The Young Turks - Global Insecurity

Episode Date: September 12, 2022

A liberated Ukrainian village says Russian Troops are dropping like flies. The Swedish election is highlighting anti-immigration democrats. The flooding in Pakistan has been described as incomprehensible. A Texas woman shares her life-threatening story of how she changed her stance from anti-abortion to pro-abortion.  Hosts: Ana Kasparian, Cenk Uygur *** The largest online progressive news show in the world. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian. LIVE weekdays 6-8 pm ET. Help support our mission and get perks. Membership protects TYT's independence from corporate ownership and allows us to provide free live shows that speak truth to power for people around the world. See Perks: ▶ https://www.youtube.com/TheYoungTurks/join SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ http://www.facebook.com/TheYoungTurks TWITTER: ☞ http://www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM: ☞ http://www.instagram.com/TheYoungTurks TWITCH: ☞ http://www.twitch.com/tyt 👕 Merch: http://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist ▶ https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey ▶ https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt Unbossed with Sen. Nina Turner ▶ https://www.youtube.com/unbossedtyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA #TYT #TheYoungTurks #BreakingNews Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. All right. Holyo, Young Turks, Jake, you granite, and despairing with you guys. We've kind of an awesome show today. That's the kind of show we have today.

And already we have a comment from the audience on Twitch, Torch Crimson writes in, I just made blueberry peach cobbler. That's the kind of random comment that I love to hear. Sounds delish, okay? That does sound good. I have been on a sugar binge today. In fact, that's pretty much all I've eaten.

Like endless pastries and cookies. I don't know what has gotten into me, but I can't stop. Can't stop, won't stop. Yeah, well, you just described the last 20 years of my life. All right, listen, as you can tell, we're already having fun. And we do have a little bit of good news in the beginning, but it's kind of a tricky one. And then we've got a lot of international stories today. I need you to buckle up some disasters, some good news.

Casper, take it away. Hell yeah, Jank. Are you Mr. Worldwide? Are you taking that title from Pitbull? Is that what's happening? Look, I'm not saying it. Other people are saying it. You just said it.

Okay. All right. Well, our first stop is Ukraine. So let's get right to it. It's like a monkey with granite. Like a monkey with a grenade. We don't know what they do it. And they're playing with grenade in who, who, who,

it's like Russia. You just heard from is a Ukrainian man from the southern Ukrainian town of Mikhailav, a area of Ukraine that is still unfortunately occupied by Russian troops. However, it's not all bad news for Ukrainians because one of the biggest updates is that they were able to essentially implement some offensive missions that allowed for them to take back certain areas of Ukraine that had been occupied by Russian forces. In fact, it looks like the $15 billion the United States has sent to Ukraine in the form of military aid is paying off. Ukrainian troops have made gains, and Russian troops are reportedly fleeing the country, or at least parts of

the country. And this is after 28 weeks of occupation, reports indicate that Russian troops just drop their rifles on the ground and booked it in certain parts. of Ukraine that, again, they had previously occupied. Now, there's always fog of war. Some of these details have yet to be confirmed, but it does appear that the military weaponry that Ukraine has been able to obtain, thanks to aid from the United States, has paid off. And in this next video, you're going to see some more detail into which areas of Ukraine the Ukrainian troops were able to take back.

Let's watch. How have the Ukrainians been able to do this, and what's the significance? Over 1,000 square miles, it's an area that were lost since February, but now has been gained back. The key here is I'm. That was the main center of command and control, but they did a classic military pincer movement. They brought troops in from this direction. They brought troops in from this direction. They were able to chase the Russian military across the Oskill River here on the other side, on the eastern side of the Oskill River. A lot of it has to do with the artillery, because now our artillery. artillery can fire 50 kilometers over.

They're now being able to chase that Russian military well past that Drusco River, giving them that advantage on their side of the river. I think there's a lot of emphasis on the artillery, the weaponry, because, of course, it's meant to bolster support for the U.S. efforts to provide that kind of aid to Ukraine. And while I sympathize with that perspective specifically because, the United States had made security guarantees for Ukraine, as long as Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons. At the same time, it is fascinating to see how easily, with no debate, $15 billion of

military aid gets approved for Ukraine, whereas here in the United States, getting any type of social spending past is like pulling teeth. It's so incredibly difficult. Yeah. Well, Anna, I think that this story is really interesting in a couple of different ways. And we should be a little bit careful before we get too excited. But on the excited front, well, look, we sent a lot of money, really, over to defense contractors. And they sent some weapons to Ukraine. And, you know, we're taking a lot of credit, partly because we're America and partly because we want to make it seem like that $15 billion worth. In reality, the thing that worked the best were, honestly, the Turkish drones.

And I don't say that because of randot Turkish brine. Oh, yeah, the Turkish drones. Okay. Yeah. No. And in fact, that guy, the guy who made those drones is connected to Erdogan, who kind of likes Russia. So there's a little bit of drama there.

So, and Turkey's been playing both sides of this war. But the bottom line is that it doesn't matter where they're from, relatively small military equipment won the day as opposed to. giant pieces of equipment that cost billions of dollars, right, no matter where it came from. So now that's the good news, right, that, hey, it turns out even if you're a giant country, it is really hard to take smaller countries, especially this day and age. And by the way, you know who knows that lesson? We do because we basically, we couldn't hold Iraq.

We couldn't certainly couldn't hold Afghanistan. And Afghanistan is one of the least developed nations on earth, and we couldn't even win there. And so the Russians are finding out what we found out. And what they found out originally in Afghanistan many decades ago, it is really hard to take and hold sovereign countries these days. So that's the great news. And that's bad news for empires. That's why as progressives, we celebrate and as decent people we do.

Now, but here in this case, and by the way, is it real? It's definitely real because, number one, you have Ukrainian flags going up in the town centers in every one of those major cities that they're talking about. You've got it on video. There's no question about it. But also, Anna, super interesting part that now has been worried is that the Russian media is admitting it. Now, wait a minute.

If the Russian media is admitting it, Anna, there's some chance that it's like a tsunami. They're withdrawing so they could do a bigger hit later. And so I don't know that that's the case, but that is a possibility. And by bigger hit, I don't necessarily mean a larger scale invasion. They could just start dropping bombs from Russia that are. are much larger. So I don't know that yet, but it does make me worry. Yeah, that's actually pretty terrifying. And it could be a strategy where the soldiers are bluffing and it seems like they're retreating and then, you know, they might, you know, gather all of the might

they have left and pursue another offensive. But I do want to mention that there is a lot of pressure for Putin to rethink his strategy here because some of the aid that he's received from allied countries is now kind of teetering, right? So, for instance, the leader of the Chechen Republic, Ramzan Khadirov, who, by the way, sent his own fighters to Ukraine, said that if there are not immediate changes in Russia's conduct of the invasion, he would have to contact the leadership of the country to explain to them the real situation on the ground. So basically issuing a threat to Putin. The other thing is, I mean, Putin... engaged in this invasion. He engaged in the very beginning with this false notion that the

troops were going to go in and Ukrainians were going to accept them with open arms because they wanted to be liberated from Ukrainians' leadership. And of course, that was a lie. The troops were lied to, the Russian troops specifically. So they show up and no, they were not greeted with open arms. Clearly, this is a sovereign country that had no interest in being invaded violently by Russian troops. And so the fact that they haven't given up is pretty incredible. I wanted to also embarrass myself by attempting to name the towns that have been taken back by Ukrainian forces, including Kindrashivka. You also have Chakolovsky and also Veliki, which has been taken back. But the first town that I had mentioned earlier in this report,

Mikkelav, which is in southern Ukraine, is still very much under Russian occupation. In fact, if we're keeping it real, about one-fifth of the country is still under Russian occupation. So it would be inaccurate to make it seem as though Ukraine has won this war. It is still going on. I would like to see more of an attempt to engage in peace talks, not just by Ukraine, but obviously by Russia in good faith. They claim that they want peace talks, but every time they claim that, they renege, they don't take it seriously, and they continue engaging in this war.

But actually, that's taking a twist, too. Now Ukraine is saying, we're not sure we want peace talks. And before they had said in talks that they were willing to give up some portion of land. They don't say it in those words, but they make it clear in diplomatic language. Now they've come out and said, no, we're not going to give up any land, including Crimea. We're not giving up an inch. So the Ukrainians definitely think that they're winning. So now let's go back to the drama of whether that's actually true or not.

Look, there's only two possible explanation for the Chechen leader coming out and saying something harsh against Russian leadership and Russian media allowing news of their retreat. One is internal dissension. Putin has lost at least complete control. He probably still has, in this theory, a lot of control, but can I? contain everyone anymore. So things are leaking, okay? And, uh, and so that is good news, if that's the case. Now, the bad news scenario is a theory that, well, you know, like I said, a tsunami, the wave withdraws before it comes in and crashes much harder. One of the reasons

the Russian soldiers might be in an absolute panic to leave, uh, and I can give you more details of that panic in a second Anna, um, is that they might have gotten the orders. No, we're gonna bomb the hell out of that place. You gotta get out of there because we're not doing smart bombs. We're just doing mega bombs, right? And so I have no idea if that's the case, and I don't want anybody to panic. I'm not a war expert, but it is weird that the Russian media, which does 100% propaganda, is conceding that they are running and that they are retreating.

You see what I'm saying? Yeah, of course, of course. I mean, there could be some surprise attack. I think that your theory is, you know, or at least the possibility of what you're saying is, I'm not going to say likely, but it could happen. I also wanted to just quickly go to one more video because the Guardian went and spoke to the people living in Mikhailave and this one elderly woman really stood out to me. She was a feisty one.

And what she had to say about Putin was interesting. So let's take a look. So I've seen that they bombed, no longer. Oh, all the time bomb. All right. My own school, at 15th, in Plyhannock. And what's going to do you for this situation? Oh, who are you?

Putler. Pudler? Butler. Butler. Butler. And I'm just. Gittler. So she calls Vladimir Putin

Pootler. And of course, she does. does so while they're looking at a school that was bombed. I mean, certain parts of Ukraine have been completely leveled. And so I can understand the rage, the frustration. And I can also understand why, after all of this, after all of the efforts to engage in peace talks in good faith and Russia essentially reneging on any of their promises or agreements, I can understand why Ukraine is like, well, we've got the military might now. And it appears that they're retreating. So maybe we're not interested in peace talks.

But I don't know if that's the right way to go about it, right? I think that they lose, they certainly lose the moral high ground when they refuse to engage in peace talks. And ending the war, engaging in any opportunity to end the war should be the priority here. And at the same time, I wouldn't want to give up land when I'm winning either. That's true. Yeah. And it's complicated. So look, one more piece of complication, those Russian troops.

So, Anna, I read that, so some of the Russians have committed war crimes for sure. There's a town where they found 50 civilians massacred. But in one of the towns they were talking to the Ukrainians, they said, look, it depends. When they first came in, they were actually pretty nice. Like, well, not with a giant asterisk. And that asterisk is very, very important. But they said that they had come to liberate us from America. And we were like, America doesn't control us because the Russians, the soldiers have, remember,

lived in Russia where they have nonstop propaganda, the Ukraine is occupied by Nazis and by America and that they were going to liberate them. By the way, remember here in America, we also live under propaganda. So when we did the Iraq invasion, a lot of the soldiers really thought we were going to be greeted as liberators because that is what Dick Cheney had told them. Bush administration, and, you know, it's a long time ago, but we were on the air, and I can tell you, and you can see the old clips of my great frustration, the major media would not correct that. They made it seem like, oh, yeah, there's an excellent chance that Iraq is going to love

being invaded by us. And so Putin did the same propaganda to the Russian soldiers. But the citizens of that town, talking to the Washington Post in particular, said, as things got went on, we realized no, they're not just nice, okay? I mean, even if they were sent under false pretenses. So the giant asterisk was, they said, you can't go out after six o'clock. And one of the townspeople said, yeah, these two guys, the local guys, fun-loving, presumably, they had a lot of, they had some alcohol, which happens from time to time all across the world, certainly in that region as well.

And they went out, and they had their lights on, went out after six, were executed. Jeez. Murdered, right? And so when you do an occupation, you have to kill people. And that's how an occupation works. No, absolutely. I mean, some of the details of the brutality of this war, I mean, they're certainly out there. For instance, Ukrainian officials found this mass grave of 450, you know, dead bodies, Ukrainian

bodies. And they're investigating that as a potential war crime along with other pretty heinous things that have happened that I don't really care to detail here, that they're investigating as war crimes. So this has been a brutal war. And it's hard to give you an exact number of the amount of casualties on either side because of the fog of war. But it's been brutal.

And when you hear the word occupation, no, it's not a friendly occupation. A lot of people have been executed as a result of this. Yeah. And it's just one last thing. Look, there is no friendly occupation ever, ever, ever. It's always imperialism and it's in favor of an empire. And so, but if the Russians withdrawn now, and they remember, they still occupied 20% of Ukraine.

So they're not anywhere near a full withdrawal. That's important context. But if they were withdrawn now, it will have been an awful, terrible imperialist attack against a sovereign country. And it will have been nowhere near as bad as what we did to Iraq. Well, let's leave it at that. We're going to take a quick break. And when we come back, there's more international news, including the election.

that just took place in Sweden, no good news there. We're going to share the details and more coming right up. All right. All right, back on TYT, Janganana with you guys, and Tiberay Dragon on Twitch saying, I see all the way from Ireland, tip of our hat to you. That'll teach you to send a comment in from Ireland making me new accents. It's your fault and you know it. All right, it's next.

It's her fault, right. Let's move on. All right, well, we've got some more international news for you. Now we're going to move away from Ukraine, move over to Sweden, and talk about their national elections. The right wing in Sweden has, unfortunately, taken the lead in Sweden's national elections. In fact, with 95% of the vote counted, the right-wing Sweden Democrats seem to have a one-vote majority. Now, any labels, political labels

you think of here in the United States, forget everything you know about them, because in Sweden, the Swedish or Sweden Democrats, I should say, is a right-wing anti-immigration party that has run on a tough on crime platform, and I'll give you more details on that in just a moment. But again, this is a party that didn't seem to have much support. In fact, a few years ago, it won about 17% of the vote. And now that number has gone up to over 20% of the vote. Okay? So let's give you the details on what happened. Now, the full preliminary result will not be due until Wednesday, because there's still some mail-in ballots that are being counted. And there are, like, there's still about 5% of the vote that has to be tallied.

However, it is very likely that the prime minister will be a moderate by the name of Ulf Christerson. And this is going to make the situation very complicated in Sweden, especially when you consider the fact that you're going to have this moderate leader trying to form a coalition government with the right wing that appears to be in the majority right now. Now, the right wing was able to increase its popularity due to sentiment toward immigration and crime, something that I actually wasn't aware of until fairly recently. Sweden's been grappling with gang violence, gun violence, and that fear within various communities in Sweden has pushed voters to move closer to a right wing perspective.

And this next video will explain that in a little more detail. The Sweden Democrats, a party with neo-Nazi roots, is riding the wave of fear over gun violence. The country is split and it's very important that we get organized and come together. It's important about not getting the far right into the system. I don't like the way that people can't really talk and listen to each other anymore, but everything is getting polarized. But for supporters of Jimmy Ockerson and the Sweden Democrats, the time for talking is over. The country has one of the worst gun violence records in Europe

with 335 shootings last year. According to a 2017 report, nine out of ten shootings in Sweden were committed by first or second generation immigrants. Today, no one can go out without fear. We know it's because other culture come into our country. We need a new government.

It has irresponsible immigration policies. So a few other things that I want to mention because I think a lot of people tend to take what's happening within their own country and think that it's the same situation. Longbendy Twizzler's Candy keeps the fun going. Keep the fun. I'm going. Twizzlers, keep the fun going.

In other countries. So, for instance, in the United States, while the right wing attempts to paint immigrants as criminals as the individuals who are leading to an uptick in crime in this country, the evidence does not bear that out. There have been multiple studies looking into that. And it shows that immigrant neighborhoods tend to actually have lower crime than neighborhoods that mostly consist of U.S. citizens. Now, in Sweden, though, it does appear that the prevalence of crime gets tied to the immigrant communities, but it's not because

immigrants are by their very nature violent people. There's been a lot of criticism about the Swedish government's inability to assimilate individuals, educate individuals, give them opportunities and a future. And so that's the criticism from, you know, more left-wing individuals in Sweden. However, the right-wing is just saying, no, we need to end immigration. They don't want any more refugees from Africa, for instance, coming in. And let me just note that refugees from Africa are mostly coming into Sweden as a result of the unlivable conditions due to climate-related, you know, natural disasters and things like that. And they also have been taking in refugees from Ukraine as well.

But they want to, the right wing at least, they want to stop the flow of immigration and they want to focus on assimilating the refugees and immigrants who are within the country already. That's a lot to get into, Jank. Before I give you more details, why don't you jump in? Tell me what you think. Yeah. Look, this is a little bit of bittersweet news.

There's no way we're going to do a Sweden story without me doing a down joke. It's just not possible. I just want to get it out of the way. Okay. Now, having said that there's going to be lots of twists and turns in this story. It's not as simple as you might imagine. Okay. So first of all, let me just go over what Anna said, but I can give it a little bit more color. So because it's hard to keep up if you're not familiar with another country's, you know, parties. So the social Democrats are the left. Yes.

The moderates are the conservatives. The Sweden Democrats. are the really conservatives? So social democrats left, Swedish Democrats far right. Okay, so that obviously doesn't make any sense, but we're moving forward. Okay, it doesn't have to make sense. It's not your country's their country. So that's just how it developed. Okay, so don't get confused by the labels. So now number two, their politics is not necessarily the same as our politics in terms of the right wing and left wing. So some of their right wing positions are right wing just like you would have here in America. But there are two positions that they have that are very popular among the Swedish Democrats that are the far right, okay? One is they're

against guns. Now, here in America, our right wing is in favor of guns. But their right wing associates it with violence. Why? Because apparently they're not insane. They can make an easy, logical connection. They're like, the guns are the thing that kills people. We don't want people killed. We're against crime, violence, and hence obviously guns. So they're more anti-gun than the rest of the parties. And then number two is, I'm going to give you a quote here from Reuters, with the Sweden Democrats opposed to his flagship policy, referring to the other side, of benefit cuts. Yeah. The far right is opposed to benefit cuts, Anna. And so, because why? Because they're populist. But unlike in America, where the right wing uses it as fake populism and wants to cut

benefits for average Americans in Sweden because they're not taken over by corporate politics. They still have a right wing strand, but that right wing is actually populist and hence is in favor of the benefits that the government gives. I mean, what they want, I mean, the thing, the similarity between right-wing populace in Sweden and right-wing populace here in the United States is that they are nationalists. Like, they want to close the country down. They want to stop the flow of immigration, including legal immigration. They don't want to accept any refugees.

However, they certainly have a populist message when it. It comes to economic matters. So they do not want to cut funding on social programs or social spending. The other thing that they want to do is just mostly focus on assimilating people, right? And assimilation is a tricky word because I've always had kind of a negative reaction to it. But what I'm gathering from, honestly, the majority of voters in Sweden is that they want to take people who have already immigrated there, refugees who have already. come and basically create a society in which they fit in, right?

Where they understand the laws, they understand, they get an education. These are things that they want to focus on, which is also a little different from what you would expect from the right wing here in the United States. But again, that nationalist message certainly is still there, and it is shared between right wingers in the United States and in Sweden. So, yeah, there's that. The other thing I wanted to just quickly mention is this is unlikely to do, let's say the right wing is officially the majority.

They've counted all the votes. They're officially the majority. It is unlikely to have any impact on whether or not Sweden joins NATO. They're making moves to join NATO given the Russian invasion into Ukraine. And that's likely to still happen even with a right wing majority in government in Sweden. Yeah. You know, I just say add one thing on assimilation because I'm an immigrant and I came to the country when I was eight years old. And the answer is, of course, balance. It's always balanced, but neither side ever gets the balance, right? So what does balance mean? I think that you're better off, especially if you're a kid under the age of 12, doing immersive learning in English language. And so a lot of people disagree with that. and then they'll even get angry at me.

But I lived it, and I know that for me, and probably for a lot of kids, immersive learning is better. So just- What do you mean by immersive learning? So they didn't accommodate me and teach the classes in Turkish as well. I mean, it would have been, I think, absurd. I mean, how are you going to find a Turkish teacher in the middle of East Brunswick, New Jersey? And sometimes our side says, no, you have to find one that knows Tagalog and Turkish and Urdu.

And, you know, and I'm being extreme, right? But certainly Spanish is one that is taught, and this is a very normal left-wing position. We should teach Spanish and English at the same time for immigrants so they can assimilate. They think that that will lead to better assimilation. I don't think so. I think learning English is by being immersive and just going to the English classes is the better way to go. But by the way, but my school provided a teacher for me, a Vietnamese kid, and a Korean kid. So, you know, they show pictures of a cat and say cat, and that's how we learn English, right?

And so I just give that as a small example. There's a thousand ways to simulate without losing your cultural identity. Right. Yeah. No, I like that you mentioned that because for the longest time and still today, when I hear the word assimilation, especially considering the political party that tends to use that word here in the United States, what they do refer to is essentially just shedding your cultural identity.

And I disagree with that. I think that culture is a wonderful thing. I think it enriches a country as diverse. versus the United States. But if we're talking about assimilation in regard to learning the language, learning what the cultural norms are, right? What the rule, like what law laws are in this new country that you're living in. Obviously, you need that for a country to have like a sound identity, if that makes any sense, without forcing people to shed what their culture is. Yeah. And last thing I'll say on that is, look, in Europe,

Probably the best cultural export in European history is Donor Kabab. And I don't know many Europeans who would disagree. So that's a Turkish version of a gyro. It's super popular all over Europe, especially in the northern European countries. So nobody's going to argue against that kind of cultural assimilation. The number of times you've brought up Donor Kabab on this show, usually in a similar context, is amazing. Like, it's the first thing your head goes to, donor kebub. Let me.

Look at America. Are you surprised? Okay, but seriously. But look, on the other hand, a lot of old school cultures, definitely not just Turkey, but yes, sometimes Turkey, not here in America because mainly a higher socioeconomic group, wind up coming here, doctors, engineers, just because the vagaries of immigration law. But in Germany, it's honestly, Turks that are poor and needed a job and drove to Germany. And so they're from the old school, and they would beat their kids.

And it's okay for a country to say, no, we don't do that here. And you have to follow our laws. And so to me saying, I got a cultural defense, we beat them at home so I can beat him here. No, no, you have to follow the laws of the country that you're in, okay? Yeah. At the same time, killing off your entire culture makes no sense at all. It'll enrich the country that you're in now. So for God's sake, balance.

Well, let's move on to, all right, I'm going to drop it. I'm going to, all right, I can't help it. I'm going to say one more thing. You guys understand, right? What the prevalence of violent crime does to a voter's state of mind, especially when these elections come up. Just something to keep in mind as huge portions of the left continue to completely minimize the reality of violent crime in America.

It puts us at a disadvantage if we pretend like it's not happening. We have to address it and we have to address it in a robust way that ensures that we direct the country in the area, in the place that we want it to go when it comes to criminal justice reform. Otherwise, if all citizens get from the left is messaging that minimizes the reality and no real solutions, well, then they're going to look to the right wing, which I don't want, when it comes to no criminal justice reform and essentially allowing that pendulum to swing right back to the tough on crime mass incarceration policies.

We need to avoid that. So I think that what happened in Sweden is foreshadowing, but I'm sure I'll get a lot of hate for even saying that. I know. No, I'll go further. First, back to the donor kebabs. No, I'm kidding. All right, so listen, guys, Ilhan Omar nearly lost an election in a very blue district in

Minnesota, because she was for defund the police. You can say, oh, I'm mad at you for saying that. Oh, facts suck, okay? But that's just a stone cold fact. So, and here, the left in Sweden, maybe the most progressive country in the world, certainly among the most progressive in the world, and no one would doubt that, is about to lose to a party that was formerly neo-Nazi because of uprising violence. And it's not complicated as to why, because voters vote based on what is closest to them.

And physical threat to their safety is the closest thing in the world. That is a thing they'd really, really want to avoid. If you keep poking the bear, at some point, they're going to go right wing. And then of course, there's going to be an overreaction and they're going to do dumbass things like mass incarceration for jaywalking and marijuana and dumbass things. So we're trying to head that off at the past by saying, let's do logical reform, logical criminal justice reform and police reform and judicial reform. So we don't go to these extremes by enabling the right wing by pretending that that problem

doesn't exist. Absolutely. All right. We unfortunately have to take another break. So let's do that. When we come back, we'll give you an update on the awful flooding. in Pakistan. And later in the show, we'll also talk about a person who used to identify as anti-abortion, now regretting that because she needed an abortion. That story and more coming

right up. Back on the Young Turks. Jank, Anna, plus news. Let's do it. Let's start with this. And then came just unbelievable rains, just downpour sheets of rain. Pakistan this year received something like almost 200% of its average monsoonal rainfall in the period of three months. There's absolute devastation in Pakistan where one-third of the country remains underwater

a week after the country was ravaged by the deadliest floods the country has ever seen. Now, nearly 1,400 people have already died, 13,000 people have reportedly been injured. And millions have been left homeless since an unprecedented monsoon started in. mid-June. Now, there were also destructive floods in the country back in 2010, but this time around the situation is even worse and has been fueled by the climate emergency. In fact, two million acres of farmland has been completely destroyed, and tens of millions of—tens of millions of Pakistanis need humanitarian relief right away. There's also some other evidence of the climate emergency in Pakistan, as is usually the case when it comes to

some of the poorer countries around the world. For instance, there are glaciers in Pakistan that have begun to melt, creating these lakes, and the infrastructure in Pakistan can't withstand those bodies of water. And so that is also fueling some of the floods that we're seeing in Pakistan. In this video, you'll get a better understanding of just how the climate emergency has contributed to this extreme weather event. Let's watch. Experts say the disaster bears the hallmarks of a changing climate.

A warmer climate means that you have more intense rainfall, and also a warmer climate means that glaciers are more likely to melt and collapse quicker. Both of those things came together in this tragic event in Pakistan. The South Asian monsoon pattern descends on Pakistan each year between June and September. Normally, it brings much-needed rains after summer, summer. But research shows the annual monsoons are getting wetter and more dangerous because of climate change. Between June and August this year, Pakistan received nearly three times the 30-year average rainfall for this time of year, and meteorologists are warning there is more rain

on the way. So, Cenk, it's just been absolutely devastating. And the UN chief, Antonio Gutierrez, makes a great point in that it's really incumbent upon the wealthier nations to provide relief to countries like Pakistan, which of course has been ravaged by the consequences of climate change. And it's the rich countries that have contributed to climate change, not the poor countries that absolutely need our help. We'll go to his statement in just a minute, but I wanted to give you a chance to weigh in. Yeah.

So here in America, we have to remind people of a- of things like, hey, climate change is real. 99% of the world scientists aren't lying. Because as the, we were talking earlier in the show about the Russian government does propaganda through its media and has convinced the Russian citizens that they are fighting Nazis in America and Ukraine when those are just fictions, total fictions. And here in America, our media has convinced us that, hey, Republicans could be right, Democrats could be right.

Can't quite tell. It seems like maybe, probably. 99% of the world scientists aren't lying, but we're not sure, okay? So the rest of the world is perfectly aware of it, and unfortunately, living under this problem. So Pakistan has 220 million people. 32 million were displaced by the flood. Imagine if in America 32 million people were displaced. What the hell do we put them?

I mean, let alone the thousands who are dead, but here in America, we have another problem. If it doesn't happen here, we don't care. We don't give a damn at all, right? So now, what Pakistan is saying is what a lot of countries are saying, but wait a minute, we didn't create climate change, we didn't benefit from climate change, we know who did the largest countries in the world and their corporations, Exxon, Chevron, BP, you name it. By the way, also Russian oil companies and Chinese coal companies, they got all of the profits. But now Pakistan, that is certainly way, way poor than those countries, has to be.

pay for an unbelievable record-breaking cleanup and have all of these dead civilians, and they're like, well, why are we paying for it? You guys made the profit. Why don't you pay for it? And honestly, that makes a ton of sense. It does. And I appreciate that the head of the UN is making that case. So with that said, why don't we take a look at the next video? in Pakistan have been destroyed. Millions have been displaced. Pakistan says it alone cannot deal with this disaster,

which is being blamed on climate change. And with the UN chief, Antonio Guterres, visiting Pakistan, many are hopeful that more help will arrive. Pakistan needs massive financial support to respond to this crisis that have costed according to some I'm estimated about $30 billion and counting.

And debt support is entirely necessary, and it is not a matter of solidarity. It's a matter of justice. Yeah, so that's the right word to use. It's a matter of justice and trying to provide the funding to, I mean, not make up for the damage cause to the environment by the wealthy. countries, it certainly wouldn't make up for it. But this humanitarian aid is so desperately needed. I should also note that this is all taking place in Pakistan with the backdrop of political instability and an economic crisis. So Pakistan is experiencing economic freefall. It is very likely that the country will default on its loans. So there's some concern about

that. And as I mentioned, Jank, you were talking about two million acres of agricultural lands that have been destroyed as a result of this flooding, people who have been displaced because their homes have been destroyed. It really is incumbent on some of these wealthier nations to provide relief to Pakistan. And the political instability, I should note, has been going on for some time, especially considering the fact that their leader had to step down recently. and is being charged by, charged through their anti-terrorism laws. I mean, we can get into that a little bit, but it's just a complete and utter disaster in Pakistan as we speak.

Yeah. So, look, guys, let's clarify a couple of important things. Who's we that we speak of? So because if you're sitting in Nebraska, you might be thinking, wait a man, I didn't profit from any oil companies. Why am I paying Pakistan's bill? Okay. And by the way, the right wing here in America will take advantage of that.

stoke that fire, right? Okay, great. I have a perfect solution. Then why doesn't the companies that created climate change pay for it? Why am I paid for it? I'm with you, brother, Nebraska. I didn't do it. I didn't make any money off of it, right? So I don't know why the governments have to pay. Why doesn't Exxon pay? It's a good point. No, it's a real question. That's an externality of their business, Anna, right? So if they have, every business has cost and revenue. They're keeping all the revenue, but they're unloading all their costs on us, American people, Pakistani people. Why are we letting them?

It's insane. Yeah, no, you make such a great point because honestly, Jake, it's so incredible because I'm so used to we, the taxpayers, paying for the failures of U.S. based corporations and multinational corporations. They're like, it didn't even occur to me that that was a possibility. Like, that's the kind of conditioning we get not only from our politicians, but from the corporate media, right? Like the idea of the very companies and corporations that have contributed the most to the climate

emergency paying for the damage that they've caused is inconceivable. And it's, I mean, that is the greatest injustice. And we keep seeing it happening over and over again. It's always the poorest countries that suffer the biggest. consequences of the damage done by these profit-seeking corporations. And we need to push for justice. I don't think that ordinary people should have to pay for the damage that's been caused by these companies.

Look, I'll say my usual point here at the end. Why have you never heard of the idea of the corporations that profited from climate change paying for just simply the costs of climate change? It's their product that costs all of us. this money, why do we have to pay it instead of them, right? The reason you've never heard that idea is because most of the media in America are also corporations. So these corporations are all protecting each other, and they're never going to tell you the super obvious points because most of those folks are their advertisers and funnel a part of the proceeds back to the media

for propaganda instead of news. Exactly. Well, let's go back to the United States. We've got some more news on domestic-related matters, including the continued anti-abortion movement. Let's get to that. that fetus will deliver and ultimately that baby will suffocate and pass away. Kaylee's doctor was clear. When he's born, he's going to suffocate to death. He may live for a few minutes. He may live for an hour, but he is going to die. Her doctors said they could not perform an abortion, noting in her records,

termination is not legal in the state of Texas. I remember her saying, you know, the course of action that I would have taken with a patient a year ago would be to advise them to turn. He said, that is the safest course of action for you, and it's the most humane course of action for him. The young lady you just heard from is Kaylee Despain, who desperately needed an abortion after learning that the fetus she was carrying had severe abnormalities, and not only did the fetus have severe abnormalities, bringing that fetus to term also meant that she was at a heightened

risk of all sorts of complications that could impact her own health and even end her own life. But Kaylee lived in Texas, and I should also note, she and her husband used to be anti-abortion, anti-choice, until 2016. At least that's what they allege. Now, I say that because it's real easy to think of things in the abstract and think of yourself as a good person when you're, you know, stripping other people of their rights in an effort to, in your mind, protect life. But as Kaylee and her husband learned, that's not always the case. And she had to travel outside of Texas in order to get a potentially life-saving abortion. Now, the fetus she was carrying had all sorts of issues, including an extra set of chromosomes, a severe brain defect, a

severe heart defect and the fetus's lungs were too small. They weren't developing correctly. Now, here is Kaylee describing how her own life would be in danger if she was forced to carry this fetus to term. Now, if she stayed in Texas, she would be forced to. And again, it would have endangered her life. Let's watch. Carrying him to term could have put Kaylee's life in danger. She was at high risk for several potentially deadly pregnancy consequences. complications, blood clots, preeclampsia, and cancer because of an abnormal placenta. Texas law allows for abortion if the mother has a life-threatening physical condition that places her at risk of death or substantial impairment. But Texas lawmakers haven't spelled out

exactly what that means. They're extremely vague. They don't spell out exactly the situations when an abortion can be provided. I would say it's the opposite. They're extremely restrictive and broad. They threaten criminal penalties against physicians. They threaten to take someone's medical license away. Yeah, they threatened to take doctors medical license away. They are also threatened with legal action. And so what ends up happening is people or doctors, I should say, medical professionals who previously provided abortions are now afraid to provide abortions even if they believe the woman's life is in danger. The litigation is costly, as, as, you know, you know, Jank. So it's, it's something that they're not willing to take a risk on. And so

women who desperately need it, even in cases to save their lives, are being denied that care as a result of the effective abortion ban in the state of Texas. Yeah, as usually, there's a couple of issues here. First, on the doctors. Think about it, guys. The doctors can get life in prison. And so they write a vague statue and they say, well, if the life of the mother is in danger, maybe you won't get life in prison. But we're going to nitpick your decision in hindsight. So if she's bleeding out on the table, probably you won't get life in prison. But if you say that she could die of complications and every doctor agrees, well, we don't know

that she would have had those complications. You did an abortion. You're going to prison for the rest of your life. So now, think about what that creates. The doctor's oath is to do no harm, but now you've created a divergence of interest between the doctor and the patient. The doctor might think the best thing for the patient is definitely an abortion because her chances of dying have gone up dramatically.

But that is not the best thing for me, because if I do the abortion, I might go to prison for life, even if it was the right thing. So I'm sorry, I can't do it. I can't risk that for myself or my family. And that's very fair, right? I understand what the doctors are thinking. So now you've made it so the doctors and patients are not on the same team. Because big government has come in with its government tyranny and said,

you're not allowed to make decisions for your own body anymore. We have literally snatched your body and taken your choice away from you. And the doctor, we've taken away your true recommendation. and actual life-saving procedures, and we're telling you, don't do those, because we find those life-saving procedures are not moral. So you must do the thing that we find to be moral, which is let that person die, potentially. Okay. Yeah.

I mean, real quick to respond to that, Jen, I mean, like, what could go wrong, right? What could go wrong where the opinion of medical professionals falls by the. the wayside and the political ambitions of politicians in Texas reigns supreme. I mean, the Texas politicians are clearly the better experts on what is best for pregnant women in the state of Texas, right? I mean, it's just so incredibly stupid, especially when you consider the idiocy of our lawmakers, both on a state and federal level. Yeah, and now we get the conservative. So this is a mixed bag. So easy to beat up on conservatives in this story, but remember, these two were conservatives. And so, uh, and so I think

there's two different kinds of conservatives, ones that are hardwired and ones that are cultural conservatives. So what do I mean by hardwired? And I think those are the folks who are like, look, man, I'm going to protect my own and everybody else can go pound sand. I don't care about them. I don't care about people from other countries or from other towns or people that don't look like me. I don't even want them. I'm afraid of outsiders. I don't want them. I don't like, I'm just going to protect my family and my church, and I'm done with it, right? So that is a hardwired conservative, in my opinion. Cultural conservatives are ones that lived in a town or jurisdiction or state, or that is the predominant way of thinking. So they think they're

conservative because they were taught that. They were taught, hey, if they don't look like you, they're not in your religion. They might be satanic. They might be this. They might be that. They're the boogeyman. Don't like them. Okay. And hey, religion says take away women's rights and take away gay rights. So that is the moral thing to do. And if you grow up your whole life thinking, everybody you knew told you that was the moral thing to do, don't be a bad person.

Make sure you hate gay people. Make sure you take away women's rights. You might think that that's the right thing to do. And so either way, when something happens to a conservative, for the first time, they realized, oh, that takes away my rights too. Okay, no, no, no, no, no, no, I'm not in favor. of that, there's this legislator who did a great speech in South Carolina, who's a Republican.

A woman Republican legislator did a speech against these laws that they're passing on abortion to her fellow Republicans saying, you guys don't know anything about women. And you're going to come tell me how to regulate my body? Are you nuts? You don't know anything about miscarriages. You don't know anything about how we deal with our doctors. And you could come tell me how to live my life when I thought we were for freedom, right? But she does that on only issues that affect her because she's a conservative.

That's exactly right. I love that you brought that up. And one other thing I want to mention is that, you know, we're talking about a couple in Texas that had the resources necessary to travel to New Mexico specifically in order to get a potentially life-saving abortion. And the resources I'm talking about, of course, money, yes. But they didn't have the money themselves. They had family members who they had to reach out to.

And luckily, their family members lent them literally thousands of dollars. Because remember, they have to pay for the travel in addition to the abortion. Texas has banned private health insurance companies from covering abortion. And so most policies don't cover it anyway. And so they literally needed thousands of dollars. And they were able to obtain those resources from family members. Think about all the people living in Texas right now who don't have those resources. who don't have family members who are willing to lend them or can't lend them thousands of dollars

so they can go get a life-saving abortion. So exactly what we predicted, what happened is happening, where certain people with certain resources are able to, I guess, mitigate the ramifications of these draconian anti-women laws. But a lot of people, especially those living in poverty, an increasing number of Americans, in fact, are not going to have those opportunities. And it is disgusting that we have a political party who has fought so aggressively to strip women of their bodily autonomy this way. Yeah.

And they said that, I mean, look, they could afford it only because they had family and friends that could help them. But they're hurt dog. Don't ask them if they're all right. Because concertives are not immune from normal economic forces in this country. They're also getting low wages. They also don't have health care. So they had to borrow the $3,500 for the operation from what Cade, the husband, described as

the epitome of a Trump fanboy. But you know how he convinced them? He appealed to his conservative nature, which is protect those in your immediate vicinity, right? And by the way, that's, look, I don't like their conservative nature of fighting against the others, but I like that they want to protect her own. That's a good thing. And Kate had a great quote that I loved. He said, my, and this is how he convinced the Trump fanboy to give him the money.

He said, my job as a husband is to protect and love my wife. If I'm not fighting to keep her here, then I failed. And the Trump guy was like, all right, guy, you get the money, okay? So, but guys, if you're willing to see that in your own case or a friend's case, why can't you see it for everyone else? I mean, that kid could have killed her easily that fetus, and every doctor agreed it had no chance of survival. What are we doing? And the mom said, at the end, she was absolutely clear she needed to do it. She even thought about bringing it to term so that it could die in her

arms because they're so desperate for a baby. She's had four miscarriages. They're pro-life. They really, really want a baby, right? But she said she didn't want her baby dying, gasping for breath. Don't do this to women. This is crazy. We've got to We've got to turn around and we've got to turn around now. Well, we got to take a brief break when we come back for the second hour of the program. We'll show you some highlights, and they are highlights, of Lauren Bobert's debate with her Democratic opponent. Don't miss it. We'll be right back.

Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks, support our work, listen to ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.co slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.