Latest / Brian Thomas / Daniel Davis Deep Dive

Transcript

Daniel Davis Deep Dive · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Extra special and happier with the return of retired Lieutenant
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Colonel Daniel Davis what we call what he calls the
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: Daniel Davis Deep Dive. You can follow that alliterative podcast.
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Just find out where you get your regular podcasts and
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: search for Daniel Davis Deep Dive. Always some excellent conversation
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: throughout the week, and I always look forward to our
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: conversations on Tuesdays at this time. Welcome back, sir. It's
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: a pleasure as always to have you on.
• 0:22
  Speaker 2: Always my pleasure to be here, Brian. I always look
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: forward to this myself.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: I'm glad you do. It's a great segment and I
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: always end up learning a lot and sort of always
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: adjust my position because you really have an excellent way
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: of well maybe restating what we are fed in the
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: mainstream media's and that's it's a welcome, refreshing thing. So
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: it's the second it's two years since the attack on Israel.
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: They have twelve hundred people killed and two hundred and
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: fifty hostages taken. It's reported they have forty eight and
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: Israel says, well, we only think twenty of them are
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: still alive. But a critical negotiation point as we enter
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: the sit down discussions, or rather info ones, you can
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: tell us what's going on with that. I thought the
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: initial predicate was, well, we'll stop fighting when you release
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: the hostages. Is some us presented with a stumbling block
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: because maybe a lot of them, maybe all of them,
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: are not even alive. I know the family members would
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: want the bodies returned, but do they do they have
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: anything to really turn over anymore? Now?
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: I think they do. That's certainly been the case. They've
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: been pretty open about how many are alive and how
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: many you're not, so I at least I certainly hope
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: that's the case. That would be a pretty cruel twist
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: if there was really not alive at all, But you know,
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: you couldn't hide that, so if you want the war
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: to come to an end, that would be a problem.
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: And by having some alive that's always been there one
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: of the very few, if not only, negotiating cards that
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: they could play. If they didn't have those, then once
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: that became apparent, then there would be no reason for
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: Israel to do anything except just you know, put the
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: floor of the gas of the floor, et cetera, and
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: drive in militarily. So I don't I think that they
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: would do that, but we'll find out pretty soon. In fact,
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: right now there is meetings going on in Egypt for
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: the second day in a row to try to bring
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: it into this And to your point a minute ago,
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: there was no specific connection to the fighting will stop
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: as soon as the hostage is to release. In fact,
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: President Trump has repeatedly asked since he made this announcement
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: a couple of days ago, that he wants Israel to
• 2:23
  Speaker 2: stop shooting right now wild the negotiations to get the
• 2:27
  Speaker 2: hostages back and all the other terms so that we
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: can bring it into the war. But Israel has not
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: done that, and so the fighting continues to go on
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: as well, and the negotiations continue simultaneously.
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: Well, I hate to attempt to draw parallels with Russia
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: and Ukraine, but Israel has made some I know, it's
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: been bloody, and some may argue it's immoral or whatever,
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: whatever your position is relative to Israel going after God.
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: They've obviously taken over a lot of land, they've recaptured some,
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: they've destroyed some of the infrastructure. Their quote unquote winning
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: I mean noting the civilian casualties. They're winning and making
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: progress in guys and much in the same way Russia
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: continues to win and make progress in Ukraine. Considering you
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: mentioned the hostages are about the only bargaining chip Amas has.
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: Are we looking at kind of a comparable thing. They're
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: in a sense of maybe denial about the relative strength.
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: I mean, are they planning on fighting till the last
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: man is standing? What are their options for Hamas?
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that in some ways that the parallels
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: are there, As you mentioned, I mean, there is one
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: side has a decisive advantage over the other, and one
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: wants to have negotiations while they're spighting wants to have
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: no negotiations. But other than that, there's some pretty big
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: differences too, in that I don't think that there's anything
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: militarily left to accomplish for Israel. They're just blowing stuff up,
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: and I'm not sure how that's useful to their objectives,
• 3:53
  Speaker 2: because you can't literally kill your way to victory in here.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: They remember, they went from the north, you know, shortly
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: after ten seven, which is today's the two year anniversary,
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: that all the way down through Rafa, all the way
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: down to the Egyptian Gate, and then they kind of
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: started over. So now then they're moving south again, and
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: there's almost nothing. But you know, whatever's left of not rubble,
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: they're turning that into rubble now. But there's no like
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: actual combat actions going on, so it's kind of just
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: blowing a bunch of stuff up. And listen, you know,
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: the Palacti and people are the huge losers in all
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: of this. Whether it's Hamas doing stuff, it's it's you know,
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: dragging their feet on a negotiation, whether it's the Israeli
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: defense forces firing into stuff that has no apparent military value,
• 4:36
  Speaker 2: I don't know, but I do know that those people
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: are suffering, and I hope for everybody's sake there this
• 4:41
  Speaker 2: war comes to an end very very quickly.
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: Okay, Now, if Israel continues down its current path, and
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: you know, Achieese, you said, they've already achieved military victory,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: but you know, they do whatever they think they need
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: to do in the in the area. But does that
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: mean they're going to be an occupying force on a
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: going forward basis? And what's that going to look like
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: Israel going forward?
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: Now, that's one of the big sticking points that's that's
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: actually preventing the accomplishment right now, is the definition on
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: what these points mean these twenty points that President Trump's
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: team came up with, it Israel says they agreed to.
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: But then when you heard what Benjamin Attya, who said
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: after the press conference with Trump, there's some pretty big differences,
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: and you just touched on one of them. Where As
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: the Trump plan said that there would be an independent force,
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: possibly an Arab force, that everyone would agree to, that
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: would provide security, that would train a new Palestinian police
• 5:34
  Speaker 2: force to keep civil security, et cetera. But then the
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: Benjamin Attanyah who said we will provide security indefinitely, he
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: didn't even put a potential endpoint on it. He just
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: said that's what we're gonna do. So those are huge,
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: huge differences, and I think part of what the Hamas
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: negotiators are trying to figure out right now and to
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: try to assess what actually is the definition of who's
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: going to do, what will be the withdrawal lines, what
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: will be the withdrawal time lines, et cetera. Because Hamas
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: has categorically said we will stop fighting, we will return
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: all the hostage, and we will leave and lay down
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: our arms. So they have said yes to the major issues,
• 6:11
  Speaker 2: but the execution of the other details is a big
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: sticking point so far.
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: Well, and being a member of Hamas and saying Okay,
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: we'll vacate the territory doesn't mean that the ideas that
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: are shared that Hamas has the idea that Israel's evil
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: from the river to the sea. The concepts that, you know,
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: are that that really make up what Hamas is all about.
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: The hearts and minds of the people might still be
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: wed to those philosophies. We've talked about this before. You
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: can't kill your way into winning the hearts and minds
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: of people.
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: Well, listen, there's there's some some pretty hard things that
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: everybody's gonna have to face here. Number one, it's the
• 6:44
  Speaker 2: term Hamas is just the tag that we use, right,
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: But when you as a people have been starved, have
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: been bombed, and have the entire infrastructure raised to the ground,
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: that's not going to engender a lot of positive thoughts
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: towards the occupying power, the power that did that. So
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: I don't know how you erase that. That's one of
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: the things that Benjamin and Yaho said is a prerequisite
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: for all of this is that there be a basically
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: a re education program and retraining, you know, to teach
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: the new children from the Hamas, from the Palestinians, et cetera.
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: But honestly, that's that's I think an impossible ask that
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: you can't call it. People don't feel bad about what
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: we did because of all this stuff.
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: I don't know how you square this circle. Maybe subject
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: everyone to a mind control experiment. I'll of like a
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: clockwork orange where you tie them down and you brainwash
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: them and then they submit to your ideology. There's an answer,
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: But no, that's not going to happen. All right, Well,
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: I guess real quick on if Israel is not the
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: one providing this security, they have an army. We must
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: acknowledge there at least in a position to make an
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: argument that they're capable of doing that. And I understand
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: all the objections to it. Don't get me wrong. Who
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: would be that force, because it seems to me that
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: you're going to have some the necessity is going to
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: be some sort of peace keeping force like law enforcement officers.
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: Who's going to do that. The blue hair the light
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: blue hats aren't going to do that.
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: No, And that's one of the things they're talking about
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: right now. And there is a path here that could
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: be positive and it could help out because one of
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: the President Trump's you know, signature ideals and things that
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: he wants as well as Israel then Yahoo, is that
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: they want the expansion of the Abraham Accords. Right, So
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: this could be an opportunity to say, hey, some of
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: these countries that we want to have good relations with
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: and some that we already do, let's have some of
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: the troops from THEIRS who would be you know, honest
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: brokers between and respected by both parties. So there is
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: a possibility here as opposed to the blue hats you mentioned.
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: You know what, that's the sound and logical proposal as
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: it initially hits me. I like that. You know, you
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: have fellow Middle Eastern countries providing the stability they need.
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: And they're not pro Israel or pro Hamas. They just
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: live in that area and they want some peace and
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: sensibility and trading partners so they can all live happily
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: ever after. Right, let's keep that in mind as a
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: potential solution to the problem. Pivoting over, Donald Trump said
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: he hasn't quite decided about sending Tomahawk missiles. I suppose
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: he'd give them the NATO, and NATO would hand them
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: over to Ukraine. Is there anything different between that and
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: us giving them directly to Ukraine? Russia says, listen, that'll
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: be the end of any relationship we have left if
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: you do that. Because apparently the Tomahawks have a range
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: that might allow Ukraine to hit Moscow.
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they have, some variants are as. Different variants have
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: range of up to one thy five hundred miles, which
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: is like three or four times longer than even the
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: A tacklems that we have for the regular long range missiles.
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: But this one is a bit more problematic. You can't
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: just give these missiles to Ukraine. They require to be
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: fired from either strategic bombers that Ukraine doesn't have, from
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: hard silos or systems that call the typhoon that only
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: we have and there's only a few of them, or
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: ballistic missile submarines so Ukraine didn't have very many of those,
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: as I recall. So for these to be used, it
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: could only be done expressly by American military, which is
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: why Russia is reacting much more strong to this one,
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: because only American military in all fast facets of the
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: launch cycle would be doing this, and then it would
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: be a direct attack by the United States into Russia.
• 10:17
  Speaker 2: And that's why they are saying, no, this is not
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: like F sixteen's or attackems or hamars or any of
• 10:22
  Speaker 2: those other things. This one's different, and this is not
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: someplace we need to go. It will not. Let me
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: just categorically state it will not change the course of
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: the war, but it could be a provoca provocation for escalation.
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: Not a good move.
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: It is rather disturbing because I've heard you make comments
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: like that before, and I've heard others make the same comments.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: It's just not a pervasive point. People just talk about
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: are we going to give Tomahawk missiles either indirectly or directly,
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: and you think it's just like a shipment of a box.
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: You give it to them and they can launch them.
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: The fact that it will absolutely require American military personnel
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: and American military hardware, that Ukraine does not operate that
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: clearly implicates us directly. It's like boots on the ground
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: kind of activity. How do you think Russia would respond
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: to that? I know world War three is certainly a possibility,
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: but short of like declaring war on the United States,
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: what would there sort of militarily appropriate action be. Daniel Davis.
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: One of the things we've seen pretty consistently from Russia
• 11:19
  Speaker 2: throughout is that things that we would ordinarily consider acts
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: of war, and if people did to us, we'd lose
• 11:26
  Speaker 2: our minds and we would be attacking somebody the next hour.
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: Russia has shown much more sober viewpoint on this, and
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: they have not taken action that would then precipitate an
• 11:37
  Speaker 2: expansion of the war directly into NATO. Too Many people
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: in the West, I think, say, because Russia never has
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: up to that point, then there's literally anything we can
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: do and there will be a catastrophic response. I'm not
• 11:49
  Speaker 2: sure that that's going to always be a safe bet,
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: because we just never know how far we can push
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: Russia until finally there is a red line beyond which
• 11:55
  Speaker 2: they won't and they're being pretty pretty aggressive on talking
• 11:59
  Speaker 2: about one. But I don't know if even this would
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: result in it, because they would see it's not going
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: to change the outcome and they still have a path
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: to a military victory over Ukraine. So I would wager
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: that they probably would not start a war with US,
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: because then that would undo nearly everything that they had
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: done and put them into this massive fight. It would
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: be horrible for us, because now then we would be
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: targets when we haven't been before, so it would be
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: stupid to the highest degree. But I would bet that
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: Russia is not going to start a war even if
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: we do this, but they may do something else indirectly,
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: like against our interest elsewhere in the world, which won't
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: be good.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: Well, and there always is at some point a straw
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: that will break the camel's back. So whether or not
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: this is going to do it or not, I guess
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: the most important point on this is giving the Tomahawk missiles,
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: whether you and I are operating them or they can
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: operate them on their own, is not going to help
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: them militarily. It's a pointless effort.
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: That is my frustration. Why take the risk? Why find out?
• 12:54
  Speaker 2: Is this the redline beyond which they won't be pushed
• 12:57
  Speaker 2: or will they go past this one too? When it
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: won't change the outcome, It won't make Ukraine win, it
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: won't make Russia lose, but it will put us at risk,
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: and so then what is the point to doing And
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: by the way, we don't even have too many of
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: these our own. Why do I want to dwindle down
• 13:11
  Speaker 2: my own stockpile when we could really use those if
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: we get into a war, say with China or Russia
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: in the future, we need to hold onto those.
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: Another outstanding point, which is pretty much the case with
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: all military hardware we're talking about. Daniel Davis Deep Dive
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: finding where you get your podcasts? Retired Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis.
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: Great food for thought today. As always a love you man.
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: We'll talk next Tuesday. Have a great week, my pleasure.
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: Have a good one, Brian, take care brother. Coming to
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: eight forty two. If you have KCY talk station, We're
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: gonna learn about breast cancer. It's Breast Cancer Awareness Month.