OLIVER BOYD-BARRETT—Considerable controversy continues to swirl over the issue of whether Israel did or did not inflict significant damage on Iran on October 26. I trust the voices of Crooke, Ritter, Macgregor, McGovern and Johnson more than I trust Israeli claims or those of the Pentagon. Iran is a technologically advanced entity, a country of 100 million people with powerful alliances and major historical grievances with the rules-based order. Its enemies do not seem to understand that.
-
-
EDITORS—In a careful examination of Bob Woodward’s latest “historical” tome, WAR, the Duran team finds that a great deal of it is simply the usual self-approving chauvinist gossip repacked to resonate as serious history. This is scarcely surprising since Woodward has long been acting as a national security operative.
-
ROGER BOYD—In 2006, Walz ran for the US House of Representatives and won; serving until 2018. He was against the Iraq War and repeatedly voted against corporate bailouts. He showed his anti-China stance by meeting with the CIA-financed Dalai Lama and serving on a commission monitoring “human rights violations in China”, and also showed staunch support for the Zionist regime (which he has repeated during the current presidential election campaign).
-
OLIVER BOYD-BARRETT—Israel says it will strike back. I find this game of telling your oppenent you are going to attack – giving him plenty of time to prepare for your attack and then attacking, but maybe not so much as you said you would, and then waiting for the retaliation – somewhat quaint, to say the least.
It is reminiscent of seventeenth century style war-by-the-square tactics of bright uniforms, gleaming bayonets, chess-board moves and a death toll accounted for almost solely by civilians (unless you were Cromwell beseiging, starving and burning Irish towns, or European imperialists putting down the revolting natives).
-
KARL SANCHEZ—Professors Hudson and Wolff have discussed the upcoming US Election on several previous occasions with Nima, while this session specifically focuses on US political dynamics, issues foreign and domestic that are being completely ignored, and what the outcomes might be depending on who is declared the winner. And no, there’s no talk of the election being stolen by on side or the other or what the social response might be depending on who wins. The number of excellent ideas and insights are too many to list. Dr. Wolff carries the show because he has somewhat better insights and is able to articulate them better. Dr. Wolff provides one of the more interesting points that’s revealed at the 19:00 mark of the 80-minute podcast:
The Hegelian Moment of American Politics: Cold War Isolationism of the Other as the initial thesis has matured and become its antithesis: the isolation of the US as it’s now the Other compared with the Global Majority.
