany, what do they got for us on this fine week? Okay. John, you said you thought your guy, David Ellison, should have it all. Looks like he's about to. That's right, baby. You still good with that? I am the king of polymarket.

I may now, don't look into the transactions too much. but there may have been a whale that came in towards the end of the betting and threw down, you know, a quick half billion on whether or not Netflix would would bow out. I didn't have the inside information. No, it's, it's, I mean, they are accumulating toys. They are, it's, Santa's bag is, is, is full. Were you guys surprised that it, like Netflix, that it ended with such a weird kind of whimper? Yes, completely.

I was. No, Lauren, Lauren says no. What, what were you thinking? I don't know. I just remember. Lauren had the inside scoop. Oh, yeah, I wish. I would have cal sheet all over it now. Yeah, baby. I just think I've seen these types of issues in the past like during the first Trump administration. I just, and how much things have ramped up. I mean, the meetings we're seeing these executives taking with the president, the, you know, subservience in the public to him. I just had a feeling. it might be inevitable that what Trump wants will happen. Right. Well, how astonishing is it for the president of the United States in a business merger to go? I haven't decided yet who I'm going to give it to. Where it really is like we are all just things on his desk that he can hand out to, you know, party favors to be distributed to the loyalists. John, were you surprised?

No, I was not surprised at all. I never thought Netflix had a chance. to be honest. Oh, really? Yeah. No. Because of how clearly the president wanted a loyalist. Look, that's how they ended up with TikTok. That's how they had CNN is too big a prize for them to risk handing it over to news people.

Like, or people that are going to let it just operate. So I never thought that, I always thought that they were going to use. the lever of, you know, FCC approval as a manner by which to tilt the scale. And I thought the one thing Zadlov did smartly was use Netflix to drive Paramount insane and make them pay $110 billion for something that clearly, you know, and if you look at once Paramount got awarded the deal, their stock looks like a fucking luge course. Just curious what you thought was going to happen to CNN. Does it just become CBS too?

I kind of think so. I'd be astonished if they don't, if they don't walk in there and go like, a nice show you got here. It'd be a shame if something happened to it. I mean, I think the kinds of changes that you're seeing at CBS are in the offing. And he's also, he's got a much more.

personal grudge against CNN than he does against CBS. Right. That's such a good point. So I have a feeling he's going to go in there. And like their studio, I would be surprised to see that looking more like the oval. Like you're like, are those gold cherubs behind Wolf Blitzer? Like I think I think he's going to be more involved in that. And I wouldn't be surprised if one of these media properties was handed over to Trump, Inc.

That Donald Jr. had his hands. Look, those guys run a drone company. There's nothing he can't do. And as far as I know, they're not either one of them, real aeronautics guys. But I would not be surprised to see, you know, at one point, Trump going like, why doesn't, why isn't my, why are the Ellison is getting all that? Why isn't my family getting a taste of this empire? What about Jared Kushner? Kushner will go in there and develop a mall around it.

Aw. The Saudis. I mean, look, look at the financing. There's a lot of money from, I think, the Middle East. that's also going through there. This is, it's so explicitly corrupt that it's almost breathtaking. And to think that, you know,

they consider it on the par with Hunter being on the board of Burisma. You're like, you have no fucking idea. It's so quaint. I mean, yeah. Remember that? No, this is like, you know, real fucking monarch shit for sure.

You know what I thought was interesting was that over the weekend, I guess there was all of this drama blowing up with the, prediction markets and Kalshi went up shutting down the communi one and saying that it's not appropriate for people to benefit from death or to make money off of death. And it's like, that's their whole business model. You know, that's where they draw the line. These are, these are moral operators. Meanwhile, they're offering prop bets on like how long his beard would be

when he got out of the rubble. Like they're, you know, we've gamified our entire existence. And the sub-economy, the sort of speculative economy, I think is probably so much larger than the actual economy, that that's the thing that's going to blow us up. It's sort of like the derivatives market. You know, we have a derivatives market now on our lives. Everything is gamified. Everything's, you know, everything's a prop bet. I think you'll get divorced in the third quarter of, you know, fucked up.

I can't tell if it exposes, you know, that, you know, we all have a taste for gambling or if it exposes that our real economy is also just kind of a speculative game. Like I'm not sure what ends up looking worse throughout all of it. Is our amorality or the fact that maybe our entire fucking economy is a bit of a shell game with all that. What else he got, Brittany? Last question. John, God forbid, that your last meal, Taco Bell or Arby's. Oh, that's not even.

Really? Yes. Did you just say, so last, last moment on earth, a hug or a punch in the face? Like, that's, that's not even a question. That's, that's like the worst, would you rather that I've ever, you know, would you rather, you know, fall asleep eating ice cream or be burned alive? Like, Arby's and Taco Bell? All right.

There's a follow-up question. Really? to the Arby's and Taco Bell question. Yes. All right. What's your Taco Bell order? CrunchRap Supreme, no meat with refried beans to give it a nice. I like the refried over the black bean because the black bean, I don't like to see

my beans as individuals. Okay. I feel like then I get, I get attached to them. It's not right. You see them as individual nuggets of bean. The refried bean then feels more like a substrate, something in which the other ingredients, we all exist together in this,

but the black bean always felt like, who are you? You arrogant, you're not even mixing with my other ingredients. So I like the refried. And then if I'm feeling particularly celebratory, and I apologize for having thought about this too much, is I'll go the nachos, Belgronde, no meat. And that what I like about that is you have the individual. Each chip is

its own experience, his own, you can get the couple of chips that are in the corner that nobody has decided to touch. So they're empty and devoid and you can create whatever bite you want. A little bit of refried, little bit of cheese, little bit of sour, little bit of tomato. Boom. She's your own adventure. But then there are others that are in a come as you are. You will eat me as is. I am loaded for bear. And so you have all these different, what would you guys do?

I cannot stress how hungry I am right now. It's lunchtime. Are you Taco Bell people? Well, now I am. Jillian, were you not a Taco Bell? Do they even have them in Brooklyn? Oh, they must. Yes.

There are a few. Yeah. I honestly didn't think it was very vegetarian friendly. And you're just like blowing my mind. This is thrilling. It's the best one. How many times have I had to like roll through McDonald's and be like, I'll have a big Mac without the meat? And they're like, sir, I'm going to have to ask you to leave.

Like they're not. That's a crime. They'll make it. But they'll be like, you'll walk up there and be like, you know, I'm charging you extra, right? even though you're not getting the thing. But Taco Bell is made for that. I have to say your Taco Bell spiel sounded a lot like a fake ad just for nachos. That is the beauty of nachos, by the way.

It's one of the few foods that you're served where you decide the proportionality. Somebody makes you a sandwich. You don't get to go in there and go like, oh, on this bite, I'd like all turkey with just a little bit of that, you know, that people do that. But the nacho. it really is. I'm sorry, I didn't want to get choked up. This is beautiful.

It is America. I understand that it doesn't seem to be native to us, but it is an emblem of freedom. Where each chip allows you to express your individuality. Every chip, a possibility. I think FDR said that. What? Wait, what? Lauren just dropped a bar.

You just dropped a bar. Hit that again. Oh, God, I don't know if I should. No, just a new possibility with each chip. Every chip, a possibility. There you go. We're opening up our own Taco Bell. I would love that.

The weekly show is going to. Oh, I don't, they want nothing to do with it. They want nothing. It's gotten to the point at my Taco Bell because I go there regularly and generally like, oh, it's always right before band practice. Because, you know, if I'm going to go act like a 14-year-old at band practice. He's not like a teenager. I should eat like one. So now I come up and whenever I roll up, you know, they come on the thing and they go,

are you using the app? And I'm like, I don't know what that is. And what do you want? Crunch wrap supreme, no meat, refried beans. And they're like, you again. All right, sir. So it's all good. It's all good.

Guys, thank you so much. Brittany, how did they get in touch with us? Twitter. We are weekly show pod, Instagram, threads, TikTok, Blue, Blue, Sky. We are Weekly Show podcast, and you can like, subscribe, and comment on our YouTube channel, The Weekly Show at John Stewart. Breach. As always, fantastic. Great job. Very, very, very interesting conversation. Lead producer Lauren Walker, producer Brittany Mehmedevich, producer Jillian Spear, video editor and engineer, Robert Tolo, audio editor and engineer Nicole Boyce, and our executive producers, Chris McShane and Katie Gray. All right. See you guys next week.

The weekly show with John Stewart is a Comedy Central podcast. It's produced by Paramount Audio and Bus Boy Productions.